Theos-Talk Archives (March 1995 Message tl00071)

Arthur Paul Patterson wrote:

I just finished reading the Mahatma letter and I am not awfully
impressed, it might be a lack of historical background but I
wanted to breifly speak of my reaction.  First of, I found the
document awfully culturally and historically bound there are a
lot of rationalist and reductionistic tonalities throughout.  ...
etc

I don't find it hard to understand this reaction to this
particular letter, at all.

It helps, though, to keep in mind that it's on record that the
Mahatmas found it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to find
English words and phrases to convey their more occult knowledge.

As Arthur says, the hermeneutics of the scriptural God image is
ambiguous to say the least.  Finding truth in this letter clearly
depends on how we interpret it, too, piecing together an esoteric
idea from a bunch of inadequate words.

As I said in an earlier post, the word "God" in those days would
have been laden with connotations which would be incompatible
with the Mahatmas' world view, while having a few that would have
been compatible which Arthur called "the best of monotheism".  I
guess the Mahatma chose to confront those that disagreed or were
anthropomorphic, perhaps thinking he had to do some breaking down
before he could introduce subtler ideas.

Although Sinnett didn't write these letters, they were written
for him, and in any communication, the receiving person
conditions or limits what can be sent and understood.

The light of the Master's consciousness falling upon Sinnett's
(or anyone else's, for that matter) psyche could perhaps be
likened to how the energy of the sun is filtered and attenuated
when it falls on the atmosphere of the earth.  Much of the
high-frequency radiation (X-rays and ultraviolet, in the physical
example) is lost before it reaches the ground.  But it's there if
we rise a way above the ground.

Certainly, the Mahatma would have chosen the words, but what
could be said would have been strongly determined by the
Sinnett's makeup and thought world, especially as the letters
were aimed at him specifically.

Murray Stentiford