Theos-Talk Archives (January 1999 Message tt00025)

Jan 3rd 1999

Dear Rich:

May I put it this way:

I am sure that the Tantrik schools and their literature do not
exclusively deal with "sex."

2nd.  There are two broad divisions of those that follow their
codes:  the RIGHT HAND PATH
(the "Dakshinacharyas" ) and the LEFT HAND PATH (the
"Vamanacharyas" ).

The Tantras are in effect anything of the "esoteric" that is made
EXOTERIC.  To that extent Theosophy may be classified among the
Dakshinacharya texts.  It has put into plain text, for all to
read, some of the most fundamental teachings concerning our
Evolution, processes of individual work and offers, as a result,
for personal consideration a choice of "Goals".

There is no question of "prejudice" here.

As I see it:  Prejudice arises only when one decides to accept
ideas on the face value of the words in which they are expressed.
This face-value consideration is what is called the
"Eye-Doctrine."  [ It the subject matter for academic studies and
disputations - it is discursive rather than correlative.  And, it
glorifies the personality and its very limited ambitions - which
are of transient value and perish with the death of the present
body.  This is how I would characterize this. ]

The "Heart Doctrine" (as I see it) is the individual decision
making process that guides the individual through the tests and
pitfalls of life.  It may be based on "Eye Doctrine" texts as a
starting point, but then it becomes a matter of self-choice and
individual selection.  It emphasizes the concept of UNIVERSALITY;
of the Individual Self -- being "one among many."

The innate immortality of Man and the universality of
Brotherhood, based on the common Source (SPIRIT) from which we
have all emanated, are the next considerations.  Those are NOT
the concepts of the "Eye Doctrine" texts, (although they may
recognize them, they refute them) nor does the study of those
"selfish-oriented" Tantras promote a search for the inner ethical
and moral application of universal truths and laws.

In Theosophy (as I see it) we are seeking to understand how
"immortals" deal with other "immortals."  Both being "hidden"
under the veils of matter.  How do we bring out the innate
universality in each one of us, and how do we assist in refining
the "matter" with which those "veils" are made ?  The problem is
not that the Immortal HIGHER SELF within is at loggerheads with
other "HIGHER SELVES", but rather, that the "veils" with which it
is surrounded (our personality - created by our Karmic past
choices) has mistakenly assumed that it (and not the HIGHER SELF)
is the most important thing.

However there is a cautionary note that is raised for all who
study Theosophy, or any other philosophy, and ancient or modern
glosses and commentaries.  It is the question of MOTIVE.

Is the text offered altruistic, or is it not - does it concern
itself with the betterment of mankind and with the advancement of
all "creatures" in it, or does it not ?  This is where karma is
made based on our perception and choices.  This is where argument
and disputation arises.

That, as I see it is the sum and substance of the whole matter,
but I also recognize that others may see or phrase it
differently.

Dallas