Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Susan Thomas on June 1, 2009 at 12:07am

Fundamentalist Christians or Fundamentalist Theosophists?

Permalink Reply by Charles Cosimano on June 1, 2009 at 1:02pm

In the case of Dugpa, the Fundamentalist Theosophists of course.

Permalink Reply by M. Sufilight on June 1, 2009 at 5:05pm

Dear Alex and friends

My views are:

H. P. Blavatsky wrote to A. P. Sinnett, sept. 1886:
"Now you have but to demand an explanation from him, and before a Council; to force him to explain things and show that it is not he who is lying but I—when I say that he, the present Babaji, has never seen the Master 10,000 miles away or approached him or ever been to Tibet, as he insists. I bet you he will decline an explanation and either go away from London or leave the Society. Till now no one put him on the stand, and he has all the trumps for him. But insist as the President of the L.L. Society and you have a right to—that the situation should be cleared that either he or I, would be justified and—you will see the fun. Now if you do not do something of the sort you will have the Karma of allowing the L.L. to be ruined by that little dugpa. I tell you he is 1000 times more dangerous than Mohini and is a tool in the hands of our enemies. And do not lose time.

Then, when you have cleared the coast of that element—propose a reform. A group or branch, however small, cannot be a theosophical Society—unless all the members in it are magnetically bound to each other, by the same way of thinking at least in some one direction; therefore, as you will never agree with Mohini or he with you, propose two distinct Branches; I will be with yours and, if you succeed, the Master will begin writing again which He will not do not even through me, so long as the Society is instead of a Brotherhood a political Bulgaria. I have sent Vol. I of the S.D. to Adyar and am now on Vol. II—the Archaic. This alone with the new information in it will be more than you will be able to digest in 25 years with the explanations promised—if you succeed in forming a Society of your own, faithful to the original programme and doctrine and the Masters, or their teaching."

These are the only hints I am permitted to give. Action can save the Society; inaction on your part—will kill it; as showing animosity to Mohini and his group would. Consult with them in a friendly way. Let them form their own Branch within or outside the T.S. If they do the former, all right and good. If they do the latter and outside the Masters and their protection they will only prove that it was personal ambition and love of selfish ideas that made them drift away. It will perhaps be better. Answer this.
Yours ever,
H. P. B."
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/Letters%20of%20HPB.htm


Master K. H. wrote, so it is said:
"It is impossible to worship both sides, - the male and female of nature, - at once; one or the other must predominate. Only by following the absolute, sexless Unity, can the white path be trodden. Hence the necessity for chastity. The occult and the physical must never be mixed up. It is absolutely necessary to concentrate on one or the other. The tendency naturally is to Black Magic, and that is why several years of training are necessary to cut away every sort of prejudice before power can be entrusted to you. Before you can become an occultist you have to give up every prejudice, every liking, every feeling of preference for one thing or another. The adept must entirely separate himself from his personality. He must say, I am a power! It is easy to fall into Black Magic. A black magician prepares to do mischief without giving a thought to whether it will harm others. He is essentially selfish, for he works for a thing he personally loves. Apparent unselfishness may be really selfishness. A deed of kindness done with partiality may become evil, viz., by stirring up animosity in the minds of others. It is necessary when acting to lose all sense of identity and become an abstract power. There is good and evil in every point in the universe, and if one works however indirectly for one’s own partiality, one becomes to that extent a black magician. The opposite of Justice is partiality. When a man uses the powers of Nature indiscriminatingly, with partiality, and with no regard to justice, it is Black Magic. But to help a sick person is not Black Magic, but no personal preference must guide you. Like a blackleg, a black magician acts on certain knowledge. Magic is power over the forces of nature, viz., the Salvation Army by hypnotizing people and making them psychically drunk with excitement, is Black Magic. Bismarck and Beaconsfield are types of black magicians."
http://blavatskyarchives.com/koothoomicommentaries.htm

- - -

Evil originates from ParaBrahm. It is wellknown, that Karma sprang from Brahm/ParaBrahm in this Manvantara. (Bhagavad Gita, VIII). Duality came and with it good and evil. Life is where humans learn to distinguish good from evil.

"Before the eyes can see, they must be incapable of tears. Before the ear can hear, it must have lost its sensitiveness. Before the voice can speak in the presence of the Masters it must have lost the power to wound. Before the soul can stand in the presence of the Masters its feet must be washed in the blood of the heart."
(Light on the Path by Mabel Collins)
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/other/light.htm

Evil is therefore illusorical reality and a force to be reckoned with. When beings or humans exist
on the dualistic levels evil is potent and present either through Karma or through real existing evil beings or entities. You know it is possible for a person to do something evil and even do it deliberately - doing it either due to greed for power, money, influence, various goods etc. etc. - and most often through ignorance about Visdom-Compassion.

The force they use are in existence becuase Evil is merely a lower vibration of good. There are as we know various grades of good and evil. It is in existence because what is, really is although illusorically real, and that is that. What some perceives as good others perceives as evil.

What is the meaning with life poeple ask?
The main idea, which people down here are able to grasp is, that the idea is Wisdom or Wisdom-Compassion, and of course in a transcended sense beyond thought, time and space. And that Wisdom-Compassion is also called "The Force" or "The Energy". That is what I have learned. And that is why my aim is to establish MahaPralaya in a wise manner.

M. Sufilight

Permalink Reply by Susan Thomas on June 1, 2009 at 10:23pm

YOU MISSED ONE THING!!!!!!!!!!!!! The whole point is to find something OUTSIDE THEOSOPHICAL LITERATURE, to validate the usage. To my knowlege there is nothing inside the literature that wouldn't support Blavatsky. Plain old newspaper reporting, VALIDATE from an outside source. Sorry to yell, but you are MISSING THE WHOLE POINT!

Permalink Reply by M. Sufilight on June 2, 2009 at 12:27pm

Dear Susan and friends

My views are:

I am sorry about that.


In TS it was ordinarily said that: Red Caps = Dug-pa /Dog-pa and Yellow Caps = Ge-lug-pa or Dge-lugs-pa. This has changed a bit because Buthan is not the same as it used to be.


Here is something to consider...

Nitartha international
"How Nitartha international is Organized Nitartha international is a New York educational corporation created by authority of the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, and is a member organization of the University of the State of New York. "
http://www.nitartha.org/home.html

SEARCH their Doctionary: http://www.nitartha.org/dictionary_search04.html

On Dug-pa or Dog-pa we have...


dug pa - {zas kyis dug pa} poisoned by food [ry]

dug pa - old coat or garment patched up and mended, dress, garment [JV]

dug pa - 1) tattered clothing; 2) [arch] bad [IW]


With other words a poisened Aura! Garment is Aura.


- - -
dog pa - 1) pod, shell, husk; 2) pill, lump; 3) bunch, bouquet; 4) anthers; 5) thread; 6) closed in, crowded, dense, thick, narrow[ness]; 7) capsule, pod; 8) bundle, skein [IW]

dog pa - confine(ment)/ restriction [RB]

dog pa - narrow capsule, bundle, skein, neck ornament, ear of corn, narrow, strict, fear [JV]

dog pa - narrow/ confining; narrow, narrowness [ry]

- - -

But try to read between the lines...in the below...

- - - - - - -

Dug
dug - poison[ous], venom[ous], warm[th], light a fire [IW]

dug - poison, venom [JV]

dug - poison, poisonous, venomous [ry]

dug - 1) poison; 2) the kleshas [IW]

dug - 1) poison [syn: [ka ko la dang, 'joms byed ster, nag po brtsegs, be'u'i lte ba, tshangs pa'i bu, rab tu gsa]; 2) (met) the kleshas [IW]

- - -

Pa

ah, oh, bdag po'i sgra (particle expressive of ownership or possession), affixed to many words from custom, often changed to ba after vowel or nga, la or ra, sign of infinitive and participle, often used for finite tense and for par, person who deals with whatever, inhabitants of a place, ordinal numeral, peculiarity of dialects, distinguish different meanings, used mistakenly for pa'i or ba'i, =don dam pa or fallaciousness, rain, agentive particle, part of past complement, in nominalized constructions [JV]

pa - 1) male agentive particle; 2) person/ male from ... country; 3) nominalizing particle for verbs, -ing; 4) past tense particle; 5) PA.; 6) ordinal # [IW]

pa - 1) male agentive particle; 2) person/ male from ... country; 3) nominalizing particle for verbs, -ing [all finals except ng, ' l r]; 4) past tense particle; 5) PA. [R] (6) ordinal #)/ [R] [IW]

pa - 1) agentive particle; 2) person from ... country; 3) nominalizing particle; 4) past tense particle; 5) PA. [bod yig gsal byed bcu gsum pa 'di'i nga ro 'don tsul la skye gnas mchu dang, byed

pa mchu, nang gi rtsol ba mchu gnyis phrad pa dang, phyi'i rtsol ba srog chung sgra med] 1) Ming gzhi'i pho yig cig; 2) male bdag po'i sgra zhig Rta pa,...Bod pa; 3) Ming mtha' zhig [Ga da na ba ma sa...Da drag ...Nga...Phyin pa,...Shes pa,...Rkang pa,...Skyob pa,...Rgyag pa,...Gnod pa,...Dam pa]; 4) ordinal # [gsum pa] [IW]

pa - 1) agentive particle. 2) person from a country. 3) nominalizing particle. 4) past tense particle [ry]

- - - - - - -



Yellow Hats - dge-lugs-pa or "dge ldan - Gelug [thd] "


Dge-ldan and Dge-ldan-pa
dge ldan - virtuous [ry]

dge ldan - possessed of virtue or piety, pious, follower of tsong khapa [JV]

dge ldan - Gelug [thd]

dge ldan pa - 1) virtuous; 2) Gelukpa dge lugs pa [IW]

dge ldan pa - monk at Ganden [ry]

dge ldan pa - a dge lugs pa sect [JV]

dge lugs - Gelukpa school/lineage [IW]

dge lugs - Gelug, Geluk. The Tibetan school of Buddhism founded by Lord Tsongkhapa as a reformation of the Kadam tradition of Atisha Dipamkara. The present head is H.H. the 14th Dalai Lama [ry]

dge lugs pa - Gelukpa school/lineage [IW]

dge lugs pa - Gelukpa school/lineage [founded by Tsongkhapa, rje tzong kha pa blo bzang grags pa/ mdo sngags bshad sgrub zung 'brel gyi ring lugs, w yellow robes and hats = zhva ser pa] [IW]

dge lugs pa - Gelukpa, followers of the Gelug school / lineage. [founded by Tsongkhapa]; Gelukpa; earlier school of Kadampa. Syn {bka' gdams pa} [ry]

- - -

Dge
dge - 1) virtuous, good, excellent, pure etc. 2) adj. comp. of {dge ba, tshul pha ma gnyis} male and female novice [ry]

dge - 1) virtuous, good, excellent, pure, what is good about something; 2) comp {dge ba [IW]

- - -


Lugs

lugs - approach, system, method, tradition, casting, founding metal TSE [IW]

lugs - approach, system, tradition, way [thd]

lugs - {lugs srol} tradition; system; custom [RB]

lugs - verb + lugs - way of doing the verb [ry]

lugs - status, tradition, line of thought, order, systems of thought, SA yin lugs, mode, casting, founding, of metal, way, manner, fashion, mode, method, opinion, view, judgment, style of proceeding, established manner, custom, usage, rite, "manner" construction particle, principle, model [JV]

lugs - imp. of {lug pa}; approach, system, method, tradition, the casting, founding [ry]

lugs - 1) Tha dad par lug pa!; 2) manner, tradition, rule, custom, fashion; 2) poured things, casting, foundry work; 3) about, concerning, the reason for [IW]

lugs - 1) Tha dad par lug pa!; 2) manner, tradition, rule, custom, fashion; 2) poured things, casting, foundry work; 3) about, concerning, the reason for [yong lugs bshad pa: told why they had come] [IW]

- - -
This is from the online Dictionary. It is pretty close to the real deal as far as I am concerned.
Yet I am no HPB or Master Morya. :-)

Allright?


M. Sufilight

Permalink Reply by Susan Thomas on June 3, 2009 at 9:48pm

Excellent! Thank you so much. There is a whole lecture topic ther, no?

Permalink Reply by M. Sufilight on June 4, 2009 at 12:27pm

Dear friends

Thanks. Yes.

Permalink Reply by M. Sufilight on June 3, 2009 at 11:47am

Dear friends and Mark

My views are:

Mark wrote:
"Lucky from Katinka that we know how foolish and mis-informed HPB often was in her "opinions", as well as Besant, CWL, Bailey, etc., and many superior intellects also informing us. (tongue-in-cheek!)"

M. Sufilight asks:
I would really like you to tell us all with genuine examples where we can "know how foolish and mis-informed HPB often was in her "opinions"," ???

I think various members of this forum deserves an answer to your assertions and the use of the word "often". Do you not?



M. Sufilight

Permalink Reply by Katinka Hesselink on June 11, 2009 at 2:28am

As I said I asked David Reigle to answer this question. He did so very quickly, supplying me with a five page (!) PDF. I've put the whole thing, with an introduction, on my website here:

Who Are the Dugpas in Theosophical Writings? David Reigle

I think this pretty much puts the subject itself at rest, though of course we can continue arguing about whether one should even use the term.

Permalink Reply by Katinka Hesselink on June 11, 2009 at 3:10am

I had that last sentence deleted - but somehow the edit got lost & now it's too late to change it.

What I meant was that I think Joe's implicit point has now been answered pretty well too: we found someone capable of looking at all this with a scholarly eye: knowing Tibetan, Theosophical History AND Blavatsky, David Reigle probably had the notes ready for his piece. And yes, Blavatsky did not use the term in a vacuum - it was a common transliteration of drug-pa. Nor was she acting in a vacuum when she wrote negatively about the Red Caps - that too was common both in Tibetan Gelugpa circles AND in the West.

Mark: I don't think admitting that Blavatsky acted within her time is the same thing as saying she was ignorant. I fully expect anybody to make mistakes based on when they live. For instance: it's all well and good to judge bankers now for the mistakes they made that led up to the current economic crisis, but living on loans was in all of American culture, and spread to the rest of the Western world too. 'Everybody' (or almost everybody) contributed to that culture. Very few people can look beyond the limitations of their time and culture (which is partly the point the Dalai Lama was making too). Blavatsky did so in enough ways that she deserves our admiration, finding a few places where she didn't transcend the culture of her time as much as we'd like is merely testimony that she was what she says she was: a talented CHELA, not a Mahatma.

However, Reigle found a very good Blavatsky quote where she makes it clear she does understand part of this: she says that of course ordinary people in Bhutan aren't evil - just their teachers.

Living, as we do, in a time when even talking about unselfishness needs an apology, we can hardly expect THAT of Blavatsky. She lived in Victorian times and wrote for a Victorian audience. SHE hardly needed to apologize for having a problem with married priests. In fact, that very sentiment too is echoed in at least one of the non-Blavatsky quotes Reigle found for us.

Permalink Reply by Dan Caldwell on June 11, 2009 at 12:22pm

A correspondent of mine found this online:

More from the Diamond Way dictionary:

gdug
adj. comp. of {gdug pa} syn {dug} dangerous,
poisonous, hostile, malevolent, cruel, wicked, vicious, savage,
deleterious, harmful, evil; dangerous, poisonous, hostile, malevolent,
cruel, wicked, vicious, savage, deleterious, harmful, evil;

gdug pa
noxious; malevolent; vicious; dangerous, evil, poison,
mischievous, dangerous, poisonous, harmful, viciousness, hostile, cruel,
wicked, savage;

gdug pa klu
Vicious Nagas;

gdug pa can
evil person; harmful; cruel, wicked, vicious, savage;

Daniel
http://hpb.cc

Permalink Reply by M. Sufilight on June 12, 2009 at 12:46pm

I agree with you Joe.


Master KH wrote in a Mahatma Letter:
For the opposition represents enormous vested interests, and they have enthusiastic help from the Dugpas -- in Bhootan and the Vatican!
(Here is all of Mahtama Letter, No. 55. Dugpas are the same as selfish Magicians.)

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page