This is a fair question but it's one that comes from a certain level of consciousness, namely one rooted in logic and reason. Now logic and reason are important in this field, as in all others, for without them a spiritual approach can fall into all kinds of superstitious error. We need them to act as essential checks and balances on intuitive impressions and religious beliefs. Nevertheless, on their own, they cannot discern metaphysical truth, and they are superseded by direct spiritual insight. I appreciate that phrase is meaningless to mainstream contemporary opinion but that's because such opinion has limited itself to the external world of appearances, and cannot accept as real what is beyond the reach of the physical sciences.
The facts are as follows. During periods of meditation I was spoken to by what appeared to be discarnate entities through the medium of another human being. These voices (as there were more than one) referred to themselves as Masters on some occasions but, when asked what they actually were, told me just to think of them as messengers from God. They made no high-flown claims for themselves but used this term merely as a simple description.
Some possible interpretations of this experience are;
- The medium, Michael Lord, was a fraud and was consciously making this up.
- He was doing this without being aware that he was doing it, i.e. it came from his subconscious mind.
- Uncoordinated mental energies, which are the product of human thought and imagining, floating about in what might be termed psychic space, assume a kind of semi-life for a period when attention is directed towards them, at which point they can take on a semblance of reality and be channeled by the psychically impressionable.
- Deceitful spirits on the astral plane were amusing themselves by posing as spiritually enlightened beings.
- This was a standard channeling experience in which discarnate beings adopt the persona of enlightened spiritual masters in order to absorb energy from their listeners.
- It was what it purported to be.
Let's look at some of these interpretations.
- If Michael was a fraud on a conscious level he showed a skill, intelligence and insight that he did not begin to approach in any other part of his life. He also never tried to exploit this talent in any way, either with me or publicly. The voices were not his and the sense of power and authority that accompanied them were certainly not his either.
- Much of what was said above applies here too. Michael's unconscious mind would have had a wisdom not possessed by, or even approached, by anyone I have ever met or, for that matter, heard of. It would have had the ability to assume several quite different and very powerful individualities, and known things about me that Michael did not and could not know, as well as tell me things about myself that I was unaware of but could see on reflection were true.
- I think this explanation accounts for quite a lot of mediumship. Usually nothing very profound or insightful comes from it. It tends to lack focus and purpose, consisting, for the most part, of bland spiritual platitudes, already known and accepted by the medium. It is more general than particular, the very reverse of my experience.
- Also quite common in channeling circles. It can range in content from elaborate descriptions of the inner cosmos, heavy on occult detail, to flowery, devotional communications for the spiritually sweet of tooth. The Masters who spoke to me fell into neither category, being exclusively concerned with pointing out to me the ways in which I was bound to the lower self or ego.
- In my view many teachings from so called ascended masters fall into this category. There are, however, significant differences between these teachings and the ones that came through Michael. The most significant, though the least obvious to an outsider, is the matter of vibration. The spiritual intuition will always be able to determine what has a truly sacred quality and what doesn't. Unfortunately a lot might seem sacred that certainly isn't, and that is especially so these days when spirituality has been made a good deal more democratic, not entirely to its advantage. On a more concrete level, I might point to the fact that the Masters who spoke to me made no claims as to status, were solely interested in spiritual instruction, required no praise or worship, never discussed such fantasies as a New Age of love and brotherhood, did not encourage dependence, and did not give me their names or discuss anything to do with the personality. In contradistinction to the often long and rambling communications from the psychic plane theirs were always short and to the point. There was no fat on their messages.
- This is obviously my preferred option. In fact it is the true one!
When it comes down to it, it is up to each individual as to whether or not he or she can accept the reality of spiritual Masters. Meeting The Masters was not designed to convert anybody to that belief but to confirm to those already open to it that their intuition is correct. It can be a cold, dark world for the sensitive aspirant trying to make sense of life and its purpose. The knowledge that there are beings of light and love who have us in their care and under their guidance, even if we can't perceive them, should be a consolation and a source of strength when life's trials seem almost overwhelming.