Theos-Talk Archives (April 1999 Message tt00051)

In a message dated 4/2/99 4:06:31 PM, schuelergerald@optec-hq.optec.army.mil 
writes:

>>>Theosophy puts a more realistic view of human and spiritual
>evolution and progression than the one YOU PROPOSE.  One that is based
>on continual development over many lives and indeed Manvantaras.<<
>
>No Peter, I have proposed nothing. The teaching about
>liberation in a single lifetime is well established in Tibetan
>Buddhism, and I only discussed it in terms of our 2nd
>Objective--comparing religions. It would seem that there
>are several folks on this list that try to make personal
>attacks whenever they hear things that they don't like.
>My own take on Theosophy is that this teaching has
>no conflict whatever. If you see a conflict, then thats
>your problem, and you have a perfect right to discuss
>your view here. But quit saying that this teaching is
>my idea (Leon does this too) which suggests to me
>that you are overly emotional on this topic. I can't
>very well take credit for a teaching that has existed
>for some two thousand years, now can I? Of course.
>maybe I dreamed it up in a past life...??

Maybe so, since your defensive arguments to describe "what you meant"--when 
all along your original arguments to defend the concept of enlightenment in 
one lifetime, regardless of the practices of previous lifetimes, as being the 
"only" possibility, and that all other views are wrong--is no better than 
having "proposed" that view yourself in the first place.  No excuse that you 
are just "reporting" on somebody else's view hold's water, since you have not 
given any credible evidence that such a view (which you seem to believe) is 
true, except vague reference to so called, "authoritative Buddhist 
scripture"... Which, as far as I can see, is an oxymoron, and is no more 
credible than the report of miracles in the Bible.  

>So, lets see then exactly what is my own personal
>view here. My feeling is that the doctrine of countless
>lives, that we must reincarnate forever is an extreme
>postion, one of emprisonment. The other doctrine,
>that we can be liberated in a single lifetime is the
>other extreme, one of liberation. Emprisonment and
>liberation are two sides of a dualistic coin and the
>truth, I think lies somewhere between them, or
>rather it encorporates and transcends them both.

Baloney, One way to stop incarnating "forever" (and that includes through the 
eternality of Brahma) is to put out your spark of consciousness by separating 
yourself completely, in mind and spirit, from the flow of karma through 
continued, non redeemable acts of ultimate evil, or other means of spiritual 
"suicide'.  Such "isolation" is not the same as the "enlightenment" or 
"Nirvana" spoken of by Patanjali and other ancient and modern Masters.  On 
the other hand, in the case of the enlightenment of a Bodhisattva, 
"reincarnating forever" is a natural and accepted concomitant.

As for "Enlightenment in one lifetime," that may be quite possible for one 
who is a new soul with no previous bad karma and who produces the ultimate 
evil and the ultimate good to counteract it ALL in one lifetime--as "Saint" 
Milarepa was said to have done in the possibly mythic or fantasy stories of 
his "miraculous" life... However, for one who is born an advanced Chela with 
previous "clearing" of all his lower natures, and on the final cycle (from 
the physical to the mental) of his path to enlightenment, this is not really 
achieving enlightenment in one lifetime.  As most Masters seem to agree, such 
achievements should take at least seven lifetimes.  So, when we speak of 
enlightenment, we must remember that it covers all seven natures, and ranges 
between many degrees of acquired wisdom and knowledge from a mere Chela, 
through a full fledged Master, to an Avatar (who may have attained his 
Mastery in a previous Manvantara).
.  
What must rule in all these discussions, however, is, not reference to 
authorities, scriptures, or personal opinions, but the scientific, and 
impersonal laws of karma operating in accord with the fundamental laws of 
cycles and periodicity that are clearly stated as the basis of the 2nd 
Fundamental Principle--(described in the Proem of the secret Doctrine, and 
thoroughly and consistently verified by reference to the ancient teachings, 
(both Buddhist and otherwise) in the "commentaries" on the Book of Dzyan.)  I 
think that, and the many references made to the nature of karma by the 
Masters and their direct messengers (See W.Q.J's "Aphorisms on Karma" and 
HPB's teachings and comments on Karma) is enough "authority" for most 
theosophists.  

Except for the special case of Milarepa and its mythic and "magical" 
connotations--based on a clear understanding of fundamental laws of karma 
(cycles and periodicity) which "immutably" rules over all action and reaction 
in the universe, from spirit to matter, no logical credibility can be given 
to "enlightenment in one lifetime".  Such laws cannot be overcome by "wishful 
thinking," mental "rationalization," or psychological "brainwashing." 

LHM



-- 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.