Re: Concept of Mahatma:
Nov 19, 2000 07:35 AM
Thanks Peter for your notes.
I think you are as free to embrace your Mahatmas as I am to
These feelings of ours must come about from personal search
and exploration and from what I've seen from my perspective,
there is hardly anything produced in the name of the "mahatmas'
that measures up, in my view.
The sinnet letters for instance are full of tactical advice about
dealing with the English occult scene almost a hundred years
ago..... how thrilling and uplifting... but you call them as you see
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Peter Merriott" <nous@b...>
> Dear Art,
> First of all, no one is expected to accept that any person is a
> the evidence of other people. Each is entitled to his/her private
> But since you publicly urge people to reject the Theosophical
Mahatmas as no
> better than the spirit guides of spiritualism, which are no more
> kama-rupa shells, it is important that you offer something to
> your claims. So far you have offered nothing beyond 'they are
because I say
> they are'.
> You say the kind of Mahatmas you urge people to accept are
those based on
> the concept of a Mahatma as found in Indo/Tibetan traditions of
> I put a number of points to you in my post illustrating that the
> Theosophical Mahatmas of HPB are indeed such as are found
in the Indo /
> Tibetan traditions of perfected beings. They are incarnated
> met with in the flesh (and otherwise) by various people, and
> siddhis (occult powers) commonly associated with Mahatmas
of their rank. I
> also presented you with similar examples across the various
> traditions, and offered contextual support from the Buddhist
sutras that the
> ability to create and project such 'mind bodies' is traditionally
> with such Mahatmas. I also asked you to explain why we
should accept that
> all the others were genuine with the exception of the
> whom, according to you, we should regard merely as the
spooks found in
> spiritualist sceances.
> You have not dealt with any of those questions, Art.
> Instead you change tack by saying you now reject the
Mahatmas because of the
> contents of their letters. But apart from vague accusations,
> there is no substance offered to support your view.
> You say:
> > My position on this results from comparing the lives of sages
> > Ramana Maharshi, Shri Aurobindo as well as Sri
> > along with their teachings and sayings recorded with our
> > theosophic "mahatmas".
> This is also my position along with having read and studied
the writings of
> the Mahatmas for over 33 years.
> > Ramakrishna, Ramana and Aurobindo were physically
> > incarnated for people to have Darshan with them and today
> > are fortunate to have access to writings and impressions of
> > people who met them. In this way we as beings can weigh
> > words and accept or reject their words and apply them or not
> > our own lives and spiritual search.
> Again, I agree, the same could be said of the Mahatmas.
> physically incarnated human beings. Meetings with them in
the flesh and
> otherwise were recorded by those who did so. We have
access to some of the
> writings and impressions left of people who met physically met
> addition they left writings of their own, and gave written
> they collaborated with HPB in writing the Secret Doctrine & so
on. Thus we
> can weigh up all of their teachings and accept or reject their
> > Compare these teachers with what you have in the Mahatma
> > Letters in which the master was heavily involved in the
> > occult scene of England and I think you will get my point. On
> > hand you can see the one pointed spiritual genius of
> > and on the other the often spiteful and divisive character of
> > Mahatma letters.
> Yes, I have compared all these teachers and NO, I don't get
your point, and
> I doubt that any fair minded person who has seriously read
and studied those
> letters would either. Your statement above suggests you have
> familiarity with with what is in the Mahatma Letters or the
nature of the
> work they were involved in with Sinnett.
> When you are willing to replace empty accusations with views
that have some
> substance I will be happy to correspond further with you on this
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application