Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00214)

Hello Katinka & Pedro
One of the common complaints about HPB and her writings is 
what many people see as over complexity.
It seems the trend to take the path of least resistance and accept 
the simplifications of many of the Occult concepts is what the 
western mind seems to want.
Maybe there is a methodology with the struggle involved in an open 
minded, critical and persistent study of these works of HPB - it can 
be quite an uncomfortable experience especially if we are seeking 
absolute and simplistic answers.
I would even go so far as to say it can be painful.
HPB takes you certain way down this tack then that one and people 
feel this is confusing and unnecessary.
The simplified latter versions of `theosophy' dotted every i
and crossed 
every t and made it all so `simple' which I would suggest
simply develops 
mindsets that are easily fooled and dogmatic that seek comfort over
truth.
The Secret doctrine on the other hand makes you work hard and keep 
on digging rather than accept easy answers for me its more a
methodology 
than a statement.
As HPB said in the beginning of the key to theosophy "to the
mentally 
lazy or obtuse, theosophy must always remain a riddle..." 
she emphasises mental effort and her writings demand that sort of 
commitment.
The trend of today wants easy quick enlightenment, psychic whistles 
and bangs or prescribed pathways the `sweet tongued voices of
illusion'.
The heart doctrine described in the Voice of the Silence shows its
better 
to be ignorant than to have head learning with no Soul Wisdom or 
compassion to guide it.
So its a razors edge and of course motive always comes into the
equation.
Perhaps the methodology in HPB and the Mahatmas writings is designed 
to stretch the mind so that the aspirant can go beyond it and the
Buddhic 
wisdom illumine the mind.
Its the path of the jnani but there are many roads up the mountain,
this methodology is just one approach and its not for everyone.
Many paths focus on personal illumination for self but the
theosophical path 
is that of self forgetfulness, to gain Nirvana but to renounce it.

Perry



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Katinka Hesselink" <mail@k...>
wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> First of all - HPB and the Mahatmas were of an esoteric buddhist
> lineage, not an exoteric one. What's come out to the west is by
> definition exoteric. 
> 
> Still, I've puzzled over the similar question of: why focuss on so
> many details of the world around us: cosmogony, evolution. Why
didn't
> she focuss on the spiritual path and philosophy as buddhists do
today?
> My thoughts go in the following direction:
> The times were different from what they are today. Psychology hadn't
> yet found its limelight, for instance. People just hadn't en masse
> found introspection and all that crap out. So it took a lot of work
> before HPB found enough students to write 'The Voice of the
Silence' for. 
> Also - if we take brotherhood seriously - and by all accounts HPB
and
> the Mahatmas did - then one cannot just give something new and drop
> it. One has to (from a didactical standpoint) embed the new
knowledge
> in something. That something was the spiritualist movement, at first
> anyhow. Also, society was starting to learn how to deal with
evolution
> as a Darwinian concept. This concept threatened to negate all
> spirituality (as it does still do today). So they gave out (or
> created) something to counter that and grow from that. The form of
the
> Secret Doctrine is (apparently, I haven't studied the subject) very
> typical for the kinds of books that were being written at the time
in
> the sense of gathering information from all possible sources and
> coming up with some wild theory to connect the dots. Whether or not
> HPB's theory was wild I'll leave up to the readers here (I don't
think
> so myself), but her focuss was very much determined by the time she
> wrote in, I think. 
> 
> Katinka
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Pedro Oliveira <prmoliveira@y...>
> wrote:
> > The connection between HPB's Teachers and Mahayana
> > Buddhism is well established in "The Mahatma Letters",
> > in a number of her articles and in "The Voice of the
> > Silence". But although in Mahayana Buddhism emptiness
> > (sunyata) is one of the core principles, it does not
> > seem to occupy a prominent place neither in "The
> > Secret Doctrine" nor in "The Mahatma Letters", in both
> > of which evolution seems to be a central concept.
> > 
> > Can anyone throw light on this apparent puzzle?
> > 
> > 
> > Pedro