Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00246)

>>In a lecture given at the TS at Wheaton in 1981, in answer
to a question, HH said two things.  One was that the whole
universe could be viewed as a life review process.>>

In a very real sense, this is true.

 <<Second that if a review of one's past deeds
takes the form of a judgment (that is really a self-judgment) as
a manifestation of them, then the Judgment Scene in Yama's
court, where one's good conscience and one's bad conscience
(both of which are beneficent and wrathful manifestations of
your own undeveloped Prajna/consort) recount all your good
and bad deeds to see how they balance out is a life-review.
That is the original basis for my statement.>>

OK. I was referring to his book on Dreaming, Death & Dying
where scientists specifically asked him about the lack of an
after-death life review, and his answer was that Lamas simply
hadn't seen such in the normal after-death processes. Austin's
new book on Zen and the Brain states that in a major study,
only 11% of NDEs reported a life review.
I once had an intense experience where I reviewed an
incident in which I had inflicted emotional injury on another
person, and I felt that pain myself to the point of crying. This
taught me a hard lesson about karma.

<< I don't think she did.  She, and even Taimini (who gets
much wrong), claims the higher bodies are undeveloped.
Buddhism would acknowledge that one cannot get what
one does not have virtually.>>

I would agree in-so-much-as my own experience is
one of development rather than creation. But Blavasky
has the causal body or Reincarnating Ego as working
to reincarnate everyone whether developed or not. The
development, I think, is more in the nature of becoming
consciously aware of it.

<< There are two criterion, according to Tantric Buddhism, that
conclusively indicate whether or not one has contacted the
causal plane and/or have a causal body or an activated
causal body.  First, in the development of conscious presence
one can no longer be hypnotized or be susceptible to other
forms of suggestibility (psychedelic trip is mind amplifier
but amplifies that mind's on-going inner associative linkages
of suggestion).  Second, one no longer experiences dreamless
sleep.  Instead, a lucent state of awareness like a formless
samadhi is experienced.  If these two are not realized, it is
fantasy.>>

I tend to agree here, that these could serve as barometers.
I personally have only had an entire night of dreamless
lucid samadhi-like sleep once, many years ago. I can
remember it like it was last night.  And yes, I always
attributed it to being on the causal plane.

As a general rule of thumb, I use the idea that if a dream
has form and emotion, its probably on the astral, if  it
has form and is emotionless its probably on the mental,
and if its clear or lucid but formless its probably on
the causal.

<<"Subtle body" in which system?...>>

Good question. There seem to be an abundance
of subtle bodies. As I understand it, the term "subtle
body" is used in a general sense, like aura. It can
be divided into sub-divisions or bodies like the astral,
mental, or causal.  Tibetans have a Vajra (diamond-
like because it survives death) body but also a
rainbow body. Gatso talks about a dream body in
the sense of the vehicle we use for dreams, but
I think that we can have dreams with either the astral
or mental body. Blavatsky mentions at least four,
one of which is created consciously by the Adept
in order to do astral traveling.  Personally, I think
her descriptions of bodies are misleading, and I
think that it makes more sense to simply say that
we have a body of material and senses corresponding
to the substance of each major cosmic plane. As
G de Purucker points out, consciousness on any
plane requires a vehicle or body, the two forming
a basic duality.

Jerry S.