stanza 1, slokas 3-4

STANZA I.
3. UNIVERSAL MIND WAS NOT, FOR THERE WERE NO AH-HI TO CONTAIN IT.
4. THE SEVEN WAYS TO BLISS WERE NOT. THE GREAT CAUSES OF MISERY WERE NOT, FOR THERE WAS NO ONE TO PRODUCE AND GET ENSNARED BY THEM.

 

“Mr. A. Keightley:  “A man can choose what he shall think about, can the analogy be applied to Ah-hi?”

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  No, because a man has free will and the Ah-hi have no free will. They have a collective will. They are obliged to act simultaneously. It is one law that gives them the impulse and they have to act just according to that law.

 
I do not call it free will. Free will can exist only in man, in a man who has a mind with consciousness, which acts and makes him perceive things not only within himself but outside himself also.

 
These Ah-hi simply are forces; you don’t take them to be men, do you? They are not human beings.

 
Mr. A. Keightley:  No, but I take them to be conscious agents in the work.

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  Conscious in so far that they act within the universal consciousness. The Manasaputra is a different thing when they come on the third plane.

 
Mr. Hall:  Can the Ah-hi be said to be enjoying bliss?

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  Why should they enjoy bliss or enjoy non-bliss? What have they done to do so? I don’t think they enjoy anything of the kind. They cannot smoke cigarettes, even, when they like. Why should they enjoy bliss? What extraordinary ideas you have!

 
You can enjoy bliss only when you have known what is suffering.

 
Mr. Hall:  I was making a distinction in my mind between bliss and happiness.

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  I thought it was the same thing; you can have neither happiness nor bliss if you have not known suffering and pain.

 
Mr. Hall:  I was thinking of bliss as the state of the Absolute.

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  You suppose the Absolute is bliss? The Absolute can have no condition, no attribute, nothing at all. The Absolute is conditionless; that is the first thing to learn about the Absolute.

 
It is only that which is finite and differentiated which can have some attribute or something of the kind.

 
Dr. Williams:  How can they be said to be conscious intelligences in as much as intelligence is such a complex thing?

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  Because the English language does not furnish us with a better word. I admit the word is very inadequate, but the English language is not the Sanskrit language. If it were written in Sanskrit you would not find a single objection, but what can you do with the English language or any other European language?

 
Dr. Williams:  There may not be one word, but I should think a collection of words would express anything.

 
Mme. Blavatsky:  Oh, then try, if you please, to do so!”

 

H. P. Blavatsky

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s