The Mahatma Letters to A.P. Sinnett (Reading Group)

[Smaragd]

This idea of partial disintegration during pralaya and the reason behind it was too obscure for me to understand from the Secret Doctrine. So much so I have stopped reading the book. The explanation in this letter caused the Secret Doctrine rise remarkably upwards in my reading list. Good job master Morya.

The idea and experience of active time realized as more meaningful than the trophy gave me an image of man building a porch, enjoying the work and looking forward to use it. But then comes the day-to-day profane life and eventually the porch might feel completely stale, for such is the nature of formal things — they are under constant change and we are often reluctantly reminded of it. Human culture has (exoteric) tendency to divide things between sacred and profane, something Mircea Eliade has written about. Day-to-day life might be considered profane, but it is sacred if one is able to transcend the culture of ignorance in to culture of meaning. Now, as the man with his porch is gradually loosing enjoyment of the luxury, he finds the bliss or the glimpse of something sacred it used to give him, an empty box of bliss indeed. So he proceeds to active endeavours again. Considering that, I can understand why it is so easy (too easy) to come to the conclusion that after death there is nothing — when there is no movement, how can there be endless amounts of bliss.

The eternal cycle of manvantaras and pralayas sounds horrible at first, but when everything falls in to their places it's neat. Do you see melting into Oneness during pralaya as a reset where the Monad(s?) are mixed completely for the next manvantara to have "new" mix of Monads adventuring the planets? Otherwise it seems the mantavaras might just repeat identically on and on. I've wondered where it comes, the belief that some fundamental part (if I understood correctly Morya uses the word Monad for it) of the individual is reincarnating over and over when it could be a newly formed emanation of God, withouth any individual qualities, every time. Well it's the manvantaras ofcourse, with it's evolution cycles working with karma!
To still keep the idea of Oneneness between the dead matter and Spirit during pralaya, I link the eternal bliss directly or indirectly to the laws of attraction or affinity, Morya mentioned, affecting the lasting minerals. During the night love is the only movement but still, or rather, thats way the One has to sleep with one eye open. Much like special agent 007.

Great letter! I've been waiting for Morya to appear as the name have stuck to my mind since I first heard it. Reminds me of certain interesting cave settlements.

[obnoxion]

First I would like to thank fra Smaragd for his awesome post! The incredible porch metaphor and the idea of how “day-to-day life might be considered profane, but it is sacred if one is able to transcend the culture of ignorance in to culture of meaning” touched something of my innermost spiritual restlessness that can only be brought to peace by contemplation of the esoteric.
* * *
Due to a busy week ahead, I will do the 13th letter in advance. I got one of Morya’s letters (received January 1882, in Allahabad), which for some reason has felt exciting. It feels special to do one of Morya’s letters. Perhaps it is just because they are rarer the KH’s letter.

The letter is formed as Q&A between M. and A.P.S., and it deals with the basic themes of Esoteric Cosmology understood in a broad sense – the origin and the destiny of Worlds and Beings. Let it also be noted that the beginning of the letter is somewhat fragmented, so that the answer to the first question (there are seven pairs of Q&A in total) has been partly lost. As an avid reader of Gnostic and other fragments, this poor state of the letter created a very warm and homely feeling.

These kinds of personal feelings are something I am going to stress throughout this text. Perhaps the next letter will be more historically. I trust if some of you finds my treatment lacking, they will compensate with their comments. Because I see little point in making a summary of these topics that have been so well established elsewhere, I have chosen to interpret them form the point of view that is most meaningful for me personally. So, I will attempt to simplify complex topics, and bring them to the level of the human soul.

I will deal with two central topics in this letter – DHYANI CHOHANS and OUROBOROS.

* * *
DHYANI CHOHANS: What are “The Lords of Light”? They are our ancestors, and they are the goal of the dynamic process of being a human. They are the Angels of the Bible, and the Kumaras of the Hindus. They are the consciousness in nature, the persona in the seemingly impersonal. In Theosophy, they are our intelligence, our mind. They are basically everything between Spirit and Matter. They are Elohim, that is, the ratio of circle's circumference to its diameter - personified.

I admit this is a broad view of a topic that is has been treated in a very detailed manner in Theosophy, and I may have over-generalized a bit. But what I think is important is the question, what can a soul profit from entertaining a thought that there is something of worth behind this concept of Dhyani Cohans? A soul can regain a sense of a past and a destiny; a sense of respect and a connection to its environment; the epiphany that its inner life is of substance; a sense of wonderment that can evolve into a tangible enchantment; belief in the face of improbable… Basically all aboriginal cultures have had the idea that there is a half-invisible world where a chain of archetypes/entities form a chain of causes and effects to which our little world is connected. And this world of making is not unlike the world we see in our sleep, and in the visions of artistic and spiritual geniuses.

I think that humans as collective need to have a this sort of connection a world of intuitions and hints. And instead finding a way to get rid of it, we should attempt to find a way to remain in connection with it amidst the massive changes in our thinking and our world views. We should be more reluctant to lose connection to things we might not be able to regain, because I don’t believe that we are able to see all far enough into our past or our future to reliably assess our position in the cosmic drama. In our attempt to actively lose the sense of the world as – to lend a beautiful phrase from the Lotus Sutra - “An Assembly of Humans and Nonhumans”, we might be cutting off the roots of our vitality and joy.

So, this is what the concept of Dhyani Chohans means to me. And therefore I think it is important to at least entertain the thought of them. I find this is what Archetypal Psychologist James Hillman meant when he spoke how "the great task of any culture is to keep the invisibles attached” - it helps us not to be so human-centered, and at the same time it allows as to be fully human, and cherish the qualities in ourselves that we might not fully comprehend, but which do make us stand apart from our surroundings. (Here’s a link to an interview where JH speaks about the concept: http://www.scottlondon.com/interviews/hillman.html).

* * *
OUROBOROS: M. speaks of cycles of cosmic nights and days, which for me is a sensible view of the cosmos. Certainly, it is much more probable than a linear view of mystery-story between a little genesis and a small apocalypse; and on the other hand, it is more comprehendible than the idea of something from nothing.

But, as before, my main interest is the level of the soul, and the Idea of the Cosmic Serpent is a very vital model for me personally. The primal division into negative and positive, seen as the head and the tail of the serpent, is for me a most satisfying visualization of an indescribable concept. It makes it a living reality for the soul.

As a personal note, having incorporated the word for “Serpent” in my name (onoxion is formed by inserting the word for night “nox” in the middle -that is, as the heart – of the word for serpent “obion”, forming the idea of taming one’s own heart with one’s own venom, thus bringing about the great extinction or “nirvana”), the myth of the Great Serpent as the most primal image of beginning, initiation and dissolution resonates strongly with me.

[Nefastos]

To still keep the idea of Oneneness between the dead matter and Spirit during pralaya, I link the eternal bliss directly or indirectly to the laws of attraction or affinity, Morya mentioned, affecting the lasting minerals. During the night love is the only movement but still, or rather, thats way the One has to sleep with one eye open. Much like special agent 007.

Yes, this is an interesting point, especially concerning the maha-pralaya of cosmic (not just planetary) dissolution. WHO is "taking care of the laws of (super-)nature" which hold together the "seeds" of monadic karma? Sleep, perhaps, is truly a good word here. For it is not dead which can eternal lie, is it?

Do you see melting into Oneness during pralaya as a reset where the Monad(s?) are mixed completely for the next manvantara to have "new" mix of Monads adventuring the planets? Otherwise it seems the mantavaras might just repeat identically on and on.

Not identically, but in a spiraling manner. Let's remember that "becoming a dhyan chohan", which is the ultimate goal for the humankind's monads in our manvantara, is just the beginning of that dhyan chohanic work in the next. After that, who can say? Maybe there's hope even for God to make His amends... But seriously, the first stanzas of Dzyan specifically discuss this very matter:

1. The eternal parent wrapped in her ever invisible robes had slumbered once again for seven eternities.

2. Time was not, for it lay asleep in the infinite bosom of duration.

3. Universal mind was not, for there were no Ah-hi to contain it.

[...]

5. Darkness alone filled the boundless all, for father, mother and son were once more one, and the son had not awakened yet for the new wheel, and his pilgrimage thereon.

6. The seven sublime lords and the seven truths had ceased to be, and the Universe, the son of Necessity, was immersed in Paranishpanna, to be outbreathed by that which is and yet is not. Naught was.

7. The causes of existence had been done away with; the visible that was, and the invisible that is, rested in eternal non-being — the one being.

8. Alone the one form of existence stretched boundless, infinite, causeless, in dreamless sleep; and life pulsated unconscious in universal space, throughout that all-presence which is sensed by the opened eye of the Dangma.

9. But where was the Dangma when the Alaya of the universe was in Paramartha and the great wheel was Anupadaka?

Italics and underlining mine.

Great letter! I've been waiting for Morya to appear as the name have stuck to my mind since I first heard it. Reminds me of certain interesting cave settlements.

Indeed, 'tis the foundation rock of "things hidden" (occult) not only in Theosophic & Tolkienian sense, but also Judeo-Christian...

Moriah (Hebrew: מוֹרִיָּה‎, Modern Moriyya, Tiberian Môriyyā; "ordained/considered by the LORD", Arabic: ﻣﺮﻭﻩ Marwah) is the name given to a mountain range by the Book of Genesis, in which context it is the location of the sacrifice of Isaac. The Vulgate renders the location specified by God for the sacrifice as terram Visionis, traditionally rendered "land of Vision" in Catholic translations. Traditionally Moriah has been interpreted as the name of the specific mountain at which this occurred, rather than just the name of the range.

[Nefastos]

Just a stray thought about the letter XIII, commented above by Obnoxion:

Particularly because it has been seen previously that the "Mahatmas" use quite a lot of atheistic approach & often even refer to the scientific studies both on the fields of natural science and of humanities, it is interesting to see how also the extremely mystical spiritual topics are being covered or at least touched here.

The above said is the rule. The Buddhas and Avatars form the exception as verily we have yet some Avatars left to us on earth.

Italics from the original. And from the next page, at the end of the letter:

Those who succeed in doing so become Buddhas, Dyan Chohans, etc. The chief object of our struggles and initiations is to achieve this union while yet on this earth. Those who will be successful have nothing to fear of during the fifth, sixth and seventh rouds. But this is a mystery. Our beloved K.H. is on his way to the goal - the highest of all beyond as on this sphere.

In a couple of the letters is discussed this reason of Koot Hoomi's absence: he is going through some kind of a samadhi experience, which makes him less and more human as result.

These are things that I think should be of a great interest to the real occultists. I do not mean that they should be taken as items of religious worship, blind faith or something like that, but they do show as the actual goal of our work on individual level. (On a collective level of the Right Hand Path, the goal is to help humankind & other forms of life. On individual level of the Left Hand Path, it is this gradual initiatoric apotheosis.)

Of course, for the most of us the first step is to achieve real humanity before we can try to reach superhuman goals. But when we understand what it means to be a "microcosm", those two come closer to each other than it is often realized. This is our great hope.

[RaktaZoci]

Hello All, I'll do my best to present letter no.14, which more or less proceeds with the matters addressed in the two previous letters.

We get back to Master KH on this letter and review his answers to Sinnett's questions. He (Sinnett) seems to demand the proper formulae for calculating the number of cycles in a Monad's journey. He also inquires how the Monad is "transferred" throughout these different cycles.

Of explanations to these I personally have little to say. I find it, though, as if Sinnett would have quite analytical understanding to these truths and he seems to be taken with numerical explanations, which I do not personally care for that much. There is one number, though, that caught my eye:

"..making the total incarnations of man in each station or planet 777."

In fact number seven seems to have a great importance in the whole of KH's explanations here, as well as the septanary cycles involved. In fact he writes, mysteriously:

"Though I am obliged to withhold information about many points yet if you should work out any of the problems by yourself it will be my duty to tell you so. Try to solve the problem of the 777 incarnations."

I do not doubt there is truth to this mystery.


In relation of how the Monad "travels" through the cycles, KH replies:

"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 manwantariccycle, or at the close of one "Round" as you would call it. It is explained in the letter I am preparing for you."

I am actually looking forwards to this coming letter, since there is reference to it many times in the course of this text. On the subject of the Monad itself, I seem to recall several conversations with Nefastos on the matter, after which, besides getting more confused, I believed to have gotten atleast a glimpse of what actually is meant with this term. I remember some diagrams of layers upon others on an arc, etc.

Other thing that I noticed is that even though the letter many times plainly states that this-and-this information cannot be given out at this point, I still get the feeling that the author possesses that knowledge, i.e. I believe in his authority. Many times, in our Modern World, people tend to say such things because they
a) do not know the answer or
b) are too lazy to explain it.

I find it quite sad that I would even consider these possibilities, but I guess I am just so used in people being deceitful, that this immediately came to mind.

In the end of the letter, there is a drawn diagram of the cycles of Man on this planet. Do you others have access to this figure? It seems not to be present in the internet version. If such is the case, I could gladly scan it for you from my physical book.

Anyways, as I referred already in relation to to letter 9 (?), this diagram reminded me of Nefastos' presentation in Argarizim (chapter III, Insatiati) of the cycle of creation. I'd like to ask, though, does that diagram present a similar cycle as presented here? Aren't the macro- and the microcosmic referrable to one another, yes..?

[Nefastos]

Monad truly is a mystery to ponder upon, and not easily understandable. It might be that it is altogether impossible to envision without some kind of a mystic vision, but since science already have given us the concept of a Big Bang and thus almost non-existential but at the same time hyper-intense "atomic" point having in itself everything that is, has been and will be, perhaps also kâma manas can twist itself around this mindset of a monadic being from that basis. At least there's something to work on.

Other thing that I noticed is that even though the letter many times plainly states that this-and-this information cannot be given out at this point, I still get the feeling that the author possesses that knowledge, i.e. I believe in his authority. Many times, in our Modern World, people tend to say such things because they
a) do not know the answer or
b) are too lazy to explain it.

I guess this must be a common problem for many a time, and it is very good always to consider first that option (a) you mentioned. Only in rare circtumstances, when in a presence of an already acctepted master, such claims can - and do - have a meaning. And even in such case, I would rather like to see some kind of an averted answer, that gives an accepted approach to the subjected. Like: "That is a very good question. In order to understand this thing, you might start thinking on these lines..." - even though the teacher might know that the final answer cannot be found in the pupil's present phase of query.

In the end of the letter, there is a drawn diagram of the cycles of Man on this planet. Do you others have access to this figure? It seems not to be present in the internet version. If such is the case, I could gladly scan it for you from my physical book.

Good idea. Luckily, Googling the name of the figure came up with an already existing piece here.

Anyways, as I referred already in relation to to letter 9 (?), this diagram reminded me of Nefastos' presentation in Argarizim (chapter III, Insatiati) of the cycle of creation. I'd like to ask, though, does that diagram present a similar cycle as presented here? Aren't the macro- and the microcosmic referrable to one another, yes..?

Yes, it's similar, don't let the seemingly reversed order of the stages confuse you.

[Smaragd]

I fell behind a bit, but now I've managed to catch the reading groups phase. Interesting points from frater obnoxion. Actually had a conversation couple days ago about that idea of not being so human-centered and still strive towards full human potential. I have to check that Hillman interview and continue that conversation.

Other thing that I noticed is that even though the letter many times plainly states that this-and-this information cannot be given out at this point, I still get the feeling that the author possesses that knowledge, i.e. I believe in his authority. Many times, in our Modern World, people tend to say such things because they
a) do not know the answer or
b) are too lazy to explain it.

I had minor problems with these parts especially because I read some of them from a finnish translation. Reading in native language the words and sentences are more easily associated to that kind of bullshit smelling dialogue we often hear. Critical mind is summoned to doubt. My doubt lead to think the reason also might be in words themselves. Speaking about those higher rounds might be too inaccurate for it to be sensible.

Nice point of view towards the Big Bang from frater Nefastos. This weeks chapter also brought the evolutionary process from ape to human together with the idea in theosophy that during the first rounds humans are more of spirit. These two ideas I've previously failed to bring together causing great confusion.

[Smaragd]

Turn the page to Letter No. 15 and we get to this interesting subject of germs of spirit behind every life form from minerals to more organic molecules and bodies. Sakti of Parabrahma is pouring down and being further differentiated through Fohat, from one element to 5. I see the first differentiations 6th ("it is connected with the process of the highest intellection") and 7th ("energizing impulse", behind all the 6 thereon) pointing back towards Fohat (6th) and the Sakti of Parabrahma (7th); correct me if you think I'm mixing things up. The elements being abstract spirits, although named (understandably) after tangible substances, govern their own departments emanating forward their ideas, which we will ultimately sense as, for example, mineral molecules – crystallizations of the earth element.

Following these Sakti currents I came to think of karma and where does it come in here? KH is using the word force a bit reluctantly and states it being only an attribute of the one unchanging form of existence – the Sakti of Parabrahma. The word law comes to mind; law can be seen as a passive force, thus not changing but affecting the phenomenal world as a labyrinth structure (maya embodying laws ie. karma structures). Perhaps the next letter continues more on this subject of karma, for the table of content repeats the word quite frequently.

Opening up these ideas of abstract elements, this letter is a great introduction or key to continue towards Agrippas Three Books of Occult Philosophy which represents the elements in the old fashioned way of occult literature, that is, without too much clearing the subject. KH even refers mystical creatures, which I found confusing reading Agrippas opus magnum. The gnomes, the salamanders and the undines refers to the elementals, but why there are 3 and not 7 like before, or are these three only thrown in for the sake of example?
Relating to the mystical creatures, which are apparently from Kabbalistic tradition, I found it worth my while to take a new look at the Kabbalistic Tree of Life in the light of this weeks letter. Tree of life is mentioned on this letter relating to those Sakti currents dividing in to myriads of differentiations.

Takin a closer look at the manvantara, the elements manifest themselves as kingdoms according to the septenary cycles of manvantaric chain. The elemental kingdoms take consecutive steps portrayed in globes, rounds, rings and obscurations (pralayas). The diagram from the last letter helped a lot with these, but I'd like to see an animation of this thing. My head jams when I try to penetrate these ideas, so I won't step further, although there definetly are things worth discussing about in there, like the mystic exception of Buddha to the rule that no man can't be a 6th round man for now (which I didn't quite understand).

I tend to ponder these things over and over when presenting a letter leading me to question my self a thousand times and resulting in profound feelings of found meaning and finally utter feeling of getting lost between words. Hopefully there's not too many misunderstandings here.

[Yinlong]

Letter number 16 http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-16.htm was received about a week after the previous letter. Similarly as letter 15 it is organised into a series of questions by Sinnett and answers by Koot Hoomi. The letter is quite lengthy, and it definitely contains interesting details of Theosophical views of life, death and afterlife in form of what happens between and after (a possible) reincarnation - so even Heaven and Hell! (well, kind of….) However, to save some time, I can’t and won’t even try to refer to the whole content in this little analysis (those interested will anyways read the entire letter. By the way, I personally recommend the occasional reader of this thread to read this one as this particular letter was quite interestingly detailed and treats quite eternal questions), but rather I try pick interesting concepts following the structure of the letter to be discussed and pondered below.

So, the whole letter discusses the conditions or stages between life and death, and possibly a new life if the soul goes through a reincarnation. This middle stage or world (or maybe a condition of ego or process involving part of the person’s spirit after death) is called Deva Chan. In the beginning of the letter there is a quoted description from an unknown source (referred as Shan-Mun-yi-Tung), where it is described as a place where “there are no more griefs and sorrows in that cycle for them… Myriads of Spirits (Lha) resort there for rest and then return their own regions.” Also, notably, it is governed by Dhyan Chohans. The description kind of brings a heaven-like place to my mind - although it is said to not be a final destination - so, Sinnett asks rightfully what’s the resemblance to the concept of Heaven of the major religions? In his answer K.H. refutes any real resemblance of what we commonly attribute to a heaven or paradise. (Naturally, he blames H.P.B for introducing this misconception) as the final destination is somewhere else…

What (of us) and who (of us) then go to this Deva Chan? In the letter we are given, among others, the following details:
1. The ego of those “who have not slipped down into the mire of unredeemable sin and bestiality”. However, the ego (or part of it) goes through a process depending on one’s deeds during its dwellings on Earth-life.
2. Persons can remember or have memories of their previous life in Deva Chan, but these memories (if I read and understood correctly) can never return to Earth. Also, I got the impression that most (or all) part of this previous Earth-dwelling is washed away as the Ego is reborn.
3. The state is compared to a dream, and the state is called even “perpetual Maya”. However, in which the person can be also “with” his loved ones that are still living, in a blissful state, however, with little or no connection to Earth or earthly world and its troubles.
4. Communication - or sympathy with us on Earth and persons in Deva Chan (as in spiritism and automatic writing etc.) is compared to be like resonance of the materia of what these two worlds consists of - like a harmony in music. Nevertheless, the communication is said to be real, although it is said that it takes an initiated and seasoned person to make anything sensible out of the communication. Basically, claiming most outcomes through mediumism to be rubbish.
5. Deva Chan is (kind of) created by the ego. So, the contents of it derive also from the ego. It is referred as a deeply “selfish” state. Thus, also the form of the state is dictated by the contents acquired on Earth-life. Meaning that there’s a great variance in what kind of Deva Chan person ends up in.
6. The state may last basically any time, though it is quite unclear if the person perceives time normally in this state.
7. Once past Deva Chan - to “Heaven” - there is no return to have any contact with Earth.
8. Those totally sucked by dark arts “trick nature” and remain on Earth (or do not enter Deva Chan) until they are annihilated later

All in all - personally - somehow this description sounds a bit “purgatoresque” to me. Instead of going life - death - purgatory - heaven, you go cycles of life and death with purification in between until you reach a heaven-like state, which is then totally disconnected from this world. Though, I have to admit I’m not very familiar with Buddhic or Theosophical (or any) concepts of reincarnation, and I’m not personally a great fan of after-life reaching cosmic justice systems like the concept of karma etc - even though they might sometimes feel necessary or I rather wished them to be true. However, I keep my mind open for the possibility of some sort of after-life, but I doubt we are able to gain much knowledge of that (after life stages) while we are alive and here. Perhaps the reason why I don’t find the possibility of reincarnation so appealing is to do with the fact that I - at least currently - don’t believe we are equipped with anything soul-like: For example, like this essence Koot Hoomi describes to be separated and purified in Deva Chan state. An ego to me seems - or feels - more like focal points of a set of lenses on top of a stormy sea of consciousness (where the bottom is not visible and for the image to be formed I need to be alive). Well, enough of my current personal views, they probably change still. So, lets continue with the final part of the letter, which deals mostly with spirit communication - or talking to the dead.

The text refers the dead dwelling among us to be kind of shells, referring to the fact that part of them is separated in death. I remember this term and similar descriptions to be used also in Jung’s speculations on the topic. In the beginning, there are a couple of interesting points. 1. Not necessarily all spirits are bad, however, mediumism as an act is said to not bring the best qualities of them 2. The dead may be very willing to seek contact with the living, especially in the case of person dying by suicide or accident, which brings point 3. where aforementioned deaths and the following state of being is a sort of exception in the Life - Deva Chan chain. These poor part-souls need to wait for their natural life-term to be ended. Since they are separated from their higher aspects (willingly in case of a suicide), and the part here may seek to replace what they have lost by haunting the living. Though, it is mentioned that it is also possible for them to unify with the lost part of their ego.

Later it is actually quite well established again why theosophy so strongly rejects mediumism: It is possible - or even likely - to actually do harm to the contacted by introducing new negative karma. This actually kind of makes sense why so often it is emphasised to have sympathy towards any encountered being - be it living or spiritual. Also, it is argued why the discussed system is more “just” regarding the debit / credit balance of good and bad deeds especially, especially considering the cases “innocents”:

"Your Western law which punishes the innocent son of a guilty father by depriving him of his parent, rights and property; your civilized Society which brands with infamy the guileless daughter of an immoral, criminal mother; your Christian Church and Scriptures which teach that the "Lord God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation" are not all these far more unjust and cruel than anything done by Karma?"

Very last before some personal remarks Koot Hoomi reminds Sinnett with the distinction between “individuality” (Amita-Yana) and “personality” (Paccika Yana). The first being the immortal vehicle through incarnations containing the higher principles (ones going to Deva Chan) and the latter being the lower principles discussed earlier, which can be thought as the common, disappearing, earthly Ego.

Well, maybe there are enough meditations here for me and other possible more “atheistically” or “chaotically” oriented readers to meditate on the possibilities (of my mentioned “sea and collection of ego lenses”) of something traveling through more orderly space and time encapsulated in Amita-Yama.

[Nefastos]

Thank you brothers for the last letter analyses. My letter, number 17, received June 1882, was a short one. It consists of questions of Sinnett & their answers from Koot Hoomi. In brief, the topics covered were:

1) What like are the people who are radically more evolved, namely those who have already achieved the evolutionary stage that will be the humankind's standard in the "fifth round" or the next world age.
2) Are those very advanced human beings released from reincarnation.
3) What, if anything, is the essential difference between the sexes.
4-5) Are people from different evolutionary phases born to countries with different cultural possibilities for refinement. (Do I sense from the modern audience?)

And, to somewhat outside this dialogue, an extra question:

6) What exactly are the spirit guides of the mediums.

The answers might be shortened to the following form:

1) A certain type of seers/clairvoyants (Anna Kingsford, of whom there was some talk before, is given as one example); different advanced adepts in general; and "the geniuses – whether in arts, politics or religious reform". This last group is interesting, since unlike an adept, a religious reformer or a political genius might be quite unilaterally developed. But in the "fifth round" people are yet far from perfect, so this makes sense.

2) They are not. Even the greatest masters (Buddha is mentioned) will incarnate again in the extremely distant future. KH also advises to take a look at the text in Isis Unveiled:

Thus, all those great characters who tower like giants in the history of mankind, like Buddha-Siddârtha, and Jesus, in the realm of spiritual, and Alexander the Macedonian and Napoleon the Great, in the realm of physical conquests, were but reflexed images of human types which had existed ten thousand years before, in the preceding decimillennium, reproduced by the mysterious powers controlling the destinies of our world.

This extremely interesting occult doctrine of "overshadowing" is quite often discussed (hinted) in the old Theosophical texts, but never explained in full. I suggest taking into consideration the possibility that this has to do with the process of the "cast away principles" left from the ascended beings, and how those seemingly subjective veils or energetics of personae can and will be actually distributed and are neither absolute or relative in a way we think, but something that is common and specific at the same time. In KH's example, it is once again Buddha who is one such "overshadower" of the advanced individuals in the later generations.

3) The sex is "a mere accident - as you say". But this "accident" (meaning that the difference is not essential or fundamental) is not without its causes and effects, but works under karma just like everything else.

4-5) To the eyes of the many modern readers, these questions & their answers might seem almost outrageous, because our own culture has come to view the whole idea of the "races" very differently from the 19th century mindset. The idea, however, is that the different possibilities for this or that development will, of course, be born to the soil (bodies & cultures) that are karmically fittest for their self-manifestation; and such outer differences do exist. Theosophical doctrine teaches that yes, there really are differences in different human races, and even when the outer change has taken place, member of some or other race will inwardly remain as he was, regardless of outer habits.

6) While KH tells Sinnett that he cannot possibly come to know the full answer, he gives quite a handful of hints. Like in other theosophical teachings, which made great effort to criticize its contemporarily very vital and influential phenomena of spiritualism, here too KH stresses that:

unless you become acquainted with the evolution of the corruptions of elemental dross, and those of the seven principles of man - you would ever find yourself at a loss to understand - what they really are.

He points out that they are related to the soulless (!) mediums, because like gravitates to like. (In theosophy, a "soulless" human being has lost his higher principles of âtma-buddhi-manas, i.e. the link from that "true being" to the ephemereal personality has been severed. This can be the karma and result of either selfish & degrading use of magic, or extreme materialism. Outwardly this soullessness might not always be apparent.)

They are both elementaries [ex-human "demonic" spirits] and elementals [natural spirits] - at best a low, mischievous, degrading jangle.

So, the helpful spirits and familiars of the spiritualists, new-agers and so on are actually the very dregs of spirit, entities that are either so extremely undeveloped that they are far from becoming to the sphere of actual morals (even though they mimic such) or have already been disintagrated into parts from some or other astral corpse. In its often quite belief-necessitating teachings about spiritual realm, theosophy is not very different to some quite stern forms of Traditionalism, even though Traditionalists often abhor Theosophy (as a cultural mish-mash) in turn.