Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00632)

>From my understanding and independent research, I'm not sure if we really know 
what the Buddha actually taught. If we look at the Dhammapahda, which is 
considered the most authentic work on the sayings of the Buddha, we find that 
there is an entire chapter on instructions to Brahmanas. If we believe that he 
was against the Brahman tradition, it appears that he may have been actually 
promoting it from an esoteric standpoint.

The Buddhism of Ashoka's time does not seem to reflect the same religion we 
have today. For a Buddhist kingdom, there seems to be much worship of 
tradtional Hindu gods. Most historians say that this is because Ashoka was 
tolerant of other beliefs but what if Buddhism not only tolerated but accepted 
those traditions, only that it brought the ancient Esoteric Wisdom back into 
Hindu practice?

We also need an explanation for why there is no written record of the Adi 
Shankara ever criticising Buddhism. This was pointed out by the past 
Shankaracharya of Kanchipooram in his seminal work Sanatana Dharma. What is 
even stranger is that it was the Adi Shankra who introduced the idea that 
Gautama Buddha was the 9th incarnation of Vishnu. Was Adi Shankara another 
Esoteric Buddhist?

One of the oldest temples in South India is the Meenakshi Temple, refered to by 
HPB and Subbha Row as a center of adepts who live in the subterannian and 
secret vaults of the temple. The tradition says that this temple was built by 
instruction of the Buddha. One of the main and oldest reliefs in the temple 
shows the Buddha holding the hands of the Goddess Meenakshi and giving one hand 
to the God Shiva and another to the God Vishnu. The story is that he wedded the 
the two gods to Meenakshi to join the two Brahman traditions of the Aiyers and 
the Aiyengars.

All this seems to indicate to me that Esoteric Buddhism may be the original 
Buddhism, that it may have promoted brotherhood and the open comparative study 
of spiritual traditions in the light of this Esoteric knowledge. Much like 
Freemasonry in that is open to all religions as an expression of the one Truth. 
It would also indicate that the Mahayana school in Tibet may be closer to the 
original teachings than the Theravada. These are just working assumptions but 
they seem just as good to me as the traditional working assumptions of 
historians.

Koshek Swaminathan






--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Pedro Oliveira <prmoliveira@y...> wrote:
> One of the puzzles in theosophical history and
> literature is that HPB's Teachers, the Mahatmas,
> declared themselves to be Buddhists, as in this
> well-known passage from the Mahatma Letters:
> 
> "Therefore, we deny God both as philosophers and as
> Buddhists." (ML 88, chronological)
> 
> And yet, the system they taught, sometimes called
> "Aryan-Arhat Esoteric Doctrine", includes as one of
> its pivotal points Atma, or the seventh principle, the
> One Self, as well as Soul.
> 
> Apparently, there are no known school in Buddhism that
> accepts Atma as a fundamental reality. The denial of
> Atma is one of the cardinal principles in Buddhist
> philosophy. Two well-known scholars explain why:
> 
> "Buddhism stands unique in the history of human
> thought in denying the existence of such a Soul , Self
> or Atman. According to the teaching of the Buddha, 
> the idea of self is an imaginary, false belief which
> has no corresponding reality." (Walpola Rahula, "What
> the Buddha Taught")
> 
> "Sakkayaditthi (Substance-view) is avidya (ignorance)
> par excellence, and from it proceed all passions.
> Denial of Satkaya (atman or Substance) is the very
> pivot of the Buddhist metaphysics and doctrine of
> salvation." (T.R.V. Murti, "The Central Philosophy of
> Buddhism - A Study of the Madhyamika System") 
> 
> Can someone explain which Buddhism the Mahatmas
> subscribed to?
> 
> Pedro
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html