Article March 8, 1913 Issue

Mr. Merry must excuse me if I dissent from the position...

Frederick Dixon—Letchworth, England.

Letchworth Citizen

Mr. Merry must excuse me if I dissent from the position taken up in his last letter. He says now that all he originally said was that there were certain things in Christian Science which were common to Christian Science and theosophy, and he proceeds to give three instances of what he means. The original report, however, of his lecture stated quite definitely that he represented Christian Science as a counterpart of the Vedantic doctrine of Maya. This, I showed quite clearly in my last letter, is not the case. The Vedantic doctrine of Maya differs fundamentally from the Christian Science teaching of the unreality of matter, inasmuch as theosophy, on this gentleman's own showing, teaches that matter is an illusion, and this illusion "is produced by the divine nature." Christian Science denies absolutely and unequivocally that there is any connection between this illusion and divine Mind. When two teaching differ, root and branch, as to causation, to say that one is the counterpart of the other is — I wish to use the term without any offensiveness at all — playing with the facts.

Now, let me take the critic's three points, which he uses to argue that Christian Science teaching is the counterpart of the doctrine of Maya. First, he says both teach that all material phenomena are unreal and illusory. Now, all idealistic philosophy, from the time of Plato onward, has taught this. You might just as well say that Platonism, Conceptualislm, Berkeleianism, as well as the whole body of modern idealism, were counterparts of the doctrine of Maya, as that Christian Science is.

Secondly, he says that both teach that matter is due to ignorance. The Stoics taught that evil was the result of ignorance, Socrates and Epictetus taught something of the same sort; but it would hardly be contended that the teaching of Socrates, of Epictetus, or the Stoics was therefore the counterpart of Maya. As a matter of fact, on the critic's own showing, the ignorance of truth implied in the Christian Science teaching of unreality and that implied in theosophical teaching on the same subject, is fundamentally different. The illusion of matter is produced, according to theosophy, on the gentleman's own showing, by the divine nature, and must therefore be part of the consciousness of divine Mind, and, unless this Mind can rid itself of something which it possesses, must be also eternal. Christian Science, on the other hand, teaches that the divine Mind, being perfect, is conscious of nothing but perfection, and is unconscious of the illusion or lie which, in the very nature of illusion, does not exist.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

Mr. Merry must excuse me if I dissent from the position...

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access