Talk:Ascended master/Archive 1

message: The subject of Ascended Masters and Ascension has a history. These days, it's typically attached to Metaphysical circles of discussion. Even if you have no experience in this topic, or simply don't believe in it, that isn't a reason to delete the page. If so, you could delete just about every page about religion and metaphysics that you don't agree with. If you truly believe that no one will be interested in discovering anything about this topic, then delete it. Otherwise, contribute something from your own knowing. Mahamudra, 7/10/04
:The history of belief in ascended masters is complicated enough that it might be helpful to know, from which of the several groups that teach about Ascended Masters did you get the information that was first posted here?  This would help the article read better, making it less likely that waffly statements like "Some believe that. . ." will be desirable throughout the article.  Smerdis of Tlön 04:44, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Ascended masters

message: I am removing the "neutrality dispute" tag on this article because it's been 8 months and the article is pretty well spruced up and explained and they can put the tag back if they still think it's no good. --Bluejay Young 04:50, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
:I see the neutrality tag has been put back.  I don't think there is a problem with the article.  It reports on the beliefs of some people, that's all.Steve Dufour 07:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality tag

message: Refer to "An Ascension Handbook" by Tony Stubbs, published by OUGHTEN House Foundation
62.90.164.39 13:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Mahatmas and Elder Brothers (and Adepts) are the Ascended Masters, and Blavatsky referred to them as Masters. --Bluejay Young 01:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The old lady would certainly not recognise the  concept "ascended master ". her masters were human. --Vindheim 20:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  An Ascension Handbook 

message: The article says the Count of St Germain's final incarnation was as Sir Francis Bacon. But the Count lived in the 18th century, and Bacon lived in the 17th century - so that doesn't make sense.
Can someone clarify??
Cheers. --Triple-X 05:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of things about the story of Asc. Master St. Germaine (as opposed to the real guy) do not make sense. --Bluejay Young 01:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Count of St Germain V Sir Francis Bacon 

message: Strangely enough, I had never heard of the concept of ascension bloodlines before working on this article. Although it seems to be the kind of thing that fits in with other things I've read, I've never actually come across a reference to exactly what's talked about in this section. Could someone come up with a source? Thanks, --Bluejay Young 01:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ascension bloodlines?

message: madame Blavatsky claimed her teachings were derived from Masters. The "ascended" part stems from the I  am - Elizabeth Prophet strain of neotheosophy.--Vindheim 12:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You´re probably right, since the Ballards  laid the foundations for the  Prophet movement.--Vindheim 09:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ascended masters no part of Blavatsky's theosophy 

message: Why was this section removed?
: The contents were speculative - depending on a controversial understanding of the concept  "ascended  master". --Vindheim 09:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ascension in the media 

message: As far as I know the concept comes from Blavatsky's theosophy and I think that as a consequence her writings can be used as a source for this article. Voiced as an opinion attributed to Blavatsky/Theosophy of course. Citations to her work continue to be important, even if it is much work and even if it seems superfluous for people who know Theosophy. Independent scholarly works about the concept are probably more suitable than Blavatsky if available. Andries 19:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations

message: The article was on RfC, it's how I got here. It was removed from RfC as over 1 month old request.   Hele 7 13:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article was on RfC 

message: and don't kid yourself.  That's not fatal, it's just the way things are around this belief system.  People enter into and it is the best thing that ever happened to them.  Other people into it and it is hell on earth.  Both experiences are valid and must be accepted.  Sometimes people express opinions that we don't agree with.  That's too bad, life goes on.  If you can not accept that, then you have a severe problem that you need to address sooner rather than later.  Attempting to remove information that you do not agree with does not speak well of you or your belief system. - Richfife 03:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  All external links on this article are non-neutral 

message: The intro in this article is hard to understand. It should be the Wikipedia format, as in An Ascended master is a ...... It was first proposed by..... etc. --AW 18:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe this line should be first? "In various descendants and offshoots of Theosophy, [12] Ascended Masters are held to be a group of spiritually enlightened beings, once ordinary humans, who have undergone a process of spiritual transformation. " --AW 18:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Be bold and try it! However, be warned that some believers follow their specific style in this and some related articles (read the rest of the talk page). They insert large quantities of Overcapitalized Praise and Preaching and often revert changes by other editors. Making any changes permanent is a problem here.  Hele 7 22:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks to both of you. I added the line I suggested to Aburesz's line. --AW 22:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I deleted the repetition of that line which appeared in the second paragraph. Aburesz 22:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs a better intro 

message: Esotericism is not identical to a belief in initiatory knowledge, a  point which is not appropriate for discussion on this page.  However there is no doubt in academic studies of religion that the concept of intiatory knowledge is extremely ancient. Text changed accordingly.  --Vindheim 21:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that "the concept of intiatory knowledge is extremely ancient". Some writers have claimed that it was restored 4.5 million years ago (some have it at 18.5 million years) at Shamballa. Aburesz 00:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Blavatsky's number was 16 million years, I believe. That is however  a sectarian statement of faith. Academics claim only to be able to trace the concept a few thousand years back. That should anyway legitimate the statement  in the article.--Vindheim 06:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see my change was not understood.  I have modified the wording a bit more to make the intent clearer. Wjhonson 15:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  esotericism and initiatory knowledge 

message: Purely on Blavatsky, and her period of the Theosophical Society, I don't find the article at the time of writing to be neutral. I read in it "While some of her critics believe the Masters are pure fantasy" and words about her "changing stories". On the one hand, to be comprehensive and inclusive, I do agree that it should be mentioned that Blavatsky had her skeptics then and does now. What religious belief doesn't? But the article in its approach to Blavatsky's claims about the Mahatmas is not at all neutral and academic on this important point: it gives the impression that all evidence and all accounts as to the Mahatmas' real existence stemmed from just her spoken and written words. Nothing could be further from the truth! During her time some dozens of people left accounts of their meetings with the same Mahatmas, or in some cases, Mahatmas co-working with the more famous names. For example, this article, which I doubt is exhaustive, lists twenty-five people's accounts of meetings with the Masters in the late 1800s:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/mastersencounterswith.htm
A few of the accounts there are 'astral' and a skeptic may therefore take them to be dreams, but the majority are quite physical. The article is therefore over-critical by not mentioning this or taking it into account, giving a quite false impression. In my opinion, therefore, the article shouldn't make it appear that the Mahatmas' reality at that time hinged only upon the accounts of one person, Blavatsky. This is not at all the case - from the historical record. I'd suggest the wording be altered to take this into account.
On a much more minor note, there has been discussion about capitalisation. I find it rather bizarre therefore that I find 'Mahatma' spelled in the article with lower-case 'm' when Blavatsky and the Mahatma letters each, as the original sources on Mahatmas, used upper case. Steranko 11:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Only Blavatsky 

message: This article needs a cleanup according to the mediators. Going through it today, I have noticed  that there is little differentiation between the various versions of the AM beliefs. 
Perhaps representatives of the various viewpoints here  could insert the name of their organization or its main proponent(s) at relevant places. Maybe also the article should be reorganized, so that the various versions are separated  into different paragraphs  or even sections.
 
The footnotes should also be reorganized, to emphasize the  differences between sectarian and academic viewpoints. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vindheim (talk • contribs) 02:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: According to Wikipedia standards, the previous capitalizations need to be maintained. These are references to proper nouns (such as The Theosophical Society) and references to the Divine (such as "Spirit" as compared to the "spirit of a crowd at a sporting event"). According to the Wikipedia Manual of Style, references to '"Transcendent ideas in the Platonic sense also begin with a capital letter: Good and Truth."' Refer to the Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28capital_letters%29. Aburesz 19:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Captialization Standards for Religion and Philosophy

message: I have not read most of the posts on this forum, nor will I. I came to give an opinion, but I don't know if it's been covered here.
I've been called an ascended master by others, who are highly spiritual teachers. I came to wikipedia to read a little on this matter. I believe most of what I've read on the main article to be true. 
I believe there are several things that all people must embrace if they wish to advance themselves in every aspect, as well.
Some advice for any who feel they need something more..
Feel and give gratitude for everything. It has all come to you for a reason. You've either brought it upon yourself or someone else brought it to you. But it couldn't enter your reality unless you embraced it. Cheating spouses, debt, wrongful imprisonment, winning the lottery, everything comes with accordance to your actions. If you accept it before it happens and before you know about it, like it's yours, it's yours.
Your emotions are your calling. What you feel you feed. The most powerful way to change your life for the better is to feel love and gratitude for all, for everything. Wake up every morning and say thank you. Thank you for everything. Thank you for this, for that, for things I've never had but I want (say it like you have it.). Thank you for my love. Thank you for my abundance of money. Thank you for my friends. Say thank you hundreds of times in your head through your morning routines, while you're driving. When someone hits your car, believe you and your passengers are well and hope the other car's passengers are well. Anger feeds anger, love feeds love. Which feels better?
Fear is offspring of the unknown. The unknown is nothing to fear, it's a new adventure. Most people fear death. They don't know what is coming; no one can know about death, unless they've died. But most of us have died. We die, return to a spiritual plane of our level, learn, and wait for our choice of which incarnation we will choose, to better experience and learn of life. Enlightenment comes with freedom of fear of death, because you know what happens upon physical death. The unknown is no more. 
For my opinion on the 'earth changes' topic like someone requested, yes. We are at the end of an ice age, which means another will soon trigger. I don't know the exact date, but I do know many sources have pinpointed 2012. Firm your own opinion but always leave it open for more. Look at all of the natural disasters the world has encountered lately. Look at the politics. Look at the corruption in every sect of humanity. Psychiatrists have earned over 300 trillion dollars imprisoning and prescribing drugs to children and adults all over the world since the 1960's, from government funding alone. Europe has taken the first step to become one continental country. The USA has a law in place allowing the president to seize full, unchallengeable power at a time he deems emergency. The world needs a change, I am happy of the coming age. I can't wait to see what will come.
Most important for everyone to understand. There are two types of gods. The first is the divine god which governs all. The second is you. Everyone is their own god. Realize this, and be free. 
172.191.120.254 04:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  the masters 

message: I think that www.askrealjesus.com and www.mothermarysgarden.com ought to be added as external links. These are Ascended Master sponsored sites that deserve their rightful place among the Ascended Master teachings, as they are currently being given as progressive revelation. The amount of teachings & practical tools on the sites is unheard of. No one has exclusivity over the Ascended Masters, including The Temple of the Presence, which is bringing forth a bunch of gibberish in my opinion. But authenticity is not really relevant when you're dealing with this subject for wikipedia. There's no reason why these sites shouldn't be included. Presterjohn64 (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  re: adding external links 

message: Hi - grateful for some advice/ clarification please. Are Ascended Masters permitted to be for example homosexual, or are they by definition sexually chaste? Contaldo80 (talk) 19:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: chastity