In the Abhidharmakośa (AK 3.8-9) we find, as David indicated in his earlier posts on the subject, and in his earlier article on the Original Genesis, a short statement on the “modes of birth”. In the English 1991 translation of Vallée-Poussin-Pruden, Vol. 2, p. 380-381 (cf. French tr. Vallée-Poussin p. 26-27), it is rendered:
3.8c-d There are here four “wombs” of beings, beings born from eggs, etc.
3.9a Humans and animals are of the four types.
3.9b-c Beings in hell, intermediate beings, and the gods are apparitional too.
3.9d Pretas are also born from a womb.
We could call the style of reasoning of this statement inductive or empirical. The model of the “six realms of saṃsāra” is correlated with the model of the modes of birth, but there seems to be no systematic (“systemic”) relationship between the two. This could be viewed as an example of what HPB might call exoteric interpretation. The modes of birth and the six realms are not explained: they are assumed to be known to the reader.
Of the Book of Dzyan it is thought that it somehow represents universal wisdom, that is “theosophy” in its most literal sense. Then it should be axiomatic, in the sense that it does not presuppose any other knowledge, for example of more fundamental laws or definitions, to be able to uncover its message. We might think that if it is supposed to be universal, it follows that it is a fundamental, or root text (mūla). The Book of Dzyan is however, according to HPB, itself a commentary on “the seven secret folios of Kiu-te, and a Glossary [..]” (CW XIV, 422), and she suggests that an even more fundamental commentary on the secret rgyud books should exist. Nevertheless it we might assume that we should be able to recognize the Book of Dzyan in its literary style (style of reasoning) as a fundamental work.
A systematic relationship is indeed found, between the (five) modes of birth and the five elements, in Vimalaprabha 2.34, summarized in the following table.
| Earth | pṛthivīyoni | [stationary] | (sthāvarāḥ) |
| Wind | vāyuyoni | [egg-born] | aṇḍajāḥ |
| Water | udakayoni | sweat-born | saṃsvedajāḥ |
| [Fire] | born from the womb | jarāyujāḥ | |
| Space | ākāśadhātu | apparitional | upapādukāḥ |
We might compare this list to the stages of human evolution HPB described in the first section of the second volume of The Secret Doctrine, trying to find a correspondence between the element and the human principle involved in a particular evolutionary stage. The following table summarizes the result.
| Stage | Mode of Birth | Stanza | Element | |
| 1 | First | apparitional (self-born)? | IV | Space |
| 2 | Second | sweat-born | IV, V | Water |
| 3 | Third – early | sweat-born | VI, VII | Water |
| Third – middle | egg-born | VII, IX | Wind | |
| Third – late | born from the womb | IX, X | [Fire] | |
| 4 | Fourth | born from the womb | X, XI | [Fire] |
| 5 | Fifth | born from the womb | XI, XII | [Fire] |
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
Simplified, cf. SD II, 173:
| Stage | Mode of Birth | Element | |
| 1 | First | apparitional (chhayas) | Space |
| 2 | Second | sweat-born | Water |
| 3 | Third | egg-born, and birth fr. Kriyashakti | Wind |
| 4 | Fourth | born from Padmapani | [Fire] |
Birth in the First Stage is not exactly described by HPB as apparitional, but as self-born, which is more like fission. Fission as a mode of birth in biology can be seen in human cell division or in Protista, for example Paramecium. Maybe this process is closer to the stationary mode of birth (Earth element) of the Vimalaprabha.
HPB often refers to the work of Ernst Haeckel when it comes to evolutionary biology. In SD II, 177 she tries to envision man in the Middle Third Stage as a human polyp, I think not without enjoyment. Haeckel introduced the term anthropogenesis.