Theos-Talk Archives (October 1995 Message tl00560)

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 question regarding the above was the source of the assertion
>that the Animal Monads become the "animal natures" of man. The
>source given was Puruker with a request for a Blavatsky source.
>Here is what I came up with.

My comments can be called an "assertion" if they rest solely on
my say-so. If I've shown them to be supported by Purucker, then
I've shown them to be part of source Theosophy, for those that
accept Purucker as speaking for the Masters. I realize that without
an Mahatma Letter or HBP quote, the idea remains "unsupported" for
others that may accept HPB but not Purucker. So be it.

>First to clarify, HPB tells us that evolution proceeds on three
>levels simultaneously ...

Yes. I've heard of this in many different ways. We have Gods,
Monads, and Atoms, or architects, builders, and materials. For
us, perhaps, our three respective natures are stimulated and
awakened by the action of the Dhyani-Chohans in their capacity
of Agnishvattas, the Manasaputras or Solar Pitris, and the
Bharishads or Lunar Pitris.

The third class gave us our outer forms. The second class gave
us our initial fire of mind, making us truly human and distinguishable
from the animals in the Third Root Rave, and the first class has yet
to work its magic on us.

>Now what we are discussing is the evolution and progression
>of the Monad. We are told that the Monad passes through all
>the kingdoms of nature to finally become Man.

Or discussing the evolution and progression of the "ray of consciousness"
that the Monad sends forth into the material planes to participate in
the cycle of evolution. The Monad itself remains on its own lofty level,
untouched by the external events.

We pass through all the Kingdoms, one after the other, skipping none,
eventually coming into the Human Kingdom. Seven Rounds of evolutionary
progress in a Kingdom are required before entry into the next. For an
animal, being ready to enter the Human Kingdom part way through the
Planetary Manvantara does not mean thet the opportunity exists for
that experience.

Just as we can outstrip Humanity by a single Round, and become Fifth
Rounders or Mahatmas, but cannot go on to become Seventh Rounders and
graduate from the Human Kingdom at this time, it is the same for the
animals. They can outstrip their fellow animals for a Round, but cannot
complete all seven Rounds and be ready for the Human Kingdom. The
experiences are not physically possible, for external nature is too
far removed from providing the necessary evolutionary experiences.
It is simply not possible to undertake Seventh Round experiences in
this Round, as we are told in "The Mahatma Letters".

Even after the Seven Rounds are completed for a particular kingdom,
I don't think that one can enter the next higher Kingdom as a full-fledged
member of it's Fourth Round experience. Perhaps billions of years of
evolution are necessary, representing the first Three Rounds, before
the necessary background has been achieved and a newly-minted human
could be a Fourth Round Human.

Regarding the Door into the Human Kingdom closing, we have a good
commentary on HPB, with citations, in "The Divine Plan", by
Geoffrey Barborka, pages 318-19.

There, we learn that the Mind-Principle was awakened in the Third
Root Race, and as that awakening progressed into the Fourth Root Race,
the divergence between the Human and Animal Kingdom widened to the
point where there was a distinct separation between the Kingdoms.
This made it no longer possible for any Monad using the vehicles of
the Animal Kingdom for its evolutionary experience to enter the
Human Kingdom.

>"The most developed Monads . . . reach the human germ-stage in the
>first Round; Become terrestrial, though very ethereal human beings
>towards the end of the Third Round, remaining on it (the Globe)
>through the "obscuration" period as the seed for future mankind
>in the Fourth Round, and thus become the pioneers of Humanity at
>the beginning of this, the Fourth Round. Others reach the Human
>stage only during later Rounds, i.e.those still occupying animal
>forms after the middle turning-point of the Fourth Round---will
>not become men at all during this Manwantara. They will reach
>to the verge of humanity only at the close of the seventh Round
>to be, in their turn, ushered into a new chain after pralaya ... "
> (SD, i 182)

Granted, the most-developed of the Human Kingdom have their innate
humanity arise in the First Round, and less-developed of us acquire
humanity or the fire of mind in later Rounds. The deadline for this
awakening in us is in the middle of the Fourth Round, during which
the gap between the human-animal form and the strictly-animal form
rapidly wides into an impassible gulf. These are all, though, humans
in the Human Kingdom, although the outer distinction between human
and animal bodies may not become inseparable and distinct until
the middle of the Fourth Round.

Until we are given the fire of mind, or awakened into strictly-human
consciousness by our Manasaputras (higher selves, guardian angles,
or Dhyani-Chohans acting in this regard), we're indistinguishable from
animals in general. This would typically happen in the Fourth Round,
since that Round first deals with some form of Manas (or rather
Kama-Manas, using Blavatsky's 'esoteric' enumeration of the seven
principles, from Linga-Sharira through the Auric Egg, c.f. "The
Inner Group Teachings.)

>This is the most concise statement I can find. The general principle
>is reiterated often and in various places throughout the SD. The
>Monad in the animal kingdom has passed through the mineral and
>vegetable kingdoms and is now ready to become Man, i.e. self-conscious.

I'd say that self-consciousness first starts with the Mineral Kingdom,
where the greatest degree of materiality is obtained, since that is where
the upward climb begins. In each of our principles is the possibility
of self-consciousness. There is a particular form of it that we as
humans experience, the sense of personality or the action of mind in
objectifying the outer world. The self-consciousness that we evolve due
to overcoming that is our manasic self-consciousness, the treasure that
we acquire due to our evolution in the Human Kingdom.

>There is no reference to Animal Monads becoming "Human NATURES" or
>our lower attributes.

When we consider individual Monads, this would be correct. But when we
consider the composite nature of beings, while alive, as an aggregrate
of Monads, then the picture changes.

The divine ego spoken of in relation to Atman is our Inner God and the
ray of a Divine Monad. The spiritual ego spoken of in relation to Buddhi
is the offspring of the Spiritual Monad. The reimbodying ego or our
"higher self" is the offspring of the Higher Human Monad, our direct
parent or Manasaputra. The human ego or ourselves as we know us is just
that -- ourselves. We are the Lower Human Monad, the Monad that embodies
itself as a human personality. The other Monads in our constitution
both *above* and *below* us are in relationship during our active
lifetimes, and go their own ways in the after-death states. Purucker
makes this clear in his writings, and I've found nothing inconsistent
with it in HPB or the Mahatma Letters.

>This would be confusing the evolution of the Monad with the evolution
>of the Physical.

When I speak of the Animal Monad in the Human Kingdom, acting as our
animal nature, I'm not referring to the mere physical body as a living
animal. I'm referring to another Ego, the expression of a different,
lower Monad, in our psyche, acting in close relation to us in a
cooperative experience of life.

>Therefore there are not two Monads trying to inhabit our bodies (the
>animal and the physical).

Every part of our nature is seeking expression through the rest, all
the way down to the outer physical form. Even our Inner God would
act through us, where we more expressive of the divine.

>This concept prompted the very humorous question from another
>participant to the effect, What happens when the animal Monad grows
>up?

In the next Planetary Manvantara it might be in the Human Kingdom,
if it makes the grade. And if we make the grade, we may be Dhyani-
Chohans. And we might continue in relation to that particular Monad,
being its Manasaptura.

>The teaching of Purucker as given by you would lead to a
>question such as this, which may illuminate where Purucker has
>mis-spoken.

The clear distinction between the seven principles and the centers of
consciousness in us, and the doctrine of the aggregate and impermanent
nature of man, in manifest life, are difficult teachings. The distinction
is not clearly made in HPB, and Purucker makes a better job of explaining
them. There's no mention of them in Leadbeater's books that I recall
reading, and at one point I read all of them, when much younger.

I'd suggest that due to the difficult nature of the doctrines
involved, and because those of us without the benefit of having
read Purucker may find the ideas new at first, that there would
be many misconceptions about them. I've found the same thing with
people new to the idea of reincarnation, with nearly the same
objections and puzzlements being expressed at first as they
initially study the materials. I find high value in them, and
will continue to express them as best I can. I won't, of course,
credit Blavatsky with something when Purucker deserves the credit.

>The wonderful thing about Theosophy is its logical consistency.

You can say that. And we'll all agree. But when we start trying
to talk about it, and really express our understandings, you'll
find a remarkable degree of differences. Look at how differently
Jerry S. and I have come to view the Globe Chains and Planes of
Nature, and we've read the same books!

>The pages surrounding the above citations are very interesting
>and may help your understanding of evolution. Anthropogenesis,
>by the way, occupies the entire Vol. 2 of the SD.

Fine. And you may find "Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy"
by Purucker to help your understanding of evolution. Unless, of
course, you reject him as "source Theosophy". At that point, we'd
diverge, since I'd consider you to be excluding an important
part of Theosophy. <grin>

Apart from your favorite "authorities" and my favorites, we can
also simply discuss the philosophy in our own words, and see
how clear a case we can make for our respective insights. It's
a useful learning experience, and can prove helpful when we
later write something "authoritative" in a published journal
or book.

-- Eldon