Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00268)

<<<Atma is also called - the TRUTH.>>>

Rather, I would call it an expression or manifestation or ray of Truth.


<<<HPB is quoted in the SD to say that>>>

Thanks for all the nice biblical quotes. Perhaps I should tell you, I first read all of this over 30 years ago, and have been studying it all this time. I also know how to use an index. I have discovered that one cannot take the Theosophical core teachings literally, but that they have to be interpreted. Maybe you will find this to be true, huh?


<<<vol. 1, p. 227 : Atma="SPIRIT" >>>

Don't show this one to Peter, it's apt to confuse him.


<<<To study things for years and not figuring them out - doesn't imply that they are complex - just that one maybe is impatient or not very clever yet - though that can change within a second - and has so during even human earth evolution ! (It really can happen.)>>>

What I meant was, in oder to understand the globes and planes and how they relate, one has to experience them. Reading about them, and discussing them, and thinking about them, will bring much confusion.


<<<That the Lord - i.e. ParaBrahman dwells in the heart of all of us - is not nescessarily Bhakti Yoga thinking. It maybe just is the Heart doctrine of Theosophy - put forward one more time adapted to you - the readers - level on the spiritual ladder ! >>>

To say that divinity is in the heart of every person is Theosophy. To say that God is in the heart of every person is religion. I am sorry that you don't see this rather wide distinction.


<<<(The remark : 'psyhic personifications' - is that compasionate thinking comming from a wise theosophical heart ??)>>>

My remark here is neither compassionate nor uncompassionate. I was simply telling you what is really going on (out of my compassion).


<<Maybe - I am one of those understanding - Atma=Brahman.>>

Maybe. Only you can answer that one. But I can tell you that you will never understand them from reading and thinking about them.


<<<I don't need to quote, when I am making - logical statements do I ?>>>

No. And I wish you wouldn't.


<<So, Atma is Maya is a logical statement. Then Atam is Everything also is logical. The world is Maya - But the truth is shown there. (Not logic ?)>>>

I have never said that "the world is maya" although I have said that it is mayavic. But I see your point, and you quite right. I meant, and should have said, that atman is mayavic. Thank you for pointing this out. Maya itself is the way in which manas mis-interprets reality.



<<<Atma is the 'witness'.>>>

Exactly. And yet there is no witness found when we look for one. Thus atman is mayavic.


<<< Atma is the innermost in all human beings. >>>

Agreed. And human beings are mortal, and HPB tells us that the mortal cannot know the immortal.


<<<Your view on your 'I' your 'SELF' is not real it is fake - because you do not know everything yet.>>>

Well, at least I have some pretty good company - including Tzongkhapa, Atisha, Asanga, and oh yes, G de Purucker.


<<<If your view was real and not fake - you would se Atma - and you would see, experience or be (beness) that Atma is Brahman.>>

Been there. Done that. Have you?


<<<The world is Maya
There is only Brahman
There is only ParaBrahman
Atma is Brahman
ParaAtma is ParaBrahman>>>>

All I can say here, my friend, is that if you think that atman, as an evolutionary "pilgrim," is permanent and eternal, then perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the words you just quoted. Just for starters, Brahman is not Parabrahman, and atman is not paramatman. But then, I'm sure that you knew that. Also, none of the five lines you quoted are literally true, but then you already knew that too, didn't you?

Thanks for the discussion. Its fun.

Jerry S.

--