Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00154)

I normally try not to cross post messages. As Jerry has sent his replies to
my post on Theos-1 to this list, I thought it would be appropriate to send
the original messages. Peter.

-----Original Message-----

Jerry,

You offered a single sentence qoute from the SD and one from "The Inner
Group Teachings" to support the view that ATMA was a maya and therefore
there was no immortal self and enduring Self. I wonder if you have done
what you complain about to others - ie picked a couple of qoutes that
support your view but not checked to see if the overall context of HPB
writings supports that particular intepretation?

>>>JERRY: ...just look at Blavatsky's two quotes for a moment. The one
tells us that all 7 principles are within the 7-plane solar system that she
carefully describes in the SD. In fact, she
says that there is one principle per plane - although for the life of me I
have never been able to satisfactory relate them on a one-to-one
correspondence, as I have already said.<<<

I agree with your last remark about the one-to-one correspondence. I have
trouble with that too. However, in the sentence you qoute HPB is not
comparing the seven principles with the seven plane solar system. She is
referring to the symbol of the triangle as the upper triad of
Atma-Buddhi-Manas. She states:

"Each principle is on a different plane. The Chela must rise to one after
another assimilating each until the three are one..."

That the three can become one, means we need to be cautious about viewing
the planes as ultimately separate. We also know HPB says of Atman that in
truth it is no human principle at all but should be considered a Universal
principle - it is one with Parabrahm. We have to include it as a principle
because being universal it is 'in' everything. So we need to be careful
not to *limit* Atma to "within the seven plane solar system."

Your other qoute.

QUOTE 2: "Spirit is matter on the seventh plane; matter is Spirit - on the
lowest point of its cyclic activity; and both - are MAYA" (SD Vol 1 p 633)

HPB uses the term "Spirit" in many different ways in her writings, sometimes
to refer to Atma, or Cosmic Ideation, or the collective host of Dhyanis, the
demiurge, the Manasic entity, consciousness & so on. So I think we need to
understand what HPB is refering to by "Spirit" and "matter" in the sentence
you qoute above. What is the context of her statement? If we look at the
context we find she is writing about "the higher Planetary Powers" appearing
to the eye of the Seer UNDER TWO ASPECTS. These two aspects being:

===
"..the SUBJECTIVE - as influences, and the OBJECTIVE as mystic FORMS, which
under Karmic Law, become a Presence, Spirit and Matter being One as
repeatedly stated. Spirit is matter on the seventh plane; matter is
Spirit - on the lowest point of cyclic activity, and both - are Maya." (SD I
633, caps added.)
===

If it were ATMAN that HPB was referring to and calling a Maya, we would
expect to find further support for this in other places in her writings.
Yet, over and over again shes says the opposite. (see below) If Atman is
ultimately one with Parabrahm, (or as the Vedantins say "One with Brahman")
it must in essense be beyond the duality of spirit and matter.

She qoutes Shankara as stating this very thing:

"'Oh, wise man, remove the conception that not-Spirit is Spirit,' says
Sankaracharya. Atma is not-Spirit ..."(SD I 573)

hence she also states:

"ATMAN [is] the one reality on the plane of Cosmic illusion" (SD I 181)

"Atma alone is the one real and eternal substratum of all -- the essence and
absolute knowledge -- the Kshetragna.** It is called in the Esoteric
philosophy "the One Witness," (SD I 570).

"As well expressed by the translater of the Crest Jewel of Wisdom 'though
ISWARA is God.. unchanged in the profoundest depths of pralayas and in the
intensist acivities of the manvantaras... beyond (him) is ATMA round whose
pavilions is the darkness of eternal MAYA." (SD I 574)

Nonexistence or NON-BEING (abhava) in the sense of , and as separate from,
objectivity or substance [refers] to the highest monad or ATMAN. (CW X 580)

Atman… the emanation of the Absolute (CW III 414)

The seventh Principle… in essence is merely a beam of the infinite Ocean of
Light. . . an emanation from the Absolute, and indivisible in reality from
it. (CW XIV 49)

So to return to the sentence you qoute - what is the "Spirit" that is a
MAYA that HPB is referring to? It appears to be the collective name for the
"Higher Planetary powers" about which she is writing and which is the
context for her remarks. We find support for this a few pages further on in
the SD:

=== Iswara, say the Vedantins, is the highest consciousness in nature. "This
highest consciousness," answer the Occultists, "is only a synthetic unit in
the world of the manifested Logos -- or on the plane of illusion; for it is
the sum total of Dhyan-Chohanic consciousnesses." "Oh, wise man, remove the
conception that not-Spirit is Spirit," says Sankaracharya. Atma is
not-Spirit in its final Parabrahmic state, Iswara or Logos is Spirit; or, as
Occultism explains, it is a compound unity of manifested living Spirits. .
.=== (SD I 573)

and again on the next page:

"As well expressed by the translater of the Crest Jewel of Wisdom 'though
ISWARA is 'God'.. unchanged in the profoundest depths of pralayas and in the
intensist acivities of the manvantaras... beyond (him) is ATMA round whose
pavilions is the darkness of eternal MAYA." (SD I 574)


regards,

...Peter