Who was Helena Patrova Blavastky, better known as HPB? True mystic, or a fraud? There are many sites on the internet that take either stance: one defends, the other shouts accusations from the rooftop. So how do I see the real true inner Self expressed through that personality commonly known as HPB?
The question is an important one, and no doubt my readers will draw from the title of this article something positive. She has earned my respect, both intellectually and spiritually. This article will explore how I see her real mission and purpose. I will also say at the start of this article that her teachings are not for everyone. These reasons shall also be explored.
As an inquiring person into things intellectual and spiritual, Blavatsky’s teachings were fated to eventually come to the forefront of my conscious inquiry along the way of my spiritual journey. I say fated because despite reticence or acceptance of her teachings, she influenced history in the most profound way by those who can discriminate facts between emotional impulses. That being said, I can now also state my personal belief: that Blavatsky was one of the greatest, if not the GREATEST teacher, of esoteric philosophy in the last two centuries when her original teachings as taught by her are properly discriminated. That pseudo-theosophical movement which came after her death by certain individuals (which I care not to name here) absolutely degraded and reduced those teachings to something almost entirely unrecognizable except in dead letter, ultimately a worthless cipher, sprinkled here and there with partial truths, which end only in the temporal aspect of psychic phenomenon, and in the dead letter of the LAW.
I did not come to this personal conclusion lightly. When I first discovered Blavatsky, a part of my soul felt a kindred spirit, and that in her teachings were a priceless gem that had been unearthed. But at that time I was not ready for them. I didn’t have the intellectual or spiritual maturity to see her teachings clearly. Even though I had to put her teachings away at the time and could only pick them up after I had been running SOS for many more years, I know now what it was that still enabled me to come back again at a later time when I was more ready. It was what she taught as the BODHISATTAVA IDEAL. For those of you unfamiliar with this term, I will explore it later on in detail also. But first, some background information in the Biblical scriptures that allowed me to unveil this ideal (in my humble opinion) with the teachings of Jesus and the Apostle Paul.
THE BODHISATTAVA IDEAL CLEARLY TAUGHT IN THE BIBLE
I shall start by explaining the Bodhisattava ideal by first showing its corollary in the New Testament since this is a Biblical based blog. Jesus is stated to have said:
“For whosoever shall save his life shall lose it: and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it” (Matt 16:25).
The true essence of this statement, when seen esoterically, is not martyrdom, but selfless sacrifice, intelligently, in whatever station one finds themselves in through daily LIVING in THOUGHT, WORD, AND DEED. In the highest aspect of philosophy and religion, true martyrdom is not necessarily physical death, but death to the selfish impulses that more often than not shine through our personalities at this stage of the soul’s evolution. I can only make such bold claims because of my experience and difficulty in reigning in that part of our lower natures which constantly nags as a thorn in our sides. As Paul states:
“For that which I do I allow not; for what I would, that I do not; but what I hate, that I do” (Romans 7:15).
The metaphorical “thorn” in Paul’s side, I believe to be, the lower desire nature, that which is selfish and benefits the personal “I” over the many. We fight it every day, or succumb to it. One of Blavatsky’s most central points is that the ego advances by its own merits instead of blind faith. Paul also taught this; one must constantly be vigilant to “crush out” all selfishness from the personality. He truly understood what Jesus taught: that true life is in the impersonal “I,” or all of humanity, that one soul of humanity itself, of which we are truly one, over the separated “I” which is personal. Paul also uttered that great statement that summed up the law (the spiritual law, not the dead letter), which is to love thy neighbor as thyself, going so far as to leave out in that equation to love God first with all thy heart, soul, and mind. Why did he do this? Perhaps he was trying to show that to love thy neighbor as thyself is to also love God. And in this stage of our individual soul’s journey, this is what we need, as a human, to realize through thought, word, and deed, a greater conscious condition according to divine law.
And so how does Blavatsky fit into this? Let us continue to reason together about the true nature of her mission.
It is easy for the personality to get bogged down in criticisms of her. Or wrong ideas about her teachings and mission. Her true teachings when broken down to their core are embodied in Jesus’ statement that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. This is not easily understood by normal brain intellect thinking, and such measures will never unconver the true nature of this esoteric statement.
I hope what I am going to say next does not slip past your moral conscience or intellect, for (again, in my humble opinion) it shall take both to understand what I am further going to say. In her teachings from her translation of the Golden Precepts we find this statement from her work, “The Voice of Silence”:
“To live to the benefit of mankind is the first step. To practice the six glorious virtues is the second.”
This article is not going to be focused on how the second step of the six glorious virtues taught by Buddha and others from the East is exactly comparable to the Apostle Paul’s fruits of the spirit, but rather focus on the first which encompasses the foundation for them to be practiced.
So let’s start there. The first sentence: “To live to the benefit of mankind is the first step.”
What more can one ask from true spiritual discernment? What greater cause? Is there any? Let us reason that together.
Why is this the first step? It is because only with this heart in mind that any true progress can actually be gained in the spiritual aspirant. The Apostle Paul agrees when he introduces the idea of charity, which as Blavatsky defines it WAY BETTER than the Greek rendition in English: “love immortal.”
And what is the essence of the meaning of “love immortal?”
The Apostle Paul tells us, whom Blavatsky considered a great initiate, in 1 Corinthians 13, everything about charity, which when broken down to its essence, it is simply how we relate to others in the world. It is superior to all knowledge, because it is the FOUNDATION AND BASIS TO WISDOM received or attained. There is no other way to acquire it, because as Blavatsky taught, it will only be psychic, and never noetic, in which the noetic element is the acquisition of knowledge on the higher spiritual planes. And that is the great key, plainly given, but always missed by the selfish ego or physical brain-mind intellect. However, the duty of the brain-mind intellect is to fight, and the duty of the higher noetic element, is to receive by the concept we call grace.
In mainstream Christianity, just as in the pseudo-theosophical movement, this entire truth has been horrifically reversed. Somehow it has been accepted in major religions across the world that it is okay to sacrifice intellectual and moral principles to convenience. But the opposite is actually true. Let us reason on the Hermetic axiom, as “above so below.” If below, the muscles grow through pain and suffering and exercise, and in a sense death of old weaker cells, how could one think it is any different in the higher spiritual planes? In other words, “grace” is only bestowed by an Ego that is fighting, and hard. God only helps those who help themselves is a cliche that should not be taken lightly. To be selfless is not something that comes natural to the personality that exhibits a personal “I” through the desire principle in us. Jesus also said, “Since the days of John the Baptist the Kingdom of God suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.” The natural brain-mind would like to reduce this teaching to a certain condition, but it is a truism. Mainstream belief would rather take the easiest comfort route of believing, “I” can’t do it, and so therefore there is a grace that will do it for me. And this is selfishness in its most hideous form! The truth is that grace is real, and comes, when we have the courage to meet it where it is! Yes, grace is of a higher spiritual nature, but can only truly come when bestowed through devotion, which is conforming oneself to the natural law of cause and effect, or karma!
Intellectual knowledge, even that type which is esoteric and learns how to interpret scriptures allegorically, is vital. But it is just that – intellectual knowledge. It does nothing for the actual transformation of the soul unless LIVED. And this is actually what Jesus meant when he taught the parable of the talents. The interest gained is only that which lasts beyond the temporal aspects of the personality. So while intellectual knowledge is necessary, it is only a vital starting point. One must have this alongside the much more important intent of the heart, which is to understand that all mankind is ONE soul at the highest level, and how we act towards our fellow man in thought, word, and deed is the qualifying truth, the interest that last, or that which is stored up in the storehouse according to Malachi. To think, act, and speak correctly requires an impersonal nature. It goes beyond offenses and the petty desires and wishes of our own self preservation in a physical experience.
Her second statement, “To practice the six glorious virtues is the second” is also EXACTLY as Jesus, Paul, and James taught. While the first statement is the embodiment of an abstract truth, the second is the performing of it. And to see it so, we have to compare those six glorious steps with what Jesus and Paul stated in detail. And in so doing, we shall reconcile the paradox of personality and impersonality. And this I leave up to the reader to do themselves if they would find any benefit in doing so.
Interestingly, in the Apostle Paul’s 1st Corinithian teaching “charity,” or love towards one’s fellow man, holds the preeminent statement in the entire context of the spiritual gifts he espoused to the Church, or body of Christ. And that body is ONE. Is it a coincidence that the Buddhist precepts also start with Charity? As Blavatsky states, “Charity” is interpreted as “love immortal.” Her statement as “love immortal” is important because she is honing in on the idea that love, in its purest form, is of an immortal nature, simply meaning, it is not temporary, but permanent. And as the Apostle Paul would have us note, it never fails. It never fails because it is not limited to the temporality aspect of this duality, or physical world when it expresses itself in its pure condition. Again, it becomes the interest gained in the storehouse. Unconditional love always produces an effect which lasts into eternity. And that imbuing quality, which is immortal, is selflessness. It is an IMPERSONAL quality, which can be expressed through a personality only when that personality dedicates itself in thought, word, and deed to an impersonal nature. And that is the great paradox resolved between the personal and impersonal nature of individual self.
Now just a few more words on Blavatsky’s highest teachings aligned with the esoteric nature of the Bible.
The “Bodhisattava idea” so highly regarded by Blavatsky is simply this:
The ability to disregard the personal “I” wants and desires for the whole, which is thy neighbor. This takes action in thought, word, and deed. The real highest truth then, is not pointing out the faults of thy neighbor, but discovering the limitations and faults of ourselves, the personal “I.” And then eradicating them in favor of the impersonal “I,” which is the true individuality of humanity at this stage in our evolution. And then when we LIVE that, according to our own understanding and knowledge gained, is the reality of the spiritual Ego, with a capitol “E,” living its best life beyond a temporal, corporal experience. And paradoxically, we both “judge not,” and then also judge. But the judgment is emphasized in ourselves, first. Which is the attainment of wisdom, and the true Bodhisattava ideal.
And this is how I vindicate Blavatsky’s legacy. ALL her teachings, when reduced to their core, teach this one impersonal nature of BEING, and that which the human experience must strive for. And that is what the Apostle Paul truly meant when he said, “ I strive for the glory that is Christ in YOU! The impersonal divine, which is truly “love immortal.”
So hard to do! Few there be that find that path! But every person that would strive after that ideal, such is walking the path of true spirituality, above man-made religion. The choice is yours, and mine.
At the beginning of this article I stated that HPB’s teachings were not for everyone, and would address why. It is for the same reason that human nature, when examined from its lower principles, from that desire nature which was metaphorically in Cain over Abel, to choose right from wrong. There is no compromise. We live or die after our short life and are ultimately decided by the choices we make in this temporal existence. What will it be?