Your suggestion as to the box I will think over. There would have to be some contrivance to prevent the discharge of power when once the box was charged, whether during transit or subsequently: I will consider and take advice or rather permission. But I must say the idea is utterly repugnant to us as everything else smacking of spirits and mediumship. We would prefer by far using natural means as in the last transmission of my letter to you. It was one of M.'s chelas who left it for you in the flower-shed, where he entered invisible to all yet in his natural body, just as he had entered many a time your museum and other rooms, unknown to you all, during and after the "Old Lady's" stay. But unless he is told to do so by M. he will never do it, and that is why your letter to me was left unnoticed. You have an unjust feeling towards my Brother, kind sir, for he is better and more powerful than I — at least he is not as bound and restricted as I am. I have asked H.P.B. to send you a number of philosophical letters from a Dutch Theosophist at Penang — one in whom I take an interest: you ask for more work and here is some. They are translations, originals of those portions of Schopenhauer which are most in affinity with our Arhat doctrines. The English is not idiomatic but the material is valuable. Should you be disposed to utilize any portion of it, I would recommend your opening a direct correspondence with Mr. Sanders, F.T.S. — the translator.
Schopenhauer's philosophical value is so well known in the western countries that a comparison or connotation of his teachings upon will, etc., with those you have received from ourselves might be instructive. Yes, I am quite ready to look over your 50 or 60 pages and make notes on the margins; have them set up by all means and send them to me either through little "Deb" or Damodar and Djual Kool will transmit them. In a very few days, perhaps to-morrow, your two questions will be amply answered by me.
Meanwhile
Yours sincerely,
K. H.
P.S. — The Tibetan translation is not quite ready yet.
Letter No. 66142 (ML-14) Rec. July 9, 1882
Hume was at this time still writing the series of articles for The Theosophist entitled "Fragments of Occult Truth." Later he grew weary of this undertaking and Sinnett carried on, completing the series and later developing from it his book, Esoteric Buddhism. However, Hume had a keen and questing intellect and was at that time working closely with Sinnett in their mutual attempt to acquire a knowledge of the occult philosophy. Following the Question and Answer section of this letter is a chart prepared by the Mahatma K.H. called "MAN ON A PLANET," explained on the following page.
Letter from K.H. Answering Queries. Received by A.O.H., July 9th, 1882.
(1) We understand that the man-bearing cycle of necessity of our solar system consists of thirteen objective globes, of which ours is the lowest, six above it in the ascending, and six in the descending cycle with a fourteenth world lower still than ours. Is this correct?
(1)The number is not quite correct. There are seven objective and seven subjective globes (I have been just permitted for the first time to give you the right figure), the worlds of causes and of effects. The former have our earth occupying the lower turning point where spirit-matter equilibrates. But do not trouble yourself to go into calculations even on this correct basis for it will only puzzle you, since the infinite ramifications of the number seven (which is one of our greatest mysteries) being so closely allied and interdependent with the seven principles of Nature and man — this figure is the only one I am permitted (so far) to give you. What I can reveal I do so in a letter I am just finishing.
(2) We understand that below man you reckon not three kingdoms as we do (mineral, vegetable and animal) but seven. Please enumerate and explain these.
(2) Below man there are three in the objective and three in the subjective region, with man a septenary. Two of the three former none but an initiate could conceive of; the third is the Inner kingdom — below the crust of the earth — which we could name but would feel embarrassed to describe. These seven kingdoms are preceded by other and numerous septenary stages and combinations.
(3) We understand that the monad, starting in the highest world of the descending series, appears there in a mineral encasement, and there goes through a series of seven encasements representing the seven classes into which the mineral kingdom is divided, and that this done it passes to the next planet and does likewise (I purposely say nothing of the worlds of results, where it takes on the development the result of what it has gone through in the last world and the necessary preparation for the next) and so on right through the thirteen spheres, making altogether 91 mineral existences. (a) Is this correct? (b) If so, what are the classes we are to reckon in the mineral kingdom? Also (c) How does the monad get out of one encasement into another; in the case of inherbations and incarnations, the plant and animal dies, but so far as we know the mineral does not die, so how does the monad in the first round get out of one into another inmetalliation? (d) And has every separate molecule of the mineral a monad or only those groups of molecules where definite structure is observable such as crystals?
(3) Yes; in our string of worlds it starts at globe "A" of the descending series and passing through all the preliminary evolutions and combinations of the first three kingdoms it finds itself encased in its first mineral form (in what I call race when speaking of man and what we may call class in general) — of class I — there. Only it passes through seven instead of "through the thirteen spheres" even omitting the intermediate "worlds of results." Having passed through its seven great classes of inmetalliation (a good word this) with their septenary ramifications — the monad gives birth to the vegetable kingdom and moves on to the next planet "B."
(a) As you now see, except as to the numbers. (b) Your geologists divide, I believe, stones into three great groups — of sandstone, granite and chalk; or the sedimentary, igneous, and organic, following their physical characteristics, just as the psychologists and spiritualists divide man into the trinity of body, soul, and spirit. Our method is totally different. We divide minerals (also the other kingdoms) according to their occult properties, i.e., according to the relative proportion of the seven universal principles which they contain. I am sorry to refuse you, but I cannot, am not permitted to answer your question. To facilitate for you a question of simple nomenclature, however, I would advise you to study perfectly the seven principles in man, and thus143 to divide the seven great classes of the minerals correspondentially. For instance, the group of the sedimentary would answer to the compound (chemically speaking) body of man or his first principle; the organic to the second (some call it third) principle or jiva, etc., etc. You must exercise your own intuitions in that. Thus you might also intuit certain truths even as to their properties. I am more than willing to help you but things have to be divulged gradually. (c) By occult osmosis. The plant and animal leave their carcases behind when life is extinct. So does the mineral only at longer intervals, as its rocky body is more lasting. It dies at the end of every manwantaric cycle, or at the close of one "Round" as you would call it. It is explained in the letter I am preparing for you. (d) Every molecule is part of the Universal Life. Man's soul (his fourth and fifth principle) is but a compound of the progressed entities of the lower kingdom. The superabundance or preponderance of one over another compound will often determine the instincts and passions of a man, unless these are checked by the soothing and spiritualizing influence of his sixth principle.