Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00502)

In a message dated 12/14/02 11:54:05 AM, mhart@idirect.ca writes:

>But, as this and other lists have so well demonstrated (?), that 
>kind of comparative "hidden" doesn't seem to have led to too 
>many pauses . . . (generally speaking?) . . . So . . . I wonder if 
>I'm thinking, speculating in terms of some kind of "another 
>step" or "means" (re "getting some kind of handle on those 
>hiddens") that might, somehow, trickle in some . . . Hmm . . . 
>Of course, if there were any kind of "another step" that would 
>"help much," seems as if (?) it would've been discovered ages 
>ago, already, so . . . 

One of the "hiddens" may be the misinterpretation of the meaning of the word 
Maya by many Buddhist students. My good friend Sri Swami VP, a Pali & 
Sanskrit scholar, Master of Advaita Vedanta teachings and a Mahayana Buddhist 
Arahat and Guru-ji, as well as former wealthy Indian pharmacist -- translated 
the word "Maya" into English for me as; "Mother Nature." 

Incidentally, during a lecture by the Swami at my study group in Miami, when 
another newbie student asked, "Who is Maya? "He replied, "The wife of Karma." 
When she ingenuously asked, "What does he do?" Swami VP replied, with a 
straight face, "He is the father and guide of their children's lives, deaths 
and rebirths." (I could only. . . <|:-)>

When I asked him if Maya also meant "illusion." He said, "Only sometimes -- 
when interpreted as Maya being constantly changing and subject to cycles of 
sleep and awakening... Thus to consciousness, which is forever awake, Nature 
has no permanence in form, and to believe that it does, is the illusion -- or 
delusion, if you will... As the feel and beauty of Maya can delude one into 
believing she will always be as you see, hear, smell, taste, and touch her... 
But, then your body is Maya, too, so that is understandable -- until one 
becomes enlightened and can see the whole picture of Maya's existence -- 
which is identical to yours." 

I said, "Does that mean Maya doesn't exist at certain times?" And he 
answered, "No, it just means that she is constantly changing and periodically 
folds herself into herself and disappears, as forms, altogether -- but she 
can never not-exist." 

I then asked, "Is 'Mother Nature,' then, eternal in essence and in her 
infinite potential of formation?" And he replied, "Certainly, the motion or 
force of Karma or Skandas that causes Maya to appear as all parts of this 
entire universe can never cease, nor can the memory of all her potential 
forms, neither when awake, nor when she sleeps... But, that is only insofar 
as we can see to the end of Brahma's lifetime -- which is so long, in your 
terms, that it might as well be eternal." But, then he paused, and added, 
"But I don't think Maya ever can cease to exist, since Brahma is subject to 
reincarnation, too." 

I then asked, " Does that mean the Universe has no beginning and no end, and 
that all that it is, is forever both its own cause as well as all the effects 
of that cause, along with all subsequent causes and effects, ad infinitum?" 
His gratifyingly terse answer was, "Yes." (Apparently, I had asked the right 
question. :-) 

I then posed the clincher question, by asking, "Since you say consciousness 
is eternally awake, does that mean that if I merge my consciousness with that 
of Brahma I still will remain as I am?" And, he replied "How can that not be 
so, since aren't we all 'I am''' -- as Brahma also is, in whatever state or 
level of awareness our consciousness is in?" I answered, "Yes, It can't." 
(Seems he asked the right question -- but, as usual, I had to get in the last 
few words. ;-) 

There is more to this conversation, that took place over a period of over a 
year, while the Swami and I exchanged attendance as guest lecturers, and as 
students at our respective study group/ashrams -- as we went into Karma, 
Nirvana, Bodhisattva, dual mind, the three veils, etc., etc.... Although, 
there were still certain teachings, reincarnation for one, that we started 
out disagreeing about, until he admitted that the theosophical view had no 
inconsistencies in it with respect to fundamental principles (which we both 
agreed on). But, we'll hold that for later.

>From all this, I saw how easily one can arrive at the same understanding of a 
Hindu/Buddhist guru of the highest order, simply through the study of 
theosophy, by means of which I had arrived at the same conclusions of this 
wise teacher long before I ever knew even the most elementary teachings of 
Buddhism (other than the references in Isis and the SD)... Proving, that a 
Westerner need not learn the language of Buddhist scriptures, nor sit at the 
feet of Hindu or Buddhist gurus to learn the true nature of reality and the 
relationship between consciousness (Spirit) and matter (energy), mind and 
brain/body, absolute and relative, etc. 

Therefore, for any westerner who comes out of ignorance, seeking for self 
realization and enlightenment, starting from religions other than Buddhism or 
Hinduism, or as agnostics or atheists, I would recommend theosophy and its 
parallel practices of Rajah and Jnana Yoga as the most complete and efficient 
way to achieve such goals -- without necessity for any live "gurus," foreign 
languages, sanghas, or religious, theosophical or "arcane" organizational 
affiliations -- other than theosophical study groups. These can be either on 
or off-line -- where free and open questions and answers can be engaged in 
among people of like mind and similar aims, purposes and ends in view. 

I hope this further clarifies our conclusions, and ends our speculative 
confusions about -- which came first, the chicken or the egg, theosophy or 
Buddhism, and which is the best path to start out on?

LHM