ULT and Dzog Chen
Sep 13, 2003 04:30 AM
by Katinka Hesselink
We seem to agree to a large extent. I see the place for the ULT in the
theosophical spectrum in the sense that it is clearly usefull to have
a group that studies only HPB and Judge. On the other hand, I don't
think that this is what the Masters intended for the Theosophical
On the Dzog Chen issue. In the West people have become so afraid of
lineages, authority and all that, that the idea that one has to
prepare for understanding is anathema to many. On the one hand this is
correct, various sorts of experiences of consciousness can be
experienced by just about anybody. Keeping it up and not falling into
one or several of the traps on the spiritual path is a totally
Dzog Chen isn't the only tradition that has risen in popularity
because of this. Advaita Vedanta in the form of Satsang is another.
The good thing about this development is that people get to recognize
their own divinity through practical experience. The downside is that
integrating that insight into their practical lives in a healthy,
humble manner doesn't really get the same press.
Krishnamurti's work (compared to Dzog Chen by a few theosophical
writers) is comparatively safe because it's difficulty is so obvious
from the writings. But writings get shunned by many, these days.
Just a few thoughts.
--- In email@example.com, Griffin Eddie <vlad_storm@y...> wrote:
> You have done a very good job of summing up quite a few ideas that I
have always agreed with.
> Obvious there are other Masters who teach. It is not as if after
HPB died every Master dropped off the face of the earth.
> Impersonality can be taken to the extreme and become negative
instead of positive. In defense of the ULT, I understand why they did
it. At the time of the formation of the ULT personality was hyped to
a large extent and HPB's works were not being studied. Still,
impersonality taken ot he extreme can lead to a feeling of..
sterility. Obviously a more balanced approach needs to be taken.
> Any person who studies HPB and not what she studied cannot
understand what she wrote. Period.
> The proliferation of Dzogchen books points to the fact that people,
laughingly, believe that they are ready for the highest teachings when
they can barely control themselves in daily life. Dzogchen is taught
as the highest level of Tibetan Buddhism for a reason - it is for the
highest caliber of practictioner. (To you Tibetan practitioners - yes
I know that different lineages call their Ati-yoga different things, etc.)
> The ULT and TS approach are different. And I think a person is
attracted to what they need. So I don't really look at either way
as"better" or worse.
> Ultimately, Katinka, I find your candor refreshing.
> -Ed Griffin
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application