[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Koot Hoomi on "God"....Note how he defines certain usages of the word

Aug 02, 2008 09:47 PM
by danielhcaldwell

. . . according to Mr. Massey's philosophical conclusion we
have no God....He is right -- since he applies the name to an extra-
cosmic anomaly, and that we, knowing nothing of the latter, find --
each man his God -- within himself in his own personal, and at the
same time, -- impersonal Avalokiteswara. . . .

. . . Avalokita Isvar literally interpreted means "the
Lord that is seen." "Iswara" implying moreover, rather the adjective
than the noun, lordly, self-existent lordliness, not Lord. It is,
when correctly interpreted, in one sense "the divine Self perceived
or seen by Self," the Atman or seventh principle ridded of its
mayavic distinction from its Universal Source -- which becomes the
object of perception for, and by the individuality centred in Buddhi,
the sixth principle, -- something that happens only in the highest
state of Samadhi. This is applying it to the microcosm. In the other
sense Avalokitesvara implies the seventh Universal Principle, as the
object perceived by the Universal Buddhi "Mind" or Intelligence which
is the synthetic aggregation of all the Dhyan Chohans, as of all
other intelligences whether great or small, that ever were, are, or
will be. Nor is it the "Spirit of Buddhas present in the Church," but
the Omnipresent Universal Spirit in the temple of nature -- in one
case; and the seventh Principle -- the Atman in the temple -- man --
in the other. Mr. Rhys Davids might have, at least remembered, the
(to him) familiar simile made by the Christian Adept, the Kabalistic
Paul: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit
of God dwelleth in you" -- and thus avoided to have made a mess of
the name. Though as a grammarian he detected the use of the "past
particle passive" yet he shows himself far from an inspired "Panini"
in overlooking the true cause and saving his grammar by raising the
hue and cry against metaphysics. And yet, he quotes Beale's
Catena as his authority, for the invention, when, in truth, this work
is perhaps the only one in English that gives an approximately
correct explanation of the word, at any rate, on page 374. "Self-
manifested" -- How? it is asked. "Speech or Vach was regarded as the
Son or the manifestation of the Eternal Self, and was adored under
the name of Avalokitesvara, the manifested God." This shows as
clearly as can be -- that Avalokitesvara is both the unmanifested
Father and the manifested Son, the latter proceeding from, and
identical with, the other; -- namely, the Parabrahm and Jivatman, the
Universal and the individualized seventh Principle, -- the Passive
and the Active, the latter the Word, Logos, the Verb. Call it by
whatever name, only let these unfortunate, deluded Christians know
that the real Christ of every Christian is the Vach, the "mystical
Voice," . . .

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application