In Buddhism, the mind is the key thing, the fundamental aspect of the human being.
But what we ordinarily refer to and think of as “our mind” is not the true nature of our mind.
Under the law of karma – self-created destiny through cause and effect, action and reaction – our mindstream or mental continuum (chitta santana) is propelled from rebirth to rebirth in this world.
This is a stream of energy and consciousness constantly in flux and transformation and not the same from moment to moment. It is not in reality a “being” or an “entity” or an “Ego,” hence is not referred to as “soul” or “self.”
It is individual, or at least individualised, in the sense that one person’s mindstream is not that of another, but “soul” and “self” are considered unfitting and misleading words for what it actually is.
In Yogachara or Yogācāra philosophy, the mindstream/mental continuum (chitta or chitta santana) is also called alayavijnana (also written alaya-vijnana): “storehouse consciousness” or the “substratum of consciousness,” also known as mulavijnana: “root consciousness” or “base consciousness.” It is a type of extremely subtle “container” in which all our karmic seeds (from thought, feeling, word, and act) and impressions of whatever type, over lifetimes, are recorded and preserved, and from which they eventually manifest in our life experience.
On the cosmic or universal level, there is an equivalent alayavijnana applying to the whole cosmos and spoken of by Yogachara-influenced Chinese Chan Buddhists as “Universal Mind” or the “Mind of the Universe.”
While Theravada Buddhism teaches that all that goes from life to life is a sort of residuum of karma and the skandhas (the five psychophysical personality aggregates or the components of the personal self) and Mahayana Buddhism speaks of the mindstream, mental continuum, or alayavijnana referred to above, the tantric or esoteric teachings of Tibet’s Vajrayana Buddhism expand on the alaya doctrine by describing a twofold but eternally indivisible and unbroken continuum: the mindstream, continually accompanied and enveloped by an extremely subtle “energy field,” sometimes called a field of subtlest prana, the subtlest energy “wind,” or subtlest body, which is the carrier or vehicle of the reincarnating mind, in whatever state or plane of consciousness it may be in, including life on earth and the experiences between lives. This is said to be of the highest and purest nature of light.
Almost everyone’s mind is afflicted to one degree or another by selfishness, desires, lusts and passions, troubling emotions including fear, anger, and jealousy, disturbed and uncontrolled thoughts, and so on.
However, the true, real, original nature of our mind is pure, luminous, uncontaminated, unconditioned, and beyond all duality, differentiation, or adequate description. It has been referred to as the “clear light” of the Void . . . Voidness . . . Emptiness . . . Space . . . Shunyata. This is universal, one for all.
This has simply been obscured, clouded, or covered over within ourselves by the prevalence of such mental afflictions or mental poisons (kleshas) as those listed a moment ago.
The Yogachara (“yoga practice”) school of Asanga, his inspirer Maitreya, and Vasubandhu, is often called chittamatra: “mind only” or “consciousness only.” It holds that things only possess the meaning, reality, and definition that we – as their observer and experiencer – give to them or impute upon them, through the interpretations and definitions of our mind and the mental “story” that we typically automatically create for ourselves about each and every circumstance and situation. Our whole life experience is thus in one sense a vast and lengthy mental projection, in which things are to us what we think and perceive them to be, and nothing else. That projection is often little more than a projection of our anxieties, desires, opinions, and biases. Mistaking our interpretations of the experiences of life for the experience of life itself, we create and prolong our own suffering, mainly because it never occurs to most of us to try stripping all those interpretations, imputations, and superimpositions away and to reflect deeply on what remains. Thus, Yogachara teaches that our consciousness – our power of perception – is ultimately the only reality. This teaching has its fundamental root and basis in one of the most famous verses of the Dhammapada (the most well known collection of the simplest – yet still challenging – psychological and ethical sayings of the Buddha) which has been rendered as “With our thoughts we make the world.”
In the Lankavatara Sutra, Buddha explains that the alayavijnana is in reality the tathagatagarbha: buddha nature. All beings possess buddha nature. A Buddha – literally meaning “enlightened one” or “awakened one” – is one who has directly and experientially realised it and thus attained the nirvanic consciousness, ultimate bodhichitta (“wisdom-mind” or “mind of enlightenment”).
Just as “soul” and “self” are deemed unfit terms for the reincarnating mindstream, so too the pure, spotless, clear, and luminous nature of mind, or “mind of clear light” – empty of all duality, empty of everything and anything that one can conceive, empty of everything manifested – is not typically called by such terms, not even that of “Higher Self” or “Divine Self” or “Universal Self” or “Spirit.”
Considering the meanings attached to the word “self” by anyone who knows that word, how could ultimate VOIDNESS be thought of or spoken of as any type of self, whether with or without a capital S?
No-self and non-self are considered more apt terminology. Asanga says: “The non-existence of the self and the existence of the no-self: this is the true definition of emptiness.” (Abhidharmasamuccaya)
The Yogachara teachings therefore almost never use the term “self.” But Asanga’s “Books of Maitreya” do very occasionally affirm that this buddha nature – being adi-buddhi or primordial wisdom – is “true self” or “pure self.”
In the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, Buddha is presented as saying that the tathagatagarbha or buddha nature – synonymous, as we have seen, with pure mind and pure alayavijnana – is the Atman, literally “Self,” in the sense of the one universal Higher Self or Essence of all.
Most Buddhists still prefer not to use such terms, however, since they seem somewhat ill-fitting for that which is spoken of as SHUNYATA, and are also likely in many cases to either cause, increase, or prolong “self-grasping” and “self-cherishing,” whether in a subtle and more transcendental sense or not. Buddhism considers these essential to be eliminated and overcome on the path of true progress, for they are held to be at the roots of all suffering and it was Buddha’s primary stated purpose to give people the means to free themselves from that.
Self-grasping is the wish to cling on to the notion or conception of being a self – whether a mortal self or a spiritual, immortal, higher Self – and typically awakes feelings of fear, horror, dread, or repulsion upon considering or encountering the idea of letting go of all notions of “self”: personal, psychological, and spiritual.
Self-cherishing is viewed as the natural resultant of this and manifests in such ideas, feelings, or attitudes as being more special, more important, more talented, more deserving, more valuable etc. than another or others. If one would in any situation put one’s own desires or even one’s own needs before those of any other person, one is undeniably self-cherishing, and this can only be productive in the long run of negative consequences and suffering, both for oneself and others.
The very foundation and basis of Buddhism is what Buddha called the Four Noble Truths:
(1) Suffering is the unavoidable accompaniment of conditioned existence, i.e. conditioned existence is suffering.
(2) All suffering is the result of desire and craving, i.e. personal desire is the cause of all suffering.
(3) Through understanding and applying the Buddha’s teachings, suffering and its cause can however be overcome, i.e. it is possible to end the cycle of desire/craving and suffering.
(4) The path or way out of suffering: the Noble Eightfold Path, i.e. right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right meditative concentration.
These four truths and the eightfold path receive the most direct attention and promulgation in Theravada Buddhism. In the Mahayana and Vajrayana, they are typically re-presented in the words and elaborations of subsequent Buddhist teachers or Lamas and it is generally taken for granted that any Buddhist practitioner is familiar with them and accepting of them.
As an ardently nontheistic (not to be confused with atheistic) religion or philosophy, Buddhism does not call this highest reality that we were speaking of “God” nor conceive of it in any theistic manner.
Yet many Buddhists acknowledge that those who perceive ultimate reality in terms of “SELF” – such as Atman and Brahman in Hinduism – can still reach the same goal, as indeed do true mystics of all religions.
The Rig Veda of Hinduism – the most ancient scripture and book currently known to man – declares that “Truth is one, though the Sages call it by many names.” Buddhists simply consider Buddhism to deal with things the most directly, accurately, “cleanly,” and to the point, stripped of everything unnecessary.
The Dzogchen system within Tibetan Buddhism speaks of the fundamental, ultimate “ground” of all existence, while Asanga lists various synonyms for what we have been speaking about: “The essential purity, the true nature, emptiness (shunyata), the utmost point of reality, the signless, the absolute (paramartha), the one fundamental element.” (Mahayanasamgraha)
Some of the tantric (i.e. esoteric) teachings of Tibetan Buddhism state that at the ultimate level of non-dual reality, there is an indivisible unity of “absolute Space” and “primordial consciousness” or “primordial wisdom.” This is also expressed as absolute Space (i.e. that bare, boundless, unconditioned, unmanifest Space beyond, behind, or hidden within manifested space or the space we see in the sky) ever vibrating with infinite energy.
Still, since this is not a being, an entity, or an ego, Buddhism maintains that one cannot philosophically call it “God,” nor “Self.” Whilst Hindu Vedanta speaks of “THAT,” Mahayana Buddhism prefers the less reified “thatness,” “suchness,” or “isness.”
20th century Theosophical teacher Raghavan Iyer observes: “Whether this profound Teaching is put in terms of spirit and universal consciousness, in terms of Space and the Void, or indeed in any other mystical terms, what is crucial in understanding the Teaching is to avoid any fixity or rigidity arising through the limitations of one’s mind.” (“The Seventh Principle”)
In the “Teachers of The Eternal Doctrine” series first published in Iyer’s “Hermes” magazine, Elton Hall repeated this point, with reference to the ancient Chinese Buddhist philosopher Sengzhao: “Seng-chao sought to express ineffable truth in language, which is necessarily the medium and instrument of relative truth. Like Nagarjuna, he used the dialectical approach, refined in Madhyamika thought, to free consciousness from the false reification and externalization that all too readily result from thinking about the unthinkable. If one refrains from such reflection, one will not be motivated to seek Enlightenment, but if one does engage in such thought, one is easily trapped in subtle ideas whose plausibility hides their falsity.” (“Seng-Chao” emphasis added)
Theosophy therefore speaks of “the voidness of the seeming full and the fullness of the seeming void.” But this does not mean that two things are being referred to; the point is that ultimate reality totally transcends all dualistic definitions, ideas, and verbiage. Infinite voidness is infinite fullness and thus the reverse is also the case: infinite fullness is infinite voidness. At that most sublimated, unconditioned, and primal of levels, how can any dualistic classifications, divisions, or distinctions apply?
One and the same “thing” can be approached from either of the two angles: the fullness and Self preferred by Hindus, or the emptiness/voidness and non-self preferred by Buddhists. Only, while the latter needs to avoid the pitfall of nihilism, the former has to make sure their preference for the “Self” idea is not due to, or in any way prolonging or strengthening, a feeling of need to cling on desperately to viewing oneself as a self, however spiritualised. The Hindu Upanishads and Advaita Vedanta do make clear that what they call Atman or the one universal Self of all is not like anything we typically or ordinarily think of and perceive as “self” and is devoid of all ego or “I” element, mortal or immortal.
~ * ~
The majority of the above relates primarily to the wisdom aspect of Buddhism but Mahayana and Vajrayana (i.e. tantric Mahayana, such as Tibetan Buddhism; please note that tantra does not automatically equate to something sexual, and for many tantric practitioners such things do not feature at all) constantly speak of “WISDOM and COMPASSION,” prajna and karuna. Neither can properly exist or function without the other.
This compassion relates primarily to the Bodhisattva ideal and Bodhisattva path, the highest and most spiritual pinnacle of compassion possible and which all sincere spiritual practitioners can begin to reach towards or even directly embrace.
Shantideva, in the Bodhicharyavatara (“The Way of the Bodhisattva” or “Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life”) expresses it in such ways as:
“For all those ailing in the world,
Until their every sickness has been healed,
May I myself become for them
The doctor, nurse, the medicine itself.”
“And now as long as space endures,
As long as there are beings to be found,
May I continue likewise to remain
To drive away the sorrows of the world.” (i.e. to be constantly reborn in this world over and over out of love and compassion, in order to help and teach suffering humanity, rather than leaving this world behind forever by entering into Nirvana – the complete dissolution of everything individual or individualised – after death, this being a choice which a sufficiently enlightened being can make.)
“All the joy the world contains
Has come through wishing happiness for others.
All the misery the world contains
Has come through wanting pleasure for oneself.”
“The pains and sorrows of all wandering beings –
May they ripen wholly on myself.
And may the virtuous company of Bodhisattvas
Always bring about the happiness of beings.”
“Those desiring speedily to be
A refuge for themselves and others
Should make the interchange of “I” and “other,”
And thus embrace a sacred mystery.”
“May I be an isle for those who yearn for land,
A lamp for those who long for light;
For all who need a resting place, a bed; For those who need a servant, may I be their slave.”
“May beings everywhere who suffer Torment in their minds and bodies
Have, by virtue of my merit,
Joy and happiness in boundless measure.”
One cannot expect to become an actual Bodhisattva in this present lifetime but anyone so inclined can begin treading the Bodhisattva path, through two main and simple practices: (1) The cultivation of bodhichitta (the constant, ardent wish or motive to gain enlightenment solely for the benefit and service of others), (2) The perpetual practice of a virtuous, pure, altruistic, ethical, unselfish, meditative, and compassionate life, such as expressed in the paramitas, the “transcendental perfections” taught in Buddhism.
Or, in the words of “The Voice of The Silence,” translated by H. P. Blavatsky (the main founder of the modern Theosophical Movement) from an esoteric Buddhist text which she called the Book of the Golden Precepts:
“Thou canst not travel on the Path before thou hast become that Path itself.
“Let thy Soul lend its ear to every cry of pain like as the lotus bares its heart to drink the morning sun.
“Let not the fierce Sun dry one tear of pain before thyself hast wiped it from the sufferer’s eye.
“But let each burning human tear drop on thy heart and there remain; nor ever brush it off, until the pain that caused it is removed.
“To live to benefit mankind is the first step. To practise the six glorious virtues [i.e. the Paramitas] is the second.
“To don Nirmanakaya’s [i.e. a synonym in this context for Bodhisattva, called a Buddha of Compassion] humble robe is to forego eternal bliss for Self, to help on man’s salvation. To reach Nirvana’s bliss but to renounce it, is the supreme, the final step – the highest on Renunciation’s Path.
“Know, O Disciple, this is the Secret PATH, selected by the Buddhas of Perfection, who sacrificed the SELF to weaker Selves.
“Unveiled stands Truth and looks thee sternly in the face. She says:
“Sweet are the fruits of Rest and Liberation for the sake of Self; but sweeter still the fruits of long and bitter duty. Aye, Renunciation for the sake of others, of suffering fellow men.”
“He, who becomes Pratyeka-Buddha [i.e. a “solitary” Buddha or “solitary realiser,” one who pursues and achieves enlightenment and Nirvana primarily for their own sake, such as is the ideal, in one form or another, in every religion except Mahayana/Vajrayana Buddhism] makes his obeisance but to his Self. The Bodhisattva who has won the battle, who holds the prize within his palm, yet says in his divine compassion:
“For others’ sake this great reward I yield” – accomplishes the greater Renunciation.
“A SAVIOUR OF THE WORLD is he.
“Canst thou destroy divine COMPASSION? Compassion is no attribute. It is the Law of LAWS – eternal Harmony, Alaya’s SELF; a shoreless universal essence, the light of everlasting Right, and fitness of all things, the law of Love eternal.
“The more thou dost become at one with it, thy being melted in its BEING, the more thy Soul unites with that which IS, the more thou wilt become COMPASSION ABSOLUTE.
“Such is the Arya Path, Path of the Buddhas of perfection.
“Now bend thy head and listen well, O Bodhisattva – Compassion speaks and saith: “Can there be bliss when all that lives must suffer? Shalt thou be saved and hear the whole world cry?”
“Now thou hast heard that which was said.
“Thou shalt attain the seventh step and cross the gate of final knowledge, but only to wed woe – if thou would’st be Tathagata, follow upon thy predecessor’s [i.e. Gautama Buddha’s] steps, remain unselfish till the endless end.
“Thou art enlightened – choose thy way.”
“The Voice of The Silence” is in many respects quite typical of ancient Indo-Tibetan Buddhism but it also contains numerous passages and statements hinting at or referring to deeper esoteric knowledge and teachings than one can readily find in any publicly known system or school of Buddhism. Those familiar with Yogachara and also the Kalachakra Tantra can notice – through certain terms and ideas used – a definite link between “The Voice of The Silence” and these two Buddhist systems.
This is not surprising, seeing as Blavatsky and her Adept-Teachers (who repeatedly identified themselves as “Esoteric Buddhists”) stated or indicated on numerous occasions that they belonged to the secret and entirely esoteric Yogacharya School (“Yogacharya” was how “Yogachara” was usually written at that time) pre-dating the historically known and now defunct one, that this esoteric brotherhood or fraternity was spread over parts of Tibet and the Trans-Himalayan region then spoken of as “Little Tibet,” that it was connected in some way with the hidden, inner side of the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism founded by Tsong-Kha-Pa, whose leading figureheads are the Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama, and that the reincarnation lineage of the latter was especially connected with this secret School, that they had access to the secret, original Kalachakra which even the majority of Lamas have no idea about, along with many other of the most secret texts and teachings, that they are directly connected with the mysterious land or region of Shambhala and thus with the past, present, and future destiny of mankind.
But “The Voice of The Silence” is unlike any other known Buddhist text or scripture in that it frequently uses terms like “Soul,” “Ego,” and “Self,” including affirming multiple levels of self within the human being, from the personal self to the reincarnating individual Self or Soul/Ego, to the one universal Higher SELF of all, or Spirit. As this article has mentioned, while there is some precedent in some Mahayana sutras for calling the tathagatagarbha or buddha nature or pure alayavijnana “Self” and “Atman,” this is in practice barely ever done, since it seems so at odds with the essential fundamentals of Buddhism.
It is perfectly understandable why these frequent affirmations of the reality and existence of self have led many to conclude that “The Voice of The Silence” is not authentically what it claims to be and is really a Blavatskian blend of different Hindu and Buddhist ideas.
But as we do not have access to the original and complete Book of the Golden Precepts, from which she translated parts of three treatises from a total of close to ninety, we cannot know for sure whether direct equivalents of “self” and “soul” etc. are actually used in that or whether at least some of these were introduced during the translation process to make it more comprehensible, meaningful, and accessible to Westerners, who at that time (135 years ago) were just beginning to gain some familiarity with basic ideas of Hindu philosophy but knew almost nothing – and understood still less – of Buddhism. Potentially this may also be part of the reason for the rest of Blavatsky’s Theosophical teachings speaking frequently of Atma or Atman, the Higher Self, the soul, the Reincarnating Ego, and so on.
However, the above hypothesis may not actually be the case at all, for if we read “An Unpublished Discourse of Buddha” (translated by HPB and published posthumously) we see Buddha presented as affirming the reality of the Higher Self and Ego to his select group of initiated esoteric pupils and Arhats, to whom that discourse was apparently addressed. Perhaps, then, the implication is that he denied the real existence of all forms of self in his exoteric teachings, addressed to the general public and his uninitiated disciples, in order to encourage elimination of self-grasping and self-cherishing, and then privately or secretly affirmed the reality of the higher, spiritual levels of self to those in whom he knew that this would not lead to self-grasping and self-cherishing. In our experience, adopting the non-self perspective usually has far greater psychological and practical benefit – especially for those of us living in the egocentric West – than constantly thinking of “oneself” as a Self, even in the higher and universal sense.
HPB states that “[Buddhist] Scriptures treat of all such metaphysical questions very cautiously, and . . . sin by that excess of exotericism; the dead letter meaning far overshooting the mark . . . Buddha had to give the death-blow to an exuberance of unhealthy fancy and fanatical superstition resulting from ignorance, such as has rarely been known before or after. . . . He had . . . to uproot errors before he gave out the truth. . . . he could not give out all . . . so his caution led Buddha to conceal too much [i.e. in his public teachings].” (“The Key to Theosophy” p. 79-81)
But she and her Teachers, called the Masters or Mahatmas or Brothers, showed their genuine Buddhist-ness in numerous ways, including almost never using the word “God” and on repeated occasions denying the existence of God, including that of an impersonal God, whilst affirming the reality of the one infinite, omnipresent LIFE, Absolute Abstract Space/Motion/Duration/Matter, of which the Master K.H. or Koot Hoomi said it would be a “gigantic misnomer” to call “God.”
It is important to note that “The Voice of The Silence” has been publicly endorsed in writing by the present Dalai Lama, the 9th Panchen Lama, and the latter’s Chinese secretary, who wished “to point out that what is embodied in it comprises a part of the teachings of the Esoteric School. . . . Madame Blavatsky had a profound knowledge of Buddhist philosophy, and the doctrines she promulgated were those of many great teachers. This book is like a call to men to forsake desire, dispel every evil thought, and enter the true Path.” (foreword to the 1927 Peking edition of “The Voice of the Silence”)
And world-renowned Buddhist scholar D. T. Suzuki described “The Voice of The Silence” as “the real Mahayana Buddhism.”
~ * ~
A FEW OF THE MANY TRACES OF BUDDHISM IN THE WRITINGS OF H. P. BLAVATSKY AND THE INITIATED MASTER–YOGIS OF THE TRANS-HIMALAYAN ESOTERIC SCHOOL
(When reading these, it’s important to remember the universal nature of Theosophy and that it does not require or expect people to become Buddhists – although they are perfectly free and welcome to do so if they wish – nor even to be particularly interested in Buddhism. It maintains that timeless Truth transcends and pre-dates all religions. But at the same time, it cannot be denied that it elevates both the true esoteric undercurrent of Buddhism and even the public, exoteric religion of Buddhism to a higher level than it gives to any other. This could be interpreted as saying “No religion contains or expresses the whole Truth, nor is any religion free from error and distortion, but Buddha and Buddhism come closer than any other.”)
“To reach the knowledge of that SELF, thou hast to give up Self to Non-Self, Being to Non-Being, and then thou canst repose between the wings of the GREAT BIRD.” (“The Voice of The Silence” translated by H. P. Blavatsky, p. 5, original 1889 edition)
“. . . acquire a knowledge of how Non Ego, Voidness, and Darkness are Three in One and alone Self-existent and perfect.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 42)
“Thou hast to study the voidness of the seeming full, the fulness of the seeming void.” (“The Voice of The Silence” translated by H. P. Blavatsky, p. 55-56, original 1889 edition)
“Space is neither a “limitless void,” nor a “conditioned fulness,” but both: being, on the plane of absolute abstraction, the ever-incognisable Deity, which is void only to finite minds, and on that of mayavic perception, the Plenum, the absolute Container of all that is, whether manifested or unmanifested: it is, therefore, that ABSOLUTE ALL. . . . “What is that which was, is, and will be, whether there is a Universe or not; whether there be gods or none?” asks the esoteric Senzar Catechism. And the answer made is – SPACE.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 8, 9)
“Space then, or “Fan, Bar-nang” (Maha Sunyata) or, as it is called by Lao-tze, the “Emptiness” is the nature of the Buddhist Absolute.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “Editorial Appendix”)
“Neither our philosophy nor ourselves believe in a God, least of all in one whose pronoun necessitates a capital H. . . . Our doctrine knows no compromises. It either affirms or denies, for it never teaches but that which it knows to be the truth. Therefore, we deny God both as philosophers and as Buddhists. . . . we know there is in our system no such thing as God, either personal or impersonal. Parabrahm [i.e. Parabrahman or Brahman, the absolute, infinite, impersonal Divine Principle taught in the Hindu Upanishads and Advaita Vedanta] is not a God, but absolute immutable law . . . we are in a position to maintain there is no God . . . 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.” (Master K.H., “The Mahatma Letters” p. 52)
“The One Eternal Element, or element-containing Vehicle, is Space, dimensionless in every sense; co-existent with which are – endless duration, primordial (hence indestructible) matter, and motion – absolute “perpetual motion” which is the “breath” of the “One” Element. This breath, as seen, can never cease, not even during the Pralayic eternities [i.e. the vast periods of total non-manifestation between the life cycles of universes].” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 55)
“. . . there is one absolute Reality which antecedes all manifested, conditioned, being. . . . It is of course devoid of all attributes and is essentially without any relation to manifested, finite Being. It is “Be-ness” rather than Being (in Sanskrit, Sat), and is beyond all thought or speculation. This “Be-ness” is symbolised in the Secret Doctrine under two aspects. On the one hand, absolute abstract Space, representing bare subjectivity, the one thing which no human mind can either exclude from any conception, or conceive of by itself. On the other, absolute Abstract Motion representing Unconditioned Consciousness. Even our Western thinkers have shown that Consciousness is inconceivable to us apart from change, and motion best symbolises change, its essential characteristic.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 14)
Compare the preceding quote and the one before it with something we said earlier: “Some of the tantric (i.e. esoteric) teachings of Tibetan Buddhism state that at the ultimate level of non-dual reality, there is an indivisible unity of “absolute Space” and “primordial consciousness” or “primordial wisdom.” This is also expressed as absolute Space (i.e. that bare, boundless, unconditioned, unmanifest Space beyond, behind, or hidden within manifested space or the space we see in the sky) ever vibrating with infinite energy.” It was only many decades after Blavatsky’s death that it became known to anyone outside Tibet that such teachings can be found in some of the more obscure Tibetan Buddhist tantras.
One Buddhism expert was right, therefore, in saying “Blavatsky had access to Tibetan Buddhist sources which no other Westerner during her time had. Her works are by no means merely strings of plagiarisms, but rather very cogent arguments, supplemented by masses of data, that her readers should believe Buddhist claims that there is a perennial philosophy, in the possession of Adepts, which explains the origins of the world and leads to salvation from it. … Blavatsky knew what the Buddhist Tantras were, knew their content and philosophical import better than any Western contemporary, and knew bona fide Tibetan traditions surrounding them. This alone gives strong reasons not to dismiss her claims out of hand.”
One may also notice her use of the term “Be-ness” and, in one of the quotes below, “Absoluteness,” preferring the latter to “Absolute.” These are echoes of such Buddhist terms as Isness, Thatness, and Suchness, which we referred to earlier.
“. . . the ONE LIFE, eternal, invisible, yet Omnipresent, without beginning or end, . . . Its one absolute attribute, which is ITSELF, eternal, ceaseless, Motion, is called in esoteric parlance the “Great Breath,” which is the perpetual motion of the universe, in the sense of limitless, ever-present SPACE. That which is motionless cannot be Divine. But then there is nothing in fact and reality absolutely motionless within the universal soul.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 2)
The above – which may sound odd to those accustomed to supposing that the Absolute or Infinite in its unmanifest state must be something completely still, static, and motionless – is a direct expression of the Buddhist teaching that everything without any exception is constantly in flux, in movement, in motion, i.e. that nothing stays exactly the same for even one moment, and that even shunyata or emptiness – our buddha nature – is empty of any fixed, unchanging, abiding “self.” The above few quotes shed a little light on how even the ultimate Permanent is still subject to a perpetual impermanence, as paradoxical as that may at first sound. Anicca or anitya (impermanence) is one of the fundamental principles of Buddhism.
“For as our minds are but the product of the Universal Mind, so is the latter but a differentiated ray of the absolute Mind or No-Mind. The ONE, or Absoluteness, is the only eternal reality.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “Problems of Life”)
In the above quote, and in some similar passages in “Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge,” we see an affirmation of the fundamental Buddhist doctrine that all is mind. Blavatsky did not frequently speak in such terms as “Absolute Mind” for the ultimate reality of things but the fact that she occasionally did is significant from the Buddhist perspective, as is her saying that this Absolute Mind is really “No-Mind,” the latter being a frequently encountered synonym in Mahayana Buddhism for the “mind of clear light” that was spoken of in the first part of this article.
“It is all over now: the new year’s festivities are at an end and I am “Self” once more. But what is Self? only a passing guest, whose concerns are all like a mirage of the great desert.” (Master K.H., “The Mahatma Letters” p. 264)
“All of us have to get rid of our own Ego, the illusory apparent self, to recognise our true self in a transcendental divine life. But if we would not be selfish we must strive to make other people see that truth, to recognise the reality of that transcendental self, the Buddha, the Christ or God of every preacher. This is why even exoteric Buddhism is the surest path to lead men toward the one esoteric truth.” (Letter from the Maha Chohan, the Great Master of the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood)
“I am a Thibetian [i.e. Tibetan] buddhist, you know, and pledged myself to keep certain things secret.” (H. P. Blavatsky, letter of 1876 to Dr. Alexander Wilder)
“Above all, try to find yourself, and the path of knowledge will open itself before you, and this so much the easier as you have made a contact with the Light-ray of the Blessed one [i.e. Buddha], whose name you have now taken as your spiritual lode-star [i.e. guiding star, guiding light, exemplar, inspiration, etc.]. Receive in advance my blessings and my thanks.” (Master M., letter to German Theosophist Franz Hartmann, who had just become a Buddhist)
“Thus the reader is asked to bear in mind the very important difference between orthodox Buddhism – i.e., the public teachings of Gautama the Buddha, and his esoteric Budhism. His Secret Doctrine, however, differed in no wise from that of the initiated Brahmins of his day. The Buddha was a child of the Aryan [i.e. Indian] soil, a born Hindu, a Kshatrya and a disciple of the “twice born” (the initiated Brahmins) or Dwijas. His teachings, therefore, could not be different from their doctrines, for the whole Buddhist reform merely consisted in giving out a portion of that which had been kept secret from every man outside of the “enchanted” circle of Temple-Initiates and ascetics. Unable to teach all that had been imparted to him – owing to his pledges – though he taught a philosophy built upon the ground-work of the true esoteric knowledge, the Buddha gave to the world only its outward material body and kept its soul for his Elect. . . . That doctrine was preserved secretly – too secretly, perhaps – within the sanctuary.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, Introductory, p. xxi)
“The esoteric school teaches that Gautama Buddha with several of his Arhats is such a Nirmanakaya [i.e. Bodhisattva or Buddha of Compassion; in using “Nirmanakaya” as an exact synonym for “Bodhisattva,” Theosophy differs somewhat from all publicly known Buddhist teachings], higher than whom, on account of the great renunciation and sacrifice to mankind there is none known.” (H. P. Blavatsky, explanatory note in “The Voice of the Silence” p. 97, original 1889 edition)
“At a stone’s throw from the old Lamasery stands the old tower, within whose bosom have gestated generations of Bodhisatwas. It is there, where now rests your lifeless friend – my brother, the light of my soul, to whom I made a faithful promise to watch during his absence over his work.” (Master M., “The Mahatma Letters” p. 219)
“K. H. or Koot-Hoomi is now gone to sleep for three months to prepare during this Sumadhi [i.e. Samadhi] or continuous trance state for his initiation, the last but one, when he will become one of the highest adepts. Poor K. H. his body is now lying cold and stiff in a separate square building of stone with no windows or doors in it, the entrance to which is effected through an underground passage from a door in Toong-ting (reliquary, a room situated in every Thaten (temple) or Lamisery [i.e. Lamasery, another word for a Tibetan Buddhist monastery]; and his Spirit is quite free. An adept might lie so for years, when his body was carefully prepared for it beforehand by mesmeric passes etc. It is a beautiful spot where he is now in the square tower. The Himalayas on the right and a lovely lake near the lamisery. His Cho-han (spiritual instructor, master, and the Chief of a Tibetan Monastery) takes care of his body. M. [i.e. the Master Morya] also goes occasionally to visit him. It is an awful mystery that state of cataleptic sleep for such a length of time . . . You know the Buddhists do not believe in a personal God. They believe in one universal mind which gives impulses to creation but does not rule or meddle with the natural evolution or with man.” (H. P. Blavatsky, letter to Mrs Hollis Billings, October 1881)
“Koot-hoomi went to see [one of his Indian chelas or disciples] before going into “Tong-pa-ngi” [i.e. Tongpanyi, the Tibetan equivalent word for the Sanskrit Shunyata, i.e. emptiness, voidness; this seems equivalent to saying that the Master K.H. “went into the Void” during this sacred initiation process] – the state in which he now is.” (Master M., “The Mahatma Letters” p. 375)
“In the Catechism, the Master is made to ask the pupil: –
“Lift thy head, oh Lanoo; dost thou see one, or countless lights above thee, burning in the dark midnight sky?”
“I sense one Flame, oh Gurudeva, I see countless undetached sparks shining in it.”
“Thou sayest well. And now look around and into thyself. That light which burns inside thee, dost thou feel it different in anywise from the light that shines in thy Brother-men?”
“It is in no way different, though the prisoner is held in bondage by Karma, and though its outer garments delude the ignorant into saying,‘Thy Soul and My Soul.’” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 120)
“What have we, the disciples of the Arhats of Esoteric Buddhism and of Sang-gyas [i.e. the Tibetan name for Buddha], to do with the Shasters [i.e. Shastras, a generic term for Hindu scriptures] and orthodox Brahmanism? There are 100 of thousands of Fakirs, Sannyasis, or Sadhus leading the most pure lives and yet being, as they are, on the path of error, never having had an opportunity to meet, see, or even hear of us. Their forefathers have driven the followers of the only true philosophy upon earth away from India, and now it is not for the latter to come to them, but for them to come to us, if they want us. Which of them is ready to become a Buddhist, a Nastika as they call us [i.e. meaning “atheist,” “denier,” or “unbeliever,” a term used by Hindus to describe non-Hindu religions or philosophies which do not accept the authority of the Vedas or deny the existence of God and Atman]? None. Those who have believed and followed us have had their reward.” (Master M., “The Mahatma Letters” p. 462)
“[The Theosophical teaching, when derived directly from the initiated Adepts of the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood is] an exposition of certain tenets of the secret doctrine of Tibetan Buddhism – that of the Arhats which, as our readers know, is but another name for the “World Religion” or Occult Doctrine underlying all the ancient faiths of mankind.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “Esoteric Buddhism” article)
“If the simple, humane and philosophical code of daily life left to us by the greatest Man-Reformer ever known, should ever come to be adopted by mankind at large, then indeed an era of bliss and peace would dawn on Humanity.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Theosophical Glossary” p. 67, Entry for “Buddha Siddharta”)
~ * ~
“Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.”
(The Heart Sutra)
“The element of consciousness is completely pure; it encompasses everything yet is not tainted by anything.”
(Buddha in the Bhadrapala Sutra, one of the earliest Mahayana scriptures)
“Buddhist thought . . . is concerned that all limitation or anthropomorphic conceptions be avoided. One should not only dispense with any notion of Deity independent of or outside the world of phenomenal existence, but one should not reify [or “deify” in the original version of this article; both words are valid and apt] consciousness, though absolute and infinite. [H. P. Blavatsky wrote:] “. . . Buddhist rationalism was ever too alive to the insuperable difficulty of admitting one absolute consciousness, as in the words of Flint – “wherever there is consciousness, there is relation, and wherever there is relation there is dualism.”” This concern with the temptation to anthropomorphize absolute consciousness the moment one begins to speak of it is reflected not only in the contrast between Buddhism and Vedanta, but also within Buddhism itself. It appears in the difference between the Madhyamika school and the Yogachara school.”
(Raghavan Iyer, “The Seventh Principle” today published in Vol. 1 of “The Gupta Vidya”)
“Though words are spoken to explain Voidness,
Voidness itself can never be expressed.
Though we say “the true nature of mind is clear light,”
It is beyond all philosophical words and religious symbols.
Although the mind is void in essence,
It tenderly embraces all life within its womb.
To realise this inexpressible truth,
do not manipulate mind or body
but simply open into Emptiness
with relaxed, natural grace,
intellect at ease in silence,
limbs at rest in stillness
like hollow bamboos.
Neither breathing in nor breathing out
with the breath of habitual thinking,
allow the mind to be at peace
in brilliant wakefulness.
This is the royal wealth of Mahamudra [i.e. “Great Seal,” a term used in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism for the great imprint of inseparable Wisdom–Emptiness which is “stamped” upon all things],
no common coin of any realm.
Beloved Naropa, this treasure of Buddhahood
belongs to you and to all beings.
The one who fabricates
any division in consciousness
betrays the friendship of Mahamudra.
Cease all activity that separates,
abandon even the desire to be free from desires
and allow the thinking process to rise and fall
smoothly as waves on a shoreless ocean.
The one who abandons craving
for authority and definition,
and never becomes one-sided
in argument or understanding,
alone perceives the authentic meaning
hidden in the ancient scriptures.
When the limited mind
enters blessed companionship
with limitless mind,
indescribable freedom dawns.
Selfish or limited motivations
create the illusory sense of imprisonment
and scatter seeds of further delusion.
Even genuine religious teaching
can generate narrowness of vision.
Trust only the approach
that is utterly vast and profound.
The noble way of Mahamudra
never engages in the drama of
imprisonment and release.
The sage of Mahamudra
has absolutely no distractions,
because no war against distractions has ever been declared.
This nobility and gentleness alone,
this non-violence of thought and action,
is the traceless path of all Buddhas.
To walk this all-embracing way
is the bliss of Buddhahood.”
(Extracts from the Song of Mahamudra by the Mahasiddha Tilopa, written for his disciple Naropa)
“The practitioner of the Vajrayana [i.e. literally the “Diamond Way,” “Diamond Path,” or “Diamond Vehicle,” the name for the tantric or esoteric Mahayana Buddhism of Tibet] . . . for him the nature of all things is emptiness. But lamas point out that this emptiness cannot be pictured or defined: It is not the image of blankness or dead space that may come to mind. It is reality itself, the indescribable source of everything, yet not itself a thing. We might call it the spiritual essence of the world that cannot be named, grasped, or otherwise limited. Beyond all substance it pervades all things. We cannot perceive emptiness as something separate from us; we can only experience it in the ultimate depths of ourselves and the world around us. It resembles the wind that can be felt but not seen, or the invisible space in which all things are immersed like pebbles in the pool of a mountain stream. The follower of the Vajrayana cuts through the opaque and solid appearance of the world to find at its core, gleaming like a diamond, the clear and indestructible emptiness that has nothing left in it to be seen or destroyed. But all this is merely metaphor to suggest an experience of reality that lies beyond words and thought.”
(Edwin Bernbaum, “The Way to Shambhala,” quoted on p. 459 of “The Jewel in The Lotus,” compiled and edited by Raghavan Iyer, published by the United Lodge of Theosophists, Santa Barbara)
~ * ~
This article may have raised more questions about various things. Please make use of the site search function (the magnifying glass symbol at the top of the page) and visit the Articles page to see the complete list of over 400 articles covering all aspects of Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement. You may like other articles listed under the heading “BUDDHISM AND TAOISM.”
One article that sheds light on some of the subjects raised in this one is
THEOSOPHY AND TIBETAN BUDDHIST TANTRA
~ BlavatskyTheosophy.com ~
T H E O S O P H Y 