Re: Does the Theosophical Society have a Doctrine?
May 12, 1998 09:54 AM
by Brenda S Tucker
Jerry Schueler writes:
>I know that Theosophy is not Buddhism. HPB, for reasons
>of her own, took what she considered the best of all of the
>religions, and put them together while rejecting ideas that
>she did not agree with. The main example here that comes
>to my mind is reincarnation. She assures us that humans
>can't retrograde to animals because the "door is closed"
>and so on. Yet Tibetans, HH the DL included, teach that
>this is a very real possibility.
The I AM temple teaches that it is "human creation" which attaches to the
so called animals and causes the animals to act in ways that are out of
harmony and unnatural. They imply that nature would be peaceful and
well-mannered, but that the human thoughts and feelings are so enmeshed
into all of the fabric of the world. IF we live through our creation, then
I suppose that some of those "strictly negative" and "ill-powered"
elementals possess an attraction to anything that will energize them even
if they are part of another creature (who is probably trying to free
themselves of this monster vibration). This is not reincarnation into an
animal, but it is activating the animal to react in ways it normally
wouldn't. The human has a very destructive effect on some animals to the
point that their real nature becomes practically lost and buried within
them and the human thinking and feeling is directly observable instead.
Another disconnect is the past-
>life review. She claims we all have one after death, yet there
>is no such thing found in Tibetan Buddhism. HH the DL was
>asked about this, and had no answer why past-life reviews
>were considered important in the West, but acknowledges
>that the Tibetan masters had never detected such a review
>during their detailed analysis of post-death conditions.
The pastoral nature of the Tibetan culture may be largely void of
circumstances that create conflict as in the modern West. Culture,
High-Tech conveniences, job qualifications, etc. contain much more mental
information deserving of memory orientation than do the lives as I've
observed them in Tibet.
Again, in the I AM tradition, memory isn't viewed as very necessary.
Instead bad memories are sought to be destroyed, so that we can continue
with the purification and ascension into light. Is it possible that
memories pass over a screen as they pass away forever? When pastoral
objects like the earth and the stars, the grass and the hills still exist,
it seems silly to look at the thought of them as memories, because they are
in continuous existence. Our thoughts of them instead of a review are
simply a connection.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application