In the article “Dialogues between The Two Editors: On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers,” H. P. Blavatsky provides brief explanations regarding three non-physical bodies possessed by the human being and speaks of them in these terms:

#1. Astral Double ~ Astral Body ~ Astral Shadow ~ Linga Sharira in Sanskrit

“First, man has his “double” or shadow, properly so called, around which the physical body of the foetus – the future man – is built.”

She states that “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.”

Elsewhere she explains that a material (though not physical material) cord connects or ties the astral double to the physical body (Sthula Sharira) and that it is for this reason that the astral body or double “can never separate itself far from the body during life.”

In that article, HPB also uses the names “plastic body” and “protean body” for the Linga Sharira, due to the fact that it has the potential to assume many forms, for example at the materialisations that were common at Victorian era seances, where the medium’s own slightly projected astral double or Linga Sharira served as the vehicle on and through which took the form or appearance of the “shells” of the dead from Kama Loka.

In the section on dreams in “Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge,” HPB answers a question about “the condition of the Linga Sarira, or plastic body, during dreams” by clearly stating: “The condition of the Plastic form is to sleep with its body, unless projected by some powerful desire generated in the higher Manas. In dreams it plays no active part, but on the contrary is entirely passive, being the involuntarily half-sleepy witness of the experiences through which the higher principles are passing.” (p. 76)

But she also says that dreams belong to, or are experienced on, “the Astral plane.” (p. 27) In light of the above, we may suppose that the astral plane on which we dream is of a more subtle and less material level of astral than that on which the Linga Sharira exists.

“The “principles” active during ordinary dreams [i.e. as opposed to truly spiritual experiences] . . . are Kama, the seat of the personal Ego, and of desire awakened into chaotic activity by the slumbering reminiscences of the lower Manas.” (p. 59)

This therefore relates directly to that other inner body of ours, which we will shortly see HPB calls the “thought body” and the “dream body.”

The fact that the Linga Sharira (a) cannot be separated or projected very far from the physical body during life, (b) is inactive and intermeshed with the physical body during sleep, and (c) after death stays close by the physical body and “disintegrates, pari passu, with the corpse,” “dies or fades out, with the disappearance of the last atom of the body” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 190, Entry for “Linga Sharira”), “finally dissipates when the last particles of the body disintegrate” (“Tibetan Teachings”), seems to indicate that this is a body with a strong magnetic attraction towards Earth, or the physical plane.

In “The Ocean of Theosophy,” HPB’s closest colleague William Q. Judge writes that the astral body – by which he means “Linga Sarira, the design body” – “possesses an elasticity permitting its extension to a considerable distance.” (p. 39) He soon adds that “In the ordinary man who has not been trained in practical occultism or who has not the faculty by birth, the astral body cannot go more than a few feet from the physical one.” (p. 41)

This implies that the trained practical occultist – which would include the Masters of Wisdom – can project or extend their astral double or Linga Sharira “to a considerable distance” from their physical body.

In her first book “Isis Unveiled,” HPB said: “To project this ethereal body, at no matter what distance; to render it more objective and tangible by condensing over its fluidic form the waves of the parent essence, is the great secret of the adept-magician.” (Vol. 1, p. 281) The context seems to suggest that the Linga Sharira or astral double is meant. In the second volume of the same book, we read: “. . . there is no reason why the adepts, the alchemists, the savants of the secret art, should not have already found out that which scientists deny to-day, but may discover true tomorrow, i.e., how to project electrically their astral bodies, in an instant, through thousands of miles of space, leaving their material shells with a certain amount of animal vital principle to keep the physical life going, and acting within their spiritual, ethereal bodies as safely and intelligently as when clothed with the covering of flesh . . .” (Vol. 2, p. 619-620)

Later on, HPB never made such statements with regard to the Linga Sharira and in fact repeatedly said the opposite, such as her words we saw a moment ago: “This “double” . . . can never separate itself far from the body during life.” She then attributes the Adepts’ projection of a subtle form at great distances to another inner body than the Linga Sharira, as we will see.

It may be that the “spiritual, ethereal bodies” spoken of in that context in “Isis Unveiled” – the first book, in which many concepts were introduced tentatively and often very loosely – do not actually refer to the Linga Sharira at all. As the Master K.H. wrote to A. P. Sinnett in 1881, four years after “Isis Unveiled” was published: “By-the-bye you must not trust Isis literally. The book is but a tentative effort to divert the attention of the Spiritualists from their preconceptions to the true state of things. The author was made to hint and point out in the true direction, to say what things are not, not what they are.” (“The Mahatma Letters” p. 45)

If HPB’s later statements are correct, then Judge’s words quoted above are themselves somewhat loosely stated. There are a few other statements in “The Ocean of Theosophy” regarding the astral body which seem to mix up certain details from HPB’s teachings on the subject. We do not question the great value of “The Ocean of Theosophy” but it is always useful to remember that the words of H. P. Blavatsky ought to carry more weight as “esoteric authority” than those of William Judge . . . a point which Judge himself never denied and was always the first to make.

In the “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” article, HPB also refers to the Linga Sharira as the “vital double,” so called because it is “the vehicle of Life or Prana” (“The Key to Theosophy” p. 118, 121) that flows through it to the physical body. “Linga-sharira, or astral body, is the vehicle of the life principle.” (“The Secret Doctrine Dialogues” p. 479)

The Linga Sharira is sometimes also referred to in the writings of H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge as the “ethereal double” and “ethereal body.” The context usually clearly indicates that the Linga Sharira – also called astral double and astral body – is meant, and the terms “astral” and “ethereal” are frequently used interchangeably as obvious synonyms in one and the same sentence or paragraph.

“Ethereal” is not the same word as “etheric.” “Ethereal” simply means “light, fine, subtle, seemingly not of this world.” HPB did on a number of occasions use the word “etheric” but she never once wrote about “the etheric body” or “etheric double.” “Etheric” was a term used by some late 19th century scientists in its literal sense of “something belonging to the nature of ether” and that is how HPB occasionally used the term; never in connection with the Linga Sharira.

In Vol. 13 of the “H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings” series is a “Brief fragment [“ON MESMERISM AND HYPNOTISM”] ascribed to H.P.B. and published in Annie Besant’s pamphlet on Hypnotism and Mesmerism.” This fragment of text was not something published by HPB, nor is it found among any of her posthumously published writings. It may be genuine but if it is, it has almost definitely been tampered with (without saying so) by Besant, for it includes the sentence “The mesmerizer throws out his own Auric Fluid . . . through the etheric double, on his patient.” It would be a strange coincidence if the one and only time that HPB used the term “etheric double” just happened to be in a fragment of text in the possession of Annie Besant, one of the main introducers and promoters of the term “etheric double” around the dawn of the 20th century. If genuine, it is far more likely that HPB wrote “ethereal double” or “astral double” and that Besant edited it to better reflect the altered usage and re-definition of terms in “The Theosophical Society – Adyar,” of which she became the president and leader.

It was Besant’s colleague, the highly controversial, demonstrably immoral, and in numerous areas conscious fraud C. W. Leadbeater (see The Case Against C. W. Leadbeater), who first claimed to have discovered – via his self-proclaimed clairvoyant investigations and occult discoveries – the “etheric body” or “etheric double” and gave it this name. This was a decade or so after the passing of H. P. Blavatsky and a few years after that of William Judge.

In actuality, Leadbeater did not claim to have discovered it from scratch, for he acknowledged that this “etheric body” was the Linga Sharira spoken of by HPB. Everything that has been presented so far in this article regarding the Linga Sharira from HPB (i.e. thus excluding Judge’s comments about it being extensible “to a considerable distance”) was agreed with and repeated by Leadbeater regarding the Linga Sharira. According to his unverified clairvoyant faculties, this was all correct. So although it may at first appear that Leadbeater’s “etheric body” was a new or additional subtle body never mentioned by H. P. Blavatsky, that is only partly the case. What he allegedly discovered was that “physical matter exists in seven grades or orders of density, viz.: Atomic, Subatomic, Super-Etheric, Etheric, Gaseous, Liquid, Solid. Particles of all these grades enter into the composition of the physical vehicle. The latter, however, has two well-marked divisions, viz., the dense body, composed of solids, liquids and gases, and the Etheric Body, or Double, as it is frequently called, consisting of the four finer grades of physical matter.” (as summarised by A. E. Powell, an Adyar Society member and devoted follower of Leadbeater and Besant, in his compilation book “The Etheric Double”)

Due to this, Leadbeater and Besant decided that the Linga Sharira should be renamed the “etheric double” or “etheric body” and that the term “astral body” should be solely reserved for that principle or component of the human constitution which HPB referred to as Kama and Kama Rupa, the desire/passional element in man, or “fourth principle.” They also proceeded in time to alter the definition and usage of all other terms used in the original Theosophical teachings for the Seven Principles of the human constitution – including relegating Atma, re-defining it as simply “the force of spiritual will,” and teaching that the Monad is something other than and higher than both Atma and Buddhi – and much more besides. All of this was later copied or replicated in the books of Alice Bailey, whose teachings were based almost solely on those of Leadbeater and Besant, but who also introduced further changes and additions. One effect of this is to make HPB’s teachings and metaphysical framework almost incomprehensible in many respects to students of those later versions of “Theosophy.” But we will not go into that any further here.

The Leadbeater/Besant teachings became far more popular and well known than those of Blavatsky and now their usage and definitions for the terms “etheric” and “astral” are highly prevalent and widespread, including in New Age spirituality and alternative medicine.

In “The Theosophical Society – Adyar,” the Leadbeater/Besant terminology is the primary and accepted one, as it obviously also is in the Lucis Trust and Arcane School of Bailey, as well as to a large extent in the Anthroposophy of Rudolf Steiner, and the New Acropolis organisation, to name just a few, while in the United Lodge of Theosophists (founded in 1909 by Robert Crosbie with the mission statement “To spread broadcast the Teachings of Theosophy as recorded in the Writings of H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge”) it is the original terms and definitions as used by HPB that are preferred and utilised. G. de Purucker of “The Theosophical Society – Point Loma” (now split into the Pasadena and Point Loma Theosophical Societies) borrowed the term “etheric double” and “etheric body” for the Linga Sharira but also used the original terms “astral double” and “astral body” for this same principle. Although using the “etheric” term, he did not subscribe to or teach Leadbeater’s rationale for introducing this name.

Theosophists should not condemn and demonise the very word “etheric,” since that is unwarranted and mere intellectual pedantry. But one should be aware of what one means when using this term and ought also to know whether one is using it from the Leadbeater/Besant/Bailey perspective or some other. We will see later that even Robert Crosbie himself, and also his colleague and ULT co-founder Grace Clough, very occasionally used the terms “etheric” and “astral” in the same or similar manner to Leadbeater and Besant.

#2. Thought Body ~ Dream Body

In “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers,” HPB says of this body that it is –

During life: the vehicle of both thought (belonging to the Lower Manas or Kama-Manas, the lower/personal mind) and desire (belonging to Kama, the desire/passion principle)

After death: it forms the Kama Rupa in Kama Loka, also known as the “shell,” the “astral shell,” or psychic shell on the astral plane.

She states that the Occultists also know this thought body or dream body as the Mayavi Rupa, literally the “illusion body.”

In the Glossary at the end of “The Key to Theosophy,” the entry for “Protean Soul” tells us that this “thought-body” is “the higher astral form.” With this in mind, it is thus perfectly reasonable – and even perhaps necessary – to call the Linga Sharira the “lower astral.” In fact, the title of HPB’s article gives a clue; it is “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” (plural) rather than just “On The Astral Body, or Doppelganger.” She begins it by saying that the three bodies described therein are all ““doubles,” to use the word in its widest sense.”

In HPB’s writings, the term “astral” is associated in various ways with the Kama and Lower Manas principles as well as with the astral double or astral body, the Linga Sharira. This itself has caused quite a bit of confusion and misunderstanding over the years even for students of the original teachings. We will later see the usage of “lower astral” and “higher astral” by Russian Theosophist Helena Roerich in the Agni Yoga literature.

In the “Theosophical Glossary” entry for “Sukshma Sarira” (p. 312, which term literally means “subtle body” in Sanskrit) HPB says that this term applies to the “thought-body,” which she there also calls the “Manasarupa,” literally “mind-form” or “mind-body.” “The Voice of The Silence,” translated by HPB from the Book of the Golden Precepts, speaks of the need to “cleanse thy mind-body” (p. 11, original edition) and HPB’s explanatory note on p. 77 says that this is the Manasa Rupa. It is called “the body of Manas” in the “Key to Theosophy” glossary entry for the term “Taijas.”

As for the unqualified term “subtle body,” one can read, for example, in HPB’s posthumously published article “The Mystery of Buddha”: “The shock of death was broken, and like many other Adepts, He threw off the mortal coil and left it to be burnt, and its ashes to serve as relics, and began interplanetary life, clothed in His subtle body. He was reborn as Shankara . . .”

As for the term “dream body,” please see the comments on this in the previous section.

It seems safe to say, based on the above, that to the names Thought Body, Dream Body, and Mind Body, could be added Higher Astral Body, Subtle Body, and perhaps Lower Mental Body. HPB herself never once used the now popular term “mental body” but the latter is undeniably a permissible synonym for “mind-body” and “thought-body.” But from her descriptions, it seems that this “higher astral” only equates to the lower mental, i.e. the Kama-Manasic, not the truly higher mental. However, the higher has to act through the lower during incarnated life.

And how to understand “the form of an adept appearing at a distance from his body”? In “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” HPB answers that “It is a walking thought. . . . The adept may at his will use his Mayavi-rupa, but the ordinary man does not, except in very rare cases. It is called Mayavi-rupa because it is a form created for use in the particular instance, and it has quite enough of the adept’s mind in it to accomplish its purpose.” We all possess and use our thought body or dream body but only an Adept possesses both the knowledge and ability to utilise it in the specific function of Mayavi Rupa.

It is suggested to HPB: “In which case an adept can appear in several places almost simultaneously,” to which she replies: “He can. Just as Apollonius of Tyana, who was seen in two places at once, while his body was at Rome. But it must be understood that not all of even the astral adept is present in each appearance.”

Although known to have close connections with Tibet and the Trans-Himalayan region and even describing Themselves as Buddhists – specifically Esoteric Buddhists – the Masters and Initiates most directly behind H. P. Blavatsky and the modern Theosophical Movement do not belong to any publicly known form of Tibetan Buddhism or other type of Buddhism and this includes all known forms of Vajrayana, the system and approach which to Tibetans is synonymous with “Esoteric Buddhism.” Our article The REAL Esoteric Buddhism sheds some light on the Buddhism of the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood or Esoteric School.

But we mention this here because it is the case that a number of the Theosophical teachings about these various bodies are closely echoed in Tibetan Buddhism. “Dream Body,” for example, is a Tibetan Buddhist term, and they also call it the “Mind Body,” just as does HPB. According to Tibetan Buddhism, it is indeed this body – yilü in Tibetan, or yid lus in Wylie transliteration – in which we “dream” at night. In Tibetan Buddhism, becoming self-conscious in one’s dream body is essential for the practice of Dream Yoga. This is, however, an advanced tantric practice and was traditionally only taught to suitably initiated Lamas. Tibetan Buddhism, along with the closely related Tibetan Medicine, also speak of a body matching the Theosophical description of the astral double or Linga Sharira. This is called the Lha Body. Notice how the following, from Dr. Pasang Y. Arya, doctor of Tibetan Medicine, compares with details we read in the first part of this article:

““Lha” (bla) in Tibetan means ‘superior body’, or ‘energy body’. According to the Tibetan medicine and astrology concepts, between the physical body and the mind is the Lha body, which develops like a body copy, a shadow or reflection of the physical body. Therefore it is called subtle or energy body. It can hardly be seen by naked eye. The Lha body is very important to the health of the body/mind, as it always protects, nourishes and gives energy to the physical body, keeping it strong, stable and powerful. . . . After the death, Lha and consciousness separate. The consciousness continues its journey, drawn to the next reincarnation by its karma, whilst Lha stays on the earth, still bearing the person’s shape, until the physical body becomes fully decayed. Although Lha is an energy and reflection of the body, it also has a kind of pseudo-consciousness. . . . When the body is burned and becomes like ashes, it then has a different composition, and so the Lha has a very little chance to remain much longer. That is probably why Tibetans generally prefer the body cremation or sky burial.” (from an interview on the Tibet House Russia website) One should be aware though that there are many things in Tibetan religion and tradition which are completely different from, and often contrary to, Theosophy.

#3. Causal Body ~ Karmic Body

“On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” explains that this is inseparably connected with “the true Ego,” i.e. the permanent, immortal, spiritual individuality. “It is not the Monad [i.e. Atma-Buddhi], nor is it Manas proper [i.e. Higher Manas]; but is, in a way, indissolubly connected with and a compound of the Monad and Manas in Devachan [i.e. in the Heaven state after death].”

According to the article, the “thought-power” belonging during earthly life to the thought body/dream body (#2 above) originates in the causal body and after death it merges back into it, whereas the remainder of the thought body becomes the Kama Rupa or astral shell.

The causal body – Karana Sharira in Sanskrit – is the one about which least is said in the original teachings of Theosophy.

~ * ~

HPB students hardly ever mention or refer to the thought-body or dream-body spoken of above and this may well be because HPB herself hardly ever spoke of or explained it. But as we have seen, it nonetheless plays an important role and helps to make certain things more comprehensible. There is not just one correct or acceptable way to list or tabulate the principles and aspects of the human constitution as taught by Theosophy; one would be perfectly justified in light of the above to add in such terms as “thought body,” “causal body,” etc. provided one is clear about where to put them.

For some students of Theosophy, anything that differs from the specific way in which H. P. Blavatsky or William Judge listed or described something is viewed with suspicion and distrust or rejected immediately as “untheosophical” or even as “pseudo-theosophy.” There are of course some things to which such terms do legitimately apply but one ought always to investigate and examine open-mindedly before rejection and dismissal.

If one did not know that these come from “Cosmological Notes” by the Master M. or Mahatma Morya to A. O. Hume, published as an Appendix to “The Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett,” one could well dismiss the following as some sort of “false teaching,” due to how they differ in some respects from what has become accepted as the “orthodox” Theosophical teaching:

7. Spirit – Mahatma – Lhun Grub (Self existing)

6. Spiritual Soul – Atman Mayava-rupa – Lana Sem-Nyed (Spiritual Soul)

5. Animal Soul – Linga Deha Bhut – Ngi (Physical Ego)

4. Will-form – Kama-Rupa – Nga-Zhi (essence of Action)

3. Astral Body – Ling Sharir – Chhu-lung (one of the 3 airs)

2. Life-principle – Prana: Jivatma – Zer (vital ray)

1. Body – Rupa – Sku

If we are serious about one day becoming accepted and approved chelas or disciples of the Masters, we have to learn to broaden our minds, deepen our perceptions, and develop an attraction to ideas and to Truth itself, rather than making an idol of the written word with which some portions and fragments (which is all HPB claims her teachings to be, vast, majestic, and extremely important as they are) of the universal Truth were clothed at a particular point in time.

Numerous key terms that we use in Theosophy are not even the Masters’ own terms anyway but originate with A. P. Sinnett, who coined several terms of his own during his written correspondence with the Master K.H. in the early 1880s, in order to try to better understand and more clearly formulate the brand new concepts he was learning. As his book “Esoteric Buddhism,” the first systematic exposition in English of some of those teachings, became so popular and influential, Sinnett’s language and ways of tabulating and defining things remains with us today, and was perpetuated by HPB herself. We are not suggesting that his terms – such as “rounds,” “chains,” etc. – are not helpful, but one should not treat or view them as sacrosanct. In one letter to Sinnett, the Master K.H. says, “K.H. may very easily commit mistakes . . . mistakes of punctuation . . . idiomatic mistakes . . . mistakes arising from occasional confusion of terms that I had to learn from you – since it is you who are the author of “rounds” – “rings” – “earthly rings” – etc. etc.” (“The Mahatma Letters” p. 181)

The following chart or table is used on several pages of this website and, as noted at the bottom, derives its content and basis from the book “The Key to Theosophy” by H. P. Blavatsky.

The London, UK Lodge of the United Lodge of Theosophists sometimes uses this same image but with “Antahkarana” and a double-faced arrow inserted between the Higher and Lower Manas. This is certainly in line with HPB’s teachings and can be very useful.

Let’s now see a tabulation of the Seven Principles of the human constitution derived from and based on the teachings of Agni Yoga and primarily “The Letters of Helena Roerich” Vol. 1 (1929-1935) and Vol. 2 (1935-1939). Russian Theosophist Helena Roerich (1879-1955) was the conduit for the teachings known as Agni Yoga (literally “The Yoga of Fire” or “Fiery Yoga”), which are alleged to come from H. P. Blavatsky’s Guru the Master M. or Mahatma Morya.

The Agni Yoga books, also known as “Living Ethics,” deal almost entirely with the ethical, psychological, and devotional aspects of the esoteric Path that leads towards the Masters of Wisdom, as well as claiming to shed a little light on the work of those Masters during the dramatic developments of the world of the 20th century. The Agni Yoga books do not attempt to lay out metaphysical complexities or present a new philosophical framework, for they consider this to have already been done to a high degree of excellence in the writings of HPB, such as “The Secret Doctrine” and other texts of the original teachings of Theosophy. Agni Yoga allies itself quite closely to Blavatsky and her work and teachings, and represents or belongs to an entirely different “stream of influence” from later variants of Theosophy, such as the teachings of C. W. Leadbeater, Annie Besant, and Alice Bailey. Although edited out of English translations of most Agni Yoga literature, Agni Yoga directly warns against the work and teachings of Bailey, Leadbeater, etc. But please note that our mentioning Agni Yoga here does not equate to endorsing or recommending it or affirming the genuineness of all its claims.

~ * ~

THE SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF MAN

(as explained in Agni Yoga and particularly the letters of Helena Roerich)

7. ATMA or ATMAN – The Supreme Energy of Fire, spread throughout the Universe, i.e. the Fire of Space (Spirit)

6. BUDDHI – The direct vehicle and focus of Atma, the conductor through which Atma is manifested (Spiritual Soul, Spirituality)

(Atma + Buddhi = The Monad)

5. MANAS (HIGHER) – Self-consciousness, Higher Intelligence, Wisdom, including the achievements and attainments of many lifetimes; the Thinker (literally “Mind”)

(Atma-Buddhi-Manas = The Higher Triad aka the Higher Ego aka the conscious immortal Ego aka the Seed of the Spirit aka the Spirit aka the true Individuality. The “Seed of the Spirit” is often synonymous with the Monad or Atma-Buddhi, and this, when forming at the start of the cosmic cycle, becomes saturated by the rays of one or another of the seven sacred planets, hence becoming one in essence with that luminary and its ruling Dhyani or cosmic Hierarch, which becomes one’s “Cosmic Father” or “Parent” throughout all rebirths. Precise details of these are, however, not given in either Agni Yoga or Theosophy. Passage #275 of the book “Agni Yoga” says “One should understand that the seed of the spirit is a fragment of the element of fire, and the energy accumulated around it is consciousness.” Seen in this way, the Higher Manas is the individualised self-consciousness that has formed around – and thus become an inseparable part of – the seed of the spirit.)

The above is too spiritual and refined to directly manifest itself on Earth. To incarnate and thus manifest itself partially, it needs:

4. KAMA – literally “desire,” expressed in two aspects:

(a) KAMA-MANAS – Lower mind (Manas), desire-mind, intellectual mind; can form a “bridge” or path of communication (called Antahkarana) connecting Lower Manas with Higher Manas or the lower nature with the higher

(b) KAMA-RUPA – literally “desire-form,” the subjective form of mental and physical desires

(4th Principle = The Thinker in action; also constitutes the Higher Astral Body aka the Higher Subtle Body)

3. PRANA – The vital principle, involved in all manifestations in the Cosmos

2. LINGA SHARIRA – The Lower Astral Body aka Etheric Body or Etheric Double or Astral Double (aka the Lower Subtle Body), the model/design/blueprint that the physical body is built around

1. STHULA SHARIRA – The physical body

(Lower four principles = The Lower Quaternary aka the lower self, the Personality)

Agni Yoga also speaks frequently of THE AURA (only mentioned occasionally in original Theosophy) which, being multi-layered, relates to both the lower and higher principles of the human constitution. Agni Yoga also often refers to THE CENTRES or CHAKRAS, focusing especially on the Heart Chakra, called the Chalice, or Chalice of Accumulations, which is closely connected with the Higher Manas. There are also a few brief mentions of THE MENTAL BODY but this is not directly explained, other than associating it in some way with the Higher Manas and stating that the majority of people have as yet only a partially formed or partly developed Mental Body. The highest Masters already have it fully formed, and part of the spiritual aspirant’s task is to build up their own Mental Body, which can be called the highest type of Subtle Body.

The terms “etheric body” and “etheric double” are never used in the Agni Yoga books themselves, which are said to be the transcribed words, received via a type of telepathic clairaudience, of the Master, but only in Helena Roerich’s letters. However, like G. de Purucker who was mentioned earlier, although she occasionally utilised the “etheric body” term for the Linga Sharira, she did not at all subscribe to Leadbeater’s unique ideas and teachings regarding that part of us. In the Notebooks of Helena Roerich dating from after the last Agni Yoga book (“Supermundane”) was written – and which only became accessible to the world a few years ago and so far mostly in Russian only – her unseen teacher is recorded as repeatedly saying that the term “etheric” (which, as we have mentioned, was never used in this context by H. P. Blavatsky) is an erroneous and misleading name for the Linga Sharira but that he was willing to use it in his conversations with Helena due to no better expression being yet available to quickly and conveniently distinguish this body from higher principles which are also associated in the original Theosophical teachings with the term “astral.” He makes clear that many of the popular Theosophical ideas about the “etheric body” (originating with C. W. Leadbeater) are incorrect, saying, for example, “The double, or lower astral body, is sometimes called the etheric body. But such a name is not merely inaccurate but blatantly erroneous, for the shell of the lower astral body has nothing in common with the spatial ether and is manifested simply in matter that is more subtle than the earthly matter.”

In a unique teaching, not found in original Theosophy and contradicted in Leadbeater/Besant/Bailey “Theosophy,” the unseen inspirer behind Agni Yoga also repeatedly explained to Helena Roerich that the advanced Yogi–Arhat “burns up” their “etheric double” or lower astral body during life, without any harm to themselves, and that the highest Masters have no such body, for They no longer need it, and can physically incarnate without an “etheric shell.” With Them, the fourth or central principle (see above) is also transformed into the highest radiant mental body, composed of Materia Lucida (radiant or luminous matter), and is called Mayavi Rupa. When united with the higher Triad (Atma-Buddhi-Manas), it is called the Causal Body or Body of Causality.

In original Theosophy, the term “Higher Self” is not an exact synonym for “Higher Ego,” for the former was usually used by HPB to refer specifically to Atman (which literally means “Self”), the highest principle of all and a shared and universal one, inseparable and not in any way different from the Absolute itself. In Agni Yoga, the exact wording “Higher Self” is for some reason almost never used but on the few occasions that it is, it is with the same significance as in the original teachings: “The Higher Self is revealed in all beings as a single basis of the omnipresent, all-encompassing, and all-knowing Fire. The Higher Self is consciousness, spread throughout the entire space of the Manifested, but also the Unmanifested Cosmos.” (The teacher – supposedly the Master M. – to Helena Roerich, Notebook No. 88: “Cosmogonic Notes,” 1948 – 1950)

~ * ~

Aside from just a few phrases, including “seed of the spirit,” what we have shared above uses exactly the same terminology as the original Theosophical teachings. The usage of terms and definitions in connection with the fourth and second principles is also very much in harmony with what we have already seen from HPB’s “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” article. Although it differs slightly in a few respects from how Theosophists typically lay things out and describe things, it can in no way be justifiably considered untheosophical.

It is true that Helena Roerich’s usage of the Theosophical terms “Higher Ego” and “Individuality” for the Higher Triad (or Atma-Buddhi-Manas in their triune unity) is not how HPB typically uses those terms. With HPB, the immortal or Higher Ego, our permanent spiritual Individuality, almost always means specifically the Higher Manas principle itself, and is not used for the Triad in its entirety. But in just a few places, HPB does use those terms in exactly the same way as Helena Roerich: “the EGO (Atma-Buddhi-Manas, or the Trinity made One)” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 98, Entry for “Devachan”), “by Individuality is meant the Higher Triad, considered as a Unity. . . . the Individuality is the imperishable Ego which re-incarnates and clothes itself in one personality after another.” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 252, Entry for “Personality”).

We are reminded of a very short article called “Thoughts on Theosophy” which HPB published in her “Lucifer” magazine in October 1887 and which is today published in the book “Theosophical Articles and Notes” by Theosophy Company on behalf of the United Lodge of Theosophists.

It was seemingly not HPB who wrote the article, for it is signed with the ∴ symbol, used in Theosophy to represent a high Initiate or Master, and she is not known to have ever signed herself in solely this fashion. The main part of “Thoughts on Theosophy” offers this advice, which is extremely apt and relevant to the subject matter of this present article:

““The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life,” this is the key note of all true reform. Theosophy is the vehicle of the spirit that gives life, consequently nothing dogmatic can be truly theosophical. . . .

“When a word, phrase, or symbol, having been once used for the purpose of suggesting an idea new to the mind or minds being operated on, is insisted upon irrespective of the said idea, it becomes a dead letter dogma and loses its vitalising power, and serves rather as an obstruction to, than as vehicle of the spirit; but, alas, this insistence upon the letter is too often carried on under the honoured name of “Theosophy.” . . .

“The mere familiarity with the sound of a word, or a phrase, or the mere familiarity with the appearance of a symbol, does not, of necessity, involve the possession of the idea properly associated with the said word, phrase or symbol. To insist, therefore, on the contrary cannot be theosophical; but would be better described as untheosophical.

“It would certainly be theosophical work to point out kindly and temperately how certain words, phrases and symbols appear to have been misunderstood or misapplied, how various claims and professions may be excessive or confused as a consequence of ignorance or vanity, or both. But . . . wholesale condemnation would, on the contrary, be untheosophical.”

We are well aware that we (i.e. the writer of this article, who is the editor of this website) have been guilty repeatedly of what is criticised in “Thoughts on Theosophy” and it would be hypocrisy to speak as if this were not so. We are always ready to openly and unashamedly acknowledge where mistakes have been made due to excess or misdirected zeal or insufficiently open-minded examination of things. After all, the original version of this article was titled “The Etheric Body Does Not Exist” and we now realise – as has been shown – that even if the term “etheric body” is an inaccurate and in many respects unhelpful one, much of what is said about it by Leadbeater and Besant is indeed in close harmony with what HPB has to say about the Linga Sharira and has a genuinely Theosophical basis. But please notice that we said “much” and not “all.”

It seems that much confusion as well as vagueness and haziness could be avoided all round if the terms “lower astral body” and “higher astral body” were to be introduced and used frequently in their appropriate place by all Theosophists. Although HPB did not directly use these terms like this, her writings do provide a sound basis for doing so, as her “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” article shows.

As mentioned earlier, even Robert Crosbie himself, and also his colleague and ULT co-founder Grace Clough, very occasionally used the terms “etheric” and “astral” in the same or similar manner to Leadbeater and Besant. Considering their complete distrust of Leadbeater and any alterations to HPB’s teachings, this is rather surprising, and they were sufficiently well versed in the original teachings of Theosophy to know that neither HPB nor William Judge ever used this pair of terms in this particular way, nor made any mention of an “etheric” body.

These references are in books that are still published today by the United Lodge of Theosophists. Crosbie’s is in one of his letters, published posthumously in “The Friendly Philosopher” p. 104. Speaking of elementals, he explains to his correspondent: “Some would have etheric forms, and some astral.”

It is no secret that Crosbie entirely distrusted Leadbeater and in one letter directly states that “Leadbeater sought to be recognized as a great teacher and in order to break into other realms of nature used most abhorrent means – black magic, in fact.” (“The Friendly Philosopher” p. 28) It was not until the publication of Gregory Tillett’s “The Elder Brother: A Biography of Charles Webster Leadbeater” in the 1980s that clear evidence was provided of Leadbeater having indeed used auto-erotic sexual magic practices – truly black magic, according to HPB’s teachings – to force open his psychic abilities and perceptions of the astral plane. Although Leadbeater is proven – again by Tillett’s biography of him – to have been a conscious fraud in many respects, there is evidence that he did genuinely possess a low grade of psychic perception, probably arising from his extremely unwise practices, but this can by no means be considered truly spiritual clairvoyance.

In light of what is known about Robert Crosbie, it seems that he was not subscribing to or trying to promote Leadbeater’s unique ideas about the etheric body but was – in this one known instance – using the terms “etheric” and “astral” in the typical Leadbeater way so as to quickly and conveniently make a distinction between what we can also call “lower astral” and “higher astral.” In other words, that some elementals are embodied in forms belonging to the level of the Linga Sharira, while others are embodied in forms belonging to the Kamic level and nature.

The reference from Grace Clough (one of the founding associates of the ULT’s Parent Lodge in Los Angeles) is on p. 67-68 of the book “Because – For The Children Who Ask Why,” first published during Crosbie’s lifetime, in 1916. She writes: “Just as our earth has seven bodies, so have we. . . . You remember how we spoke of worlds being made – first issuing as a fiery cloud from the Great Darkness. We were there, and so have bodies of that cold fire-matter. Some call that the etheric body. . . . Then came a more gaseous state of matter, and we had bodies made of that. Then air was our habitation, and next we came into the astral state . . . [with an] astral body.”

As far as we know, no Theosophists have spoken of the “etheric body” as a body of “cold fire-matter,” however. Nevertheless, we here see Clough essentially endorsing and voluntarily utilising the term “etheric body” and distinguishing it from the term and concept of “astral body.”

As for our having “seven bodies,” an idea and phrasing found amongst many Leadbeater/Besant and Bailey students, we personally find this a questionable notion. It should be mentioned that H. P. Blavatsky never spoke of the human being having seven bodies, though she did of course teach about the human being’s seven principles. But a principle is not necessarily a synonym for a subtle body. After all, if Atman, the Higher Self, is understood as taught by HPB and her Adept-Teachers, how could there be such a thing as the “Atmic Body”? “We say that the Spirit, or Atman, is no individual property of any man, but is the Divine essence which has no body, no form, which is imponderable, invisible and indivisible, that which does not exist and yet is, as the Buddhists say of Nirvana.” (HPB, “The Key to Theosophy” p. 101)

In her “Theosophical Glossary,” HPB offers a definition of her frequently used term “Principles”: “The Elements or original essences, the basic differentiations upon and of which all things are built up. We use the term to denote the seven individual and fundamental aspects of the One Universal Reality in Kosmos and in man. Hence also the seven aspects in their manifestation in the human being – divine, spiritual, psychic, astral, physiological and simply physical.” (p. 262-263)

Curiously, in that listing of six (rather than seven) aspects or principles in the human being, she names the last or lowest three as “astral, physiological and simply physical,” thus seemingly distinguishing between “physiological” and “physical” with regard to our principles.

On p. 100 of “The Key to Theosophy” we find her saying, “The “principles,” as already said, save the body [i.e. Sthula Sharira], the life [i.e. Prana], and the astral eidolon [i.e. Linga Sharira], all of which disperse at death, are simply aspects and states of consciousness. There is but one real man, enduring through the cycle of life and immortal in essence, if not in form, and this is Manas, the Mind-man or embodied Consciousness.” This important statement was sometimes paraphrased by Helena Roerich, such as: “Therefore, point out that the so-called principles in us (with the exception of the physical body and the etheric double, which disintegrate after death) are just aspects or conditions of our consciousness. Indeed, all the divisions into spirit, soul, Manas – higher and lower – are in reality only various qualities of one and the same fundamental energy of Fire, or of life or consciousness.” (Letter, 16th November 1935)

With Leadbeater, Besant, Hodson, Jinarajadasa, Arundale, Bailey, Saraydarian, Creme, and others, “principles” are almost entirely replaced by “bodies”; for example, they hardly ever – if at all – speak of the Manasic principle but solely of the Mental Body, lower and higher. Similarly, Kama as a principle becomes simply the Astral Body.

What we saw earlier from HPB’s “On Astral Bodies, or Doppelgangers” article indicates that both principles and bodies can and do co-exist, such as the “Thought Body” being closely associated with the Lower Manas and Kama principles but not the same as them. It seems though that the Theosophy of H. P. Blavatsky speaks directly of only three non-physical bodies: the astral or Linga Sharira, the thought-body or dream-body or mind-body associated with the Lower Manas and Kama, and the mysterious causal body. Naturally, this may not be the whole story but the over-simplified recasting of Seven Principles as Seven Bodies seems entirely unwarranted and also has the effect of directing the student’s attention and thought to form – of whatever degree of matter – rather than to the most important and only truly enduring thing, which is consciousness.

We will close with a passage in which HPB quotes Visconde de Figanière, who was a Portuguese esotericist, diplomat, journalist, and more. Elsewhere, she describes his “Esoteric Studies” as “abstruse but very interesting.” His writing is certainly abstruse, far more so than HPB’s, but we quote the following due to it making a distinction – albeit an unexplained one, though referring to the development and nature of the outer form of man through the Root Races – between “astral” and “ethereal.” HPB comments that “every true occultist will endorse” his remarks.

“For suggestiveness, we would recommend a short article in the Theosophist of August, 1887, “Esoteric Studies.” Its author . . . winds up a very clever, though too short, exposition of his theory by saying that which every true occultist will endorse: “With physico-ethereal man there must be involution of sex. As physico-astral man depended on entities of the sub-human class (evolved from animal prototypes) for rebirth, so will physico-ethereal man find among the graceful, shapely orders issuing from the air-plane, one or more which will be developed for his successive embodiments when procreated forms are given –a process which will include all mankind only very gradually.”” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 289)

~ * ~

This article may have raised more questions about various things. Please make use of the site search function (the magnifying glass symbol at the top of the page) and visit the Articles page to see the complete list of over 400 articles covering all aspects of Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement.

~ BlavatskyTheosophy.com ~