Theos-Talk Archives (August 2000 Message tt00009)

Thanks, Kim, for your comments.

I will try to follow up on these items you are
referring to. Once I reread and study your email I'll
try to make a few comments.

Daniel


--- Kim Poulsen <kpoulsen@vip.cybercity.dk> wrote:
> Dan,
> a few short notes on the question of a buddhist
> Absolute:
> 
> Most tibetan buddhists, including the gelugpa,
> divide their beliefs in an
> esoteric and exoteric part. The exoteric part is
> typically something like
> Nagarjuna's philsophy of Void, described below [btw
> the relation between the
> void and svabhaava - the manifestation of Self as a
> part of that void is
> esoteric in itself]
>     The esoteric part is usually one or more tantric
> lineages, orally
> transmitted, and kept very secret to this day.
>     The only major tantric commentary, translated in
> part into a western
> language, has only  recently been made available. It
> is the Vimalaprabha,
> the great commentary on the Kalachakra Tantra, a
> major object of research
> for David Reigle (a fine scholar and something of
> the closest to a *true*
> theosophist I can imagine)
>     And now for the Absolute - this work, especially
> in its fifth book, the
> book of "dzny'a na" teaches the principle called the
> "parama akshara" or
> Supreme/Absolute Immutable, the same name used for
> ages in indian philosophy
> for the Absolute principle (the other being Param
> brahma). To remove any
> doubts on the identity the Vimalaprabha uses the
> same qualities (jnana and
> bliss) as the Vedanta for this principle, and also
> associates it with the
> Turiya state of consciousness (as do the Vedanta
> philosophy - and HPB).
>    This secret doctrine of the Kalacakra tantra is
> specifically associated
> with the gelugpa, especially its chiefs, the Dalai
> lama, etc. It is also
> considered secret to this day.
>   The recent translations of the "Great Commentary"
> are found in ph.d
> dissertations by Ronald Newman (1986), Vesna Wallace
> and James Hartzell (all
> available through UMI), and in a little book by
> Raniero Gnoli (translated
> into italian).
>     Should anyone want bibliograhic details or
> discuss the philosophy of
> this Absolute please e-mail me privately.
> 
> Kim Poulsen
> 
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: Daniel Caldwell <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
> To: <theos-talk@theosophy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 5:53 AM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: The Gelugpa Tradition and
> THE SECRET DOCTRINE on
> the Absolute
> 
> 
> >
> > Frank,
> >
> > Thanks for your comments below.  In this email I
> will
> > address just one comment of yours:
> >
> >
> > I wrote:
> >
> > > > The quote:
> > > > > "Dolpopa apparently teaches the first
> > fundamental
> > > proposition
> > > > > of The Secret Doctrine, and Tsong-kha-pa
> > > apparently
> > > > > refutes it"
> > >
> > > > are the words of David Reigle in his book
> > > BLAVATSKY'S
> > > > SECRET BOOKS.  They are NOT mine.  It is David
> > > > Reigle's opinion that Tsong-kha-pa refuted the
> 1st
> > > > Fundamental proposition as given in HPB's
> Secret
> > > > Doctrine.
> >
> >
> > Frank, you wrote in reply:
> >
> > > If this is so, then David is surely wrong. For
> me
> > > there is no difference between Tsongkhapa and
> SD.
> >
> >
> > Frank, whatever you may think of David Reigle's
> > research, here is what another researcher says
> about
> > the issue under discussion.  I quote BELOW his
> letter
> > to me which he has given me permission to quote on
> > these forums.  The letter is from Rich Taylor:
> >
> >
> > Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:51:10 EDT
> > Subject: The Gelugpa Tradition and THE SECRET
> DOCTRINE
> > on the Absolute
> >
> > Daniel,
> >
> > Thanks for your comments -- they have jumped
> started
> > my dissertation work after too-long a hiatus.
> >
> > You are right about Tsong Kha Pa. (And of course,
> your
> > source Reigle is right about him.) It is a serious
> > problem, and you can quote me on it.
> > The Gelugs-Pas are ASBOLUTELY DEAD-SET against any
> > absolute, of ANY  kind. Emptiness is the highest
> > principle -- not a pleroma-emptiness like
> > the Gnostics, but an emptiness even empty of
> > emptiness. They are serious about this.
> >
> > It is a deconstructive position, not a positive
> > assertion. I will find quotes to this effect. The
> > Gelugs will oppose ANY positive assertion,
> > just as Nagarjuna (their hero) did, and HPB makes
> > plenty of them.
> >
> > Reigle continues to assert that "secret" books of
> > Tsong Kha Pa will vindicate HPB's adoration of him
> > while contradicting his public and well-known
> > teachings. But this is a faith statement. The
> > situation as it stands is that HPB is closer to
> > Jonang-pas than any other known school of
> Buddhism,
> > and directly opposed (in principle) to the
> Madhyamaka
> > position of the Yellow Hats.
> >
> > I'll have more on this in a few weeks.
> >
> > Rich
> > ------------------
> >
> > So Frank, here is another Blavatsky student who
> has
> > studied Tsong-kha-pa and has come to a conclusion
> that
> > confirms Reigle's.  Rich promises to provide some
> > documentation and I will pass that along when he
> gives
> > it to me.
> >
> > Yes, Frank, I will call David Reigle and read him
> what
> > you say in your public email about him and Hank T.
>  I
> > don't know if he will want to respond.
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > Daniel H. Caldwell
> > DanielhCaldwell@yahoo.com
> > Blavatsky Archives Online
> > http://sites.netscape.net/dhcblainfo/
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
> > http://invites.yahoo.com/
> >
> > -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
> theos-talk@theosophy.com
> >
> 
=== message truncated ===


=====
Daniel H. Caldwell
DanielhCaldwell@yahoo.com
Blavatsky Archives Online
http://sites.netscape.net/dhcblainfo/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.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.