Site map
About us
 Quick search

Print this page

Share International HomeShare International Home


The Law of Cause and Effect in action
Interview with the the Master –, through Benjamin Creme
by Patricia Pitchon

Press releases of Maitreya's forecasts, distributed to the world's media, have demonstrated how humanity itself creates the events which affect the world, for good or ill.

For three years, Share International has published articles based on interviews with an associate of Maitreya. Press releases containing highlights of these articles are distributed regularly to the media, world-wide. Many journalists have wondered about the aims and purposes Maitreya has in connection with these press releases. Benjamin Creme’s Master, Who works closely with Maitreya, kindly agreed to address this question, through Mr Creme, in an interview with Patricia Pitchon.

Patricia Pitchon: What is the purpose of the press releases? The Master: They have several purposes: to give information; in particular, to illuminate for humanity the working of the Law of Cause and Effect. This is a major instruction for humanity. Humanity as a whole does not recognize its complicity in the events that happen in the world — even to the extent of the changes in the world’s weather patterns. Yet many of the earthquakes, much of the weather disturbances, the floods and hurricanes, the volcanic eruptions, and so on, are due to the destructive energies sent out by humanity. Their thoughts and feelings carry energy and make a collective impact. These factors create thoughtforms which are so destructive that they upset the elementals who control the weather. So the traditional weather patterns are completely awry.

Another purpose is to illuminate for humanity, in relation to political and economic events, the degree to which people themselves influence these events, for good or ill. If you are constructive and creative, it will be for the good. If you are destructive or divisive, as is often the case, separative, then you reap this karmic reaction, what you have sown. Maitreya is teaching about this law.

Another important reason for these press releases is simply to draw attention to Maitreya, to the fact that He is here. The forecasts, given over a very large range of subjects, are so pertinent and so accurate — as a totality — that they have drawn from the media and from influential people in the world a degree of interest which would not otherwise be there. They have created in the mind-belt a sense of the presence of Maitreya, of the Christ. That influences everyone from world leaders down to the ordinary person. So He is teaching humanity its responsibility — in terms of action and reaction — and drawing attention to His presence. (Benjamin Creme: He is also corroborating, in a very definite fashion, what I and others have been making known about His presence in the world. It tends to support what we have been saying; when I am on radio or television, for instance, the people who invite me do so often because these press releases have been sent to them.

In a sense He is making my job easier. By making the media more aware, He is creating a threshold for His appearance, a state of mind in which His appearance will not be ‘out of the blue’. It will not be so extraordinary and so unexpected as to be immediately dismissed.)

PP: What is the best use that journalists can make of these press releases?

The Master: To take them seriously.

PP: But what does that mean in practice?

The Master: If they take them seriously they will talk about them, they will make them known to their contacts in political circles, to other journalists. The more they talk about them and discuss them — without necessarily believing them, but taking them seriously — the quicker is created the thoughtform about the presence in the world of this extraordinary person called Maitreya.

Whether they accept Him as the Christ or as Maitreya Buddha is not at this point important. What is important is that they take it seriously. And, in many cases, they do so.

PP: What is the Master’s view about the extreme timidity with which the media in Britain has related to this story and also to the press releases? At the moment, they seem unable to make comments referring to the press releases except in the form of a joke.

The Master: They usually mention the press releases when they are impressed enough to do so by the accuracy and unexpectedness of some of the predictions, but especially where there is one instance in which a prediction has not worked out. But they would not do so, at all, if they were not impressed. Every time they mention them, it is because they are impressed. They have nothing to gain from ‘whipping an old mule’. If they really saw them as an ‘old mule’ which was worthless and should be put out to grass, they would leave them entirely alone. It is because they do not so see them — despite all appearances they are deeply interested in them and in some way take them seriously — that they write about them, even tongue-in-cheek. It is a sign that they have their minds on them, that they are alive, relevant, as an idea.

PP: Can the Master clarify for many bemused journalists — and some members of the general public — the relationship between, on the one hand, human free will and, on the other, a Master’s capacity to see events, trends or patterns in world affairs.

The Master: Both things are working concurrently. Maitreya is not using clairvoyance — or only from time to time. From His knowledge of the Law of Cause and Effect, He is outlining trends and tendencies which are inevitable, unless humanity does something else.

If you do not change direction, and, therefore, change these patterns, then those trends will eventuate. That is what He is saying. In this way He is illustrating the Law of Cause and Effect (ie the Law of Karma) in action.

However, you have free will. There is an influence on these events by your free will, for good or ill. In so far as you change your direction, these events will not come to pass. But if you continue in the way in which you have been doing — whatever the subject in question — these events will take place. You also influence the timing.

PP: One of the difficulties many journalists have had is in relation to time. Some of them seem to think that because events have worked out somewhat later than originally forecast, this in itself invalidates the forecast. Can the Master comment on the relationship between human free will and time?

The Master: As far as the Masters are concerned — this goes for Maitreya too, of course — there is no such thing as time. Time is a result of the action of the human brain. It does not exist. A difficulty for the Masters in foretelling future events (or what are considered as future events) is to relate them to your idea of time. The Masters have to make deliberate adjustments in Their thinking to put them into a time-frame.

However, on the physical plane, events do conform to what you call time. But the notion that these events happen outside the given time-frame usually has nothing to do with Maitreya at all, but with the associate who passed on the forecast to the journalists.

As often as not Maitreya has not said “in so many weeks, in so many months, such and such will take place”. He has given a general indication of events to those around Him.

Maitreya’s associate has generally been present and has heard these forecasts and has expressed this in his own view (and perhaps in his view of Maitreya’s view) of the time factor which Maitreya Himself may not have indicated when He made the announcement.

PP: In relation to these difficulties — of not having access to Maitreya directly for these press releases — there has been a lot of difficulty with recent pronouncements on the Gulf War. On the one hand, you, the Master, said there would be a short but very destructive war. You said this at the outset. On the other hand, the information we received through Maitreya’s associate seemed to indicate there would be no actual war — there would be skirmishes, but no actual war. Also, given the fact that the Masters do not perceive events ‘in time’, is it just a changing kaleidoscope in ‘non-time’?

The Master: No, it is not quite like that. I would draw your attention to the actual wording of the statements. This was that if President Bush continued to support the Kuwaiti and Saudi force — kings and sheikhs — then a war was inevitable. He did, and it was. But the associate indicated that any fighting would be short. Most people, looking forward to a confrontation between the coalition powers and the Iraqis, thought that it could last up to a year.

In the event, it was a few weeks, which for any war of that intensity is an extremely short time. In My view, war was inevitable but, as predicted by Maitreya’s associate, not long drawn out.

(Benjamin Creme: My Master, right at the beginning, said that Saddam Hussein could be highly destructive in the short term. But eventually, his own people would send him into oblivion — he would disappear from the scene. So the Master foresaw the destructiveness. If the Master foresaw it, Maitreya also foresaw it. The press release (that there would be no major war) was issued on 2 January. The actual bombing began on 17 January. Between these dates there was a constantly changing situation. The associate no doubt responded to this, not to hard and fast statements by Maitreya.
I will ask the Master myself now how much of this information was from Maitreya, how much from the associate, how much due to the changing situation, so that we might get a clearer idea.)

The Master: It is a combination of factors. Maitreya sees general trends and may talk about them to the groups around Him, and may convey them for the purpose of a press release to the associate. The associate colours them with his own mind to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the circumstances and the method by which the information is imparted. This is affected by his reading of the news, his watching of television, his grasp of the day-to-day happenings. When he reads the speculation of certain journalists, that colours his view of the information which was given to him in a general way. In other words, he is doing his best, but his own mind influences the slant.

PP: Is there anything that journalists could be doing with these press releases that they are not doing?

The Master: They could talk about them more and bring them more to the attention of their superiors than they do. Most journalists work under a superior, and most journalists are more afraid of their superior than of anyone else. Some journalists discuss it more openly — Eastern journalists more openly than Western journalists.

PP: When you say Eastern journalists, do you mean from India and the Middle East?

The Master: India, Pakistan, the Middle East and so on. Journalists from that area are altogether more open-minded to the information from Maitreya coming through the associate than are Western journalists, who treat it with more caution, and necessarily so.

PP: Why ‘necessarily so’?

The Master: Because of the effect that the mind of the associate has in colouring the information.

PP: We do send press releases to editors and heads of media organizations. What is the effect of these press releases on them — for example, here in the West?

The Master: It depends on the individual. In some cases they are very interested indeed and keep a watching brief on the information. They are impressed. No one with a truly open mind could be unimpressed by the astonishing accuracy of these press releases — nearly three years of such extremely interesting and accurate predictions of events over a whole gamut of subjects is unknown in this world.

PP: Why have journalists found it so difficult to bring forward discussion of these press releases — whether in print, on radio or television — in a serious way, to inform the general public here in the West?

The Master: Because they are not committed to this and they are shy of seeming to take them seriously. There is a general scepticism, but it is shot through more and more; there are holes in the scepticism, and we must look for the holes and not allow them to be plugged!

PP: Is this scepticism also a cultural thing in the West?

The Master: Yes, very much so. There is an inborn scepticism of the rational mind of the West — which is thought to be more rational than it actually is — and thought to be more rational, perhaps, than that of the East. There is a tendency in the East to look on the spiritual as part of life and there is a tendency in the West to shy away from confusion of the spiritual with the secular.

PP: Would the Master like to add anything to this interview that would be useful?

The Master: Keep in mind that this is only one of many strings to Maitreya’s bow. It is not the be-all and end-all of His endeavours, by any means. It is, for Him, a small thing, which nevertheless is having a great deal of effect.

PP: How many journalists have so far met Maitreya, approximately?

The Master: Several hundred.

PP: Why, out of these several hundred, has no word emerged of these meetings, publicly?

The Master: Many journalists have tried, and failed, to make it known. More have not tried.

PP: Why not?

The Master: They find it difficult, in their milieu, to take a stand in regard to this information, which they feel might draw ridicule on themselves.  And of course, journalists have tried to do things, indirectly — so indirectly you have not noticed. Nevertheless, journalists talk about this among themselves — those who mutually know they have had contacts talk about it and discuss ways and means of making it known, but the process is slow. The opposition is really very strong.

PP: What are the reasons for the opposition?

The Master: Ingrained complacency, ingrained ignorance, ingrained fear of change. Fear of ridicule, fear of truth when it is presented in a new guise, a capacity for self-deception, which is as strong among journalists as among others, and a non-readiness to stand up for what you know — basically, fear.

PP: How can journalists who are committed to trying to bring the teachings of Maitreya forward publicly help other journalists who are afraid?

The Master: Set an example. Nothing works so well as example. If one journalist of reputation were brave enough to come forward with what he knows and has experienced — and there are many — then others would soon follow suit. It is a matter of time.

PP: This means sooner or later it is bound to happen?

The Master: It is bound to happen. And sooner rather than later. Most journalists are just waiting for the head of Maitreya to show above the battlements, then they will speak out.

PP: How will this come about?

The Master: Wait and see. They are waiting to see Him. When it is safe to talk, they will talk. Until it is safe, people are diffident, and sometimes they are just thwarted.

PP: Does this being ‘safe’ mean when Maitreya comes out more publicly?

The Master: When Maitreya Himself makes certain moves, so that they cannot deny that He is here.

From the April 1991 issue of Share International

More interviews with this Master
Articles by this Master
Archives main index 
Background information page


HomeTop of Page


First published April 1999, Last modified: 15-Oct-2005