Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00463)

--- Ali Hassan <ananda_hotai@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >St Paul (Romans, 13:10) says: "Love worketh no ill
> to his neighbour:
> >therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."
> >
> >"The Law which, shunning learning, teaches Wisdom,
> reveals a tale of
> >woe." (The Voice of the Silence, II:106)


> What do you think is meant by this? 


That brain-knowledge, memory-based knowledge, is
incapable to respond meaningfully to the truth of
suffering. It will always find a explanation for
suffering within its own databank of past impressions,
concepts and ideas. On the other hand, it only took
the Buddha one encounter with a beggar on the roadside
to cause him to make the serch for the cause of
suffering the end-all and be-all of his life.



> >"False learning is rejected by the wise, and
> scattered to the winds
> >by the Good Law. Its wheel revolves for all, the
> humble and the
> >proud. The Doctrine of the Eye is for the crowd,
> the Doctrine of the
> >Heart for the elect. The first repeat in pride:
> 'Behold, I know'; the
> >last, they who in humbleness have garnered, low
> confess, 'Thus have I
> >heard.'" (Idem, II:119)
> 
> ya ya yadda. In my experience, the Law of Karma
> clothes what we call Love. 
> This is not what St. Paul referred to, just as the
> Buddha referred to two 
> different Streams- one which is the downward flow,
> i.e. karmic law; the 
> other one, which entered, one is called a
> Stream-entrant, i.e. one following 
> the Dharma-Law, not the karma-law.
> If you can't understand the difference, I suggest
> you reread your own first 
> quote, the one about beginners.


I always go back to that quote. To follow the law of
dharma is not inconsistent with the "karma-law", as
dharma, in one of its definitions, means "the law of
one's own being." The "stream-entrant" (srotapatti) is
someone that is on the path to Nirvana, and not
necessarily someone who is free from karma. Adepts, it
is said, are free from personal karma (jivanmuktas)
but are still under the Law, and that is the reason
why they cannot (and never) subject the mind of
another to their own.


> >"Yet I confess that I, individually, am not yet
> exempt from some of
> >the terrestial attachments. I am still attracted
> towards some men
> >more than toward others, and philanthropy as
> preached by our Great
> >Patron — "the Saviour of the World — the Teacher of
> Nirvana and the
> >Law," has never killed in me either individual
> preferences of
> >friendship, love for my next of kin, or the ardent
> feeling of
> >patriotism for the country in which I was last
> materially
> >individualized." (Letter 15, chronological)
> >
> >In the Indian tradition, Shiva is identified as the
> Destroyer and
> >Regenerator aspects of the Ultimate Reality or Law
> (Brahman). The
> >name Shiva, though, means "auspicious, propitious,
> gracious,
> >favourable, benign, kind, benevolent, friendly,
> dear." (From "A
> >Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Sir Monier
> Monier-Williams.)
> >
> >Pedro


> Yes, Shiva is Destroyer. Shiva is guru. Shiva
> destroys everything that is 
> dukkha, or form, from the life of the microbe to the
> universe. If properly 
> propitiated, Shiva the guru will destroy our
> ignorance. With Shiva's grace, 
> we transcend the law of karma by fulfilling the Law
> of Love, thus becoming 
> Law-Givers. See if you can find this quote anywhere?
> 
> regards-
> 
> Ali

Your "Shiva", as described by you, is nothing more
than a personal god if it is to be propitiated. I was
referring to Shiva as a principle or aspect of the
Ultimate Reality (Brahman). As amply demonstrated by
both HPB and the Mahatmas, there is no room for a
personal god (or saviour) in Theosophy outside our own
seventh principle, Atma. But, of course, there are
millions, like yourself, who believe in it and
personal beliefs should be respected.

Pedro



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html