|
Michael
D. Robbins Probably
each of us questions how we may best approach an esoteric interpretation
of the astrological chart. I wonder how many of us have even interpreted
our own charts in a truly esoteric manner, in keeping with the many
suggestions and hints which the Tibetan has given, and in relation to
that point on the Path of Return we may be treading. I
was reviewing the Sagittarius chapter in Esoteric Astrology, pp.186-187.
It is quoted in full below. I will interpolate some remarks in blue
print. Do we here have important hints concerning how to approach esoteric
chart interpretation? “Take for example the constellation which we are
now considering, and remember that the same basic streams of energy
will have to be [Page 186] noted in connection with every other sign
in which a man may take incarnation. We find that we shall have to consider:
1.
The Sun Sign.—In this case Sagittarius conditions circumstances, indicating
inheritance and forcing the environment to be declarative in connection
with the subject. 2.
The Rising Sign.—The ascendant can be one of the other eleven signs.
(Or for that matter, the Rising Sign can be identical with the Sun sign.)3. The Mutable Cross.—The four energies which meet "at the midway point" and have a united and definite effect upon the subject. The same statement applies to the other two Crosses. (Now this is a really interesting one and very important for chart interpretation. He is suggesting that even if the Sagittarius Sun many be the only position upon the Mutable Cross, the other three arms of this Cross (and their rulers) will be significant in the life of the subject and must be included in the interpretation. This particular approach is not much considered in the chart interpretations of even esoterically-inclined astrologers. Normally they interpret what is ‘there’ and not what is ‘not there’. This means that if there are planets placed in Gemini, or Virgo or Pisces, they will consider those signs important in relation to the Sagittarian subject; but if there are no planets in those signs, they will generally not consider the other Mutable Signs as important contributants to the Sagittarian life. What does it mean to factor in Gemini, Virgo and Pisces into the life equation of a subject born with the Sun in Sagittarius? He tells us that all these energies have a “united and definite effect upon the subject”. This means that if you are a Sagittarian, the Gemini, Virgo and Pisces streams are definitely influential, and that the tendencies embodied by these signs will play upon and influence the Sagittarian subject. How many of us have asked ourselves how much we are influenced by the other three arms of the Cross in which our Sun Sign is placed, even if there are no planets to be found in these signs. To what degree do these three other influences (if they can be detected) compare with the strength of influence of the Sun Sign? In my own case with the Sun in Aries, I have increasingly noticed the influence of the sign Capricorn as influential. Libra and Cancer both have other planets. To what extent am I, then, supposed to consider this Capricorn influence as part of the individual equation? Also, I think it becomes necessary to consider the arms of the Cross in their own right, independently of the planets they may ‘hold’. The constellations and their concentrated influences through the signs, are energy/gods in their own right, and have important differences of nature from even the planets most associated with them. By this I mean, for practical example, that Aries is, qualitatively, more than and different in certain significant ways from Mars, its orthodox ruler. Further it is different from Mercury and Uranus as well—quite obviously. But more subtly, Aries is different from the first ray which is transmitted through it and also from the seventh ray which is likewise transmitted through it. An interesting problem arises in connection with the fourfold influence of a Cross. No matter what your Sun Sign may be, you will always be influenced by the other three arms of the Cross upon which your Sun Sign is found. Anyone born upon the Mutable Cross, for instance, will be influenced by all four influences and their rulers. Thus, it becomes extremely important to determine how and in what measure or degree and when this additional influence operates. For instance, in my own case, I always detect the presence of Aries influences and behaviors, but I only sometimes detect the influence of Capricornian influences and behaviors. (And certainly of Libra, which holds Neptune the esoteric ruler of the Rising Sign, and Cancer, which holds Jupiter {the soul ray planet} and which is the Rising Sign itself}. The real test comes in evaluating the significance and influence of those arms which do not hold the major planets. {With asteroids and many other planetoids and undiscovered planets, probably every arm can be found to hold something}. Further, while I know I have certain Aretian tasks to undertake in order to fulfill my dharma, should I also apply myself to Capricornian tasks (as well as Libran and Cancerian tasks) in order to round out the approach to the dharma? Probably, it would be interesting for each one of us to assess our Sun Sign energy in relation to the energy of the three other arms of the birth Cross, and evaluate the strength and importance of the other three influences. This would be an interesting topic for group consideration. 4.
The Orthodox Planets.—These condition the personality. In this case
we have Mercury and Jupiter. The twelve houses governed by the planets
are likewise of prime importance from the angle of the transmitted energy. 5.
The Esoteric Planets.—These bring in renewed or increased planetary
energy and ray energy in a more dynamic manner. In the case of Sagittarius
these energies are Venus, the Moon, the Earth and Pluto. 6.The
Planetary Ruler of a Hierarchy.—In this particular case, this planet
is Mars, ruling the sixth Creative Hierarchy, the lunar Lords (the elementals
of the threefold personality) who have to be brought under the control
of the solar Lord.
The hierarchical ruler of Sagittarius is extremely accessible, because the Sixth Creative Hierarchy is not remote, but, rather, almost unavoidable. The lunar lords are to ascend, to be uplifted and liberated. One can see how the Sagittarian initiate wielding the aspirational and elevational power of Mars could contribute to the repolarization of the atoms in the three lunar vehicles, and ensure that they serve, completely, the director—the soul. A study of the above will reveal most interesting relationships and prove my point anent the multiplicity of energies to which the wonderful mechanism of man can respond and to which, as evolution proceeds, he can become increasingly sensitive. D.K.’s point is that we all respond to a multiplicity of energies—far more than we might have imagined by looking at our Sun Sign and its relations in a narrow way. My
main point : I cannot here enter into a detailed analysis of the many
energies which pour through the disciple as he arrives at the final
stages upon the Mutable Cross, and in Sagittarius achieves the determination
to "direct his steps into another way of life and with ardour firm
to mount another Cross," as the Old Commentary puts it. I can only
point out that the following ray forces pour onto the man through the
medium of the following planets: |
Mercury—4th Ray—Harmony through Conflict.
| Jupiter—2nd Ray—Love-wisdom. | Venus—5th Ray—Concrete Science. Mind. | The Moon—4th Ray—Harmony through Conflict. Esoteric |
The Earth—3rd Ray—Active Intelligence.
| Pluto-1st Ray—Destructive aspect. Hierarchical
An analysis of this will show that the "forces of conflict" are powerful in this sign, primarily in the life of the disciple. Harmony through Conflict is ceaselessly active and appears in both the orthodox and the esoteric assignments. The destructive power of the first ray, focussed in Pluto, brings change, darkness and death. To this intensity and potency of Pluto must be added the forceful and dynamic energy of the planet Mars. This brings the entire human family, as well as the individual, under the law of strife, based this time upon sixth ray devotion to an ideal, high or low. All
these play upon the individual born in the sign of [Page 188] Sagittarius,
as well as upon the fourth Creative Hierarchy as a whole When D.K. speaks
of the “forces of conflict”, He is seeing tabulating the ray influence
of Mercury, and the Moon and the character of Mars. He is saying that
conflict is inherent in the life of every Sagittarian because these
planets are associated with Sagittarius because they are rulers of the
signs which are the other arms of the Cross upon which Sagittarius is
found. I
only have time now to open the theme for discussion. I have evolved
a method for esoteric chart interpretation which takes a more synthetic
approach to a sign (as suggested above) into consideration. I will share
at least a prototype of this method in a forthcoming letter. It is my hope that we may take an orderly approach to developing the themes of esoteric astrology within our group process. As far as I am concerned, the book Esoteric Astrology has not really been fathomed. We could do this, systematically, and organize our discourse upon themes within the book which need real study and penetration. I
will be back to you with more ideas along this line. Also, I have devised
study questions for every page of the Esoteric Astrology book.
Because we are enjoined to “Enquire the Way”, we could easily grow by
proposing questions and then answering them. At some future time, perhaps
relatively shortly, I will share some of these questions, and we could,
if we choose, see whether we can penetrate them.
“Solar
Systems and Constellations as Planetary in their Motion: “The
orbital path of the solar system in the heavens around its cosmic centre
is now being sensed, and the general drift also of our constellation
is being taken into consideration as a welcome hypothesis. Scientists
have not yet admitted into their calculations the fact that our solar
system is revolving around a cosmic centre along with six other constellations
of even greater magnitude in the majority of cases than ours, only one
being approximately of the same magnitude as our solar system.
This cosmic centre in turn forms part of a great wheel till—to the eye
of the illumined seer—the entire vault of Heaven is seen to be in motion.
All the constellations, viewing them as a whole, are impelled in one
direction.” (TCF 1084) Commentary: This is one of the most important
references discussing the relationship of our solar system (or our constellation)
to a center around which it revolves. The difference between solar systems
and constellations is blinded in this reference. In this case,
“our solar system” may be a one-Sun(ed) solar system or may be a blind
for “our constellation”. Conclusions which can be drawn from the paragraph
above are that 1) our solar system is revolving around a cosmic center;
2) our constellation (composed of seven one-Sun(ed) solar systems) is
revolving around a cosmic center; 3) seven constellations (including
ours) are revolving around a cosmic center. If 3) is true, then 2) and
1) are also true.Related References on the Revolution of our Solar System
“Ponder on this and remember also that our Sun is travelling through space (carrying our solar system along in its sphere of influence) around our own central and conditioning star which it has been rightly presumed exists in the constellation Taurus, the Bull, being found in the Pleiades.” (EA 111) “4. The Rod of the cosmic Logos associated with our solar Logos is secreted in that central spot in the heavens around which our solar system revolves, and which is termed "the central spiritual sun."” (IHS 130) “Note: The Pleiades as the central group of the Bull and Alcyone, one of the 7 Pleiades, is supposed to be the star around which our universe revolves.” (EA 679) “The
Pleiades are the centre around which our solar system revolves.”—S.
D., II, 251, 581, 582. (TCF 1154) DK
then extrapolates from our tiny solar system to the “entire vault of
Heaven”. The
old Commentary expresses this obscure truth as follows:
"The one wheel turns. One turn alone is made, and every sphere, and suns of all degrees, follow its course. Commentary:
Only one turn would be necessary, as the reason for cyclicity is to
allow a cycling entity to sequentially absorb from other entities
(of a nature greater than itself). A superior force can only be completely
absorbed by an inferior force in time,
The One Great Entity, however, has none greater than itself from whom to absorb. Its one slow turn allows for a sequential emission to all lesser entities who must receive that emission. The night of time is lost in it, and kalpas measure less than seconds in the little day of man. Commentary:
If we attempt a little calculation, we note (TCF 39) that a Kalpa is
measured as 4, 320,000,000 years. Ten million million kalpas is 4.32
x 10 (23rd). Assuming that a Brahmic cycle is 3,110,400,000,000, then
twice ten million million Brahmic cycles is 6.2208 x 10 (26th). Let
us suppose a generic age for the universe of 100 universal years or
cosmic years, just as the age of our solar system or solar Logos is
100 years of Brahma. If we suppose (conservatively) that one hour
of cosmic time has passed, then we wish to know how many hours
there are in 100 years. So we take 24 hours in a day, x 360 days in
a year, x 100 years and arrive at 864,000 hours. If we look at the following
sentence—“ Ten million million kalpas pass, and twice ten million million
Brahmic cycles and yet one hour of cosmic time is not completed and
interpret that ten million million kalpas are to be added to
twice ten million million Brahmic cycles, the sum is 1.0525 x 10 (50th)
which is (very very roughly) the number of earth years which have passed
during the time of one cosmic hour. But this figures must be multiplied
by 864,000 to find out how many earth years pass is 100 cosmic years.
Of
course, according to the Old Commentary, the number would really be
greater, because “and yet one hour of cosmic time is not completed”.
We do not know how much is completed and how much remains. When, for
the sake of simplicity (and because one hour is the only definite measurement
we can use) we presume that one hour of cosmic time has elapsed, we
are, of course, underestimating the number of earth years which would
be contained within that hour of cosmic time. Ten million million kalpas pass, and twice ten million million Brahmic cycles and yet one hour of cosmic time is not completed. Commentary:
In the calculation above, I added the two figures together, because
of the word, “and”, but it would be possible to use either of them alone.
I think however, that the Old Commentary is suggesting a sum. Still,
the language is all figurative and poetic rather than exact and scientific,
so the best we can hope for is to generate a figure with a ‘reasonable’
order of magnitude.
Within the wheel, forming that wheel, are all the lesser wheels from the first to the tenth dimension. These in their cyclic turn hold in their spheres of force other and lesser wheels. Yet many suns compose the cosmic One. Commentary:
Ten dimensions are significant. We know that in relation to any Creative
Hierarchy, there are seven divisions of form and nine divisions of consciousness.
Perhaps there is a correspondence in Spectral Classes or in Luminosity
Classes. Or more occultly, perhaps there is a correspondence in the
“orders” which DK assigns to different stars or solar systems. For instance,
our solar system is a “system of the fourth order”; Betelgeuse is a
system of the second order.
>With regard to the Ten Dimensions, universally considered, perhaps
some external cosmic structures can be suggestive.
1. Atom 2. Man 3. Planet 4. Solar system 5. Constellations (including Super-Constellations, like the OAWNMBS) 6. Clusters and Globular Clusters 7. Galaxies 8. Family of Galaxies 9. Super-Galaxies 10. The Entire Vault of the Heavens Of course, these are all external structures (in time and space), and at best can be only symbolic representations of the Entities Who ensoul them. I realize as well that I am not aware of all possible structures, so many other may be significant, and the ones listed may not all be primary. Still, it is an attempt to suggest possible dimensions of the “wheels” within the universe. Wheels within wheels, spheres within spheres. Each pursues his course and attracts or rejects his brother, and yet cannot escape from the encircling arms of the mother. Commentary:
The great Law of Attraction (and Repulsion) is universally operative.
The study of polarity is all-important on all levels. It would be interesting
to know that solar system which is, to ours, the polar opposite, as
well as those solar systems or constellations which are antithetical
to the vibration of our solar system.
The “mother” here is probably ‘universal form’. When the wheels of the fourth dimension, of which our sun is one and all that is of lesser force and higher number, such as the eighth and ninth degrees, turn upon themselves, devour each other, and turn and rend their mother, then will the cosmic wheel be ready for a faster revolution." Commentary:
It is difficult to think that developments which occur in relation to
our sun could have any influence whatsoever on the “cosmic wheel” IF
that “cosmic wheel” represents the One Great Wheel. But IF that cosmic
wheel is a constellational wheel (in which our sun plays a role) or
even a super-constellational wheel (like the OAWNMBS level-2) then developments
in relation to our sun could have an effect.
The word “degrees” suggests that the word “dimension” represents initiatory status—among the stars. We know our sun is one of the “fourth order”; that it is said, here, that our sun is a wheel “of the fourth dimension” seems to suggest that the term, “dimension” (as here used) is equivalent to order number. That the wheels “turn upon themselves” suggests fourth dimensional rotation—the “wheel turning on itself”, as chakras are said to do. That they “devour each other” suggests the processes of absorption and obscuration. Those more inclusive entities of a higher order, remain; the lower entities are absorbed into them, just as the Brahmic planets are absorbed into Saturn, Mercury into Uranus and Venus into Neptune—and the three synthesizing planets into the Sun. It will, therefore, be apparent that the power of man to conceive of these whirling constellations, to measure their interaction, and to realise their essential unity is not as yet great enough. We are told that even to the [Page 1085] liberated Dhyan Chohan the mystery of that which lies beyond his own solar Ring-Pass-Not is hid. Commentary:
So, largely, we are dealing with the unknowable, and simply trying to
understand certain structural probabilities, without being able to enter
into the quality of such entities, esoterically. It is significant that
constellations are called “whirling constellations”, suggesting
both rotary motion and the motion of “revolution” (which is connected
to the spiral cyclic motion of the second ray. The kind of motion which
is called “drift” is allied to the motion which is called “driving forward
through space” or “progress onward”, and it is first ray motion.
Certain influences indicate to Him and certain lines of force demonstrate to Him the fact that some constellations are knit with His system in a close and corporate union. We know that the Great Bear, the Pleiades, Draco or the Dragon are in some way associated with the solar system but as yet He knows not their function nor the nature of the other constellations. Commentary:
DK has given us the function of Draco the Dragon as associated with
the center at the base of the spine of the OAWNMBS. Much has also been
given on the Great Bear and the Pleiades, so it is difficult to reconcile
the statement here given that the Dhyan Chohan does not know the nature
of their function.
It must also be remembered that the turning of our tiny systemic wheel, and the revolution of a cosmic wheel can be hastened, or retarded, by influences emanating from unknown or unrealised constellations whose association with a systemic or a cosmic Logos is as mysterious relatively as the effect individuals have upon each other in the human family. This effect is hidden in logoic karma and is beyond the ken of man. Commentary:
Here DK is talking about our solar Logos and (I believe) the next type
entity in hierarchical order, a cosmic Logos (i.e., a constellational
Logos: cf. TCF 293)
The Universe Before entering the next section, which raises the scale of our consideration far beyond the usual, let us see if we can understand how DK uses the word “universe”. Several meanings are possible: 1. The Manifest and Unmanifest Entirety 2. The Manifest Entirety, both visible and invisible, as there are many manifestations on (to us) invisible planes. 3. That part of the Manifest Entirety which is visible and objective—i.e., conventionally material. 4. Some aspect of the Manifest Entirety. For instance, a “universe” might be a relatively small structure, such as a galaxy. There
are too many references to “universe” (367), but perhaps some references
to “our universe” can be telling, presumably because if there is an
“our universe” there is also a universe with is not ours. In
this case, the “universe” would not represent the Entirety (visible
and/or invisible).
The Universal Universe: “This solar Deity is a peculiar and characteristic expression of the quality of the solar Logos. Forget not that in the great scheme of the universal universe (not just our universe) our solar Logos is as differentiated and distinctive in quality as are any of the sons of men.” (EP I 25) Commentary: It is clear from the foregoing, that one must be careful when interpreting the word “universe”, because clearly, it does not always represent the Entirety. Perhaps the term “universal universe” represents the Entirety, but there is no assurance of this. I have found in the AAB books, that such words as “universe” and “infinite” are not used in their ultimate senses, but only to refer to structures or numbers which are very large. The Solar Logos Bringing our “Universe” into Being: “Let us, talking necessarily in symbols, consider the universal Soul, or the consciousness of the Logos Who brought our universe into being. Let us regard the Deity as pervading the form of His solar system with life, and as being conscious of His work, of His project and His goal. This solar system is an appearance, but God remains transcendent. Within all forms God is immanent, yet persists aloof and withdrawn.” (EP I 57) Commentary: Although this reference could be considered somewhat blinded, it does seem to discuss the creation of a solar system as a universe. In this case, a “universe” is simply a very large entirety—the whole thing of a large thing (even though this thing may be very very small within the structure of the “universal universe”). Location of “Our Universe”!: “We need to bear in mind that our universe (as far as the highest human consciousness can as yet conceive of it) is to be found on the seven subplanes of the cosmic physical plane, and that our highest type of energy, embodying for us the purest expression of Spirit, is but the force manifestation of the first subplane of the cosmic physical plane. We are dealing, therefore, as far as consciousness is concerned, with what might be regarded symbolically as the brain reaction and response [Page 6] to cosmic purpose,—the brain reaction of God Himself.” (EP II 5-6) Commentary: Clearly, our universe, as here discussed, is simply the entirety of a great entity (an entity relatively limited compared to the greater Entirety). Second Ray Souls Work on the Line of Least Resistance within Our Universe: “Souls on this ray, as they come into incarnation through desire, attract. They are magnetic more than they are dynamic; they are constructive, and they work along the line which is, for all lives and forms, the line of least resistance within our universe.” (EP II 81). Commentary: Thus, clearly, there must be other universes in which the line of least resistance might be some other ray. Our Universe of Heavens: “It must be remembered that, from certain angles, the circle of twelve signs or constellations constitutes a special unity which revolves within our universe of heavens as our planet revolves in the centre of our circle of influences.” (EP II 196) Commentary: Local, again. Our Universe of Fixed Stars: “c. They are thus considered (Alcyone, in particular) as the central point around which our universe of fixed stars revolves." (II. 582.)” (EP II 657) Commentary: Alcyone/the Pleiades cannot be the center of the entire Entirety, obviously. So clearly there are certain stars and star groups which, in their aggregate, are considered “our universe of fixed stars”, and all of these revolve around Alcyone/Pleiades. The Same Idea: “Note: The Pleiades as the central group of the Bull and Alcyone, one of the 7 Pleiades, is supposed to be the star around which our universe revolves.” (EA 679) A Peculiar Sequence: “I realise that this information has little meaning to you and lies beyond your understanding, but so was much that I gave you in A Treatise on Cosmic Fire. Its sole value for you lies in the revelation of the linking up and the interplay between all parts of our solar system, our universe and the zodiac.” (R&I 269) Commentary: So if the term “universe” (as here used) meant ‘the Great Entirely’, it would be most peculiar to list it in a sequence with our solar system and the zodiac. Commentary:
Thus, I think it is clear that we must be most careful lest we jump
to conclusions in thinking that the term “universe” necessarily extends
to the Entire Entirety—though at times, it may.
Different Wheels and their Magnitude “The
wheel of the universe, or the sumtotal of all stars and starry systems.”
(TCF 1085)
Commentary:
We can accept this statement at face value—namely that this “wheel of
the universe” does, indeed, represent the “sum total” of the Great Entirety.
Whether this is possible we shall see. Or, it could represent the sumtotal
of all stars and starry systems within a limited structure, such as
a galaxy. A
cosmic wheel could be a galaxy or something less. On face value, we
cannot tell anything about the scope of such a cosmic wheel. Perhaps
there will be hints below. These cosmic wheels, according to
the esoteric books, are divided into forty-nine groups, each comprising
millions of septenary constellations. Commentary: Now we begin to see
something of the size of such a cosmic wheel, which will tell us something
about how to interpret the universal wheel. Let us look at some of the
largest cosmic structures which DK has mapped for us. On TCF 344, we
see seven large Beings, each with seven subdivisions. There are therefore,
49 subdivisions, on the cosmic monadic plane. BUT, it is suggested that
each of these 49 triangles has only one group of seven constellations.
In the diagram, the seven stars of the Great Bear are one such sevenfold
constellation. The kind of cosmic wheel we are dealing with has forty-nine
groups each of which contain “millions of septenary constellations”,
thus, when considering a cosmic wheel of this kind, we may be talking
about a galaxy (or even something larger). On the largest level, such
cosmic wheels, could be an Archetypal Seven, composed of forty-nine
groups, each of which is composed of millions of sevenfold galaxies!
On this level, rather than a solar Logos and its solar system being
the fundamental unit, a galaxy could be considered a fundamental
unit.
Then, just as there are solar systems, constellations, super-constellations and supreme constellations (which are mapped, I believe, on TCF 293)—there would be a galaxy, a constellation of seven galaxies, a super-constellation of forty-nine galaxies, and a supreme-constellation of 343 galaxies. Of course, that could not be the end of the story! For
purposes of study by the Adepts, they are each known by a symbol, and
these forty nine symbols embody all that can be apprehended anent the
size, magnitude, quality, vibratory activity, and objective of those
great forms through which an EXISTENCE is experiencing. The
Chohans of high degree know the forty nine sounds which give the quality
of the consciousness aspect of these great Beings Who are as far removed
from the consciousness of our solar Logos as the consciousness of man
is removed from that of a crystal.
Commentary: Now this is a big hint. Man is as a cell to the planetary Logos, and presumably, more like a crystal to a solar Logos. Crystals, I believe, can be both elementary (composed of elementary substance) or molecular. I could not go so far as to say that to a solar Logos, man is as an atom. But it is necessary for us to say that man, to a solar Logos is less than the cell he is to the planetary Logos. Considering
the billions or even trillions of cells which can be found in the human
body, to what type of Entity could a solar Logos be considered a cell.
Well, there are, I believe, billions of stars in a galaxy. One
was discovered, relatively recently, which has six trillion!
Thus, to me, I think the proportion which sees a solar Logos as a cell within the Galactic Logos is reasonable. But what is the hierarchical distance between a cell and a crystal. I don’t know. Also, what is the hierarchical distance between a cell and an atom? Certainly 1) internal cell structures, 2) complex-organic molecules, 2) simple molecules, and then 4) atoms must lie between. Then, there is the question of whether there are EXISTENCES in relation to which the analogy must be extended to include sub-atomic particles (of various magnitudes). SO! If a solar Logos is as a cell (we hypothesize) to a Galactic Logos, to what sort of EXISTENCE is it as a crystal (which is an aggregation of simple molecules or atoms). The idea of aggregation is here important, otherwise the Tibetan could have said, “as a molecule” or “as an atom”. But in a crystal is to be found the idea of many—enough to make a crystalline structure. Perhaps the Being we are looking for is an Entity ensouling seven galaxies or forty-nine galaxies, or 343 galaxies. We can discuss. Such a being would be to the Galactic World what a “Cosmic Parabrahm” would be the world of solar Logoi! (See TCF 344) The knowledge thus appreciated by the Chohans is naturally theoretical and conveys only to their relatively limited consciousness the general nature of the group of constellations, and the force occasionally emanating from them which has at times to be taken into calculation Commentary:
Coming “back to earth” so to speak, it would be hard to imagine that
a Chohan, whose technical knowledge does not lie beyond the solar ring-pass-not,
could be interested in any extra-galactic structure. It is hard to believe
also that anything beyond our OAWNMBS would be of concern. We have to see how literally we wish to take the word “atomic life” If a Cosmic Parabrahm is as a atom to a the “septenary constellations” listed above---(millions of them are found in each of the 49 groups into which a cosmic wheel is divided), then what must be the magnitudes of a cosmic wheel and its 49 groups, and the millions of constellations found in each of those groups. One
can see how very blinded or blinding are these references.
There is no certainty here. Since solar systems are the type of Entities
which have ideographs, it becomes clear that Beings in the category
of “Systemic Wheels” are Cosmic Parabrahms. The question is, are these
Cosmic Parabrahms atomic to 1) a Cosmic Wheel; 2)to one
of the 49 groups into which Cosmic Wheels are divided; or 3) to one
of the millions of “constellations” which comprise one of the 49 divisions
of a Cosmic Wheel? As there are even billions of galaxies in our cosmos,
it may be that the fundamental unit of such Cosmic Wheels are
not solar Logoi at all, but are galaxies themselves.
The Major Divisions of the Cosmic Entirety could look like this: 1. One Universal Wheel—all stars and starry systems 2.
Cosmic Wheels—the seven largest substructures in Cosmos. 3.
Sub-Cosmic Wheels—the sevenfold divisions of each Cosmic Wheel 4.
Forty Nine Groups—the sevenfold divisions into which each Sub-Cosmic
Wheel is divided. 5. Millions of septenary constellations
(in which the basic unit is a galaxy) 6. Galaxies,
themselves. 7. Seven Sub-Galactic Divisions 8.
Globular clusters within Seven Sub-Galactic Divisions—maybe this is
not a legitimate category) 9. Systemic Wheels (of 343 solar
Logoi) within the Globular Clusters, or some galactic subdivision. Each
Systemic Wheel is a Cosmic Parabrahm. 10. Seven OAWNMBSs within each
Systemic Wheel. (TCF 343) 11. Seven sevenfold constellations within
each OAWNMBS. 12. Seven solar logoi within each such sevenfold constellation.
13. Seven major planets (planetary schemes) within each solar Logos.
14. Seven chains within each planetary scheme. 15. Seven globes within
each planetary chain. 16. Seven groups of Monads within each planetary
globe. (“Monadic groupings”) 17. Seven sub-groups within each monadic
grouping—these sub-groups correlating to the seven subrays of the Monad.
(cf. TCF 176) These are essentially Ashramic groups. 18. Etc.
down to the microcosmic level. Our solar system is disclosed as being:
a. A system of the fourth order, having its force centres upon the fourth
cosmic plane, and making its objective manifestation from the fourth
systemic plane, via the fourth subplane of the systemic physical plane.
b. Blue in colour, esoteric orange and green. c. A system which is occultly
known to the Adept as "in an airy sign in which the Bird can fly."
d. A system formed of "three fires which form a fourth." e.
A system in which the Bird has "four tail feathers" [Page
1087] and hence can occultly "mount to a higher plane and find
its fifth." f. A system which has four major cycles, and minor
periods of manifestation which are multiples of that figure.
g.
A system which in the alchemical phraseology of the Masters is viewed
as being "a product of the fourth; the fourth itself in process
of transmutation; and the living stone with four shells."
All this can be seen at one glance by the Master who has the ideographic
word before Him. Other ideograms are available for His use which
give Him the immediate information as He studies the influences contacting
our solar system. Chain
wheels , called in some of the books rounds. (There are chain rounds
and scheme rounds). (Including....the Wheel of the Chain,
the Wheel of a globe, the Wheel of a race) The revolution of any one
globe. The cycle of the three worlds The wheel of a plane The revolution
or cyclic appearance of a kingdom in nature. This applies within a scheme
but only to the four kingdoms in objective appearance. The revolution
of a planetary center producing monadic appearance. The monadic wheel,
or the periodic appearance of units of the fourth Creative Hierarchy.
Thus we pass down the scale through all the kingdoms and forms till we arrive at the tiny revolution of the atom of substance.” (TCF 1087) |