David Reigle’s Analysis on legitimate Buddhist Esoteric Lineage in Theosophy: Great Madhyamaka and Samkhya

INTRODUCTION

In David Reigle’s analysis when discussing the relation of Theosophy to Great Madhyamaka and the Samkhya school, he positions Theosophy as the contemporary manifestation of an ancient Wisdom Tradition, emphasizing its doctrinal coherence with esoteric Eastern systems, rather than eclectic borrowings. This distinction in defining Theosophy is key to future research, because standard definitions of Theosophy outside of proponents of Theosophy’s positions incorrectly and even lazily limit it to being a “syncretism,” “a pot-pourri dish,” or eclectic system “borrowing” from traditions. Theosophists only discuss various traditions to demonstrate “the golden thread” of the perennial Wisdom Tradition in both the worldly traceable sense and the occult and metaphysical sense. For this reason, I also demonstrate their parallels to Pre-Socratic philosophy.

Reigle argues that Theosophy restores a primordial, non-theistic unity obscured in exoteric religions, and its great contribution to this restorative project requires exploration into secret Tibetan lineages and Indian philosophies. In his analyses, Great Madhyamaka (dbu ma chen po or Shentong) represents Theosophy’s philosophical core in Buddhist terms, while Samkhya provides its cosmology of eternal substance. This extends infact to Pre-Socratic parallels made in Blavatsky’s The Secret Doctrine itself, viewing this eternal substance also called the One Reality as similar to ancient Western monistic cosmologies, where an eternal, boundless principle underlies manifestation without a creator.

When checking this assertion, the facts directly affirm Theosophy’s legitimacy through textual and conceptual analogy, often referencing sources predating Christian scriptures.

THEOSOPHY AND GREAT MADHYAMAKA

Reigle states boldly!

“We may reasonably identify this Great Madhyamaka as the doctrinal position of the Wisdom Tradition known today as Theosophy. We may say, in brief, that the doctrinal position of Theosophy is Great Madhyamaka.”

Reigle is identifying the Great Madhyamaka as the doctrinal foundation of Theosophy, preserved in the Jonangpa school and rooted in Maitreya-Asanga’s Yogacara lineage and reinterpreted. Unlike Rangtong Madhyamaka (self-empty, as in Prasangika), which negates all inherent existence (svabhava), the Shentong view on the doctrine of emptiness in Madhyamaka asserts an ultimate reality “empty of other,” but truly existent as nondual primordial wisdom (jnana). This is in Theosophy’s first fundamental proposition: an “Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and Immutable PRINCIPLE” transcending conception (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 14).

The approach towards this study in Theosophy has been criticized in the West, often in a condescending tone by a person intent on treating Theosophy as “amateurish” or its proponents. It appears that not only is this because Theosophy is not understood well, and instead constantly explained through diluted or simplified means that prevents time-consuming explanation of the elements required to properly understand it, Reigle’s point tells us that these positions were born from rigorous study, logic and metaphysical abstraction deeply rooted in Middle Way and other schools practices in Buddhism.

Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso Rinpoche describes the Shentong view in this introduction:

“In the nature of the mind there is no stain. There is not the slightest conceptual fabrication in the mind’s true nature, and that is why mind is known as “empty of other,” gzhan-stong. Since the ineffable nature of mind of every single sentient being is clear light and since the essence of this clear light is free of the slightest stain that arises due to dualistic fixations and mental constructs, one can develop the vast understanding that the one who apprehends (the subject) and what is apprehended (objects) have the same essence. Knowing this enables practitioners to develop inconceivable compassion and a pure vision of reality. Knowing that relative apprehensions are “self-empty,” rang-stong, and knowing that mind’s true nature is “empty of other,” gzhan-stong, a sincere practitioner no longer slips into garments that are extreme views about creation or cessation. Seeing that all phenomena that can be apprehended are empty of an own essence, one no longer clings to the extreme of permanence. Seeing that mind’s true nature is replete with many invaluable qualities that manifest spontaneously and naturally, one no longer clings to the extreme of nihilism or cessation. Since all relative phenomena that appear are empty of a self, it is conclusive that the mind that apprehends and conceives relative appearances is also empty of a self. Since mind’s true nature transcends what can be accomplished, affirmed, or refuted, then what one thinks must be accomplished and what one thinks must be abandoned are always and already pure and free.”

CONCEPTS IN THEOSOPHY, SHENTONG MADHYAMAKA AND SAMKHYA

On Ultimate Reality as Other-Empty in Shentong, this school posits that phenomena are self-empty (Rangtong), but ultimate dharmata (true nature) and jnana are other-empty, ultimately real. There is absoluteness beyond duality, yet this absoluteness beyond duality is the source of manifestation.

Yogacara terms in Theosophy include alaya (storehouse consciousness) and parinispanna (perfected nature), which appear in the Book of Dzyan (Stanza 1, verse 9, p. 47). Alaya is the basis of all, and corresponds to the “Anima Mundi” (World-Soul). Reigle noted however, that Theosophy rejects the concept of ultimate consciousness. In another school, founded by Dolpopa, Jonangpa restores “Golden Age” (Krita Yuga) teachings from Kalachakra harkening Theosophy’s revival of prehistoric wisdom. Reigle quotes Dolpopa, stating that “a principle which is permanent, stable, quiescent, and eternal, which is devoid of anything but itself” refers to dhātu (element) which is “not born, does not die…permanent, stable, quiescent, and eternal” according to the Ratna-gotra-vibhaga (verse 80). Reigle connects it to Theosophy’s “One Element.” There is but “one element; metaphysically, one substratum or permanent cause of all manifestations.”

The emphasis and divergence of the Esoteric versus the Exoteric in esoteric Buddhism is reflected in the Mahatmas’ esoteric Buddhism, and also Tsongkhapa’s (Gelugpa) critiques of Shentong as heretical. Reigle suggests he hid esoteric truths and encouraged hiding these truths.

Reigle concludes Great Madhyamaka revives ancient harmony between Madhyamaka and Yogacara, using the latter to affirm an ultimate reality beyond negation.

Reigle portrays Samkhya as a pre-Vedic system uniquely preserving the Wisdom Tradition’s teaching that the universe evolves from matter alone (prakriti), with spirit (purusha) as passive. This aligns with Theosophy’s non-theistic cosmology, where matter is eternal and indestructible, rejecting the theory of creation by God. Samkhya Reigle says importantly “is a major piece of the ancient Wisdom-Religion now found nowhere else.”

MATTER THE INDESTRUCTIBLE PRINCIPLE

When it is said in Theosophy, that the one eternal and indestructible principle in the Universe is “matter alone” as the One Substance, Samkhya’s prakriti (eternal substance) equates, because it evolves through 23 tattvas without purusha’s active role. The man, K.H. had declared that “we believe in matter alone,” and that indestructible matter is Nature herself and its nature is eternal, which also corresponds to Theosophy’s mulaprakriti, described as “the Root of all…indestructible and eternal in The Secret Doctrine (Vol. 1, p. 147). Blavatsky taught, that svabhava is prakriti’s inherent tendency. Evolution is “as taught by Manu and Kapila…the groundwork of the modern teachings” (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 186). When Theosophy advances the position of the supernal unity of Matter and Spirit, this is not dualistic; because purusha is plural yet a “compound unity” (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 573). Purusha and prakriti are of one principle, and the distinction is born from their respective manifestations. Similarly, in the Great Madhyamaka tradition, Samkhya’s purusha-prakriti duality resolves in Shentong’s nondual wisdom, arguing for eternal reality beyond phenomena.

This subject was covered in these Cosmological Notes on God in the Mahatma papers, and why these adepts were adamant against the “God-theory,” relying on the concept of God and the flaw (or limitations) of theism, particularly of Christian theology.

Reigle notes Samkhya’s antiquity, when stating that off all known systems, only Samkhya teaches this universe as matter alone (p. 6), revealing sadly, that this school of classical Indian philosophy is basically extinct.

SAMKHYA AND PRE-SOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY AND COSMOLOGY

Reigle leads us to more insightful European and Mediterranean parallels, viewing Theosophy’s principles as universal and analogous to Pre-Socratic monism where a boundless ARCHE (origin) underlies the cosmos without anthropomorphic gods. This position on indestructible matter and eternal motion is similar to modern unified fields.

In pre-Socratic monism, the ONE REALITY taught in Theosophy resembles Parmenides’ eternal “ONE” (unchanging principle) and Anaximander’s APEIRON (boundless, indefinable source). In Theosophy, Blavatsky explained this principle as the “one absolute, indestructible, eternal, and uncreated UNCONSCIOUSNESS” of an element that is absolutely independent. What is this? This is SPACE, or Bar-nang (Maha-sunyata).

Shentong school also teaches of an “inconceivable something” that is absolute and eternal — a truly absolute emptiness (sunyata). Svabhava as the boundless ONE ELEMENT correlates directly to Anaximenes’ AIR and Thales’ WATER as primal substance. The Mahatma papers teach us that MATTER (or nature) acting by her own peculiar energy, of which not an atom is ever in an absolute state of rest.

Svabhava is defined in one place as “Force or Motion ever generating its electricity which is life” (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, pp. 634-635,). It is the same boundless essence as taught by Heraclitus called Arche, being the inherent nature of dhatu or Space. If this svabhava is taken to be the one element, Reigle states, we would have an exact statement of the Theosophical position.

Concept	Theosophy (Reigle)	Great Madhyamaka	Samkhya	Pre-Socratic Systems
Ultimate Reality	Omnipresent, Immutable Principle; Be-ness (SAT)	Nondual primordial wisdom; other-empty (Shentong)	Prakriti as eternal SUBSTANCE	Apeiron (Anaximander): Boundless source
Svabhava	Inherent essence of the ONE ELEMENT; eternal	Threefold in dhatu; truly existent	Prakriti’s self-acting nature	Arche as inherent principle (e.g., Heraclitus’ logos as eternal flux)
Emptiness/Unity	Beyond duality; spirit-matter one.	Mahashunyata; empty of other	Purusha-prakriti as compound unity	Parmenides’ τὸ Ἕν or ONE SUBSTANCE: Eternal, unchanging
Cosmogenesis	Evolution from mulaprakriti; FOHAT as link	From dhātu; tathagatagarbha obscured	Prakriti evolves 23 tattvas	Eternal motion in boundless SPACE

Reigle’s work provides scholarly proofs of Theosophy’s esoteric Buddhist roots, with Samkhya reflected in the basis of its cosmology. Pre-Socratic philosophies affirm its universality, even when Reigle states that “the doctrinal standpoint of the Ratna-gotra-vibhāga as understood in the Great Madhyamaka tradition is the closest position to that proposed in The Secret Doctrine.