Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00798)

Hi Kim,

     I've taken a break from my paper (it is very painful), and
posted a response to our terminology discussion.  Now I can go
back and suffer :-)

.................................

Ok Kim, to sum up what I so far understand of your nomenclature
we have:

1. For HPB's 7 principles, you want to use the diagram on page
     607, and we agreed on this to be a basic reference for her
     principles..


2. A comparison of Kim's nomenclature to two of HPB's  which you
     approved:

Kim                     p. 607                p. 524-25

atma                    atman                  atman
auric envelope       auric envelope
buddhi                  buddhi                 buddhi
manas                  manas                 manas
lower mind            lower manas        lower manas
                                                        kama-rupa
astral                    linga sarira          linga sarira
physical                 prana                 prana



3. nomenclature for the Macrocosmic planes so far:

Kim                      HPB                               CWL

Universal planes         Macrocosmic planes (B:CW XII:658 "A") ?
?                            Alayic
?                            Mahatic
?                            Fohatic
?                            Jivic
?                            Astral
?                            Prakritic

(note: Kim appears not to accept the names in fig. A as names of
the Macrocosmic planes viz: "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."


Universal planes         Kosmic planes
?
?
?
?
?
?
?

Solar physical body      Prakritic planes (B:CW XII:658 "B")
("planes of the solar
system")


?                            Auric  prakritic
?                            Alayic prakritic
?                            Mahatic prakritic
?                            Jivic  prakritic
?                            Astral prakritic
?                            Objective


Four lower planes of the
solar system (or planes of
earth's the planetary
chain)                   Prakritic planes (B:CW XII:658)   ?

etheric (or buddhic)         Fohatic
gaseous (or mental)          Jivic
liquid (or astral)           Astral
dense (or physical)          Objective



Perhaps you will be able to fill in some of the blanks in the
above?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Now to respond to your comments:

JHE
>>My question doesn't concern the consciousness aspect, but the
>>"extension" aspect.

Kim
>Why? Excuse me Jerry, why would you want to go into an
>discussion of universal "extension"? What is the relevance to
>our discussion in your opinion (I have honestly no clue to it)?

JHE
It may not be relevant--or it may be.  It depends upon how you
answer my question.  See below where you begin: "In eastern
thought..."

Kim
>I think it may be about time that you forward *your* terminology
>and a few examples of your views on esoteric metaphysics. It
>would save me some time guessing your meaning - see below
>for no less than 3 rounds of exchanges related to one of your
>terms  which I apparently keep misunderstanding.

JHE
I apologize for my part in making this more difficult than it
might otherwise have been.  My terminology is exactly the same as
HPB's when I write about HPB, and exactly the same as CWL when I
write about him.  Therefore it would not be necessary to give it.
Perhaps later we might find that our understanding of HPB's
and/or CWL's terms differ, but that is a different issue then
what I'm trying to deal with here.  The reason why I'm asking for
your terms is because in your early explanations, I quickly
picked up that your terminology is apparently based upon your
third all inclusive system, which I guess is based upon AAB's
terms.  I have no objections to your adopting any terminology
that suits you, however, I need to know how these terms translate
into HPB's and CWL's terms so that I can understand them.
Actually, all of this preliminary questioning would not be
necessary if you were to use only HPB's terms for HPB and CWL's
terms for CWL.  But I do understand that your orientation is
around your "third" system, as this is where you are most
comfortable expressing yourself.  Therefore I'm trying to learn
your nomenclature and how it corresponds to HPB's and CWL's.

Kim
>In eastern thought finiteness is a manifestation and limited
>expression of something infinite. To postulate an infinitude of
>finite systems containing each other as chinese dolls is to miss
>the vital philosophical point even if the postulate can be made.
>As manifestations they cannot have any relation to the absolute
>whatever they may contain.

JHE
Would I be correct in reading in your answer that the extent of
"universal `extension'" is infinite?

Kim
>Excuse me for being vague. I am using the description of the
>starting point of esoteric symbology as mentioned on the first
>page of Proem plus the Schwarz diagrams plus the Subba Row
>diagrams already mentioned to illustrate my point - which is
>related to your questioning of me, not the parameters of our
>discussion.

JHE
Yes, as you point out they are not within the parameters of our
discussion, so they are not helpful to me.


JHE
>>You are saying that the planes for the earth's system of globes
>>are the same as the planes of the solar system?  Do you have a
>>name for it?

Kim
>The Earth chain, the planes of the solar system. Have we not
>been here before?

JHE
Probably, but remember, I'm trying to learn your terms and how
you use them, so please have patience with me.  The questions may
seem inane and redundant, but it is because I trying to get as
clear of definitions as possible from you without my having to
read implied meaning into them; judging them; or making any
assumptions that your understanding is or is not the same as
mine.

So, regarding your answer to my question: the four lower planes
of the solar system are the planes of the earth chain (globes A-
E) correct?

JHE
>>>No, I don't mean the sacred planets. I was asking for the
>>>overall term for the planes of the sun's system of globes, ie
>>>the sun's globes A - G.

Kim
>>Your question was extremely confusing. You mean by the sun's
>>system of globes the visible, physical globes (as I understand
>>it). They would generally be globe D of the various chains -
>>all on the seventh plane.

JHE
Perhaps my question will be clearer if I draw a diagram of the
globes of our Sun:

___________________________________

globe A                 globe G       (IV)
___________________________________

globe B                 globe F       (III)
___________________________________

globe C                 globe E       (II)
___________________________________

           globe D (our visible sun)  (I)
___________________________________


What do you call the four planes diagrammed above?


......................................

JHE
>>Then for the planes of the solar system, you call them "the
>>solar physical body"?  By "7 globes of a chain" you mean both
>>the earth chain and the sun chain?

Kim
>We must identify your sun chain before we go any futher. Please
>give me a reference. I can think of at least three concepts
>which may be designated as such.

JHE
I mean the Sun's chain of globes.  Please see the above diagram.

JHE
>>With regard to CWL's "constitution of man" compared to HPB's
>>"constitution of man."   As for your "notion" of a common
>>esoteric system, I understand that you operate from this
>>assumption.  The reason why this or any other assumption can't
>>be forwarded as proof is because doing so is an exercise in
>>circular reasoning.

Kim
>The evidence will speak for itself. It already did. Your initial
>objection which caught my eye was the following:
>"Therefore, I find two striking differences between HPB's
>principles and CWL's bodies.  The first is that the CWL's
>bodies are found on the seven solar planes while HPB's are on
>the seven sub-planes of the solar physical plane.  The second
>difference is that CWL's bodies are formed from the Elements,
>while HPB's are *aspects* of the Elements." This is in my
>opinion a confusion on somebodys behalf (you or CWL - or
>you AND CWL) of a) the "upadhis", the vehicles of consciousness,
>the principles and b) the parts (to avoid confusion with
>principles) of consciousness as manifesting on any plane of
>consciousness.

JHE
Thank you for reposting this.  You have on several occasions
referred to "my error" without citing it.  So until now, I did
not know your meaning.  I think that whether my evaluations of
CWL's system is indeed an "error" depends upon our respective
understandings of the terms: "solar planes" and "solar physical
plane,"  our respective understanding of CWL's system, our
understanding of the terms "elements," "aspects," ""upadhis",
"vehicles of consciousness," and "principles of consciousness."
Considering our obvious differences in nomenclature, and that you
have not seen the charts for CWL's system as yet, I suggest that
it is too early for you to make a judgement as to the veracity of
my statement concerning CWL's system.

Best
Jerry H-E

------------------------------------------
   |Jerry Hejka-Ekins,                      |
      |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT                |
         |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu   |
            |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org       |
               ------------------------------------------