WHAT SHALL WE
DO FOR OUR
FELLOW-MEN?
From the
writings of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, the
founder of modern Theosophy and co-founder of
the
original Theosophical Society in
____________________________
Cardiff
Theosophical Society
Mission
Statement
The
dominant and core activity of Cardiff Theosophical Society
is to
promote and assist the study of Theosophical Teachings
as defined by the
writings of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky,
William Quan Judge, Alfred Percy Sinnett and
their lineage.
This
Mission Statement does not preclude non Theosophical
activities
but these must be of a spiritual nature
and/or
compatible with the Objects of the Society.
____________________________
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
1831-1891
The
Founder of Modern Theosophy
What Shall We Do
For Our Fellow-Men?
by
Helena Petrovna
Blavatsky
CORRESPONDENCE
You have obliged my friends and myself
by answering or annotating my letter to you in your number
of July I5th. Will you allow us to continue this discussion? Several letters
which I have received in consequence of this correspondence not only from
You agree with us--as your note 4 to my
last letter (pg. 431) unmistakably shows--that the ultimate Goal which the
mystic or the occultist have to strive for, is not perfection IN existence (the
"world") but absolute being: that is, we have to strive
for deliverance FROM all existence in any of the three worlds or planes of
existence. The difference of opinions, however, is this: Shall we now,
nevertheless, assist all our fellow-men indiscriminately in their worldly affairs;
shall we occupy ourselves with their national and individual Karma, in order to
help them to improve the "world" and to live happily in it;
shall we strive with them to realize socialistic problems, to further
science, arts and industries, to teach them cosmology, the evolution of man and
of the universe, etc., etc.,--or on the other hand, shall we only do the best
we can to show our fellow-men the road of wisdom that will lead them out of
the world and as straight as possible towards their acknowledged goal of
absolute existence (Para-Nirvana, Moksha,
Atma)? Shall we consequently only work for
those who are willing to get rid of all individual existence and yearning to be
delivered from all selfishness, from all strivings, who are longing only for
eternal peace?
Answer.
As the undersigned accepts for her views and walk in life no authority
dead or living, no system of philosophy or religion but one--namely,
the esoteric teachings of ethics and philosophy of those she calls "MASTERS"--answers
have, therefore, to be given strictly in accordance with these teachings. My first
reply then is: Nothing of that which is conducive to help man, collectively or
individually, to live--not "happily"--but less unhappily in
this world, ought to be indifferent to the Theosophist-Occultist. It is no
concern of his whether his help benefits a man in his worldly or spiritual
progress; his first duty is to be ever ready to help if he can, without
stopping to philosophize. It is because our clerical and lay Pharisees too
often offer a Christian dogmatic tract, instead of the simple bread of life to
the wretches they meet--whether these are starving physically or morally--that
pessimism, materialism and despair win with every day more ground in our age.
Weal and woe, or happiness and misery, are relative terms. Each of us finds
them according to his or her predilections; one in worldly, the other in
intellectual pursuits, and no one system will ever satisfy all. Hence, while
one finds his pleasure and rest in family joys, another in
"Socialism" and the third in a "longing only for eternal peace,"
there may be those who are starving for truth, in every department of the
science of nature, and who consequently are yearning to learn the esoteric
views about "cosmology, the evolution of man and of the
Universe."--H.P.B.
According to our opinion the latter
course is the right one for a mystic; the former one we take to be a statement
of our views. Your notes to my former letter are quite consistent with this
view, for in your note 3 you say: "Paranirvana
is reached only when the Manvantara has closed and
during the 'night' of the universe or Pralaya."
If the final aim of paranirvana cannot be
attained individually, but only solidarily by the
whole of the present humanity, it stands to reason, that in order to arrive at
our consummation we have not only to do the best we can for the suppression of
our own self, but that we have to work first for the world-process to hurry all
the worldly interests of Hottentots, and the European vivisectors,
having sufficiently advanced to see their final goal of salvation, are ready to
join us in striving towards that deliverance.
Answer.
According to our opinion as there is no essential difference between a
"mystic" and a "Theosophist-Esotericist"
or Eastern Occultist, the above cited course is not "the right one
for a mystic." One, who while "yearning to be delivered from all
selfishness" directs at the same time all his energies only to that
portion of humanity which is of his own way of thinking, shows himself not only
very selfish but is guilty of prejudice and partiality. When saying that
Para, or Parinirvana rather,
is reached only at the Manvantaric close, I never
meant to imply the "planetary" but the whole Cosmic Manvantara, i.e., at the end of
"an age" of Brahmâ, not one
"Day." For this is the only time when during the universal Pralaya mankind (i.e., not only the
terrestrial mankind but that of every "man" or "manu-bearing" globe, star, sun or planet) will
reach "solidarily" Parinirvana,
and even then it will not be the whole mankind, but only those portions of the
mankind which will have made themselves ready for it. Our correspondent's
remark about the "Hottentots" and "European vivisectors"
seems to indicate to my surprise that my learned Brother has in his mind only
our little unprogressed Terrene mankind?--H.P.B.
You have the great advantage
over us, that you speak with absolute certainty on all these points, in saying:
"this is the esoteric doctrine," and "such is the teaching of my
masters." We do not think that we have any such certain warrant for
our belief; on the contrary, we want to learn, and are ready to receive,
wisdom, wherever it may offer itself to us. We know of no authority or divine
revelation; for, as far as we accept Vedantic or Buddhistic doctrines, we only do so because we have been
convinced by the reasons given; or, where the reasons prove to be beyond our
comprehension, but where our intuition tells us: this, nevertheless, is likely
to be true, we try our best to make our understanding follow our intuition.
Answer.
I speak "with absolute certainty" only so far as my own personal
belief is concerned. Those who have not the same warrant for their
belief as I have, would be very credulous and foolish to accept it on blind
faith. Nor does the writer believe any more than her correspondent and his
friends in any "authority" let alone "divine revelation"!
Luckier in this than they are, I need not even rely in this as they do on my intuition,
as there is no infallible intuition. But what I do believe in is (1),
the unbroken oral teachings revealed by living divine men during the
infancy of mankind to the elect among men; (2), that it has reached us unaltered;
and (3) that the MASTERS are thoroughly versed in the science based on such
uninterrupted teaching.--H.P.B.
In reference, therefore, to your note 5,
it was not, nor is it, our intention "to inflict any criticism on
you"; on the contrary we should never waste time with opposing anything we
think wrong; we leave that to its own fate; but we try rather to get at
positive information or arguments, wherever we think they may offer themselves.
Moreover, we have never denied, nor shall we ever forget, that we owe you great
and many thanks for your having originated the present movement and for having
made popular many striking ideas hitherto foreign to European civilization. We
should now feel further obliged to you, if you (or your masters) will give us
some reasons, which could make it appear likely to us, why paranirvana
could not be attained by any jiva at
any time (a), and why the final goal can only be reached solidarily
Answer (a).
There is some confusion here. I never said that no jiva
could attain Parinirvana, nor meant to infer that
"the final goal can only be reached solidarily"
by our present humanity. This is to attribute to me an ignorance to which I am
not prepared to plead guilty, and in his turn my correspondent has
misunderstood me. But as every system in India teaches several kinds of pralayas as also of Nirvanic
or "Moksha" states, Dr. Hübbe
Schleiden has evidently confused the Prakrita with the Naimittika
Pralaya, of the Visishtadwaita
Vedantins. I even suspect that my esteemed
correspondent has imbibed more of the teachings of this particular sect of the
three Vedantic schools than he had bargained for;
that his "Brahmin Guru" in short, of whom there are various legends
coming to us from Germany, has coloured his pupil far more with the philosophy
of Sri Ramanujacharya, than with that of Sri Sankarachârya. But this is a trifle connected with circumstances
beyond his control and of a Karmic character. His aversion to
"Cosmology" and other sciences including theogony,
and as contrasted with "Ethics" pure and simple, dates also from the
period he was taken in hand by the said learned guru. The latter expressed it
personally to us, after his sudden salto mortali from esotericism--too difficult to comprehend
and therefore to teach,--to ethics which any one who knows a Southern
language or two of India, can impart by simply translating his texts from philosophical
works with which the country abounds. The result of this is, that my esteemed
friend and correspondent talks Visishtadwaitism as
unconsciously as M. Jourdain talked
"prose," while believing he argues from the Mahayâna
and Vedantic standpoint--pure and simple. If
otherwise, I place myself under correction. But how can a Vedantin
speak of Jivas as though these were separate
entities and independent of JIVATMA the one universal soul! This is a
purely Visishtadwaita doctrine which asserts that Jivatma is different in each individual from that in
another individual? He asks "why parinirvana
could not be attained by any jiva at any
time." We answer that if by "jiva" he
means the "Higher Self" or the divine ego of man, only--then
we say it may reach Nirvana, not Parinirvana, but
even this, only when one becomes Jivanmukta,
which does not mean "at any time." But if he understands
by "Jiva" simply the one life which,
the Visishtadwaitas say is contained in every
particle of matter, separating it from the sarira
or body that contains it, then, we do not understand at all what he means.
For, we do not agree that Parabrahm only pervades every
Jiva, as well as each particle of matter, but say
that Parabrahm is inseparable from every Jiva, as from every particle of matter since it is the absolute,
and that IT is in truth that Jivatma itself crystallized--for
want of a better word. Before I answer his questions, therefore, I must know
whether he means by Parinirvana, the same as I do,
and of which of the Pralayas he is talking. Is
it of the Prakrita Maha
Pralaya, which takes place every 311 ,040,000,000,000
years; or of the Naimittika Pralaya occurring after each Brahma Kalpa
equal to 1,000 Maha Yugas, or which? Convincing
reasons can be given then only when two disputants understand each other. I
speak from the esoteric standpoint almost identical with the Adwaita interpretation; Dr. Hübbe
Schleiden argues from that of--let him say what system,
for, lacking omniscience, I cannot tell.--H.P.B.
by the whole of the humanity living at
present. In order to further this discussion, I will state here some of the
reasons which appear to speak against this view, and I will try to further
elucidate some of the consequences of acting in accordance with each of these
two views:
The unselfishness of the Altruist has a
very different character according to which of the two views he takes. To begin
with our view, the true Mystic who believes that he can attain
deliverance from the world and from his individuality independent of the Karma
of any other entities, or of the whole humanity, is an Altruist, because and so
far as he is a monist, that is to say, on account of the tat twam asi. Not the form
or the individuality, but the being of all entities is the same and is
his own; in proportion as he feels his own avidya,
agnana or unwisdom, so
does he feel that of other entities, and has compassion with them on that
(b). To feel
"compassion" without an adequate practical result ensuing from it is
not to show oneself an "Altruist" but the reverse. Real
self-development on the esoteric lines is action. "Inaction
in a deed of mercy becomes an action in a deadly sin." (Vide The
Two Paths in the "Voice of the Silence," p. 31.)--H.P.B.
account. (b) To take now
the other view: Is not the altruism of an occultist who sees himself tied to
the Karma of all his fellowmen, and who, on that account, labours for and with
them, rather an egotistical one? For is not at the bottom of his
"unselfishness" the knowledge that he cannot work out his own salvation
at any lesser price? The escape from selfishness for such a man is
self-sacrifice for the "world"; for the mystic, however, it is
self-sacrifice to the eternal, to absolute being. Altruism is certainly
considered one of the first requirements of any German Theosopher--we
can or will not speak for others--but we are rather inclined to think that
altruism had never been demanded in this country in the former sense (of
self-sacrifice for the "world"), but only in the latter sense
of self-sacrifice to the eternal.(c)
(c). An Occultist does not feel
"himself tied to the Karma of all his fellow men," no more than one
man feels his legs motionless because of the paralysis of another man's legs.
But this does not prevent the fact that the legs of both are evolved from, and
contain the same ultimate essence of the ONE LIFE. Therefore, there can be no egotistical
feeling in his labours for the less favoured brother. Esoterically, there
is no other way, means or method of sacrificing oneself
"to the eternal" than by working and sacrificing oneself for the
collective spirit of Life, embodied in, and (for us) represented in its highest
divine aspect by Humanity alone. Witness the Nirmanakâya,--the
sublime doctrine which no Orientalist understands to
this day but which Dr. Hübbe Schleiden
can find in the IInd and IIIrd
Treatises in the "Voice of the Silence." Naught else
shows forth the eternal; and in no other way than this can any mystic or
occultist truly reach the eternal, whatever the Orientalists
and the vocabularies of Buddhist terms may say, for the real meaning of the Trikâya, the triple power of Buddha's
embodiment, and of Nirvana in its triple negative and positive definitions has
ever escaped them.
If our correspondent believes that by
calling himself "theosopher" in preference
to "theosophist" he escapes thereby any idea of sophistry connected
with his views, then he is mistaken. I say it in all sincerity, the opinions he
expresses in his letters are in my humble judgment the very fruit of sophistry.
If I have misunderstood him, I stand under correction.--H.P.B.
2. It is a misunderstanding, if you
think in your note 5, that we are advocating entire "withdrawal or
isolation from the world." We do so as little as yourself, but only
recommend an "ascetic life," as far as it is necessary to prepare
anyone for those tasks imposed upon him by following the road to final
deliverance from the world. But the consequence of your view seems to lead to
joining the world in a worldly life, and until good enough reasons are
given for it, we do not approve of this conduct. That we should have to join
our fellow men in all their worldly interests and pursuits, in order to
assist them and hasten them on to the solidary and
common goal, is contrary to our intuition.(a) To
Answer.
(a) It is difficult to find out how the view expressed in my last answer
can lead to such an inference, or where have I advised my brother Theosophists
to join men "in all their worldly interests and pursuits!"
Useless to quote here again that which is said in note 1, for every one can
turn to the passage and see that I have said nothing of the kind. For one
precept I can give a dozen. "Not nakedness, not plaited hair, not dirt,
not fasting or lying on the earth . . . not sitting motionless, can purify one
who has not overcome desires," says Dhammapada
(chap. I, 141). "Neither abstinence from fish or flesh, nor going
naked, nor the shaving of the head, nor matted hair, etc., etc., will cleanse a
man not free from delusions" Amagandha
Sutta (7, 11). This is what I meant. Between
salvation through dirt and stench, like St. Labro and
some Fakirs, and worldly life with an eye to every interest, there is a long
way. Strict asceticism in the midst of the world, is more meritorious than
avoiding those who do not think as we do, and thus losing an opportunity of
showing them the truth.--H.P.B.
strive for the deliverance from the
world by furthering and favouring the world-process seems rather a round-about
method. Our inclination leads us to retire from all worldly life, and to
work apart--from a monastery or otherwise--together with and for all those fellow-men
who are striving for the same goal of deliverance, and who are willing to rid
themselves of all karma, their own as well as that of others. We would assist
also all those who have to remain in worldly life, but who are already
looking forward to the same goal of release, and who join us in doing their
best to attain this end. We make no secret of our aims or our striving; we lay
our views and our reasons before anyone who will hear them, and we are
ready to receive amongst us anyone who will honestly join us.(b)
Above all, however, we are doing
(b). So do we.
And if, not all of us live up to our highest ideal of wisdom, it is only
because we are men not gods, after all. But there is one thing, however,
we never do (those in the esoteric circle, at any rate): we set ourselves as
examples to no men, for we remember well that precept in Amagandha Sutta that says:
"Self-praise, disparaging others, conceit, evil communications
(denunciations), these constitute (moral) uncleanness"; and again, as in
the Dhammapada, "The fault of
others is easily perceived, but that of oneself is difficult to perceive; the
faults of others one lays open as much as possible, but one's own fault one
hides, as a cheat hides the bad die from the gambler."--H.P.B.
our best to live up to our highest ideal
of wisdom; and perhaps the good example may prove to be more useful to our
fellow-men than any organized propaganda of teaching.
By the bye, in your note you couple
together Schopenhauer and Eduard von Hartmann. In this
question, however, both are of opposite opinions. Schopenhauer, like most
German mystics and theosophers, represents the views
of Vedanta and (exoteric) Buddhism, that final salvation can, and can only, be
individually attained independent of time and the karma of others. Hartmann,
however, verges much more towards your opinion, for he does not believe in individual
consummation and deliverance from the world; he thinks all mysticism and
particularly that which is now known as Indian philosophy, an error, and
demands of everyone as an altruistic duty to give himself up to the
world-process, and to do his best in order to hasten its end. (He is the
"clever modern philosopher" whom I have mentioned on page 435).(c)
(c). As I have never read von
Hartmann, and know very little of Schopenhauer, nor do they interest me, I have
permitted myself only to bring them forward as examples of the worst kind of
pessimism; and you corroborate what I said, by what you state of Hartmann. If,
however, as you say, Hartmann thinks "Indian philosophy an error,"
then he cannot be said to verge toward my opinion, as I hold
quite a contrary view. India might return the compliment with interest.--H.P.B.
3. There is, and can be, no doubt that
Vedanta and (exoteric) Buddhism do not hold your view, but ours. Moreover, one
could scarcely dispute that Lord Buddha--whatever esoteric doctrine he may have
taught--founded monasteries, or that he favoured and assisted in doing so.
Whether he expected all his disciples to become Bodhisattvas may be doubtful,
but he certainly pointed out the "happy life" of a Bhikshu as the road to salvation; he expressly abstained
from teaching cosmology or any worldly science; he never meddled with the
worldly affairs of men, but every assistance he rendered them was entirely
restricted to showing them the road to deliverance from existence. And just the
same with Vedanta. It prohibits any attachment to worldly views and interests,
or enquiries after cosmology or evolution a fortiori socialism and any
other world-improvement. All this Vedanta calls Agnana
(Buddhism: Avidya), while Gnana or wisdom--the only aim of a sage (Gnani)--is but the striving for the realization of the
eternal (true reality, Atma).(a)
Answer (a).
It depends on what you call Vedanta--whether the Dwaita,
the Adwaita, or the Visishtadwaita.
That we differ from all these, is no news, and I have spoken of it repeatedly.
Yet in the esotericism of the Upanishads, when correctly
understood, and our esotericism, there will not be found much difference. Nor
have I ever disputed any of the facts about Buddha as now brought forward;
although these are facts from only his exoteric biography. Nor has he
invented or drawn from his inner consciousness the philosophy he taught, but
only the method of his rendering it. Buddhism being simply esoteric Bodhism taught before him secretly in the arcana of the Brahminical
temples, contains, of course, more than one doctrine of which the Lord Buddha
never spoke of in public. But this shows in no way that he did not teach them
to his Arhats. Again, between "attachment to
worldly views or interests" and the study of Cosmology, which is not "a
worldly science" however, there is an abyss. One pertains to religious and
philosophical asceticism, the other is necessary for the study of
Occultism--which is not Buddhistic, but
universal. Without the study of cosmogony and theogony
which teach the hidden value of every force in Nature and their direct
correspondence to, and relation with, the forces in man (or the principles) no
occult psychophysics or knowledge of man as he truly is, is possible.
No one is forced to study esoteric philosophy unless he likes it, nor has
anyone ever confused Occultism with Buddhism or Vedantism.--H.P.B.
Agnani (misprinted in the July number page 436:
agnam) signified just the same as what
is rendered by "fool" in the English translations of the Dhammapada and the Suttas. It is
never understood "intellectually" and certainly does not mean an ignoramus,
on the contrary, the scientists are rather more likely to be agnanis than any "uneducated"
mystic. Agnani expresses always a
relative notion. Gnani is anyone who is
striving for the self-realization of the eternal; a perfect gnani is only the jivanmukta,
but anyone who is on the road of development to this end may be
(relatively) called gnani, while anyone
who is less advanced is comparatively an agnani.
As, however, every gnani sees the
ultimate goal above himself, he will call himself an agnani,
until he has attained jivanmukta; moreover,
no true mystic will ever call any fellow-man a "fool" in the
intellectual sense of the word, for he lays very little stress on
intellectuality. To him anyone is a "fool" only in so far as he cares
for (worldly) existence and strives for anything else than wisdom, deliverance,
paranirvana. And this turn of mind is entirely a
question of the "will" of the individuality. The "will" of
the agnani is carrying him from spirit
into matter (descending arch of the cycle), while the "will" of the gnani disentangles him from matter and makes
him soar up towards "spirit" and out of all existence. This question
of overcoming the "dead point" in the circle is by no means one of
intellectuality; it is quite likely that a sister of mercy or a common labourer
may have turned the corner while the Bacons, Goethes,
Humboldts, &c., may yet linger on the descending
side of existence tied down to it by their individual wants and desires.(b)
(b). Agnam,
instead of agnani was of course a
printer's mistake. With such every Journal and Magazine abounds, in Germany, I
suppose, as much as in England, and from which LUCIFER is no more free than the
Sphinx. It is the printer's and the proof-reader's Karma. But it is
a worse mistake, however, to translate Agnani
by "fool," all the Beals, Oldenbergs, Webers, and Hardys, to the contrary. Gnana
(or, Jnâna, rather) is Wisdom certainly, but even
more, for it is the spiritual knowledge of things divine, unknown to all but
those who attain it--and which saves the Jivanmuktas
who have mastered both Karmayoga and Jnânayoga. Hence, if all those who have not jnâna (or gnana) at their
fingers' end, are to be considered "fools" this would mean that the
whole world save a few Yogis is composed of fools, which would be out-carlyleing Carlyle in his opinion of his countrymen. Ajnâna, in truth, means simply
"ignorance of the true Wisdom," or literally, "Wisdomless" and not at all "fool." To
explain that the word "fool" is "never understood
intellectually" is to say nothing, or worse, an Irish bull, as, according
to every etymological definition and dictionary, a fool is one who is
"deficient in intellect" and "destitute of
reason." Therefore, while thanking the kind doctor for the trouble he has
taken to explain so minutely the vexed Sanskrit term, I can do so only in the
name of LUCIFER'S readers, not for myself, as I knew all he says, minus his
risky new definition of "fool" and plus something else,
probably as early as on the day when he made his first appearance into this
world of Maya. No doubt, neither Bacon, Humboldt, nor even the
great Hæckel himself, the "light of
Germany," could ever be regarded as "gnanis";
but no more could any European I know of, however much he may have rid himself
of all "individual wants and desires."--H.P.B.
4. As we agree, that all existence, in
fact, the whole world and the whole of its evolutionary process, its joys and
evils, its gods and its devils, are Maya (illusion) or erroneous
conception of the true reality: how can it appear to us worth while to assist
and to promote this process of misconception?(a)
Answer (a).
Precisely, because the term maya, just
like that of "agnana" in your own
words--expresses only a relative notion. The world . . . "its joys
and evils, its gods and devils," and men to boot, are undeniably, when
compared with that awful reality everlasting eternity, no better
than the productions and tricks of maya, illusion.
But there the line of demarcation is drawn. So long as we are incapable of
forming even an approximately correct conception of this inconceivable eternity,
for us, who are just as much an illusion as anything else outside of
that eternity, the sorrows and misery of that greatest of all illusions--human
life in the universal mahamaya--for us,
I say, such sorrows and miseries are a vivid and a very sad reality. A shadow
from your body, dancing on the white wall, is a reality so long as it is there,
for yourself and all who can see it; because a reality is just as relative as
an illusion. And if one "illusion" does not help another
"illusion" of the same kind to study and recognise the true nature of
Self, then, I fear, very few of us will ever get out from the clutches of maya.--H.P.B.
5. Like all world-existence, time and
causality also are only Maya or--as Kant and Schopenhauer have proved
beyond contradiction--are only our conditioned notions, forms of our intellection.
Why then should any moment of time, or one of our own unreal forms of thought,
be more favourable to the attainment of paranirvana
than any other? To this paranirvana, Atma, or true reality, any manvantara
is just as unreal as any pralaya. And this is the
same with regard to causality, as with respect to time,
from whichever point of view you look at it. If from that of absolute
reality, all causality and karma are unreal, and to realize this unreality is
the secret of deliverance from it. But even if you look at it from the agnana-view, that is to say, taking existence
for a reality, there can never (in "time") be an end--nor can there
have been a beginning--of causality. It makes, therefore, no difference whether
any world is in pralaya or not; also Vedanta rightly
says that during any pralaya the karana
sharira (causal body, agnana)
of Ishvara and of all jivas,
in fact, of all existence, is continuing.(b) And how could this be other
(b). This is again a Visishtadwaita interpretation, which we do
not accept in the esoteric school. We cannot say, as they do that while the
gross bodies alone perish, the sukshma particles,
which they consider uncreated and indestructible and the only real things,
alone remain. Nor do we believe any Vedantin of the Sankarachârya school would agree in uttering such a heresy.
For this amounts to saying that Manomaya Kosha, which corresponds to what we call Manas, mind, with its volitious
feelings and even Kamarupa the vehicle
of the lower manas, also survives during pralaya. See page 185 in Five Years of Theosophy and
ponder over the three classifications of the human principles. Thence it
follows that the Karana Sarira (which means
simply the human Monad collectively or the reincarnating ego), the
"causal body" cannot continue; especially if, as you say, it is agnana, ignorance or the wisdomless
principle, and even agreeably with your definition "a fool." The
idea alone of this "fool" surviving during any pralaya,
is enough to make the hair of any Vedanta philosopher and even of a full blown Jivanmukta, turn grey, and thrust him right back into an
"agnani" again. Surely as you formulate it,
this must be a lapsus calami?
And why should the Karana Sarira of Iswara let alone that of "all Jivas
(!) be necessary during pralaya for the
evolution of another universe? Iswara, whether as a
personal god, or an intelligent independent principle, per se,
every Buddhist whether esoteric or exoteric and orthodox, will reject;
while some Vedantins would define him as Parabrahm plus MAYA (only, i.e., a
conception valid enough during the reign of maya, but
not otherwise. That which remains during pralaya is
the eternal potentiality of every condition of Pragna
(consciousness) contained in that plane or field of consciousness,
which the Adwaita calls Chidakasan
and Chinmatra (abstract
consciousness), which, being absolute, is therefore perfect unconsciousness--as
a true Vedantin would say.--H.P.B.
wise? After the destruction of any
universe in pralaya, must not another appear? Before
our present universe must there not have been an infinite number of other
universes? How could this be, if the cause of existence did not last through
any pralaya as well as through any kalpa? And if so, why should any pralaya
be a more favourable moment for the attainment of paranirvana
than any manvantara?
6. But if then one moment of time and
one phase of causality were more favourable for this than any other: why should
it just be any pralaya after a manvantara, not the end of the maha-kalpa
or at least that of a kalpa. In any
kalpa (of 4,320 millions of earthly years) there are
14 manvantaras and pralayas
and in each maha-kalpa (of 311,040 milliards of
earthly years) there are (36,000 X I4) 504,000 manvantaras
and pralayas. Why is this opportunity of paranirvana offered just so often and not oftener, or not
once only at the end of each universe. In other words, why can paranirvana only be obtained by spurts and in batches; why,
if it cannot be attained by any individuality at its own time, why must
one wait only for the whole of one's present fellow-humanity; why not also for
all the animals, plants, amœbas and protoplasms, perhaps also for the minerals of our
planet--and why not also for the entities on all the other stars of the
universe?(a)
Answer
(a). As Dr. Hübbe Schleiden
objects in the form of questions to statements and arguments that have never
been formulated by me, I have nothing to say to this.--H.P.B.
7. But, it appears, the difficulty lies
somewhat deeper still. That which has to be overcome, in order to attain paranirvana, is the erroneous conception of separateness,
the selfishness of individuality, the "thirst for existence" (trishna, tanha). It
stands to reason, that this sense of individuality can only be overcome
individually: How can this process be dependent on other individualities or
anything else at all? Selfishness in the abstract which is the cause of
all existence, in fact, Agnana and Maya,
can never be all together removed and extinguished. Agnana is as endless as it is beginningless,
and the number of jivas (atoms?) is absolutely
infinite; if the jivas of a whole universe were to be
extinguished in paranirvana, jivaship
and agnana would not be lessened by one atom. In
fact, both are mere unreality and misconception. Now, why should just one batch
of humanity have to unite, in order to get rid each of his own misconception of
reality?(b)
(b) . Here again the only
"unreality and misconception" I can perceive are his own. I am glad
to find my correspondent so learned, and having made such wonderful progress
since I saw him last some three years ago, when still in the fulness of his agnana; but
I really cannot see what all his arguments refer to?.--H.P.B.
Summing up, I will now give three
instances of the difference in which, I think a Mystic or (exoteric) Buddhist, Bhikshu or Arhat, on the one
side, and an occultist or theosophist on the other, would act, if both are
fully consistent with their views and principles. Both will certainly use any
opportunity which offers itself to do good to their fellow-men; but the good
which they will try to do, will be of a different kind.
Supposing they meet a poor, starving
wretch, with whom they share their only morsel of bread: the mystic will try to
make the man understand that the body is only to be kept up, because that
entity which lives in it has a certain spiritual destination, and that this
destination is nothing less than getting rid of all existence, and, at the same
time, of all wants and desires; that having to beg for one's food is no real
hardship, but might give a happier life than that of rich people with all their
imaginary worries and pretensions, that, in fact, the life of a destitute who is
nothing and who has nothing in the world, is the "happy
life"--as Buddha and Jesus have shown--when it is coupled with the right
aspiration to the eternal, the only true and unchangeable reality, the divine
peace. If the mystic finds that the man's heart is incapable of responding to
any keynote of such true religiousness, he will leave him alone, hoping that,
at some future time, he too will find out that all his worldly wants and
desires are insatiable and unsatisfying, and that after all true and final
happiness can only be found in striving for the eternal.--Not so the occultist.
He will know that he himself cannot finally realise the eternal, until
every other human individuality has likewise gone through all the worldly
aspirations and has been weaned from them. He will, therefore, try to assist
this poor wretch first in his worldly affairs; he will perhaps teach him some
trade or handicraft by which he can earn his daily bread, or he will plan with
him some socialistic scheme for bettering the worldly position of the poor.
Answer.
Here the "Mystic" acts precisely as a "Theosophist or
Occultist" of the Eastern school would. It is extremely interesting to
learn where Dr. Hübbe Schleiden
has studied "Occultists" of the type he is describing? If it is in
Germany, then pitying the Occultist who knows "that he himself cannot
realize the eternal" until every human soul has been weaned from
"worldly aspirations" I would invite him to come to London where
other Occultists who reside therein would teach him better. But then why not
qualify the "Occultist" in such case and thus show his nationality?
Our correspondent mentions with evident scorn, "Socialism" in this
letter, as often as he does "Cosmology"? We have but two English
Socialists, so far, in the T.S. of which two every Theosophist ought to be
proud and accept them as his exemplar in practical Buddha- and Christ-like
charity and virtues. Such socialists--two active altruists full of unselfish
love and charity and ready to work for all that suffers and needs help--are
decidedly worth ten thousand Mystics and other Theosophers,
whether German or English, who talk instead of acting and sermonize instead
of teaching. But let us take note of our correspondent's second
instance.--H.P.B.
Secondly, supposing further the mystic
and the occultist meet two women, the one of the "Martha" sort, the
other of the "Mary" character. The mystic will first remind both that
every one has, in the first instance, to do his or her duty conscientiously, be
it a compulsory or a self-imposed duty. Whatever one has once undertaken and
wherever he or she has contracted any obligation towards a fellow-being, this
has to be fulfilled "up to the uttermost farthing." But, on the other
hand, the mystic will, just for this very reason, warn them against creating
for themselves new attachments to the world and worldly affairs more than they
find absolutely unavoidable. He will again try to direct the whole of their
attention to their final goal and kindle in them every spark of high and
genuine aspiration to the eternal.--Not so the occultist. He may also say all
that the mystic has said and which fully satisfies "Mary"; as
"Martha," however, is not content with this and thinks the subject
rather tedious and wearisome, he will have compassion with her worldliness and
teach her some esoteric cosmology or speak to her of the possibilities of
developing psychic powers and so on.
Answer.
Is the cat out of the bag at last? I am asked to "oblige"
our correspondent by answering questions, and instead of clear statements, I
find no better than transparent hints against the working methods of the T.S.!
Those who go against "esoteric cosmology" and the development of
psychic powers are not forced to study either. But I have heard these
objections four years ago, and they too, were started by a certain
"Guru" we are both acquainted with, when that learned
"Mystic" had had enough of Chelaship and
suddenly developed the ambition of becoming a Teacher. They are stale.--H.P.B.
Thirdly, supposing our mystic and our
occultist meet a sick man who applies to them for help. Both will certainly try
to cure him the best they can. At the same time, both will use this opportunity
to turn their patient's mind to the eternal if they can; they will try to make
him see that everything in the world is only the just effect of some
cause, and that, as he is consciously suffering from his present illness, he
himself must somewhere have consciously given the corresponding and
adequate cause for his illness, either in his present or in any former life;
that the only way of getting finally rid of all ills and evils is, not to
create any more causes, but rather to abstain from all doing, to rid oneself of
every avoidable want and desire, and in this way to lift oneself above all
causality (karma). This, however, can only be achieved by putting good objects
of aspiration into the place of the bad, the better object into that of the
good, and the best into that of the better; directing, however, one's whole
attention to our highest goal of consummation and living in the eternal as much
as we can, this is the only mode of thought that will finally deliver
us from the imperfections of existence.
If the patient cannot see the force of
this train of argument or does not like it, the mystic will leave him to his
own further development, and to some future opportunity which might bring the
same man near him again, but in a more favourable state of mind.
Not so the occultist. He will consider
it his duty to stick to this man to whose Karma, as to that of everyone else,
he is irremediably and unavoidably bound; he will not abandon him until he has
helped him on to such an advanced state of true spiritual development that he
begins to see his final goal and to aspire to it "with all his heart, with
all his soul, and with all his might." In the meantime, however, the
occultist will try to prepare him for that by helping him to arrange his
worldly life in a manner as favourable to such an aspiration as possible. He
will make him see that vegetarian or rather fruit-diet is the only food fully
in accordance with human nature; he will teach him the fundamental rules of
esoteric hygienics; he will show him how to make the
right use of vitality (mesmerism), and as he does not feel any aspiration for
the nameless and formless eternal, he will meanwhile make him aspire for
esoteric knowledge and for occult powers.
Now, will you do us the great favour to
show us reasons why the mystic is wrong and the occultist right, or why paranirvana should not be attained by any individuality and
at any time, when its own karma has been burnt by gnana
in samadhi, and independent of the
karma of any other individual or that of humanity.
Yours sincerely,
HÜBBE-SCHLEIDEN
Neuhaugen
bei München, September,
1889
Answer.
As no Occultist of my acquaintance would act in this supposed
fashion no answer is possible. We theosophists, and especially your humble
servant, are too occupied with our work to lose time at answering supposititious
cases and fictions. When our prolific correspondent tells us whom he
means under the name of the "Occultist" and when or where the
latter has acted in that way, I will be at his service. Perhaps he means some
Theosophist or rather member of the T.S. under this term? For I, at any rate,
never met yet an "Occultist" of that description. As to the
closing question I believe it was sufficiently answered in the earlier
explanations of this reply.
Yours, as sincerely,
H.P.BLAVATSKY
Lucifer,
October, 1889
1Perchance also, from
Madras?--[ED.]
Events
Information Line 029 2049 6017
For more info on Theosophy
Try these
Cardiff
Theosophical Society meetings are informal
and there’s always a cup of tea afterwards
The Cardiff Theosophical Society Website
The National Wales Theosophy Website
Dave’s
Streetwise Theosophy Boards
If
you run a Theosophy Group then please
Feel
free to use any material on this Website
Theosophy
Cardiff’s Instant Guide to Theosophy
Cardiff
Theosophical Order of Service (TOS)
Within the
British Isles, The Adyar Theosophical Society has
Groups in;
Bangor*Basingstoke*Billericay*Birmingham*Blackburn*Bolton*Bournemouth
Bradford*Bristol*Camberley*Cardiff*Chester*Conwy*Coventry*Dundee*Edinburgh
Folkstone*Glasgow*Grimsby*Inverness*Isle
of Man*Lancaster*Leeds*Leicester
Letchworth*London*Manchester*Merseyside*Middlesborough*Newcastle upon Tyne
North
Devon*Northampton*Northern Ireland*Norwich*Nottingham
Perth*Republic of Ireland*Sidmouth*Southport*Sussex*Swansea*Torbay
Tunbridge Wells*Wallasey*Warrington*Wembley*Winchester*Worthing
One Liners & Quick Explanations
The main criteria
for the inclusion of
links on this site is
that they are have some
relationship (however
tenuous) to Theosophy
and are lightweight,
amusing or entertaining.
Topics include
Quantum Theory and Socks,
Dick
Dastardly and Legendary Blues Singers.
No
Aardvarks were harmed in the
Includes
stuff about Marlon Brando, Old cars,
Odeon
Cinema Burnley, Heavy Metal, Wales,
Cups of Tea, Mrs Trellis of
North Wales.
Cardiff
Theosophical Order of Service
General pages about Wales, Welsh History
and The History of Theosophy in Wales
Her Teachers Morya
& Koot Hoomi
The Most
Basic Theosophy Website in the Universe
If
you run a Theosophy Group you can use
this as an
introductory handout
Biography of Helena Petrovna
Blavatsky
Lentil burgers, a
thousand press ups before breakfast and
the daily 25 mile
run may put it off for a while but death
seems to get most of
us in the end. We are pleased to
present for your
consideration, a definitive work on the
subject by a Student of
Katherine Tingley entitled
For everyone
everywhere, not just in Wales
Theosophy and the Number Seven
A selection of articles relating to the
esoteric
significance of the Number 7 in Theosophy
The Spiritual Home of Urban Theosophy
The Earth Base for Evolutionary Theosophy
Quick Explanations with Links to More Detailed Info
What is Theosophy
? Theosophy Defined (More Detail)
Three Fundamental Propositions Key Concepts of Theosophy
Cosmogenesis Anthropogenesis Root Races
Ascended Masters After Death States
The Seven Principles of Man Karma
Reincarnation Helena Petrovna
Blavatsky
Colonel Henry Steel Olcott William Quan Judge
The Start of the Theosophical
Society
History of the Theosophical
Society
Theosophical Society Presidents
History of the Theosophical
Society in Wales
The Three Objectives of the
Theosophical Society
Explanation of the Theosophical
Society Emblem
The Theosophical Order of
Service (TOS)
Glossaries of Theosophical Terms
by
Annie
Besant
THE PHYSICAL PLANE THE ASTRAL PLANE
KÂMALOKA
THE MENTAL PLANE DEVACHAN
THE BUDDHIC AND NIRVANIC PLANES
THE THREE KINDS OF KARMA COLLECTIVE KARMA
THE LAW OF SACRIFICE MAN'S
ASCENT
______________________
Annie Besant Visits Cardiff 1924
An Outline of Theosophy
Charles Webster Leadbeater
Theosophy - What it is How is it Known?
The Method of Observation General Principles
Advantage Gained from this
Knowledge
The Deity The Divine Scheme The Constitution of Man
The True Man Reincarnation The Wider Outlook
Death Man’s Past and Future Cause and Effect
Reincarnation
This
guide has been included in response
to the
number of enquiries we receive on this
subject at Cardiff
Theosophical Society
From A Textbook
of Theosophy By C W Leadbeater
How We Remember our Past Lives
Life after Death & Reincarnation
The
Slaughter of the
a
great demand by the public for lectures on Reincarnation
Classic Introductory Theosophy Text
A Text Book of Theosophy By C
What Theosophy Is From the Absolute to Man
The Formation of a Solar System The Evolution of Life
The Constitution of Man After Death Reincarnation
The Purpose of Life The Planetary Chains
The Result of Theosophical Study
The Occult
World
By
Alfred Percy Sinnett
The
Occult World is an treatise on the
Occult
and Occult Phenomena, presented
in readable style, by an early giant of
the
Theosophical Movement.
Preface to the American Edition Introduction
Occultism and its Adepts The Theosophical Society
First Occult Experiences Teachings of Occult Philosophy
Later Occult Phenomena Appendix
The
Seven Principles of Man
By
Annie
Besant
A Student of Katherine Tingley
Katherine Tingley (1847
-1929)Was the founder & President
of the Point Loma
Theosophical Society 1896 -1929
She and her students produced a series of informative
Theosophical works in the early years of the 20th century
Elementary Theosophy Who is the Man?
Body and Soul
Body, Soul and Spirit Reincarnation
Karma The Seven in Man and Nature
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky 1831 – 1891
The
Founder of Modern Theosophy
Index of
Articles by
By
H P
Blavatsky
Is the Desire to Live Selfish?
Ancient Magic in Modern Science
Precepts Compiled by H P Blavatsky
Obras Por H P Blavatsky
En Espanol
Articles
about the Life of H P Blavatsky
Writings of Ernest Egerton Wood
Theosophy and the Number Seven
A selection of articles relating to the
esoteric
significance of the Number 7 in Theosophy
Index of
Searchable
Full
Text Versions of
Definitive
Theosophical
Works
H P Blavatsky’s Secret Doctrine
Isis Unveiled by H P Blavatsky
H P Blavatsky’s Esoteric Glossary
Mahatma Letters to A P Sinnett
1 - 25
A Modern Revival of Ancient Wisdom
(Selection of Articles by H P Blavatsky)
The Secret Doctrine – Volume 3
A compilation of H P Blavatsky’s
writings published after her death
Esoteric Christianity or the Lesser Mysteries
The Early Teachings of The Masters
A Collection of Fugitive Fragments
Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy
Mystical,
Philosophical, Theosophical, Historical
and Scientific Essays Selected from "The
Theosophist"
Edited by George
Robert Stow Mead
From Talks on the Path of Occultism - Vol. II
In the Twilight”
Series of Articles
The In the Twilight”
series appeared during
1898 in The Theosophical Review and
from 1909-1913 in The Theosophist.
compiled from information supplied by
her relatives and friends and edited by A P Sinnett
Letters and
Talks on Theosophy and the Theosophical Life
Obras Teosoficas En Espanol
Theosophische Schriften Auf
Deutsch
Karma Fundamental Principles Laws: Natural and Man-Made
The Law of Laws
The Eternal Now Succession
Causation
The Laws of Nature A
Lesson of The Law Karma Does Not Crush
Apply This Law
Man in The Three Worlds Understand The Truth
Man and His Surroundings The Three Fates The Pair of Triplets
Thought, The Builder Practical Meditation Will and Desire
The Mastery of Desire Two Other Points The Third Thread
Perfect Justice
Our Environment
Our Kith and Kin Our Nation
The Light for a Good Man Knowledge of Law The Opposing Schools
The More Modern View Self-Examination Out of the Past
Old Friendships
We Grow By Giving Collective Karma Family Karma
National Karma India’s Karma National
Disasters
Annotated Edition Published
1885
Preface to the Annotated Edition Preface to the Original Edition
Esoteric Teachers The Constitution of Man The Planetary Chain
The World Periods Devachan Kama Loca
The Human Tide-Wave The Progress of Humanity
Buddha Nirvana The Universe The Doctrine Reviewed
Try these if you are looking for a
local Theosophy Group or Centre
UK Listing of Theosophical Groups
Worldwide Directory of Theosophical Links
General pages
about Wales, Welsh History
and The History of
Theosophy in Wales
Wales is a Principality within the United
Kingdom
and has an eastern border with England. The
land
area is just over 8,000 square miles. Snowdon in
North Wales is the highest mountain at
3,650 feet.
The coastline is almost 750 miles long. The
population
of Wales as at the 2001 census is
2,946,200.
All Wales
Guide to Theosophy Instant Guide to Theosophy
Theosophy
Wales Hornet Theosophy Wales Now
Cardiff
Theosophical Archive Elementary Theosophy
Basic
Theosophy Theosophy in Cardiff Theosophy
in Wales
Hey Look!
Theosophy in Cardiff Streetwise
Theosophy
Grand
Tour Theosophy Aardvark Theosophy Starts Here
Theosophy 206 Biography of William Q Judge
Theosophy Cardiff’s Face Book of Great Theosophists
Theosophy Evolution Theosophy Generally Stated
Biography of Helena Petrovna
Blavatsky
____________________________
Cardiff
Theosophical Society
Mission
Statement
The
dominant and core activity of Cardiff Theosophical Society
is to
promote and assist the study of Theosophical Teachings
as defined by the
writings of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky,
William Quan Judge, Alfred Percy Sinnett and
their lineage.
This
Mission Statement does not preclude non Theosophical
activities
but these must be of a spiritual nature
and/or
compatible with the Objects of the Society.
____________________________
Cardiff Theosophical Society
206 Newport Road,
Cardiff, Wales, UK, CF24 -1DL
Webpage posted by Dave Marsland