Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00193)

[Dallas]<< Sketch of after-death events between incarnations:...>>

Dallas, your 11-step sketch is what I would call the generalized
Theosophical After-Death Model or at least your version of it.  I think that
you summarize Blavatsky very well at least insofar as the high points are
concerned. But I have some problems with this model.

1.  It is, after all, a model and not "truth." We do not, in fact, all go
through each of these stages or steps each time we die. The model is a
general one, and was meant to address the "average" person.

2.  This model is exactly what Jung was referring to when he accused
Theosophists of "lazy thinking." If we fully understand that it is a model
of reality, and not neccesarily what really happens, then we can accept the
model without the stigma (and the restriction) of lazy thinking. Lazy
thinkers are those who accept a model such as this as reality itself.

3.  A short example. First, as I have pointed out before, Tibetan Buddhism,
which tracks the after-death processes with almost as fine precision as
Theosophy, does not recognize your step 2 at all.  I think that most people
would agree that the life review comes prior to death (I have had several of
these when death seemed imminent but didn't happen). Very few NDEs include
it.  The Tibetan Book of the Dead does agree with a preview of the next
upcoming life, and is in general agreement with the Theosophical model once
we get through the semantics.

4.  Your version of the model fails to mention the etheric body, which also
survives for a time. I think that the etheric (stula-sharia and prana) is
the "shade" or "ghost," and not the astral (kama). I admit that this is a
nit-pick, but it does demonstrate the very real semantic problem that we
have in modern Theosophy.

5.  I think that your subjective division of good and bad, or "nobel" and
"gross," is a cultural fantasy that varies with each person.  Blavatsky gave
out this model to a bunch of Christians, and put it into words that they
could grasp. We don't have any need today to continue this kind of thing.
Nobel actions versus gross actions are such only in the eyes of the
beholder.

6.  According to the MLs, Devachan is a state and not a location. It exists
on the mental plane, which is itself a state and not a location.

7.  I still say, for a variety of reasons, that your "immortal ego" is a
mayavic illusion. The "akasic" or akashic records are on the causal plane,
and it is only the "aroma" of each life that gets stored there. These
"records" form the skandhas of each reincarnation. It is the causal body
(atma-buddhi-higher manas) that perpetuates reincarnation, not the mental
body (manas) which is new each time. In fact, it is because the lower four
bodies/principles are newly made with each incarnation, that we can dismiss
reincarnation for all intents and purposes as not being applicable to human
beings (because human beings can be defined as the lower four of the seven
and thus are newly made each time). Only the skandhas or tendencies made in
one life are carried over to another, not any "soul" or "immortal ego."

8.  Death and sleep are brothers.  The after-death states are very much like
the dream-sleep states that we go through at night. Nothing terribly
mysterious there. The Theosophical After-Death Model can appear intimidating
and we need to get past all the big words. But, if you can control your
dreams, you can control your after-death experiences too, and can
consciously direct your next birth to some extent.

Just some thoughts.

Jerry S.