Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00462)

Dear Brigitte,

Concerning the quotes you give below, did you yourself actually take 
all the time and effort to COMPARE the original text in THE SECRET 
DOCTRINE with the original text in Schlagintweit's BUDDHISM IN TIBET?

I'm just curious how and where you obtained all of these quotations.

It appears to me that you simply copied (even in the same order) the 
series of Schlagintweit quotes from Richard Taylor's BLAVATSKY AND 
BUDDHISM which is online at:

http://www.blavatsky.net/forum/taylor/tibetanSources1.htm

The specific quotes you give from BUDDHISM IN TIBET are found in 
Taylor's draft of his dissertation at:

http://www.blavatsky.net/forum/taylor/tibetanSources1.htm

Taylor's commentary on the quotes might also be helpful and useful to 
interested readers on Theos-Talk.

Taylor's note 54 even informs readers:

"I am indebted to Daniel Caldwell for first making known to me HPB's 
dependence on Schlagintweit's work."

This material that I found in Schlagintweit calls into question what 
both S. Cranston and M. Gomes have written on this "appropriation" 
issue.

I hope Blavatsky students who read this will carefully study what 
Richard Taylor wrote about these "appropriations". I also hope some 
of them will offer their insights and observations on what is the 
significance of these quotes from Schlagintweit being found in the SD.

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://hpb.cc


Brigitte wrote in part:

> To give some concrete examples how this looks like in the SD see
> these unaccounted for example that have been copied in the SD from
> The Buddhism of Tibet by Emil Schlagintweit (1863)
> E.S. pages 51-2 it states:
>
> The Buddhists believe that each Buddha when preaching the law to 
men,
> manifests himself at the same time in the three worlds which their
> cosmographical system acknowledges. In the world of desire, the
> lowest of the three to which the earth belongs, he appears in human
> shape.In the world of forms he manifests himself in a more sublime
> form as Dhyåni Buddha.
> In the highest world, the one of the incorporeal beings, he has
> neither shape nor name. The Dhyåni Buddhas have the faculty of
> creating from themselves by virtue of Dhyåna, or abstract 
meditation,
> an equally celestial son, a Dhyåni Bodhisattva, who after the
death
> of a Månushi Buddha is charged with the continuance of the work
> undertaken by the departed Buddha till the next epoch of religion
> begins, when again a subsequent Månushi Buddha appears.
>
> Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, volume three (1897):
> Buddhists of the Mahåyåna mystic system teach that each Buddha
> manifests Himself (hypostatically or otherwise) simultaneously in
> three worlds of Being, namely, in the world of Kåma
(concupiscence
> or desire the sensuous universe or our earth) in the shape of a man;
> in the world of R¨pa (form, yet supersensuous) as a Bodhisattva;
and
> in the highest Spiritual World (that of purely incorporeal
> existences) as a Dhyåni-Buddha. The latter prevails eternally in
> space and time,i.e., from one Mahå-Kalpa to the other-the
synthetic
> culmination of the three beings Adi-Buddha, the Wisdom-Principle,
> which is Absolute, and therefore out of space and time.
> Their interelation is the following: The Dhyåni -Buddha, when the
> world needs a human Buuddha, "creates" through the power of
Dhyåna
> (meditation, omnipotent devotion), a mind-born son-a Bodhisattva -
> whose mission it is after the physicall death of his human, or
> Månushya-Buddha, to continue his work on earth till the
appearance
> of the subsequent Buddha. The Esoteric meaning of this teaching is
> quite clear.
> … [HPB's footnote:] … What is given here is taken from the
> secret portions of Dus Kyi Khorlo (Kåla Chakra, in Sanskrit, or
the
> "Wheel of Time," or duration.)
>
> Schlagintweit, p. 34:
> Parinishpanna (Tib. Yong grub) … "completely perfect," or
> simply "perfect," is the unchangeable and unassignable true
> existence, which is also the scope of the path, the summum bonum, 
the
> absolute.
> Of this kind can be only that which enters the mind clear and
> undarkened, as for instance, the emptiness, or the Non-ego. In 
order,
> therefore, that his mind may become free from all that would in any
> way attract his attention, it is necessary that man view every thing
> existing as deal, because it is dependent on something else; then
> only as a natural consequence-he arrives at a right understanding of
> the Non-ego, and to a knowledge of how the voidness is alone self-
> existent and perfect.
>
> The Secret Doctrine, volume one (1888):
> "Paranishpanna" is the absolute perfection which all existences
> attain at the close of a great period of activity, or Mahå-
> Manvantara, andin which they rest during the succeeding period of
> repose. In Tibetan it is called Yong-Grb. Up to the day of the
> Yogåcårya school the true nature of Paranirvana
[parinirvåˆa] was
> taught publicly, but since then it has become entirely esoteric;
> hence so many contradictory interpretations of it. It is only a true
> Idealist who can understand it.
> Everything has to be viewed as ideal, with the exception of
> Paranirvana, by him who would comprehend that state, and acquire a
> knowledge of how Non Ego, Voidness, and Darkness are Three in One 
and
> alone Self-existent and perfect.)
>
> In the same section, Schlagintweit gives the Tibetan translation of
> parikalpita (i.e., Kung tag) and defines it as:
> …the supposition, the error. Of this kind is the belief in
> absolute existence to which those beings adhere who are incapable of
> understanding that every thing is empty.… some believing a thing
> existing which does not, as e.g. the Non-ego …
>
> Blavatasky writes, Parikalpita (in Tibetan Kun-ttag [sic]) is error,
> made by those unable to realize the emptiness and illusionary nature
> of all;
> who believe something to exist which does not-e.g., the Non-Ego.)
> Schlagintweit: Paratantra is whatever exists by a dependent or 
causal
> connexion."
>
> Schlagintweit:
> We come now to the two truths. They are: Samvritisatya (Tib.
> Kundzabchi denpa) and Paramårthasatya (Tib. Dondampai denpa), or
> the relative truth and the absolute one … A difference prevails
> between the Yogåcåryas and the Madhyamikas with reference to
> the interpreration of Paramårtha; the former say that
Paramårtha is
> also what is dependent upon other things (Paratantra); the latter 
say
> thatis it limited to Parinishpanna, or to that
> which has the character of absolute perfection.… Samvriti is
that
> which is the origin of illusion, but Paramårtha is the
> self-consciousness* of the saint in his self-meditation, which is
> able to dissipate illusions,i.e., which is above all (parama) and
> contains the true undertstanding (artha). [footnote] Sanskrit
> Svasamvedana, "the reflection which analyses itself.")
>
> Blavatsky:
> [Re:] Paramårtha: the Yogåcåryas interpret the term as that
> which is also dependent upon other things (paratantral) [sic]; and
> the Madhyamikas say that Paramårtha is limited to Paranishpanna
or
> absolute perfection … [footnote] "Paramårtha" is
self-consciousness
> in Sanskrit, Svasamvedana, or the "self-analysing reflection" from
> two words, parama (above everything) and artha (comprehension), 
Satya
> meaning absolute true being, or Essence In Tibetan
Paramårthasayta 
is
> Dondampaidenpa. The opposite of this absolute reality, or actuality,
> is Samvritisatya-the relative truth only-"Samvritti" meaning "false
> conception" and being the origina of illision, Maya; in Tibetan
> Kundzabchi-denpa, "illusion-creating appearance." )
>
> In fact Blavatsky's purported shift from a "Hermetic" (i.e., 
Western)
> to an "Oriental" perspective has been greatly exaggerated.
> Hanegraaff, drawing on the work of Helmuth von Glasenapp and Jörg
> Wichmann, persuasively argues that this shift is "more apparent than
> real" and that theosophy as a whole, despite its popularisation of
> some Indian doctrines, "is not only rooted in western esotericism,
> but has remained an essentially western movement"
>
> Today there is sufficient information about Tibet and
> Buddhism on the internet so that in fact anybody else when 
compairing
> this with Blavatsky's 19th century SD/source material will be able 
to
> see the general point.
>
> I myself just currently looking 5 minutes on Google yielded 
following
> 2 more snip bits:
>
> 1)"The Armchair Traveller: HPB in Tibet by R.A. Gilbert (A famous
> researcher who wrote 5 books on related subjects)
>
> 2) Fictitious Tibet: The Origin and Persistence of Rampaism by
> Agehananda Bharati
>
> Both at: http://members.tripod.com/davidgreen_2/
>
> Brigitte
> See also:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/4410
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/4427
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/4431
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/4701