Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00342)

JERRY: Here is the PROBLEM in a nutshell: If Atma cannot be transcended, why
do we need Paramatman and the Monad? And why should enlightenment and the
Path itself be limited to Atma? If it can be transcended, then how can it be
permanent? This is the illogical box in which I find this situation. I can
get out of this box by defining atma as impermanent and mayavic. How would
you get out of it?<<<

PETER: I'm afraid you are in a box of your own making here. I don't feel I
share your predicament. If what HPB says is true ie in reality Atman is the
ONE LIFE, at one with Parabrahm, why then do you feel the need to transcend
it and in what sense is the Path limited to Atman if it is one with
Parabrahm, the Absolute? But let me also ask you - who is it that
transcends ATMAN? What is it you believe you are doing when you "transcend"
Atman?<<<

JERRY: Yes, you can readily accept illogical statements because you assume
that every word Blavatsky wrote was literally true.<<<
--------

Jerry, I think you are just getting personal now. I think you should stick
to the substance of the discussion and leave out the ad-hominem remarks. As
it happens, I don't believe every word that HPB wrote is "literally true".
But, yes, I am trying to understand the doctrines that she and the Mahatmas
jointly presented in the Secret Doctrine. So I don't simply dismiss what
she and they write nor turn their words upside down and inside out to make
to make them fit into more easily digestable beliefs or fit in with some
other belief like Buddhism or Vedanta or whatever.
-------------------------------

PETER: I also don't feel the need to have an answer to every question about
Theosophy, nor be able to explain everything found in HPB's works, before I
can question the viewpoint of another member of these lists.<<<

JERRY: You sound just a bit defensive. I am sorry if I have pushed you too
far. I am really trying to help you, BTW. I felt (wrongly?) that if I could
make you think logically about your statements, it could help you. I'll back
off.
-------

I am sorry if it came across that way. But I think you have misunderstood.
Its just straight talking. Its kind of you to think of helping. I have
also tried to help you realise the limitations of logic and where your use
of it is not quite as logical as you like to think it is. I think we and
the other list members who are students of Theosophy have a lot to offer to
each other. Lets find a way to work more productively together.

Thanks,

...Peter