theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

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

Re: Theos-World Re: Meister Eckhart on "God"

Nov 22, 2008 04:51 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen


Dear Christina and all

My views are:

On Adi-Buddhi In COLLATION OF THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARIES 
"OG Akasa -- (Sanskrit) The word means "brilliant," "shining," "luminous." The fifth kosmic element, the fifth essence or "quintessence," called Aether by the ancient Stoics; but it is not the ether of science. The ether of science is merely one of its lower elements. In the Brahmanical scriptures akasa is used for what the northern Buddhists call svabhavat, more mystically Adi-buddhi -- "primeval buddhi"; it is also mulaprakriti, the kosmical spirit-substance, the reservoir of Being and of beings. The Hebrew Old Testament refers to it as the kosmic "waters." It is universal substantial space; also mystically Alaya. (See also Mulaprakriti, Alaya) "


So please help me and others out.
What is the problem in Mahatma Letter 15?


M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: christinaleestemaker 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 1:29 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: Meister Eckhart on "God"


  If you read well I have that from ML 15 page 88,89 which reply I give 
  on your called parabrahm from letter10 in which they wrote Parabrahm 
  is no god and that is try.
  Better explanation on what Parabrahm is , one can read on this 
  subject and will find much more information.
  Christina 

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
  theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > Dear Christina
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > Where do you find anything about Adi Buddhi and Atma-Buddhi in the 
  > Mahatma Letter no. 10.`?
  > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-10.htm
  > 
  > You could give me some quotes on where you have the words Adi 
  Buddhi and Atma-Buddhi from.
  > 
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: christinaleestemaker 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 12:55 PM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: Meister Eckhart on "God"
  > 
  > 
  > What I wanted to show ,is not on HPB or whatever, but related to 
  the 
  > Mahatma Letters.You copied a part of letter 10.So my reaction was 
  on 
  > that.
  > And I think I can give myself the answer, that they made a 
  mistake in 
  > press by Adi Buddhi needed to be Atma-Buddhi in its periodical 
  way in 
  > the way of Parabrahm+Maya which gives Iswar, that power they 
  called 
  > commonly god.
  > And as far as I know that could only be atmabuddhi and not Adi 
  buddhi.
  > Christina
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
  > theosophy@> wrote:
  > >
  > > Dear friends
  > > 
  > > My views are:
  > > 
  > > I wrote about ParaBrahm as it was defined in TS before W. C. 
  > Leadbeater started to tell people about the importance of what he 
  > quite misleading called "God".
  > > 
  > > 
  > > From The Secret Doctrine by H. P. Blavatsky:
  > > "An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and Immutable PRINCIPLE on 
  > which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the 
  power of 
  > human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human 
  expression or 
  > similitude. It is beyond the range and reach of thought -- in the 
  > words of Mandukya, "unthinkable and unspeakable." 
  > > (The Secret Doctrine, vol. 1, p. 14)
  > > 
  > > H. P. Blavatsky and Master says:
  > > "Parabraham is not this or that, it is not even consciousness, 
  as
  > > it cannot be related to matter or anything conditioned. It is 
  not 
  > Ego nor is
  > > it Non-ego, not even Atma, but verily the one source of all 
  > manifestations
  > > and modes of existence."
  > > (written in The secret Doctrine, Vol 1., page 130 by Blavatsky )
  > > http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/SDVolume_I.htm
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Se for instance also my posting july 2008 at Theos-talk
  > > http://www.theosophy.com/theos-talk/200807/tt00404.html
  > > 
  > > 
  > > But some persons do not understand, so they continue to find 
  the 
  > word "God" to be so very important even when we clearly have 
  shown 
  > that it is not so.M. Sufilight
  > > 
  > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > From: christinaleestemaker 
  > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > > Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 12:07 PM
  > > Subject: Theos-World Re: Meister Eckhart on "God"
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Morten I copied the same, but not any respond.
  > > By the way it is the vision of the East.
  > > Can we explain what is parabrahm?
  > > For example ML 15 page 88-9:
  > > The initiated Brahmin calls it Yin Sin and Fohat,Brahman and 
  > Sakti 
  > > when manifesting as that force.We will perhaps be near correct 
  to 
  > > call it infinite life and the source of all life visible and 
  > > invisible, an essence of inexhaustible, ever present, in short 
  > > Swabhavat.(S in its universal application and Fohat when 
  > manifesting 
  > > throughout our phenomenal world, or rather the visible 
  > universe,hence 
  > > in its limitations.It is pavritti when active, nirvritti when 
  > passive.
  > > Call it the Sakti of parabrahm if you like and say with the 
  > Adwaities
  > > (Subba Row is one) that Parabrahm + Maya becomes Ishwar, the 
  > ceative 
  > > principle- a power commonly called God which disappears and 
  dies 
  > with 
  > > the rest when pralaya comes.
  > > Or you may hold with the northern Buddhists philosophers and 
  call 
  > it 
  > > AdiBuddhi, the all- pervading supreme and absolute intelligence 
  > with 
  > > iis periodically manifesting Divinity-"Avalokiteshvara"a 
  > manvantaric 
  > > intelligent nature crowned with humanity. 
  > > 
  > > see more on parabrahm on pages: 86.52,53-4,74,89,195,338-9 and 
  > 340.
  > > 
  > > We can search for all page in which has been used parabrahm for 
  > > having a total vision.
  > > 
  > > As I understand well Parabrahm is infinite( an attribute of Yin 
  > Sin, 
  > > or the one form of existence) AdiBuddhi or Dharmakaya, the 
  > mystic, 
  > > universally diffused essence,which stays forever)when 
  manifesting 
  > in 
  > > the fenominal world of senses, namely, only your old 
  acquaintance 
  > > Fohat. But with maya is disappears and dies when pralaya 
  comes.So 
  > > what we call god(Iswar) is temporary.
  > > I cannot understand why they also called that AdiBuddhi, for 
  that 
  > > never disappears and also never dies.
  > > 
  > > Christina 
  > > 
  > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" 
  <global-
  > > theosophy@> wrote:
  > > >
  > > > Dear all readers
  > > > 
  > > > My views are:
  > > > 
  > > > There is no God.
  > > > There is ParaBrahm.
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > Mahatma Letter 10:
  > > > "Therefore, we deny God both as philosophers and as 
  Buddhists. 
  > We 
  > > know there 
  > > > are planetary and other spiritual lives, and we know there is 
  > in 
  > > our system 
  > > > no such thing as God, either personal or impersonal. 
  Parabrahm 
  > is 
  > > not a God, 
  > > > but absolute immutable law, and Iswar is the effect of Avidya 
  > and 
  > > Maya, 
  > > > ignorance based upon the great delusion. The word "God" was 
  > > invented to 
  > > > designate the unknown cause of those effects which man has 
  > either 
  > > admired or 
  > > > dreaded without understanding them, and since we claim and 
  that 
  > we 
  > > are able 
  > > > to prove what we claim -- i.e. the knowledge of that cause 
  and 
  > > causes we are 
  > > > in a position to maintain there is no God or Gods behind them.
  > > > The idea of God is not an innate but an acquired notion, and 
  we 
  > > have but one 
  > > > thing in common with theologies -- we reveal the infinite. 
  But 
  > > while we 
  > > > assign to all the phenomena that proceed from the infinite 
  and 
  > > limitless 
  > > > space, duration and motion, material, natural, sensible and 
  > known 
  > > (to us at 
  > > > least) cause, the theists assign them spiritual, super-
  natural 
  > and 
  > > > unintelligible an un-known causes. The God of the Theologians 
  > is 
  > > simply and 
  > > > imaginary power, un loup garou as d'Holbach expressed it -- a 
  > power 
  > > which 
  > > > has never yet manifested itself. Our chief aim is to deliver 
  > > humanity of 
  > > > this nightmare, to teach man virtue for its own sake, and to 
  > walk 
  > > in life 
  > > > relying on himself instead of leaning on a theological 
  crutch, 
  > that 
  > > for 
  > > > countless ages was the direct cause of nearly all human 
  misery."
  > > > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-10.htm
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > M. Sufilight
  > > > 
  > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > > From: "MKR" <mkr777@>
  > > > To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
  > > > Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 3:10 AM
  > > > Subject: Re: Theos-World Meister Eckhart on "God"
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > Here is a real story.
  > > > 
  > > > Here one early morning, a man, his wife, and two kids were 
  > walking 
  > > on the
  > > > side walk of a major street, all of them in birthday suits. A 
  > > policeman
  > > > stopped them and politely inquired of them why are they in 
  this 
  > > condition;
  > > > may be they are homeless or someone stole all their clothes 
  etc.
  > > > 
  > > > The man responded responded that God commanded them to take 
  > throw 
  > > away all
  > > > their clothes and directed them to start walking on the 
  > sidewalk. 
  > > The
  > > > policeman politely told them he would give a ride and took 
  them 
  > to 
  > > the
  > > > police station in his patrol car.
  > > > 
  > > > At least they are not doing any harm to anyone. Sometimes God 
  > acts 
  > > in
  > > > strange ways!!! I like such a God not the ones which is on a 
  > > destructive
  > > > path.
  > > > 
  > > > mkr
  > > > 
  > > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:16 PM, <Drpsionic@> wrote:
  > > > 
  > > > > I rather like my comment on God when my wife had her stroke 
  > and 
  > > was in a
  > > > >
  > > > > coma for two weeks, thus causing one of her sisters to 
  > comment 
  > > that "God
  > > > > has a
  > > > > reason for this." My response was, "If your idiot God knew 
  > what 
  > > he was
  > > > > doing
  > > > > in the first place she would not be here!"
  > > > >
  > > > > Chuck the Heretic
  > > > >
  > > > >
  > > > > In a message dated 11/16/2008 11:49:06 A.M. Central 
  Standard 
  > Time,
  > > > > danielhcaldwell@ <danielhcaldwell%40yahoo.com> writes:
  > > > >
  > > > > Here are some of my favorite quotes from
  > > > > Meister Eckhart (c.1260-c.1328, German mystic):
  > > > >
  > > > > "God is exempt from all things and he is
  > > > > all things."
  > > > >
  > > > > "He who thinks that he sees God, if he
  > > > > see aught sees naught of God."
  > > > >
  > > > > "I do not find God outside myself nor
  > > > > conceive him excepting as my own and in me."
  > > > >
  > > > > "If I were not, God would not be God."
  > > > >
  > > > > "All creatures are pure nothingness. I
  > > > > do not say they are small or
  > > > > petty: they are pure nothingness.p
  > > > >
  > > > > "The being [of things] is God."
  > > > >
  > > > > "The being and the nature of God are
  > > > > mine. . . . the spark in the soul is beyond
  > > > > time and space; the soul's
  > > > > light is uncreated and cannot be created, it
  > > > > takes possession of God with no mediation; the
  > > > > core of the soul and the core of God are one."
  > > > >
  > > > > "Why I pray God to rid me of God is because
  > > > > conditionless being is above God and above
  > > > > distinction.d
  > > > >
  > > > > "God works, the Godhead does no work."
  > > > > -------------------------------------------------
  > > > >
  > > > > [Short biographical sketch of Eckhart at:
  > > > > _http://www.bartlebyhttp://www.http://www.b_
  > > > > (http://www.bartleby.com/65/ec/Eckhart.html) ]
  > > > >
  > > > > Do the IDEAS given in these quotes by Eckhart
  > > > > relate to what is written about "God" in THE
  > > > > SECRET DOCTRINE and THE MAHATMA LETTERS?
  > > > >
  > > > > If so,how?
  > > > >
  > > > > Daniel
  > > > > _http://hpb.cc_ (http://hpb.cc/)
  > > > >
  > > > > **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, 
  theaters, 
  > > movie news &
  > > > > more!(
  > > > > http://pr.atwola.com/
  promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/
  > aol?
  > > redir=htt
  > > > > p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?
  > > ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
  > > > >
  > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > > > >
  > > > >
  > > > >
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > ------------------------------------
  > > > 
  > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
  > > >
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > >
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


           

[Back to Top]


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