[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World Madame Blavatsky and Jiddu Krishnamurti; a conducive "marriage?"

May 12, 2008 12:50 PM
by Martin

Yes all is empty and full at the same time:
the only way to experience this as truth is to be in
complete harmony with it...else it could never been
witnessed since the observer isn't there either unless
in harmony with it...

Therefore all is full existent, all is possible even
the impossible, there is suffering enjoying etc.
however when at the time of leaving this world one is
focussed on this harmony to be real and only, one
cannot return anymore, except when makes karma on
purpose to be of service still as a nirmanakaya or a
living Bodhisatva...for example by creating humanoids
or beings on another planet...still being in the flesh
or on another level.

These are temporary views of mine, so do not bind me
to them :-) Criticism please!

--- wrote:

>            The
>                                              Heart
> of Prajna Paramita Sutra
>           With
> Verses Without A Stand
>      When Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva was practicing
> the profound Prajna Paramita, he illuminated
> the five skandas and saw that they are all empty,
> and he crossed beyond all suffering and difficulty.
>      Shariputra, form does not differ from
> emptiness; emptiness does not differ from form. Form
> itself
> is emptiness; emptiness itself is form. So, too ,
> are feeling, cognition, formation, and
> consciousness.
>      Shariputra, all dharmas are empty of
> characteristics. They are not produced. Not
> destroyed, not
> defiled, not pure, and they neither increase nor
> diminish.  Therefore, in emptiness there is no form,
> feeling, cognition, formation, or consciousness; no
> eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, or mind; no sights
> , sounds, smells, tastes, objects of touch, or
> dharmas; no field of the eyes, up to and including
> no field
> of mind consciousness; and no ignorance or ending of
> ignorance, up to and including no old age and 
> death or ending of old age and death. There is no
> suffering, no accumulating, no extinction, no way, 
> and no understanding and no attaining.
>      Because nothing is attained, the Bodhisattva,
> through reliance on Prajna Paramita, is unimpeded in
> his mind, because there is no impediment , he is not
> afraid, and he leaves distorted dream thinking far
> behind. Ultimately Nirvana!
>      All Buddhas of the three periods of time attain
> Annutara-Samyaksambhodi through reliance on Prajna
> paramita. Therefore, know that Prajna Paramita is a
> Great Spiritual Mantra, a great bright mantra, a
> supreme mantra, an unequelled mantra. It can remove
> all suffering; it is genuine and not false. That is
> why the Mantra of Prajna Paramita was spoken, Recite
> it like this;
>                                        Gate Gate
> Paragate Parasamgate Bodhi Svaha!
>                   (The Heart Sutra and Commentary by
> Tripitiaka Master Hua, BTTS 1980)
> -------------- Original message -------------- 
> From: Aryel Sanat <> 
> On May 8, 2008, at 1:12 PM, Morten Nymann Olesen
> wrote:
> > To all readers
> >
> > My views are:
> >
> > Thanks Nigel!
> >
> > On J. Krishnamurti:
> > I do not understand how J. Krishnamurti can be
> said to be in 
> > support of Esoteric Buddhism and Blavatsky's
> version of theosophy 
> > on the teaching of Master-Chelaship. Krishnamurti
> rejected guru's 
> > and called them a crutch.
> > Are you able to explain this?
> >
> Dear Morten,
> As I pointed out in my introductory statement
> (documented by the 
> two papers with quotes from HPB, which can be found
> at, 
> the purpose of all perennial schools that we know
> of, was to bring 
> about a psychological/spiritual transformation in
> the candidate. 
> Part of what this means is that the hope of these
> schools & their 
> teachers was that a candidate would at some point
> become himself a 
> Master, & would cease to be a candidate. Candidates
> were not meant 
> to be candidates for life, eternal beginners, at
> least not in this 
> sense. There is of course a sense in which learning
> never stops, & 
> in that sense, all of us, including spiritual
> teachers, are eternal 
> beginners. But in the context of a perennial school,
> a candidate was 
> expected to "advance." Otherwise, why have a school?
> The chelaship that HPB & her teachers spoke of made
> reference to the 
> old perennial schools (although of course the term
> "chela" itself 
> would not be found in other schools, other words
> referring to the 
> same thing being used).
> She & her teachers specifically referred to the fact
> that there would 
> be a new, major-major cycle beginning shortly after
> her death. She 
> used the date 1897 to refer to the beginning of that
> new, major 
> cycle. According to her & her teachers, every time
> there is a new 
> cycle, especially one of this enormous magnitude,
> there is a teacher 
> who provides what KH called "the keynote teaching"
> for that new era. 
> (Incidentally, this is the origin of the notion of a
> "new age" 
> beginning at this time, which had its source in HPB
> & her teachers, 
> though the majority of humanity seem to be totally
> ignorant of this 
> fact.) HPB & her teachers could have been mistaken
> about this. If 
> you think they were mistaken, then we'll just agree
> to disagree on 
> this point. It's a rather important point, however,
> since, according 
> to a number of statements they made, HPB's teachers
> seemed to 
> consider this the main reason why the TS was
> founded.
> As I understand it, K was addressing himself not to
> people still 
> attached to the old way of conducting business in
> perennial schools, 
> but to people engaged somehow in a state of being in
> harmony with the 
> cycle now beginning. He was addressing himself to
> the new 
> consciousness. For anyone paying attention to what's
> been happening 
> in the world since the founding of the TS, that new
> consciousness has 
> been flowering in recent times. It is a
> consciousness that does not 
> seem to have existed before these times. Part of
> what I mean is that 
> all humans are now forced to see themselves as
> integral components of 
> humanity. In the past, it was almost a given that
> people attached 
> themselves to the culture they were born to. In that
> environment, it 
> was far more difficult for perennial teachers to
> teach 
> transformation, & so they did the best they could,
> even though the 
> people they were trying to teach found it difficult
> to grasp that 
> there was one humanity, & universal virtues not
> dependent on their 
> particular conditioning. This may be a major reason
> why both HPB & 
> her teachers in their letters spoke of how all
> previous perennial 
> attempts had been "failures," & why sometimes they
> spoke of the TS 
> with skepticism.
> In any case, you speak of "Esoteric Buddhism" in the
> question you 
> raise. To my knowledge, esoteric Buddhism is
> exclusively associated 
> with the Vajrayana of Tibet, so I take it that this
> is the Buddhism 
> you're referring to, especially since you speak of
> "chelaship." The 
> Prime Minister of Tibet in Exile, who is the Dalai
> Lama's 
=== message truncated ===

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ


[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application