Reincarnation and the Law of Karma Part 3

The orthodox theology answers Figuier's question by the argument that "in our finite understanding, we cannot pretend to understand G.o.d's plans, purposes and designs, nor to criticize his form of justice." It holds that we must look beyond that mortal life for the evidence of G.o.d's love, and not attempt to judge it according to what we see here on earth of men's miseries and inequalities. It holds that the suffering and misery come to us as an inheritance from Adam, and as a result of the sins of our first parents; but that if we are "good" it will all be evened up and recompensed in the next world. Of course the extremists who hold to Predestination have held that some were happy and some miserable, simply because G.o.d in the exercise of His will had elected and predestined them to those conditions, but it would scarcely be fair to quote this as the position of current theology, because the tendency of modern theological thought is away from that conception. We mention it merely as showing what some have thought of the subject. Others have sought refuge in the idea that we suffer for the sins of our parents, according to the old doctrine that "the sins of the parents shall be visited upon the children," but even this is not in accordance with man's highest idea of justice and love.

Pa.s.sing on to the second view, namely that the soul was pre-existent, that is, existed in some higher state not understood by us, from whence it was thrust into human form, etc., we note that the questions as to the cause of inequality, misery, etc., considered a moment ago, are still actively with us--this view does not straighten out the question at all. For whether the soul was pre-existent in a higher state, or whether it was freshly created, the fact remains that as souls they must be equal in the sense of being made by the same process, and from the same material, and that up to the point of their embodiment they had not sinned or merited any reward or punishment, nor had they earned anything one way or another. And yet, according to the theory, these equally innocent and inexperienced souls are born, some being thrust into the bodies of children to be born in environments conducive to advancement, development, etc., and gifted with natural advantages, while others are thrust into bodies of children to be born into the most wretched environments and surroundings, and devoid of many natural advantages--not to speak of the crippled, deformed, and pain-ridden ones in all walks of life. There is no more explanation of the problem in this view than there was in the first mentioned one.

Pa.s.sing on to the third view, namely, that the soul is one of countless others which emanated from the Source of Being aeons ago, equal in power, opportunities, etc., and which individual soul has worked its way up to its present position through many rebirths and lives, in which it has gained many experiences and lessons, which determine its present condition, and which in turn will profit by the experiences and lessons of the present life by which the next stage of its life will be determined--we find what many have considered to be the only logical and possible explanation of the problem of life's inequalities, providing there is an "answer" at all, and that there is any such thing as a "soul," and a loving, just G.o.d. Figuier, the French writer, from whom we quoted that remarkable pa.s.sage breathing the pessimism of the old view of life, a few moments ago, admitted that in rebirth was to be found a just explanation of the matter. He says: "If, on the contrary, we admit the plurality of human existences and reincarnation--that is, the pa.s.sage of the same soul through several bodies--all this is made wonderfully clear. Our presence on such or such a part of the earth is no longer the effect of a caprice of Fate, or the result of chance; it is merely a station in the long journey that we make through the world.

Before our birth, we have already lived, and this life is the sequel and result of previous ones. We have a soul that we must purify, improve and enn.o.ble during our stay upon earth; or having already completed an imperfect and wicked life, we are compelled to begin a new one, and thus strive to rise to the level of those who have pa.s.sed on to higher planes."

The advocates of Reincarnation point out that the idea of Justice is fully carried out in that view of life, inasmuch as what we are is determined by what we have been; and what we shall be is determined by what we are now; and that we are constantly urged on by the pressure of the unfolding spirit, and attracted upward by the Divine One. Under this conception there is no such thing as Chance--all is according to Law.

As an ancient Grecian philosopher once said: "Without the doctrine of metempsychosis, it is not possible to justify the ways of G.o.d," and many other philosophers and theologians have followed him in this thought. If we enjoy, we have earned it; if we suffer, we have earned it; in both cases through our own endeavors and efforts, and not by "chance," nor by reason of the merits or demerits of our forefathers, nor because of "predestination" nor "election" to that fate. If this be true, then one is given the understanding to stoically bear the pains and miseries of this life without cursing Fate or imputing injustice to the Divine. And likewise he is given an incentive toward making the best of his opportunities now, in order to pa.s.s on to higher and more satisfactory conditions in future lives. Reincarnationists claim that rewards and punishments are properly awarded only on the plane in which the deed, good or bad, was committed, "else their nature is changed, their effects impaired, and their collateral bearings lost." A writer on the subject has pointed out this fact in the following words: "Physical outrage has to be checked by the infliction of physical pain, and not merely by the arousing of internal regret. Honest lives find appropriate consequence in visible honor. But one career is too short for the precise balancing of accounts, and many are needed that every good or evil done in each may be requited on the earth where it took place." In reference to this mention of rewards and penalties, we would say that very many advanced Reincarnationists do not regard the conditions of life as "rewards and punishments," but, on the contrary, look upon them as forming part of the Lessons in the Kindergarten of Life, to be learned and profited by in future lives. We shall speak of this further in our consideration of the question of "Karma"--the difference is vital, and should be closely observed in considering the subject.

Before we pa.s.s from the consideration of the question of Justice, as exemplified by Reincarnation, we would call your attention to the difference in the views of life and its rewards and punishments held by the orthodox theologians and the Reincarnationists, respectively. On the one hand, the orthodox theologians hold that for the deeds, good or evil, performed by a man during his short lifetime of a few years, and then performed under conditions arbitrarily imposed upon him at birth by his Creator, man is rewarded or punished by an eternity of happiness or misery--heaven or h.e.l.l. Perhaps the man has lived but one or two years of reasonable understanding--or full three-score and ten--and has violated certain moral, ethical or even religious laws, perhaps only to the extent of refusing to believe something that his reason absolutely refused to accept--for this he is doomed to an everlasting sojourn in a place of pain, misery or punishment, or a state equivalent thereto. Or, on the other hand, he has done the things that he ought to have done, and left undone the things that he ought not to have done--even though this doing and not-doing was made very easy for him by reason of his environment and surroundings--and to crown his beautiful life he had accepted the orthodox creeds and beliefs of his fathers, as a matter of course--then this man is rewarded by an eternity of bliss, happiness and joy--without end. Try to think of what ETERNITY means--think of the aeons upon aeons of time, on and on, and on, forever--and the poor sinner is suffering exquisite torture all that time, and in all time to come, without limit, respite, without mercy! And all the same time, the "good"

man is enjoying his blissful state, without limit, or end, or satiety!

And the time of probation, during which the two worked out their future fate, was as a grain of sand as compared with the countless universes in s.p.a.ce in all eternity--a relation which reduces the span of man's lifetime to almost absolutely NOTHING, mathematically considered. Think of this--is this Justice?

And on the other hand, from the point of view of the Reincarnationist, is not the measure of cause and effect more equitably adjusted, even if we regard it as a matter of "reward and punishment"--a crude view by the way--when we see that every infraction of the law is followed by a corresponding effect, and an adherence to the law by a proportionate effect. Does not the "punishment fit the crime" better in this case--the rewards also. And looking at it from a reasonable point of view, devoid from theological bias, which plan seems to be the best exemplification of Justice and Natural Law, not to speak of the higher Divine Justice and Cosmic Law? Of course, we are not urging these ideas as "proofs" of Reincarnation, for strictly speaking "proof" must lie outside of speculation of "what ought to be"--proof belongs to the region of "what is" and "facts in experience." But, nevertheless, while one is considering the matter, it should be viewed from every possible aspect, in order to see "how it works out."

It is also urged along the lines of the Justice of Reincarnation, as opposed to the injustice of the contrary doctrine, that there are many cases of little infants who have only a few days, or minutes, of this life, before they pa.s.s out of the body in death. According to the anti-reincarnation doctrine, these little souls have been freshly created, and placed into physical bodies, and then without having had to taste of the experiences of life, are ushered into the higher planes, there to pa.s.s an eternal existence--while other souls have to live out their long lives of earth in order to reach the same higher states, and then, according to the prevailing doctrine, even then they may have earned eternal punishment instead of eternal bliss. According to this idea the happiest fate would be for all to die as infants (providing we were baptized, some good souls would add), and the death of an infant should be the occasion for the greatest rejoicing on the part of those who love it. But in spite of the doctrine, human nature does not so act.

According to the doctrine of Reincarnation, the little babe's soul was but pursuing the same path as the rest of the race--it had its past, as well as its future, according to Law and Justice. While, if the ordinary view be correct, no one would begrudge the infant its happy fate, still one would have good cause for complaint as the Inequality and Injustice of others having to live out long lives of pain, discomfort and misery, for no cause, instead of being at once translated into a higher life as was the infant. If the ordinary view be true, then why the need of earth-life at all--why not create a soul and then place it in the heavenly realms at once; if it is possible and proper in some cases, why not in all; if the experience is not indispensable, then why impose it on certain souls, when all are freshly created and equal in merit and deserts? If earthly life has any virtue, then the infant's soul is robbed of its right. If earthly life has no virtue, the adult souls are forced to live a useless existence on earth, running the risk of d.a.m.nation if they fail, while the infant souls escape this. Is this equality of opportunity and experience, or Justice? There would seem to be something wrong with either the facts, or the theory. Test the problem with the doctrine of Reincarnation, and see how it works out!

CHAPTER IX.

THE ARGUMENT FOR REINCARNATION.

In addition to the consideration of Justice, there are many other advantages claimed by the advocates of Reincarnation which are worthy of the careful consideration of students of the problem of the soul. We shall give to each of these princ.i.p.al points a brief consideration in this chapter, that you may acquaint yourself with the several points of the argument.

It is argued that the principle of a.n.a.logy renders it more reasonable to believe that the present life of the soul is but one link in a great chain of existences, which chain stretches far back into the past on one side, and far out into the future on the other, than to suppose that it has been specially created for this petty term of a few years of earth life, and then projected for weal or woe into an eternity of spiritual existence. It is argued that the principle of Evolution on the Physical Plane points to an a.n.a.logy of Evolution of the Spiritual Plane. It is reasoned that just as birth on the next plane of life follows death on the present one, so a.n.a.logy would indicate that a death on past planes preceded birth on this, and so on. It is argued that every form of life that we know of has arisen from lower forms, which in turn arose from still lower forms, and so on; and that following the same a.n.a.logy the soul has risen from lower to higher, and will mount on to still higher forms and planes. It is argued that "special creation" is unknown in the universe, and that it is far more reasonable to apply the principle of evolution to the soul than to consider it as an exception and violation of the universal law.

It is also claimed by some thinkers that the idea of future-existence presupposes past-existence, for everything that is "begun" must "end"

some time, and therefore if we are to suppose that the soul is to continue its existence in the future, we must think of it as having an existence in the past--being eternal at both ends of the earth-life, as it were. Opponents of the idea of immortality are fond of arguing that there was no more reason for supposing that a soul would continue to exist after the death of the body, than there was for supposing that it had existed previously. A well-known man once was asked the question: "What becomes of a man's soul after death?" when he evaded the question by answering: "It goes back to where it came from." And to many this idea has seemed sufficient to make them doubt the idea of immortality.

The ancient Greek philosophers felt it logically necessary for them to a.s.sert the eternal pre-existence of the soul in order to justify their claim of future existence for it. They argued that if the soul is immortal, it must have always existed, for an immortal thing could not have been created--if it was not immortal by nature, it could never be made so, and if it was immortal by nature, then it had always existed.

The argument usually employed is this: A thing is either mortal or immortal, one or the other; if it is mortal it has been born and must die; if it is immortal, it cannot have been born, neither can it die; mortality means subject to life and death--immortality means immunity from both. The Greeks devoted much time and care to this argument, and attached great importance to it. They reasoned that nothing that possessed Reality could have emerged from nothingness, nor could it pa.s.s into nothingness. If it were Real it was Eternal; if it was not Eternal it was not Real, and would pa.s.s away even as it was born. They also claimed that the sense of immortality possessed by the Ego, was an indication of its having experienced life in the past, as well as antic.i.p.ating life in the future--there is a sense of "oldness" pervading every thought of the soul regarding its own nature. It is claimed as an illogical a.s.sumption to hold that back of the present there extends an eternity of non-existence for the soul, while ahead of it there extends an eternity of being--it is held that it is far more logical to regard the present life as merely a single point in an eternity of existence.

It is argued, further, that Reincarnation fits in with the known scientific principle of conservation of energy--that is, that no energy is ever created or is lost, but that all energy is but a form of the universal energy, which flows on from form to form, from manifestation to manifestation, ever the same, and yet manifesting in myriad forms--never born, never dying, but always moving on, and on, and on to new manifestations. Therefore it is thought that it is reasonable to suppose that the soul follows the same law of re-embodiment, rising higher and higher, throughout time, until finally it re-enters the Universal Spirit from which it emerged, and in which it will continue to exist, as it existed before it emerged for the cycle of manifestation.

It is also argued that Reincarnation brings Life within the Law of Cause and Effect, just as is everything else in the universe. The law of re-birth, according to the causes generated during past lives, would bring the existence of the soul within and in harmony with natural laws, instead of without and contrary to them.

It is further argued that the feeling of "original sin" of which so many people a.s.sert a consciousness, may be explained better by the theory of Reincarnation than by any theological doctrine. The orthodox doctrine is that "original sin" was something inherited from Adam by reason of our forefather's transgression, but this jars upon the thought of today, as well it might, for what has the "soul" to do with Adam--it did not descend from him, or from aught else but the Source of Being--there is no line of descent for souls, though there may be for bodies. What has Adam to do with your soul, if it came fresh from the mint of the Maker, pure and unsullied--how could his sin taint your new soul? Theology here a.s.serts either arrant nonsense, or else grave injustice. But if for "Adam" we subst.i.tute our past existences and the thoughts and deeds thereof, we may understand that feeling of conscious recognition of past wrong-doing and remorse, which so many testify to, though they be reasonably free from the same in the present life. The b.u.t.terfly dimly remembers its worm state, and although it now soars, it feels the slime of the mud in which it once crawled.

It is also argued that in one life the soul would fail to acquire the varied experience which is necessary to form a well rounded mentality of understanding. Dwarfed by its limited experience in the narrow sphere occupied by many human beings, it would be far from acquiring the knowledge which would seem to be necessary for a developed and advanced soul. Besides this there would be as great an inequality on the part of souls after death, as there is before death--some would pa.s.s into the future state as ignorant beings, while others would possess a full nature of understanding. As a leading authority has said: "A perfected man must have experienced every type of earthly relation and duty, every phase of desire, affection and pa.s.sion, every form of temptation and every variety of conflict. No one life can possibly furnish the material for more than a minute section of such experience." Along this same line it is urged that the soul's development must come largely from contact and relationship with other souls, in a variety of phases and forms. It must experience pain and happiness, love, pity, failure, success--it must know the discipline of sympathy, toleration, patience, energy, fort.i.tude, foresight, grat.i.tude, pity, benevolence, and love in all of its phases. This, it is urged, is possible only through repeated incarnations, as the span of one life is too small and its limit too narrow to embrace but a small fraction of the necessary experiences of the soul on its journey toward development and attainment. One must feel the sorrows and joys of all forms of life before "understanding" may come. Narrowness, lack of tolerance, prejudice, and similar forms of undeveloped consciousness must be wiped out by the broad understanding and sympathy that come only from experience.

It is argued that only by repeated incarnations the soul is able to realize the futility of the search for happiness and satisfaction in material things. One, while dissatisfied and disappointed at his own condition, is apt to imagine that in some other earthly condition he would find satisfaction and happiness now denied him, and dying carries with him the subsconcious desire to enjoy those conditions, which desire attracts him back to earth-life in search of those conditions. So long as the soul desires anything that earth can offer, it is earth-bound and drawn back into the vortex. But after repeated incarnations the soul learns well its lesson that only in itself may be found happiness--and that only when it learns its real nature, source, and destiny--and then it pa.s.ses on to higher planes. As an authority says: "In time, the soul sees that a spiritual being cannot be nourished on inferior food, and that any joy short of union with the Divine must be illusionary."

It is also argued that but few people, as we see them in earth-life, have realized the existence of a higher part of their being, and still fewer have a.s.serted the supremacy of the higher, and subordinated the lower part of the self to that higher. Were they to pa.s.s on to a final state of being after death, they would carry with them all of their lower propensities and attributes, and would be utterly incapable of manifesting the spiritual part of their nature which alone would be satisfied and happy in the spiritual realms. Therefore, it needs repeated lives in order to evolve from the lower conditions and to develop and unfold the higher.

Touching upon the question of unextinguished desire, mentioned a moment ago, the following quotation from a writer on the subject, gives clearly and briefly the Reincarnationist argument regarding this point. The writer says: "Desire for other forms of earthly experience can only be extinguished by undergoing them. It is obvious that any one of us, if now translated to the unseen world, would feel regret that he had not tasted existence in some other situation or surroundings. He would wish to have known what it was to possess wealth and rank, or beauty, or to live in a different race or climate, or to see more of the world and society. No spiritual ascent could progress while earthly longings were dragging back the soul, and so it frees itself from them by successively securing them and dropping them. When the round of such knowledge has been traversed, regret for ignorance has died out." This idea of "Living-Out and Out-Living" is urged by a number of writers and thinkers on the subject. J. Wm. Lloyd says, in his "Dawn Thought," on this subject: "You rise and overcome simply by the natural process of living fully and thus outliving, as a child its milk-teeth, a serpent his slough. Living and Outliving, that expresses it. Until you have learned the one lesson fully you are never ready for a new one." The same writer, in the same book, also says: "By sin, shame, joy, virtue and sorrow, action and reaction, attraction and repulsion, the soul, like a barbed arrow, ever goes on. It cannot go back, or return through the valves of its coming. But this must not be understood to be fulfilled in one and every earth-visit. It is true only of the whole circle-voyage of the soul. In one earth-trip, one 'life,' as we say, it may be that there would nothing be but a standing still or a turning back, nothing but sin. But the whole course of all is on." But there is the danger of a misunderstanding of this doctrine, and some have misinterpreted it, and read it to advise a plunging into all kinds of sinful experience in order to "live-out and out-live," which idea is wrong, and cannot be entertained by any true student of the subjects, however much it may be used by those who wish to avail themselves of an excuse for material dissipation. Mabel Collins, in her notes to "Light on the Path," says on this subject: "Seek it by testing all experience, and remember that, when I say this, I do not say, 'Yield to the seduction of sense, in order to know it.' Before you have become an occultist, you may do this, but not afterwards. When you have chosen and entered the path, you cannot yield to these seductions without shame. Yet you can experience them without horror; can weigh, observe and test them, and wait with the patience of confidence for the hour when they shall affect you no longer. But do not condemn a man that yields; stretch out your hand to him as a brother pilgrim whose feet have become heavy with mire.

Remember, O disciple! that great though the gulf may be between the good man and the sinner, it is greater between the good man and the man who has attained knowledge; it is immeasurable between the good man and the one on the threshold of divinity. Therefore, be wary, lest too soon you fancy yourself a thing apart from the ma.s.s." And again, the same writer says: "Before you can attain knowledge you must have pa.s.sed through all places, foul and clean alike. Therefore, remember that the soiled garment you shrink from touching may have been yours yesterday, may be yours tomorrow. And if you turn with horror from it when it is flung upon your shoulders, it will cling the more closely to you. The self-righteous man makes for himself a bed of mire. Abstain because it is right to abstain, not that yourself shall be kept clean."

It is also argued that Reincarnation is necessary in order to give the evolving races a chance to perfect themselves--that is, not through their physical descendants, which would not affect the souls of those living in the bodies of the races to-day, but by perfection and growth of the souls themselves. It is pointed out that to usher a savage or barbarian to the spiritual planes after death, no matter how true to his duty and "his lights" the soul had been, would be to work an absurd translation. Such a soul would not be fitted for the higher spiritual planes, and would be most unhappy and miserable there. It will be seen that Reincarnationists make quite a distinction between "goodness" and "advancement"--while they recognize and urge the former, they regard it as only one side of the question, the other being "spiritual growth and unfoldment." It will be seen that Reincarnation provides for a Spiritual Evolution with all of its advantages, as well as a material evolution such as science holds to be correct.

Concluding this chapter, let us quote once more from the authority on the subject before mentioned, who writes anonymously in the pamphlet from which the quotation is taken. He says: "Nature does nothing by leaps. She does not, in this case, introduce into a region of spirit and spiritual life a being who has known little else than matter and material life, with small comprehension even of that. To do so would be a.n.a.logous to transferring suddenly a ploughboy into a company of metaphysicians. The pursuit of any topic implies some preliminary acquaintance with its nature, aims, and mental requirements; and the more elevated the topic, the more copious the preparation for it. It is inevitable that a being who has before him an eternity of progress through zones of knowledge and spiritual experience ever nearing the Central Sun, should be fitted for it through long acquisition of the faculties which alone can deal with it. Their delicacy, their vigor, their penetrativeness, their unlikeness to those called for on the material plane, show the contrast of the earth-life to the spirit-life.

And they show, too, the inconceivability of a sudden transition from one to the other, of a policy unknown in any other department of Nature's workings, of a break in the law of uplifting through Evolution. A man, before he can become a 'G.o.d,' must first become a perfect man; and he can become a perfect man neither in seventy years of life on earth, nor in any number of years of life from which human conditions are absent.

* * * Re-birth and re-life must go on till their purposes are accomplished. If, indeed, we were mere victims of an evolutionary law, helpless atoms on which the machinery of Nature pitilessly played, the prospect of a succession of incarnations, no one of which gave satisfaction, might drive us to mad despair. But we have thrust on us no such cheerless exposition. We are shown that Reincarnations are the law for man, because they are the conditions of his progress, which is also a law, but he may mould them and better them and lessen them. He cannot rid himself of the machinery, but neither should wish to. Endowed with the power to guide it for the best, prompted with the motive to use that power, he may harmonize both his aspirations and his efforts with the system that expressed the infinite wisdom of the supreme, and through the journey from the temporal to the eternal tread the way with steady feet, braced with the consciousness that he is one of an innumerable mult.i.tude, and with the certainty that he and they alike, if they so will it, may attain finally to that sphere where birth and death are but memories of the past."

In this chapter we have given you a number of the arguments favorable to the doctrine of Reincarnation, from a number of sources. Some of these arguments do not specially appeal to us, personally, for the reason that they are rather more theological than scientific, but we have included them that the argument may appear as generally presented, and because we feel that in a work of this kind we must not omit an argument which is used by many of the best authorities, simply because it may not appeal to our particular temperament or habit of thought. To some, the theological argument may appeal more strongly than would the scientific, and it very properly is given here. The proper way to present any subject is to give it in its many aspects, and as it may appear from varied viewpoints.

CHAPTER X.

THE PROOFS OF REINCARNATION.

To many minds the "proof" of a doctrine is its reasonableness and its adaptability as an answer to existing problems. And, accordingly, to such, the many arguments advanced in favor of the doctrine, of which we have given a few in the preceding chapters, together with the almost universal acceptance of the fundamental ideas on the part of the race, in at least some period of its development, would be considered as a very good "proof" of the doctrine, at least so far as it might be considered as the "most available working theory" of the soul's existence, past and future, and as better meeting the requirements of a doctrine or theory than any other idea advanced by metaphysical, theological, or philosophical thinkers.

But to the scientific mind, or the minds of those who demand something in the nature of actual experience of facts, no amount of reasonable abstract theorizing and speculation is acceptable even in the way of a "working hypothesis," unless based upon some tangible "facts" or knowledge gained through human experience. While people possessing such minds will usually admit freely that the doctrine of Reincarnation is more logical than the opposing theories, and that it fits better the requirements of the case, still they will maintain that all theories regarding the soul must be based upon premises that cannot be established by actual experience in human consciousness. They hold that in absence of proof in experience--actual "facts"--these premises are not established, and that all structures of reasoning based upon them must partake of their insecurity. These people are like the slangy "man from Missouri" who "wants to be shown"--nay, more, they are like the companion of the above man--the Man from Texas, who not only says: "You've got to show me," but who also demands that the thing be "placed in my hand." And, after all, one has no right to criticize these people--they are but manifesting the scientific spirit of the age which demands facts as a basis for theories, rather than theories that need facts to prove them. And, unless Reincarnation is able to satisfy the demands of this cla.s.s of thinkers, the advocates of the doctrine need not complain if the scientific mind dismisses the doctrine as "not proven."

After all, the best proof along the above mentioned lines--in fact, about the only possible strict proof--is the fragmentary recollections of former lives, which many people possess at times--these recollections often flashing across the mind, bringing with it a conviction that the place or thing "has been experienced before." Nearly every person has had glimpses of something that appeared to be a recollection from the past life of the individual. We see places that we have never known, and they seem perfectly familiar; we meet strangers, and we are convinced that we have known them in the past; we read an old book and feel that we have seen it before, often so much so that we can antic.i.p.ate the story or argument of the writer; we hear some strange philosophical doctrine, and we recognize it as an old friend. Many people have had this experience in the matter of Occultism--in the very matter of the doctrine of Reincarnation itself--when they first heard it, although it struck them as strange and unusual, yet they felt an inner conviction that it was an old story to them--that they "had heard it all before."

These experiences are by far too common to be dismissed as mere fancy or coincidence. Nearly every living person has had some experience along this line.

A recent writer along the lines of Oriental Philosophy has said regarding this common experience of the race: "Many people have had 'peculiar experiences' that are accountable only upon the hypothesis of Metempsychosis. Who has not experienced the consciousness of having felt the thing before--having thought it some time in the dim past? Who has not witnessed new scenes that appear old, very old? Who has not met persons for the first time, whose presence awakened memories of a past lying far back in the misty ages of long ago? Who has not been seized at times with the consciousness of a mighty 'oldness' of soul? Who has not heard music, often entirely new compositions, which somehow awakened memories of similar strains, scenes, places, faces, voices, lands, a.s.sociations, and events, sounding dimly on the strings of memory as the breezes of the harmony floats over them? Who has not gazed at some old painting, or piece of statuary, with the sense of having seen it all before? Who has not lived through events which brought with them a certainty of being merely a repet.i.tion of some shadowy occurrences away back in lives lived long ago? Who has not felt the influence of the mountain, the sea, the desert, coming to them when they are far from such scenes--coming so vividly as to cause the actual scene of the present to fade into comparative unreality? Who has not had these experiences?"

We have been informed by Hindus well advanced in the occult theory and practice that it is quite a common thing for people of their country to awaken to an almost complete recollection of their former lives; in some cases they have related details of former lives that have been fully verified by investigation in parts of the land very remote from their present residence. In one case, a Hindu sage related to us an instance where a poor Hindu, who had worked steadily in the village in which he had been born, without leaving it, ever since his childhood days. This man one day cried out that he had awakened to a recollection of having been a man of such and such a village, in a province hundreds of miles from his home. Some wealthy people became interested in the matter, and after having taken down his statements in writing, and after careful examination and questioning, they took him to the town in question. Upon entering the village the man seemed dazed, and cried out: "Everything is changed--it is the same and yet not the same!" Finally, however, he began to recognize some of the old landmarks of the place, and to call the places and roads by their names. Then, coming to a familiar corner, he cried: "Down there is my old home," and, rushing down the road for several hundred yards, he finally stopped before the ruins of an old cottage, and burst into tears, saying that the roof of his home had fallen in, and the walls were crumbling to pieces. Inquiry among the oldest men of the place brought to light the fact that when these aged men were boys, the house had been occupied by an old man, bearing the same name first mentioned by the Hindu as having been his own in his previous life. Other facts about the former location of places in the village were verified by the old men. Finally, while walking around the ruins, the man said: "There should be a pot of silver buried there--I hid it there when I lived here." The people rapidly uncovered the ground indicated, and brought to light an old pot containing a few pieces of silver coin of a date corresponding to the lifetime of the former occupant of the house. Our informant told us that he had personal knowledge of a number of similar cases, none of which, however, were quite as complete in detail as the one mentioned. He also informed us that he himself, and a number of his acquaintances who had attained certain degrees of occult unfoldment, were fully aware of their past lives for several incarnations back.

Another instance came under our personal observation, in which an American who had never been to India, when taken into a room in which a Hindu priest who was visiting America had erected a shrine or altar before which he performed his religious services, readily recognized the arrangement of the details of worship, ritual, ceremony, etc., and was conscious of having seen, or at least dreamed of seeing, a similar shrine at some time in the past, and as having had some connection with the same. The Hindu priest, upon hearing the American's remarks, stated that his knowledge of the details of the shrine, as then expressed, indicated a knowledge possible only to one who had served at a Hindu altar in some capacity.

We know of another case in which an acquaintance, a prominent attorney in the West, told us that when undergoing his initiation in the Masonic order he had a full recollection of having undergone the same before, and he actually antic.i.p.ated each successive step. This knowledge, however, ceased after he had pa.s.sed beyond the first three degrees which took him to the place where he was a full Master Mason, the higher degrees being entirely new to him, and having been apparently not experienced before. This man was not a believer in any doctrine of Reincarnation, and related the incident merely as "one of those things that no man can explain."

We know of another case, in which a student of Hindu Philosophy and Oriental Occultism found that he could antic.i.p.ate each step of the teaching and doctrine, and each bit of knowledge gained by him seemed merely a recollection of something known long since. So true was this that he was able to supply the "missing links" of the teaching, where he had not access to the proper sources of information at the time, and in each case he afterward found that he had stated the same correctly.

And this included many points of the Inner Teachings not generally taught to the general public, but reserved for the few. Subsequent contact with native Hindu teachers brought to light the fact that he had already unraveled many tangled skeins of doctrine deemed possible only to the "elect."

Many of these recollections of the past come as if they were memories of something experienced in dreams, but sometimes after the loose end of the thought is firmly grasped and mentally drawn out, other bits of recollection will follow. Sir Walter Scott wrote in his diary in 1828: "I was strangely haunted by what I would call the sense of pre-existence, viz., a confused idea that nothing that pa.s.sed was said for the first time; that the same topics had been discussed, and the same persons had stated the same opinions on them." William Home, an English writer, was instantly converted from materialism to a belief in a spiritual existence by an incident that occurred to him in a part of London utterly strange to him. He entered a waiting room, and to his surprise everything seemed familiar to him. As he says: "I seemed to recognize every object. I said to myself, what is this? I have never been here before, and yet I have seen all this, and if so, there is a very peculiar knot in that shutter." He then crossed the room, and opened the shutter, and after examination he saw the identical peculiar knot that he had felt sure was there. Pythagoras is said to have distinctly remembered a number of his previous incarnations, and at one time pointed out a shield in a Grecian temple as having been carried by him in a previous incarnation at the siege of Troy. A well-known ancient Hindu sage is said to have transcribed a lost sacred book of doctrine from memory of its study in a previous life. Children often talk strangely of former lives, which ideas, however, are generally frightened out of them by reproof on the part of parents, and often punishment for untruthfulness and romancing. As they grow older these memories fade away.

People traveling in strange places often experience emotion when viewing some particular scene, and memory seems to painfully struggle to bring into the field of consciousness the former connection between the scene and the individual. Many persons have testified to these occurrences, many of them being matter-of-fact, unimaginative people, who had never even heard of the doctrine of Reincarnation. Charles d.i.c.kens, in one of his books of foreign travel, tells of a bridge in Italy which produced a peculiar effect upon him. He says: "If I had been murdered there in some former life, I could not have seemed to remember the place more thoroughly, or with more emphatic chilling of the blood; and the real remembrance of it acquired in that minute is so strengthened by the imaginary recollection that I hardly think I could forget it." Another recorded instance is that of a person entering a foreign library for the first time. Pa.s.sing to the department of ancient books, he said that he had a dim idea that a certain rare book was to be found on such a shelf, in such a corner, describing at the same time certain peculiarities of the volume. A search failed to discover the volume in the stated place, but investigation showed that it was in another place in the library, and an old a.s.sistant stated that a generation back it had been moved from its former place (as stated by the visitor), where it had been previously located for very many years. An examination of the volume showed a perfect correspondence in every detail with the description of the strange visitor.

And so the story proceeds. Reference to the many works written on the subject of the future life of the soul will supply many more instances of the glimpses of recollection of past incarnations. But why spread these instances over more pages? The experience of other people, while of scientific interest and value as affording a basis for a theory or doctrine, will never supply the experience that the close and rigid investigator demands. Only his own experiences will satisfy him--and perhaps not even those, for he may consider them delusions. These experiences of others have their princ.i.p.al value as corroborative proofs of one's own experiences, and thus serve to prove that the individual experience was not abnormal, unusual, or a delusion. To those who have not had these glimpses of recollection, the only proof that can be offered is the usual arguments in favor of the doctrine, and the account of the experiences of others--this may satisfy, and may not. But to those who have had these glimpses--particularly in a marked degree--there will come a feeling of certainty and conviction that in some cases is as real as the certainty and conviction of the present existence, and which will be proof against all argument to the contrary.

To such people the knowledge of previous existences is as much a matter of consciousness as the fact of the existence of last year--yesterday--a moment ago--or even the present moment, which slips away while we attempt to consider it. And those who have this consciousness of past lives, even though the details may be vague, intuitively accept the teachings regarding the future lives of the soul. The soul that recognizes its "oldness" also feels its certainty of survival--not as a mere matter of faith, but as an item of consciousness, the boundaries of time being transcended.

But there are other arguments advanced in favor of Reincarnation, which its advocates consider so strong as to ent.i.tle them to be cla.s.sed as "proofs." Among these may be mentioned the difference in tastes, talents, predispositions, etc., noticeable among children and adults, and which can scarcely be attributed to heredity. This same idea carries one to the consideration of the question of "youthful genius,"

"prodigies," etc.

It is a part of this argument to a.s.sume that if all souls were freshly created, by the same Creator, and from the same material, they would resemble each other very closely, and in fact would be practically identical. And, it is urged, the fact that every child is different in tastes, temperament, qualities, nature, etc., independent of heredity and environment, then it must follow that the difference must be sought for further back. Children of the same parents differ very materially in nature, disposition, etc.; in fact, strangers are often more alike than children of the same parents, born within a few years of each other, and reared in the same environment. Those having much experience with young babies know that each infant has its own nature and disposition, and in which it differs from every other infant, although they may be cla.s.sed into groups, of course. The infant a few hours born shows a gentleness, or a lack of it--a yielding or a struggle, a disposition to adjust itself, or a stubbornness, etc. And as the child grows, these traits show more plainly, and the nature of the individual a.s.serts itself, subject, of course, to a moulding and shaping, but always a.s.serting its original character in some way.

Not only in the matter of disposition but in the matter of tastes, tendencies, moral inclinations, etc., do the children differ. Some like this, and dislike that, and the reverse; some are attracted toward this and repelled by that, and the reverse; some are kind while others are cruel; some manifest an innate sense of refinement, while others show coa.r.s.eness and lack of delicate feeling. This among children of the same family, remember. And, when the child enters school, we find this one takes to mathematics as the duck does to water, while its brother loathes the subject; the anti-arithmetic child may excel in history or geography, or else grammar, which is the despair of others. Some are at once attracted to music, and others to drawing, while both of these branches are most distasteful to others. And it will be noticed that in the studies to which the child is attracted, it seems to learn almost without effort, as if it were merely re-learning some favorite study, momentarily forgotten. And in the case of the disliked study, every step is attended with toil. In some cases the child seems to learn every branch with the minimum effort, and with practically no effort; while in other cases the child has to plod wearily over every branch, as if breaking entirely new ground. And this continues into after life, when the adult finds this thing or that thing into which he naturally fits as if it were made for him, the knowledge concerning it coming to him like the lesson of yesterday.

We know of a case in which a man had proved a failure in everything he had undertaken up to the age of forty, when his father-in-law, in disgust, placed him at the head of an enterprise which he had had to "take over" for a bad debt. The "failure" immediately took the keenest interest in the work, and in a month knew more about it than many men who had been in the concern for years. His mind found itself perfectly at home, and he made improvement after improvement rapidly, and with uniform success. He had found his work, and in a few years stepped to the front rank in the country in that particular line of business.