Feb 02, 2002 09:21 AM
by Gerald Schueler
<<<Brigitte: Throughout Blavatsky's work, the Orient continues to be a homogenized and generalized culture. Thus a generic Buddhism enters the Mahatma letters where Tibetan lamas and Theravada (Pali)
scriptures cexist without any sense of the anachronism involved. >>>
Agreed, but perhaps this was done deliberately, trying to give out to the public what they thought it could handle/understand. This problem has surfaced recently, and many high ranking Tibetans are facing this dilimna: To authorize the publication of previously secret documents and texts and let them fall into the hands of the credulous or to let these teachings die out. As a result (I guess I have to thank China for this one) we are now getting some really deep/profound Tibetan teachings which otherwise we in the West would never know about. In Blavatsky's day there was no such time crunch, and no need to give out more than the public could understand. Besides, even within Tibetan Buddhism, it is typical to begin with Pali ethics, proceed to sutrayama, and, if qualified, go on to vajrayana, and then, if qualified, to Dzogchen. In short, generic ideas may have been given out in the MLs deliberately with the intention of letting the more perceptive student delve into the actual teachings on their own.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application