1. Behold the beginnings of sentient formless life. First the Divine, the one from the Mother-Spirit; then the Spiritual; the three from the one, the four from the one, and the five from which the three, the five, and the seven. These are the three-fold, the four-fold downward; the “mind-born” sons of the first Lord; the shining seven. It is they who are thou, me, him, oh Lanoo. They, who watch over thee, and thy mother earth.
2. The one ray multiplies the smaller rays. Life precedes form, and life survives the last atom of form. Through the countless rays proceeds the life-ray, the one, like a thread through many jewels.
3. When the one becomes two, the threefold appears, and the three are one; and it is our thread, oh Lanoo, the heart of the man-plant called Saptaparna.
5. The spark hangs from the flame by the finest thread of Fohat. It journeys through the Seven Worlds of Maya. It stops in the first, and is a metal and a stone; it passes into the second and behold – a plant; the plant whirls through seven changes and becomes a sacred animal. From the combined attributes of these, Manu, the thinker is formed. Who forms him? The seven lives, and the one life. Who completes him? The five-fold Lha. And who perfects the last body? Fish, sin, and soma…..
“Mr. Old: The next paragraph clears it up, I think. Question 3 (c). According to this view, the “spiritual plasm” referred to in the paragraph in question is not the Devachanic Entity, though it is liable to be confounded with it. (Spiritual plasm is mentioned in The Secret Doctrine I:219 and 224).
There is, of course, a mystery within a mystery here, but it is very desirable that we should have a clear view of the matter, in connection with the more immediate derivation and evolution of the seven human principles.
Mme. Blavatsky: You see what I said. You are right, and Mr. Sinnett or somebody else spoke also of this heredity business as being an obstacle. Do you remember, Mr. Burrows, who spoke about it, that it was an obstacle?
Mr. Burrows: I don’t remember.
Mme. Blavatsky: It is just that which enters into Karmic attributes. Heredity is governed by Karma, in short. Therefore, you see, Karma will take care to bring it into a musical physical body.
Mr. Old: Then we may say that the law of heredity applies to the four lower principles, and the law of Karma operates in the plane of the three higher.
Mme. Blavatsky: The law of heredity has nothing to do with life. Remember what you learn, if you please, apart from Thursdays. Exoterically it is, not esoterically.
Mr. Old: (d) From what is said on page 224, line 10 et seq, the above view would appear to be supported, with the further addition that the parent is also responsible for Manas – perhaps we should say, some portion of Manas?
Mme. Blavatsky: Now, how can the parent be responsible for Manas? You will say next it is responsible for Atma.
Mr. Old: It is the animal mind we refer to, perhaps?
Mme. Blavatsky: It is the reflection from the higher mind. We say it is dual simply because on this plane the full Manas cannot manifest; and in relation to its lower Manas, it is just the same as Parabrahm’s relation to the first Logos; it radiates.
Very well, and the rest depends upon the more or less perfect organisms, on education, on environment, and on everything, on the vices that are inculcated; all these that come, and are so many obstacles.
Mr. Kingsland: Then Manas stands there in the same way Prana does in reference to the lower, to the life on the physical plane. It is universal, so to speak.
Mme. Blavatsky: The Manas is universal. These are distinct entities which incarnate, which in other Manvantaras have finished their cycle, and it is their time to incarnate in this cycle.
Mr. Kingsland: It says here the five lower principles in the four.
Mme. Blavatsky: It is not the five principles of the seven, it is the five principles of the lower principles. It is perfectly correctly said there. Man must have the fruition of all the five, it is said, and this fruition carries within it no responsibility to anyone.
You look there on the page that you have been mentioning, page 224, line 20. You find there the phrase I have quoted: “Man must have the fruition of all the five”, and this fruition carries with it no responsibility to anyone.
How can the parents be responsible for Manas, where Manas is a defined and independent entity? The parents may in some way be karmically responsible for the physical organism of the child, but certainly not for Manas.
Mr. Kingsland: Not responsible for Manas any more than they are responsible for Prana.
Mme. Blavatsky: Most assuredly.”
H. P. Blavatsky