[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]


Dec 16, 1994 08:25 AM
by Arthur Patterson

Paul and Others,

I would very much like to continue the discussion on Mahatmas and
such.  I am looking forward to reading Paul's work on them from a
historical point of view.

Here is how I understand it from a very beginning vantage point
with virtually no reading on them.  But I have scanned Olcott a
little and Liesel has made mention of the teachers.  I can
understand historical teachers who "incarnate" the collective
wisdom of humankind which we in turn personify.  That is what I
would like to believe.  It suites me.But I am not all that
committed to reinforcing my ignorance so I am open to listening
to other possibilities.  What suits me is undoubtedly not
necessarily the truth.  So what do you consider the nature of
these advanced beings.  Buddha, Christ and Mohammed were they
chelas? What gets to me is when some esoterics make chelas and
teachers into space creatures and sci-fi constructions that they
in turn give allegiance to without any boundaries of tradition.
We love to project our need for power on things beyond us, both,
so we can give our power away and at the same time feel powerful
connecting to it - without responsibility.

To Paul:

No problem about not responding to Steiner.  I think that what I
said is not necessarily Steinerian or Anthroposophical.  I was
"using" Steiner to clarify my own thoughts of Light's Winter
Wrapping.  Steiner does confuse me even though right now I am a
bit attracted to him.  What I see is that he is sometimes as
intellectually cold as he leaves you.  Sometimes he does seem too
heady and sort of fixated on perception.  Seeing a few light hues
around objects can be explained in many ways.  In the sixties
some of us would say Wow Colors..  Man...  So what? There are
auras but what about them do they lead us to tolerance of each
other or to loving actions if so tell me about them but if not -
well why not just forget it- after all it is not a contest to see
who is more esoterically perceptive is it? That is my critique.
What I do appreciate is the emphasis on feeling and gothean
epistemology which leads to a relationship to the physical and
spiritual universe.  I also am more familiar with the Christian
concepts in Steiner although I need to explore further.


Thank you for your encouragement, and acknowledgement that my
hermenuetics of suspicion can sometimes be a safeguard against
gullibility.  I only hope that I can be truely open when I need
to be.  I like anyone am afraid of the magnitude of the universe
and the limited nature of human consciousness.  I once told a
Christian friend that i in a way envied his certainty.  I
compared our levels of certainty to a wall and a thin onions
skin.  Mine was the onion skin.  I am agnostic in many ways but I
am hoping for reality.

Under the Mercy,

Arthur Patterson

Winnipeg, MB
Canada R3E 1Y5

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application