Discerning the True Teacher

2002-6-23 06:16:00

Keith, I appreciate your comments.

Let me add this. A person may claim to be in communion with the Masters (because of a desire motive) and yet teach many things that are true.

Teachers fall into five categories.

(1) Representatives of the Brotherhood of Light.
(2) Representatives of the Dark Brothers (some knowingly, others unknowingly).
(3) Those who have studied well and teach what they have learned with the concrete mind.
(4) Those who channel astral entities
(5) Those who channel their subconscious

Now the interesting thing here is that all of these teachers will make some statements which are true and some that are false.

Am I saying that a teacher of the Brotherhood of Light may give out false doctrine from time to time?

Yes, he may because no person under the influence of the flesh is infallible. Even the true teacher may get over confident from time to time and give out teachings without checking with the soul first.

What then is the difference between the true teacher and the other four categories?

The Teacher of light may not be infallible, but his overall teachings will be very accurate.

A Brother of Light has purity of intent to teach the truth no matter where it takes him and will not consciously deceive. He (or she) will also give out many new teachings shedding a new light, expanding on new principles that can be verified by the soul of the student. He will speak words, eternal words that will not pass away. His words will stimulate the intuition in the student and from time to time bring a "flashing forth" of light within the mind making clear that which was previously obscure.

Teachers not in alignment with the Brotherhood may teach many things that are true, but will also have a mixture of many things that are not true.

Many of these teachers have no qualms about the use of deception to obtain their ends.

These teachers will use many fancy words and give out much data, but rarely will they expand on a principle by using words of simplicity.

They do not speak eternal words and their teachings will pass away in a generation or two.

Even with these drawbacks the sincere student can find gems of truth revealed by all teachers in the five categories above.

Let me give an example.

Rodney has a big ego and wants to make a name for himself as a great teacher. He realizes that Einstein was one of the greatest minds of all time so he studies him intently. After a thorough study he begins to wish he had thought up many of Einstein's theories.

Then he does the next best thing and "borrows" Einstein's teachings and changes the terms. Instead of calling his most famous discovery the "Theory of Relativity" he renames it "The Doctrine of Space/Time Relationships," and writes much about it incorporating a rewording of the great scientist's teachings.

Now let us suppose that Jim (who has never read Einstein) come across Rodney's writings and studies them in the light of the soul. What will he find?

He will find as much truth in Rodney's writings as he would have by studying Einstein in so far as Rodney reproduced them correctly.

Does this then make Rodney a true teacher? After all Jim is learning some truth here.

No it does not.

Why?

Because the teaching begins with a deception - the deception that Rodney originated the principles he was teaching.

But Jim is learning something, so where is the harm?

Answer: The harm comes from several levels. Not only is Rodney operating from a plane of deception, but he is a thief, stealing a revelation that was not his own.

Now suppose that Jim is impressed with Rodney because of this theft and wants to be a student and learn more.

If the real Einstein were the teacher Jim would indeed learn much more that was true. But the real question here is where will Rodney take Jim now he has given out all he has taken from Einstein? Because he has no greater truth, he now has to make them up and now he is relying purely on his imagination and the majority of what he teaches hereafter is false.

Unfortunately, there are many Jims out there who are impressed by a stolen truth and then trust the later imaginary teachings without running them by their souls.

This is a subtle manipulation used by the Brothers of Darkness and often their pawns have no idea of their participation therein.

I first took note of Elizabeth Claire Prophet when I discovered her book entitled "Intermediate Studies of the Human Aura." This book caught my attention because it was supposed to be channeled by Djwhal Khul.

After reading a couple pages it became obvious to me that these were not the words of the Tibetan Master. It sounded nothing like his thought process and a number of items even disagree with what he gave through Alice A. Bailey.

I thought I had better give it a fair trial and forced myself to read the whole book. I found a couple passages I underlined but the material could not compare in intelligence to the real DK.

Then I checked out some of her other writings channeling several other masters. I was not surprised to find that all these masters sounded the same, use the same vocabulary, the same thought process with the same degree of light. I concluded that all the teachings of all these masters were the work and imagination of one person - Ms Prophet.

Keith points out that the book I gave reference to on Ms Prophet sounds like a hatchet job and this may be correct to a degree, but let me state this.

Any controversial teacher or leader will have both extremes written about him. There is no better example of this than Joseph Smith. I have heard that more words have been written about him than any other American including George Washington.

It is almost impossible to find an objective book about him for writers either seem to love him or hate him.

Those who accept him ignore any controversial material and whitewash his history. In fact the Mormon Church recently excommunicated a respected LDS historian who revealed documents indicating Joseph dabbled in magic, astrology and the occult.

On the other hand, the anti-Mormons go out of their way to dig up anything that puts him in a bad light and almost every sentence they write is drenched in hate and attack.

So what should the seeker of truth do here? Should he avoid reading what both sides have to say because of distortion?

No.

He must read both sides and in doing so he will find many verifiable details on both sides which are true. He must then take these truths and put together a picture in his mind from an objective point of view.

The same is true of Elizabeth Claire Prophet. One must read both sides and then come to an objective conclusion.

In any study the greatest weight must be given to the actual words of the teacher. Are they borrowed from someone else or are they true revelation? If they are borrowed is proper credit noted?

When I first read Elizabeth Claire Prophet I noticed that much was borrowed from Alice A. Bailey yet no credit was noted. Then I checked the list of books the group offered for sale. Many books were listed, but the Bailey books were mysteriously absent. Could it be that Ms Prophet did not want students reading Bailey for fear of learning where much of her channeled material came from?

I haven't checked their booklist for some time, but this was the situation at that time.

Even if Elizabeth Claire Prophet does not channel real Masters, some good (as well as bad) comes from her teachings. Many have been stimulated by her written words which are true or insightful and have been given encouragement to continue their search.