Theos-Talk Archives (May 1998 Message tt00211)

May 8th 1998

Dear Jerry:

  Your post on the Nirmanakaya and on Turiya is a good reason why
I take refuge in quoting what others say.  Specifically what is
said in Theosophy.  It is also why the Buddhist Bhikkus prelude
their answers with the statement:  "Thus have I heard ..."

While in India (for 35 years) I spent many an hour at the Royal
Asiatic Society library pouring over the ancient texts (in
translation), and listening to many a lecture on the ancient
sacred texts and their interpretation -- Hindu, Tibetan and
Buddhist, that, of course counts for nothing in an attempt to
reconcile our view points, but I do think that I have had a
longer acquaintance with oriental literature than you (and most
here) have had,  and also that I have found that the Theosophical
interpretation is far more broad based than recent Orientalism.
It might be of interest to debate the matter with some real
Buddhist, Tibetan and Hindu scholars who are versed in ideas and
not merely in words.

I eventually realized that most of the translators made some
things far more confusing than they need be.  Also that ideas are
far more valuable than words are.

I am sorry indeed that the definitions that you use and trust are
different from those of Theosophy.

Instead of seeking for accord and understanding you seem to me to
be contentious, as though that would in some way clear the air.
It does not.

It merely shows that you have trusted, and now trust, a certain
line of thinking or of definition, and I try to see in yours
something which will bridge the gap you seem so aware of.  I am
not trying to prove you wrong.  But I am trying to show that
Theosophy is far broader based than any one of the various
systems that are being studied.  It is neither dogmatic nor is it
sectarian.  I would not say to your face ( as you have to mine)
you err.  I would say, "You may be mistaken !"

However I am sorry that you seem to fail to provide me with some
evidence of what you hold to be correct.  You merely say "You (I)
am wring!"  To say the best, that is quite unhelpful.

I am eager to understand, and you could help.  Will you ?

Dallas.

> From: "Jerry Schueler" <gschueler@netgsi.com>
> Date: Friday, May 08, 1998 12:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Dangers of psychism

>>And superior to Samadhi is the state named Turiya.  -- The 4th
>>state of the Taraka Raja Yoga, one that corresponds with Atma,
>>and on this plane with "dreamless" sleep, -- a "causal"
>>condition.        Theos. Glossary p. 345
>>
>>See also:  Voice, p 16, 21  SD I 157, 244, 570, 594;
>>Mahatma Letters 109, 131, 343.
>>
>>SAMADHI:  T. Glos p. 286,  Patanjali Yoga Sutras, p. 37
>>
>>Dallas
>>
>
>
>Dallas, your quotes are misinformed. Samadhi, both types
>in fact, are above Turiya. It goes like this: waking, dreaming,
>sleeping, coma (turiya), and samadhi both with and without
>"traces."  The first four states of consciousness correspond
>each to one of the four lower cosmic planes below the Abyss.
>Samadhi has always been the name for the spiritual state
>which exists above the Abyss. You may be quoting proper
>Theosophy (I don't know) but my version is the one that is
>taught throughout Hinduism and Buddhism. This may be
>yet another "disconnect" that Theosophy has with Oriental
>teachings. You will not find Patanjali or any other yogic
>authority saying that turiya is above samadhi.
>
>Jerry S.