Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00214)

>>There is the judgment scene in Yama's court
which is sort of a moral self-assessment.>>

According to HH the Dali Lama, Tibetan Buddhism
does not recognize a life review as a part
of the normal death process. Perhaps the "moral
self-assessment" process that you mention is a
part of kamaloka?

<< First, according to Tibetan Buddhism, most ordinary
humans do not _have_ a "causal body."  Or at least, one
that is individualized.>>

Well then, here is one more difference between
Theosophy and Tibetan Buddhism (makes me wonder
why Blavatsky felt the need to go against her
Tibetan Teachers so much).

Speaking for myself, I have found from out-of-body
experiences that there seems to be a "body" of some
kind on each plane. This is in accord with the AB/CWL
model as well as G de Purucker. My "causal" body or
whatever we want to call it, is the one that I
seem to have when focusing on the causal plane (4th
plane up). I take the "causal" part mainly on faith
as I have no personal experience of it actually causing
anything.

<< Only Buddhas have the causal body (karana
sarira).  The causal body is the body of self-origination
or the absolute or dharmadhatu.  This is the Vajra-Body.>>

As I understand it, the Vajra-body is pretty much
equivalent to the subtle body of an Adept -- it is
created consciously and its use constitutes the
dreaded M word.  The idea of creating a subtle body
is also in Taoist Yoga, which teaches that only by
creating such a body can we hope for immortality.
Of course, the Tibetans also teach a "rainbow body"
which seems to be much the same thing. The rainbow
body got its name from the fact that when an adept
dies and enters it, a rainbow appears in the sky (??)

If we look behind all of the semantics, the basic
teaching is that we either have or must create a
subtle body.  As I understand Theosophy, we all
already have a subtle body, and all that is needed
is to learn how to use it (I suspect that this is
what Taoism means by having to "create" one). This
certainly fits well with my experience. Whether
we have only one or a series is semantics and
head-knowledge that has no bearing on experience.

<< By contrast, a Buddha, especially in Dzog chen,
does not have a alayavijnana because it is the
consciousness continuum (bhavana) of primordial
ignorance/bliss within which karmic tendencies
accumulate. >>

I believe that Dzog Chen teaches that no one has
an "alayavijnana" or storehouse, because such an
idea smacks too much of an intrinsic reality or
soul, alias monad. The storehouse of skandhas,
like everything else in the lower cosmic planes
(samsara), has only a relative or everyday
reality.

Buddhas can create a "body" on virtually any
plane, and even multiple bodies, if they have
need to do so.

<< So, your statement that seeds of reincarnation
lies at the causal level is half-right,
but also, moves too much towards a nihilist/no
one reincarnates position. >>

Seeds of our personal reincarnation only. This idea
comes from early Theosophical writers and is, I believe,
where the term "causal" came from. The causal body
is mentioned by Blavatsky, and not just by CWL. It
is the vehicle of the reincarnating Ego. Your idea
that " Buddhahood _is_ the causal body " goes farther
than Theosophy would take us, but in the sense that
buddhahood=divine monad, I agree that this is the
"real" causal body.

I do believe in reincarnation, but only in the
Buddhist sense, not the Hindu. The Gita, which
suggests it is only a matter of changing one's
outer clothes, is extremely naive and misleading.

<< And remember, the skandha of consciousness is
the thread and continuum (bhavana) between lives
even for Hinayanists. >>

I think that this skandha equates to what we would
call "human consciousness" and not pure consciousness
(cit).  I would equate it with Jung's Collective
Unconscious.  Even a Hinayanist would agree that no
permanent self or Ego reincarnates. According to
Blavatsky, the "thread and continuum between lives"
is the sutratma, which is not, I believe, a skandha.
The "ignorance/bliss sheath or anandamayakosa" is,
I think, equivalent to Blavatsky's Reincarnating Ego.

Jerry S.