Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: Formation of Religions and Karma

Expand Messages
  • dalval14@earthlink.net
    Saturday, March 09, 2002 Re: formation of Religions and the Karma thereof. Dear Doss: You are absolutely right. Buddhism is technically not a religion,
    Message 1 of 9 , Mar 10, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Saturday, March 09, 2002

      Re: formation of Religions and the Karma thereof.

      Dear Doss:

      You are absolutely right. Buddhism is technically not a
      religion, although called so in the West.

      It is a philosophy and a logic of living the best and most moral
      kind of life that is possible. It is an application of the
      universal law of Evolution and Karma, which gives every part and
      portion of the entire Universe the eventual potential of becoming
      directly a "Knower of God." A WISE INDIVIDUAL -- a "MASTER OF

      If we look at the doctrine of Monads we find that the primordial
      Unity on the plane of manifestation of SPIRIT and MATTER ( ATMA
      AND BUDDHI ) -- as "Buddhi" is mulla-prakriti or
      "root-matter" -- produces entities that undergo to vast process
      of evolution so that their "forms" ( Matter ) may be so refined
      by moral and ethical choice as to become capable to supporting
      the living glory of SPIRIT as an actuality. -- perhaps something
      like the Entity that stands behind the SUN of our solar system.

      But this can be said of the origins of any great present-day
      religion, as they started out (historically, each of them) with a
      small group of devotees, and a teacher who was not bound by the
      formalities of some set religion into which he (and they) were

      Such teachers who appear yuga after yuga, serve to indicate to
      their devotees and pupils that the human MIND is free, immortal,
      and can improve and evolve itself; and become eventually wholly
      spiritual. Any one who reads The SECRET DOCTRINE and the MAHATMA
      LETTERS carefully will realize this is a possibility within our
      conceptualization and grasp if we will but TRY.

      As time passed, those who followed this kind of reform, decided
      to formalize it. And, since in most cases, the Teachers had
      withdrawn (to enable the pupils and disciples to progress freely
      and on their own volition) -- these "successors" (and this is a
      uniform observation), then decided to make the task "easier" --
      and made some, or all, of the teachings into more rigid tenets.
      A "Catechism" was then published, and "council" were called from
      time to time to reshape those dogmas and make the tenets even
      more rigid. All religions have or are, going through these

      But as you say Buddhism alone remain philosophical, and the
      establishment of the Sangha (assemblage) of Monks keeps it
      flexible and directed at the essential philosophy of "right
      livelihood" established by the Buddha.

      We can see this has happened in all "religions." Thus they
      became un-thinking "faiths," and "blind beliefs," in all
      religions. The result, after hundreds of years, has produced
      dogmas, a church (or temple) and priests who desire to be
      considered learned -- and who ultimately decide there is a good
      livelihood to be made in human gullibility, ignorance, inertia,
      pleasure loving, and sloth. Considered impersonally every
      current "religion" fits this description. Hinduism has at base
      the ancient teachings and serves to preserve them -- as I
      understand it INTACT. That which the West has been allowed to
      contact is purely the rind of the fruit. And even that has been

      It is TRUTH at the base, and, thereafter, a progressive dogmatism
      and the interposition of punitive measures to be taken with
      heretics or protestants that have been instituted in all cults
      and sects. But few inquire on joining what those "penalties"
      are. Our general sense of morality and fairness has become
      overlaid with the influence of moral calluses.

      At least, Theosophy, as a philosophy, and as read from the
      ORIGINAL TEACHINGS has not reached the stage of a rigid and
      dogmatic religion. But since the active study and application of
      those ORIGINAL TEACHINGS has and is declared to be "too
      difficult," or, "needing interpretation," by the interposition of
      "explanations" from a revered Pupil, leader or successor to the
      original Teacher, one can see how in the bodies that were called
      originally the one, only and united THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, there
      is beginning to be seen the existence of imposition in matters of
      orthodoxy and controlled action and thinking -- if one desires to
      remain "with the club." If this sounds severe, or opinionated.
      It is because after many years of study and comparison it seems
      to be so (to me). Others may disagree. If the PRINCIPLES are
      clear, then who needs interpretations ? Why is it that the
      "interpretations" are honored, and the older ORIGINAL TEACHINGS
      are more and more remotely set into an almost totally obstructed
      background? Ask yourself who did the "interpreter" learn from?
      Did he or she ever offer themselves as the sole medium with which
      to grasp and understand the ORIGINAL TEACHINGS ?

      Better still: Are the ORIGINAL TEACHINGS of Theosophy adequately
      universal and impersonal? Are they for any one (who exerts
      themselves) ? If so, then why the hesitancy to approach, to
      read, to study and to apply ? How else is TRUTH to be secured ?
      No one can secure it for us, we have to d the ultimate work --
      so why delay ?

      Fortunately for all of us the ORIGINAL TEACHINGS are available in
      print, on the Internet, and widely disseminated. So those who
      desire to approach H P B and the Mahatmas DIRECTLY (as they ought
      to be approached) can still do so INDEPENDENTLY.

      Best wishes. as always,


      -----Original Message-----
      From: ramadoss@... [mailto:ramadoss@...]
      Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:01 PM
      To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: AA-Dal
      Subject: RE: Theos-World Karma

      At 10:23 AM 3/8/02 -0800, dalval14@... wrote:

      >Most religions and priests have stepped between the sufferer and
      >the truth and pretend that there is a Personal Ruler - a God -
      >that is responsible for their suffering and if appealed to in
      >proper way with adequate funds to the intercessing priest all
      >be resolved -- or else, when nothing happens -- it is the
      >unquestionable "will of a heartless or vengeful God."

      A stark contrast is Buddhism with its lack of personal God. And
      that is why
      it seems to be appealing more and more to the younger thinking
      around the world.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.