Re: HPB's Masters as "shadowy beings"
Nov 19, 2000 07:46 AM
I'm assuming this is from Daniel Caldwell...
Daniel I admire your work and I don't doubt your physical
existence, but you seem to want to believe in the physical
manifestations of the "mahatmas" as recorded by early
theosophists. You are welcome to your belief and may keep it.
I for one will be differing with you on this. Pardon me if I sound a
bit direct, but to me it is much like the testimonies Joseph Smith
produced to butress his claims of the Golden tablets that were
translated into the Book of Mormon. We can read at length from
his witnesses but ultimately where does it get us? No further
along than when we started. I must take the role of the doubting
Thomas here and say that there is very little substance to these
shadowy fellows. They really represent far less than what has
survived from the great Mahasiddha Gorakhnath.
But all these thing aside I wish you well in your path.
-- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Blavatsky Archives" <info@b...>
> Subject: HPB's Masters as "shadowy beings"
> Thanks Art for your comments below. I see that again as on
> occasions you insist on characterizing the Mahatmas as
> But exactly what do you mean by this phrase "shadowy
beings"? I also find
> it hard to understand why you insist that the Masters of HPB
> but "spirit guides".
> Take for example, this account by William T. Brown:
> "The place to which our narrative really next pertains is the city
> Lahore. Here, as elsewhere, Colonel Olcott delivered stirring
> large audiences; but Lahore has a special interest, because
there we saw,
> his own physical body, Mahatma Koot Hoomi himself."
> "On the afternoon of the 19th November, I saw the Master in
> and recognized him. . . . At Jammu I had another opportunity of
> Mahatma Koot Hoomi in propria persona. One evening I went
to the end of
> "compound" (private enclosure), and there I found the Master
> approach. I saluted in European fashion, and came, hat in
hand, to within
> few yards of the place on which he was standing. After a
minute or so he
> marched away, the noise of his footsteps on the gravel being
> What is your opinion of these events?
> Even Paul Johnson is of the opinion that:
> "There were two points in the history of the TS at which the
> and Koot Hoomi appeared as SOLID HISTORICAL
PERSONAGES rather than elusive
> semi-ethereal beings. At both of these points, the same
> configuration is apparent: the Founders of the TS, the Maharaja
> Singh, and an Amritsar Sikh Sirdar are found working in
> October and November 1880, the Founders' trip to the Punjab
to meet these
> figures coincided with the beginning of the Mahatma
> November 1883, Olcott's trip to Lahore and Jammu again
> Sirdars and the Maharaja of Kashmir." caps added
> And elsewhere Johnson writes:
> "What I do contend is that a visit [from Master KH]
> occurring during a journey that is well grounded
> in historical evidence, documented by three
> witnesses [Brown, Olcott, Damodar]who
> portray the Master as arriving and departing in A QUITE
> CORPOREAL MANNER, is much more solid evidence relevant
> identifying K.H. than is found elsewhere in Theosophical
> literature. Furthermore, the coincidence of Olcott, Brown and
> Damodar spending their days in Lahore in the company of
> and Singh Sabha leaders, then receiving nocturnal visits from
> Koot Hoomi and Djual Kul, suggests a link between the Singh
> Sabha and these Masters. The following week, the same kind
> Mahatmic contacts continued while the three travelers were in
> Ranbir Singh's palace, suggesting a similar link with him.
> Art, it seems to me that you consistently ignore all evidence
> put in
> doubt your own "explanation" that HPB's Masters were not real
> blood men but only non-physical "spirit guides".
> You have every right to believe whatever you want to about
> But when you write:
> "I do feel strongly that to hold to the existence of these shadowy
> to bring a kind of disrepute on us and the work of theosophy."
> and also when you point out (as you have done for the last year
> that thinking, reasonable students of Theosophy should come
to a similar
> then I suggest that you provide this forum with some of the
> and reasoning that you believe would lead other theosophists
to what you
> think is the clear and obvious conclusion. I am assuming you
> to share your insights with other students of Theosophy
especially if you
> believe that the truth on this matter should be sought with
> >What I understand is that the Masters as commonly
> >by Theosophists is a concept that was heavily influenced by
> >spirit guides then used in the spiritualist movement... here I
> >to the mysterious letters that appear from the Mahatmas...
> >The tradition of the Mahasiddhis in India and Tibet is much
> >than that late grafting of our historical Theosophical
> >The "Mahatma" idea is really i believe a synthesis between
> >Rosicrucian concept of the invisible brotherhood and the
> >european ideas of what a Mahatma was then current in the
> >twentieth century... These ideas are of historical interest only
> >should be respected as such. I do feel strongly that to hold to
> >existence of these shadowy beings is to bring a kind of
> >on us and the work of theosophy.
> >Arthur Gregory
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> You can always access our site by
> simply typing into the URL address
> bar the following 6 characters:
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application