Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00200)

Friday, January 11, 2002

Dear Mika Perala:

I have no idea -- but any one can become a Buddhist -- there are
no formalities, as the "religion" built up about the teachings of
the Buddha is not monolithic at all. It is philosophical. Hence
there are several "Schools" of Buddhism.

Go the very end of the LIGHT ON THE PATH OF ASIA by Sir Edwin
Arnold and you will find the formula given in English

I take my refuge in they name and thee,
I take my refuge in thy Law of goof,
I take my refuge in thy order. OM !

Any one who has sympathy for these ideas (they are not
formalities) can repeat the words and claim thereafter he is a
Buddhist (in a literal and superficial sense).

If one desires to become a Buddhist in the REAL SENSE, then it is
a vow taken in quiet and silence with an intention to live as
closely as one can to the life illustrated by the BUDDHA.

To BE A BUDDHIST is to FOLLOW THE PHILOSOPHY of the BUDDHA, and
to dedicate ones' self to ALTRUISM. It is not like joining a
church in the Western fashion at all.

I hope this is of help.

When H.P.Blavatsky and Col. Olcott first visited Ceylon ( 1880 )
together they formally took "Pansil" or the Pancha Shilas" --
the 5 Observances, of which three are popularly recited at all
Buddhis meetings at the end of the period of teaching or
discussion. To that extent everyone who has attended and heard or
recited these are "Buddhists." What they make of themselves in
their private lives is entirely their own affair. There is to my
knowledge no superficial pretense or veneer to being an
"apparent" Buddhist.

Best wishes,

Dallas

===========================




-----Original Message-----
From: mika perälä [mailto:mikap@dlc.fi]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 6:17 AM
To: Theosophy Study List
Subject: Re: Liberation

Seah wrote:


> Dallas
>
> Last year Peter Marriott wrote interesting things on Atma.
[Will you say
> some more, Peter, please, if you are reading this?] It make me
realise if
we
> want to understand what Blavatsky is talking on Atma it is
more helpful
to
> use Vedanta not Buddhism. The Buddhists on this list want to
limit
> Blavatsky to their viewpoint, or say she make mistakes when her
words
don't
> fit their Buddhist views. But isn't Theosophy meant to be
the core
truth
> of all world religions, not just Buddhism?
>
> I am sure I read somewhere that Blavatsky's teacher was an
Adwaitee?

I wonder why Blavatsky became a buddhist?
Not just to please anyone, wasn't her style.


mika perala


---
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as:
dalval14@earthlink.net
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-theos-l-14759P@list.vnet.net