Theos-Talk Archives (October 1995 Message tl00482)

Coherence:

>>Those animals that made it through that "door" became the Animal
>>Monads in our constitution. They as centers of consciousness are
>>the animal nature which our human nature, the Human Monad, uses.
>>The "horse" that you ride is an Animal Monad in the Human Kingdom,
>>destinated, if it continues its evolution, to be a Human Monad in
>>its own right at the end of the Seventh Round.

>My understanding is that up to the middle of the fourth round, the
>highest of the animal souls (monads) were able to enter the human
>kingdom as MAN, Humanity, at which point the door was closed.

This is what I read in Leadbeater and Jinarajadasa, but not in Purucker.
It is inconsistent with the model from "The Mahatma Letters". If you
can find some Blavatsky quotes to support it, I'd like to read them.

Basically, a Monad cannot outstrip the evolution of its lifewave by
more than one Round. And it takes all Seven Rounds to complete the
evolution in a Kingdom. (The only exceptions are the Bodhisattvas and
Buddhas, which are Sixth Rounders.) It is not possible therefore to
complete our human evolution, nor for animals to complete their animal
evolution at this point.

The door to the next Kingdom represents a critical point at which
the Monads have to pass in order to continue their progress through
the remaining Rounds in order to graduate. It is not the graduation
itself.

The reference to Animal Monads in the Human Kingdom that comes to
mind is by Purucker, in (I think) Volume III of "The Dialogues of
G. de Purucker", in a supplemental section on the Animal Monad.

> Now these late-comers to the party are represented by the more
> savage races that HPB talks about.

These late-comers may by those *humans* in which the Manasaputras
were late to incarnate rather than Animal Monads.

> In these "lower", less developed races, they essentially are
> irresponsible owing to the lack of development of MANAS, which is the
> distinguishing feature between Man and Animal, but which will be
> developed in these races in the course of time and evolution.

This distinguishes the different classes of humans *to a degree*.
But since we're in the Fourth Round, we're really working on Kama
or Kama-Manas, and haven't really gotten to Manas proper until the
Fifth Round.

> It is not my understanding that the Animals who were able or developed
> enough to enter the human kingdom became OUR animal natures. Can we
> clarify this point?

My primary source for this is Purucker. If you can show Blavatsky
to disagree, I'd like to study what she says, since Purucker seems
consistent with "The Mahatma Letters".

-- Eldon