extracted from MATRIX IV
from Chaozation Website
With all such scattered “arcanum” now gathered for our convenience on the central new age floor of comparison-shopping, the sense distilled most strongly is that of the real redundance with which these tired volumes speak—the iteration in innumerable translations and redactions and meticulous incunabula, of “wisdom” drawn from the same few sources (whether nominally Theravada or Mahayana, the Kankala-malini-Tantra or Mahaprajna-paramitopadesa) of secrets whispered, tomb-robbed and fancifully embroidered till generational erosion degrades the imprint of the original to a garbled “Keys of Enoch” eidolon (from which all “Black Pullets” and dark grimoires may be scrawled in general information-loss of the scratchy candle-lit quill, trailing mimetic marks just near-enough the abraded godnames for suitable evocation of dross conceived in the very verbal abortions of the dim transcription itself).
Some of those surviving sources are sufficiently “primary” expressions of authentic initiated Intelligence indigenous to the tutelary Type of this planetary School, as to merit continued respect and ongoing study—after all, that’s Why it’s called the Perennial Wisdom, because it doesn’t “date”, it doesn’t fade to fashion or collapse with hat-in-hand to the first Voice issuing from an elevation literally above its own. It’s the argument of Initiated Intelligence and its Perennial Wisdom, that what was valid “then” is valid forever.
Whatever has been transmitted to the greater part of fidelity from those traditions into the present, is a viable Lifeform perhaps cryogenically “trapped” in a preservative medium (such as Tarot, or the “Shakespere” plays) which while keeping the codes intact doesn’t in itself advance the healing Key, but which yields to ready thawing and a disclosure of contents in the Presence of the Living Key—i.e. the ever-awake Being of Initiated Adeptship able to disperse the Spell and, with a Kiss, bring Sleeping Beauty from aeonic slumber back to Consciousness again.
What can anyone make of such a claim, when the whole category “Mahachohan” while sounding impressive-enough in the rural regions doesn’t really correspond to anything...familiar? For all we know it’s like claiming you’re the “Rajafalafel of Rajistan”; sounds fine, and with a few epaulets and tassels sewn back on your highschool-band uniform we’re sure you’d cut a convincing figure—but who’d know differently? Who was the last “Rajafalafel of Rajistan” to come through these parts? and how do we know your predecessor carried proper credentials while he was here? Aside from a few very general words about the Mahachohan in the Bailey material (and the probable willingness of a multitude of theosophists to dispute this present claim), nothing really arises to succinctly characterize what the Mahachohan is nor should be, or how to distinguish him from any Mahatma-Khan-Jeeves or random maricon meandering down the street any given day...
The Mahachohan, like his Manu/Bodhisattva counterparts, always sheds clues as naturally as the molting of a snake concerning the authenticity of his presence, wherever he appears; but as much as these clues are assuredly present, by that much is it the sure responsibility of each to awaken some part of the uncommon faculty within himself in order to identify that this is true. Only inauthentic beings look for, and give, conventionally unambiguous “signs” or standard traits easily cross-checked against a list (recall when “christians” silently dropped the convention of scanning for “Christ’s return” according to the giveaway sandals and Scheherazadelocks, when the hippies appeared...)
Though the term “humility” is the least fashionable of any human term, nonetheless the first-line gift for the kind of insight able to deliver such accurate Recognition depends—more than anyone would like to concede—upon that Grace of the truly humble who without self-serving show may make a deep self-admission down past jealousy or rage, envy or resentment at the perceived power of the Master to Show as none other can Show, and Tell as none-other can Tell. For, after all, in this mudhut schoolhouse of Earthburg, Show-and-Tell is the deepest game that can be played, for which the “Confessional” of the catholic cloister is the nearest religiously-mangled approximation.
This sort of humbleness is not understandable at all to those for whom “confession” of avatarship automatically, inevitably and necessarily signals ego-aggrandizement—this, of course, owing to the fact that in the projective case of themselves such confession could only be ego-aggrandizement. But for the authentic spiritual master any such pronouncement comes as a real admission, a confession in truth owing precisely to the most intimate understanding of how Impossible such a Position (state or condition) actually is, not only with respect to the current level of mankind’s comprehension or according to the real magnitude of the “difficulty” involved, but simply as a measure of the Chasm between finite knowing and Infinite apprehension, suspended in the Samadhi of Confession but materially present in and along-with every gesture the avatar otherwise makes, being an inexpugnable aspect of the Whole right with everything else.
Theodore Rojack in particular takes exception to Bacon as being, perhaps, the most “pernicious” influence amongst all the acknowledged renaissance luminaries. How does one reconcile the apparent concerted materialism and rational skepticism of Francis Bacon with the idea he’s Mahachohan and thus a manifestation of one of the three spiritual Offices of theosophy? Here’s how, MT rejoins with the case for the defense: what’s conventionally “known” about Bacon is hardly all there is to know about him. However, what’s not academically sanctified isn’t banished thereby to inaccessible regions; a tradition persists in the Mystery School arcanum to the effect that Bacon, like several other court luminaries of the time such as John Dee, led (at least) a double life.
Whereas Dee was not only Elizabeth’s court astrologer and conduit of the Enochian Tablets (along with Edward Kelly) but a spy for the crown in foreign realms and the original 007, Bacon was the pivotal hierophant single-handedly responsible for consolidating the fragments of initiatory societies throughout Europe and renewing the Mystery Tradition altogether for the coming age; he was, as Manley Palmer Hall reiterates in his Secret Teachings Of All Ages, the original Rosicrucian or Christian Rozencranz himself, through whom the symbolisms and initiatory practices of the secret societies streamed forward refreshed in the forms of spiritual Masonry, various Rose-cross Orders and more generally the Qabalisms that appeared in specialty through distinguished outcroppings of Flammel, Maier, Fludd, Ashmole etc.
Therefore all such societies to the present day regardless the alleged or real corruptions they’ve undergone or the syncretisms by which they’re subsequently characterized, owe their being in substantial part to the private studies, the hidden practices and secret lucubrations of the Lord Chancellor. How does all this square with the apparently antithetical character of his Novum Organum, Great Instauration etc.? wherein the crown’s chief lawyer set forth all the essential precepts for what has become by hindsight the “self-alienating” modes of cognitive objectification and reductive analysis etc.? In answer, we must assume an uncommon or esoteric overview.
We must understand the renaissance for what it was, and what it meant in larger spiritual terms as an expression of a particular cross-roads juncture in Earth-conscious development. We may say that, by Overview, it was the determined “commission” of the Spiritual Hierarchy (“Great White Brotherhood” etc.) which oversees mankind’s spiritual progress to greater or lesser effect, to foment the European Renaissance—in conjunction with a general counterpart revival of Qabalism spearheaded by Moses Cordovera and Isaac Luria in Safed, Galilee—as an acute counterbalance of personal investigation/insight unfettered by authoritarian religious sanction in reaction to the receding Middle Ages.
At the same time, the Brotherhood was not uncognizant of the kinds of purely “materialist” focus and analytic concentration such emphasis would engender; as with every great Spiritual Move, the inevitable “negative” side-effects were calculated into the overall account as a kind of advised “risk” presumably subsumed to the larger Aim of quickening the corruptive and disintegrating influences coded in any case into the last cyclic Stage of the Kali Yuga (the final and most negative of the four great spiritual cycles) so as to hasten the general conscious-alchemical process of Solve.
The stage of Solve, (decay,
corruption, entering-into-solution) is, in alchemy, the prerequisite
condition for recombining the dissociated elements into new and
higher syntheses; as with all things of which consciousness is the
standard, the forms into which patterns become crystallized giving
the contextual limit of their elemental interactions must undergo a transmutative process much like “death”—the known/comfortable
identity-types must dissolve, having become progressively
dysfunctional owing to their rigidity in a changing context, in
order for their constituents to be freed thus contributing to more
supple integrations and versatile/unitive alignments with the ample
The thrust of the Brotherhood was therefore two-fold; on the one hand it would strike a blow to free consciousness-in-general from corrupt misapplication of the deductive mode and the a priori; on the other it would assay to incorporate the resultant imbalances tilted to the opposite (inductive/a posteriori) side, so as to accelerate the coming disintegrative force of the final phase of the Kali Yuga (through which we’re now collectively passing); the rationale for this is the same Biblically memorialized in the saying that, unless those “last days” were shortened, none would survive their corruptive power (i.e. the longer the actual time-span allotted negative influence or the slower, more leisurely its stretched-out distribution of effect over the given allotment of time, the more thoroughly would consciousness be subjected to its power and thus the more fatally saturated in its quality, so that nothing might recover from so complete an exposure).
Therefore the Brotherhood sent its Mahachohan to produce this two-fold effect in the world, at the critical juncture of the Renaissance. What we “see” of Bacon officially, is not as a consequence all there is to see. If we could understand that what we see of him in Novum Organum is but a facet of bis overall work and being (and that, not necessarily appreciated or understood for what it is regardless the admitted scope of its influence) and, that there are other equally-as-powerful and fateful influences flowing directly from his presence not conventionally ascribed to him or associated with him, we might come more easily to see how Bacon fulfills the truly spiritual dimension indispensable to any characterization of the “Mahachohan”. What if this allegedly “objective”, detached proto-scientific type were juxtaposed against the universally acknowledged heart and monumental humanity of a “William Shakespeare”? and what if in this juxtaposition we suddenly see, as by a miracle, the “two” countenances blend unmistakably into one (just as the famous Droushout portrait of “Shakespeare” dissolves unmistakably into the template of the Baconian bust when superimposed—see graphic evidence in Hall’s Secret Teachings etc.).
What? Come now, MT, you’re not falling back on that hoary old argument of the “Baconians”, long disproved and passed-on by scholars everywhere? Why yes, as a matter of fact MT’s doing just that; indeed he’s calling succinctly for a republication of all pertinent (and largely out-of-print) volumes pertaining to the Baconian/Stratfordian logomachy, just as folks have currently been calling for a reopening or public disclosure of the Congressional archives in the case of the Kennedy assassination. Even more emphatically than the Warren Commission failed to “prove” its lone-gunman thesis, so the Stratfordians, it will be found in any fair review of the respective documents, never came close to disproving the Baconian thesis—on the other hand, the Baconians and in particular through the prolific work of Edward Johnson have definitively proven already beyond the shadow of any reasonable or unreasonable doubt, not only that the actor “Shakespere” could never have written the plays but that Bacon necessarily had to, and moreover left ample encrypted evidence to prove it!
All the Stratfordians ever did, is selectively nibble at “weaker” points of
the con argument re Shakespeare, and never substantially addressed,
attacked or disproved the self-evident Baconian ciphers found all
over the “Shakespere” manuscripts except to resort to ludicrous ad hominem arguments which are the substantial source of all present
misperceptions about Bacon himself (i.e. it’s thanks to this
hack-job of “debunking” that history carries the general impression
even in its encyclopedias that Bacon “favored the method of torture”
for extracting political information, or that his prosecution for
“bribery” was anything more than a political sacrifice of the
well-known variety so that James could protect his “favorite”,
Not only do the first letters of the first and second lines wed to the last three letters of the third render BACon, but such a cipher is typical of known ciphers in Bacon’s acknowledged works. Again, Bacon’s initiatic number by simple English “qabala” (explained in extenso in The Mother Book) was 33 (thus the 33rd degree of Freemasonry). On one folio page of King Henry the Fourth Part One, the name “Francis” or “Fran” appears exactly 33 times. As Manley Hall points out,
From the memory files of MT, we have the interesting example of “Shakespeare’s” most familiar appellation, of syllables so warmly lugubrious and reassuring to Stratfordians everywhere: “The Bard of Avon”.
This endearing “title” was bestowed upon the false fronting actor/joint owner of Stratford on Avon by his ostensible “good friend”, Ben Jonson. Now it’s well known that Jonson was a best friend of Francis Bacon. Extensive documentation testifies to this fact in the form of diaries and notes, whereas Jonson’s “great friendship” with Shakespear is evidentially confined to a few brief Jonsonian references to the “bard” not all of which are flattering in the least and some of which are only interpretable as outright ridicule (a fact the Stratfordians duly ignore; just as they ignore the fact that, though Jonson was ostensibly a mutual friend of both Bacon and the actor Shakespere there is not one mention in all of Bacon’s voluminous writings re “Shakespere”, or “Shakespear”, or “Shakespeare” etc.
For the “two” greatest literary lights of the age sharing a mutual friend between them not to find even the semblance of an association making its way to a single surviving page has to be one of the historical oddities of all time—until you realize that, given Bacon’s undoubted knowledge of Hebrew Qabalism by internal evidence of his own writings, we find “Bard of Avon” dissolves by Baconian magick into Bard of (o=6,f=6:6+6=12:1+2=3,3=Gimel, in English equivalency a “G” or C) Avon: Bα C on.
The remaining internal letters (r d a v) also have deep meaning discussed more fully in The Mother Book). This then gives the readership a brief depiction of a former manifestation of the Mahachohan (see excerpt from introduction to The Mother Book, this volume, for more on past historical expressions of the self same single Personality of the Mahachohan; and see The Mother Book itself for an extensive examination of all these historical personalities and their hidden interrelationships as well as an exposition of a known spiritual text which proves their collective Identity through a Magickal manipulation of Time Itself).
If folks can actually accept these homilies from the ventriloquist transmissions of perfectly unapparent entities, then such folks are welcome to them. It’s a good thing however that the Marciniak Pleiadeans never counselled Jesus or Buddha, never whispered their wisdom into Einstein’s or Edison’s ear or told Tesla these scintillating truths—let alone coached Jim Thorpe, or trained Jake LaMotta! These are the same Pleiadeans who (without MT specifically in mind, of course—how could we dare presume such self glorifying focus of celestial attention!) counsel in sober sotto voce “We recommend that you do a little questioning of anyone who overdefines and tells you absolutes”.
Well, we recommend you question any ostensibly celestial or “higher dimensional” source which has no account of “absolute” in its highflying corpus at all, for which in fact “absolute” is such anathema; for these are those same who absolutize relativism inferentially in the same manner as Bashar, and to the same self contradictory effect (see Bashar book review, this volume). These are those for whom “over definition” apparently has some meaning, whereas “absolute” apparently has none. (This does not, however, prevent them from pontificating at one point:
This is precisely what’s not an absolute. This is a very specific and tendentious mandate of a contingent type from an interestingly manipulative source.)
Rather, then, than committing to the precise definition of first
principles which ought to
be the primary and overriding concern of any spiritual teaching or
metaphysical philosophy at all,
the Pleiadeans prefer to shadow dance us along with admittedly
shifting “stories”. This is certainly
in keeping with their intransigent relativism; for first principles
properly defined ought to be
Clearly defined first principles introducing the soul to the ontological depths of itself can be applied; tales as to our ostensible “celestial parentage” can’t be applied, but merely believed, leading nonetheless to actions on the basis of such belief which haven’t benefit of reliance on anything more substantial than the initial motivating hearsay. Yet, this seems to be exactly how the “Pleiadeans” want it. However, owing to their “confession” as shapeshifting storytellers we shouldn’t expect any more consistency or carry through logic on their part; thus when they chide us, on the one hand (with an “eye” this way? or are such speculations just more self importance with no basis in fact?) to “Look at the New Age. Do you see how the New Age is separated? All kinds of things are said to keep you from discovering what you have in common” (p. 91, op. cit.), they counsel us on the other,
Any reasonable soul would of course ask how we’re supposed to be so discerning, and at the same time honor some ideal of non separate “camaraderie” in the New Age when those with whom the Pleiadeans are counseling us to have such camaraderie are often channelers and spokespersons for just those tricky sources they’d warn us against! Apparently the Pleiadeans (or at least the Marciniak mannequin through which they speak) are unable to resolve such contradictions, since, as token toward that comradeship the jacket of Bringers quotes glowing words in re view from Darryl Anka “channel for ‘Bashar’” while “Bashar”, as it should be clear to all—at least after reading the Bashar Book Review this volume—is precisely the type of “tricky being” who tells you “you create your own reality” so as to lure you into acceptance of space-alien abduction!
Ostensibly the Pleiadeans wouldn’t want the readership to get the impression “Bashar” is “just okay” with them though “he” appears by endorsement on their dust jacket... would they? Or is it just that they share an endearing trait in commonality with 3rd stage humankind, and will wantonly quote anyone or anything at all having a kind word for them despite what they otherwise know about said source?
Thus you may accept hearsay of the “Pleiadeans” that the invisible barrier of the planetary energy net is a masking screen originally thrown ‘round the planet to “keep you here”, by the negative reptilian types; when this business of the enveloping energy grid sounds vaguely familiar and you turn to a source such as Rα wherein you recall having heard something parallel, you’re faced with the conundrum of “choosing” between diametrically opposed explanations—for the Rα material insists this same energy screen was installed by the Positive Hierarchy to impartially preserve the Earth-sphere from undue influence impinging from without.
For the context is, that each such storytelling source approaches from Elsewhere at an oblique angle; this “angle” isn’t just spatially oblique—it’s composed rather of probability components. Each source approaches from a slightly variable—or greatly variable—probability-current. From the perspective of any given outside source, “we” may have “gotten here” (and presently inhabit circumstances) according to the specific probability field by which that source is remotely connected to us. Thus while each may “perceive” the same basic condition or “fact” as the other (e.g. the enveloping Earth energy-net) they may perceive its origin, purpose and significance quite differently depending on the luminous probability-stream down which they respectively sight.
The events themselves must come to pass according to the type and quality of configuration; but the determinative content surrounding, feeding into and concretely constituting those events are variable just as the exact meaning of Jupiter-square-Neptune may discharge in several probable ways and only arises as a specific complex of factors in the relative context “ I “ experience. In the same way the “sinking of Atlantis” or the “Earth energy-screen” may be considered a “necessary scheduled event”; but a number of probable outriders issue from the raw potential of any such event Those probabilities will “materialize” in their own separate contexts according to the coordinative streams that connect the percipient to the event.
Thus in one context the spiritual learning requirement signified by the scheduled presence of an “Earth energy-screen” may come about as the apparent result of spiritual determinations issuing from a positive “Confederacy”; in another context, according to the luminous self-linkups of probability networks the requirement might be fulfilled through nefarious designs of some Negative machination. In either case the “requirement” is fulfilled, yet each probable event carries its own stress, implications, net of consequences and probable-projections in turn. Thus the “acceptance” of any given “story” of any given source as of primary importance regarding “your” origins, the facts and meanings of “your” present condition etc. isn‘t innocuous.
Yet as an incarnational being you’re connected to an Earth-history which is unique to your perspective. You’re not obliged to “choose histories”, or accept stories, indeed you should not, for all that is a distraction to spiritual development. If indeed you “create your own reality”, ask the Pleiadeans how such philosophy seems to have landed them in the negative mess they describe which is manifestly not to their liking, and for the repair of which they’re specifically here at our doorstep at this Time?
We then launch into the pastoral opening of our Argument, the beginning of our prophetic Criticism in “Why You Don’t Create Your Own Reality” printed originally in the T-Bird circa 1989. This leads toward the Heart of our Practical Demonstration by way of “What Is The Mother Current?”, i.e. the two-part essay “Motto-in-the-Lotto/The Big Spin” wherein the first great Miracle of the Mother and Mahachohan is introduced (for the second and Greater miracle of the Mother/Mahachohan, see The Mother Book). The following section, Mother-current Transmissions, advances the demonstration by way of revealing the demonstrable Way of Initiation, and of the initiate.
In Mordrend Technologies we address the verboten, not only in terms of the secret science/technology which isn’t supposed to exist (but does), but in terms least familiar to the public perennially treated to window-dressing and never let into the Store, where the real business of karmic bookkeeping for the planet takes place; herein that public will find Mother and Father at their designated labor, much to the general surprise, so that many are bound to bridle at first the way children do when initially beholding their parents at work in the actual job-context, thus waking up to the behind-scenes truth re the way in which those children had been invisibly and unknowingly supported all along.
Next we give the readership a
preview examination of our extended discussion regarding the
theosophical Offices and Rays, with special emphasis on the
Ray of Intelligent Activity, in our Mother Book Introduction excerpt.
After that we bash on ahead into the “heart-of-darkness” or
dialectic rendezvous with the space-being Bashar, opening out
immediately thereafter into the Principal Essay, The Great
Instauration Finis (or Thank God It’s Friday, we’re in Safe during
the Sabbath). You’ll find numbers of other interesting things along
the way, all of which advance in some specific manner the Courtroom
Case for humanity against those incoming Accusers said humanity
seems so-far not even able to identify. Fortunately, mankind has for
its Attorney the greatest Lawyer the world has ever known.
Read the full report of " Magnum Organum" (PDF file)