Theos-Talk Archives (March 1995 Message tl00091)

I have been very preoccupied with various other duties but have
scanned my last 100 E-mail messages and feel compelled to make a
few comments.

I assume the Mahatma letter being commented upon is ML #10 (so
listed in the first 3 editions) and designated as Letter No.  88
in the new chronological edition.

First of all, the letter is NOT written by A.P.  Sinnett but the
letter is actually extracts of notes by Master Koot Hoomi on
several "chapters" or essays written by A.O.  Hume.

Also these Mahatma Letters were not written soley for A.P.
Sinnett and A.O.  Hume, but as indicated in the letters
themselves, the teachings and occult ideas were to be
disseminated in articles and books written by A.O.  Hume and A.P.
Sinnett.  In other words, the teachings were to be conveyed to
the general public.

Back to letter #10, I would suggest that this letter needs to be
carefully studied and viewed in the context of what is written in
Letters 22 and 134.  Plus the concepts need to looked out in the
light of what HPB says elsewhere in the first 200 pages of Vol.
I of the Secret Doctrine, as well as in Isis Unveiled, the Key to
Theosophy, etc.

I believe Arthur Osborn provides much background in his COSMIC
WOMB.

And at the end of ML #82 (Letter No.  113 in the chrono ed), KH
provides additional insight into what he means in Letter #10 when
he writes:

"...according to Mr.  Massey's philosophical conclusion *we have
no god?* He is right---since he applies the name to an
extracosmic anomaly, and that, we knowing nothing of the latter,
find each man his *God*--within himself in his own personal , and
at the same time *impersonal* Avalokiteswara...."

How many millions if not billions of people still believe in a
"God" separate from themselves and separate from the universe? It
is said that there are 50 million "born-again" Christians in the
U.S.A.  Having had discussions with many of these
fundamentallist, orthodox Christians, I can assume you that
probably 99.9% of them believe in the kind of "God" that Master
K.H.  says does NOT exist! [Correction: in the last sentence the
word "assume" should be "assure"!]

And related to this is the statement that HPB was
anti-Christianity.  She certainly criticized the "literal"
interpretation of the Bible.  She also was against "elevating"
the Bible and Christianity to a unique status among all world
scriptures and world religions.  How many millions if not
hundreds of millions of Christians still believe the Bible is
alone divinely inspired and all other religious writings come
from Satan? How many millions...  still believe that Jesus Christ
alone saves one's soul from Damanation and hellfire? How many
millions still disbelieve in reincarnation because they believe
the Bible does NOT teach such a concept? How many millions...
still beleive that there really was a Garden of Eden, that there
really was a physical opening of the Red Sea, etc.  etc? How many
of the millions of Christians know 2 cents about the sacred
writings of Hinduism, Buddhisms, Sikhism, etc.  etc?

STudents of Theosophy would do well to publicize that there is an
esoteric side to Christianity, that the language of symbolism and
allegory does exist and that the Bible is but part of a much
larger corpus of sacred writings.  etc etc.

The book THE NEW TESTAMENT COMMENTARIES OF H.  P.  BLAVATSKY (I
believe that is the exact title?) published by Point Loma
Publications is a good reference point from which to start the
exploration of what HPB says about Christianity but,
unfortunately, no book has been written to date which attempts to
show in both general and specific terms what HPB says about
Christianity, about the historicity of Jesus Christ, about the
origins of Christianity, about the relationship between
Chrisitianity and other world religions, about esoteric
Christianity and the language of symbols and allegory as found in
both the Old and New Testaments and in various religious writings
from the Gnostics to the Norse myths, from the Puranas to
Mesopotaminan mythology, etc.  etc.  I mean a really indepth
treatment covering possibly 500 to 1000 pages.  As it is, even
most students of Theosophy are probably not as aware as they
should be as to what HPB and her Masters taught on these topics.

Letter # 10 is a very profound letter and much of what is said is
not easily assimilated without exploring the background as to
what Master K.H.  says.

In doing classes on the Mahatma Letters, I find that students to
often start disagreeing with what the Mahatamas says *before*
they really know what the Mahatmas are talking about! Read the
latter part of Letter No.  22 where Master K.H.  says "Learn
first our laws and educate your perceptions." and also: "I tell
you plainly you are unfit to learn, for your mind is too full
,and there is not a corner vacant from whence a previous occupant
would not arise, to struggle with and drive away the newcomer.
Therefore...  I only give you time to reflect and deduce and
first learn well what was already given to you...."

Much of Letters 10 and 22 deal with the concept of "theism" as
opposed to A-theism and PAN-theism.  Look these terms up in a
good encyclopedia or consult THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY
edited by Paul Edwards.  See the article "Concepts of God" in the
Ency of Phil.  and the related articles on Arguments for the
Existence of God, as well as the articles on Atheism, Pantheism
and Theism in the volumes edited by Paul Edwards.  For example,
the article on Theism starts off by saying: "Theism signifies
belief in one God (theos) whi is (a) personal, (b) worthy of
adoration, and (c) separate from the world, but (d) continuously
active in it." [Correction: the word "whi" in the last sentence
should be "who".] KH's comments in letter 10 and 22 is a critique
of the theistic concept.

Another book that gives good back ground material to Letters 10
and 22 is the book by John Hick entitled PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION.
See especially chapters on "The Judaic-Christian Concept of God",
"Grounds for Belief in God," and "Grounds for Disbelief in God."

Since K.H.  mentions Samuel Clarke.  Spinoza, Baron de Holbach,
and others in Letter 10, read the biographical articles on these
individuals in THE ENCYLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY and K.H.'s comments
may appear more understandable, etc.

In summary, the letters under consideration need to be read,
reread and studied and the student needs to educated himself on
many subjets relevant to the letters including not only the ones
mentioned above but also on mysticism (in the sense of a
universal mysticism), esoteric christianity, etc.

Those interested should now read Letter #134 which has caused a
great deal of controversy in Theosophical circles.  It will be
interesting to hear people's comments on the subject matter of
Letter 134 (as numbered in the first 3 editions of the MLs).

Daniel Caldwell