{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_7377/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_7377","id":"gutenberg_7377","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7377","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Philosophy, Hindu","Reincarnation","Vedanta"],"text":"Produced by Dave Maddock, Charles Franks and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVEDANTA PHILOSOPHY\n\nFIVE LECTURES ON REINCARNATION\n\nBY\n\nSWAMI ABHEDANANDA\n\n_Author of \"India and her People\", \"Self-Knowledge\", \"How to be a\nYogi\", \"Divine Heritage of Man\", etc._\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n  I.--REINCARNATION\n\n II.--HEREDITY AND REINCARNATION\n\nIII.--EVOLUTION AND REINCARNATION\n\n IV.--WHICH IS SCIENTIFIC, RESURRECTION OR REINCARNATION?\n\n  V.--THEORY OF TRANSMIGRATION\n\n\n\n\nI. REINCARNATION\n\n\nThe visible phenomena of the universe are bound by the universal law\nof cause and effect. The effect is visible or perceptible, while the\ncause is invisible or imperceptible. The falling of an apple from a\ntree is the effect of a certain invisible force called gravitation.\nAlthough the force cannot be perceived by the senses, its expression\nis visible. All perceptible phenomena are but the various expressions\nof different forces which act as invisible agents upon the subtle and\nimperceptible forms of matter. These invisible agents or forces\ntogether with the imperceptible particles of matter make up the subtle\nstates of the phenomenal universe. When a subtle force becomes\nobjectified, it appears as a gross object.  Therefore, we can say,\nthat every gross form is an expression of some subtle force acting\nupon the subtle particles of matter. The minute particles of hydrogen\nand oxygen when combined by chemical force, appear in the gross form\nof water. Water can never be separated from hydrogen and oxygen, which\nare its subtle component parts. Its existence depends upon that of its\ncomponent parts, or in other words, upon its subtle form. If the\nsubtle state changes, the gross manifestation will also change. The\npeculiarity in the gross form of a plant depends upon the peculiar\nnature of its subtle form, the seed. The peculiar nature of the gross\nforms in the animal kingdom depends upon the subtle forms which\nmanifest variously in each of the intermediate stages between the\nmicroscopic unit of living matter and the highest man. The gross human\nbody is closely related to its subtle body.  Not only this, but every\nmovement or change in the physical form is caused by the activity and\nchange of the subtle body. If the subtle body be affected or changed a\nlittle, the gross body will also be affected similarly. The material\nbody being the expression of the subtle body, its birth, growth, decay\nand death depend upon the changes of the subtle body.  As long as the\nsubtle body remains, it will continue to express itself in a\ncorresponding gross form.\n\nNow let us understand clearly what we mean by a subtle body. It is\nnothing but a minute germ of a living substance. It contains the\ninvisible particles of matter which are held together by vital force,\nand it also possesses mind or thought-force in a potential state, just\nas the seed of a plant contains in it the life force and the power of\ngrowth. According to Vedanta, the subtle body consists of\n_Antahkaranam_, that is, the internal organ or the mind substance\nwith its various modifications, mind, intellect, egoism, memory, the\nfive instruments of perception: the powers of seeing, hearing,\nsmelling, tasting and touching; the five instruments of action, such\nas the powers of seizing, moving, speaking, evacuating, and\ngenerating, and the five _Pr\u00e2nas. Pr\u00e2na_ is a Sanskrit word which\nmeans vital energy or the life-sustaining power in us. Although\n_Pr\u00e2na_ is one, it takes five different names on account of the\nfive different functions it performs. This word _Pr\u00e2na_ includes\nthe five manifestations of the vital force: First, that power which\nmoves the lungs and draws the atmospheric air from outside into the\nsystem. This is also called _Pr\u00e2na_. Second, that power which\nthrows out of the system such things as are not wanted. It is called\nin Sanskrit _Ap\u00e2na_. Third, it takes the name of _Sam\u00e2na_,\nas performing digestive functions and carrying the extract of food to\nevery part of the body. It is called _Ud\u00e2na_ when it is the cause\nof bringing down food from the mouth through the alimentary canal to\nthe stomach, and also when it is the cause of the power of speech. The\nfifth power of _Pr\u00e2na_ is that which works in every part of the\nnervous system from head to foot, through every canal, which keeps the\nshape of the body, preserves it from putrefaction, and gives health\nand life to every cell and organ. These are the various manifestations\nof the vital force or _Pr\u00e2na_. These subtle powers together with\nthe non-composite elements of the gross body, or the ethereal\nparticles of subtle matter, and also with the potentialities of all\nthe impressions, ideas and tendencies which each individual gathers in\none life, make up his subtle body.  As a resultant of all the\ndifferent actions of mind and body which an individual performs in his\npresent life, will be the tendencies and desires in his future life;\nnothing will be lost.\n\nEvery action of body or mind which we do, every thought which we\nthink, becomes fine, and is stored up in the form of a _Samsk\u00e2ra_\nor impression in our minds. It remains latent for some time, and then\nit rises up in the form of a mental wave and produces new\ndesires. These desires are called in Vedanta, _V\u00e2san\u00e2s_. V\u00e2san\u00e2s\nor strong desires are the manufacturers of new bodies. If V\u00e2san\u00e2 or\nlonging for worldly pleasures and objects remains in anybody, even\nafter hundreds of births, that person will be born again. Nothing can\nprevent the course of strong desires. Desires must be fulfilled sooner\nor later.\n\nEvery voluntary or involuntary action of the body, sense or mind must\ncorrespond to the dormant impressions stored up in the subtle\nbody. Although growth, the process of nourishment and all the changes\nof the gross physical body take place according to the necessarily\nacting causes, yet the whole series of actions, and consequently every\nindividual act, the condition of the body which accomplishes it, nay,\nthe whole process in and through which the body exists, are nothing\nbut the outward expressions of the latent impressions stored up in the\nsubtle body. Upon these rests the perfect suitableness of the animal\nor human body to the animal or human nature of one's impressions. The\norgans of the senses must therefore completely correspond to the\nprincipal desires which are the strongest and most ready to\nmanifest. They are the visible expressions of these desires. If there\nbe no hunger or desire to eat, teeth, throat and bowels will be of no\nuse. If there be no desire for grasping and moving, hands and legs\nwill be useless. Similarly it can be shown that the desire for seeing,\nhearing, etc., has produced the eye, ear, etc. If I have no desire to\nuse my hand, and if I do not use it at all, within a few months it\nwill wither away and die. In India there are some religious fanatics\nwho hold up their arms and do not use them at all; after a few months\ntheir arms wither and become stiff and dead. A person who lies on his\nback for six months loses the power of walking. There are many such\ninstances which prove the injurious effects of the disuse of our limbs\nand organs.\n\nAs the human form, generally, corresponds to the human will,\ngenerally, so the individual bodily structure corresponds to the\ncharacter, desires, will and thought of the individual. Therefore the\nouter nature is nothing but the expression of the inner nature. This\ninner nature of each individual is what re-incarnates or expresses\nitself successively in various forms, one after another. When a man\ndies the individual ego or _J\u00eeva_ (as it is called in Sanskrit),\nwhich means the germ of life or the living soul of man, is not\ndestroyed, but it continues to exist in an invisible form. It remains\nlike a permanent thread stringing together the separate lives by the\nlaw of cause and effect. The subtle body is like a water-globule which\nsprang in the beginningless past from the eternal ocean of Reality;\nand it contains the reflection of the unchangeable light of\nIntelligence.  As a water-globule remains sometimes in an invisible\nvapory state in a cloud, then in rain or snow or ice, and again as\nsteam or in mud, but is never destroyed, so the subtle body sometimes\nremains unmanifested and sometimes expresses itself in gross forms of\nanimal or human beings, according to the desires and tendencies that\nare ready to manifest. It may go to heaven, that is, to some other\nplanet, or it may be born again on this earth. It depends on the\nnature and strength of one's life-long tendency and bent of mind. This\nidea is clearly expressed in Vedanta. \"The thought, will or desire\nwhich is extremely strong during lifetime, will become predominant at\nthe time of death and will mould the inner nature of the dying\nperson. The newly moulded inner nature will express in a new form.\"\n(Bhagavad G\u00eet\u00e2.) The thought, will or desire which moulds the inner\nnature has the power of selecting or attracting such conditions or\nenvironments as will help it in its way of manifestation. This process\ncorresponds in some respects to the law of \"natural selection.\"\n\nWe shall be better able to understand that process by studying how the\nseeds of different trees select from the common environments different\nmaterials, and absorb and assimilate different quantities of\nelements. Suppose two seeds, one of an oak and the other of a\nchestnut, are planted in a pot. The power of growth in both the seeds\nis of the same nature. The environments, earth, water, heat and light\nare the same. But still there is some peculiarity in each of the\nseeds, which will absorb from the common environments different\nquantities of elements and other properties which are fit to help the\ngrowth of the peculiar nature and form of the fruit, flower, leaves of\neach tree. Suppose the chestnut is a horse-chestnut. If, under\ndifferent conditions, the peculiar nature of the horse-chestnut\nchanges into that of a sweet chestnut, then, along with the changes in\nthe seed, the whole nature of the tree, leaves, fruits will also be\nchanged. It will no more attract, absorb or assimilate those\nsubstances and qualities of the environments which it did when it was\na horse-chestnut. Similarly, through the law of \"natural selection\"\nthe newly moulded thought-body of the dying person will choose and\nattract such parts from the common environments as are helpful to its\nproper expression or manifestation. Parents are nothing but the\nprincipal parts of the environment of the re-incarnating\nindividual. The newly moulded inner nature or subtle body of the\nindividual will by the law of \"natural selection\" involuntarily\nchoose, or be unconsciously drawn to, as it were, its suitable parents\nand will be born of them. As, for instance, if I have a strong desire\nto become an artist, and if after a life-long struggle I do not\nsucceed in being the greatest, after the death of the body I will be\nborn of such parents and with such environments as will help me to\nbecome the best artist.\n\nThe whole process is expressed in Eastern philosophy by the doctrine\nof the Reincarnation of the individual soul.  Although this doctrine\nis commonly rejected in the West, it is unreservedly accepted by the\nvast majority of mankind of the present day, as it was in past\ncenturies. The scientific explanation of this theory we find nowhere\nexcept in the writings of the Hindus; still we know that from very\nancient times it was believed by the philosophers, sages and prophets\nof different countries. The ancient civilization of Egypt was built\nupon a crude form of the doctrine of Reincarnation. Herodotus says:\n\"The Egyptians propounded the theory that the human soul is\nimperishable, and that where the body of any one dies it enters into\nsome other creature that may be ready to receive it.\" Pythagoras and\nhis disciples spread it through Greece and Italy. Pythagoras says:\n\"All has soul; all is soul wandering in the organic world, and obeying\neternal will or law.\"\n\nIn Dryden's Ovid we read:--\n\n  \"Death has no power the immortal soul to slay,\n  That, when its present body turns to clay,\n  Seeks a fresh home, and with unlessened might\n  Inspires another frame with life and light.\"\n\nIt was the keynote of Plato's philosophy.  Plato says: \"Soul is older\nthan body. Souls are continually born over again into this life.\" The\nidea of Reincarnation was spread widely in Greece and Italy by\nPythagoras, Empedocles, Plato, Virgil and Ovid.  It was known to the\nNeo-Platonists, Plotinus and Proclus. Plotinus says: \"The soul leaving\nthe body becomes that power which it has most developed.  Let us fly\nthen from here below and rise to the intellectual world, that we may\nnot fall into a purely sensible life by allowing ourselves to follow\nsensible images....\" It was the fundamental principle of the religion\nof the Persian Magi. Alexander the Great accepted this idea after\ncoming in contact with the Hindu philosophers. Julius Caesar found\nthat the Gauls had some belief regarding the pre-existence of the\nhuman soul. The Druids of old Gaul believed that the souls of men\ntransmigrate into those bodies whose habits and characters they most\nresemble. Celts and Britons were impressed with this idea. It was a\nfavorite theme of the Arab philosophers and many Mahomedan Sufis. The\nJews adopted it after the Babylonian captivity.  Philo of Alexandria,\nwho was a contemporary of Christ, preached amongst the Hebrews the\nPlatonic idea of the pre-existence and rebirth of human souls.  Philo\nsays: \"The company of disembodied souls is distributed in various\norders. The law of some of them is to enter mortal bodies, and after\ncertain prescribed periods be again set free.\" John the Baptist was\naccording to the Jews a second Elijah; Jesus was believed by many to\nbe the re-appearance of some other prophet. (See Matt, xvi, 14, also\nxvii, 12.) Solomon says in his Book of Wisdom: \"I was a child of good\nnature and a good soul came to me, or rather because I was good I came\ninto an undefiled body.\"\n\nThe Talmud and Cabala teach the same thing.  In the Talmud it is said\nthat Abel's soul passed into the body of Seth, and then into that of\nMoses.  Along with the spread of the Cabala this doctrine (which was\nknown as Transmigration and Metempsychosis) \"began to take root in\nJudaism and then it gained believers even among men who were little\ninclined towards Mysticism. Juda ben Asher (Asheri) for instance,\ndiscussing this doctrine in a letter to his father endeavored to place\nit upon a philosophical basis.\" (Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol.  XII,\np. 232.) We also read, \"The Cabalists eagerly adopted the doctrine on\naccount of the vast field it offered to mystic speculations. Moreover\nit was almost a necessary corollary of their psychological system. The\nabsolute condition of the soul is, according to them, its return,\nafter developing all those perfections, the germs of which are\neternally implanted in it, to the Infinite Source from which it\nemanated. Another term of life must therefore be vouchsafed to those\nsouls which have not fulfilled their destiny here below, and have not\nbeen sufficiently purified for the state of union with the Primordial\nCause. Hence if the soul, on its first assumption of a human body and\nsojourn on earth, fails to acquire that experience for which it\ndescended from heaven and becomes contaminated by that which is\npolluting, it must reinhabit a body till it is able to ascend in a\npurified state through repeated trials.\"  This is the theory of the\nZohar, which says: \"All souls are subject to transmigration; and men\ndo not know the ways of the Holy One, blessed be He!  They do not know\nthat they are brought before the tribunal both before they enter into\nthis world and after they leave it; they are ignorant of the many\ntransmigrations and secret probations which they have to undergo, and\nof the number of souls and spirits which enter into this world and\nwhich do not return to the palace of the Heavenly King. Men do not\nknow how the souls revolve like a stone which is thrown from a\nsling. But the time is at hand when these mysteries will be\ndisclosed.\" (Zohar, II, 99 _b_.)\n\nLike many of the Church Fathers the Cabalists used as their main\nargument in favor of the doctrine of metempsychosis the justice of\nGod. But for the belief in metempsychosis, they maintained, the\nquestion why God often permits the wicked to lead a happy life while\nmany righteous are miserable would be unanswerable. Then too the\ninfliction of pain upon children would be an act of cruelty unless it\nis imposed in punishment of sin committed by the soul in a previous\nstate. Isaac Abravanel sees in the commandment of the Levirate a proof\nof the doctrine of metempsychosis for which he gives the following\nreasons: (1) God in His mercy willed that another trial should be\ngiven to the soul, which having yielded to the sanguine temperament of\nthe body had committed a capital sin, such as murder, adultery, etc.;\n(2) it is only just that when a man dies young a chance should be\ngiven to his soul to execute in another body the good deeds which it\nhad not time to perform in the first body; (3) the soul of the wicked\nsometimes passes into another body in order to receive its deserved\npunishment here below instead of in the other world where it would be\nmuch more severe. (Commentary on Deuteronomy, XXV, 5.)\n\nChristianity is not exempt from this idea. Origen and other Church\nFathers believed in it. Origen says: \"For God, justly disposing of his\ncreatures according to their desert, united the diversities of minds\nin one congruous world, that he might, as it were, adorn his mansion\n(in which ought to be not only vases of gold and silver, but of wood\nalso and clay, and some to honor and some to dishonor) with these\ndiverse vases, minds or souls. To these causes the world owes its\ndiversity, while Divine Providence disposes each according to his\ntendency, mind and disposition.\" He also says: \"I think this is a\nquestion how it happens that the human mind is influenced now by the\ngood, now by the evil. The causes of this I suspect to be more ancient\nthan this corporeal birth.\" The idea of Reincarnation spread so fast\namongst the early Christians that Justinian was obliged to suppress it\nby passing a law in the Council of Constantinople in 538 A.D. The law\nwas this: \"Whoever shall support the mythical presentation of the\npre-existence of the soul, and the consequently wonderful opinion of\nits return, let him be Anathema.\" The Gnostics and Manichaeans\npropagated the tenets of Reincarnation amongst the mediaeval sects\nsuch as the Bogomiles and Paulicians. Some of the followers of this\nso-called erroneous belief were cruelly persecuted in 385 A.D.\n\nIn the seventeenth century some of the Cambridge Platonists, as\nDr. Henry More and others, accepted the idea of rebirth. Most of the\nGerman philosophers of the middle ages and of recent days have\nadvocated and upheld this doctrine. Many quotations can be given from\nthe writings of great thinkers, like Kant, Scotus, Schelling, Fichte,\nLeibnitz, Schopenhauer, Giardano Bruno, Goethe, Lessing, Herder and a\nhost of others. The great skeptic Hume says in his posthumous essay on\n\"The Immortality of the Soul,\" \"The metempsychosis is therefore the\nonly system of this kind that philosophy can hearken to.\" Scientists\nlike Flammarion and Huxley have supported this doctrine of\nReincarnation. Professor Huxley says: \"None but hasty thinkers will\nreject it on the ground of inherent absurdity. Like the doctrine of\nevolution itself, that of transmigration has its roots in the world of\nreality.\" (\"Evolution and Ethics,\" p. 61.)\n\nSome of the theological leaders have preached it. The eminent German\ntheologian Dr. Julius M\u00fcller supports this theory in his work on \"The\nChristian Doctrine of Sin.\" Prominent theologians, such as Dr. Dorner,\nErnesti, R\u00fcckert, Edward Beecher, Henry Ward Beecher, Phillips Brooks,\npreached many a time touching the question of the pre-existence and\nrebirth of the individual soul. Swedenborg and Emerson maintained\nit. Emerson says in his essay on Experience, \"We wake and find\nourselves on a stair. There are stairs below us which we seem to have\nascended; there are stairs above us, many a one, which go upward and\nout of sight.\"\n\nAlmost all of the poets, ancient or modern, profess it. William\nWordsworth says in \"Intimations of Immortality:\"--\n\n  \"The soul that rises with us, our life's star,\n    Hath had elsewhere its setting,\n  And cometh from afar.\"\n\nTennyson writes in the \"Two Voices;\"\n\n  \"Or, if through lower lives I came--\n  Tho' all experience past became,\n  Consolidate in mind and frame--\n  I might forget my weaker lot;\n  For is not our first year forgot?\n  The haunts of memory echo not.\"\n\nWalt Whitman says in \"Leaves of Grass:\"\n\n  \"As to you, Life, I reckon you are the leavings of many deaths,\n  No doubt I have died myself ten thousand times before.\"\n\nSimilar passages can be quoted from almost all the poets of different\ncountries. Even amongst the aboriginal tribes of Africa, Asia, North\nand South America, traces of this belief in the rebirth of souls is to\nbe found. Nearly three-fourths of the population of Asia believe in\nthe doctrine of Reincarnation, and through it they find a satisfactory\nexplanation of the problem of life. There is no religion which denies\nthe continuity of the individual soul after death.\n\nThose who do not believe in Reincarnation try to explain the world of\ninequalities and diversities either by the one-birth theory or by the\ntheory of hereditary transmission. Neither of these theories, however,\nis sufficient to explain the inequalities that we meet with in our\neveryday life. Those who believe in the one-birth theory, that we have\ncome here for the first and last time, do not understand that the\nacquirement of wisdom and experience is the purpose of human life; nor\ncan they explain why children who die young should come into existence\nand pass away without getting the opportunity to learn anything or\nwhat purpose is served by their coming thus for a few days, remaining\nin utter ignorance and then passing away without gaining anything\nwhatever. The Christian dogma, based on the one-birth theory, tells us\nthat the child which dies soon after its birth is sure to be saved and\nwill enjoy eternal life and everlasting happiness in heaven. The\nChristians who really believe in this dogma ought to pray to their\nheavenly Father for the death of their children immediately after\ntheir birth and ought to thank the merciful Father when the grave\ncloses over their little forms. Thus the one-birth theory of Christian\ntheology does not remove any difficulty.\n\nTwo great religions, Judaism with its two offspring--Christianity and\nMahomedanism--and Zoroastrianism, still uphold the one-birth theory.\n\nThe followers of these, shutting their eyes to the absurdity and\nunreasonableness of such a theory, believe that human souls are\ncreated out of nothing at the time of the birth of their bodies and\nthat they continue to exist throughout eternity either to suffer or to\nenjoy because of the deeds performed during the short period of their\nearthly existence. Here the question arises why should a man be held\nresponsible throughout eternity for the works which he was forced or\npredestined to perform by the will of the Lord of the universe? The\ntheory of predestination and grace, instead of explaining the\ndifficulty, makes God partial and unjust. If the omnipotent personal\nGod created human souls out of nothing, could He not make all souls\nequally good and happy? Why does He make one to enjoy all the\nblessings of life and another to suffer all miseries throughout\neternity? Why is one born with good tendencies and another with evil\nones? Why is one man virtuous throughout his life and another bestial?\nWhy is one born intelligent and another idiotic? If God out of His own\nwill made all these inequalities, or, in other words, if God created\none man to suffer and another to enjoy, then how partial and unjust\nmust He be! He must be worse than a tyrant. How can we worship Him,\nhow call Him just and merciful?\n\nSome people try to save God from this charge of partiality and\ninjustice by saying that all good things of this universe are the work\nof God, and all evil things are the work of a demon or Satan. God\ncreated everything good, but it was Satan who brought evil into this\nworld and made everything bad. Now let us see how far such a statement\nis logically correct. Good and evil are two relative terms; the\nexistence of one depends upon that of the other. Good cannot exist\nwithout evil, and evil cannot exist without being related to\ngood. When God created what we call good, He must have created evil at\nthe same time, otherwise He could not create good alone. If the\ncreator of evil, call him by whatever name you like, had brought evil\ninto this world, he must have created it simultaneously with God;\notherwise it would have been impossible for God to create good, which\ncan exist only as related to evil. As such they will have to admit\nthat the Creators of good and evil sat together at the same time to\ncreate this world, which is a mixture of good and evil. Consequently,\nboth of them are equally powerful, and limited by each other.\nTherefore neither of them is infinite in powers or omnipotent. So we\ncannot say that the Almighty God of the universe created good alone\nand not the evil.\n\nAnother argument which the Vedantists advance in support of the theory\nof Reincarnation is that \"Nothing is destroyed in the universe.\"\nDestruction in the sense of the annihilation of a thing is unknown to\nthe Vedantic philosophers, just as it is unknown to the modern\nscientists. They say \"non-existence can never become existence and\nexistence can never become non-existence;\" or, in other words, that\nwhich did not exist can never exist, and conversely that which exists\nin any form can never become non-existent. This is the law of\nnature. As such, the impressions or ideas which we now have, together\nwith the powers which we possess, will not be destroyed but will\nremain with us in some form or other. Our bodies may change, but the\npowers, Karma, Samskaras or impressions and the materials which\nmanufactured our bodies must remain in us in an unmanifested\nform. They will never be destroyed. Again science tells us that that\nwhich remains in an unmanifested or potential state must at some time\nor other be manifested in a kinetic or actual form. Therefore we shall\nget other bodies, sooner or later. It is for this reason said in the\n\"Bhagavad G\u00eet\u00e2\": \"Birth must be followed by death and death must be\nfollowed by birth.\" Such a continuously recurring series of births and\ndeaths each germ of life must go through. Another consideration is\nthat the beginning, ending and continuing are conceptions of the human\nmind; their significance depends entirely upon our conception of\ntime. But we all know that time has no absolute existence. It is\nmerely a form of our knowledge of our own existence in relation to\nthat of nature.  The conception of time vanishes at the sleep of\ndeath, just as it does every night when we are in sound sleep. Death\nresembles the state of our sound sleep. The soul wakes up from the\nsleep of death just in the same manner as the insects awake in spring\nafter sleeping the long and rigid winter-sleep, as a chrysalis in the\nbed of a cocoon spun by itself in autumn. Nature teaches us the great\nlesson of rebirth and the similarity between sleep and death by the\nrejuvenation of the chrysalis in the spring. After death the soul\nwakes up and puts on or manufactures the garment of a new body, just\nin the same manner as we put on new clothes after throwing away the\nold and worn-out ones. Thus the soul continues to manifest itself over\nand over again either on the human or any other plane of existence,\nbeing bound by the Law of Karma or of Cause and Sequence.\n\n  \"Death, so called, is but older matter dressed\n  In some new form. And in a varied vest,\n  From tenement to tenement though tossed,\n  The soul is still the same, the figure only lost.\"\n\n  _Poem on Pythagoras, Dryden's Ovid._\n\nHere it may be asked, if we existed before our birth why do we not\nremember? This is one of the strongest objections often raised against\nthe belief in pre-existence. Some people deny the existence of the\nsoul in the past simply because they cannot remember the events of\ntheir past. Others, again, who hold memory as the standard of\nexistence, say, if our memory of the present ceases to exist at the\ntime of death, with it we shall also cease to be; we cannot be\nimmortal; because they hold that memory is the standard of life, and\nif we do not remember then we are not the same beings.\n\nVedanta answers these questions by saying that it is possible for us\nto remember our previous existences.  Those who have read \"Raja Yoga\"\nwill recall that in the 18th aphorism of the third chapter it is said:\n\"By perceiving the Samsk\u00e2ras one acquires the knowledge of past\nlives.\" Here the Samsk\u00e2ras mean the impressions of the past experience\nwhich lie dormant in our subliminal self, and are never lost. Memory\nis nothing but the awakening and rising of latent impressions above\nthe threshold of consciousness. A Raja Yogi, through powerful\nconcentration upon these dormant impressions of the subconscious mind,\ncan remember all the events of his past lives. There have been many\ninstances in India of Yogis who could know not only their own past\nlives but correctly tell those of others. It is said that Buddha\nremembered five hundred of his previous births.\n\nOur subliminal self, or the subconscious mind, is the storehouse of\nall the impressions that we gather through our experiences during our\nlifetime. They are stored up, pigeon-holed there, in the _Chitta_, as\nit is called in Vedanta. \"Chitta\" means the same subconscious mind or\nsubliminal self which is the storehouse of all impressions and\nexperiences. And these impressions remain latent until favorable\nconditions rouse them and bring them out on the plane of\nconsciousness. Here let us take an illustration: In a dark room\npictures are thrown on a screen by lantern-slides. The room is\nabsolutely dark. We are looking at the pictures. Suppose we open a\nwindow and allow the rays of the midday sun to fall upon the\nscreen. Would we be able to see those pictures? No. Why? Because the\nmore powerful flood of light will subdue the light of the lantern and\nthe pictures. But although they are invisible to our eyes we cannot\ndeny their existence on the screen. Similarly, the pictures of the\nevents of our previous lives upon the screen of the subliminal self\nmay be invisible to us at present, but they exist there. Why are they\ninvisible to us now? Because the more powerful light of\nsense-consciousness has subdued them. If we close the windows and\ndoors of our senses from outside contact and darken the inner chamber\nof our self, then by focusing the light of consciousness and\nconcentrating the mental rays we shall be able to know and remember\nour past lives, and all the events and experiences thereof. Those who\nwish therefore to develop their memory and remember their past should\npractice Raja Yoga and learn the method of acquiring the power of\nconcentration by shutting the doors and windows of their senses. And\nthat power of concentration must be helped by the power of\nself-control. That is, by controlling the doors and windows of our own\nsenses.\n\nThese dormant impressions, whether we remember them or not, are the\nchief factors in moulding our individual characters with which we are\nborn, and they are the causes of the inequalities and diversities\nwhich we find around us. When we study the characters and powers of\ngeniuses and prodigies we cannot deny the pre-existence of the\nsoul. Whatever the soul has mastered in a previous life manifests in\nthe present. The memory of particular events is not so important. If\nwe possess the wisdom and knowledge which we gathered in our previous\nlives, then it matters very little whether or not we remember the\nparticular events, or the struggles which we went through in order to\ngain that knowledge. Those particular things may not come to us in our\nmemory, but we have not lost the wisdom. Now, study your own present\nlife and you will see that in this life you have gained some\nexperience. The particular events and the struggles which you went\nthrough are passing out of your memory, but the experience, the\nknowledge which you have gained through that experience, has moulded\nyour character, has shaped you in a different manner. You will not\nhave to go through those different events again to remember; how you\nacquired that experience is not necessary; the wisdom gained is quite\nenough.\n\nThen, again, we find among ourselves persons who are born with some\nwonderful powers. Take, for instance, the power of self-control. One\nis born with the power of self-control highly developed, and that\nself-control may not be acquired by another after years of hard\nstruggle. Why is there this difference? Bhagavan Sri Ramakrishna was\nborn with God-consciousness, and he went into the highest state of\nSam\u00e2dhi when he was four years old; but this state is very difficult\nfor other Yogis to acquire. There was a Yogi who came to see\nRamakrishna. He was an old man and possessed wonderful powers, and he\nsaid: \"I have struggled for forty years to acquire that state which is\nnatural with you.\" There are many such instances which show that\npre-existence is a fact, and that these latent or dormant impressions\nof previous lives are the chief factors in moulding the individual\ncharacter without depending upon the memory of the past. Because we\ncannot remember our past, because of the loss of memory of the\nparticular events, the soul's progress is not arrested. The soul will\ncontinue to progress further and further, even though the memory may\nbe weak.\n\nEach individual soul possesses this storehouse of previous experiences\nin the background, in the subconscious mind. Take the instance of two\nlovers. What is love? It is the attraction between two souls. This\nlove does not die with the death of the body. True love survives death\nand continues to grow, to become stronger and stronger. Eventually it\nbrings the two souls together and makes them one. The theory of\npre-existence alone can explain why two souls at first sight know each\nother and become attached to each other by the tie of friendship. This\nmutual love will continue to grow and will become stronger, and in the\nend will bring these lovers together, no matter where they\ngo. Therefore, Vedanta does not say that the death of the body will\nend the attraction or the attachment of two souls; but as the souls\nare immortal so their relation will continue forever.\n\nThe Yogis know how to develop memory and how to read past lives. They\nsay, time and space exist in relation to our present mental condition;\nif we can rise above this plane, our higher mind sees the past and\nfuture just as we see things before our eyes. Those who wish to\nsatisfy the idle curiosity of their minds may spend their energy by\ntrying to recollect their past lives. But I think it will be much more\nhelpful to us if we devote our time and energy in moulding our future\nand in trying to be better than we are now, because the recollection\nof our former condition would only force us to make a bad use of the\npresent. How unhappy he must be who knows that the wicked deeds of his\npast life will surely react on him and will bring distress, misery,\nunhappiness or suffering within a few days or a few months. Such a man\nwould be so restless and unhappy that he would not be able to do any\nwork properly; he would constantly think in what form misery would\nappear to him. He would not be able to eat or even sleep. He would be\nmost miserable. Therefore we ought to regard it as a great blessing\nthat we do not recollect our past lives and past deeds. Vedanta says,\ndo not waste your valuable time in thinking of your past lives, do not\nlook backward during the tiresome journey through the different stages\nof evolution, always look forward and try first to attain to the\nhighest point of spiritual development; then if you want to know your\npast lives you will recollect them all. Nothing will remain unknown to\nyou, the Knower of the universe. When the all-knowing Divine Self will\nmanifest through you, time and space will vanish and past and future\nwill be changed into the eternal present. Then you will say as Sri\nKrishna said to Arjuna, in the \"Bhagavad Gita:\" \"Both you and I have\npassed through many lives; you do not recollect any, but I know them\nall.\" (Ch. iv., 5.)\n\n\n\nII. HEREDITY AND REINCARNATION.\n\n\nThose who accept the theory of heredity deny the existence of the\nhuman soul as an entity separable from the gross physical\norganism. Consequently they do not discuss the question whether the\nindividual soul existed in the past or will continue to exist after\nthe death of the body. This kind of question does not disturb their\nminds. They generally maintain that the individual soul is inseparable\nfrom the body or the brain or nervous system; consequently what we\ncall soul or the conscious entity or the thinker is produced along\nwith the birth of the organism or brain, lasts as long as the body\nlasts and dies when the organism is dissolved into its elements.  But\nthose, on the other hand, who accept the theory of Reincarnation admit\nthe existence of soul as a conscious entity which is independent of\nthe physical organism, that it continues to live after death and that\nit existed before the birth of the body. The theory of heredity has\nalways been supported by the materialistic scientists, atheists and\nagnostics of all ages and also by those who believe in the special\ncreation of the first man and woman at a certain definite time and\nthat their qualities, character, life and soul have been transmitted\nto all humanity through successive generations. The commonly accepted\nmeaning of the theory of heredity is that all the well-marked\npeculiarities, both physical and mental, in the parents are handed on\nto the children; or, in other words, heredity is that property of an\norganism by which its peculiar nature is transmitted to its\ndescendants.\n\nIn the whole history of humanity there has never been a time when this\nquestion of heredity has been discussed so minutely and in so many\ndifferent ways as it has been in the present century. Although this\ntheory was known in the East by the ancient Vedanta philosophers, by\nthe Buddhists of the pre-Christian era and by the Greek philosophers\nin the West, still it has received a new impetus and has grown with\nnew strength since the introduction of the Darwinian theory of the\nevolution of species.  Along with the latest discoveries in\nphysiology, biology, embryology and other branches of modern science,\nthe popular simple meaning of heredity--that the offspring not only\nresemble their parents among animals as well as among men, but inherit\nall the individual peculiarities, life and character of their\nparents--has taken the shape of the most complicated and difficult\nproblem which it is almost impossible to solve. Our minds are no\nlonger satisfied with Haeckel's definition that heredity is simply an\novergrowth of the individual, a simple continuity of growth; but we\nwant to know the particular method by which hereditary transmission\ntakes place.  We ask, how can a single cell reproduce the whole body\nof the offspring, its mind, character and all the peculiarities of an\norganism? Out of the myriads of cells of which a body is composed,\nwhat kind of cell is that which possesses the power of reproducing the\npeculiarities, both mental and physical, which are to be found in the\nform of the new-born babe?  This is the most puzzling of all the\nproblems which the scientific mind has ever encountered. The\nfundamental question connected with the theory of heredity is: How can\na single cell of the body contain within itself all the hereditary\ntendencies of the hypothesis of the continuity of the germ-plasm gives\nan identical starting-point to each successive generation, and thus\nexplains how it is that an identical product arises from all of\nthem. In other words, the hypothesis explains heredity as part of the\nunderlying problems of assimilation and of the causes which act\ndirectly during ontogeny. (Vol. I, p. 170.)\n\nAccording to Weismann, all the peculiarities which we find in an\norganism are not inherited by the organism from that of the parents,\nbut he says: \"Nothing can arise in an organism unless the\npredisposition to it is pre-existent, for every acquired character is\nsimply the reaction of the organism upon a certain stimulus.\" (Vol. I,\np. 172.) Therefore the germ-cells do not inherit all the peculiarities\nof the parents, but possess the predisposition or a potentiality of\nthe tendencies which gradually develop into individual characters.\n\nWe will be able to understand his theory better from the following\nquotations, which give his own words. He says: \"I have called this\nsubstance 'germ-plasm,' and have assumed that it possesses a highly\ncomplex structure, conferring upon it the power of developing into a\ncomplex organism.\"  (\"Heredity,\" Vol. I, p. 170.) Again he says:\n\"There is, therefore, continuity of the germ-plasm from one generation\nto another. One might represent the germ-plasm by the metaphor of a\nlong, creeping rootstock from which plants arise at intervals, these\nlatter representing the individuals of successive generations. Hence\nit follows that the transmission of acquired characters is an\nimpossibility, for if the germ-plasm is not formed anew in each\nindividual, but is derived from that which preceded it, its structure,\nand, above all, its molecular constitution, cannot depend upon the\nindividual in which it happens to occur, but such an individual only\nforms, as it were, the nutritive soil at the expense of which the\ngerm-plasm grows, while the latter possessed its characteristic\nstructure from the beginning, viz., before the commencement of growth.\nBut the tendencies of heredity, of which the germ-plasm is the bearer,\ndepend upon this very molecular structure, and hence only those\ncharacters can be transmitted through successive generations which\nhave been previously inherited, viz., those characters which were\npotentially contained in the structure of the germ-plasm. It also\nfollows that those other characters which have been acquired by the\ninfluence of special external conditions, during the lifetime of the\nparent, cannot be transmitted at all.\"  (Vol. I, p. 273.) In\nconclusion, Weismann writes: \"But at all events we have gained this\nmuch, that the only facts which appear to directly prove a\ntransmission of acquired characters have been refuted, and that the\nonly firm foundation on which this hypothesis has been hitherto based\nhas been destroyed.\"(Vol. I, p. 461.)\n\nThus we see how far the theory of heredity has been pushed by the\ngreat scientific investigators of the present age. We have no longer\nany right to believe in the old oft-refuted hypothesis which assumes\nthat each individual organism produces germ-cells afresh again and\nagain and transmits all its powers developed and acquired by the\nparents; but, on the contrary, we have come to know to-day that\nparents are nothing but mere channels through which these germ-plasms\nor germ-cells manifest their peculiar tendencies and powers which\nexisted in them from the very beginning. The main point is that the\ngerms are not created by the parents, but that they existed in\nprevious generations.\n\nNow, what are those germs like? Wherefrom do they acquire these\ntendencies, these peculiarities?  That is another very difficult\nproblem. Dr. Weismann and his followers say that these peculiarities\nare gained or inherited \"from the common stock,\" but what that common\nstock is they do not explain.  Where is that common stock and why will\ncertain germs acquire certain tendencies and other germs retain other\npeculiarities? What regulates them? These questions are not solved. So\nfar we have gathered from Dr. Weismann's explanation that the parents\nare not the creators of the germs but, on the contrary, that the germs\nexisted before the birth of the body, before the growth of the body,\nin previous generations, or in the common stock of the universe. The\nprevious generations are dead and gone, so we may say that they\nexisted in the universe. We cannot now believe the old, crude,\noften-refuted idea that God creates the germ at the time of birth and\nputs into it all the powers and peculiarities of the parents. This\ntheory makes God unjust and partial, so it does not appeal to us any\nmore. We need better and more rational explanations. The one-birth\ntheory, which has been preached by Christian ministers and other\nreligionists for so many years, does not remove the difficulties, does\nnot explain the cause of the inequalities and diversities, does not\nanswer the question whether we acquire all the tendencies and\npeculiarities of the parents or whether acquired characters cannot be\ntransmitted. We have already seen that these questions are left\nunsolved by the one-birth theory of Christianity and of Judaism. But\nthis theory of \"continuity of the germ-plasm\" pushes the question of\nheredity to the door of Reincarnation. If modern science can explain\nwhat that common stock is and why and how these germs retain those\npeculiarities and tendencies, then the answer will be complete and not\nuntil then. The Vedanta philosophy, however, has already explained the\ncause of the potentiality in the germ of life or \"germ-plasm\" or\ngerm-cell.\n\nVedanta solves this difficulty by saying that each of these\ngerm-plasms or germ-cells is nothing but the subtle form of a\nreincarnating individual, containing potentially all the experiences,\ncharacters, tendencies, and desires which one had in one's previous\nlife. It existed before the birth of the body and it will continue\nafter the death of the body. This germ or subtle body is not the same\nas the astral body of the Theosophists, or the double of the\nmetaphysical thinkers or the disembodied spirit of the Spiritualists;\nbut it is an ethereal center of activity-physical, mental and\norganic. It is a center which possesses the tendency to manifest these\npowers on different planes of existence. It contains the minute\nparticles of matter or ethereal substance and the life principle or\nvital energy by which we live and move. It also possesses the mental\npowers and sense powers; but all these remain latent, just as in a\nseed we see that the powers of growth, of assimilation and of\nproducing flowers and fruits are latent.\n\nAt the time of death the individual soul contracts and remains in the\nform of a germ of life. It is for this reason, Vedanta teaches, that\nit is neither the will of God nor the fault of the parents that forms\nthe characters of children, but each child is responsible for its\ntendencies, capacities, powers and character. It is its own \"Karma\" or\npast actions that make a child a murderer or a saint, virtuous or\nsinful. The stored-up potentialities in a subtle body manifest in the\ncharacter of an individual.\n\nThe argument advanced by the supporters of the theory of hereditary\ntransmission does not furnish a satisfactory explanation of the cause\nof the inequalities and diversities of the universe. Why is it that\nthe children of the same parents show a marked dissimilarity to their\nparents and to each other?\n\nWhy do twins develop into dissimilar characters and possess opposite\nqualities, although they are born of the same parents at the same time\nand brought up under similar conditions and environments? How can\nheredity explain such cases? Suppose a man has five children; one is\nhonest and saintly, another is an idiot, the third becomes a murderer,\nthe fourth a genius or prodigy, and the fifth a cripple and\ndiseased. Who made these dissimilarities? They cannot be\naccidents. There is no such thing as an accident. Every event of the\nuniverse is bound by the law of cause and effect. There must be some\ncause of these inequalities. Who made one honest and saintly, another\nan idiot, and so forth? Parents? That cannot be. They never dreamed\nthat they would beget a murderer or a villain or an idiot. On the\ncontrary, all parents wish their children to be the best and\nhappiest. But in spite of such desires they get such children. Why?\nWhat is the cause? Does the theory of heredity explain it? No, not at\nall. Suppose a man, twenty-four years old, who has certain traits,\nlike musical or artistic talents, such as painting and so on, has a\ncrooked nose and other peculiarities, like cross-eyes, which resemble\nthose of his grandfather. Suppose his grandfather died six years\nbefore he was born. Now, those who believe in the theory of heredity\nwill say that this young man inherited all these peculiarities from\nhis grandfather. When did he inherit? His grandfather had died six\nyears before he was born. He inherited, of course, in the form of that\ngerm. What is that germ like? A minute protoplasm, a jelly-like\nsubstance, and if you examine it with a powerful microscope you will\nhardly find any difference between it and the proto-plasmic germ of a\ndog, or of a cat, or of a tree. It is smaller than a pin's head. And\nin that state this young man inherited all these peculiarities from\nhis grandfather; or, in other words, before he had a nose, he got a\ncrooked nose; before he had eyes, he inherited cross-eyes, and before\nhe had any brain, he inherited all the wonderful powers-his musical\nand artistic talents. Does it not seem absurd to you? Even if we admit\nthis theory of heredity, then what do we understand? That the whole of\nthis young man existed in the form of a protoplasm before he was\nborn. His cross-eyes, his crooked nose, his artistic talents--all\nthese pre-existed in the form of a protoplasmic cell. This leads up to\nthe same thing which is taught by the theory of Reincarnation, or, in\nother words, if it be possible for this young man to remain in the\nform of a protoplasm and inherit all these things before his birth,\nwhy cannot we believe that the soul or the subtle body of this young\nman possessed them from the very beginning? According to Vedanta this\nyoung man was not the creature of his grandfather, but he had his own\nindependent existence; only by coming through the channel of his\nparents he had received certain characteristic impressions, just as a\ntree in its process of growth will receive from the environments\ncertain peculiarities when it assimilates those properties.\n\nThe doctrine of Reincarnation alone can explain satisfactorily and\nrationally the diversities among children and the reason of the many\ninstances of uncommon powers and genius displayed in childhood. The\ntheory of heredity has up to this time failed to give any good reason\nfor them. Why is it that Pascal, when twelve years old, succeeded in\ndiscovering for himself the greater part of plane geometry. How could\nthe shepherd Mangiamelo, when five years old, calculate like an\narithmetical machine. Think of the child Zerah Colburn: when he was\nunder eight years of age he could solve the most tremendous\nmathematical problems instantly and without using any figures. \"In one\ninstance he took the number 8 and raised it up progressively to the\nsixteenth power and instantly mentioned the result which contained 15\nfigures--28l,474,976,710,656.\" Of course he was right in every\nfigure. When asked the square root of numbers consisting of six\nfigures, he would state the result instantly with perfect accuracy. He\nused to give the cube root of numbers in the hundreds of millions the\nvery moment when it was asked. Somebody asked him once how many\nminutes there were in 48 years, he answered, 25,288,800.\n\nMozart, the great musician, wrote a sonata when he was four years old\nand an opera in his eighth year. Theresa Milanolla played the violin\nwith such skill that many people thought that she must have played\nbefore her birth. There are many such instances of wonderful powers\nexhibited by artists and painters when they were quite young.\nSankar\u00e2charya, the great commentator of the Vedanta philosophy,\nfinished his commentary when he was twelve years old. How can such\ncases be explained by the theory of hereditary transmission? Many of\nyou have heard of the wonderful musical talents of Blind Tom. This\nblind negro slave was born on his master's plantation and was brought\nup as a typical negro.  He received no training in music or in any\nother line. One day when his master's family were at dinner he\nhappened to come into his master's parlor and displayed his marvelous\nmusical power for the first time by playing on his master's\npiano. Afterwards he was exhibited in different states of this\ncountry. Physically he was nothing but a typical negro. His intellect\nwas very poor, but in music he was a master. His musical talents were\nso great that he composed music for himself and played his own\ncompositions. Sometimes after hearing a new piece of rapid music once,\nhe could reproduce it note for note. Where did he get all these\npowers? From whom did he inherit them? His parents perhaps never heard\nof a piano. He never had a lesson in his life, and he could not have\nunderstood even if he had had any. Not long ago I saw a girl of about\nsix years, who played the piano most beautifully and who could\nreproduce the most difficult music after hearing it once. It seems to\nme that she must have played the piano in her previous incarnation.\nThis is the only explanation that we can give.\n\nDoes heredity explain such cases? No. These illustrations are\nsufficient to disprove the theory of \"cumulative heredity\".\n\"Cumulative\" means gradualness.  The believers in this theory say that\na genius is the result of cumulative heredity, that is, it presents\nitself by degrees from less genius to greater and still greater and so\non. In the whole history of the genealogy of geniuses, like Homer,\nPlato, Shakespeare, Goethe, Raphael, there never was in their families\nalmost Plato, almost Shakespeare, or almost Goethe. Neither is it\npossible to trace the extraordinary powers of any of these back to any\nmember of their ancestral line. Therefore we can say that no other\ntheory than that of Reincarnation can explain satisfactorily the\ncauses which produce geniuses and prodigies in this world.\n\nThose who accept the truth of Reincarnation do not blame their parents\nfor their poor talents, or for not possessing extraordinary powers,\nbut they remain content with their own lot, knowing that they have\nmade themselves as they are to-day by their own thoughts and deeds in\ntheir previous incarnations. They understand the meaning of the saying\n\"what thou sowest thou must reap,\" and always endeavor to mould their\nfuture by better thoughts and better deeds. They explain all the\ninequalities and diversities of life and character by the law of\n\"Karma,\" which governs the process of Reincarnation as well as the\ngradual evolution of the germs of life from lower to higher stages of\nexistence.\n\n\n\nIII. EVOLUTION AND REINCARNATION.\n\n\nThe amazing achievements of modern science have been opening every day\nnew gates of wisdom and slowly bringing human minds nearer and nearer\nto the ultimate reality of the universe. The fire of knowledge kindled\nby science has already burnt down many dogmas and beliefs, held sacred\nby the superstition of the past, which stood in the way of\ntruth-seeking minds. In the first place science has disproved the\ntheory of the creation of the universe out of nothing by the action of\nsome supernatural power. It has shown that the universe did not appear\nin its present form or come into existence all of a sudden only a few\nthousand years ago, but that it has taken ages to pass through\ndifferent stages before it could reach its present condition.  Each of\nthese stages was directly related to a previous stage by the law of\ncausation, which always operates in accordance with definite\nrules. The phenomena of the universe, according to science, are\nsubject to evolution, or gradual change and progressive development\nfrom a relatively uniform condition to a relative complexity. From the\ngreatest solar system down to the smallest blade of grass, everything\nin the universe has taken its present shape and form through this\ncosmic process of evolution. Our planet earth has gradually evolved,\nperhaps out of a nebulous mass which existed at first in a gaseous\nstate. The sun, moon, stars, satellites and other planets have come\ninto existence by going through innumerable changes produced by the\nevolutionary process of the Cosmos. Through the same process plants,\ninsects, fishes, reptiles, birds, animals, man, and all living matter\nthat inhabit this earth have evolved from minute germs of life into\ntheir present forms. The theory of Evolution says that man did not\ncome into existence all of a sudden, but is related to lower animals\nand to plants, either directly or indirectly. The germ of life had\npassed through various stages of physical form before it could appear\nas a man. That branch of science which is called Embryology has proved\nthe fact that \"man is the epitome of the whole creation.\" It tells\nthat the human body before its birth passes through all the different\nstages of the animal kingdom--such as the polyp, fish, reptile, dog,\nape, and at last, man. If we remember that nature is always\nconsistent, that her laws are uniform and that whatever exists in the\nmicrocosm exists also in the macrocosm, and then study nature, we\nshall find that all the germs of life which exist in the universe are\nbound to pass through stages resembling the embryonic types before\nthey can appear in the form of man.\n\nIn explaining the theory of Evolution, science says that there are two\nprincipal factors in the process of evolution; the first is the\ntendency to vary, which exists in all living forms whether vegetable\nor animal; the second is the tendency of environment to influence that\nvariation, either favorably or unfavorably. Without the first,\nevolution of any kind would be absolutely impossible. But the cause of\nthat innate tendency to vary is still unknown to science. Upon the\nsecond depends the law of natural selection. The variation must be\nadapted to favorable conditions of life; consequently either the germ\nof life will select suitable environments or vary itself in order to\nsuit the surrounding conditions, if they are unfavorable. But the\nagent of this selective process is the struggle for existence, which\nis a no less important factor. Thus Evolution depends on these three\nlaws: Tendency to vary, or variation, natural selection, and struggle\nfor existence. Science tries to explain through these three laws the\nphysical, mental, intellectual, moral and spiritual evolution of\nmankind. But the theory of Evolution will remain unintelligible until\nscience can trace the cause of that innate \"tendency to vary\" which\nexists in every stage of all living forms.\n\nIf we study closely we find that man's \"self\" consists of two natures,\none animal and the other moral or spiritual. Animal nature includes\nall the animal propensities, desire for sense enjoyments, love of\nself, fear of death and struggle for existence. Each of these is to be\nfound in lower animals as well as in human beings, the difference\nbeing only in degree and not in kind. In a savage tribe the expression\nof this animal nature is simple and natural, while in a highly\ncivilized nation it is expressed not in a simple and straightforward\nmanner, but in an artful and refined way. In a civilized community the\nsame nature working through varied device, policy and plan brings the\nsame results in a more polished form. In the struggle for existence\namongst lower animals and savage tribes, those who are physically\nstrong survive and gain advantage over those who are physically weak;\nwhile in the civilized world the same result is obtained, not by\ndisplaying physical force, but by art, diplomacy, policy, strategy and\nskill. Various kinds of defensive and offensive weapons have been\ninvented to conquer those who are less skillful in using them,\nalthough they may be physically stronger. The simple expression of\nanimal nature which we notice in savages and lower animals, by the\nnatural process of evolution has gradually become more and more\ncomplex, as we find in the civilized nations of the world. The energy\nof the lower human nature is spent chiefly in the struggle for\nmaterial existence.\n\nBut there is another nature in man which is higher than this. It\nexpresses itself in various ways, but on a higher plane. Love of\ntruth, mastery over passion, control of the senses, disinterested\nself-sacrifice, mercy and kindness to all creatures, desire to help\nthe distressed, forgiveness, faith in a Supreme Being and devotion;\nall these are the expressions of that higher moral and spiritual\nnature. They cannot be explained as developed from animal nature by\nmeans of the struggle for material existence. For these qualities are\nnot to be found in lower animals, although the struggle for existence\nis there. The moral and spiritual nature of human beings cannot be\ntraced as the outgrowth or gradual development of the animal\nnature. There is a dispute among the Evolutionists as to the method of\nexplaining their cause. Some say that these higher faculties have\nevolved out of the lower ones and have developed by variation and\nnatural selection; while others hold that some other higher influence,\nlaw or agency is required to account for them.\n\nProfessor Huxley says: \"As I have already urged, the practice of that\nwhich is ethically best--what we call goodness or virtue--involves a\ncourse of conduct which in all respects is opposed to that which leads\nto success in the cosmic struggle for existence. In place of ruthless\nself-assertion, it demands self-restraint; in place of thrusting aside\nor treading down all competitors, it requires that the individual\nshall not merely respect, but shall help his fellows; its influence is\ndirected not so much to the survival of the fittest as to the fitting\nof as many as possible to survive. It repudiates the gladiatorial\ntheory of existence. It demands that each man who enters into the\nenjoyment of the advantages of a polity shall be mindful of his debt\nto those who have laboriously constructed it, and shall take heed that\nno act of his weakens the fabric in which he has been permitted to\nlive. Laws and moral precepts are directed to the end of curbing the\ncosmic process, and reminding the individual of his duty to the\ncommunity, to the protection and influence of which he owes, if not\nexistence itself, at least the life of something better than a brutal\nsavage.\" (\"Evolution and Ethics,\" pp. 81-82.)\n\nProf. Calderwood says: \"So far as human organism is concerned, there\nseem no overwhelming obstacles to be encountered by an evolution\ntheory, but it seems impossible under such a theory to account for the\nappearance of the thinking, self-regulating life distinctly human.\"\nThus, according to some of the best thinkers, the explanation of the\nmoral and spiritual nature of man as a development of the animal\nnature, is quite insufficient and unsatisfactory.  The theory of\nnatural selection in the struggle for existence cannot explain the\ncause of the higher nature of man. We cannot say that a theory is\ncomplete because it explains many facts.  On the contrary, if it fails\nto explain a single fact, then it is proved to be incomplete. As such,\nthe theory that cannot explain satisfactorily the cause of the moral\nand spiritual nature of man cannot be accepted as a complete\ntheory. That explanation will be considered as complete which will\nexplain most satisfactorily all the various manifestations of the\nanimal, moral and spiritual nature.  Moreover, supposing the \"tendency\nto vary\" has evolved into the moral and spiritual nature of man,\nscience does not explain the cause of that tendency to vary, nor how\nanimal nature can be transformed into moral and spiritual nature. Is\nthat \"tendency to vary\" indefinite, or is it limited by any definite\nlaw? Science does not say anything about it.\n\nThe explanation of the theologians, that the spiritual nature has been\nsuperadded to the animal nature by some extra-cosmic spiritual agency\nis not scientific, nor does it appeal to our reason. Now let us see\nwhat Vedanta has to say on this point. Vedanta accepts evolution and\nadmits the laws of variation and natural selection, but goes a step\nbeyond modern science by explaining the cause of that \"tendency to\nvary.\" It says, \"there is nothing in the end which was not also in the\nbeginning.\" It is a law which governs the process of evolution as well\nas the law of causation. If we admit this grand truth of nature, then\nit will not be difficult to explain by the theory of Evolution the\ngradual manifestation of the higher nature of man.  The tendency of\nscientific monism is towards that end.\n\nSome of the modern scientists who hold the monistic position have\nfound out the same truth which was discovered long ago by the Vedantic\nphilosophers in India. J. Arthur Thomson, an eminent English scientist\nof the present day, in his book on \"The Study of Animal Life,\" says:\n\"The world is one, not two-fold-, the spiritual influx is the primal\nreality and there is nothing in the end which was not also in the\nbeginning.\" But the evolutionists do not accept this truth. Let us\nunderstand it clearly. It means that that which existed potentially at\nthe time of the beginning of evolution has gradually manifested in the\nvarious stages and grades of evolution. If we admit that a unicellular\ngerm of life or a bioplasm, after passing through various stages of\nevolution, has ultimately manifested in the form of a highly developed\nhuman being, then we shall have to admit the potentiality of all the\nmanifested powers in that germ or bioplasm, because the law is \"that\nwhich exists in the end existed also in the beginning.\"  The animal\nnature, higher nature, mind, intellect, spirit, all these exist\npotentially in the germ of life.  If we do not admit this law then the\nproblem will arise: How can non-existence become existent?  How can\nsomething come out of nothing? How can that come into existence which\ndid not exist before? Each germ of life, according to Vedanta,\npossesses infinite potentialities and infinite possibilities.  The\npowers that remain latent have the natural tendency to manifest\nperfectly and to become actual. In their attempt they vary according\nto the surrounding environments, selecting suitable conditions or\nremaining latent as long as circumstances do not favor them. Therefore\nvariation, according to Vedanta, is caused by this attempt of the\npotential powers to become actual. When life and mind began to evolve,\nthe possibilities of action and reaction hitherto latent in the germ\nof life became real and all things became, in a sense, new. Nobody can\nimagine the amount of latent power which a minute germ of life\npossesses until it expresses in gross form on the physical plane. By\nseeing the seed of a Banyan tree, one who has never seen the tree\ncannot imagine what powers lie dormant in it. When a baby is born we\ncannot tell whether he will be a great saint, or a wonderful artist,\nor a philosopher, or an idiot, or a villain of the worst type. Parents\nknow nothing about his future. Along with his growth certain latent\npowers gradually begin to manifest. Those which are the strongest and\nmost powerful will overcome others and check their course for some\ntime; but when the powers that remain subdued by stronger ones get\nfavorable conditions they will appear in manifested forms. As, for\ninstance, chemical forces may slumber in matter for a thousand years,\nbut when the contact with the re-agents sets them free, they appear\nagain and produce certain results. For thousands of years galvanism\nslumbered in copper and zinc, which lay quietly beside silver. As soon\nas all three are brought together under the required conditions silver\nis consumed in flame. A dry seed of a plant may preserve the\nslumbering power of growth through two or three thousand years and\nthen reappear under favorable conditions. Sir G. Wilkinson, the great\narchaeologist, found some grains of wheat in a hermetically sealed\nvase in a grave at Thebes, which must have lain there for three\nthousand years. When Mr. Pettigrew sowed them they grew into plants.\nSome vegetable roots found in the hands of an Egyptian mummy, which\nmust have been at least two thousand years old, were planted in a\nflower-pot, and they grew and flourished. Thus, whenever the latent\npowers get favorable conditions, they manifest according to their\nnature, even after thousands of years.\n\nSimilarly, there are many instances of slumbering mental powers. After\nremaining dormant for a long period in our normal condition, they may,\nin certain abnormal states--such as madness, delirium, catalepsy,\nhypnotic sleep and so forth-flash out into luminous consciousness and\nthrow into absolute oblivion the powers that are manifesting in the\nnormal state. Talents for eloquence, music, painting, and uncommon\ningenuity in several mechanical arts, traces of which were never found\nin the ordinary normal condition, are often evolved in the state of\nmadness. Somnambulists in deep sleep have solved most difficult\nmathematical problems and performed various acts with results which\nhave surprised them in their normal waking states. Thus we can\nunderstand that each individual mind is the storehouse of many powers,\nvarious impressions and ideas, some of which manifest in our normal\nstate, while others remain latent. Our present condition of mind and\nbody is nothing but the manifested form of certain dormant powers that\nexist in ourselves. If new powers are roused up and begin to manifest\nthe whole nature will be changed into a new form. The manifestation of\nlatent powers is at the bottom of the evolution of one species into\nanother. This idea has been expressed in a few words by Patanjali, the\ngreat Hindu evolutionist who lived long before the Christian\nera. [Footnote: The reader ought to know that the doctrine of\nEvolution was known in India long before the Christian era. About the\nseventh century, B. C., Kapila, the father of Hindu Evolutionists,\nexplained this theory for the first time through logic and\nscience. Sir Monier Monier Williams says: \"Indeed if I may be allowed\nthe anachronism, the Hindus were Spinozites more than 2,000 years\nbefore the existence of Spinoza; and Darwinians many centuries before\nDarwin; and Evolutionists many centuries before the doctrine of\nEvolution had been accepted by the scientists of our time and before\nany word like Evolution existed in any language of the world.\" (P. 12,\n\"Hinduism and Brahminism.\") Prof. Huxley says: \"To say nothing of\nIndian Sages to whom Evolution was a familiar notion ages before Paul\nof Tarsus was born.\" (P. 150, \"Science and Hebrew Tradition.\")] In the\nsecond aphorism of the fourth chapter (see \"Raja Yoga,\" by Swami\nVivekananda, p. 210) it is said, \"The Evolution into another species\nis caused by the in-filling of nature.\"  The nature is filled not from\nwithout but from within.  Nothing is superadded to the individual soul\nfrom outside. The germs are already there, but their development\ndepends upon their coming in contact with the necessary conditions\nrequisite for proper manifestation. We sometimes see a wicked man\nsuddenly become saintlike. There are instances of murderers and\nrobbers becoming saints. A religionist will explain the cause of their\nsudden change, by saying that the grace of the Almighty has fallen\nupon them and transformed their whole nature.  But Vedanta says that\nthe moral and spiritual powers that remained latent in them have been\nroused up, and the result is the sudden transformation. None can tell\nwhen or how the slumbering powers will wake up and begin to\nmanifest. The germ of life, or the individual soul as it is ordinarily\ncalled, possesses infinite possibilities. Each germ of life is\nstudying, as it were, the book of its own nature by unfolding one page\nafter another. When it has gone through all the pages, or, in other\nwords, all the stages of evolution, perfect knowledge is acquired, and\nits course is finished. We have read our lower nature by turning each\npage, or, in other words, by passing through each stage of animal life\nfrom the minutest bioplasm up to the present stage of existence. Now\nwe are studying the pages which deal with moral and spiritual laws. If\nany one wants to read any page over again he will do it. Just as in\nreading a book, if anybody feels particularly interested in any page\nor chapter he will read it over and over again and will not open a new\npage or a new chapter until he is perfectly satisfied with\nit. Similarly, in reading the book of life, if the individual soul\nlikes any particular stage, he will stay there until he is perfectly\nsatisfied with it; after that he will go forward and study other\npages. One may read very slowly, and another very fast; but whether we\nread slowly or rapidly each one of us is bound to read the whole book\nof nature and attain to perfection sooner or later.\n\nAccording to Vedanta, the end and aim of Evolution is the attainment\nof perfection. Physical evolution of animal life reached its\nperfection in human form. There cannot be any other form higher than\nhuman on this earth under present conditions. It is the perfection of\nanimal form. From this we can infer that the tendency of the law of\nEvolution is to reach perfection. When it is attained to, the whole\npurpose is served. Do we see in nature any other higher form evolved\nout of the human body? No.  Shall we not be justified if we say that\nthe end of physical evolution is the attainment of the perfection of\nanimal form? Again as the purpose and method of natural laws are\nuniform throughout the universe, the end of intellectual, moral and\nspiritual evolution will be attained when intellectual, moral and\nspiritual perfection are acquired. Intellectual perfection means\nperfection of intellect; and intellect is perfect when we understand\nthe true nature of things and never mistake the unreal for the real,\nmatter for spirit, non-eternal for eternal, or _vice versa_. Moral\nperfection consists in the destruction of selfishness; and spiritual\nperfection is the manifestation of the true nature of spirit which is\nimmortal, free, divine and one with the Universal Spirit or\nGod. Evolution attains to the highest fulfilment of its purpose when\nthe spirit manifests perfectly.  The tendency of nature is to have\nperfect manifestation of all her powers. When certain powers\npredominate they manifest first while the others remain dormant. As we\nfind in the process of evolution, when animal nature manifests\nperfectly the moral and spiritual nature remain latent. Again when\nmoral and spiritual nature manifest fully, the animal is in\nabeyance. It is for this reason we do not find expressions of moral\nand spiritual nature in lower animals or in those human beings who\nlive like them. Man is the only animal in whom such perfect\nexpressions of moral and spiritual nature are possible.  When the\nindividual soul begins to study its spiritual nature, its lower or\nanimal nature is gradually eclipsed. As the higher nature becomes\npowerful the lower nature dwindles into insignificance; its energy is\ntransformed into that of the higher nature, and ultimately it\ndisappears altogether and rises no more. Then the soul becomes free\nfrom the lower or animal nature. There are many stages in the higher\nnature, as well as in the lower. Each of these stages binds the\nindividual soul so long as it stays there. As it rises on a higher\nplane the lower stages disappear and cease to bind. But the moment\nthat any individual, after passing through all the stages of the\nspiritual nature, reaches the ultimate point of perfection, he\nrealizes his true nature which is immortal and divine. Then his true\nindividuality manifests. For lack of true knowledge, he identified\nhimself with each stage successively and thought that his\nindividuality was one with the powers which were manifested in each\nstage. Consequently he thought by mistake that he was affected by the\nchanges of each stage. But now he realizes that his real individuality\nalways remained unaffected.  He sees that his true individuality\nshines always in the same manner, although the limiting adjuncts may\nvary. As the light of a lamp appears of different colors, if it passes\nthrough glasses of different colors, so the light of the true\nindividual appears as animal or human when it passes through the\nanimal or human nature of the subtle body. The subtle body of an\nindividual changes from animal nature through moral and spiritual into\ndivine. As this gradual growth cannot be expected in one life we shall\nhave to admit the truth of Reincarnation, which teaches gradual\nevolution of the germ of life or the individual soul through many\nlives and various forms. Otherwise the theory of Evolution will remain\nimperfect, incomplete and purposeless. The doctrine of Reincarnation\ndiffers from the accepted theory of Evolution in admitting a gradual\nbut continuous evolution of the subtle body through many gross\nforms. The gross body may appear or disappear, but the subtle body\ncontinues to exist even after the dissolution of the gross body and\nre-manifests itself in some other form.\n\nThe theory of Reincarnation when properly understood will appear as a\nsupplement to the theory of Evolution. Without this most important\nsupplement the Evolution theory will never be complete and\nperfect. Evolution explains the process of life, while Reincarnation\nexplains the purpose of life. Therefore, both must go hand in hand to\nmake the explanation satisfactory in every respect.\n\nJames Freeman Clarke says: \"That man has come up to his present state\nof development by passing through lower forms, is the popular doctrine\nof science to-day. What is called Evolution teaches that we have\nreached our present state by a very long and gradual ascent from the\nlowest animal organizations. It is true that the Darwinian theory\ntakes no notice of the evolution of the soul, but only of the\nbody. But it appears to me that a combination of the two views would\nremove many difficulties which still attach to the theory of natural\nselection and the survival of the fittest. If we are to believe in\nEvolution let us have the assistance of the soul itself in this\ndevelopment of new species. Thus science and philosophy will\nco-operate, nor will poetry hesitate to lend her aid.\" (P. 190, \"Ten\nGreat Religions,\" II.) Evolution of the body depends upon the\nevolution of the germ of life or the individual soul. When these two\nare combined the explanation becomes perfect.\n\nThe theory of Reincarnation is a logical necessity for the completion\nof the theory of Evolution. If we admit a continuous evolution of a\nunit of the germ of life through many gross manifestations then we\nunconsciously accept the teachings of the doctrine of Reincarnation.\nIn passing through different forms and manifestations the unit of life\ndoes not lose its identity or individuality. As an atom does not lose\nits identity or individuality (if you allow me to suppose an atom has\na kind of individuality) although it passes from the mineral, through\nthe vegetable, into the animal, so the germ of life always preserves\nits identity or individuality although it passes through the different\nstages of evolution.\n\nTherefore it is said in the \"Bhagavad G\u00eet\u00e2,\" as in our ordinary life\nthe individual soul passes from a baby body to a young one and from a\nyoung to an old, and carries with it all the impressions, ideas and\nexperience that it has gathered in its former stage of existence and\nreproduces them in proper time, so when a man dies the individual soul\npasses from an old body into a new one, and takes with it the subtle\nbody wherein are stored up all that it experienced and gathered during\nits past incarnations. Knowing this, wise men are never afraid of\ndeath. They know that death is nothing but a mere change from one body\ninto another. Therefore, if any one does not succeed in conquering the\nlower nature by the higher, he will try again in his next incarnation,\nafter starting from the point which he reached in his past life. He\nwill not begin again from the very beginning, but from the last stage\nat which he arrived. Thus we see that Reincarnation is the logical\nsequence of evolution. It completes and makes perfect that theory and\nexplains the cause of the moral and spiritual nature of man.\n\n\n\nIV. WHICH IS SCIENTIFIC--RESURRECTION OR REINCARNATION?\n\n\nThe students of history are interested to know where the idea of\nresurrection first arose and how it was adopted by other nations. If\nwe read carefully the writings ascribed to Moses and other writers of\nthe Old Testament we find that the ancient Israelites did not believe\nin the Christian heaven or hell, nor in reward or punishment after\ndeath. It is doubtful whether they had any clear conception of the\nexistence of soul after the dissolution of the human body. They had no\ndefinite idea of the hereafter.  They did not believe in the\nresurrection either of the soul or body. Job longed for death thinking\nthat it would end his mental agony. In Psalms we read, \"Wilt Thou shew\nwonders to the dead?  Shall the dead arise and praise Thee?\"\n(Ps. lxxxviii, 10.) \"In death there is no remembrance of Thee; in the\ngrave who shall give Thee thanks?\" (Ps. vi, 5.) Again (Ps. cxlvi, 4)\nit is said about princes and the son of man,--\"His breath goeth forth,\nhe returneth to his earth, in that very day his thoughts perish.\" \"The\ndead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence.\"\n(Ps. cxv, 17.)  Solomon speaks boldly: \"All things come alike to all;\nthere is one event to the righteous and to the wicked, to the good and\nto the clean and to the unclean... as is the good, so is the sinner.\"\n(Eccl. ix, 2.) \"Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine\nwith a merry heart....  Live joyfully with thy wife... for there is no\nwork, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in the grave, whither thou\ngoest.\" (Eccl. ix, 7, 9, 10.)  Again in verse 5 it is said: \"The dead\nknow not anything, neither have they anymore a reward, for the memory\nof them is forgotten.\" Solomon says: \"For that which befalleth the\nsons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the\none dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath, so that\na man hath no pre-eminence above a beast.\" \"All go into one place; all\nare of the dust and all turn to dust again.\" \"Who knoweth the spirit\nof man that goeth upward and the spirit of the beast that goeth\ndownward to the earth?\" (Eccl.  iii, 19-21.) There are many such\npassages which show clearly that before the Babylonian captivity the\nIsraelites had no belief in reward or punishment, neither in heaven\nnor hell nor in the resurrection of the soul. Some say that they had a\nbelief in a sheol or pit where departed souls remained after death,\nbut were never resurrected. But when the ancient Jews were conquered\nby the Persians, 536 B.C., they came in contact with a nation which\nhad developed a belief in one God, in a heaven and a hell, in the\nresurrection of the dead, in reward and punishment after death, and in\nthe last day of judgment. Under the dominion of Persia, whose rule\nbegan with the capture of Babylon and lasted from 536-333 B.C., the\nJews were greatly influenced by the Persian religion.  They gave up\ntheir idolatry, gradually developed social organization and had\nconsiderable liberty.  About that time the Jews were divided into two\nclasses, the Pharisees and Sadducees. Those who adopted the religious\nideas of the Parsees were called Pharisees (according to some\nauthorities the word Pharisee was the Hebrew form of Parsee), and\nthose who followed strictly the Jewish ideas, ceremonies, rituals and\nbeliefs were called Sadducees. The former were sharply opposed to the\nlatter in their doctrinal beliefs. They believed in angels and\nspirits, they expected the resurrection of the dead and believed in\nfuture reward and punishment and also in Divine pre-ordination. The\nSadducees did not step beyond the bounds of ancient Judaism.  They\nwere Orthodox and very conservative in their views. They denied the\nexistence of angels and spirits, the resurrection of the dead, and\nreward and punishment after death. In Matt, xxii, 23, we read, \"The\nsame day came to him the Sadducees which say that there is no\nresurrection.\" The Sadducees were fewer in number than the\nPharisees. Gradually the latter grew very powerful and after the death\nof Jesus their doctrines of the resurrection of the dead, and of\nreward and punishment after death, and the belief in angels and\nspirits, became the cardinal principles of the new Christian sect.\nThus we see that the idea of resurrection first arose in Persia and\nafterwards took a prominent place in the writings of the New\nTestament, and since then it has been largely accepted by the\nChristians of the Western countries. The Zoroastrians believed that\nthe soul of the dead hovers about the body for three nights and does\nnot depart for the other world until the dawn after the third night.\nThen the righteous go to heaven and the wicked to hell. There the\nwicked remain until the time of renovation of the universe, that is,\nthe judgment day. After the renovation, when Ahriman or Satan is\nkilled, the souls of the wicked will be purified and have everlasting\nprogress. [Footnote: \"Sacred Books of the East,\" Vol. xvii, pp. 27,\n34, 46.] The question was asked, \"How shall they produce\nresurrection?\" Ahura Mazda says: \"The reply is this, that the\npreparation and production of the resurrection are an achievement\nconnected with miracle, a sublimity, and afterwards also a wondrous\nappearance unto the creatures uninformed. The secrets and affairs of\nthe persistent Creator are like every mystery and secret.\" [Footnote:\n_Ibid_., p. 80.]\n\nThe Zoroastrians believed in the resurrection, not of the physical\nbody, but of the soul, and that it was an act of miracle. Similarly\nmiraculous was the resurrection of Jesus. Although Jesus Himself never\nmentioned what kind of resurrection, whether of body or of soul that\nHe meant and believed in, the interpretation of the writers of the\nGospels shows that His disciples understood Him to mean bodily\nresurrection and the re-appearance of His physical form. The three\ndays remained, just as the Zoroastrians believed. The miraculous and\nwondrous appearance of Jesus before His disciples was preached most\nvigorously by Paul. In his Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul declares\nemphatically that the whole of the Christian religion depends upon the\nmiraculous resurrection and re-appearance of Jesus.  Although Paul\nsaid the spiritual body of the risen dead is not the same as flesh and\nblood body (I Cor., XV), still that important point is generally\noverlooked, and the result is the belief which we find amongst some of\nthe Christian sects; that at the call of the angels, the body will\nrise from the grave and the mouldering dust of bones and flesh will be\nput together by the miraculous power of the Almighty God. Paul says:\n\"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of\nthem that slept\" (I Cor., XV, 20). He preached that Christ was the\nfirst born from the dead, that those who believe in Christ would rise\nas He did and that those who would not believe in Him or in His\nresurrection should not rise.\n\nWe have already noticed that the Parsees believed in a miraculous\nresurrection; that the same miracle became more definite in the case\nof Jesus; and that the Christian faith was afterwards founded upon\nthat miraculous event. Both the Parsees and the followers of Christ\ndid not mean by resurrection any universal law, but a miracle done by\ncertain supernatural powers. They did not give any scientific reasons\nfor such a miracle.\n\nBut modern science denies miracles. It teaches that this universe is\nguided, not by miracles as the old thinkers used to believe, but by\ndefinite laws which are always consistent and universal. There cannot\nbe any exception to those laws which are uniform throughout. If\nresurrection be one of those laws, then it must have existed before\nthe birth of Jesus; as such, how could He be the first born from the\ndead, as described by Paul. Conversely, if Jesus was the first who\nrose from the dead, then resurrection cannot be a universal\nlaw. Scientists would not believe in anything which is not based upon\nuniversal laws. Some of the agnostics and materialists have gone so\nfar as to say that Jesus did not die on the cross, but his animation\nwas suspended when his body was taken down from the cross by Joseph of\nArimathsea. When Joseph went to Pilate and craved the body of Jesus,\nPilate marvelled if He were dead (Mark XV, 44), because it was only\nsix hours after the crucifixion. Some of the modern physiologists are\nof opinion that temperate and strong men might live for several days\non the cross. These heretical agnostics and skeptical scientists say\nthat the body of Jesus revived after a few hours in the cool, rock-cut\ntomb, that he walked out of the tomb, went to Galilee and appeared\nbefore his disciples. [Footnote: Vide \"Science and Christian\nTradition,\" by Prof. Huxley, pp.  279-280.] Whatever the facts may be\n(nobody can now tell exactly what actually happened), it is clear that\nthe scientists are not ready to take anything upon authority. They do\nnot care to believe in anything because it is written in this book or\nthat. They must have convincing proofs and a rational explanation of\nevery phenomenon of nature. They want to penetrate into miracles in\norder to discover the universal laws that govern them. If they do not\nfind any such laws, they will surely reject every event that is\nsupposed to be caused by miraculous or supernatural powers.\n\nThe theory of a miraculous resurrection is attended with the belief\nthat the individual soul does not exist before birth. The supporters\nof this theory hold that at the time of birth, the individual, being\ncreated out of nothing, comes fresh into existence. But science tells\nus that sudden creation out of nothing and a total destruction of\nanything are both impossible. Matter and force are indestructible.\nScience teaches evolution and not creation, and denies the\nintervention of any supernatural being as the cause of phenomenal\nchanges. The theory of Resurrection ignores all these ultimate\nconclusions of modern science. On the contrary, the doctrine of\nReincarnation, after accepting all the truths and laws of nature that\nhave been discovered by modern science, carries them to their proper\nlogical conclusions.  Reincarnation is based upon evolution.  It means\na continuous evolution of an individual germ of life, and a gradual\nre-manifestation of all the powers and forces that exist in it\npotentially. Moreover, the doctrine of Reincarnation is founded on the\nlaw of cause and effect. It teaches that the cause is not outside of\nthe effect, but lies in the effect. The cause is the potential or\nunmanifested state of the effect, and effect is the actual or\nmanifested cause.  There is one current of infinite force or power\nconstantly flowing in the ocean of reality of the universe, and\nappearing in the innumerable forms of waves. We call one set of waves\nthe cause of another set, but in fact that which is the cause is the\npotentiality of the future effect and the actuality of a previous\npotential cause. The underlying current is one and the same\nthroughout. Reincarnation denies the idea that the soul has come into\nexistence all of a sudden or has been created for the first time, but\nit holds that it has been existing from the beginningless past, and\nwill exist all through eternity.  The individual soul enjoys or\nsuffers according to the acts it performs. All enjoyment and suffering\nare but the reactions of our actions. Actions are the causes and the\nreactions are the results. Our present life is the result of our past\nactions, and our future will be the result of the present. The actions\nwhich we are now doing will not be lost. Do you think that the\nthought-forces of one life-time will end suddenly after death?\nNo. They will be conserved and remain potentially in the center and\nre-manifest under suitable conditions. Each human soul is nothing but\na center of thought-force. This center is called in Sanskrit\n_S\u00fbkshma Sar\u00eera_ or the subtle body of an individual. The subtle\ngerm of life or, in other words, the invisible center of\nthought-forces, will manufacture a physical vehicle for expressing the\nlatent powers that are ready for manifestation.  This process will\ncontinue until the germ can express most perfectly all the powers that\nare coiled up in its invisible form. As the doctrine of Reincarnation\nis in agreement with all the physical laws, so it is based upon\npsychical, moral and ethical laws. As on the objective plane the law\nof action and reaction governs the objective phenomena, so on the\nsubjective plane of consciousness, if the mental action or thought be\ngood, the reaction will be good, and the reaction will be evil if the\nmental action be evil, because every action produces a similar\nreaction, A good reaction is one which makes us happy and brings\npleasant sensations or peace of mind, while an evil reaction brings\nsuffering, unpleasant sensations, and makes one miserable. Thus\nReincarnation makes us free agents for action, as well as for reaping\nthe results or reactions of those actions. In fact, we mould our own\nnature, according to our desires, tendencies and works.\n\nThe theory of Resurrection, as commonly understood, does not explain\nwhy one man is born with a sinful nature and another with a virtuous\none. It contents itself with saying as Luther said: \"Man is a beast of\nburden who only moves as his rider orders; sometimes God rides him and\nsometimes Satan.\"  But why God should allow Satan to ride His own\ncreature nobody can tell. At any rate, man must suffer eternally for\nthe crimes which he is forced by Satan to commit. Moreover this theory\npre-supposes predestination and that the individual soul is\nfore-doomed to go either to heaven or to hell. St.  Augustine first\nstarted this doctrine of Predestination and Grace to explain why one\nis born sinful and another sinless. According to this theory, God, the\nmerciful, favors somebody with His grace at the time of his birth and\nthen he comes into this world ready to be saved, but the mass of\nhumanity is born sinful and destined for eternal damnation. Very few\nindeed receive the gift of grace and are predestined to be\nsaved. Moreover, this doctrine tells us that God creates man out of\nnothing, forbids him something, but at the same time He does not give\nhim the power to obey His commands. Ultimately God punishes him with\neternal torture on account of his weakness. The body and soul will not\nbe separated.  He will not be set free from his body, because, if it\nbe so, there will be the end of his suffering, which God does not\nlike. All these sufferings and punishments are predestined before his\nbirth. Thus, St.  Augustine's dogma of Predestination and Grace\ninstead of explaining the difficulty satisfactorily brings horror and\ndread to human minds, while the doctrine of Reincarnation teaches\ngradual progress from lower to higher, through ages until the\nindividual reaches perfection. It holds that each individual will\nbecome perfect like Jesus or Buddha or like the Father in heaven and\nmanifest divinity either in this life or in some other. One span of\nlife is too short for developing one's powers to perfection.  If you\nshould try to train an idiot to become a great artist or a\nphilosopher, would you ever succeed in your attempt to make him so\nduring his lifetime?  No. And will you punish him because he cannot\nbecome so? Can a man who possesses the slightest common sense be so\nunreasonable? Similarly what would you think if God punishes a man\nbecause he cannot become perfect within a lifetime? It is a poor\nargument to say that God has given us free-will to choose between\nright and wrong, and we are responsible for our choice; if we choose\nwrongly we must be punished. The advocates of such an argument forget\nthat at the same time God has let loose His powerful Satan to corrupt\nHis creatures.\n\nIt reminds me of an old story. Once on a time at a certain place a\nprisoner was released and set free through the kindness of a\ntyrant. The tyrant said to the prisoner \"Look here, wicked man, I give\nyou freedom, you can go to any place; but there is one condition; if\nyou are attacked by any wild animal you will be put in the dungeon and\nthere will be no end to your torture.\" So saying he gave him freedom,\nbut at the same time ordered his servants to let loose a hungry wolf\nto chase the man. You can imagine what became of the prisoner. Can we\ncall this an act of mercy!\n\nThe doctrine of Reincarnation says that each individual soul is\npotentially perfect and is gradually unfolding its powers and making\nthem actual through the process of Evolution. At every step of that\nprocess it is gaining different experiences which last only for a\ntime. Therefore neither God nor Satan is responsible for our good or\nevil actions.  Good and evil are like the up and down or the crest and\nhollow of a wave in the sea. A wave cannot rise without making a\nhollow somewhere in the sea.  So in the infinite ocean of reality\ninnumerable waves are constantly rising. The summit of each wave is\ncalled good, while the hollow beside it is evil or misery and the\ncurrent of each individual life is constantly flowing towards the\nultimate destination which we call perfection. Who can tell how long\nit will take to reach that goal? If anybody can attain to perfection\nin this life, he is no longer bound to reincarnate. If he fails he\nwill continue to progress by taking some other body. Reincarnation\ndoes not teach, as many people think, that in the next incarnation one\nwill begin from the very beginning, but it says that one will start\nfrom that point which one reaches before death and will keep the\nthread of progress unbroken. It does not teach that we go back to\nanimal bodies after death, but that we get our bodies according to our\ndesires, tendencies and powers. If any person has no desire to come\nback to this world or to any other and does not want to enjoy any\nparticular object of pleasure, and if he is perfectly free from\nselfishness that person will not have to come back. The theory of\nReincarnation is logical and satisfactory. While the theory of\nResurrection is neither based on scientific truths nor can it\nlogically explain the cause of life and death, Reincarnation solves\nall the problems of life and explains scientifically all the questions\nand doubts that arise in the human mind.\n\n\"Reincarnation is not easily understood by a thoughtless child deluded\nby the delusion of wealth, name or fame. Everything ends with death,\nhe thinks, and thus falls again and again under the sway of death.\"\n\n\n\nV. THEORY OF TRANSMIGRATION.\n\n\nThe theory of transmigration is one of the oldest theories accepted by\nthe people of the Orient to solve the problems concerning life and\ndeath as well as to explain the continuity of existence after death.\nThis theory presupposes the existence of the soul as an entity which\ncan live even when the gross material body is dead or dissolved into\nits elements.  Those who deny the existence of the soul, of the\nself-conscious thinker and actor, as an entity distinct from the gross\nmaterial body, necessarily deny this theory of transmigration. The\nmaterialistic thinkers of all ages have refused to accept this theory,\nbecause they do not admit the existence of a soul or a self-conscious\nthinker and actor as an entity, separate from the gross material\nbody. Consequently they do not ask or discuss whether the soul will\nexist after death or not, whether it will continue to live or not.\nSuch materialists are not the creatures of the twentieth century, but\nthey have lived in all ages, in all countries. In India and in other\ncivilized countries of ancient times you will find that materialistic\nthinkers prevailed and they gave the same arguments which we hear now\nfrom the agnostics and scientists of to-day. Their arguments are\ngenerally one-sided and unsatisfactory. They try to deduce the soul or\nself-conscious entity from the combination of matter or material\nforces, but they have not succeeded in giving a scientific proof of\nit. No arguments in favor of the existence of a soul as an entity will\nconvince them, because they deny the existence of anything that cannot\nbe perceived by sense powers.  If we could bring the soul down on the\nsense plane and make it visible to these materialistic thinkers, and\nif they could make experiments upon it, then perhaps they would be\nconvinced to a certain extent, but not until then. But how can we\nbring the soul down on the sense plane when it is ethereal and finer\nthan anything that we can perceive with our senses?\n\nThose who try to explain the cause of our earthly life by the theory\nof heredity do not believe in the truth of transmigration. The modern\nscientists, agnostics and materialists generally accept the theory of\nheredity and endeavor to explain everything by it; but if we examine\ntheir arguments for the theory of heredity, we shall find that the\ntheory of transmigration is much more satisfactory, much more rational\nthan that of heredity.\n\nAmong the followers of the great religions of the world, the majority\nof Christians, Jews, Mohammedans and Parsees deny the truth of\ntransmigration.  Of course, there was a time when the Christians\nbelieved in this transmigration theory. Origen and other Church\nFathers accepted it until the time of Justinian, who anathematized all\nthose who believed in Reincarnation or the pre-existence of the soul.\nAmong the Jews we find that in the Cabala this idea of transmigration\nplays the most important part.  In fact the Cabalists accepted this\ntheory to explain all the difficulties that could not be explained by\nany other theory. But those Jews, Christians, Mohammedans and Parsees\nwho do not believe in the theory of transmigration accept the\none-birth theory; that is, that God creates the souls at the time of\nbirth out of nothing, and these souls, having come into existence out\nof nothing, continue to live forever; that this is our first and last\nbirth that we receive; we did not exist before, we are suddenly\ncreated by God, and after death each one of us will continue to live\neither in heaven or hell to enjoy or to suffer throughout\neternity. Among the modern Spiritualists we find that those who are\nborn and brought up with this idea of one birth do not accept the\ntheory of transmigration. Still there are millions and millions of\npeople all over the world who do believe in transmigration and who\nhave found comfort and consolation in their lives as well as a\nsatisfactory solution of the problems of life and death.\n\nThe theory of Transmigration, or Metempsychosis, as it has been called\nby many philosophers, originally meant the passing of a soul from one\nbody after death into another; or, in other words, it meant that the\nsoul after dwelling in one particular body for a certain length of\ntime leaves it at the time of death, and in order to gain experience\nenters into some other body, either human, animal or angelic, which is\nready to receive it. It may migrate from the human body to an angelic\nbody and then come down on the human plane, or to the animal plane and\nbe born again as an animal. So the original meaning of transmigration\nor metempsychosis was the revolution of the soul from body to body\nwhether animal, human, angelic or of the gods. The migrating substance\nbeing a fixed quantity, with fixed qualities, chooses its form\naccording to its taste, desire and bent of character. This idea\nprevailed among the ancient Egyptians, according to whom the soul,\nafter leaving the dead body, would travel from one body to another for\nthousands and thousands of years in order to gain experiences in each\nof the different stages of life.\n\nAmong the Greek philosophers we find that Pythagoras, Plato and their\nfollowers believed in this theory of Metempsychosis or Transmigration\nof souls.  Pythagoras says: \"After death the rational mind, having\nbeen freed from the chains of the body, assumes an ethereal vehicle\nand passes into the region of the dead where it remains till it is\nsent back to this world to inhabit some other body human or\nanimal. After undergoing successive purgations, when it is\nsufficiently purified, it is received among the gods and returns to\nthe eternal source from which it first proceeded.\" Plato also believed\nin this theory. Of course we cannot tell exactly from whence\nPythagoras and Plato got these ideas.  Some say that they learned\nthese doctrines from Egypt; others believed that, either directly or\nindirectly, they learned the theory of transmigration from\nIndia. Plato describes in \"Phaedrus,\" in mythological language, why\nand how the souls take their birth upon this plane, either as human or\nanimal.  He says: \"In the heaven Zeus, the Father and Lord of all\ncreatures, drives his winged car, ordering all things and\nsuperintending them. A host of deities and spirits follow him, each\nfulfilling his own function.  Whoever will and can follows them. After\ntaking this round, they advance by a steep course along the inner\ncircumference of the heavenly vault and proceed to a banquet. The\nchariots of the gods, being well balanced and well driven, advance\neasily; others with difficulty; for the vicious horse, unless the\ncharioteer has thoroughly broken him, weighs down the car by his\nproclivity towards the earth, whereupon the soul is put to the\nextremity of toil and effort. The souls of gods reach the summit, go\noutside and stand upon the surface of heaven, and enjoy celestial\nbliss. Such is the life of the gods; other souls which follow God best\nand are likest to Him succeed in seeing the vision of truth and in\nentering into the outer world with great difficulty.  The rest of the\nsouls longing after the upper world all follow; but not being strong\nenough, they are carried round in the deep below, plunging, treading\non one another, striving to be first, and there, in confusion and\nextremity of effort, many of them are lamed and have their wings\nbroken. Thus when the soul is unable to follow and fails to behold the\nvision of Truth, sinks beneath the double load of forgetfulness and\nvice, her feathers fall from her and she drops to earth and is born\nagain and again as human beings or as animals.\" Plato says: \"Ten\nthousand years must elapse before the soul can return to the place\nfrom whence she came, for she cannot grow her wings in less.\" \"At the\nend of the first thousand years, the souls of the good and of the evil\nkind come together to draw lots, and choose their bodies according to\ntheir tendencies and the bent of their characters. They may take any\nthey like.  Instead of receiving the natural consequences of their\ndeeds and misdeeds of their previous lives they are allowed to choose\ntheir own lot, according to their experience and bent of\ncharacter. Some, being disgusted with mankind, prefer to be born as\nanimals, such as lions and eagles or some other animals. Others\ndelight in trying their luck as human beings.\" From this mythological\ndescription we gather what Plato meant by transmigration.\n\nThis Platonic idea of transmigration or of successive lives of those\nwho inhabit this earth has been criticized by various thinkers of\nmodern times; and referring to this idea the late Doctor Myers, of the\nPsychical Research Society of London, writes in his second volume of\n\"Human Personality\": \"The simple fact that such was probably the\nopinion of both Plato and Virgil shows that there is nothing here\nwhich is alien to the best reason or to the highest instincts of\nmen. Nor, indeed, is it easy to realize any theory of the _direct\ncreation_ of spirits at such different stages of advancement as\nthose which enter upon the earth in the guise of mortal man. There\n_must_, one feels, be some kind of continuity--some form of\nspiritual past.\" (P. 134.)  Why does He not create all souls equal?\nWhy will one soul be highly advanced spiritually while another is\nentirely ignorant and idiotic? This question cannot be answered, this\nproblem cannot be solved by the special creation theory, and therefore\nDoctor Myers says that there is no doubt that there was some previous\ncontinuity or spiritual past of each individual soul, and therefore he\ntacitly admits the theory of Transmigration. Although from a\nscientific viewpoint he could not give any direct proof regarding this\nidea of a pre-existence of the soul, still he could not deny it\nentirely when he said: \"The shaping forces which have made our bodies\nand our minds what they are may always have been psychical\nforces--from the first living slime-speck to the complex intelligences\nof to-day.\" \"The old transmigrationist's view would thus possess a\nshare of truth and the actual man would be the resultant not only of\nintermingling heredities on father's and mother's sides, but of\nintermingling heredities, one of planetary and one of cosmic scope.\"\n(\"Human Personality,\" Vol. II, p. 267.)\n\nBut this theory of Transmigration, as described by Plato, is a little\ndifferent from a similar theory which existed in India before his\ntime. In the Platonic idea of transmigration, as we have already seen,\nthe souls were allowed to choose their own lot according to their\nexperience or bent of character, but not to receive the natural\nconsequence of their deeds and misdeeds. Plato did not say anything\nabout the law which governs souls; but in ancient India the great\nthinkers and philosophers explained that each individual soul is bound\nby the inexorable law of nature to receive its body as a natural\nconsequence of its former deeds and misdeeds, and not to have free\nchoice of its lot according to its bent of character. The great\nthinkers and philosophers of ancient India discovered the universal\nlaw of cause and effect, of action and reaction, and called it by the\nSanskrit term \"Karma,\" which means the law of cause and sequence; that\nevery cause must be followed by an effect of a similar nature, that\nevery action must produce similar reaction, and conversely every\nreaction or effect is the result of an action or cause of a similar\ncharacter. Thus there is always a balance and harmony between cause\nand effect, between action and reaction. This law of Karma has now\nbecome a fundamental verity of modern science. It is called by\ndifferent names: the scientists call it the law of causation, the law\nof compensation, the law of retribution, the law of action and\nreaction, but they all refer to the same idea,--that every cause must\nproduce a similar result and every action must produce a similar\nreaction.\n\nNow these ancient thinkers of India applied this law of Karma to\nexplain the destiny of human souls, and it was upon this law they\nbased the theory of Transmigration. They maintained that human souls\nare bound by this irresistible law and cannot get out of it; their\nthoughts and deeds are the causes which produce results of similar\nnature. So their future birth does not depend upon their whimsical,\nfree choice, but it is limited by the thoughts and deeds or misdeeds\nof their previous lives. In the Platonic idea we find that the souls\ngo according to their choice. They may not take a human form if they\nprefer an animal form, but in the Hindu idea of transmigration we find\nthat it is not a result of free choice, but, if our thoughts and deeds\nforce us to take a particular form, then we are subject to the law of\nKarma, which governs our future birth and the evolution of our\nsouls. Consequently the Hindu theory of Transmigration differs\nfundamentally from the Platonic as well as from the Egyptian idea of\nTransmigration. In the Platonic and Egyptian theories we see that the\nsouls, after leaving the body, enter into another body which is\nwaiting to receive the migrating soul, but in the Hindu theory of\nTransmigration the body is not waiting to receive the migrating soul,\nbut on the contrary the soul, being subject to the laws of evolution,\nmanufactures the gross material body according to its desires and\ntendencies. Just as a germ of life will develop a grosser form by\ncellular subdivision, by growth, and by assimilation of the\nenvironmental conditions, so the germ of the human soul will\nmanufacture the body by obeying the laws which govern the physical\nplane.  Parents are nothing but the channels through which the\nmigrating souls receive their material forms.  Parents do not create\nthe souls; they have no power to create. They can only give the\nsuitable environments necessary for manufacturing a gross physical\nbody. The souls come with their tendencies, with their desires, and\nthey remain as germs of life.\n\nNow these germs of life contain vital forces, sense powers, psychic\npowers, and ethereal particles of matter. At the time of death the\nsoul contracts and withdraws all its powers from the sense organs to\nits innermost center, and in that contracted state it leaves the\nbody. But these powers do not leave the soul. By the law of\npersistence of force and conservation of energy they remain latent in\nthat center until environmental conditions become favorable for their\nremanifestation. Rebirth means the manifestation of the latent powers\nwhich exist in the germ of life or in the individual soul. These germs\nof life are called by different names. Leibnitz called them monads and\nmodern scientists call them bioplasms or some such name, but the\nVedanta philosophers describe them as subtle bodies. These germs or\nsubtle bodies are subject to evolution and growth; they arise from\nlower to higher stages of development, from the mineral through the\nvegetable to the animal kingdom and eventually they become human\nbeings and then they go on progressing.\n\nIn the Platonic theory the idea of progress, growth or gradual\nevolution of the soul from the lower to higher stages of existence is\nentirely excluded, because, as I have already said, the migrating\nsubstance is of a fixed quantity with fixed qualities, that is, these\nqualities do not change and are not affected by either growth or\nevolution. They are constant quantities.  In order to differentiate\nthese two ideas we should call the Hindu theory of Transmigration by\nthe term \"Reincarnation.\" The Hindu or Vedantic theory of\nReincarnation, however, is not the same as the Buddhistic theory of\nRebirth, for the Buddhists do not believe in the permanence of the\nsoul entity.  There is another point where the Reincarnation theory\ndiffers from Platonic transmigration. According to this theory of\nReincarnation there is growth and evolution of each individual soul\nfrom the lower to higher stages of development. The soul or germ of\nlife, after passing through the lower stages, comes to the human plane\nand gains experience and knowledge; and after coming to the human\nplane, it does not retrograde to animal bodies. The Platonic theory\nteaches that human souls migrate into animal bodies or angelic bodies\nand return from the angelic to the human or the animal, and that some\nof them prefer to become animals; while the theory of Reincarnation,\ntaking its stand upon the scientific truth of gradual evolution,\nteaches that the human souls have already passed through different\ngrades of the animal, nay, of the vegetable kingdom, by the natural\nprocess of evolution. After having once received the human organism,\nwhy should a soul choose to go back to the lesser and more imperfect\norganism of an animal? How is it possible for a lesser manifestation\nto hold a greater one? Why should a greater manifestation choose more\nlimited forms in preference to those of others? This question arises\nin the Platonic theory of Transmigration. Therefore, the Reincarnation\ntheory, or the theory of Transmigration according to the Hindus,\nrejects this idea of the going back of human souls to animal forms.\nWe have already passed in the evolutionary process through the lower\ngrade of animal organisms. Now that we have outgrown them why should\nwe go back to them?\n\nIt is true, however, that in India there are many uneducated people\namong the Hindus who believe that human souls do migrate into animal\nbodies after death to gain experience and reap the results of their\nwicked deeds, being bound by the law of Karma; but in the Platonic\ntheory the law of Karma plays no part in the transmigration of\nsouls. The educated and thoughtful minds of India, however, accept the\nmore rational and scientific theory of Reincarnation. Although there\nare passages in the scriptural writings of the Hindus which apparently\nrefer to the retrogression of the human soul into animal nature, still\nsuch passages do not necessarily mean that the souls will be obliged\nto take animal bodies. They may live like animals even when they have\nhuman bodies, as we may find among us many people like cats and dogs\nand snakes in human form and they are often more vicious than natural\ncats, dogs or snakes. They are reaping their own Karma and manifesting\ntheir animal nature, though physically they look like human\nbeings. This kind of retrogression is possible for one who after\nreaching the human plane goes backward on account of wicked thoughts\nand deeds on the animal plane. Such a temporary retrogression brings\nknowledge and helps it in its onward progress toward the manifestation\nof higher powers on the higher plane of consciousness.  All the wicked\nthoughts and wicked deeds are nothing but the results of our own\nmistakes. What is sin?  Sin is nothing but a mistake and it proceeds\nfrom ignorance. For instance, if I do not know that fire burns, I may\nput my finger into it and get burned.  The result of this mistake is\nthe burning of the finger and this has taught me once for all that\nfire burns; I shall never again put my finger into fire.  So every\nmistake is a great teacher in the long run.  No one is born so high\nand perfect as not to commit any mistake or any sin. Every mistake\nlike this opens our eyes to the laws of the universe by bringing to us\nsuch results as we do not desire. As one life is not enough to gain\nexperience in all the stages of evolution, we must have to admit the\ndoctrine of the Reincarnation of the soul for the fulfillment of the\nultimate purpose of earthly life. Professor Huxley says: \"None but\nhasty thinkers will reject it on the ground of inherent absurdity.\nLike the doctrine of evolution itself that of transmigration has its\nroots in the world of reality.\"","title":"Five Lectures on Reincarnation","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":20323}