Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00990)

> RIhle@aol.com
> writes
> >P.S.:  I was the happiest of men the other day:  I actually found a place
(in
> >COLLECTED WRITINGS, p.53) where HPB  puts *Buddhi* in parenthesis as a
> >synonym for *Spirit*.
> >
> >Godspeed,
> >
> >Richard Ihle
>
> Glad you were happy!  I would opine that "Buddhi" and "Spirit" live next
> door to each other, but are not synonymous.  "Atma" and "Spirit" share
> the same house.  Just an opinion. ("Mahatma" is often translated Great
> [Maha] Spirit [Atma].

I would agree with Alan.  It is part of the poverty of the English language
that there are so few terms to describe supersensuous realities.  "Spirit"
has to do double, triple, even quadruple duty.  HPB may occasionally use
"Buddhi" as a term for "spirit," but for each instance of this we can find 50
uses of "buddhi" translated as "soul" and "upadhi" of "Atma" or "Spirit."

There can't be any doubt that Buddhi partakes of the highest essence, and it
often referred to as the passive aspect of kundalini (the active aspect).  It
seems to me that as Atma is  perfectly universal "spirit," it would not be
able to manifest at any point were it not for the lens or sheath or focus
privided by that highest essence buddhi/kundalini.  Thus buddhi is most often
called "soul" or "spirit vehicle" but this can make it sound too material in
English.  Alas, we vulgarians have a great language for expressing economic
and material reality, and so hardship with the spiritual (soulful?) life.