Re: Response to Rich
Jan 15, 1999 08:30 AM
by Jerry Schueler
>Would you not agree that that which is public knowledge is, by default,
For the most part, yes. But even some "public" knowledge is
esoteric because it has to be experienced to be understood.
I can tell you all about a mystical experience, but if you never
had one, you won't know what I am talking about. This is also
true of emptiness which has to be experienced.
>Are you suggesting HPB only knew or had access to the "lowest" (?) Buddhist
Either that, or she decided only to discuss the lowest in her writings.
>We know virtually nothing about the real/inner Olcott, BTW. Because a man
>does not speak Chinese we should not *assume* he knows nothing of China.
I generally judge people by their writings. His are very exoteric and
largely Theravadin. If he was initiated, he kept it to himself.
>> Most of her teaching was directed toward the masses
>We are the "masses". Theosophy was/is directed toward Humanity as a whole :
>the practical realization of Universal Brotherhood.
>> and only her Voice contains any real esotericism.
>It "contains" as much "esotericism" as we can, or can not, discern; as does
>"The Secret Doctrine". It is, maybe, pertinent to recall that 'The Voice
>the Silence' is "Dedicated to the few". It gives (or witholds) as the case
No, it doesn't. Its all fairly easy esoteric material, at least by today's
standards. She never mentions emptiness or non-duality. Try reading
a Dzogchen text and see the difference.
>> Probably the
>> single most
>> important teaching in all Buddhism is emptiness, and this HPB never
>> discusses. .
>Study "The Secret Doctrine" where you will discover countless pointers to
>*so-called* "emptiness" as it is meant to be understood.
Gee, thanks for the great tip! I have studied the SD for over 30 years
and somehow must have missed it.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application