च॒त्वारि॒ वाक्परि॑मिता प॒दानि॒ तानि॑ विदुर्ब्राह्म॒णा ये म॑नी॒षिण॑: । गुहा॒ त्रीणि॒ निहि॑ता॒ नेङ्ग॑यन्ति तु॒रीयं॑ वा॒चो म॑नु॒ष्या॑ वदन्ति ॥
“There are four definite levels or degrees of Vach (Speech, Voice, Word); the uninitiated person perceives only one of these levels; the other three are carefully concealed as secret and known only to the wise.”
(Rig Veda 1.164.45)
“When the term Logos, Verbum, Vach, the mystic divine voice of every nation and philosophy comes to be better understood, then only will come the first glimmering of the Dawn of one Universal Religion.”
(H. P. Blavatsky, “Theosophical Articles and Notes” p. 89)
“. . . the sevenfold cosmos . . . Its noumenal core is irradiated with Daiviprakriti, the invisible light manifested through Ishwara, the Logos, as well as the unutterable potency of Vach, the Verbum in its supernal essence (Para). The visible universe, constituted by Vach in its objective or vaikhari aspect, veils this core through a screen of appearances that are essentially illusory, though they endure for immense periods of manvantaric time.”
(Raghavan Iyer, “The Light of The Logos”)
“The Mahatmas (Great Souls), partaking of the Daiviprakriti (Divine Nature), worship Me with one-pointedness and know Me to be the imperishable source and essence of all things and beings.”
(Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 9, Verse 13)
~ * ~
Anyone who seriously attempts the study of “The Secret Doctrine” by H. P. Blavatsky will come across numerous references to Vach and will also see mention, albeit less frequently, of something called Daiviprakriti, described as “The Light of the Logos.” If one reads the writings of HPB’s Indian contemporary T. Subba Row or “The Doctrine of The Bhagavad Gita” by Bhavani Shankar, another authentic chela (disciple) of the Trans-Himalayan Mahatmas, one will also encounter repeated references to such terms as these. No-one can be blamed for finding them rather difficult to clearly grasp and comprehend but most will recognise that there is something very important and significant behind these words.
The aim of this article is to help clarify and explain something of what they really mean and signify. We have not been given all the answers by any means but what has been disclosed is certainly sufficient for us to think over, reflect upon, and contemplate in meditation, which can lead to deeper awareness and insight.
This Sanskrit word “Vach” – which means “speech,” “voice,” “word,” “sound,” “verbum,” “Logos” etc. – is also written in English as “Vak” and sometimes as “Vac.” The pronunciation should be “Vaak.”
Although the fourfold Vach is mentioned in some Hindu scriptures – including the oldest, the Rig Veda – it is not a subject which many Hindus have explored or written about and it will be found that the majority of Hindus are actually unfamiliar with it. This is most likely because of its abstruseness and complexity. In spite of that, Theosophy recognises that it is an important teaching which reveals as well as conceals many sacred truths.
While some of what Theosophy says about Vach can also be found in exoteric Hindu thought, other features of this teaching are found nowhere other than Theosophy. This is an indication that a little of the secret and truly esoteric teaching about Vach has been divulged by the Masters of Wisdom and Their disciples. The equating of Madhyama Vach with Daiviprakriti is one of those apparently esoteric details, whilst virtually everything Theosophy says about Daiviprakriti is entirely absent from all known Hindu teachings.
One of the few Hindu teachers or gurus of the 20th century to talk about Vach was Sri Aurobindo, who used the “Vak” spelling, but neither he nor his colleague Mirra Alfassa (known as “The Mother”) elaborated on the subject to the extent found in the Theosophical literature. Aurobindo can be read about in our article Sri Aurobindo, Raja Yoga, and Theosophy. He also occasionally wrote of Daiviprakriti (writing it as two words: “daivi prakriti”) in a very veiled and obscure way, without elaboration.
The Hindu system of Kashmir Shaivism, increasingly popular in the West, makes mention of Vach and its various degrees or gradations since, being a tantric system, it has particular interest in the deeper and more esoteric realities of the Universe. The fundamental Kashmir Shaivism view of the Ultimate Reality or Absolute and how the Universe comes into being is quite similar to that of Theosophy, despite the differences in terminology. In most other respects, however, there is little similarity and at times Kashmir Shaivism descends into sexual tantra, to which the Theosophical Mahatmas are particularly opposed.
Students of Theosophy who come across references to Daiviprakriti may understandably have wondered whether it is just another name for Mulaprakriti. But it is not. Since Daiviprakriti is described as the Light of the Logos, we may also wonder whether it is just a synonym for the Logos itself or whether it is a name for the First Logos (Unmanifested Logos), Second Logos (Semi-Manifested Logos), or Third Logos (Manifested Logos). In fact it is neither, although it is of course closely related to all three. And although occasionally it is spoken of as if exactly synonymous with Fohat, the cosmic electricity, we will see below that there is a subtle distinction between them. It seems that, technically speaking, Fohat is the next stage of differentiation from Daiviprakriti. References for this can be found in the article on Fohat just linked to.
In that article, we also said:
“A few so-called scholars and academic researchers in today’s Theosophical world have asserted in confident – if not perhaps conceited – tones that no such term as “Daiviprakriti” actually exists and that it therefore must have been either an invention of HPB and T. Subba Row or a mistaken term used by them in ignorance. One such scholar has also informed Theosophists that the Sanskrit term “Mulaprakriti,” which is used frequently by HPB and Subba Row and said by them to be a technical term used in the Vedanta philosophy of Hinduism, is in fact never used at all in Vedanta or by any Vedantins and that thus they are again mistaken.
“It would not be out of place here to mention that these individuals are themselves mistaken on both grounds. There are plenty of Hindus who are familiar with the term “Daiviprakriti.” Some spell it as “Deviprakriti,” which is pronounced in exactly the same way, whilst most write it as “Daivi Prakriti” or “Daivim Prakritim.” Any student of Sanskrit ought to know that the term is found in the Bhagavad Gita, in the thirteenth verse of the ninth chapter. HPB’s, Subba Row’s, and other Theosophists’ only “mistake” was to write “Daiviprakriti” as one single word instead of two. But as there are Hindus who also write it as one word, this can barely be considered a mistake, let alone a justification for saying that the word does not exist.”
Since the term is found in the Bhagavad Gita, it is not surprising that it is Subba Row’s and Bhavani Shankar’s lectures about the Gita which place such an emphasis or attach such an importance to it. That ninth chapter or discourse is titled in Sanskrit “Raja Vidya Raja Guhya Yoga” which literally means “The Yoga of the Royal Knowledge and the Royal Mystery.” William Q. Judge, in his rendition of the Bhagavad Gita, defines it as “Devotion by means of the Kingly Knowledge and the Kingly Mystery.” This chapter is also known in Sanskrit as “Adhyatma Yoga,” literally meaning “The Yoga of the Primordial or Highest Self.”
Its usage in that Gita verse appears so simple and unassuming, however, that barely anyone would ever suspect the depth of esoteric significance, meaning, and import which it holds. But as H. P. Blavatsky said of the Bhagavad Gita: “The work is pre-eminently occult or esoteric. . . . the Gita is a record of the ancient teachings during the Mystery of Initiation.” (See The Theosophy of The Bhagavad Gita) The literal or surface meaning of the book is not its truest, most real, or originally intended meaning and interpretation. This is true for all genuinely esoteric texts from the great Teachers and Sages of ancient times.
To illustrate our point, take a look at how the verse is rendered by both William Judge and the late Swami Sivananda, a respected scholar and teacher of Vedanta:
WQJ: “But those great of soul, partaking of the godlike nature, knowing me to be the imperishable principle of all things, worship me, diverted to nothing else.”
Sivananda: “But the great souls [Mahatmas], O Arjuna, partaking of My divine nature, worship Me with a single mind (with the mind devoted to nothing else), knowing Me as the imperishable source of beings.”
Daiviprakriti is what has there been translated as “the godlike nature” and “My divine nature.” But as we’ll now discover, it means so much more than such a verse can ever suggest to the mind of the exoteric follower of religion.
~ * ~
SOME DEFINITIONS FROM H. P. BLAVATSKY
“Vâch (Sk.). To call Vâch “speech” simply, is deficient in clearness. Vâch is the mystic personification of speech, and the female Logos, being one with Brahmâ, who created her out of one-half of his body, which he divided into two portions; she is also one with Virâj (called the “female” Virâj) who was created in her by Brahmâ. In one sense Vâch is “speech” by which knowledge was taught to man; in another she is the “mystic, secret speech” which descends upon and enters into the primeval Rishis, as the “tongues of fire” are said to have “sat upon” the apostles. For, she is called “the female creator”, the “mother of the Vedas”, etc., etc. Esoterically, she is the subjective Creative Force which, emanating from the Creative Deity (the subjective Universe, its “privation”, or ideation) becomes the manifested “world of speech”, i.e., the concrete expression of ideation, hence the “Word” or Logos. Vâch is “the male and female” Adam of the first chapter of Genesis, and thus called “Vâch-Virâj” by the sages. (See Atharva Veda.) She is also “the celestial Saraswatî produced from the heavens”, a “voice derived from speechless Brahmâ” (Mahâbhârata); the goddess of wisdom and eloquence. She is called Sata-rûpa, the goddess of a hundred forms.” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 357)
“Daivi-prakriti (Sk.). Primordial, homogeneous light, called by some Indian Occultists “the Light of the Logos” (see Notes on the Bhagavat Gita, by T. Subba Row, B.A., L.L.B.); when differentiated this light becomes FOHAT.” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 94)
“Anâhata Shabda (Sk.). The mystic voices and sounds heard by the Yogi at the incipient stage of his meditation, The third of the four states of sound, otherwise called Madhyamâ – the fourth state being when it is perceptible by the physical sense of hearing. The sound in its previous stages is not heard except by those who have developed their internal, highest spiritual senses. The four stages are called respectively, Parâ, Pashyantî, Madhyamâ and Vaikharî.” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 20-21)
“The light from the ONE MASTER, the one unfading golden light of Spirit, shoots its effulgent beams on the disciple from the very first. Its rays thread through the thick dark clouds of matter.
“Now here, now there, these rays illumine it, like sun-sparks light the earth through the thick foliage of the jungle growth. But, O Disciple, unless the flesh is passive, head cool, the soul as firm and pure as flaming diamond, the radiance will not reach the chamber, its sunlight will not warm the heart, nor will the mystic sounds of the Akasic heights reach the ear, however eager, at the initial stage.” (“The Voice of The Silence” p. 17-18, original 1889 edition, translated from The Book of The Golden Precepts)
A note regarding the above phrase “the mystic sounds of the Akashic heights”: “These mystic sounds or the melody heard by the ascetic at the beginning of his cycle of meditation called Anahad-shabd by the Yogis.” (“The Voice of The Silence” p. 78)
T. SUBBA ROW ON VACH AND DAIVIPRAKRITI
“I may however allude to one other point, which explains the reason why Eswara is called Verbum or Logos; why in fact it is called Sabda Brahmam. The explanation I am going to give you will appear thoroughly mystical. But if mystical it has a tremendous significance when properly understood. Our old writers said that Vach is of four kinds. These are called para, pasyanti, madhyama, vaikhari. This statement you will find in the Rig Veda itself and in several of the Upanishads. Vaikhari Vach is what we utter. Every kind of vaikhari Vach exists in its madhyama, further in its pasyanti, and ultimately in its para form. . . . Now the whole manifested solar system exists in its sukshma form in this light or energy of the Logos, because its image is caught up and transferred to cosmic matter, and again the whole cosmos must necessarily exist in the one source of energy from which this light emanates. The whole cosmos in its objective form is vaikhari Vach, the light of the Logos is the madhyama form, and the Logos itself the pasyanti form, and Parabrahmam the para aspect of that Vach. It is by the light of this explanation that we must try to understand certain statements made by various philosophers to the effect that the manifested cosmos is the Verbum manifested as cosmos.”
“This light from the Logos is called Daiviprakriti in the Bhagavad Gita; it is the Gnostic Sophia and the Holy Ghost of the Christians. . . . I may point out that this light is symbolized as Gayatri. You know Gayatri is not Prakriti. It is considered as the light of the Logos, and in order to convey to our minds a definite image, it is represented as the light of the sun. But the sun from which it springs is not the physical sun that we see, but the central sun of the light of wisdom, hence we do not use in our sandhyavandanam any symbol representing the physical sun. This light is further called the mahachaitanyam of the whole cosmos. It is the life of the whole of nature. It will be observed that what manifests itself as light, as consciousness, and as force, is just one and the same energy. All the various kinds of forces that we know of, all the various modes of consciousness with which we are acquainted, and life manifested in every kind of organism, are but the manifestations of one and the same power, that power being the one that springs from the Logos originally. It will have to be surveyed in all these aspects, because the part that it really plays in the cosmos is one of considerable importance.” (“Notes on The Bhagavad Gita” p. 26, 22-23, Theosophical University Press; not to be confused with the book of that title by William Judge and Robert Crosbie)
BHAVANI SHANKAR ON DAIVIPRAKRITI
From “The Doctrine of The Bhagavad Gita” (page numbers of the “Popular Prakashan” edition, not the Concord Grove Press edition)
“When Evolution begins, Ishwara wakes up, so to say, with the image or conception of what is to be in the Cosmos, which Daiviprakriti or His Light catches and impresses on Cosmic matter which is already manifested. This Light may, therefore, be said to be a kind of link between objective matter and the subjective thought of Ishwara. While Mulaprakriti is the cause of bondage, Daiviprakriti is the cause of illumination. It is also symbolised as Gayatri in our Hindu Philosophy. It represents the life-aspect, while Mulaprakriti represents the form-aspect in Cosmos.” (p. 62)
“In Sushupti (dreamless sleep), you become one with yourself. The Light of Ishwara is the Turiya Avastha, or the fourth state. It is the Atma. According to the ordinary Vedantic classification, there are four states of Conscious Existence, namely, Viswa, Taijasa, Prajna and Turiya. These may be described as the objective, clairvoyant, ecstatic and ultra-ecstatic states of Consciousness. The seats or Upadhis relating to these states, are the Sthoola Sharira (physical body), the Sukshma Sharira (subtle body), the Karana Sharira (human monad) and Daiviprakriti (Light of the Logos). The fourth (Turiya Chaittanya, the fourth life-wave) is Daiviprakriti, which is the real Atma; and is “realised by merging the other three in it in the order of the lower in the higher.” So merge the objective consciousness into the clairvoyant consciousness, then merge this into the ecstatic consciousness, and lastly the ecstatic consciousness into the ultra-ecstatic consciousness (Mandukya Upanishad, Sloka 2).” (p. 76)
“He becomes fit for receiving illumination through the Light of Ishwara, with the help of the Guru. . . . It can be imparted by Jivanmuktas forming the hierarchy of adepts who awaken in the disciple the divine vision (spiritual clairvoyance) and transmit to him the Light of the Logos. They form the Guruparampara, the highest of whom is described thus:
Dakshinamurti Stotra 12.
“Ah! the wonder under the Banyan tree, there sits the Guru Deva, a youth, the disciples, elders; the teaching is silence, and the disciples’ doubts are dispelled.”
[Note: This Hymn To Dakshinamurti by Adi Shankaracharya can be read in full here; Shankaracharya stated that the great Guru of all Gurus described in this hymn is an embodiment of Shiva. Theosophy agrees with this, as can be read in The Real Significance of Shiva, but Shiva is only one of many names that have been applied to this “Nameless One.”]
“It is the Light of the Logos (Daiviprakriti) which keeps up the Guruparampara; for it is the spiritual light that is transmitted from Guru to the disciple when the time for real initiation comes. It is the bond of union and brotherhood which maintains and preserves the chain of spiritual intercourse through all the Great Jivanmuktas of the world, and to enter into any such brotherhood, one should bring oneself within the influence of that spiritual Light of the Logos.” (p. 113)
RAGHAVAN IYER ON THE FOUR FORMS OF VACH
“At the highest level light is both a precursor and a successor to the Logos, and allegorical theogony speaks of it as being both the mother and the daughter of the Logos. While the Logos is itself the pasyanti form of Vach, and its cosmically diffused light is the madhyama form, prior to both is the Para form of Vach correlative with Mulaprakriti, the noumenal Root of Nature as an aspect of Parabrahm. This highest aspect of Vach is an invisible supernal light latent within Mulaprakriti, which is not the Light of the Logos because there is not yet a creative Logos, or a manifested cosmos. Para Vach is a light that is potentially present within the darkness of Mulaprakriti, the indestructible and eternal essence of matter, which is like a vast etheric ocean of inconceivably subtle substance. When that primordial light is focused at a point, which is called the Spiritual Sun, the intense concentration of universal potential light-energy conceives the prototype of a whole system of worlds that will come into manifestation. In the subsequent process of gestation the concentrating light-centre of the Logos diffuses a light which is different from the pregenetic noumenal light that is ontologically prior to the creative Logos. The diffused Light of the Logos determines the rates of vibration and the relations between molecules and atoms throughout the evolving cosmos. Light, then, passes in and through the focusing centre of the Logos, emerging into another realm which, though dense when compared to the light that precedes the Logos, is still so subtle and ethereal that the astral senses can give no impression of it. It can only be conceived by negating sense-perception and disengaging from all sensory images of light and dark. When at a higher stage of meditation the creative Logos, the invisible centre of the cosmos, is perceived through the medium of the light that issues from it, then a critical state is reached involving the capacity of self-consciousness to release the active energy that is the propelling power of manifestation. Meditation is thus the basis of true magic.” (from “The Light of The Logos” article, first published in the September 1980 “Hermes” magazine by the Santa Barbara United Lodge of Theosophists)
“THE SECRET DOCTRINE” (BY H. P. BLAVATSKY) ON VACH AND DAIVIPRAKRITI
“Vâch seems, in many an aspect, to approach the Chinese Kwan-yin, but there is no regular worship of Vâch under this name in India, as there is of Kwan-Yin in China. No exoteric religious system has ever adopted a female Creator, and thus woman was regarded and treated, from the first dawn of popular religions, as inferior to man. It is only in China and Egypt that Kwan-Yin and Isis were placed on a par with the male gods. Esotericism ignores both sexes. Its highest Deity is sexless as it is formless, neither Father nor Mother; and its first manifested beings, celestial and terrestrial alike, become only gradually androgynous and finally separate into distinct sexes.”
“Thus in the Esotericism of the Vedantins, Daiviprakriti, the Light manifested through Eswara, the Logos, is at one and the same time the Mother and also the Daughter of the Logos or Verbum of Parabrahmam; while in that of the trans-Himalayan teachings it is – in the hierarchy of allegorical and metaphysical theogony – “the MOTHER” or abstract, ideal matter, Mulaprakriti, the Root of Nature; – from the metaphysical standpoint, a correlation of Adi-Bhûta, manifested in the Logos, Avalokitêshwâra; – and from the purely occult and Cosmical, Fohat the “Son of the Son,” the androgynous energy resulting from this “Light of the Logos,” and which manifests in the plane of the objective Universe as the hidden, as much as the revealed, Electricity – which is LIFE. . . .
“If Kwan-Yin is the “melodious Voice,” so is Vâch; “the melodious cow who milked forth sustenance and water” (the female principle) – “who yields us nourishment and sustenance,” as Mother-Nature. She is associated in the work of creation with the Prajâpati. She is male and female ad libitum, as Eve is with Adam. And she is a form of Aditi – the principle higher than Ether – in Akâsa, the synthesis of all the forces in Nature; thus Vâch and Kwan-Yin are both the magic potency of Occult sound in Nature and Ether – which “Voice” calls forth Sien-Tchan, the illusive form of the Universe out of Chaos and the Seven Elements.” (Vol. 1, p. 136-137)
“. . . Vâch, the hidden power of the Mantras.” (Vol. 1, p. 354)
“. . . “the highest trinity that we are capable of understanding,” which is Mulaprakriti (the veil), the Logos, and the conscious energy “of the latter,” or its power and light . . . called, in the Bhagavat-Gita, Daiviprakriti.” (Vol. 1, p. 429-430)
“Vâch, the daughter and the mother of the Logos, . . . In the Rig Veda, Vâch is “mystic speech,” by whom Occult Knowledge and Wisdom are communicated to man, and thus Vâch is said to have “entered the Rishis.” She is “generated by the gods;” she is the divine Vâch – the “Queen of gods”; and she is associated – like Sephira with the Sephiroth – with the Prajâpati in their work of creation. Moreover, she is called “the mother of the Vedas,” “since it is through her power (as mystic speech) that Brahmâ revealed them, and also owing to her power that he produced the universe” – i.e., through speech, and words (synthesized by the “WORD”) and numbers.
“But Vâch being also spoken of as the daughter of Daksha – “the god who lives in all the Kalpas” – her Mayavic character is thereby shown: during the pralaya she disappears, absorbed in the one, all-devouring Ray. . . .
“Moreover, there is certainly a cosmic, not a physiological meaning attached to the Indian allegory, since Vâch is a permutation of Aditi and Mulaprakriti (Chaos), and Brahmâ a permutation of Naràyana, the Spirit of God entering into, and fructifying nature; therefore, there is nothing phallic in the conception at all.
“As already stated, Aditi-Vâch is the female Logos, or the “word,” Verbum; and Sephira in the Kabala is the same. These feminine Logoi are all correlations, in their noumenal aspect, of Light, and Sound, and Ether, showing how well-informed were the ancients both in physical science (as now known to the moderns), and as to the birth of that science in the Spiritual and Astral spheres. . . .
“This connects Vâch and Sephira with the goddess Kwan-Yin, the “merciful mother, “ the divine VOICE of the soul even in Exoteric Buddhism; and with the female aspect of Kwan-Shai-yin, the Logos, the verbum of Creation, and at the same time with the voice that speaks audibly to the Initiate, according to Esoteric Buddhism. Bath Kol, the filia Vocis, the daughter of the divine voice of the Hebrews, responding from the mercy seat within the veil of the temple is – a result. . . .
“Thus Vâch, Shekinah, or the “music of the spheres” of Pythagoras, are one, if we take for our example instances in the three most (apparently) dissimilar religious philosophies in the world – the Hindu, the Greek and the Chaldean Hebrew. These personations and allegories may be viewed under four (chief) and three (lesser) aspects or seven in all, as in Esotericism. The para form is the ever subjective and latent Light and Sound, which exist eternally in the bosom of the INCOGNISABLE; when transferred into the ideation of the Logos, or its latent light, it is called pasyanti, and when it becomes that light expressed, it is madhyama. . . .
“And this may also, if it does not unriddle the mystery altogether, at any rate lift a corner of the veil off those wondrous allegories that have been thrown upon Vâch, the most mysterious of all the Brahmanical goddesses, she who is termed “the melodious cow who milked forth sustenance and water” (the Earth with all her mystic powers); and again she “who yields us nourishment and sustenance” (physical Earth). Isis is also mystic Nature and also Earth; and her cow’s horns identify her with Vâch. The latter, after having been recognised in her highest form as para, becomes at the lower or material end of creation – Vaikhari. Hence she is mystic, though physical, Nature, with all her magic ways and properties.
“Again, as goddess of Speech and of Sound, and a permutation of Aditi – she is Chaos, in one sense. At any rate, she is the “Mother of the gods,” and it is from Brahmâ (Iswara, or the Logos) and Vâch, as from Adam Kadmon and Sephira, that the real manifested theogony has to start. Beyond, all is darkness and abstract speculation. With the Dhyan Chohans, or the gods, the Seers, the Prophets and the adepts in general are on firm ground. Whether as Aditi, or the divine Sophia of the Greek Gnostics, she is the mother of the seven sons: the “Angels of the Face,” of the “Deep,” or the “Great Green One” of the “Book of the Dead.”” (Vol. 1, p. 430-434)
“The six-pointed Star refers to the six Forces or Powers of Nature, the six planes, principles, etc., etc., all synthesized by the seventh, or the central point in the Star. All these, the upper and lower hierarchies included, emanate from the “Heavenly or Celestial Virgin,” the great mother in all religions, the Androgyne, the Sephira-Adam-Kadmon. In its Unity, primordial light is the seventh, or highest, principle, Daivi-prakriti, the light of the unmanifested Logos. But in its differentiation it becomes Fohat, or the “Seven Sons.” The former [i.e. Daiviprakriti] is symbolised by the Central point in the double-Triangle; the latter [i.e. Fohat] by the hexagon itself, or the “six limbs” of the Microprosopus the Seventh being Malkuth, the “Bride” of the Christian Kabalists, or our Earth.” (Vol. 1, p. 216)
“Our Esoteric Doctrine. . .teaches that it is this original, primordial prima materia, divine and intelligent, the direct emanation of the Universal Mind – the Daiviprakriti (the divine light emanating from the Logos) – which formed the nuclei of all the “self-moving” orbs in Kosmos. It is the informing, ever-present moving-power and life-principle, the vital soul of the suns, moons, planets, and even of our Earth.” (Vol. 1, p. 602)
“The six forces [i.e. the six Shaktis of Parashakti, Jnanashakti, Itchashakti, Kriyashakti, Kundalini Shakti, and Mantrika Shakti, all briefly described on p. 292-293] are in their unity represented by the “Daiviprakriti” (the Seventh, the light of the LOGOS).” (Vol. 1, p. 293)
“The Occultists call this light Daiviprakriti in the East, and light of Christos in the West. It is the light of the LOGOS, the direct reflection of the ever Unknowable on the plane of Universal manifestation.” (Vol. 2, p. 38)
SOME CLOSING THOUGHTS
“All sacred knowledge is karmically double-edged, for though it is accessible, it cannot be applied properly without simultaneously generating the suitable conditions, and if it is accessible but not used, it becomes inaccessible. This means at the most practical level that, without fear or cavil, one should sincerely try to use and apply the teachings in daily life, without excessive concern to draw elaborate inferences from instantaneous responses. Just as the Word is behind all words, what is hidden is always greater than what is revealed. But where there is the authentic attempt to reflect the concealed Thought, the Light of the Logos will guide, and the reflection will be greater than one may know.” (Raghavan Iyer, “The Logos and Man,” “Hermes” magazine, August 1981)
“To sense no difference between the divine Light of the Logos and the modest light of the table lamp that illumines one’s book, is to begin to live an inner life, because one is aware of what is going on archetypally and cosmically in reference to higher states of consciousness.”
“The misuses of language and the general overuse of sound inevitably obscure the Light of the Logos and block the invisible channels of consciousness. These prevailing irregularities must be made smooth patiently and gently, with the firm recognition that all inward reform is undertaken on behalf of, and in indebtedness to, Vach and Kwan Yin. One must assume the standpoint of the owner of the carriage directing the driver from within, and as Robert Crosbie said repeatedly, “See yourself as the Perceiver.” One must recognize always that the real Perceiver has nothing to do with the shadowy self, or what is too commonly verbalized.”
“Imbued with the spirit of light and learning, and steeped in the archetypal logic of the unfoldment of the universe from within without, one will savour the analogous reflections of the Logos at every level of the world, until one comes to have a totally altered way of looking at matter and mind, space and time, motion and force, light and electricity, heat, water, air and, above all, fire. With an ever-increasing sense of the invisible world, one will recognize what is noumenal and causal within it, in relation to which the visible world is that realm in which the only point or purpose of breathing is a constant spirit of thanksgiving.” (Raghavan Iyer, “The Light of The Logos,” “Hermes” magazine, September 1980)
~ * ~
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 300 articles covering all aspects of Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement.
~ BlavatskyTheosophy.com ~