Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00078)

Hi,

First of all the Mahatmas is an interrogation point that will remain 
open in the history of the Theosophical Movement. But in the same 
time how Blavatsky could have produced the Secret Doctrine? Was she 
a genius? So there is a general tendency to consider the existence 
of the Mahatmas a real fact. Not only but it's quite logical 
attitude to consider the existence of more advanced persons between 
humanity. 

But Bill in his e-mail formulated questions based in a very 
Ledbearterian view about the Mahatmas. Leadbeater on his writings 
created an idolatry atmosphere around the Mahatmas, that it is still 
hold by many today in the Theosophical Society. There is no such 
thing as idealized by Leadbeater in his mythomaniac crises. Actually 
many of the mixing up we see today in the so called new age movement 
and all this idolatry around the Mahatmas is a consequence in great 
degree of Leadbeaters writings.

I think its interesting to consider this quote of Krishnamurti from 
Katinka's site:

Krishnaji asked "Have you read *Masters on the Path*?"

to which Achyut said, "Yes. I remember everything."

Krishnaji responded

"Have you noticed something? Their bodies are refined bodies. But it 
sounds like an ordinary person when it is said that he has a beard. 
But it sounds like an ordinary person when it is said that he has a 
beard, he has such-and-such color of eyes. It is to corporealize the 
incorporeal. CWL has distorted the concept of the Masters and 
brought it to the level of idolatry."

Bill also formulates a question about Universal Brotherhood, where 
he presumes that there is a common understanding and agreement about 
what universal brotherhood means. In fact there is not a common 
agreement of what Universal Brotherhood might mean. Some consider a 
loving attitude towards others, or the realization of the oneness of 
life, or a system based on very clear laws. 

Third is nature elitist? Why some persons are born with the mind 
potential of Einstein or as a Gandhi and others are not? Why some 
persons are interested into just to reach economical status or fame 
while other are interested to find a deeper meaning to understand 
the nature of existence? There is nothing like equality in the very 
concept of Universal brotherhood the first thing which should be 
understood is the great difference that exists into the inner 
potentials and level of understanding of every individual. And this 
is not an elitist attitude but is a lesson that nature itself 
teaches us. To expect that everybody would have the same 
understanding is a cruel attitude towards the inner potential and 
interests of others. Actually about Universal Brotherhood Annie 
Besant have presented very interested ideas to be considered. 

Erica