Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01447)

>These principles apply to our seven-principled existence here
>on Globe D earth. In the after-death states, we drop our lower
>principles, and are no longer connected to an external, objective
>world. We then exist in the spheres of effects, that follow our
>earth, a sphere of causes. These "places" are called spheres of
>effects because of their entirely subjective nature. Some are
>hell worlds, like kamaloka, others are heaven worlds, like
>devachan (dewachan in Tibetan).

	Eldon, we simply will have to agree to disagree.  My
own honest  feeling is that you and JHE have sadly muddled up
HPBs teachings.  But, if it works for you, who am I to argue?  BTW,
for me to say that I think you have muddled her teachings, is
no worse than for you to say that I have confused HPBs model
with that of CWLs.  I like CWLs terminology, but do not care for
large chunks of his model.  I have seen nothing in HPB's model
that I don't agree with, insofar as I understand it and use it.  Perhaps
we can just leave all of this with the thought that we each have our
own interpretations of what HPB had to teach us?  OK?
	The very best way to understand the "sphere of effects"
is to consider our dreams.  We dream on the astral or mental
planes, in a dream body, in dream worlds that are usually, but
not necessarily, in the sphere of effects.  I can usually tell, after
I wake and think about the dream that I had, whether it was in
a sphere or effects or not.  In such a sphere we have little or no
conscious control over our environment and seem a helpless
victim to the dream and its karmic contents.  In a sphere of
effects, we are blown about by the winds of our own karma.  While
in a sphere of causes we create new karma as well.  These
"spheres" have little to do with subjectivity or objectivity except
insofar as they are viewed/autopsied during the waking state.
There is lots of objectivity in our dreams while we are dreaming.
To say that  spheres of effects are entirely subjective and that
spheres of causes are entirely objective is a bit naive, and at
least to me, is meaningless.

>Until or unless we have an actual birth on Globe E, we cannot
>be said to have a body on a higher plane, in the normal manner
>of having bodies.
	This sentence flys in the face of traditional occultism
and magic.  It may be Theosophy, but it certainly is not theosophy.
Even your caveat "in the normal manner of having bodies" doesn't
hold, because there is no such thing--the "normal" manner differs
on each plane.  You are equating "body" with the seventh principle
only (which I feel is true only for living physical beings on Globe D).
I prefer to view "body" as G de P talks about it--as a vehicle through
which consciousness can function/focus on any of the cosmic
planes.

	Still friends though, I hope.

	Jerry S.
	Member, TI