Theos-Talk Archives (March 1995 Message tl00027)

I realized that my reference to Joshu's koan in relation to the
web or network of existence probably didn't make much senses so I
thought I would try to clarify my reference.  Koan: Does a dog
have Buddha nature? answer: Mu (no!)

It is probably the most used and most important of the Zen koans.
Many newcomers struggle with it before going on.  My perspective
is very personal as I have used it while reading the books of Ken
Wilber such as THE SPECTRUM OF EXISTENCE, THE ATMAN PROJECT, UP
FROM EDEN, NO BOUNDARY AND SO ON.  Some of these have been
published by Quest and so are theosophical at least by
association and IMHO largely in content.  Mr.  Wilber borrows, if
the people where alive a stronger term could be used, liberally
from theosophical and buddhist writings to apply the ideas,
especially the 7 planes or level, to psychology.  Jean Houston
has done much the same, but applying the ideas of evolution and
involution to history, sociology and mythology.  (This is an
admitted oversimplification of their work, but what can you
expect in a few sentences :)

Anyway, I guess Mr.  Wilber and Ms.  Houston have taken theosophy
where few men or women have dared to go (play Star Trek theme
here).  That is why I am a little impatient, though in full
understanding, of those who want to cling to Blavatsky, the
Masters and the 19th century.  Yeah they are great, but it's
almost 2000, less than four years by my clock.  HPB and the ML
are great, but what do they have to say to us today (minus the
science and gossip of the time).


Well, I think Mr.  WIlber and Ms.  Houston have shown the way to
bringing it all up to date, in their own way.  This is not to say
they are a replacement, or even a substitute for the original
works, but are pointing the way to the future, not the past.

Fade back to Josu's koan.  I was studying the koan along with Mr.
Wilber's ATMAN PROJECT and their was talk about Sunyata as a web
that is no web but the final veil before everything is
transparent to everything else.  This is what is meant (for me)
by the enigmatic or even absurd answers given to such question as
"what is Buddha?" answer: the wind blows cold on the north slope
(or variations on that type of thing).  The point is that Buddha
nature is not a mental or even an intuitional construct but is
interpenetrating all existense such that I cannot seperate
Buddha-nature from a tree in the garden, a dog or an outhouse
stick.

So the hierarchies are a useful tool like driving on the right
hand side of the road in American and on the left in G.B.  but
are finally left (I mean abandoned :) when one "winds slowly
every upward" on the great path (see Proem probably misquoted) to
Transparent Universal Mind.

And a last thought on Modern Master, Jung had his own Master,
talking Wise Old Man or amenuensis (sp?).  I forgot his name, but
there is picture of him in THE RED BOOK and he dictated THE SEVEN
SERMONS TO THE DEAD and one would think much of what Jung said
about the God-image in the collective unconcious and things that
had to do with his "revelations" from his Higher Self.  Why don't
we form a cult around Jung? Well, because he was so clear that
these Masters are within us all and available to us.  Of course,
his ability to intergrate and verbalize his experience is beyond
most of our abilities.  I'm not sure HPB would want a cult of the
Masters.  Is this what the Esoteric Section is or was? Somehow I
don't expect an answer on that one.

Krishnamurti at the beginning of this century disavowed all cults
and gurus and Masters as THE way to TRUTH.  He stated that truth
is a pathless land.  Although many of us still need pointers and
guidelines and books etc.  his message can still reach us in
1995.

Namaste

Keith Price