Theos-Talk Archives (February 1995 Message tl00231)

LieselFD@aol.com writes:

> Re the "Mahatma Letters"
> I'm not for fooling around with all the folderol about
> precipitating letters & tea cups.  Phenomena aren't the basis of
> Theosophy.  What I have in mind, & I'm sure Paul Gillingwater, &
> Murray do too, is to take the important letters which teach
> Theosophy - Buddhism.  We'd have to pick & choose, but there's a
> lot to be learned, if you look at the right letters.

Thanks Liesel, yes, you're right -- I'm not interested in the
phenomenal aspect of the letters themselves, or all the occult
goings-on that occured last century.  What's important to me is
the teachings.

I was privileged two years ago to visit the British Library with
Astrea, and to handle and read carefully the original letters for
several hours.  As far as I'm concerned, they're genuine, so I'm
not particularly interested in getting into a debate about
fraudulent production or forgery.  To me, HPB's masters were real
men, as evidenced by many contemporary accounts (impossible for
HPB to have fabricated them all.)

Re: Buddhism.  Yes, KH makes the point that the heart of their
doctrines is Buddhist, but with some significant differences from
the exoteric schools, and with a healthy dose of Advaiti
(non-dualist) philosophy.  It's possible that the ideas of rounds
and chains might be too difficult to discuss in detail on the
THEOS-L list, but there are plenty of other statements and hints
which in my opinion have startling implications.

Another aspect I consider useful to consider are some of the
flashes of humor which shine through in the letters, and the
personal criticism directed at Hume, Home and other
contemporaries.  We have to remember these letters were
originally written as private communications to Sinnet, and are
as close to source material as theosophists can get, in my
opinion, apart from HPB's own collaborative writings.

cheers
Paul Gillingwater