For clearer understanding on the part of the general reader, it must be stated that Occult Science recognizes seven cosmical elements, four entirely physical and the 5th (Ether) semi-material, as it will become visible in the air towards the end of our Fourth Round, to reign supreme over the others during the whole of the Fifth. The remaining two are as yet absolutely beyond the range of human perception. These latter will, however, appear as presentments during the sixth and seventh Races of this round, and will become known in the sixth and seventh Rounds respectively.

Obviously the first four entirely physical elements are those enumerated above and the fifth, Ether, is in the process of manifesting now, but the other elements, whether regarded as Ethers or not, are not yet manifest on our globe. There is therefore nothing in the H.P.B./Masters system that could correspond to the A.B./C.W.L. system's four 'ethers or etheric states of matter.

Sub-atomic States of Matter

It can be asked, if the above is true, what is the matter that is manifest at spiritualistic séances as ectoplasm and of what are the 'auras' of Kirlian photography composed?

To answer the second question first, Kirlean photographs are relatively high voltage discharges affected by the emanations from living bodies, or where a part of a body has been detached (cut off or severed by accident) the astral (not etheric) model still remaining intact affects the discharge. An understanding of this involves a knowledge of how forms or models in the astral are projected into objectivity at physical level.

The first question concerning the exuding of the matter called ectoplasm from mediums (spiritualistic) during séances involves a process of the disintegration of the physical substance of the medium's body, i.e. the creation of a special state of physical matter for the time being. The phantom's weight increases as that of the medium correspondingly decreases. Ectoplasm is exuded as an amorphous mass from an orifice, e.g. mouth or nostril, and then it, or some of it, assumes a form, or a number of forms, of recognizable likenesses. These are impressed on the substance by psychic (astral) force by elementals from patterns in the minds of those present or in the Astral Light.

Blavatsky describes (see Secret Doctrine, Volume I, Page 257; 3rd Edition Page 267; 4th Edition, Page 259) what characteristic of matter will correspond to the 'etheric' state when it does manifest, and she says it will be that of 'permeability'. Along with it a sixth sense will develop in man which will enable him to see 'through' solid matter. Not only that, in the then proper 'etheric' state a solid object will be able to pass through another solid one, say a wall, or knots will be able to be tied in an endless cord, etc. This is something that elementals are now able to do and sometimes do at séances. If the etheric states as described by Leadbeater were of this nature this state of permeability and the sixth sense would also be here now, but they are not. It should be noted that, just as Leadbeater 'created' his 'etheric states of matter, so there must be other states of matter than those we normally know - as implied a number of times by Blavatsky - which do not ordinarily exist in a free state. An example of the temporary creation of one of these abnormal states would be that of the endless cord knots just cited, wherein abnormal states of matter would have been created by the Elementals.

Established Terminology

When Blavatsky wanted to describe something non-physical and tenuous in nature she used the word 'ethereal' (not etheric), which again she specifically related to the astral plane (see Secret Doctrine, Volume II, page 299; 3rd Edition, page 313; 4th Edition, page 300). Further, towards the end of an article that she entitled 'A Danger Signal' written for La Revue Théosophique, April 1889, (see Collected Writings, Volume XI, page 185 et seq.) Blavatsky makes the following statement: 'The terminology established some fifteen years ago in the Theosophical Society is the correct one, because in every case these terms are a faithful translation of their Sanskrit equivalents, almost as old as the latest human race', and then significantly she adds, 'This terminology could not be modified at present without running the risk of introducing into the theosophical teachings a chaos which would be deplorable and dangerous to their clarity'. This statement is particularly relevant and significant in the light of what in fact happened to the theosophical terminology in the books written later on.

It was in 1889 that Blavatsky wrote The Key to Theosophy and therein she very carefully defined her terms and their meanings. Towards the end of Chapter IX (page 171 Original Edition) she wrote a section, 'Definite words for definite things'. In this she was concerned that the terminology should be settled. She used a large part of that section for definitions of the elements of the human 'soul'. In a footnote (Page 175) she puts, 'Shifting of Metaphysical terms ', which she says 'applies here only to the shifting of their translated equivalents from the Eastern expressions: for to this day there never existed such terms in English, every Theosophist having to coin his own terms to render his thought. It is high time then to settle on some definite nomenclature', and this she did in The Key where she defined precisely all the more commonly used words and gave their Sanskrit equivalents. She set out the constitution of man, giving the English equivalents of the Eastern names.

Besant's The Ancient Wisdom was written in 1897, eight years after this terminology had been established. In it (Page 194) she equates the Linga Sarira to her Etheric Double which in her system, as explained above, she places on the physical plane. This introduces a difficulty because the Linga Sarira in the Hindu and original theosophical sense is on the plane above the physical.  

It must also be remembered that, according to Blavatsky, there is a Laya Centre between the physical plane proper and the one of the Linga Sarira (the astral) above it, and therefore distinctly different sets of senses operate on the planes on either side of the Laya Centres. The physical is cognizable by physical senses but the plane of the Linga Sarira (the Astral in the Blavatsky system) is not; the latter requires astral senses, i.e. those of clairvoyance and clairaudience. In the A.B./C.W.L. system, however, the Etheric Body or Double being 'etheric' physical, but on the physical plane, would not be separated from the dense physical by a Laya Centre: physical senses would therefore apply to both the gross physical and the etheric physical.

I) Atma, the Higher Self, is neither your spirit nor mine, but like sunlight shines on all. It is the universally diffused divine principle, and is inseparable from its one and absolute super-spirit, as the sunbeam is inseparable from sunlight.

II) Buddhi, the spiritual soul is only its vehicle. Neither Atma nor Buddhi separately, nor the two collectively, are of any more use to the body of man, than sunlight and its beams are for a mass of granite buried in the earth, unless the divine duad is assimilated by, and reflected in, some consciousness. Neither Atma nor Buddhi are ever reached by Karma, because the former is the highest aspect of Karma, the working agent of Itself in one aspect, and the latter is unconscious on this Plane. This consciousness or mind is

III) Manas, the derivation or product in a reflected form, of ahamkara, 'the conception of I,' or 'Ego-ship'. It is, therefore, when inseparably united to the first two, called the spiritual Ego, and taijasa, the radiant. This is the real individuality, or the divine man. It is this Ego which - having originally incarnated in the senseless human form animated by, but unconscious of, the presence in itself of the dual monad, since it had no consciousness - made of that human-like form a real man. It is this Ego, this 'causal body', which overshadows every personality into which Karma forces it to incarnate. It is this Ego which is held responsible for all the sins committed through and in, every new body or personality - the evanescent masks which hide the true individual through the long series of rebirths. [Key to Theosophy, VIII, 135]

__________

The Higher Self is   
Atma, the inseparable ray of the Universal and One SELF. It is the God above, more than within us. Happy the man who succeeds in saturating his Inner Ego with it!

The Spiritual Divine Ego is
the spiritual soul or Buddhi, in close union with Manas, the mind-principle, without which the former is no Ego at all, but only the Atmic Vehicle.

The Inner, or Higher Ego, is   
 Manas, the 'fifth' principle, so called, independently of Buddhi. The mind-principle is only the Spiritual Ego when merged into one with Buddhi; no materialist being supposed to have in him such an Ego, however great his intellectual capacities. It is the permanent individuality or the reincarnating Ego. The Lower, or Personal ego, is the physical man in conjunction with his lower self, i.e. animal instincts, passions, desires, etc. It is called the false personality, and consists of the lower Manas combined with Kama Rupa, and operating through the physical body and its phantom or double. [Key to Theosophy, IX, 176]

It is also important to note that, whereas there are tattvic correspondences to the solid, liquid, gaseous and fiery states of matter, there are none to the four physical 'etheric' states.

Besant's Terminology

In her book The Ancient Wisdom, in a footnote, Besant says, 'Linga Sarira was the name originally given to the Etheric Body and must not be confused with the Linga Sarira of Hindu philosophy. Sthula Sarira is the Sanskrit name for the dense body'. But the 'Etheric Body' is her modern term and Linga Sarira is an ancient one. She does not explain the origins of the term 'Etheric Body' nor what she meant by 'originally', but in the original (Blavatsky) theosophical literature there is no 'etheric' body or state of matter. Besant does not say why the Etheric Body should not be confused with the Linga Sarira. She implies that the term Etheric Body was somehow of more ancient usage than Linga Sarira but does not justify her statement. It was certainly used as a word by mediaeval and even 19th century occultists but not in the sense in which Besant used it. To this double, however, she ascribed most of the characteristics and qualities of the astral body (2nd principle) of the Blavatsky system, often referred to by its Indian name Linga Sarira.

In the H.P.B./Masters literature the word 'etheric' does appear in a few places, e.g. concerning the force used in the Keeley motor (see Secret Doctrine, Volume I, page 562; 3rd Edition, page 613; 4th Edition, page 285) but there Blavatsky expressly relates 'etheric' to Astral (i.e. her 2nd plane). It could be that in contrasting it with the meaning given to the word by the Hindus Besant was thinking of Linga Sarira being translated as 'sex-body' (see Collected Writings, Volume IV, page 53), Linga being the Sanskrit word for phallus or maleness. Blavatsky does mention this but persists with her use of the word. The meaning she gave to Linga Sarira in her Theosophical Glossary is as follows:

 'Linga Sarira. The 'body', i.e., the aerial symbol of the body. This term designates the doppelgänger or the 'astral body' of man or animal. It is the eidolon of the Greeks, the vital and prototypal body; the reflection of the man of flesh. It is born before and dies or fades out, with the disappearance of the last atom of the body.'

It is used in this sense consistently throughout the Blavatsky writings. Linga Sarira is the direct equivalent of Blavatsky's astral body. Later she explains the Linga Sarira's relationship to the Kama and Mayavi Rupas in Collected Writings of H.P.Blavatsky, Vol.IV, page 53.

In all the voluminous literature that came during and after the Besant era, the astral plane became identified with the Kama Loca (4th Blavatsky plane), but to add to the confusion many of the qualities ascribed to the astral plane in the later literature were in fact those of the astral plane (2nd) as originally described by Blavatsky, and sometimes of the Astral Light (Blavatsky).

Little or no mention of the Astral Light, as such, is made in the later literature in spite of its importance, particularly in explaining psychic phenomena. Another important difference between the A.B./C.W.L. view on 'etheric' states and the H.P.B./Masters description of Ether is that the former might be regarded, as 'developmental' states of matter, and would then be associated with the processes of involution, whereas the tattvic Ether and higher states are evolutionary, i.e. they will appear only in the Rounds after our present fourth.

Besant said she was making these changes to eradicate confusions but it is difficult to see that any confusions existed, especially as Blavatsky had been at such pains to define her terms which she used consistently throughout both her own and the Masters' writings.

Principles and Planes

Many confusions were introduced by the changes made by Besant in both the terminology and classifications of the principles and planes. A fundamental one was the use of the word 'Monadic' to describe a plane (2nd) (see Table IV below). Monad is defined in the Blavatsky literature as a duad, the combination of Atma and Buddhi. It is also used in the universal sense to include Mahat i.e. Monad is then regarded as a triad (see Secret Doctrine, Volume I, page 570; 3rd Edition, page 623; 4th Edition, page 293). There is a reference in the S.D. Vol.III to the Monad as both a duality and a triad, but by the latter the Ego (the upper Triad in man) is obviously meant. Although Monad as defined by Blavatsky is one and indivisible, the triad Atma-Buddhi-Manas is sometimes referred to in her literature as the human Ego (see terminology and definitions given at the end of Chapter IX of The Key to Theosophy , page 176 in the Original Edition).

Note Table IV (page 14) for new names of planes in A.B./C.W.L. system (see Besant's Study in Consciousness, page 3)

The division of the physical plane by Besant into two (a dense lower and an upper etheric) not only meant a radical rearrangement of the principles of man, but also affected the naming of the planes in Nature on which the 'subjective' globes of a Chain are placed. The H.P.B./Masters scale of principles is clearly set out in The Key (see Table II). Besant's variations on this are given on page 194 of her The Ancient Wisdom (Table III herein). They are also set out on page 48 and there are further variations in the footnote, where the numbering of the principles is inverted. Here Atma is allocated to the 5th plane, counting from the bottom, instead of the 7th (see Table IV). It is explained in the text that two higher principles above the 5th (3rd in Table IV) are beyond the consciousness of man at this time. No reference to any such higher principles or planes is given in the Blavatsky literature. Corresponding planes of Nature are given on page 3 of Besant's A Study in Consciousness. Here Adi and Anupadaka are names given to the two planes above Atma, whereas in the H.P.B./Masters classification Atma is supreme, i.e. no planes above it, and the names Adi and Anupadaka are those of the Tattvas corresponding to Atma and Buddhi (see Table I).  Besant applied the word 'Monadic' (see Table IV) to her No.2 plane (counting downwards) making it superior to the Spiritual (Atmic). Apart from the fact that in the classical system there is no 'plane' above Atma, Besant's nomenclature is illogical in that whether Monad is regarded as a duad or triad, Atma is its highest component. Any combination of Atma with Buddhi and Manas, both derivatives of 'Atma', could not possibly be superior to Atma.

On page 194 of The Ancient Wisdom Besant gives a table of principles and 'forms'. Under the forms she lists a series of bodies which she says corresponds to the Koshas in the Vedantic classification, but here she relates Atma to the bliss, Buddhi to the causal and Manas to the mental body respectively. These terms are not so used in the Blavatsky system where the causal body corresponds to the higher Manas and bliss to Buddhi (see Secret Doctrine, Volume 1, page 157; 3rd Edition Page 181; 4th Edition page 211). In Besant's Table the astral body is equated to Kama, or the animal soul, and the Etheric Double to Linga Sarira and the dense body to Sthula Sarira. Underneath the Table Besant says: 'It will be seen that the difference is merely a question of names and that the 6th, 5th, 4th and 3rd 'principles' (not however numbered in the Table) are merely Atma working in the buddhic, causal, mental and astral bodies while the 2nd and 1st principles are the two lowest bodies themselves'. To this statement was added, 'This sudden change in the method of naming is apt to cause confusion in the mind of the student, and as Blavatsky, our revered teacher, expressed much dissatisfaction with the then current nomenclature as confused and misleading and desired others and myself to try and improve it, the above names as descriptive, simple and representing the facts are here adopted'. The changes, together with others, made by Besant did not in fact represent the same 'facts', e.g. the invention and insertion of the 'etheric' body, but they were adopted both within and outside the Theosophical Society. In the meanwhile they have virtually become standard 'Theosophy'. It is difficult to understand how Blavatsky's 'then current nomenclature' was 'confused and misleading', in that so near to her death as 1889 when she wrote The Key to Theosophy she set out so clearly and simply the terminology which had been devised over many years with the Masters' cooperation. Up to that time there were no English expressions for the then devised terms, and there was certainly no confusion in them.

As an example of how Besant's new nomenclature was imposed on the membership of the T.S. (and the interested public), we have the following from Leadbeater's Textbook of Theosophy, page 61: 

It is true that Blavatsky made some variations in the ordinary septenary classification of planes and principles in the Papers for her Esoteric School, particularly in dividing Manas into upper and lower, and sometimes omitting the physical body as a principle, but she never altered the main theme of her sevenfold system, with Atma as the supreme principle and plane. It will be seen from the foregoing that the alterations made by Besant, which were generally adopted by later writers in the Society, e.g. Leadbeater, C. Jinarajadasa, A.E. Powell, etc., were more than mere terminological changes and certainly did nothing to improve clarity.

It is important to note what is said in Secret Doctrine, Volume 3, (495 footnote; Collected Writings of H.P.Blavatsky, Volume 12, Page 608 footnote; E.W., 394 footnote). 'It is erroneous to call the fourth [2nd in A.B./C.W.L.] human principle 'Kama Rupa'. It is no Rupa at all until after death, but stands for the Kamic elements in man, his animal desires and passions, such as anger, lust, envy, revenge, etc., the progeny of selfishness and matter'. This states categorically that there is no Astral Body (4th principle vehicle as such) until after death. In what body then it can be asked does 'astral' travel occur, if there is no body during life in which to travel? Blavatsky tells us,  

'When a man visits another in his Astral Body, it is the Linga-sarira that goes, but this cannot happen at any great distance.

If a man thinks intensely of another at a distance, his Mayavi-Rupa (see later) may appear to that person, without the projector knowing anything about it. This Mayavi-rupa is formed by the unconscious use of Kriyashakti. (Collected Writings, Volume XII, Pages 706/7).

Doubles

In the matter of the 'doubles' in man's constitution Blavatsky wrote an article, in question and answer form between herself and M.C., for Lucifer (December 1888, see Collected Writings, Volume X, page 217 et seq.) 'On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgängers' wherein she clearly states:

H.P.B. Our occult philosophy teaches us there are three kinds of 'doubles', to use the word in its widest sense. (1) Man has his 'double' or shadow, properly so called, around which the physical body of the foetus - the future man - is built. The imagination of the mother, or an accident which affects the child, will affect also the astral body. The astral and the physical both exist before the mind is developed into action, and before the Atma awakes. This occurs when the child is seven years old, and with it comes the responsibility attaching to a conscious sentient being. This 'double' is born with man, dies with him and can never separate itself far from the body during life, and though surviving him, it disintegrates, pari passu, with the corpse. It is this, which is sometimes seen over the graves like a luminous figure of the man that was, during certain atmospheric conditions. From its physical aspect it is, during life, man's vital double and after death, only the gases given off from the decaying body. But, as regards its origin and essence, it is something more. This 'double' is what we have agreed to call linga-sarira, but which I would propose to call, for greater convenience, 'Protean' or 'Plastic Body'.

M.C.  [Mabel Collins]  Why Protean or Plastic?

 H.P.B. Protean, because it can assume all forms; e.g. the 'shepherd magicians' whom popular rumour accuses, perhaps not without some reason, of being 'were-wolves', and 'mediums in cabinets', whose own 'Plastic Bodies' play the part of materialized grandmothers and 'John Kings'. Otherwise, why the invariable custom of the 'dear departed angels' to come out but little further than arm's length from the medium whether entranced or not? Mind, I do not at all deny foreign influences in this kind of phenomena. But I do affirm that foreign interference is rare, and that the materialized form is always that of the medium's 'Astral' or Protean Body.

M.C.   But how is this astral body created?

H.P.B. It is not created: it grows, as I told you, with the man and exists in the rudimentary condition even before the child is born.

M.C.   And what about the second?

 H.P.B. The second is the 'Thought' body, or Dream body, rather; known among Occultists as the Mayavi-rupa, or 'illusion-body'. During life this image is the vehicle both of thought and of the animal passions and desires, drawing at one and the same time from the lowest terrestrial manas(mind) and Kama, the element of desire. It is dual in its potentiality, and after death forms, what is called in the East Bhoot, or Kama-rupa, but which is better known to theosophists as the 'Spook'.

M.C.   And the third?

H.P.B. The third is the true Ego, called in the East, by a name meaning 'causal body' but which in the trans-Himalayan schools is always called the 'Karmic body', which is the same. For Karma or action is the cause which produces incessant rebirths or 'reincarnations'. It is not the Monad, nor is it Manas proper; but is, in a way, indissolubly connected with, and a compound of the Monad and Manas in Devachan.

 M.C.   Then there are three doubles?

 H.P.B. If you can call the Christian and other Trinities 'three Gods', then there are three doubles. But in truth there is only one under three aspects or phases: the most material portion disappearing with the body; the middle one, surviving both as an independent, but temporary entity in the land of shadows; the third, immortal, throughout the manvantara unless Nirvana puts an end to it before.

After this Blavatsky went on to explain the difference between the Mayavi and Kama Rupa, very relevant to 'astral' travel and the after-death states. All this explanation was to eradicate confusion.

Man's Constitution as Principles and Aspects

There is important explanatory passage in the Secret Doctrine, Volume III, Page 493, or Collected Writings , Volume XII, page 607, which gives another view of the elements of man's make-up, and which significantly supplements what was in The Key tabulated above. These extracts indicate how precisely Blavatsky defined the terms which had then been decided upon. The established classification and numbering of the principles of man were those used consistently throughout the massive Blavatsky literature.

Some variations on the main theme were made in her E.S. Papers but these were explained. It is hard to see how any confusion could have arisen prior to the changes made by Besant herself.

ABOUT 'PRINCIPLES' AND 'ASPECTS'

Speaking metaphorically and philosophically, on strict esoteric lines, man as a complete unit is composed of Four basic Principles and Three Aspects produced by them on this earth. In the semi-esoteric teachings, these Four and Three have been called Seven Principles, to facilitate the comprehension of the masses.

The aim of this document is to draw attention to the fact that the Ethers of which the Etheric Double was said to be composed (see The Ancient Wisdom page 50 et seq.) do not exist. Students may also be interested in the alterations to the original classification of the human principles which were made to accommodate the Etheric Body. These, as given by Besant, are set out in tabular form below (see Ancient Wisdom page 193):

After Death

Summary

The foregoing analysis and comparison deals with only some of the salient points of difference between the Theosophy as given us by the Masters and the system propounded by Besant and her followers. There are many other areas of difference not touched on in this paper, viz. group souls, permanent atoms, the dispensing of Karma and the attitude to religion.

From what has been given it is quite clear that in the respects mentioned the two systems are irreconcilable. This is particularly so in connection with the latest information Blavatsky gave out in the Papers to her Inner Group. The A.B./C.W.L. system is incompatible with the correspondences given there and with, for example, the hierarchical colours and their relationship to the principles of man. It is important that serious students of Theosophy should know about these discrepancies.

Note

The clairvoyant investigations into the atomic structure of some elements was started in 1895. An early reference to the term 'Etheric' is on page 20 of Leadbeater's book The Astral Plane (1895, reprint 1987). On page 21 he refers to Blavatsky's 'seven principles of man', but Blavatsky never made reference to the Etheric Double (see Table II and references to Blavatsky's Doubles on page 16 et seq.)