RE: Theos-World Re: Were the Mahatmas Buddhists?
Mar 26, 2004 07:51 PM
by Ali Hassan
From: "Koshek Swaminathan" <arasophia@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: Were the Mahatmas Buddhists?
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 16:29:35 -0000
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.
I think it's safe to say the Buddha was against the caste system and its
repressiveness. I don't think he promoted "Brahmanism" at all, so there
wasn't any esoteric standpoint.
He was just addressing the Brahmanas individually as "those who endeavor to
live the holy life". Just as they called him "Lord", "Bhagwhan".
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?
The deity-worship was entrenched then, as now. Gautama, I believe sought to
dissuade men from worshipping forms of any sort as being an inferior
practice. His teaching was that there is no reality in form, even in that of
divine personages.
I'm reminded of Sri Ramakrishna's recounting- he was, of course, a gone
devotee of the Mother- his telling of how he finally, reluctantly even-
crossed from the worship of her in form to the formless- that is a crucial
point of the Buddha's message, imo. To not get sidetracked by the form.
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?
I have heard that the incarnation of Shankara- and maybe Blavatsky mentions
this- was brought about to achieve a sort of balancing of what had happened
to the teachings of the Buddha- that they had been quickly perverted into a
nihilistic form that was poisoning the root of the teaching.
Of course, Shankara's devotional style was diametrically opposed, and modern
buddhists revile his movement as a "killer" of 'pure' buddhism. But, most
likely its 'spirit' was already dead.
Shankara would not criticise Buddhism- nor was he there to reform that
which was a reform movement. What explanation is needed?
<snip>
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.
It should be safe to say that the most intimate teachings of the buddha,
nor, ftm, the Zen Patriarchs were not made available in any of the exoteric
traditions passed down.
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")
I think that is the point of nihilism where buddhism went sour, as I
mentioned above. Many of Gautama's teachings mention the atma and soul, in a
not-impermanent light. What is misunderstood, imo, by exoteric buddhism is
that atma = self, i.e. impermanent ego; and Atma = Self, i.e. Ego; and there
is a huge difference that is not well defined or understood.
> "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
I would venture that the Mahatmas, being privy to the very words of the
Buddha- as well as very likely having been Arhants of His Circle, subscribe
to the Buddhism of the Buddha.
If they maintain there is no God, yet there is Atman, it is the most
wonderful teaching in itself. They reify Gautama's own message- don't get
caught up into anthropormorphizing a face onto the Infinite- for that is
infinite foolishness. What a brilliant, brilliant thing Gautama must have
taught.
That, I feel is what actually happened when it is recounted that whenever a
person asked the Buddha if there is a God, he would sink into silence- I
believe, not just silence, but he would go straight to Beyond the Beyond.
regards-
Ali
_________________________________________________________________
Get reliable access on MSN 9 Dial-up. 3 months for the price of 1!
(Limited-time offer)
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup&pgmarket=en-us&ST=1/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
