Awakening Inner Self Abd Ill
Awakening Inner Self Abd Ill
Awakening Inner Self Abd Ill
We human beings have always made assumptions about our origin and destiny. Over
the centuries, widely accepted views have been codified into tenets of religious faith or
presented as scientific theories, and most of us have accepted what we have been told by
those who claim to know. To borrow an idea from The King and I, we are convinced that
what we really do not know is so.
Contrary to the belief systems offered by many religions, the Theosophical view is that
we must discover Truth within ourselves. It must result from our experience rather than
from our belief.
To experience Truth is to understand a principle. That understanding comes to us in a
sudden, timeless flash. One minute we do not understand, and the next we do. There is no
measurable time between knowing and not knowing. When such insight illumines the
mind, belief is replaced by understanding. The result of that intuitive flash is an experience
of integration, wholeness, peace, and in some cases even bliss. For a timeless moment, we
may say that our mind has become one with the universal mind, with Truth itself. The
knower and the known have become one and there is no longer self and the truth, but only
Truth.
To say that Truth must be experienced is not to say that intellectual knowledge is un-
important. There are many critically important facts that we must learn, such as our home
address, the number of miles between our city and another that we wish to visit, or where
we keep our coat. There are, however, other kinds of knowledge that we get only from
experience. For example, we may read books on how to ride a bicycle, but we’ll never be
able actually to ride until we get on a bicycle and learn to manage it by trial and error.
What ancient sages have said or what our contemporaries teach may fascinate us. The
words of others may even stimulate us to search further. Yet, believing something simply
because someone has told it to us is much like reading books on bicycle riding, remember-
ing what was said, and thinking that we now know how to ride a bicycle.
Even though the Theosophical Society has no creed or required beliefs, we who are
members of the Society are not exempt from the centuries during which humanity has
been conditioned to rely on authority rather than to discover for ourselves. We, too, tend
to believe what we are told by those whom we admire or by those who appear to know
what is true. We, too, often rely on some authority figure such as Helena Blavatsky, Annie
Besant, or a contemporary member of the Theosophical Society.
In less than twenty-five years after the founding of the Theosophical Society, one of
The Theosophical Society in America
HPB’s adept teachers noticed that the members of the Society were falling into the same
old rut of belief. While saying that they had no dogma, they were taking his words and
those of others as a creed, even though they insisted that no member had to believe those
words. They, like many of us now, felt that they knew the truth because someone they
respected had told them.
Blavatsky, like other wise teachers, insisted that Truth could not be taught in words.
“The teacher can but point the way,” says The Voice of the Silence (fragment 3). Words can
do no more. We can express our beliefs and theories in words, but we cannot cause others
to experience a truth simply by telling them.
Moreover, belief and theory alone are not only insufficient; when they crystallize into
a belief system they can actually block our understanding and spiritual development. That
can be illustrated by a simple example: Some friends describe their home to us. They tell
us about the various rooms, about their garden and front lawn, and even about the sur-
rounding neighborhood. All they say is completely accurate. We form a picture of their
house and its environs as they talk, and we are invited to visit. However, when we
actually see the house and the neighborhood, they are different from what we had
imagined. A description can only prompt us to discover the reality of the thing described.
To know our friends’ home, we must experience it for ourselves. When we do, it is differ-
ent from what we believed, based on the description.
Likewise, if friends describe a delicious but rare tropical fruit that we have never seen
or tasted, their description may be completely accurate. It is sweet, they tell us. It tastes
something like a blend of mango, peach, and pineapple. Having heard their accurate
description, do we now know its taste? Of course not, we must taste it ourselves in order
to know, and when we do, it will inevitably taste different from what we imagined.
In the same way, when we hear or read a teaching or doctrine, we form an idea out of
our own experience of what it refers to. But if we have not ourselves had the experience
that the teaching refers to, the ideas we form about it are inevitably false.
To say that Truth cannot be conveyed in words does not mean that we should aban-
don Theosophical theories or reasonable assumptions about reality. The theories may be
quite accurate, the teachings sound. Yet unless we verify them both outside and inside
ourselves, we will be caught in error. What we are asked to do is to realize that all theories
are maps; they are not the places the maps represent.
For millennia we have been taught that each of us either has or is a soul, a spirit, an
inner self. Without proof, many choose to believe that. Without proof, others choose not to
believe it. Surrounded by a multitude of conflicting theories and beliefs, can we ever really
come to know truth from falsehood?
Theosophical and other spiritual literature offers clues that may lead us to awakening
2
The Theosophical Society in America
our inner self and to discover that we not only have a soul but are it. Those clues are not a
series of facts to be learned. They are not instructions for setting up a scientific laboratory
in which we can prove to ourselves and others the truth or falsehood about the inner self.
Rather the clues are guidelines for living in such a way that we actually become the scien-
tific laboratory ourselves.
At the very heart of this way of life leading to certain knowledge are two essential
principles:
• A relentless pursuit of Truth
• Compassion
The first of these, a relentless pursuit of Truth, is implied by the Theosophical Society’s
motto: “There is no religion higher than Truth.” But what is Truth? When Pilate asked that
question, Jesus did not answer. He was silent perhaps because, although ideas, theories,
and opinions can be put into words, Truth cannot.
In Helena Blavatsky’s affirmation, “The Golden Stairs,” two of the requirements for
reaching the temple of divine wisdom are an open mind and an eager intellect. The temple
of divine wisdom is synonymous with the inner self. To reach that temple is to awaken the
inner self.
Most of us would like to think that we have an open mind and an eager intellect. But
when it comes to Theosophical or other spiritual literature, do we acknowledge inconsis-
tencies, contradictions, errors in fact, and even blatant prejudice if we find it? Or do we
explain it away or ignore it like those who believe blindly in the doctrine of their choice?
Moreover, do we clearly see our own failings, inconsistencies, and inadequacies? Are we
searching for understanding or are we defending our beliefs?
If we persist in holding on to our beliefs in spite of evidence to the contrary, we may
fall into a subtle form of selfishness that Blavatsky’s adept teacher, Kuthumi, called a
dangerous selfishness “in the higher principles.” As an example, he states that there are
persons “so intensely absorbed in the contemplation of their own supposed ‘righteous-
ness’ that nothing can ever appear right to them outside the focus of their own vision...
and their judgment of the right and wrong” (Mahatma Letters, chronological no. 134, 3rd
ed. no. 64).
The adepts claim that they teach only what they know for themselves. If one of their
brotherhood claims to have discovered a principle, no adept will accept it until it can be
verified and reverified by the other adepts. Since the adepts will not accept any doctrine
without verification, why should we? They reject blind belief, and they encourage us to do
the same. Kuthumi writes:
[A student] is at perfect liberty, and often quite justified from the standpoint of
appearances—to suspect his Guru of being “a fraud”... the greater, the sincerer his
3
The Theosophical Society in America
4
The Theosophical Society in America