Theos-Talk Archives (November 2008 Message tt00213)

Dear friends

My views are:

In The Bhagavad Gita it is written in Sankaracharya's commentary to it, that ParaBrahm is neither nothing nor something.

- - -

"Parabrahm is not "God," because It is not a God. "It is that which is supreme, and not supreme (paravara)," explains Mandukya Upanishad (2.28). IT is "Supreme" as CAUSE, not supreme as effect. Parabrahm is simply, as a "Secondless Reality," the all-inclusive Kosmos - or, rather, the infinite Cosmic Space - in the highest spiritual sense, of course. Brahma (neuter) being the unchanging, pure, free, undecaying supreme Root, "the ONE true Existence, Paramarthika," and the absolute Chit and Chaitanya (intelligence, consciousness) cannot be a cognize, "for THAT can have no subject of cognition." Can the flame be called the essence of Fire? This Essence is "the LIFE and LIGHT of the Universe, the visible fire and flame are destruction, death, and evil." "Fire and Flame destroy the body of an Arhat, their essence makes him immortal." (Bodhi-mur, Book II.) "The knowledge of the absolute Spirit, like the effulgence of the sun, or like heat in fire, is naught else than the absolute Essence itself," says Sankaracharya. IT - is "the Spirit of the Fire," not fire itself; therefore, "the attributes of the latter, heat or flame, are not the attributes of the Spirit, but of that of which that Spirit is the unconscious cause." Is not the above sentence the true key-note of later Rosicrucian philosophy?"
(written in The secret Doctrine, Vol 1., page 6 by Blavatsky )
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/SDVolume_I.htm


"Parabraham is not this or that, it is not even consciousness, as
it cannot be related to matter or anything conditioned. It is not Ego nor is
it Non-ego, not even Atma, but verily the one source of all manifestations
and modes of existence."
(written in The secret Doctrine, Vol 1., page 130 by Blavatsky )
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/SDVolume_I.htm

 " If a Vedantic Brahmin of the Adwaita Sect, when asked whether he believes in the existence of God, is always likely to answer, as Jacolliot was answered-"I am myself 'God';" a Buddhist (a Sinhalese especially) would simply laugh, and say in reply, "There is no God; no Creation." Yet the root philosophy of both Adwaita and Buddhist scholars is identical, and both have the same respect for animal life, for both believe that every creature on earth, however small and humble, "is an immortal portion of the immortal matter"-for matter with them has quite another significance than it has with either Christian or materialist-and that every creature is subject to Karma."
(written in The secret Doctrine, Vol 1., page 636 by Blavatsky )
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/SDVolume_I.htm


 - - -

The Adwaitee says:

The world is Maya or Mayavic. (The world on all 7 planes are illusorical and mayavic).
There is only Parabrahm. (Beyond thoughts and non-dual. Neti, neti.)
Atma=ParaBrahm. (Within your false opinion of your self is the true "opinion" - namely ParaBrahm.)


The Buddhist says:

There is no ParaBrahm
There is no illusion.
There is only emptyness or not-I.


The Christian says:

There is a personal male creator God apart from the world.
There is a true God in the flesh named Jesus Christ.
There is salvation, but not for all.
There is an eternal hell.


The Muslim says:

There is a Paradise with beautiful serving Virgins and no male servants.
There is a sex-less Allah
Mohammad was a profet and no God in the flesh.
There is salvation, but not for nonbelievers.
There is an eternal hell.


- - -

We Know that the Adwaitee and Buddhist are very close to the truth about life and the wisdom teachings. Especially if they agree on that they both of them are so. We know, that the Christians and Muslims in general are not.

You may seek correct me if I am wrong in the above.



M. Sufilight



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: danielhcaldwell 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:46 PM
  Subject: Theos-World KH does teach the ONE LIFE


  Anand,

  I have written a whole posting on this subject already.

  See:

  "Anand writes; 'Just take one example....'"
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/47309

  But I want to add ONE MORE EXAMPLE from Mahatma Letter #10 which shows 
  that for some reason best known to you, you have MISUNDERSTOOD what KH 
  is teaching when you write: "As I understand this statement, Letter 
  rejects the idea of ONE LIFE."

  Take a quote which I have already given many times to you. It is from 
  this same Letter #10. KH writes:

  ----------------------------------------------------------
  . . . We are not Adwaitees, but our teaching respecting the one life
  is identical with that of the Adwaitee with regard to Parabrahm. And
  no true philosophically trained Adwaitee will ever call himself an
  agnostic, for he knows that he is Parabrahm and identical in every
  respect with the universal life and soul -- the macrocosm is the
  microcosm and he knows that there is no God apart from himself, no
  creator as no being....
  ---------------------------------------------------------

  Here KH says that "OUR teaching respecting THE ONE LIFE is IDENTICAL 
  with that of the Adwaitee with regard to PARABRAHM."

  IDENTICAL....

  An Adwaitee "KNOWS that he IS Parabrahm and IDENTICAL...with THE 
  UNIVERSAL LIFE AND SOUL."

  In other words, THE ONE LIFE is the UNIVERSAL LIFE, the UNIVERSAL SOUL.

  There is NO GOD apart from himSELF. In other words, the UNIVERSAL 
  SELF, UNIVERSAL SOUL includes and is in fact all lesser selves and 
  souls. All are actally ONE...ONE LIFE.

  There is no creator or BEING apart from, or separate from or OUTSIDE 
  the ONE LIFE, the UNIVERSAL life, the UNIVERSAL soul.

  I really don't know how you misunderstand what KH writes.....This 
  really puzzles me.....

  Daniel



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]