Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00057)

>Jerry Schueler wrote:
>
>> No ego or self reincarnates. This is a basic Buddhist teaching,
>>which I agree with.  BTW, the "real" you is already spiritual, and doesn't
>>need another life on Earth or anywhere else. The whole notion of a
>>personal self that learns and grows via reincarnation is a maya. It is
>>the exoteric view of reincarnation, and one that HPB tried to dispell.
>>Unfortunately, the TSs have all touted this exoteric view since HPB
>>and have done a general dis-service to humanity (IMO of course).
>
>
>In my understanding the view that HPB tried to dispel is that held
>by many spiritualists of her time which claimed that the human
>personality, regularly and quickly returned to earth-life, the
>denial of reincarnation apply only to "astral monad".

This is also my understanding of what she taught.

>What she taught
>is that there is Inner or Higher Ego which is the permanent Individuality,
>the Reincarnating Ego, it become more and more individualized and learn
>more and more by suffering through its cycle of rebirths.

Yes, but she also taught that "permanent" and "eternal" only refers
to this manvantara. Thus the Ego is long-lasting, but not truly eternal.
This is also the Buddhist view.


>This Ego
>start with Divine consciousness; no past, no future, no separation,
>though the inner essence of the Higher Ego is unsoilable, the outer
>may be soiled. At the end of its cycle of incarnations, it is still
>the same divine consciousness, but it has now become individualized
>self consciousness.
>


No. Only the Monad starts with divine consciousness. I think if you
re-read her material you will find that the Reincarnating Ego is but
a "ray" of the Monad, and thus is not divine, nor is it eternal.
The whole idea of "individualized self consciousness" is very
tricky. How can we presume to suppose a divine Monad starts
out without self-consciousness?  The Ego may gain self-consciousness
but not the Monad.


>It should not be thought that because the Buddhist system deny self,
>there is no transmigrator. They posit many different modes of
>transmigration without a permanent, independent self.
>

Right. Such as skandhas or propensities. HPB also calls them
shistas.


>One of the earliest models was the so-called 'twelve-linked chain
>of dependent origination' begin with avidya as the first link.
>The third one, vijnana (consciousness), was conceived of as somehow
>carrying the samskaras (impression). Dependent on it arose the fourth
>of the twelve links, nama-rupa (name and form) in essence the mental
>and physical constituents of a new life.
>

Right, but remember that vijnana is a lower form of consciousness,
and not equal to samadhi.


>The Yogacharyas assert that the mind-basis-of-all (alaya-vijnana)
>is the actual I since it is the transmigrator and carrier of seeds.
>This tenet is very similar to HPB's.
>

Right. But the Yogacharayas are not the whole of Buddhism.
The Dzogchen, which is generally considered a "higher" school,
does not go along with the alaya-vijnana notion. IMHO, the only "real"
I is the Monad, about which little can be said.


>In the Prasangika system, it is the mere-I imputed in dependence upon
>the mental and physical aggregates that nevertheless can function
>and transmigrates.
>

The Prasangika teach a higher form of Buddhism than the Yogacharaya,
IMHO. The key word in your statement is "dependence."  The question
is, Where is an independent I, and the answer is that such an I does
not exist.


>There will be no profit to say that doctrine of reincarnation, even
>as generally understood, is Maya, it is true that outside of the
>Absolute everything is illusion and in reality there is no one in
>delusion and no one get enlightenment but as long as we have to use
>words as mean of communication, the doctrine should be treated as
>conventional truth and as one of the best possible descriptions of
>reality that will help us out of the mire of Maya.
>

If you are saying here that reincarnation exists as conventional
truth, then I wholehearted agree. Reincarnation does not exist
as absolute truth.


>Let me quote from Nagarjuna's "Treatise on the Middle Way".
>
>....
>Best,
>
>Visanu
>
>

I absolutely adore Nagarguna. Thanks for the quotes.


Jerry S.