Theos-Talk Archives (April 1999 Message tt00019)

April 4th

AS I see it, some definitions are helpful:

MUKTA/MUKTI  "Liberation from sentient life-a candidate for
Moksha, freedom from flesh and matter, or life on this earth.:
Theos. Glos, p. 218

JIVANMUKTA	  "An adept or yogi who has reached the ultimate state
of holiness, and separated himself from matter;  a Mahatma, or
"Nirvanee," a "dweller in bliss" and emancipation.  Virtually one
who has reached Nirvana during life."  Theos. Glos. P. 159-60

TRIYANA  "The 3 vehicles across Sansara..."Sravaka,"  "Pratyekha
Buddha" and "Bodhisattva," or the 3 degrees of Yogaship...the
Pratyekha Buddha state refers to him who lives all for himself
and very little for others, occupying the middle of the vehicle,
filling it all and leaving no room for others. - Such is the
selfish candidate for Nirvana."  T. Glos p. 344-5

AS I READ IT EVERY DEFINITION INVOLVES LIBERATION FROM THE
PHYSICAL AND PERSONAL ASPECTS OF PRESENT LIVING.  BUT IT DOES NOT
MEAN ABANDONING THE SELFISH POINT OF VIEW, ALTHOUGH, ADMITTEDLY,
SUCH A PRATYEKHA BUDDHA WOULD COMPLY WITH ALL THE RIGOROUS
CRITERIA OF THAT KIND OF "PERFECTION" AS CAN BE OBTAINED IN THIS
WORLD.  AS AN "EGO" IT ELIMINATES ANY BONDS WITH THE PRESENT
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE TO THIS EARTH.  BUT CANNOT LIBERATE ITSELF
FROM THE DEEPER OR HIGHER AND MORE INDIVIDUAL BONDS RELATING TO
MANAS, BUDDHI AND ATMA.

THAT TRUE PERFECTION WHICH INCLUDES ALL THESE HIGHER "PRINCIPLES"
WOULD APPARENTLY EXTEND THE "TIME FRAME" TO AN ENORMOUS EXTENT -
AS IN THE CASE OF THE BODHISATTVA YANA."  IN THE 3RD FRAGMENT OF
THE "VOICE OF THE SILENCE" WE FIND THE QUESTIONS OF ULTIMATE
CONSIDERATION FOR THE NEEDS OF OTHERS - COMPASSION - BEING
ADDRESSED.  THE IDEALS DESCRIBED THERE, TO ME, REPRESENT A FAR
HIGHER ATTITUDE THAT THE SELFISH IDEA OF "LIBERATION FROM MY
'PERSONAL' "SUFFERING AND LIMITATIONS." ONE GAINS THE POWER TO
ACCEPT SUCH THINGS WHILE STRIVING TO BE OF ASSISTANCE TO OTHERS -
LIKE A "FATHER DAMIEN," OR A "SISTER TERESA."

These are only my own speculations and conclusions

I see very little value in using the views expressed by the old
"schools"
Of Buddhism, Hinduism etc. as our power to think is what is at
stake and not the scholarship of referring to earlier
definitions - which are also, admittedly of value as starting
points for our own independent thinking.
It is the logic that is inherent in any concept that is important
and not the value of rigidly adhering to the conclusions of the
past.  Those conclusions need to be understood and if necessary
challenged.  To much is often lost in translation by earlier
writers for us to give entire credence to their conclusions.
Such has been my finding.

Dallas

===========================


-----Original Message-----
From:	owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of bjs
Sent:	Saturday, April 03, 1999 6:23 PM
To:	theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject:	Theos-World Response to Dan

>>And aren't there differing and contradictory views on
"liberation" among Hindu groups?  Among Buddhist groups?  Among
Tibetan
Buddhists? Between Hindu and Buddhist groups?  You believe Peter
is
oversimplifying; but aren't you doing the same thing?
I repeat:  Since this is a Theosophical discussion list, how does
HPB or
the Masters define this term "liberation"? Can you tell us,
Jerry?>>

Gee, I even got Dan upset.  Good. One of my motives is to make
you guys
think a little.

No, I don't think that the views differ very much. Basically the
idea is
freedom or release from suffereing, however you want to define
suffering.

I think that HPB only uses liberation in the jivamukti sense,
which is
Hindu. Why she neglets the Buddhist doctrines of liberation and
emptiness, I don't know, except possibly that people weren't
ready to
hear it (and from responses on this list, they still aren't).

I told Peter that I would say no more on this topic, and so I
won't. Nor
will I take the time and effort to give you guys quotes that
everyone
ignores anyway. If you or anyone else are interested in this
subject,
then I suggest you consult the source material like I did.

Jerry S



-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.