Dewa, Angel and Archangel

Throughout recorded history, there have been accounts of visitation upon humans by angels and archangels. There are also many channels of these beings of light. Some of the more popular channeled entities are the well-known Archangels like Michael, Uriel, Gabriel and Raphael. Many channels also communicate with ascended masters like Saint Germain, Djwal Khul, El Morya and others. All these well-known figures are members of what is commonly called the Great White Brotherhood.

In eastern religions, Angels are known as Devas. In Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, reference is made to Devas and to the deeds they perform under instruction from Heaven. While there are similarities between eastern and western beliefs where angels aka devas are concerned, there are also differences. For example, in Christianity, angels are perceived to be immortals. Whereas in Buddhism, devas are not immortals but have very long lives from thousands of years to longer than that. I believe this to be a terminology and context thing. Clearly references are being made to higher celestial beings that do God's will. The people at a particular locality would view them in differing light and interpret based on their level of spiritual growth i.e. what they can comprehend.

So it would not be surprising that in western religions they interpret a higher being that lives for a few thousand of earth years to be immortal if the concept of having a very long life is beyond ordinary human comprehension at that point in time. Lets face it, the east was far more spiritually developed than the west at that point in time. And the east definitely treat their Avatars a whole lot better.

The thing about it is that are both western and eastern religions referring to the same beings though now they are called different names? It is clearly not impossible. Example: could Erlang Shen (二郎神) be an Archangel? I'm not saying that he it but just think about it with an open mind. It is definitely not beyond the realm of possibility. 

Interestingly, every culture depicts their devas or angels clothed the same way that the people of that culture were clothed at the point in time at that locality. And we know truth is NOT the exclusive right of any one culture. So why is it that Taoist devas and deities dress like Chinese. Hindu devas and deities dress like Indians. Buddhist devas and deities are even more interesting in that the same deva or deity can be female to the Chinese Buddhist sect but male to the Indian, Sri Lankan and Tibetan Buddhist sect. The only consistency appears in western  and middle eastern culture in that Archangels remain pretty much the same in Judaism, Catholism, Christianity and Islam. However, the locale in which these western religions were founded on were pretty much the same location i.e. Middle Eastern. So in the aspect of clothing, they pretty much wear the same stuff. Whereas eastern religions were founded pretty far apart in completely different cultures and so in the aspect of clothing, the different cultures wear very very different clothing styles. I chose clothing as an example because it is one of the more obvious differences that stands out and is unique to a particular locale.

Probably, if we were born at that time at a particular locale, we would hold in our minds a certain expectations as to what clothing would look like. And hence when a being appears before us, we try to describe what that being look like. The being could very well have looked like Marvel comics Iron Man without the helmet and faceplate. If you have never seen that kind of suit of armour before, how would you describe it to others? And those who listen to you would try to picture in their mind what you are attempting to describe. Trust me... after a few rounds, the picture would get distorted quite a bit from what was originally meant. And over the centuries, the popular depiction would set in and be accepted as the truth about how that being looked like.

Another example: if you are Indian living thousands of years ago before there was any contact with neighbouring nations, you probably would not know that your skin is dark since everyone's skin is dark. And so if a being whose "skin" is tannish appears before you, you will describe that being as "fair skinned". But if that same being were to present him/herself in China on say the very next day. The Chinese there would say a very dark skinned deva appeared! Interesting don't you think?

Anyway... many people do not realize that the angelic (or deva) realms are just another level of existence where lessons do take place. The Angels, Archangels or Devas are learning their lessons in their own evolution back to the light. Archangel Michael has been asked before why he has not always been cast in a favourable light. Michael's response was that there was some validity to the criticism cast upon him. Michael is well-known for his sword of truth, and the image often portrayed is one of combating the darkness. Michael is now quick to point out that a being of light who fights the darkness is polarized. In other words, if you fight the darkness, you make it real (at least for you), and you cannot move into the realms of Oneness. Michael has long since risen into the realms of Oneness, but this old image still remains in the minds of many.

The Dalai Lama Speaks About The Conduct of a Teacher

The excerpt below on the subject of spiritual abuse both religious and secular and is taken from the "Worlds in Harmony: Dialogues on Compassionate Action." His Holiness the The Dalai Lama with Daniel Goldman, Stephen Levine, Jean Shinoda Bolen, Daniel Brown, Jack Engler, Margaret Brenman-Gibson, and Joanna Macy. (Berkeley: Parallax Press, 1992). The book is on Gnostics.org's reading list for those studying with them for service to others and is very enlightening. This excerpt is taken from the Section: "Buddhism in the West." Pgs.82-88. You can purchase this book at http://www.gnosticbooks.com/dalai_lama/audlalailama.htm


Stephen Levine: I'm not sure it is even possible not to be touched by another's pain when our hearts are engaged.


Jack Engler: Oh, it's possible. Therapists do it all the time.


Margaret Brenman-Gibson: Or they try to.


Stephen Levine: Not good therapists.


Margaret Brenman-Gibson: I am not in the least persuaded that it is useful for therapists to hold as an ideal the aim of "being above the suffering" of those who come for help.


Jack Engler: No, we do this all the time. Your Holiness, have been talking a lot about the importance of a helping relationship in psychotherapy and spiritual practice. I remember hearing you say, "If you can't help, at least don't harm."


You also said that if one is going to face one's suffering and penetrate it deeply, it needs to be done in the context of trust, safety, and understanding. That often means with another person or in a community, a sangha, with a teacher; and that brings the teacher and the student, or the therapist and the patient, into a very close, intimate relationship with each other. In some ways they even have to love each other. Maybe there is some combination of love and attachment, but the relationship is there and it grows.


That relationship poses certain vulnerabilities, dangers and risks for both of them, particularly for the student or the patient. It is very sad that we see so much evidence of this today, where the helper has abused his or her position or power. In Boston, where I practice, almost every month the newspaper has headlines of another therapist who has been accused of misusing his or her power by his or her clients, usually men abusing women. We have also heard many similar examples in the Buddhist sanghas around the country of teachers who have abused positions of power and trust.


In my clinical practice, I am having more people come to me who have been abused by therapists. Recently, a number of therapists themselves have come who have abused their clients and are asking for help. It is very difficult to work with fellow therapists who have abused their clients, but we must. They need help as much as anyone else. In Western psychotherapeutic training, one is taught how to anticipate these situations and deal with them in order not to fall into that danger.


Even so, people fall. The risks are great. But at least the major professions that most therapists belong to-psychiatry, psychology, social work, nursing-are regulated by state licensing or certification boards that oversee professional conduct. Substantiated, ethical misconduct can lead to the therapist losing their license to practice in their profession.


Clients also have recourse to civil or criminal action in the courts. Is there anything equivalent to this oversight function in Buddhism? How is that handled with Buddhist teachers? How is it handled in their training; and secondly, if it comes to public attention that some teacher is having difficulties in this area, how is that then handled in the teaching community?


Dalai Lama: Part of the blame lies with the students, because they pamper the spiritual teachers; they spoil them. In the Buddhist tradition, someone becomes a spiritual teacher in relation to a disciple. There isn't any particular license or piece of paper or degree that you give someone qualifying that person as a spiritual teacher. You are a lama because you have students.


In cultivating a relationship with a spiritual teacher it is important not to be too quick to consider that person to be your spiritual teacher, because it is a very powerful relationship. For however long it may take-two years, five years, ten years, or longer-you simply regard this other person as a spiritual friend, and, in the meantime, you observe closely that person's behavior, attitudes, and ways of teaching, until you are very confident of his or her integrity. Then there is no need for any license. But it is very important, from the beginning, to have a very firm, sound approach.


There isn't any aspect of the training towards becoming a lama that is specifically designed to help you avoid abusing your own students, if you ever have students. But the very nature of Buddhist practice is to cultivate compassion, a sense of altruism towards others, and if this is pure, then the teacher will not abuse his influence.


Jack Engler: That's a very big "if" one is pure enough. I think people enter into these relationships on the assumption that the teacher has some degree of enlightenment; and then, when the abuse takes place or similar mistakes are made, the disillusionment is quite strong.


Dalai Lama: I normally recommend to Buddhist practitioners not to see every action of their spiritual teacher as divine and noble. In all of the Buddhist teachings, there are specific, very demanding qualities that are required of a spiritual mentor. If one has a teacher who is engaging in unsuitable or wrong behavior, it is appropriate for the students to criticize that behavior.


It says very explicitly in the sutras, in the Buddha's own teachings, that in those aspects were the teacher's behavior is wholesome, you should follow in that teacher's footsteps, but where it is unwholesome, you should not. So when it is incompatible with the wholesome, when it is incompatible with the Buddhist teachings, then you don't follow in the guru's footsteps.


You don't simply say, "It is good behavior because it is the guru's." This is never done. It states explicitly in the sutras that if the guru's behavior is improper, you should identify it as being improper and not follow it. It states explicitly that you should recognize the unwholesome as being unwholesome, so one might infer that it is worthwhile to criticize it. In one text of The Highest Yoga Tantra, it explicitly mentions that any advice that your teacher gives you that is unsuitable to your Buddhist way of life, your practice, should not be followed.


Jean Shinoda Bolen: But everything you've said puts the responsibility on the student, not on the one who is presumably more enlightened.


Dalai Lama: The guru, the spiritual teacher, is responsible for his or her improper behavior. It is the student's responsibility not to be drawn into it. The blame is on both. Partly it is because the student is too obedient and devoted to the spiritual master, a kind of blind acceptance of that person's guidance. That always spoils the person. But of course part of the blame lies on the spiritual master, because he lacks the integrity that is necessary to be immune to that kind of vulnerability.


Jack Engler: Your Holiness, the relationship of a student and a teacher starts as an unequal relationship, much as a therapeutic relationship does. One person has much more power and, supposedly, more wisdom, more insight. The other person is in the position of seeking help and is therefore much more vulnerable to being mistreated.


I am concerned that the way you have presented this so far puts too much responsibility on the person who is being mistreated or victimized. It seems to me that the higher responsibility must reside, at least in the beginning, with the teacher or the therapist.


Dalai Lama: Yes, you are speaking quite practically. In fact it varies with different centers and different lamas. One thing that I have noticed is that most Dharma centers in the West have come into existence as a result of an individual teacher's contacts with a few students. These Dharma centers did not come into existence as part of some program of a central organization, and, therefore, there has not been any way to check them.


In the future, we are thinking about having some kind of central organization. I receive quite a number of letters complaining about these different teachers. Therefore, I think the time has come. We can do something. The advantage of having this kind of central organization is that whenever a new Dharma center requires a teacher, a Board of Directors could recommend a particular teacher who possesses the basic qualifications that are necessary to be a spiritual teacher.


Then, on the basis of such a recommendation, someone could be selected. When the selection has been made on the basis of an individual contact, it is often difficult for the student to have the knowledge to judge whether the spiritual teacher is suitable or not, qualified or not. Imagine that a person has been appointed to be the head of a center and, after two or three years, this person's behavior starts to degenerate. At that time the Board could withdraw its support, saying, "You are no longer suitable."


Daniel Goleman: I think this is good news for many Dharma students-licensing for lamas. I think it is clear that the majority of teachers have been very good. It is a small group who have had problems, though you may know more than I do since you get so many letters.


Jack Engler: Your Holiness, in the relationship of students and teachers, where the teacher is abusing the student, dominating the student in an improper way because of the teacher's greater training, presumably greater wisdom, greater position of power, if this happens isn't it really the teacher who is guilty, rather than saying it's the student's fault because they were faithful too quickly? Do you feel that the responsibility really lies chiefly with the student?


Dalai Lama: No, in that case, the responsibility does lie chiefly with the teacher. When the person is supposed to be offering Dharma, offering spiritual teaching, and he himself indulges in an action that he has been preaching to others to avoid, then it's disgraceful. One can say that person has betrayed the task...


Daniel Brown: I think there is a middle ground. Sometimes there is too much attachment, what we call pathological attachment, and relationships become compulsive. There is too much desire. On the other hand, there are individuals who get too detached. They remain aloof and distant. They have some problem engaging in a relationship that in and open and honest way with their feelings. Somewhere in between is a kind of engagement that is healthy, and helping a client find that middle ground is useful.

The Diamond Sutra as I understand it

The Diamond Sutra (translated into chinese)

The Diamond Sutra is another prominent Buddhist sutra


The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia:-

The Diamond Sūtra (Sanskrit: Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra), is a short and well-known Mahāyāna sūtra from the Prajñāpāramitā, or "Perfection of Wisdom" genre, and emphasizes the practice of non-abiding and non-attachment. Note that the title properly translated is the Diamond Cutter of Perfect Wisdom although it is popular to refer to it as the Diamond Sūtra.

From my understanding, The Diamond Sutra is about the essential teaching of Buddhism, that of non-duality. That is the fact that there are actually no individual existences in this world.


IMHO, while I am certainly no expert, I believe the Diamond Sutra tells us what we now know via Quantum Physics. That all is an illusion and we just think we exist as individuals but we actually don't. Everything in our physical world can be broken down to atoms and atoms can be further broken down into empty space and even finer particles (with more space than anything else). In fact, while the "tangible" physical world is a world of duality i.e. hot vs cold, good vs bad, etc, at the tiniest level, it is actually just empty space i.e. just an illusion. So in actual terms, there is no in here and out there. We're actually interconnected in a massive energy field. So essentially we're in a state of complete non-duality: there are no individuals, no sentient beings. So the elderly Subhuti asks these questions of the Buddha and the Buddha explains and so the Sutra explains this essential teaching of Buddhism.


There are many "chapters" to the Diamond Sutra. It also mentions four marks in which we, humans, are caught. And if we cannot liberate ourself from those four notions then we are not an authentic bodhisattva.


Take this for an example: if we look at say a pen. In our mind, there is an appearance of say, a mark or ink if you prefer. Our minds captures this appearance and we have sort of an idea or rather a perception of the mark (ink) and vice versa. The subject and object depends on each other to co-exist. One makes the other and the other is made by the other.. get it? That mark (or ink mark) results in us having concepts, perceptions and even notions about them of how things are etc etc. So, the appearance helps the mind to form perceptions and notions and the mind catches the appearance of the ink mark to make a concept. So both are responsible. However, most of the time, our perceptions and notions are not entirely correct.


The best example to illustrate this is marriage. When two person fall in love are they really falling in love with each other or their perception of each other? She's beautiful, she is graceful, she is this and that. He is soooo handsome, strong, manly... etc etc. So in each other's mind, they see some concept (perception) of the other which may not be real. It was the concept/perception that they've attached to that person. And this perception/concept feeds on each other. And our loving mind is then created with the help of the appearance of the other. This loving mind grasps at the appearances to form a notion, a perception about the other person. And the object of our love is the appearance of the other person, which we have created in our mind. It is the meaning that we attached to an image created in our mind. the image is but an illusion. After marriage, that illusion falls apart when the other "parts" of both individuals are noticed" for the first time. Actually, those traits were there all along, we chose not to see it. So, a new form of illusion then starts to take hold and the process repeats but this time negatively.


Whew... I'll go into more later. Very taxing.


Related past post"

1. Heart Sutra
2. Boddhisattva - what is a boddhisattva

The Heart Sutra as I understand it

Boddhisattva Kuan Yin
(chinese female version)

The Prajna Paramita Hrdaya Sutra (aka Heart Sutra) is one of the most prominent sutra together with the Diamond Sutra in Mahayana Buddhism especially for those who follow the Boddhisattva Kuan Yin (aka Boddhisattva Avalokitesvara). I had that urge to take a look at it... a look only... coz I'm no expert...and see what it could possibly mean in general spiritual terms. 


The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia:

The Heart Sūtra (Sanskrit: प्रज्ञापारमिताहृदय Prajñāpāramitā Hṛdaya; Chinese: 般若波羅蜜多心經; pinyin: Bōrěbōluómìduō Xīnjīng) is a Mahāyāna Buddhist sūtra. Its Sanskrit name Prajñāpāramitā Hṛdaya literally translates to "Heart of the Perfection of Transcendent Wisdom." The Heart Sūtra is often cited as the best known and most popular of all Buddhist scriptures.

Below is the Heart Sutra translated (I don't know if it is accurate) to english by Master Hua:

When Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva was practicing the profound prajna paramita, he illuminated the five skandhas and saw that they are all empty, and he crossed beyond all suffering and difficulty. 

The Heart Sutra

Shariputra, form does not differ from emptiness; emptiness does not differ rom form, Form itself is emptiness; emptiness itself is form. So, too, are feeling, cognition, formation, and consciousness. 

Shariputra, all dharmas are empty of characteristics. They are not produced. Not destroyed, not defiled, not pure, and they neither increase nor diminish. Therefore, in emptiness there is no form, feeling, cognition, formation, or consciousness; no eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, or mind; no sights, sounds, smells, tastes, objects of touch, or dharmas; no field of the eyes, up to and including no field of mind-consciousness; and no ignorance or ending of ignorance, up to and including no old age and death or ending of old age and death. There is no suffering, no accumulating, no extinction, no Way, and no understanding and no attaining. 

Because nothing is attained, the Boddhisattva, through reliance on prajna paramita, is unimpeded in his mind. Because there is no impediment, he is not afraid, and he leaves distorted dream-thinking far behind. Ultimately Nirvana! 

All Buddhas of the three periods of time attain Anuttarasamyaksambodhi through reliance on prajna paramita. Therefore, know that prajna paramita is a great spiritual mantra, an unequalled mantra. It can remove all suffering; it is genuine and not false. That is why the mantra of prajna paramita was spoken. Recite it like this: 

gate gate par agate parasamgate bodhi svaha!

Whew... that was a mouthful. Like I said, I'm no expert. But I do believe the Buddha and the Boddhisattvas were attempting to explain certain truths to the people of their time. And I do believe that all origins of religions are somewhat from the same source albeit misconstrued and/or abused over time by human beings. And the east (India, China etc) definitely treated their prophets/Avatar/Messiahs better compared to the west (middle east and westward) where they either send them to the cross or create wars against other religions.

Boddhisattva Avalokitesvara
(male version)

Anyway, we do know now, through science, that we are actually energy (or empty space if you want to be blunt about it). Many people will dispute this but that's their problem if they want to deny their own existence and true nature. Take our body and break it down to the smallest part, we get cells. When we break the cells down, we get atoms and molecules. Go further in, and we get nothingness or just energy. So essentially we are energy or emptiness if you prefer. This explains the first 3 paragraphs already. we are essentially space and therefore all physical, emotional aspects etc are all non-existence in a certain way. God force is pure energy with consciousness (and yet without consciousness). 




And once we realize this, or to put it in a better way, enlightened to our true nature or what we really are i.e. God force (or universal consciousness or etc etc whatever you want to call it), then we must also realize that all the things that we get hooked up with is actually nothing... It's like, "What the hell man, stuff are stuff and its no big a deal". This then explains the 4th paragraph.


The 5th paragraph may be baffling. In fact, most buddhist scriptures like to talk about Buddhas of 3 periods of time: past, present and future. Well, like I said, I'm no expert but in spirituality, time is a concept that we "invented" in the physical realm. In the spiritual world, the concept of time does not exist. All instances are already played out to perfection. So it could be that that paragraph is trying to tell us that it is by knowing what this sutra attempts to tell us that we can be enlightened (or come to realization) to our true nature irregardless of time... that's my guess.


But why then is it called Heart Sutra? Why Heart? Well we know that The One Source is all compassion and love. So, could it be that the sutra is telling us that once we know our true nature which is the God force (for we are created in HIS likeness), we can only be Love and Compassion because that's God force, and hence that's why the sutra is called the "Heart" Sutra?. How else to explain love and compassion other than to point to our heart for the people at that time in history.


Well.. That's my 2 cents on the Heart Sutra...


Somewhat related post:

1. Boddhisattva - what is a boddhisattva?
2. The Diamond Sutra

Boddhisattva - what is a Boddhisattva?

The following is extracted from wikipedia:

In Buddhism, a bodhisattva (Sanskrit: बोधिसत्त्व bodhisattva; Pali: बोधिसत्त bodhisatta) is either an enlightened (bodhi) existence (sattva) or an enlightenment-being or, given the variant Sanskrit spelling satva rather than sattva, "heroic-minded one (satva) for enlightenment (bodhi)." The Pali term has sometimes been translated as "wisdom-being," although in modern publications, and especially in tantric works, this is more commonly reserved for the term jñānasattva ("awareness-being"; Tib. ཡེ་ཤེས་སེམས་དཔའ་་, Wyl. ye shes sems dpa’). Traditionally, a bodhisattva is anyone who, motivated by great compassion, has generated bodhicitta, which is a spontaneous wish to attain Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings. 

The bodhisattva is a popular subject in Buddhist art. Usage of the term bodhisattva has evolved over time. In early Indian Buddhism, for example, the term bodhisattva was primarily used to refer specifically to the Buddha Shakyamuni in his former lives. The Jatakas, which are the stories of his lives, depict the various attempts of the bodhisattva to embrace qualities like self-sacrifice and morality.

The Lord Christ

So what is a Boddhisattva? In spirituality, to put it in simple terms, a Boddhisattva is an enlightened being who is just one step from attaining buddhahood. But is Boddhisattvas reserved for Buddhism only? No. The term may have been coined in Buddhism, but it actually isn't reserved for Buddhist only. Remember, all religion are man made. So in essence we can say that Boddhisattvas are very advanced souls, they are very spiritually developed, and are just short of achieving a stage in spiritual development called buddhahood. They have been around many lifetimes and have spiritually grown to a very high level.


A boddhisattva is an all compassion being. One who is in the Boddhisttva path displays compassion towards all sentient beings. While it is true that our soul is all compassion also, there is a difference here in that a Boddhisattva (or Boddhisattva in training) would deliberately reach out to others to bring them along (so to speak). Sounds familiar?


What I am about to say may offend some people, well... I'm sorry but it's just tough luck if you can't accept The Truth. The lord Christ is a Boddhisattva. In his last few days up until the time he was at the cross, he went through the last few initiations to achieve one step short of buddhahood. I won't go into detail on the initiations on the last few moments as differing spiritual/esoteric schools have slightly differing views of it so there is no point in going into it here. And when his consciousness returns, he shall "return" as the matreiya Buddha. Again some people will claim that the Matreiya is the false christ. Oh puhleeezz...this is just to protect the central pillar of your religion.


Well, coming back... so how does the boddhisattva vow fit in to all these? Well, I'm no expert but from my understanding, there are differing paths to achieve enlightenment/ascension etc. Remember, all the rivers lead to the ocean and the oceans are one big body of water. Well, yeah, I know there is the dead sea, but you get what I mean about the rivers and oceans. One of the paths of spiritual development of our soul is that of the boddhisattva path. Which in Buddhism, they've basically explained it as a spiritual warrior who has taken a vow to defer his/her ascension to buddhahood until all sentient beings achieve enlightenment. Whoooh, sounds like quite a vow. Myself, not really interested in it, I personally prefer the other paths which don't involve this vow. But that's just me. Different people have different views of it and it really depends on what your spiritual path is. Your soul could have taken a vow before you take this physical incarnation. Some of us are not meant to go through that path, but while we are in the physical world, we shiok-shiok blindly go and take the vow when a buddhist monk comes visiting. I know cause I "accidentally" took one. Here's what happened:


A high level Tibetan Rimpoche came to town and there was chanting and puja for a whole week at one of the convention centers in the city almost a decade ago. We happily went to that event. After a few days of chanting, there was a particular day when chanting was happening and we could feel tremendous divine energies down pouring into the center. Those of us who could "see", saw deities coming down from above. Those of us who could "feel", felt the divine energies coming in through our ajna chakra, to the throat chakra and then to the heart chakra. We were all excited. The monks were chanting in Tibetan. And after they've finished, the Rimpoche said in Tibetan and a local guy translated it, "you've just taken the Boddhisattva vow". And some of us just went "shit...WTF?!" :-) Well, no worries, if at the spiritual level, you're not meant to go through that path, you still won't go through it :-)

4 arm Avalokitesvara

Well, anyway, the Lord Christ was a Boddhisattva. The Buddhist would have raised eyebrows on that statement. The Catholics/Christians would never accept that statement. The Hindus and Moslems won't care about that statement. Whatever lah... 


How do you know if you could be on the Boodhisattva path (Boddhisattva in training) regardless if you have or have not taken the vow?



The Bodhisattva vow is:
Sentient beings are numberless
    I vow to save them all.
Deluding passions are inexhaustible
    I vow to end them all.

Dharma Gates are limitless
   I vow to master them all.

The Buddha's Way is Supreme
   I vow to attain it.

Well... there is no way of telling for sure in this physical world. If you have taken it in the spirit world, you can't tell it here unless you are such an advanced soul that you can trace back or just pop a visit up there to find out. However, there are hints that may tell a thing or two. Examples: Do you get angry with injustice? Can you sense it when someone is lying? Are your greatest power love and compassion? These are just a few of the questions that we can ask ourselves. There are several ways that a quick search in the internet would provide some general guide (not necessarily accurate), or a trip to the library and looking through esoteric books on boddhisattvas may provide some answers. The answer to such questions can more or less tell if you have taken the vow before and are on the path. It is not necessarily true but a guide nonetheless. Furthermore, if you find that you may be on the Boddhisattva path but in this lifetime, you are christian or moslem, then what should you do? Well... you don't have to leave, that much is for sure. Remember, all religions are man-made anyway. By all means, stay on in your religion if your heart tells you to. But listen to your heart (higher soul etc). You'll find that the philosophy that the prophet/Avatar of your religion prescribes has pretty much the same principles (remove the religious doctrines of course). Therefore, subscribe to the path shown by Christ, Kuan Yin etc not what the religion tells you to do. And reach out to all sentient beings as your heart tells you and not as what your religion's ulterior motives says (propagation).


Somewhat related posts:
The Perversion of Religion
Religious Dogma
Reincarnation
Souls in Reincarnation


Not so related, but somehow still somewhat related posts:
Medical Cadeceus
What is a Light worker?
Yoga
Different Levels of Truths