Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00221)

July 17 2004

Dear Perry:

For myself, I think you have stated the situation admirably.

As I see the next step is to help others to look into their own natures, to
think and see, the inner Guru. The ATMA -- the HIGHER SELF.

Buddhi is its residence, but ITS presence is to be recognized and
approached.

Have you looked at SECRET DOCTRINE II 167?  

Also if you have TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE ( I know it is in
Blavatsky: COLLECTED WORKS Vol. X -- around pp. 250-3; in my book it is
on p. 64-6) it speaks of the nightly "confabulations between the higher
mind and the HIGHER SELF." Gave me something to wonder about, and
research.

Also in SECRET DOCTRINE II there is on pp. 275 fn, and 281-2 a hint about
the "undying race." Curious.

Best wishes,

Dallas

====================================== 

-----Original Message-----
From: Perry Coles [mailto:perrycoles@y...] 
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 6:37 AM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: Mahatmas, Evolution and Emptiness

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



 
Yahoo! Groups Links