Theos-Talk Archives (September 2002 Message tt00086)

Steve Stubbs, who certainly does not consider himself a "theosophical 
fundamentalist", has written the following assessment about the 
Mahatmas:

". . . the only proof we can have of the masters' historical 
existence is testimony from a qualified witness, and we have that 
from Olcott. . . . Olcott's testimony is sufficient in my judgment to 
establish their corporeal existence as legal persons. . . . I cannot 
agree with anyone that they were fictions, fantasies, imagined 
beings, trance personalities, or any such thing as that unless the 
Olcott evidence can be satisfactorily disposed of. I raised that 
question some time ago, and no one has ever addressed it, so for that 
reason I remain stubbornly convinced that the mahatmas were real men 
as they were claimed to be." 
Quoted from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/5195

If Brian thinks differently on this subject from Steve, then he 
should specifically address this question and issue that Steve raised 
many months ago on Theos-Talk.

Daniel H. Caldwell

Visit Blavatsky Archives at:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm

"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at
their right value; and unless a judge compares notes and
hears both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision."
H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218.