Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00517)

>Jerry S,
>Do you agree with all tht  HPB says in her text (pp.557-6, HPB's CW, Vol.
>12) accompanying
>this diagram No. IV (p. 658).

	Dan, I am not at all sure what you mean by "agree with."  If
you mean, is this how I experience the planes, then I must say no.
But if you mean, is this in agreement with my understanding of the
HPB Model, then I would say yes, to a degree.  But pp 657-659 is very
cloudy and not at all as clear as it first looks.  For example, in Figure B
(p 658) she has the lowest plane as "1st or Objective" and this under
the title of "Prakritic Planes."  But there is an asterisk here, with a
baffling note that this is "The Fourth Globe of every Planetary Chain."
Now, is it a plane or a globe, and is she confusing the two?  My own
interpretation (and her whole model is full of interpretations, whether
we like it or not) is that Globe D, the 4th of her 7, the lowest of every
planetary chain, is located on the Objective or lowest prakritic plane--
which is our physical plane.  In other words, she is saying that every
planetary chain has a "lowest" plane, on which is located its lowest
and most gross globe.
	Now, and here is where the whole thing gets messy, we
really only need to confine ourselves to the lower universal plane
or solar system of 7 planes.  But, some folks like to think of each
cosmic plane containing its own planetary chain of globes.  Lets
use the Qabala as a reference.  The teaching there is that there
are 4 worlds--Assiah (matter, humanity, shells), Yetzirah (formative,
angels), Briah (creative, archangels), and Atziluth (archetypal, deity).
I have seen Qabalists who insist that there are 10 Sephiroth on
each of these worlds.  But I have also seen folks who teach that
these "worlds" are really planes within our solar system.  If we look
at the figure on page 200 of Vol 1 of the SD (I keep harping on this
figure, don't I?)  we will note that HPB give the names of the 4 lower
planes as the names of  the 4 worlds of the Qabala.  She also
places her 7 globes on these 4 planes.  The Big Question here
is:  Is this a figure of the 7 cosmic planes, or of the 7 prakritic planes
within our solar system?  I would submit that anything outside or
beyond the scope of her figure on page 200 of Vol 1 of the SD is
irrelevant to us, and should be ignored.  Thus *our* universe consists
of 7 planes, containing 12 globes, with her 7 globes A through G on
the lowest 4 planes, just beneath the Abyss which divides the lower
4 planes from the upper 3 (denoted in her figure by a triangle).
	Now, only with this in mind, can we make sense out of
Diagram IV on page 658.

>   For the 7 principles - the diagram on p. 607
	Yes, and I agree that the 3 lower are aspects rather
than principles.  Principles tend toward longevity, while our 3
lower aspects only last for 1 lifetime.  But, sadly, this list of
principles doesn't jive with Figure C on p 658, as I will demonstrate.

>>   For the universal or macrocosmic planes Figure A of p. 658. The names
>relates only to forces manifesting within the solar system and no attempt
>is made to designate them on their own plane.
	Right.

>   For the solar physical body or prakritic planes Figure B of p. 658.
>These are the planes of the solar system. On the 4 lower we have the 7
>globes of a chain.
	OK, but the names she uses here are extremely confusing.
I hate the name "Objective" preferring "physical," which is what she
really means.  Astral is ok.  Jivic and Fohatic are terrible names to
use because neither Jiva nor Fohat are confined to these planes as
these names would suggest.  I wish she had stuck to the 4 Qabalistic
terms that she used in the SD.  Anyway, the Abyss goes either between
the 4th and 5th plane or is itself the 5th plane, depending on how we
want to define it.  And her 7 globes are only the lowest 7 of the chain,
not the entire chain itself.

>  For the sub-planes of these planes of consciousness see diagram C. They
>are also the seven parts of consciousness as manifesting on either plane.
>Must not be confused with seven principles.
	These are really the 7 stages of consciousness, not the subplanes
themselves.  The names here refer to consciousness on each of the 7
subplanes, rather than to the subplanes themselves.  And even here we
see some confusion.  I would assume that Objective=Physical.  But what
is her Astral?  She gives Kama-Pranic for the 3rd, which I would think
would be the emotions.  But if so, to what does her Astral refer? (Astral
usually refers to the emotions).   Also, her names here fly in the face of
those given on page 607.
	On page 607, we see that the four principles are atman, buddhi,
the auric envelope and  manas.  The lower 3 principles or "aspects" are
given as prana, linga-sarira, and lower manas.  However, when we
apply these 7 to the 7 planes, it doesn't look like Figure C on page 658,
which it should.  Figure C should show buddhi as the 5th, with manas
as the 4th,  lower manas (which includes kama) as the 3rd,   prana as
the 2nd, and linga-sarira as the 1st.  But it doesn't.   The lowest and
highest planes are ok, but the in-between are all off by one.
	With the above problems, I don't see how anyone can make
an intelligent argument of HPBs Model using the figures on p 658 and
the principles of p 607, because the two don't match.  In her INNER
TEACHINGS she clearly says "Each principle is on a different plane"
(p 19).  So why doesn't she simply place them that way?  Instead Figure
C is a mish-mash.

	Jerry S.
	Member, TI