Aug 03, 1996 01:05 PM
by Dr. A.M.Bain
In message <199608030741.AAA19233@sure.net>, James S Yungkans
>I would like to know your position,
>Kabalistically (if you care) to the discussions at hand (using your
>terminology, of course).
>With this in mind, I would present a means of communication for one who does
>not speak "Adayrian Theosophese" I would choose to position the bodies
>under discussion (which you called theosophical) using the following:
>Ist Logos Ayn: "NOT"
>2nd Logos Ayn-Sof: "Limitless"
>3rd Logos Ayn-Sof-Aur:"Limitless light"
Possibly an interesting set of correspondences to some, but I fear I am
with John 1:1 on this, so that there cannot be three logoi.
> = "Supernal Triangle"
Perhaps, if we agree on what "monad" means (I see this as referring to a
single, discrete unit of being).
>Abyss of Jerry S. Daat
>Atma-Buddhi-Manas Causal body Chesed-Gevurah-Tiferet
> = "Intermediate Triangle"
My understanding of Kabbalist philosophy does not include "Causal body"
as a reference to anything, though I have some idea of Atma-Buddhi-Manas
as principles emanating from, or contained within the monad - perhaps
>Kama-Manas Mental/Astral Unit Hod-Netzach
Kama-Manas is not a term I know anything worth writing about.
Mental/Astral Unit (or component?) perhaps, but I ascribe this to the
world of Yetzirah.
>Linga Sarina Etheric Double Yesod
Again, the SD refs are not my cup. The problem I see with this
discussion is that it assumes an agreed frame of reference on basic
Kabbalist perceptions, but as you note below, there are a number of ways
in which Kabbalah can be presented.
I will try to explain: in my K (for "Kabbalah") view, this would be true
of the Greater Yesod on the scale of Jacob's Ladder when applied to the
level of human Being, but would not do so on the scale of the minor
"sephiroth" in the four worlds. This will not mean much to some
Kabbalists, so we are faced with the ever-present problem of defining
>Shula Sarina Physical Body Malkhut
> = "Infernal Triange +
> bride (=Malkhut)"
I don't accept any "Infernal Triangle" but do accept the idea that
Malkuth includes all of the Sephiroth preceding it, which means that all
of these various "bodies" are present within the physical in some way,
if indeed the existence of this many "bodies" can be verified, which
seems doubtful. "Etheric body" yes, as there is more than enough
evidence to support its existence from personal testimony.
>Quoting from the Bahir, "Why does the torah begin with a 'Beth'. So that it
>may begin with a blessing." Blessing is said, according to Rabbi Kaplan, to
>represent Chakhmah (Wisdom), so the model begins with a blessing (a Monad),
>bringing to mind the common language that a child is a blessing.
The model you have presented above equates the monad with three
sephiroth, whereas 'Hokma is only one Sephira. (We will probably agree
to differ on spelling - so let's use whatever we normally use, so long
as we understand the same thing by it). Kaplan had a great deal to say!
> The Book
>of Trees (a manuscript which preserved a great number of kabalistic systems
>not as commonly used as those of the Gra and the Ari), in an older
>kabalistic tree system shows Keter-Chokhmah-Binah as a single circle with
>three dots in it (i.e. a single unit.) This again would imply a monad, but
>as a "Three in One" conceptually. SD1, Page 200, would possibly represent
>this as either "the divine and formless worlds of spirit (but I would rather
>make these the logoic levels), as the line which divides the triange from
>the four worlds (or on that line), or as center point of the triange (not
>Shown) which would descend into the center of the circle (again not shown).
>The last being deduced from ES Lesson #1 (albeit by interpretation.)
This is all SD stuff, and I have never seen ES Lesson #1. (Unless it is
one of the SD vol. 3 items?). Not my cup. I appreciate your interest in
a comparative study (a la 2nd object) and which I commend, but I am
unlikely to have the time to stay with you on this - maybe Jerry S. and
one or two others will find it interesting. The same applies to the
your next three paragraphs.
>the grouping of Chesed-Gevural-Tiferet (Atma-Buddhi-Manas) would (again
>referring to Page 200) be the world of Atzilut (the Archetypal World.) This
>would place the Monad (or possibly the Causal body) in a position to contain
>all of the Archetypes that could be formed during an incarnation.
>Contuniing the model would place Manas (both Buddhi and Kama) in Beriyah
>(the creative world) and Kama (with Kama-Prana) in Yetzirah (the formative
>world.) Kama would therefore belong to both Beriyah and Yetzirah (as any
>seperation from the ALL would be an illusion, per Buddhist doctorine)
>To finish the model, Yesod & Malkhut would compose the 'Sarina'. In the
>model referred to from the book of Trees, Yesod and Malkhut are again
>combined as a single circle with two dots. This would simply show the close
>embrace between the eteric double and the Physical body.
I have snipped the Bailey refs, as I am not familiar with her work.
Others may follow up on this, I suspect.
>The prior posts on reincarnation (or embodiment) would be good sources of
>doctorine to discuss in conjunction with the above.
I don't think so. What this material appears to address is incarnation,
>Starting with no past
>ideas about your viewpoints (so that you aren't "Bemused"), please show us
>how a 40+ year veteran of kabalistic thought would explain the concepts.
I do this in my "Keys to Kabbalah" which is only available privately
printed from myself. It is necessary to pay for this, as there are a
number of diagrams, as well as Hebrew text, plus versions of "Sepher
Yetzirah" and "The 32 Paths of Wisdom" plus two different sets of tarot
Trump illustrations, diagrams of cathedral churches, Solomon's temple,
and the Temple at Luxor, plus commentaries and appendices. Sorry about
that, but 40+ veteran years cannot be sent in a couple of e-mails!
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age
(Note figure "one" after WWW)
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application