© 2002 VNN
|
EDITORIAL  What Were the Theosophical Society Masters the Masters Of? (Part II) BY BHAKTI ANANDA GOSWAMI EDITORIAL, Dec 4 (VNN) — What Were They The Masters Of ? Bhakti Ananda Goswami Challenges The Theosophical Mahatmas So What Were the Theosophical Society Masters the Masters Of ? Part II Theosophical Society (T S) and Movement Propositions From T S Sources 1. The only true philosophy of the Earth, Theosophy identified as Buddhism, is found in the Mahatmas' Letters, and these Letters are the primary source of esoteric / occult or higher wisdom for Theosophists. Next to these letters, the Stanzas of Dzyan are of canonical importance to Theosophists. 2. The Theosophical Masters, authors of the Mahatma Letters, especially Koot Hoomi, Master Morya and Serapis, are the highest authorities who have revealed themselves to humanity. 3. The Master of the Masters Koot Hoomi and Morya, is Serapis. 4. H.P. Blavatsky is the rather hidden incarnation of Serapis. 5. The brotherhood of Theosophical Masters has reincarnated throughout time, guiding the world (and evolution of the races). Thus all previous revelations, religions and advances in various fields, must be interpreted in the context of their supposed relationship to the T S Masters. 6. The priests of dogmatic or doctrinal ORGANIZED RELIGIONS [ including Hinduism] have corrupted their scriptures, so it is better to read the more authentic core of teachings contained in the Stanzas of Dzyan and the synthesized teachings of the Mahatmas and HPB. There is no need to learn languages and study the source works themselves, as HPB has provided a clear and accurate synthesis of everything in these that is significant to study. 7. Sannyasis and Sadhus etc. are on the path of error, and Theosophy has nothing to do with the Shastra of Brahminism. 8. Koot Hoomi / Theosophy absolutely denies the existence of God or Gods. My additional assertions... 9. There is an amalgamation of Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism with Advaita Vedantism and Vaishnava sources in the teachings of Theosophical 'Buddhism.' 10. Madame Blavatsky was a very intellectually gifted and educated person, who was the central figure in the whole development of Theosophy. Whether or not she wrote the Mahatma Letters with the help of corporeal or incorporeal beings, may or may not be of importance in certain kinds of analysis of the letters. The actual content of the letters can be examined in relationship to real-world ancient textual and living traditions, to see if the Mahatmas' presentations are accurate with regard to those thought-systems. Let Us Now Consider Some of the Curious Facts Related to the Specific Mixture of Kashmiri Eastern and Western Esoteric Teachings in the Mahatma Letters. In one letter KH writes to Sinnett: ...Our best, most learned. and highest adepts are of the races of the 'greasy Tibetans'; and the Penjabi Singhs -- ...... Most of the debates that I have seen regarding the T.S. Masters have focused on the Masters' identity, the precipitation of their letters, H.P. Blavatsky's or someone else's medium-ship or 'channeling' of their thoughts / writings, textual analysis of their letters for contemporary or near-contemporary plagiarized material, stylistic elements, language or other clues to their identity. I do not intend to address any of these things, which have all been chewed before. Rather than chewing-the-chewed, like a cow not done with its cud, I want to provide a reading of the Letters from the perspective of a person familiar with some of the source-works and traditions that the Mahatmas used and / or claimed to be representing. Ideas and the words, written and spoken, and images or symbols and actions that convey them, have history. Innovations occur and get diffused. Ideas spark social movements that wax and wane. Thought-forms, like other 'things' have certain time-and-space limitations. Communication is sent and received in specific forms and languages. Each word or symbol has a content actually intended by its sender, and any number of meanings imposed on it by receivers. Scientifically-minded historians (not historical-fiction writers) want to know what was actually meant by the creators or sender(s) of a document from the past. They want to understand the successive meanings giving to an original or earlier document by later translators and commentators. They want to peel-back the layers of time, and get at the original core of an idea. Such scientifically-minded persons do not want to impose meanings on history, they want to discover the real meanings already there in history. They don't want to 'massage the data' to fit into preconceived notions of history, or to support an agenda of some kind. The real lover of truth wants to understand what really happened, who the real players were, and what their motives, means and actions, and the consequences were etc. Such investigators use scientific methodologies and means of inquiry designed to safe-guard the objectivity and integrity of their efforts. They try to avoid errors by rigorously identifying their sources, to be sure of authenticity. In the case of my own studies, from the very beginning I learned of the value of interdisciplinary research from my father (a research electrobiophysicist), who taught me that errors could be avoided and facts established beyond doubt by approaching a subject or question from a multiplicity of disciplines instead of only one. Thus my studies utilized every discipline that I could bring to bear on a particular question. This has given me a well-rounded grasp of the main subjects of my historical inquiries. In Theosophical sources, the Master Koot Hoomi (K H) writes about the Tibetans and Penjabi Singhs, Mr. Sinnet says that K H was a native of the Punjab, H.P. Blavatsky says that Koot Hoomi is a Pujabi, and both Blavatsky and others identify K H with Kashmir. Thus, I begin my commentary on the Mahatma Letters with this fact, because I will be focusing quite a bit on the Kashmiri-like syncristic Vaishnava, Buddhist and related content of the Letters. There is a well-established connection between the Sikhs of Kashmir and Theosophy. What people don't realize is that the Sikhs often worship in Vishnu temples, because of their close historical connection to Vaishnavism. Tibetan Buddhism, Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Devi worship, Sufism, Sikhism and all the branches of these traditions have their own real world histories. For example, there is a traditional date for the entrance of Padmasambhava into Tibet, and thus an eighth century AD historical beginning to Tibetan Buddhism. The Advaita Vedantism of Sri Adi Shankaracharya has a history too, as do the successive waves of Ishmali and Sufi Mohammedanism into the Punjab and Kashmir. In the Mahatma Letters there is a curious mix of Atheistic and Theistic Vaishnava, Advaita Vedanta, Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism, Sikh and Sufi reinterpretations of Vaishnava, Shaivite and Devi teachings, and other amalgamations which can be found ESPECIALLY in the region of Kashmir. In the religious melting-pot of Kashmir today for instance, there may be found Vaishnava-influenced Muslim Sufi brahmins who do not eat flesh, Tantric-influenced Sahajiya Vaishnavas, various Sufi-Vaishnava or Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid groups, and Sikhism, which as another Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid religion is of course related to the Vaishnava and Shaivite Kshatriya (warrior class) of the Punjab. Thus the Sikh name 'Singh' is important in this connection. Pure Land Buddhism, as originally in Nepal and Tibet, has its historical origins in Vaishnavism, and so is connected to the strange Kashmiri mix in the thread of Vaishnava doctrines and practices running through the whole region. It is from this regional melting-pot of Indic and Western (Sufi and Gnostic) traditions that the Masters K H and Morya seem to have acquired some of their unorthodox understanding of the Sanskrit Shastras (scriptures) and to have created their hodge-podge of an eastern thought system. Whoever they were, they were masters of something, but what was that something? To assess their competence as masters of eastern traditions, one would need themself to be qualified in such traditions. As an instructing master in the Vedic-based Tradition of Vaishnavism, I am qualified to assess the accuracy of the what the masters have presented from my own tradition. Since the oldest literary traditions in the region are clearly those of the Sanskrit Vedic Vaishnava-related texts, and the Masters refer to some doctrines from these texts, then it is reasonable to assess the Mahatmas' presentation of ideas from these texts to determine their accuracy. The Example of the Rig Veda and Proto-Mahayana Buddhism For example, the Rig Veda is by all estimations very much older than the Advaita Vedantan writings of Adi Sankaracharya, the beginning of Tibetan Buddhism (8th c AD), the Era of Asoka, or even the life of Sakyamuni Buddha Himself. The Purusha Sukta Hymn is considered by many scholars to be among the oldest surviving writings of humanity. The Purusha Sukta is found in a collection of Vedic Sanskrit Hymns, the Rig Veda. These hymns glorify God under a variety of Names and Forms, as these forms have appeared from the Cosmic Body of the universal self-sacrificed Purusha, Who is described in the Purusha Sukta. In later corruptions of this monotheistic tradition, the forms of Purusha, are demoted to a mere multiplicity of 'gods'. Thus polytheism, pantheism etc. eventually obscured the originality and supremacy of Purusha as the transcendent supreme Deity of the Rig Veda. Purusha assumed a cosmic form for self-sacrifice to create, sustain (as sacramental food / Prasadam) and redeem every world / cosmic manifestation. In the Purusha Sukta, and related Vedic texts, it is clearly understood that Purusha is VISHNU. The Purusha Sukta is still chanted today on Vaishnava altars as the Eucharistic PRASADAM offerings are being made. Another one of Vishnu's Vedic names is Asura (from the root meaning being, to be, exist). In the Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism, R. C. Zaehner identifies the cosmic Purusha with the Zoroastrian supreme Deity Ahura Mazda (Ahura=Asura). The Jagganatha or Universal Form of Vishnu as Purusha is sometimes called his Vishva Rupa or Virata Rupa. This is one of the theophanies of SRI KRISHNA that was revealed to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-gita, The cosmic form of God in Jewish mysticism is definitely related to the revelation of Sri Krishna in the Gita. The universal Purusha is of course identified with the Purusha AVATARA FORMS OF VISHNU. In the Vedas, Vishnu is called by many names, including Asura and Purusha. It is Vishnu Who is worshiped in multi-form in the Vedic hymns. This is the tradition of the oldest stratum of Vedic so-called 'Hinduism', and all of the principle Vedic Nama-Rupa name-forms of Vishnu are found many centuries later in Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan and related Nepalese Buddhism. There the very ancient Vedic names and forms of Vishnu-Purusha AS LOKSHEVARA, are connected to Vaishnava doctrines, rites, practices, sacramental social order etc.. So the foundation of Tibetan Buddhism is in the much earlier worship of Vishnu-Purusha, without any doubt. When the entire socio-religious cultural milieu in which Sakyamuni's Buddhism first developed was Vedic-Vaishnava, how is it reasonable to assume that the pervasive elements of Vaishnavism in Mahayana Buddhism are later, intrusions or corruptions? In fact, Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan Buddhism, uses the very Sanskrit Names of Krishna-Vishnu for the ADI BUDDHA, who is also called ADI PURUSHA, BHAGAVAN, PURUSOTTAMA etc. To claim that a younger tradition (Buddhism) owes nothing to its origins is ridiculous. THIS IS THE SUI GENERIS nonsense of Theravadin Buddhism. The extremely ancient Purusha Sukta related Forms of Lokesvara are those of Vedic Purusha or Vishnu. The same names and forms are there in both the Buddhist and Vaishnava traditions, and this is not peculiar to the Nepalese-Tibetan form of Buddhism either. Everywhere in Pure Land Mahayana Buddhism it is the same. The names, forms, doctrines, rites etc. of the salvific transcendent other-power tradition of Buddhism are closely related to those of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism. When we look at the Sanskrit sources for the Mahatmas' Hindu and Buddhist ideas, again the oldest of these are the Vaishnava and Vaishnava-related scriptures, litanies and prayers. For those accustomed to thinking of Sanskrit literatures in terms of some generic hinduism, no such thing existed in the ancient world. Scriptures were the testimony of specific traditions, such as the sattvic Vaishnava or Shaivite or tantric Devi worshiping traditions. In the CULT OF TARA by S. Beyer, the original Sanskrit texts for the Tibetan Buddhist rituals of Mother Tara are given. Any Vaishnava pujari priest would immediately recognize these Sanskrit mantrams, hymns and rites! So, if we are going to seriously consider the claims of the Mahatmas to mastery in Tibetan Buddhism, I want to see evidence in their Letters that they knew of, and understood the close relationship between Tibetan Buddhism, and Vaishnavism. Contact VNN about this story  Send this story to a friend
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
