Theos-Talk Archives (September 1997 Message tt00034)

Mr. D. Reigle presents evidence of great labor in his latest
study on the use of the ideas conveyed by the Sanskrit words
SVABHAVA, ANATMAN, and SUNYATA.

I hope my observations will find or evoke some interest:

In THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, Mme. Blavatsky emphasizes the
difference between the "Eye," and the "Heart" doctrines. But the
"Heart" doctrine cannot be discovered by a systematic analysis of
what is made available to the "Eye."

Our everyday consciousness (as taught in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY)
seems to be concentrated mainly in "kama-manas" the lower aspect
of the mind faculty, allied to Kama (passions and desires), and
which is where we function in our active day-to-day personality.

One of its capacities is that it tries to reconstruct from
physical evidence that which was the generating energy or motive
for the original event. It is quite limited by such physical
evidence. it also relies very heavily on the opinions so far
generated by those who are considered "authorities," or
"experts," in a particular discipline. To effectively deal with
Indian, Chinese, Tibetan and other Oriental traditions one needs
to be immersed in them for several years, on the spot, and not at
a distance, espencilly, not from the physical limits imposed by a
residence in the "West."

The "Heart" doctrine stems from the plane of the "buddhi-manas"
the wise and compassionate mind (symbolized by the "heart.") and,
this seems to manifest when compassion and pity move an
individual to acts of generosity providing of wisdom and
information which is honest, sicnere and true is thus, a portion
of this work.

An ancient Hindu text points out that there is only "One
Consciousness" functioning in each individual, and that this One
Consciousness, as the WITNESS, pierces up and down the seven
planes of his being, and serves to unite all experiences in each
of those separate levels into a single memory store (akasa) for
all events experienced and witnessed. It is the reson why memory
exists. It is the seat of our Consciousness as EGO-Self, (and
not someone else). We contact this memory base invountarily when
we say "My Voice of Conscience" spoke to me.

The Universe is One and not divisible except for purposes of
understanding through analysis, but, in doing this one needs to
constantly recall the uniting factor which adjusts each "part" to
all the others all the time.

Each of us are a portion of that Universe, a "ray" of ITS Single
consciousness, and as such we store for it (so to say) that
aspect of experience which has been entrusted to us. It is
immortal, and so are we (as Egoic consciousness, not as a
physical form). If it seems to us to represent enormous
potentials, then we will find the same potentials resident in our
own selves, and available at will, when we have fitted ourselves
to handle them in a generous and harmless fashion. Theosophy is
both the study of the theory of right living and provides hints
concerning the practical doing of this.

With this as a preliminary, let us look again at what Mr. Reigle
has so kindly prepared for us.

I notice the phrase used very early: "believing Theosophists" --
Unless credulous or lazy, there should be no "believing"
theosophists, since Theosophy demands alertness and inquiry into
causes. Not to accept blindly anyone's "authority."

As to the Great Adepts, should we not consider the concept that
they have the faculty of recalling at will memory of events which
they witnessed hundreds, thousands of years back. We have the
same capability in potential, but lack, so far. in this
incarnation, the training to do this. Theosophy draws our
attention to this possibility. We are the ones who ought to
consider how to bring it about.

If we look at our World as a great school, an educational
enterprise, then the Adepts are those who have become professors
in it, and we are students at various levels of training. We are
all immortals, but we have started our training at various times
according to our desire to learn. [ "Desire first arose in It
that was the primal germ of mind..."]

Esoteric Brahmanism and esoteric Buddhism while using different
terms are the same in objective: the learning of the secret, the
motivational and causative laws of our world, of ourselves; and
seeking to refine and develop our capacities is common to both.
[ Hermes in Egypt said succinctly: "Man know thyself." ] That is
our first task, having contacted Theosophy in this life, we have
every opportunity opened to us to go on.

In Theosophial literature it is hinted that Sri Sankarachariya's
Ego and that of Gautama the Buddha were the same, and that
Sankaracharya came shortly after the death of the Buddha to
insititute reforms among the Brahmins. The "Smartava" sect
continues this tradition.

"SUNYATA" If philosophically, we try to reconcile "nothing-ness"
with substance, form or "something-ness," then we ought to be
able to admit, the possibility that the ABSOLUTE ALL (or
ABSOLUTENESS) cannot be described by beings who are limited by
being conditioned and resident in forms. It can only be dimly
conceived as a condition of "non-manifestation." Or rather, as a
necessary and unllimited "background" to anything that is
"limited."

The Stanzas of Dzyan seem to indicate that an aspect of this
ABSOLUTENESS includes the potential of "manifestation," of
"limitation," and therefore it is not illogical or inconsistent
to find ourselves IN MANIFESTATION, considering
"non-manifestation" without being able to define IT in any way.
The very fact that we do have thse ideas indicates, does it not,
that resident within each of us is an aspect of the Absolute, and
the Timeless, and that this "ray" is that which can contemplate
and discuss these matters within us !

 From another point of view one might say that the vast cycles of
Manvantaras and Pralayas are evidence of the periodical
reincarnation of the Universe.

The "Secret Doctrine" seems to be constructed on a different
pattern than "Isis." It did not need extensive quotations, as
"Isis" did, to show the existence in classical times of evidence
to Theosophical principles, and the existence of Wise Men in
those same ancient times who had marvelous minds and some
exercised miraculous powers.

In one place HPB states that in the SD she was able to explain
exoteric Hindu symbolism esoterically. That would seem to
indicate that the first 300 pages of the SD contain a great deal
of material for us to study and assimilate. Then, perhaps, we
will begin to undersand what THEOSOPHY really is.

She pointed to inconsistencies and inaccurate conclusions arrived
at by orientalists contemporary to her, and she was frequently
visited by Max Mueller and others. She did employ in the SD
contemporary writings as evidence of closeness or divergence from
theosophical doctrines.

The objective of the "Secret Doctrine" book was to show
thoughtful men and women that there was evidence for the "Heart
doctrine." And while part of it was to be detected in
philosophical and ancient literature, the rest was inwardly
resident in each such inquirer. Self-proof was important, once
one is awoken to its possibility, it is employed increasingly.

If it is diffcult now, over 100 years after her death, and in her
absence, to discover evidence of a "Svabhavika School," one of
the reasons is that it was probaly esoteric. It had no reson to
expose itself to exoteric view, but its members would be known to
other esotericists of the time,. There is ample evidence to show
that the Theosphical Adepts and HPB had the ability to contact
such groups at will. In such matters the whole of the evidence
has to be also considered.

I offer these stray thoughts in the hope of evoking interest in
these subjects.

I find I am also puzzled by many statements made in Theosophical
literature, and have set "aside" a number of these to see how
they get resolved as more study is pursued.