Theos-Talk Archives (November 2000 Message tt00098)

"Arthur E. Gregory" wrote:
> > Yes, I agree with you, Art. The whole of the Secret Doctrine
> from which
> > this passage comes is an example of the "genius" of HPB and
> the Mahatmas who
> > together produced that work.
> >
> 
> Thanks for your insights Peter.... I think I would differ with you on
> the concept of "Mahatmas" as it is usually understood in
> theosophic circles. To me the Mahatmas of the early
> theosophic movement are very close to spirit guides in the
> Spiritualist movement and that's just the way I see it. 

That actually came later. The Mahatmas represented themselves as being
quite human, and were rather upset when treated as something greater
than human. 

> many of the
> early theosophists were spiritualists and frequented seances
> and this tinged the Mahatma concept with a kind of flavor that to
> me has thrown many of our most valuable contributions into
> disrepute. 

Actually, Blavatsky went into the Spiritualist movement because the
type of people who joined it were the type of people likely to be
interested in Theosophy. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (among other things, a
leader of the British Spiritualist movement) wrote that when she first
came, the spirits were quite friendly towards her, but turned against
her when she started declaring that they were just empty shells.

Bart Lidofsky