“Being unsupplied with any philosophy of their own to account for the lesions, the pathologists, true to professional instinct, resort to negation. “That such deformity may be produced by mental impressions on pregnant women there is an absence of positive proof”, they say.
“Moles, mothers’ marks, and cutaneous spots as ascribed to morbid states of the coats of the ovum. …A very generally recognized cause of malformation consists in impeded development of the foetus, the cause of which is not always obvious, but is for the most part concealed. …Transient forms of the human foetus are comparable to persistent forms of many lower animals.”
Can the learned professor explain why? “Hence malformations resulting from arrest of development often acquire an animal-like appearance.”
Exactly; but why do not pathologists inform us why it is so? Any anatomist who has made the development and growth of the embryo and foetus “a subject of special study”, can tell, without much brain-work, what daily experience and the evidence of his own eyes show him, viz.: that up to a certain period, the human embryo is a facsimile of a young batrachian in its first remove from the spawn – a tadpole.
But no physiologist or anatomist seems to have had the idea of applying to the development of the human being – from the first instant of its physical appearance as a germ to its ultimate formation and birth – the Pythagorean esoteric doctrine of metempsychosis, so erroneously interpreted by critics.
The meaning of the kabalistic axiom: “A stone becomes a plant; a plant a beast; a beast a man, etc.”, was mentioned in another place in relation to the spiritual and physical evolution of man on this earth. We will now add a few words more to make the idea clearer.”
H. P. Blavatsky