Theos-Talk Archives (April 2003 Message tt00176)

Tuesday, April 29, 2003

May I butt in? on NIRVANA ?


Dear Jerry:

No I don't discount the labor through many lives necessary to
achieve universal WISDOM. But I would not want to take "nirvana"
or Nibbana." If it takes a long while, so be it. If I am able
to consider that I am an immortal within time on my hands, how
best to spend it? But I am well aware of the faults and problems
of my personality. I also think that the inks with the elements
of the personality are old ties and duties that exist between us
all. Are they to be dropped? Am I to scoot off free from any
kind of bondage? And what happens to them? Do they perchance
depend on me? Can I afford to "stand them up?"

It is to my mind a very selfish escapism -- escapism from the
toils and sorrows of the word. And thus to leave everyone for a
pleasant repose (maybe ?) -- and then what is to be done?
Nothing?

Who has ever come back with the full capacity to describe the
condition?

How can we validate this beforehand?

Look at the end of the VOICE OF THE SILENCE where it speaks of
renouncing Nirvana. Why is that suggested?

What is compassion? How does it relate to universal brotherhood
and the community of immortal Monads where the less progressed
depend on the sacrifice and help they receive from those who are
advanced?

Incidentally in viewing the 7 "Principles" of man and Nature, the
ATMA-BUDDHI MONAD
is not the "PERSONALITY."

Technically the word "personality" meaning "mask" is reserved for
the lower 4 "principles" [body, astral body, prana, kama] This
is mortal and dies. The INDIVIDUALITY [Atma, Buddhi, Manas]
being immortal incarnates in a succession of "personalities."

Bodhisattva is pure Buddhi -- WISDOM INCARNATE, as I understand
it. But it is here within us all the time -- our personalities
fail to let it shine through them.

Well in my mind, "time" is not so consequent.

Best wishes,

Dallas

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

-----Original Message-----
From: G S
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 12:55 PM
To:
Subject: NIRVANA More ----

<<<While someone could (easily enough?) clarify what
about that topic in terms of what Theosophy has to
say about it, I suspect that there might still be the
somewhat unanswered question (for some of us?) re
which Theosophic version, or interpretation, or
interpretive tendency, is being upheld, and why ...>>>

Agreed. First of all, Theosophy always offers an exoteric and an
esoteric version of each "answer" and so interpretation is
necessary (and interpretation is really a good thing).


<<<In other words, as long as our "why's" are, after all,
dependent arisings (ie, rather blatantly karmic and
mayavic, essentially), "why" would Theosophists want
to get particularly caught up in them, seeing an aspect
of Theosophy would seem to involve the transcending
of karma (ie, not that some of those "whys" don't offer
certain kinds of helpful clues when "read between the
lines")? After all, isn't "good karma" just as binding as
any other kind of karma? >>>

Even though all our speculation and story telling and modeling is
maya and karmic, they are nevertheless important. I am referring
here to our worldview, and it is in speculation and modeling that
we are able to expand our worldview. First get good karma and try
to reduce the bad, then worry about transcending both. It is an
interesting fact that in order to transcend karma, one first must
have accumulated a great deal of merit, or good karma.

<<< And not that I'm referring to some kind of "shuffling off to
nirvana" by oneself, as Leon might've put it.>>>

Leon and Dallas and others, seem to have no idea how much effort
must be expended to enter nirvana. They dismiss the goal as if it
were oh so easy. It is not. And it is only after acquiring the
ability to do so, that the bodisattvic vow can possibly be
realized for what it really is -- a sharp and deadly
double-edged sword. If you try to take the bodisattvic vow while
identifying with a personal self, you will have some real karmic
problems. As long as we identify with a personal self, nirvana is
our only real choice and to dismiss it out-of-hand while
admitting to a personal self is like a child playing with
matches. Our personal self that is able to enter nirvana is known
in Theosophy as the atma-buddhi monad, and this personal Self
would seem to be the goal of many Theosophists. But atma-buddhi
per se cannot be a bodisattva, which is the purified
atma-buddhi-manas. Some Theosophists don't seem to understand
this fine distinction, but one day, when the chance comes for
them to identify with atma-buddhi, I hope they recall what I
saying here and retain manas, which by then should already be
relatively purified.

Just Some thoughts,

Jerry S.