Theos-Talk Archives (June 1997 Message tl00206)

Keith writes-->
<< HPB talked about blinds (half-truths) to confuse the profane.  From my
reading
 the SECRET DOCTRINE is one big blind except if one has some intuitive
 connection.  That is why I have not had the interest of who said what, and
 what the sources were. >>

Richard Ihle writes-->
I agree with you, Keith.

One of the reasons I continue to harp on the "Big T" theme is that it tends
to put the big nail in HPB's coffin rather than the little nail which can be
pried off by an individual who has a little intuition (and just in general is
a good s(S)elf-observer).

Our fine, departed friend Alexis used to talk about "process theosophy."
 Unfortunately, there doesn't seem much process left once ~Theosophy~
once-and-for-all gets defined as "doctrines found in HPB's (and related)
writings."  A person just "learns" Theosophy and thinks he or she has some
answers.

Alas, the person probably has no answers at all without undertaking the
theosophical process for himself or herself.

Brother Mark asks this question:  ". . . can anyone tell me how theosophy has
resolved the difference between the traditional Hindu view of Atman and
Brahman and the quite succint refutation of these concepts by Buddhism (for
example, in the Buddhist doctrine of anatman)?"

Mark may as well have capitalized ~theosophy~ because the answers are most
likely to come from inside-the-coffin context anyway.  Atman/anatman:  Is
there really someone who thinks they can know the answer to that by reading
HPB or anyone else?  No, that is a question which can only be approached by
one's own "personal mysticism"--which is the whole epistemological idea of
theosophy to begin with.

It sometimes amazes me that more people do not see how HPB's and other grand
cosmological systems may have come into being.  The "process" in process
theosophy is not from large to small; it is the reverse.  Take
~reincarnation~ and ~karma~ for examples.  Is it too far-fetched to consider
that individuals first watched themselves going to sleep each night and then
being "re-born" the next morning?  Is it too far-fetched to consider that
they may have had desires the previous day (according to their "tendencies")
and perhaps did certain things, the consequences of which may or may not yet
have been experienced.  Is it too far-fetched to consider that the (perhaps
many) creators of the ideas of reincarnation and karma were simply those who
applied the "as below, so above" methodology?

Now, of course, esoteric study is seems to be largely of the "as above, so
below" orientation.  The concepts of reincarnation and karma must seem so
grand to some people that they believe they could have only come from the
Gods or at least semi-preternatural Mahatmas.  It does not seem to dawn upon
them that they also have within themselves the potential for saying
something, at least speculatively, about the big picture if they meditate and
are keen enough observers of the small picture--particularly their own
psychological states and development.  The result, of course, will not be
something "true" or "not true" in the conventional sense; the result will
most likely merely be the well-loved-by-mystics "peace which passeth
understanding" about certain aspects of the bigger picture.

But capital Theosophists often do not seem quite comfortable as mystics.
 They often seem to want to nail things down, once and for all, with the big
T.  Unfortunately, this attitude does not always welcome the possibility that
THE SECRET DOCTRINE may also be, in many respects, a "blind" to be sure.  But
a blind for what?

Practical Adeptship, of course.

Read about reincarnation and karma and think about what the originator(s)
might have been observing in his or her personal life which could have
inspired such a theosophical leap.  Read about anthropogenesis and think
about what personal, subtle psychogenetic events the originator(s) might have
been observing and which are still largely unknown to modern psychology.
 Read about ~Kriyashakti~ as the natural possession of the "coming races" and
think about what special development some advanced originator(s) may have
started to observe in his or her own life.

Old HPB:  Maybe she was a genius when it came to inventing the ultimate blind
as well:  Put THE SECRET DOCTRINE so high in the stratosphere that the
"profane" are unable to stretch-out their legs far enough to keep walking on
earth while reading it. . . .