Theos-Talk Archives (November 1998 Message tt00530)

Dan,

Thanks for the great quotes on Buddhist Tantricism and Karmamudra
and Jnanamudra. You certainly saved me a lot of time and effort.  I
first published this in my 1987 book, so have been aware of it for
some time. I pretty much agree with everything you say.

When I mentioned that there were several discrepancies between
Blavatsky and the Mahayana/Vajrayana I was mainly thinking about
liberation via coupling emptiness and bliss.  HPB says almost
nothing about this at all even though she must have known a great
deal about it.

My original point in all of this was to get the idea of liberation
out to Theosophists who apparently have no concept of it. Just
like I did a few years ago with ethics, I am deliberately trying
to get people to think about karma and reincarnation more
than the simplified exoteric view of cause and effect going
on for ever. I have talked to several prominent and long-time
Theosophist over the years who have admitted to me that
the concept of liberation in a single lifetime was foreign to
them, and they did not consider it to be Theosophical. I
was bothered by this, because it is a central teaching in
Tibet, where HPB is supposed to have studied. Of course
it applies to only a few people, but it is the possibility of it
happening at all that counts here, not the likelihood. Milarepa,
one of the most famous saints in Tibet killed a person via
black magic and nevertheless was liberated in that very
life. This seems to be a novel and downright unacceptable
idea in Theosophy where everyone prefers to think that
karma and reincarnation *have* to go on forever (I have
heard that seven lifetimes are needed, but this too seems
to be an arbitrary idea that I haven't found anywhere in
Buddhism).

Now, either you can show me where HPB or her Masters
teach this idea, or else I think you have to agree that there
seems to be a disconnect. The idea that HPB deliberately
withheld this idea seems to be a lilkely possibility.

One of the primary methods or techniques used for
liberation in a single lifetime is the coupling of emptiness
(objectivity in its highest sense) with bliss (subjectivity in its
highest sense).  This has been taught in Tibet for apparent
centuries even though HPB ignores it, or at best de-emphasizes
it (I can't recall ever seeing it in her writings and would greatly
appreciate it if you or someone could do so). In point of
fact, her doctrine of monads would seem to be in direct
opposition to it, unless we realize that these "monads"
are not really monadic (indivisible) at all, which is how I
read it.  Of course, another possibility exists, one that
Eldon proposed some time ago, to the effect that HPB's
Theosophy is simply not Buddhism.

This is some pretty hard stuff here, and I agree that it is
not for beginners to even worry much about. Few, if any,
Theosophists know or care about emptiness, and even
fewer know or care about bliss (which uses a consort
for stimulation). Bascially, as I student of both HPB
and Tibetan Buddhism, I am bothered by this apparent
disconnect and feel that Theosophists should at least
be aware of these important  Buddhist concepts even
if they prefer not to believe in them.

Jerry S.