< A Debate on Re-Incarnation (continued from page 12-185) >
body should have such a memory. All might have such a recollection if they would only strive for it. Everything depended upon the relations that a man got into with his soul. If he properly cultivated a connection with his soul, he would become so impressible as to recover all the soul’s recollections, and would then know positively. Such was the recollection he claimed to have of his own past. It was not a continual recollection,—a man must be further advanced than he was to have that,—but such glimpses and frequent recollections as could not be accounted for on any other hypothesis than that of Re-incarnation.
Madame de Steiger desired to remind Dr. Nichols of the teachings of the Spirits Ski and James Nolan, who used to manifest through Mrs. Billing’s mediumship, on the subject of Re-incarnation.
Dr. Nichols said that Ski had told him that Re-Incarnation was a fact, and that he should know something about it. Another Spirit also wished to have a serious talk with him on the subject, for which he (Dr. Nichols) had not yet found time. Mrs. Nichols, who was something of a medium herself, was a very decided Re-Incarnationist, and that was almost the only subject on which they ever quarrelled.
Signor Rondi said he could only understand the justice of God in the light of the doctrine of Re-Incarnation. Dr. Nichols had said that he should not like to come back to earth again, but God did not ask His children where they would like to go to learn their lessons. Mrs. Nichols had no doubt learned the doctrine of Re-Incarnation through her Spirits. All the continental Spirits taught the doctrine, and many American Spirits had lately done so. He had heard Dr. Peebles, for instance, preaching Re-incarnation, and he had assisted at several séances where the Spirits were nearly all Re-Incarnationists. The Chinese philosopher himself had to-night been re-incarnated in the body of Mr. Morse.
Mr. Greenwell complained that Re-Incarnationists dealt only in speculation, but he wanted facts. When he heard the expression, “I do not believe, I know,” he certainly expected something more to follow.
Mrs. Hallock said that if a person remembered all his former Re-Incarnations he might not care to mention them in a promiscuous assembly. She did not remember one, but in the light of the doctrine her whole present life was explained to her. She thought she had been tolerably bad in some former life, and she accepted a good deal of what happened to her here as punishment and as discipline by which she hoped she had profited.
Dr. Anna Kingsford said she was beginning to recollect her former incarnations but they were not such as she would like to make public. One of them filled her with shame and horror whenever she thought of it.
Mr. Wortley thought that the idea of Re-Incarnation originated in the great law of natural development. If he remembered, for instance, being a tiger, that slight reminiscence might have originated from the fact of his Spirit essence being a part and portion of the individual tiger. They ought not, however, to look backwards in a Sodom and Gomorrah fashion, but to look onward and forward to the higher laws of progress. He wanted to go on to the grand spheres and to develop the higher faculties.
Dr. Nichols said that the thought of self-forgetfulness or the loss of personal consciousness of identity was excessively objectionable to him as a matter of feeling, and he should require a clear and distinct proof externally of the doctrine before he should be willing to accept it.
Mr. Tietkens said he had sometimes extraordinary visions. He thought at one time that he was in a canoe in India on the waters of a broad stream, the trees surrounding him being like those of a tropical climate. On another occasion he seemed to be in a very large building of an Egyptian character with numerous sacred symbols connected with religion. He had inquired at several séances what those things meant, and he was told that they related to previous incarnations; but at a home circle on which he could rely he was distinctly told by those who had gone before that there was no truth in that doctrine. His own belief was that the visions were impressions given by the Spirit guides to impress men with the sense of their own earth-lives. Higher inspirational mediums who were surrounded with a beautiful aura would understand what he meant. It was on that aura that those impressions were given, and men in this life thought that they were the scenes of their former Incarnations.
Tien-Sien-Tie in reply said: With regard to the first point raised, whether it would not be a progression rather than a retrogression for a Nero to be converted into a Howard, the question was purely speculative, based on that inevitable “if.” If it could be proved that Nero did come back and was converted into a Howard, we should at once be prepared to admit that that was a very decided progress; but until that proof is established, we are inclined to shelter ourselves under the statement that the matter is purely speculation and not proved or provable. It has been said that having some knowledge of the Eastern faith, we are occupying an anomalous position by asking for proof in favour of a doctrine with which we ought to be familiar. It is precisely because we are familiar with the doctrine and do not believe in it, that we ask for proof. A proof that is purely a matter of personal consciousness cannot be reproduced for external satisfaction. Proof that is not capable of being reduced to external evidence is no proof to any person outside the individual who receives it. You assume that the justice of God is reconciled by this theory. We ask you, what do you know of the justice of God? You know nothing, you only imagine; and in proportion to your intellectual and spiritual development are your conclusions concerning the justice of God. You may entertain entirely different conceptions twenty years hence; and your present ideas of Re-Incarnation and Spiritualism, and all other isms, may undergo severe modifications. We are asked to accept the fourfold theory of life and to believe that the real progressive soul does not return, but the ruach does. What is this ruach? Where does this thing stand, and what is it? Does it possess intelligence, feelings, sensations, emotions? Can we speak of it as any sort of rational entity? We are not acquainted with it certainly. We know the existence of the will-power, that an individual can project and produce results; but we do not know the thing which is presented in the form of which you have heard. The question is, plainly,—Is the birth of a human creature in this world the result of natural processes which are identical in every case, or is it the result of some other soul being re-incarnated into the womb of the mother? Here we have a physiological variation with a vengeance, if it be true; your children may be somebody else’s, and you may be somebody else. In fact, so inextricably confused become the relationships of life at this point, that we hardly care to pursue the subject further. We claim the fixity of nature's laws in this matter; we cannot depart from them. We repeat, that the soul individualises itself through material progressions or developments; that it becomes consciously individualised in the form of a human creature, and that this stage of existence is only the platform upon which that result is accomplished. You may go into other spiritual states. The question was asked, here is the spiritual state? May we not ask, Where is the departed soul prior to its re-incarnation into material existence? What is it, and how does it live? The soul departs from the body: it either carries with it the machinery to continue its expression or it is bereft of such machinery. If it has no machinery to continue the expression of its past qualities and its consciousness, neither you nor we, nor anybody, can define it, because we are all possessed of such machinery, and you cannot understand a conditioned thing entirely dissimilar to yourself. If it be possessed of these agencies, there is no need to come back into this world where that condition was procured. That it shall go into another or spiritual condition conformable to the requirements of that machinery which it possesses, seems to us a legitimate and common-sense conclusion; that it should ever sacrifice that machinery and come back to the human fetus and develop another set of machinery does not strike us as necessary. We are taking a negative position; it is for the champions of the cause to give the required demonstration of the affirmative, not for the opponents. You must leave God's justice out of consideration, for you know nothing of it except in proportion to the development of your own mind. We place ourselves firmly and squarely upon the laws of nature, and we will not budge from them for all the speculations you may bring forward. That the world’s human conditions are results of preceding animal and physical conditions we do not deny; but that we are consciously tigers, brutes, fishes and birds we do deny. That there may be lingering traces here and there of past processes of preparation we do not dispute, but we do dispute that departed human souls come back through the processes of physical birth into this world. If this world has not afforded you proper opportunities of expression, we do not think you will be likely to succeed in gaining a right sort of condition in a future generation. We have no evidence of Re-Incarnation, although we have had speculations in abundance.
Dr. Anna Kingsford: What does the philosopher mean by evidence? What kind of evidence will satisfy him?
<... continues on page 10-187 >