Theos-Talk Archives (July 2000 Message tt00059)

Frank,

Thanks for your comments below.

The quote:

> Dolpopa
> apparently teaches the first fundamental proposition
> of The Secret Doctrine, and Tsong-kha-pa apparently
> refutes it

are the words of David Reigle in his book BLAVATSKY'S
SECRET BOOKS.  They are NOT mine.  It is David
Reigle's opinion that Tsong-kha-pa refuted the 1st
Fundamental proposition as given in HPB's Secret
Doctrine.

Frank, you wrote:

> Dolpopa teaches actually quite the
> opposite of what is the
> first fundamental proposition of the SD. "Permanent,
> stable quiescent and
> eternal" reminds me rather of the God of the
> Christian church as of the SD.

Frank, your response is quite interesting but I guess
the crux of the matter IS how you DEFINE each of these
terms:

(1) permanent
(2)  stable
(3) quiescent
(4) eternal

As well as DEFINING those terms used by HPB:

(a) omnipresent
(b) eternal
(c) boundless
(d) immutable

I do not know if Dolpopa used those 4 terms as given
by David Reigle.  Of course the original terms used by
Dolpopa would have been in Tibetan.

I will ask David Reigle for his input.  

But does anyone else on this list know if
Tsong-kha-pa's view included an Absolute (principle)
which was eternal and immutable?

HPB writes:

"It is the ONE LIFE, eternal, invisible, yet
Omnipresent, without beginning or end, yet periodical
in its regular manifestations, between which periods
reigns the dark mystery of non-Being; unconscious, yet
absolute Consciousness; unrealisable, yet the one
self-existing reality. . . ." Vol. 1, Page 2 

Does Tsong-kha-pa and the Gelugpas believe in "the ONE
LIFE", eternal...."the one self-existing reality"?

Maybe others on this list can fill in the blanks.

Daniel


--- Frank Reitemeyer <ringding@blinx.de> wrote:

> Daniel,
> I have read your interesting comment several times,
> but I really can't
> figure out what to your good opinion is the
> contradiction between Tsongkhapa
> and the SD.
> You say:
> >lived just after Dolpopa, 1292-1361. This critique
> is
> > of much importance to Theosophists, since Dolpopa
> > apparently teaches the first fundamental
> proposition
> > of The Secret Doctrine, and Tsong-kha-pa
> apparently
> > refutes it;
> 
> -- but is that true? Can you give a quote?
> From the quotes you gave I see no contradiction
> between Tsongkhapa and the
> SD.
> In opposite, you say taht Tsongkhapa rejects the
> Jonangpa school which
> teaches:
> 
> > The Jonangpa teaching of a permanent, stable,
> > quiescent, and eternal dhatu
> > or tathagata-garbha or dharma-kaya which is "empty
> of
> > other" (gzhan stong)
> 
> is in bold contrast to the first fundamental
> principle HPB gives in her SD:
> 
> > (a) An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and
> Immutable
> > PRINCIPLE on which all speculation is impossible,
> > since it transcends the power of human conception
> and
> 
> Omnipresent means periodical in the objective world
> (SD I:2), but that is
> not the "permanent and stable" doctrine of Jonangpa
> and I think Tsongkhapa
> was quite correct in rejecting that doctrine.
> 
> Further you write:
> > This critique is of much importance to
> Theosophists, since Dolpopa
> > apparently teaches the first fundamental
> proposition
> > of The Secret Doctrine, and Tsong-kha-pa
> apparently
> > refutes it; yet Tsong-kha-pa is regarded by
> 
> Insofar - as I assume from your comments - Dolpopa
> teaches the same as
> Jonangpa, then Dolpopa teaches actually quite the
> opposite of what is the
> first fundamental proposition of the SD. "Permanent,
> stable quiescent and
> eternal" reminds me rather of the God of the
> Christian church as of the SD.
> 
> Frank

=====
Daniel H. Caldwell
DanielhCaldwell@yahoo.com
Blavatsky Archives Online
http://sites.netscape.net/dhcblainfo/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/

-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.