Malkioni Boddisvattvas

From: Peter Metcalfe (
Date: Thu 14 May 1998 - 15:01:11 EEST

Nils Weinander.

>> [on why we should use the Boddhisvattva parallel]

>Read again. I explained why _I_ find the parallell
>useful. If anyone else finds likewise, they are of
>course invited to share the idea, but I explicitly
>wrote that you can ignore it if you don't like it.

And I am allowed to question the usefulness of the parallel, am
I not? If one choses to post ideas here then one should expect
a fair bit of comment about it. So saying that people should hold

their peace if they don't like it or see problems with it is a
bit churlish.

>> But in every case that I've seen so far, the Boddhisvattva
>> parallel was presented as some universal truth about Malkioni
>> Saints. This is what annoys me.

>Hmm? The only absolute I have seen in this debate is
>on the line of "no, that is wrong".

Read the thread again. Some people were discussing it as being
applicable to all Malkioni Saints. It was only _after_ I
pointed out the changes that would be required that people started
saying they were only talking about the beliefs of a few heretics.
So regardless of whether the parallel was a statement of faith that
should be adopted for salvation or just a mere suggestion, I do feel
that I was justified in pointing out the problems with adopting it
and not be derided for reading "too deeply" or issuing absolute "no,
that is wrong".

>But, since my
>position has been unclear, I repeat: I like to use
>one aspect of bodhisattvas as a model for one aspect
>of malkioni saints, that is a postponement of their
>respective state of grace in order to help others on
>the same way. OK?

You are doing it again! In the last post you said you wanted
it because it would be a useful bone of contention between
the differing sects. And now it's back to all saints are
postponing Solace.

>Also, as I have explicitly stated, I use one model,
>like this one, until a better comes along. If that
>happens, I adopt the better explanation.

Given that this is largely a matter of taste, I simply am not
interested in changing your mind. All I set out to do was to
illustrate some of the problems of the parallel with what is
known about Malkionism.

>So please, expand on the Seven Heavens. Are they all in Solace?

A qualified yes.

>Where do the average dead Malkioni in good standing go?

It depends on how good they were in life.

>Which saints are in which heaven?

Unknown as yet.

>> Simultaneous existance is not unusual as there are living
>> Saints (ie in Solace and on Earth) in Glorantha.

>But that is no problem in my model, since they, as saints,
>are not in Solace yet.

If they are not in Solace, then how do they gain the ability
to work miracles?

- --Peter Metcalfe


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 23:17:20 EEST