The Star of Azazel - Azazelin Tähti

Versed enough you seem, frater, to offer a bounty! I will go to my Polyharmonia and to my Yoga Sutras, and inspect this topic from many angles. But most of all I am thankful for the example of the half-turned Shakti in Shiva's lap, as this parable will also grace my Buddhist studies.

It would be interesting to know if there were some direct Shaiva sources that inspired the Blavatskia/Koothoomian Theosophy.

Anyway, I hope some day we will have a chance to discuss some topics from the Kashmir texts in person.

First of all, thank you again fra Nefastos for patient and carefully constructed answers!

Nefastos wrote: Underlining mine. In the theosophical cosmology, no. Maybe to some more modern minded Hindus or Buddhists. But in "Blavatskian" theosophy (thus including this "Koothoomian" theosophy, or vice versa) Maya is all that belongs to the lower threefold world of physics, emotions and even to the lower, calculating intellect. Actually, this whole trinity IS maya per se, since it is the surface of the water whereto the higher, timeless trinity is thus reflected. From this stems that quite interesting "dualistic philosophy of unity" where everything is one... and yet is not. The very fundamentals of fundamental being in time are in esse false. To perceive anything truly at all one must first rise above the whole of that which he has until that seen as reality - only excluding the very core, the spirit, of things both physical & mental. Pretty demanding, one might say.

Pretty demanding indeed. Even though the goal pictures a pretty steep and high mountain, I think this answer clarified my thoughts a lot. I will contemplate on this.

Nefastos wrote: KH says that there is no "spirit" (without matter) or "matter" (without spirit) at all, but these two names just refer to the occult "density" of being. A New Ager would say that "everything is vibration" (without usually having the slightest idea what he's talking about). Which is, actually, once again the Shaivist doctrine.

Thus, when either seeming polarity escapes the whole of any being or creature (which are the same: rock, for an occultist, is a living being infused by certain kind of fohatic living spirit) the other polarity alone cannot exist either. When the fundamental power structure of any being is collapsed, the rest literally ceases to exist (as itself). Think about splitting an atom, for example.

But what the theosophists never actually say in clear words, but which can be deducted from the teachings of both Blavatsky, Koot Hoomi and Bailey (the others theosophical luminaries usually lack the metaphysical sense to actually give teaching on these things) is that the KH's "perfect equilibrium" - which, as he says in this letter, is "the only law" - is not perfect in actual manifestation, but rather an ideal against which everything happens: even the longest manvantaras (the cosmic ages of billions of years). That is why even in pralaya or cosmic night of dissolution the mineral planets can survive: they still hold some semblance of spirit, id est, karma: and this is the "cosmic evil" spoken by Bailey. The eternal or almost-eternal (lasting beyond even the cosmic periods of time) un-equilibrium.

Again, this answer helped my understanding of the analogies on completely different level. I cannot say - of course - that I can wholly grasp the entire truth behind this but I believe this helps me to read and proceed with the content further.

I must admit that I sometimes feel overly frustrated when reading these letters. I can kind of often see that there is probably a lot of wisdom if I would reach the top (or core) of the thought in the lines, which are often delivered like a rain of pearls in thickness, but I kind of don't find any foothold of where everything is based - what's the whole line of logic. Even the probably obvious-to-many ideas that are also visible in Nefastos/SoA's texts are often left blurry. Yes, I know and admit that my understanding of theosophical principles is thin - these letters are practically my crash course to the topic. Not sure just if I'm doing it the overly hard way. In any case, do you have any recommended book or something that would be good to read alongside and used as a reference when stuck? Or maybe I just need to start rereading the letters from the beginning alongside your (always valuable, so much appreciated) comments. That would be like "canon" reading style. Probably of course the whole point of a reading group - just as long others won't feel frustrated of my simple questions In the meanwhile, I try to be more persistent.

Nefastos wrote: KH's snide remarks on Hume's ornithological hobbies were also based on the fact that the birds were (as they still are) often killed in the process of study. This comes up in one of the letters.

I should have guessed that... Good point!

The Theosophical texts are easy to redicule. Before I was introduced to fra Nefastos amazing insights on old Theosophy, I had little interest in Theosophy. Though Blavatskian fragments, that is, some hand-picked gems from the SD and IU, have been an immense inspiration, before meeting with fra Nefastos and his ideas, I was not that interested in Theosophy. And even in Blavatsky, the exclusive Yellow Hat sympathies were for me intolerable.

It cannot be denied that the main works of Blavatsky are thick with inexplicable charm. They have a magical quality that cannot be mocked away by temporal authorities. I think for a long time this corpus has been many things for many people. But the they have nevere ceased to be an enigma.

Every generation produces things of such quality that their true worth cannot be judged by the appreciation of their times. In fra Nefastos, I think, our generation has brought forth a genuinely unique interpreter, who has given us more than enough reasons to carry these Treasures of Theosophy for future generations.

I knew right away that I do not want to miss this opportunity to go through these challenging letters with fra Nefastos. I thought that the least I could do would be to prove him wrong, and make sure we will not quit untill each letter has been dealt with.

Now, I think that I have managed to dig up some interesting history. I was actually inspired to these historical considerations by fra Smaragds' thorough first messages. But I have had little to give in other areas. And one of those areas is asking good questions. Because it is so important that the genuine baffelment that these letters produce in us be expressed with sincerety!

I feel we've had a great dynamic here. And though I have had very little time to put into this project, I've gotten so much out if. I would not have participated in a reading group for The Mahatma Letters, if fra Nefastos wouldn't have participated. But from the very beginning, I have really felt like this is a solid group. I mean, each week I look forward to that week's letter with the same positivie anxiousness.

You are too kind, my brothers... To avoid embarrassment, I just go straight to the next letters! These are long indeed, so I have split the text below to more bite-sized chapters.

* * *

Letter(s) 23. Received at Simla October 1882. Letter 23A is a long list of questions from many different, seemingly random fields from Sinnett to Koot Hoomi. Letter 23B is a thirty pages long battery of answers to each of them. It seems that KH has really embraced this part of the work and seen it very meaningful, considering how much energy was put into the correspondence (instead of, for example, making a new Blavatsky-book).

Which shows us an interesting and meaningful aspect of the occult work. Many of these questions & answers deal, once again, with the paradigm clash of the scientific & esoteric approaches. And yet, even though the correspondent never fails to underline the problematics of the former, often with quite a barbed wit, the discourse itself is yet seen as meaningful enough to continue – to the certain point at least. It might also bring to mind some fascinating questions about the personal–impersonal life of an adept. KH had studied, it is said, in the European universities, and in this letter also he often relates how he has personally followed some scientific debate & development of Western theories. Why? What was the ratio of personal interest and the occult responsibilities of his? – If we choose to think the Tibetan masters as actual living human beings, that is, instead of figments of Blavatsky's mind, or something along those lines.

* * *

But, onwards to the questions themselves. As said, they are quite random, based on many different details on many different discussions between APS and KH. Every time I see these kinds of lists, in the writings of the old or of today, I am thinking: "Are THESE really the things you would like to know, most of all?" But since they were, and were considered important enough to get answered, here we go...

The questions deal with the subjects of:

– Characteristics brought from previous incarnations, and can these be seen by the adepts

Let's pause here for a moment. KH answers that "unfortunately" some of the adepts can see such karmic influences. Why this curious word, "unfortunately"? I think the reason is that when a person's mind is turned to see the past as the form of the present, it necessarily focuses on this past and sees it as "real", which is the very opposite of (KH's) Buddhist metaphysical ideal. There is a reason why people extremely seldom have any kind of remembrance about their "former lives": would that be otherwise, we would be living to a wrong direction, instead of growing to new things clinging to the alreasy attained characteristics of our past. What does it mean to Johannes today had part of my soul been such and such student of the occult arts thousand of years ago, a pauper, or a Jack the Ripper? To think of that which is gone would turn the soul upside down to regression. Rather, it is usually better not to know: not to know our failings, which will necessarily bring about their consequences (which would then paralyze our much-needed although seemingly futile striving), and even better not to know our strong points from the time that is already gone, so not to build ourselves to them, but to new advancement demanded from us in this age. Curiously enough, in the latter part of the letter KH actually tells Sinnett about his last incarnation as a Roman consul whom he even names. But these kind of exceptions are, I think, like a tantric "exception proves the rule", which is important part of the process in many turning points of one's occult advancement.

* * *

Continuing the list of the subjects covered in questions:

– Why, if the human culture is so ancient as the occultists claim, does the last two thousand year's cultural advancement seem so extremely rapid compared to the hunreds of thousands of years before it
– Origin of evil
– Cycles of time
– Some points of physical science. E.g. meteorological, astronomical facts
– "Heaven" (Deva Chan) and is one's consciousness there personal or not
– "Shells" or ghosts of the dead people, and is their consciousness personal or not
– "Planet of Death"

Of the latter, the "planet of death", KH refuses to say anything. After this, the whole concept is not, it seems, ever again brought up in theosophical discourse. So, how exactly this relates to the "eighth sphere" as the zone of refuse of the solar system and possibly "avitchi" as one's mental hell of disintegration, can't be known. By the way, this was the only question in the list of 32 that received no answer whatsoever.

In the latter part of the letter, KH yet writes about seemingly different subject, the destiny of completely evil beings who have no remorse whatsoever:

KH wrote:Bad, irretrievably bad must be that Ego that yields no mite from its fifth Principle [twofold manas is meant here, I think], and has to be annihilated, to disappear in the Eighth Sphere. A mite, as I say, collected from the Personal Ego suffices to save him from the dreary Fate. Not so after the completion of the great cycle: either a long Nirvana of Bliss (unconscious though it be in the, and according to, your crude conceptions); after which – life as a Dhyan Chohan for a whole Manvantara, or else "Avitchi Nirvana" and a Manvantara of misery and Horror as a -- you must not hear the word nor I -- pronounce or write it. But "those" have nought to do with the mortals who pass through the seven spheres.

The last sentence is of crucial importance here. That completely failed soul-substance that has proven to be unable to raise itself to any kind of ethical i.e. spiritual advancement, is cast off, to live & die in some isolated "universe" suited to its extremely perverted approach to the life as a whole. This, we might deduce, is kind of an anti-sun which consists of the manvantaric "eighth sphere" of utter refusal. And from such a literal hell-hole, the "cosmic evil" that I mentioned in the post above, the great disharmony of the world as a whole might thus radiate as like from a lense of condensation. But those "beings" identifying themselves with such a current cannot, as KH says, be in any actual contact with mortal men, by the very fact that they are actually not beings but the very "polarity of anti-contact" (complete killing out of the tiniest speck of empathy & sympathy).

* * *

But let us take a few steps backwards. Sinnett asked about the seeming quickening of human culture as seen in the eyes of history. To this KH answers in two ways: First, he says, it happens to the "races" of men that before their collapse, they ignite into a fervent flame that seems to blaze extremely strong. Such a thing happened also to the race inhabiting America before the conquistadors, and even though their culture was very advanced. KH implies that our European culture is living its fireworks now for a relatively short period of time, after which it too will die out, and eventually lost to the latter history just in the same way as the advanced cultures of the ancient times are now completely lost to us.

Later, it is interesting to see that KH uses the same symbol of a "tree" that is now in use of of own brotherhood, even though he uses it as a metaphor for the core of occult teaching itself.

KH wrote:"Thou shalt not eat of the fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil of the tree that is growing for thy heirs" we may say with more right than would be willingly conceded to us by the Humes [materialistically intellectual people] of your Sub-race [Europeans]. This "tree" is in our safe-keeping, entrusted to us by the Dhyan Chohans, the protectors of our Race [the mankind as a whole, the "root race"] and the Trustees for those that are coming.

* * *

Concerning the scientific points, I am not interested myself. As I mentioned, KH often criticizes the very foundation.

KH wrote:But what can I add yo that already told? I am unable to give you purely scientific information since we can never agree entirely with Western conclusions; and that ours will be rejected as "un-scientific." [...] Of course your Science is right in many of her generalities, but her premises are wrong, or at any rate – very faulty.

About Sun there is a great deal of talk in this letter. One of the important points is that the Sun we see is not the actual Sun, but rather its shadow, and that Sun "gives everything and receives nothing" for the whole of the solar system. There's also an interesting bit of information about sun (of an immense size, in another solar system) that works from behind Jupiter; which gives an interesting explanation for the Jupiter archetype's connection with Solar domination (seen also, for example, in the brotherhood's Celestial Hymns).

* * *

There's also an interesting part concerning KH's personal advancement in the equally interesting context about vital force in electricity (which, as he also mentions, is a form of magnetism and everpresent in all natural phenomena):

KH wrote:If, as I hope, in a few years, I am entirely my own master – I may have the pleasure of demonstrating to you on your own writing table that life is not only transformable into other aspects or phases of the all-pervading Force, but that, it can be actually infused into an artificial man. Frankenstein is a myth only so far as he is the hero of a mystic tale; in nature – he is a possibility

* * *

I will only go through one more thing, the one of the post mortem consciousness. KH says that no matter how ill, confused or deranged one is, a dying man will have a moment of clarity concerning his life as a whole at the very moment of his death, and that moment forms a seed by which his new life will be built. After that, the structure of a human will disintegrate into principles of which the higher see the lower ones as the once-worn clothes, and the lower once gradually collapse into a kind of elemental senility due to the forces of disintegration:

KH wrote:A.P.S. – the friend and brother of K.H. will go to Deva Chan; and A.P.S. the Editor and the lawn-tennis man, the Don Juan, in a mild way, in the palmy days of "Saints, Sinners and Sceneries," identifying himself by mentioning a usually covered mole or scar, – will, perhaps, be abusing the Babus through a medium to some old friend in California or London. [...] And, when left alone for one short instant by some disturbance in a circle [of a spiritualist seance], or the thought of the medium wandering for a moment to some other person – that shell will begin to hesitate in its thoughts whether it is A.P.S., S. Wheeler, or Ratigan; and end by assuring itself it is Julius Caesar.

Thus, the shells or disintegrating ghosts ("elementaries") of the lower personalities are in equal state of decomposion as the people's physical remains. But if the cohesion of a lower will is very strong, such an disintegration can be held in check:

KH wrote:The few exceptions to this rule – cases of half succesful sorcerers, or very wicked persons passionately attached to Self – offer a real danger to the living. These very material shells, whose last dying thought was Self, –Self, –Self – and to live, to live ! will often feel it [that process of disintegration or consciousness of their own death] instinctively. So do some suicides – though not all. What happens then is terrible for it becomes a case of post mortem licanthropy. The shell will cling so tenaciously to itse semblance of life that it will seek refuge in a new organism in any beast – in a dog, a hyaena, a bird when no human organism is close at hand – rather than submit to annihilation.

And with such a great horror piece, it is good to end this lengthy commentary to the letters 23.

Since sex is endlessly fascinating subject to my Venereal temperament, I'd like to comment this a bit:

Smaragd wrote:Human understanding of the world where even sex needs to be explained or we might not even know how to reproduce is how I see the Maya. [...] I remember as a kid when I learned how babies are made I wondered how come I've not known this, and how animals know how to do it when their communication is not so literal.

But which is "more" Maya, animal instinct how to couple, or human mental structure which can even obscure that instinct?

The question is especially delicious when we ask it from Blavatsky, for she has a paradoxal view on this. Like discussed above with Yinlong, Blavatsky's (hardcore Buddhist) idea about Maya is that everything but pure spirit is already Maya. But in practice Blavatskian theosophy very much focuses on the opposite idea, and most of all in regard to sex. Blavatsky was very proud of her own virginity & connected sex organs to black magic unreservedly.

Personally, I would rather say that both (emotional "animal" instinct & rational "human" mind) are equally Maya and can be equally used to both liberation or becoming more & more bound. If there are skeleton keys in occultism – and I believe there are – they belong to spirit i.e. ethics. All the structured elements from body to feelings and reason are twofold by their very nature.

The letters 24a and 24b were received in autumn 1882. The topic of this letter are “The Famous Contradictions”, and seems to deal with a list of some contradictions in Theosophical teachings, and the reasons behind them. Originally, I hoped to shed some light on the historic circumstances, but as I lack the resources to do it properly, I will instead deal with two important topics of this two part letter; namely, Devachana and adeptship. Of the famous contradictions, however, one of the more famous one involved the Theosophical views on reincarnation: In Isis Unveiled reincarnation was mentioned as a rare aberration, while in later teachings the doctrine of reincarnation is more central. Neither A.P.S. nor K.H. seem to be much bothered about such things, though they did decide to give these contradictions some attention. Those who are used to reading challenging occult texts, must be used to digesting fragments and accepting sequential unveilings (the agamas, for example), so I guess such things are problems mainly if one is struggling with feelings of ambivalence. Then again, IU is a work that often has a decidedly scientific tone. But when we are discussing books from the 19th century, scientific enthusiasm and intuitive speculations where the fashion of the day, not completely unlike saying f*ck in gangster rap in our days. Where such temporal fashions are deemed intolerable, there the text ought to be gently undressed; but, alas, such gentleness is seldom found together with such impatience.

One of the problems for some Indian members of the Theosophical Society was (if I have understood correctly), that Theosophy did not accept the idea of unerring revelation. This was a major challenge for Christians and Muslims, for whom their Holy Scripts are more real than the world. But to join the TS, they had to make considerable personal accommodations in the name of brotherhood of men. On the other hand, a Hindu or a Buddhist could have just joined the TS with little or no accommodations at all. Perhaps because of this initial ease, it was the sanctity of the Vedas that later became the subject of jealousies. Perhaps some one more knowledgeable will kindly correct me on my history. But my point is that (according to my understanding), TS has never claimed to produce unerring texts. And this quite “unreligious” attitude could justify the “scientific” tone of IU.

Erring brings us neatly to the topic of adeptship. KH describes adeptsip in humane tones:
- An adept — the highest as the lowest — is one only during the exercise of his occult powers.
- The adept is The Inner Man. One could perhaps put it like this: Adeptship is an acute state where the obstacle of the outer man is to some degree removed from the way of the Inner Man. In general terms, adept is a person who can make such contact to this Inner Man.
- Contact with Inner Man requires effort, and thus is not a continuous state.
- So the adept is a an imperfect human being, who, however, has access to certain occult powers, though this access requires effort and cannot be a continuous state.

The Devachana as a possible state of after life, seems to correspond closely to Buddhist teachings. It is a place where one enjoys (or, according to some, wastes) the fruits of one’s merits. I suppose that at the lowest it means the Gandharva Heaven, which has been considered by some to be a shamefully low after-life state for a monk. At the highest, Devachana might be compared to the Pure Lands, though I would say this is a comparison that does not work in every situation. I am under the impression that Pure Lands in some form of Buddhism are considerable higher states than Devachana, if Devachana is understood as a Devaloka that will lead to (when the merits run thin) to the first faint hints of Avitchi statets. The loftiest ideas of Pure Lands come closer to the ideas of Vajra Realm, which is – despite of graphic representations – a state beyond all thought, and thus nothing like Kamaloka. Anyway, Devachana is The Heaven many wait after death (or so says Blavatsky, while KH seems to deny this association). And KH says that most of us will indeed end up in Devachana after death, and we will (in a way) be re-connected there with our loved ones.

Clearly separate state above the Devachana is the state of Arhat, which is in the Bodhisattvic point of view the aspiration of the Pratyekabuddha, that is, the selfish Buddha. It has been said (Dalai Lama XIV “Tantra in Tibet”) that Pratyekabuddhas often choose to be born in very dark times, and that their path is so different from Bodhisattva-path that it would be worse for a bodhisattvic aspirant to turn to pratyeka-path, than to be born in one of the hell-worlds. Be that as it may, at least in serious esoteric Buddhism, Devachana as an after-death state would be something between a considerable setback and a humiliating failure.

And this is all the time I have for this letter. More about Devachana in Theosophy Wiki: http://theosophy.wiki/w-en/index.php?title=Devachan

Almost in time to present the next letter (only one day late) and here it comes..

Letter no.25 deals with the topic of Devachan, the state opposite to that of Avichi, and addresses some queries Sinnett has presented on the subject. Sinnett seems to think that this state would be some kind of monotonous existence of a prolonged one moment of happiness from the persons life. Master KH, however, seems to disagree with this.

Firstly, KH states that only the subjective "qualities", which are of moral and spiritual nature, are transferred to the state of devachan, while the other objective ones, or ones which consist of a more "grosser energies", are manifested in physical reality and appear in the coming rebirths. So, from these higher aspirations the soul (or spiritual self, not sure what term to use here) prepares for itself a sort of a ideal inner world, in which it will "rejoice", until Karmic law states otherwise.

KH emphasizes, though, that this "prolonged moment" means a whole lot more that what it could be imagined to mean if misunderstood. His comparison of the devachanic state being based on the "key-note" of the mentioned blissful moment is, in my opinion, really beautifully put. I will analyze this comparison later in the course of this text.

Next, KH comments the common misconception that "The more merit, the longer period in devachan". This point of view does not make sense, since there is no time in devachanic state. Or atleast not in the sense as we, finite beings, conceive it.

I find the concept of time fascinating, all in all. As it is approached in phenomenology, there are different types of activities of the mind, which occur on different types of manifested reality. Some activities can take place in time & space, others of either of these or none. Thoughts, for example, do not appear in space, but in time. The ideal state, which holds for example the mathematical truths, is so called over-timeless and it is considered unchanging. So, if this can be grasped in philosophy, why couldn't it me done considering other things..?

KH continues with a common comparison to all of us: If one is having a blissful time, time can often elapse really fast, or faster as it "should". Or, as a contradiction, if one is being tortured, even a minute seems to last for ages. He also mentions that time is something created entirely by ourselves. No other being on earth revolves so much around time as man.

Further, KH tries to explain the reality related to both Devachan and Avichi and especially what they are not. Devachanic state, even though in a sense compared to a dream state, is not that if undestood in "an earthly manner", but is far more complex. In Devachan the soul can truly be in peace, where it is stripped of its obstructions on the state of matter, such as vulnerability and the happenings of chance. Earthly life could more rather be compared to suffering, no matter how well the individual would have served his/her purpose.

After this KH spares a few words on Avitchi and what kind of beings end up in there. The main point being that Avichi serves as an antithesis to Devachan and only "soulless beings" will end up there as a punishment. Once again, I tend to connect these beings to the entities mentioned in Nefastos´ text "Beings of the Mask". Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Then, after explaining the already mentioned, KH gets back to the original queries. I will add a full quote from the text, which in a perfect way summarizes KH´s answer:

KH wrote:That one note, as I said, struck from the lyre of life, would form but the Key-note of the being's subjective state, and work out into numberless harmonic tones and semi-tones of psychic phantasmagoria. There — all unrealized hopes, aspirations, dreams, become fully realized, and the dreams of the objective become the realities of the subjective existence.

As promised earlier, this musical reference brought into my mind another philosophical issue, once again from the field of phenomenology. Husserl takes the idea of melody and approachs it from a philosophical point of view. Each individual note of a melody takes place in a separate moment in time. Only together, though, can they produce a harmony, which will not happen if any of the notes is not played. Thus separate moments of the present take place simultaneously as a complete, sort of past-present, unity.

After this KH briefly addresses the different cycles of this complex round of existences. I will not comment this since I haven't really completely grasped this elaborate system. I will point out, though, that as I've seen it, of the different "states" after death, have I understood correctly that in theosophical terms Kama-Loka is the plane of existence often described as the astral plane? This would fit my earlier reference ot The Beings of the Mask as the plane where the shells dwell.

RaktaZoci wrote:After this KH spares a few words on Avitchi and what kind of beings end up in there. The main point being that Avichi serves as an antithesis to Devachan and only "soulless beings" will end up there as a punishment. Once again, I tend to connect these beings to the entities mentioned in Nefastos´ text "Beings of the Mask". Please correct me if I'm wrong.

RaktaZoci wrote:I will point out, though, that as I've seen it, of the different "states" after death, have I understood correctly that in theosophical terms Kama-Loka is the plane of existence often described as the astral plane? This would fit my earlier reference ot The Beings of the Mask as the plane where the shells dwell.

Article Beings of the Mask (not available in English yet...) mainly discussed astral beings. Purely astral creatures are subjective, meaning that they are not intelligent beings in the words' normal meaning. (Let us recall what KH said above about spirits attending a seance: that they formulate their already disintegrating personalities with help of the attendants' thoughts & emotions. Those seance-spirits are amalgam of etherical and astral substance.)

An avitchee, on the other hand, is – like KH says here – someone that needs to be "punished", so to say. A ghost is just neutral matter, be it good or bad or something in between because of its accumulated magnetisms (see the motto of Discordamelior II:II). The same idea is also discussed in Argarizim's last chapter (Lucifer): the truly "heavy" matter is intellectual, and that is where the real "sin" is made. The the deceased person consists of:

- Spiritual principles which go to devachan, nirvâna, &c.
- Energy or prâna
- Material principles of:
1a) Physical atoms whose circulations are a matter of science
1b) Etherical atoms which are the disintegrating "ghost" (elementary spirit)
2) Astral i.e. emotional currents which gradually dissolve into astral planes (forming, for example, those "beings of the mask" in different grades and intensities)
3) Formal mental structures that decompose or fade away slower in kama loka or necropolises (gloomy or nice or bittersweet, but mechanical) of the dead

Now the question is, into what of these several human remnants or building blocks does the Ego – one's focus of self – belong to?

The answer is in Matthew 6:21:

For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

What was the most important – that is, having the most intense magnetic attraction – for one's self during his or her life will also be the principle with which one ascends or descends. In a linear model of post mortem states we can say that the Ego usually unclothes itself gradually from different principles: 1a, 1b, 2, and so on, until it comes to the point where its evolution does not support identification. (For example, very few people can identify with their nirvânic i.e. purely atmic self which has no place, no time, no formal thoughts, & cetera, and thus they more or less "skip" the nirvâna as Egos, even though their yet impersonal monad experiences it.)

The avitchee is therefore one's Ego, who instead of devachan's sacred dreams partakes on this anti-devachan's dense nightmares of torture, which it has woven for itself. (For our "rewards" and "punishments" are nothing but the very matter we have created upon ourselves, but whose true nature has escaped us because of elemental prison present during earthly life.) It is not the same as astral plane, but is a form of matter denser than our physical world, and therefore invisible to it – similar to how our physical life is invisible to a devachanee who enjoys a much more free, happy, "real" form of spiritual life; or, how an artistic genius, say, a composer, does not feel or remember hunger when one is at the peak of inspiration. The higher cancels out lower, if we are able to grasp it; but that grasping demands that we "treasure" such higher feeling instead of turning it down. An avitchee is an ego who has turned down every possible higher inclination, always clinging to the lowest possible form of personal density, in other words, "evil", like cruelty and extreme one-sidedness (chosen blindness to unity, empathy, & spirit). These are mental states, and they ultimately create a mental vortex like a black hole under the physical creation. This slow sewer or extreme selfishness is avitchi, reserved to very few truly soulless beings. At the same time they are being annihilated in it and made immortal by it (see Levi-quote given in the letter, which is also the motto of Discordamelior II:III), since at the very pole of extreme negativism time – which is a mental approach - slows and distorts to the point that it practically ceases to be.

Thank you for these valuable clarifications. To understand this book better we would require another commentary book by fra Nefastos!

Nefastos wrote:The the deceased person consists of:

- Spiritual principles which go to devachan, nirvâna, &c.
- Energy or prâna
- Material principles of:
1a) Physical atoms whose circulations are a matter of science
1b) Etherical atoms which are the disintegrating "ghost" (elementary spirit)
2) Astral i.e. emotional currents which gradually dissolve into astral planes (forming, for example, those "beings of the mask" in different grades and intensities)
3) Formal mental structures that decompose or fade away slower in kama loka or necropolises (gloomy or nice or bittersweet, but mechanical) of the dead

For some reason I tend to confuse the parts 1a) and 2) with each other. Maybe this has something to do with my former questions concerning the difference between Astral light and Akasa etc. ?

So I was also incorrect with my assumption of kama loka=astral plane?

Please excuse me, if I blabber on and on about the same things, just trying to understand.

Not at all, these are interesting subjects. For me at least...

RaktaZoci wrote:For some reason I tend to confuse the parts 1a) and 2) with each other. Maybe this has something to do with my former questions concerning the difference between Astral light and Akasa etc. ?

1a is something so uninteresting that we can usually skip it wholly when discussing occultism. (Like it is done in the schema of principles in the philosophy of SoA.) It is this, the plane of billiard balls hitting each other; the non-energetic (i.e. having only kinetic or outer kind of energy, instead of being energetical essentially and immediately) but gross physical constructs: "sthûla sharîra" of the theosophists, something built upon the foundation of the true physical man ("etheric double"). (Actually, it is not double, but we as the bodies studied by doctors and pathologists, are.)

RaktaZoci wrote:So I was also incorrect with my assumption of kama loka=astral plane?

I'd rather say that kâma loka is a part of astral world. Like the more physical astral borders on etheric (where the "ghosts" live), the deeper astral borders on lower manasic; and this lower manasic astral is Hades or kâma loka.