HPB correlates this in her statement:

“The Taraka Raja Yogis recognize only three Upadhis, in which Atma may work. These three states are: Jagrat(Waking), Swapna(Dreaming), Sushupti(Causal). Corresponding to Sthula Upadhi, Sukshms Upadhi and Karana Upadhi. In the transcendental state of Samadhi body with its Linga Sarira (the vehicle of Life-principle) is left out of consideration, and is the synthesis of all or the Absolute Force.  It is quite true that the three  Upadhis of the TRY are, best and simple, but only in purely contemplative yoga. Though there are seven principles in man, they are but three distinct Upadhi-s, in each of which his Atma may work independently of the rest.”

TSR reasserts his point of view, according to TRY thus:

  1. Upadhi-s cannot be confounded with the states of consciousness (Pajna) with it.  Upadhi is a physical organism.
  2. Logos has seven forms or there are seven kinds of Logoi in the cosmos. Each is the central figure of one of the seven branches of the ancient Wisdom-religion.
  3. Seven distinct principles correspond to seven distinct states of Prajna or consciousness. These correspondences bridge the gulf between the objective and the subjective, and indicate the mysterious circuit through which Ideation passes. Seven principlesare allied to seven states of matter, and to seven forms of force. These principles are harmoniouslyarranged between two poles, which define the limits of human consciousness.

The real classification of principles yet remains a secret and is a   topic for exploration. The position of differentiation and the causation of the various principles are explained by TSR thus:

Karana sarira is a center of consciousness (prajna) into which the 3rd principle of the cosmos, Sutratma, differentiates. The Light of the Logos permeates every kind of organism. In a figurative way, he suggests:  Assume Logos to be the Sun. (i) We can take a clear mirror on hand and catch the reflection of Sun on that (ii) We can transfer the reflected rays of Sun to a polished metallic plate (iii) We can also make the reflected rays of the metallic plate transfer themselves to a wall. Thus we have three images of the Sun, one being clearer than the other, and one being more resplendent than the other. The clear mirror is the Karana sarira. Metallic plate is the Astral body. Wall is the physical body. In each case, a Bimbam (a reflected image) is made. That reflected image is ‘for the time being’ considered as ‘self’ and assumed as of an independent stature. Luster of each reflected image is of varying degrees. This luster is a man’s knowledge. This knowledge depends on the condition of the Upadhi.Real Self is the Logos itself, and what is considered as ‘ego’ is but a reflection. Each distinct image can form a separate center. Man is quaternary:

        1.Sthula sarira 2. Sukshma sarira 3. Karana sarira and 4. Atma.

He also explains the stand of Niriswara Samkhyas who do not reckon the fourth principle viz. Atma but assume another term AVYAKTA. This Avyakta is the Mulaprakriti or rather Parabrahman manifested in Mulaprakriti as its Upadhi. In this consideration, Avyakta is the Parabrahman, the highest principle in Man. The other three are the principles that simply exist in it and by reason of it. In other words, Avyakta is the one principle which is the root of all self, which become differentiated in the course of evolution or rather which appears to be differentiated in the various organisms, which subsist in every kind of  Upadhi, and which is the real spiritual entity, a man has to reach. Niriswara Samkhyas do not deny the existence of Parabrahman, but they do not take note of the Logos and its Light – the two entities in nature, in classifying the principles of man.”

TRY explains the cosmic principles and their correspondences in the man very clearly.


Manifested Cosmos                                             Human body

Vaishvanara(Basis of objective world)                   Sthula sarira

Hiranyagarbha(Basis of astral world)                    Sukshma sarira

Ishvara (Logos or sutrayma)                                Karanopadhi

Parabrahman                                                      Light of the Logos


Coming back to the consideration of the Brahmanical system and its origins, we have the following from HPB:

            “The Vedas, and Brahmanism and along with these, Samskrit, were importations into what we now regard as India. They were never indigenous to its soil. There was a time when the ancient nations of the west included under the generic name of India, many of the countries of Asia now classified under other names. There was an Upper, a Lower and a Western India, even during the comparatively late period of Alexander; and Persia(Iran) is called western India in some ancient classics. The countries now named Tibet, Mongolia, and greater Tartary were considered by them as forming part of India. When we say, therefore, that India has civilized the world and was the Alma Mater of the civilizations, arts and sciences of all other nations (Babylonia and perhaps even Egypt, included) we mean archaic. Pre-historic India, India of the time when the Great Gobi were a sea, the lost “Atlantis” formed part of an umbrella continent which began at the Himalayas and ran down over south India, Ceylon, Java, to far away Tasmania.”

Recent history has recorded many more fragmentations and renames of the countries mentioned. The philosophical terms underwent a lot of conglomeration too. Three kinds of existence are postulated by Vedanta thus: Paramaarthika(the true, the only real one), 2. Vyavaharika(the practical and 3. Pratibhasika(the apparent or illusory). The term Jiva wherever it appears is to be understood contextually. It can be the highest principle or the lowest or none/both.

                                                                                                                                Dr N C RAMANUJACHARY

Views: 201


You need to be a member of Theosophy.Net to add comments!

Join Theosophy.Net

Comment by David J. McEssey on August 3, 2012 at 11:58pm

 Why does every thing have to be divided into groups, sub- groups etc... why

cannot the forest be seen for what it is; a refugee of life each part making up

a greater whole, each unique, special. why make it seem hard to understand

and confusing.

 I follow a Nike slogan "just do it' with my addition "just know it"

Search Theosophy.Net!


What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


Theosophy References

Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2024   Created by Theosophy Network.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service