Re: Globes and Rounds RE: Quotes from MLs RE: Globe/Plane Confusion
Sep 27, 1995 01:02 PM
by Jerry Schueler
Daniel C:<(1) Jerry S. seems to make a number of comments which require
explication of underlying ASSUMPTIONS.>
Yes, my understanding of the GV Model, like all models, is based
on some initial assumptions. Also, scope. I am looking at pathworking
and personal experience rather than the collective experiences of an entire
life-wave. This gives us some different results when we exercise the model.
I am using the GV Model in the same way that magicians and occultists
use the Tree of Life: as a map of the invisible worlds that surround us.
I am assuming that Globe D is on the physical plane, that C and E are
on the astral plane. That C is along the Arc of Descent leading into D,
while E is on the Arc of Ascent leading upward from D, etc. etc. etc. All
models have assumptions, and as everyone knows "garbage in equals
garbage out" with any model. BTW, HPB's three theorems or occult laws
as given in the proem to the SD are also part of my initial assumptions -
what I have called the Law of Duality, the Law of Periodicity, and the Law
of Identity all play significant roles in how my model functions.
Dan:<Did the quote from MLs or from Eldon indicate that we leave a principle on
Eldon's response gave me the impression that this is what he was
saying. Did I misinterpret?
Dan:<Where in the ML quotes did it say there are 12 globes?>
I don't know if the ML says this anywhere. But HPB alludes to
it in her Esoteric Instructions, and Purucker detailed it in his writings. As
I have already pointed out, I am using Purucker's 7-plane 12-Globe Model
as my basic source or foundation for what I have called the GV Model. It
is, in my view, the most complete version. I don't think that Purucker
himself consciously realized the full extent of what he was doing, because
his 12-Globe version has lead me to conclude that Globes B' and F' are
in the Abyss itself - i.e., that they equate to Daath.
Dan:<First of all what are the three cosmic planes? and the other 4 cosmic
There are several versions of what the 7 planes are. Here are just
three (the one of the far right is from Purucker):
1 Physical Physical
2 Etheric Astral
3 Astral Mental
4 Lower Mental Causal Cosmic Kama
5 Higher mental Lower Spiritual Mahat
6 Spiritual Higher Spiritual Adi-Buddhi
7 Divine Divine
Dan quoting the MLs:<"The lower world of effects is the sphere of such distorted
Thoughts; of the most sensual conceptions, and pictures; of anthropomorphic
deities, the out-creations of their creators, the sensual...etc>
This quote is talking about the lower subplanes of the astral
plane (each of the 7 planes is divided into 7 subplanes), and this description
also includes portions of Globe E.
Dan:<does "lower world of effects" = "astral world"?>
Not a complete equality. the "lower world of effects" is equal
only to the lower and most gross portions of the astral world. The higher
subplanes are relatively pleasant.
Dan:< Why does KH say *lower* world of effects? Is this in contrast to *higher*
world of effects?>
Yes, as I have already shown.
Dan:<What is the Abyss in these two quotations? >
The Abyss, or Great Outer Abyss, or Veil of the Abyss, is the
Ring-Pass-Not of the human mind. It lies at the top of HPB's 7 Globes,
and thus at the top of the causal plane. The human mind cannot conceive of
anything higher, and in pathworking, the human mind cannot cross this Abyss nor
experience the spiritual planes above it. We can discuss, and talk about,
anything on the lower 4 planes, but beyond the Abyss, words simply fail, and
attempts are pretty useless - though many people, myself included, have
tried to do this anyway. Experiences above the Abyss are therefore mystical
and, in fact, such things are called "mystical experiences."
Dan:<You say there are in fact a distinction between the "kama-loka" of
<Arupa-Loka and Kama-Loka" and the "kama-loka" of the after death states?
<What do you base all of this on? What are your assumptions?
The fact here is that Buddhism teaches the threefold
division of kama-rupa-arupa, and these are not related specifically to
any after-death states. If the Mahatmas intended this, then why has
no other theosophical writers, including HPB, mention this anywhere?
The only thing that I can think of, is that they are using "wheels-within-
wheels" approach here with the idea that just as there are three primary
realms, so kama-loka and devachan each have three divisions. But
I am just guessing. Lots of Buddhists books mention the three lokas -
just to name one, see footnote 1 on page 208 of FOUNDATIONS OF
TIBETAN MYSTICISM by Lama Govinda (who, I think, was a theosophist
Dan:<I will ask both Eldon and Jerry S ( and others too) where does this
teachings of the globes, etc. *originate* in modern Theosophy?>
It started with the MLs, and Sinnet. Then HPB's SD gave us
an update. Then her Esoteric Instructions gives us more hints. Judge
says little or nothing. Tingley says little or nothing. Then along comes
Purucker, who gives us so much detail, it would appear that he was
talking from his own experiences (which he may have been). Now,
to add to this, CWL talks a lot about the planes, but with little mention of
the Globes. Basically, I have been putting this stuff from all over the
place together - a synthesis - to form a reasonably coherent whole.
Dan:<Both Eldon and Jerry S. have quoted AB/CWL or GdP in their discussions
of globes. Are they filtering the original teaching through these writers?
I'm not saying that these writers are wrong or right, but they did NOT
write the original Theosophical material on the globes, etc.>
No, these writers did not "filter" but rather they added. I don't
really see any conflict at all between them. As I have already said, I am
using a synthesis, which as far as I know, does not dispute or go against
anything that any theosophical writer from any TS has said. So, in order
to see where I am coming from, you will have to research a lot of writers,
which is pretty much what I did. I also include a lot of stuff from Qabalistic
pathworking, which does not, as far as I know, conflict with anything
either. If there is any "conflict" it is probably with interpretation, which is
sometimes uncertain. But, my "interpretations" do not conflict.
Dan:<Can elementals, shells,etc. exist in the "world of effects" as "something
objective, external to our own subjective states of consciousness'?>
Yes. They are very real.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application