r e i n c a r n a t i o n
FIVE LECTURES ON REINCARNATION ---- Swami Abhedananda.
II.
THOSE WHO ACCEPT THE THEORY OF HEREDITY DENY THE EXISTENCE OF THE HUMAN SOUL AS AN ENTITY SEPERABLE FROM THE GROSS PHYSICAL ORGANISM.
Consequently they do not discuss the question whether the
individual soul existed in the past or will continue to exist after
the death of the body. This kind of question does not disturb their
minds. They generally maintain that the individual soul is inseparable
from the body or the brain or nervous system; consequently what we
call soul or the conscious entity or the thinker is produced along
with the birth of the organism or brain, lasts as long as the body
lasts and dies when the organism is dissolved into its elements. But
those, on the other hand, who accept the theory of Reincarnation admit
the existence of soul as a conscious entity which is independent of
the physical organism, that it continues to live after death and that
it existed before the birth of the body. The theory of heredity has
always been supported by the materialistic scientists, atheists and
agnostics of all ages and also by those who believe in the special
creation of the first man and woman at a certain definite time and
that their qualities, character, life and soul have been transmitted
to all humanity through successive generations. The commonly accepted
meaning of the theory of heredity is that all the well-marked
peculiarities, both physical and mental, in the parents are handed on
to the children; or, in other words, heredity is that property of an
organism by which its peculiar nature is transmitted to its
descendants.
In the whole history of humanity there has never been a time when this
question of heredity has been discussed so minutely and in so many
different ways as it has been in the present century. Although this
theory was known in the East by the ancient Vedanta philosophers, by
the Buddhists of the pre-Christian era and by the Greek philosophers
in the West, still it has received a new impetus and has grown with
new strength since the introduction of the Darwinian theory of the
evolution of species. Along with the latest discoveries in
physiology, biology, embryology and other branches of modern science,
the popular simple meaning of heredity—that the offspring not only
resemble their parents among animals as well as among men, but inherit
all the individual peculiarities, life and character of their
parents—has taken the shape of the most complicated and difficult
problem which it is almost impossible to solve. Our minds are no
longer satisfied with Haeckel's definition that heredity is simply an
overgrowth of the individual, a simple continuity of growth; but we
want to know the particular method by which hereditary transmission
takes place. We ask, how can a single cell reproduce the whole body
of the offspring, its mind, character and all the peculiarities of an
organism? Out of the myriads of cells of which a body is composed,
what kind of cell is that which possesses the power of reproducing the
peculiarities, both mental and physical, which are to be found in the
form of the new-born babe? This is the most puzzling of all the
problems which the scientific mind has ever encountered. The
fundamental question connected with the theory of heredity is: How can
a single cell of the body contain within itself all the hereditary
tendencies of the hypothesis of the continuity of the germ-plasm gives
an identical starting-point to each successive generation, and thus
explains how it is that an identical product arises from all of
them. In other words, the hypothesis explains heredity as part of the
underlying problems of assimilation and of the causes which act
directly during ontogeny. (Vol. I, p. 170.)
According to Weismann, all the peculiarities which we find in an
organism are not inherited by the organism from that of the parents,
but he says: "Nothing can arise in an organism unless the
predisposition to it is pre-existent, for every acquired character is
simply the reaction of the organism upon a certain stimulus." (Vol. I,
p. 172.) Therefore the germ-cells do not inherit all the peculiarities
of the parents, but possess the predisposition or a potentiality of
the tendencies which gradually develop into individual characters.
GERM-PLASM THEORY.
WE WILL BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HIS THEORY BETTER FROM THE FOLLOWING QUOTATIONS, WHICH GIVE HIS OWN WORDS. He says: "I have called this
substance 'germ-plasm,' and have assumed that it possesses a highly
complex structure, conferring upon it the power of developing into a
complex organism." ("Heredity," Vol. I, p. 170.) Again he says:
"There is, therefore, continuity of the germ-plasm from one generation
to another. One might represent the germ-plasm by the metaphor of a
long, creeping rootstock from which plants arise at intervals, these
latter representing the individuals of successive generations. Hence
it follows that the transmission of acquired characters is an
impossibility, for if the germ-plasm is not formed anew in each
individual, but is derived from that which preceded it, its structure,
and, above all, its molecular constitution, cannot depend upon the
individual in which it happens to occur, but such an individual only
forms, as it were, the nutritive soil at the expense of which the
germ-plasm grows, while the latter possessed its characteristic
structure from the beginning, viz., before the commencement of growth.
But the tendencies of heredity, of which the germ-plasm is the bearer,
depend upon this very molecular structure, and hence only those
characters can be transmitted through successive generations which
have been previously inherited, viz., those characters which were
potentially contained in the structure of the germ-plasm. It also
follows that those other characters which have been acquired by the
influence of special external conditions, during the lifetime of the
parent, cannot be transmitted at all." (Vol. I, p. 273.) In
conclusion, Weismann writes: "But at all events we have gained this
much, that the only facts which appear to directly prove a
transmission of acquired characters have been refuted, and that the
only firm foundation on which this hypothesis has been hitherto based
has been destroyed."(Vol. I, p. 461.)
Thus we see how far the theory of heredity has been pushed by the
great scientific investigators of the present age. We have no longer
any right to believe in the old oft-refuted hypothesis which assumes
that each individual organism produces germ-cells afresh again and
again and transmits all its powers developed and acquired by the
parents; but, on the contrary, we have come to know to-day that
parents are nothing but mere channels through which these germ-plasms
or germ-cells manifest their peculiar tendencies and powers which
existed in them from the very beginning. The main point is that the
germs are not created by the parents, but that they existed in
previous generations.
GERMS DO NOT GENIUSES MAKE.
NOW, WHAT ARE THOSE GERMS LIKE? Wherefrom do they acquire these
tendencies, these peculiarities? That is another very difficult
problem. Dr. Weismann and his followers say that these peculiarities
are gained or inherited "from the common stock," but what that common
stock is they do not explain. Where is that common stock and why will
certain germs acquire certain tendencies and other germs retain other
peculiarities? What regulates them? These questions are not solved. So
far we have gathered from Dr. Weismann's explanation that the parents
are not the creators of the germs but, on the contrary, that the germs
existed before the birth of the body, before the growth of the body,
in previous generations, or in the common stock of the universe. The
previous generations are dead and gone, so we may say that they
existed in the universe. We cannot now believe the old, crude,
often-refuted idea that God creates the germ at the time of birth and
puts into it all the powers and peculiarities of the parents. This
theory makes God unjust and partial, so it does not appeal to us any
more. We need better and more rational explanations. The one-birth
theory, which has been preached by Christian ministers and other
religionists for so many years, does not remove the difficulties, does
not explain the cause of the inequalities and diversities, does not
answer the question whether we acquire all the tendencies and
peculiarities of the parents or whether acquired characters cannot be
transmitted. We have already seen that these questions are left
unsolved by the one-birth theory of Christianity and of Judaism. But
this theory of "continuity of the germ-plasm" pushes the question of
heredity to the door of Reincarnation. If modern science can explain
what that common stock is and why and how these germs retain those
peculiarities and tendencies, then the answer will be complete and not
until then. The Vedanta philosophy, however, has already explained the
cause of the potentiality in the germ of life or "germ-plasm" or
germ-cell.
Vedanta solves this difficulty by saying that each of these
germ-plasms or germ-cells is nothing but the subtle form of a
reincarnating individual, containing potentially all the experiences,
characters, tendencies, and desires which one had in one's previous
life. It existed before the birth of the body and it will continue
after the death of the body. This germ or subtle body is not the same
as the astral body of the Theosophists, or the double of the
metaphysical thinkers or the disembodied spirit of the Spiritualists;
but it is an ethereal center of activity-physical, mental and
organic. It is a center which possesses the tendency to manifest these
powers on different planes of existence. It contains the minute
particles of matter or ethereal substance and the life principle or
vital energy by which we live and move. It also possesses the mental
powers and sense powers; but all these remain latent, just as in a
seed we see that the powers of growth, of assimilation and of
producing flowers and fruits are latent.
At the time of death the individual soul contracts and remains in the
form of a germ of life. It is for this reason, Vedanta teaches, that
it is neither the will of God nor the fault of the parents that forms
the characters of children, but each child is responsible for its
tendencies, capacities, powers and character. It is its own "Karma" or
past actions that make a child a murderer or a saint, virtuous or
sinful. The stored-up potentialities in a subtle body manifest in the
character of an individual.
The argument advanced by the supporters of the theory of hereditary
transmission does not furnish a satisfactory explanation of the cause
of the inequalities and diversities of the universe. Why is it that
the children of the same parents show a marked dissimilarity to their
parents and to each other?
Why do twins develop into dissimilar characters and possess opposite
qualities, although they are born of the same parents at the same time
and brought up under similar conditions and environments? How can
heredity explain such cases? Suppose a man has five children; one is
honest and saintly, another is an idiot, the third becomes a murderer,
the fourth a genius or prodigy, and the fifth a cripple and
diseased. Who made these dissimilarities? They cannot be
accidents. There is no such thing as an accident. Every event of the
universe is bound by the law of cause and effect. There must be some
cause of these inequalities. Who made one honest and saintly, another
an idiot, and so forth? Parents? That cannot be. They never dreamed
that they would beget a murderer or a villain or an idiot. On the
contrary, all parents wish their children to be the best and
happiest. But in spite of such desires they get such children. Why?
What is the cause? Does the theory of heredity explain it? No, not at
all. Suppose a man, twenty-four years old, who has certain traits,
like musical or artistic talents, such as painting and so on, has a
crooked nose and other peculiarities, like cross-eyes, which resemble
those of his grandfather. Suppose his grandfather died six years
before he was born. Now, those who believe in the theory of heredity
will say that this young man inherited all these peculiarities from
his grandfather. When did he inherit? His grandfather had died six
years before he was born. He inherited, of course, in the form of that
germ. What is that germ like? A minute protoplasm, a jelly-like
substance, and if you examine it with a powerful microscope you will
hardly find any difference between it and the proto-plasmic germ of a
dog, or of a cat, or of a tree. It is smaller than a pin's head. And
in that state this young man inherited all these peculiarities from
his grandfather; or, in other words, before he had a nose, he got a
crooked nose; before he had eyes, he inherited cross-eyes, and before
he had any brain, he inherited all the wonderful powers-his musical
and artistic talents. Does it not seem absurd to you? Even if we admit
this theory of heredity, then what do we understand? That the whole of
this young man existed in the form of a protoplasm before he was
born. His cross-eyes, his crooked nose, his artistic talents—all
these pre-existed in the form of a protoplasmic cell. This leads up to
the same thing which is taught by the theory of Reincarnation, or, in
other words, if it be possible for this young man to remain in the
form of a protoplasm and inherit all these things before his birth,
why cannot we believe that the soul or the subtle body of this young
man possessed them from the very beginning? According to Vedanta this
young man was not the creature of his grandfather, but he had his own
independent existence; only by coming through the channel of his
parents he had received certain characteristic impressions, just as a
tree in its process of growth will receive from the environments
certain peculiarities when it assimilates those properties.
The doctrine of Reincarnation alone can explain satisfactorily and
rationally the diversities among children and the reason of the many
instances of uncommon powers and genius displayed in childhood. The
theory of heredity has up to this time failed to give any good reason
for them. Why is it that Pascal, when twelve years old, succeeded in
discovering for himself the greater part of plane geometry. How could
the shepherd Mangiamelo, when five years old, calculate like an
arithmetical machine. Think of the child Zerah Colburn: when he was
under eight years of age he could solve the most tremendous
mathematical problems instantly and without using any figures. "In one
instance he took the number 8 and raised it up progressively to the
sixteenth power and instantly mentioned the result which contained 15
figures—28l,474,976,710,656." Of course he was right in every
figure. When asked the square root of numbers consisting of six
figures, he would state the result instantly with perfect accuracy. He
used to give the cube root of numbers in the hundreds of millions the
very moment when it was asked. Somebody asked him once how many
minutes there were in 48 years, he answered, 25,288,800.
Mozart, the great musician, wrote a sonata when he was four years old
and an opera in his eighth year. Theresa Milanolla played the violin
with such skill that many people thought that she must have played
before her birth. There are many such instances of wonderful powers
exhibited by artists and painters when they were quite young.
Sankarâcharya, the great commentator of the Vedanta philosophy,
finished his commentary when he was twelve years old. How can such
cases be explained by the theory of hereditary transmission? Many of
you have heard of the wonderful musical talents of Blind Tom. This
blind negro slave was born on his master's plantation and was brought
up as a typical negro. He received no training in music or in any
other line. One day when his master's family were at dinner he
happened to come into his master's parlor and displayed his marvelous
musical power for the first time by playing on his master's
piano. Afterwards he was exhibited in different states of this
country. Physically he was nothing but a typical negro. His intellect
was very poor, but in music he was a master. His musical talents were
so great that he composed music for himself and played his own
compositions. Sometimes after hearing a new piece of rapid music once,
he could reproduce it note for note. Where did he get all these
powers? From whom did he inherit them? His parents perhaps never heard
of a piano. He never had a lesson in his life, and he could not have
understood even if he had had any. Not long ago I saw a girl of about
six years, who played the piano most beautifully and who could
reproduce the most difficult music after hearing it once. It seems to
me that she must have played the piano in her previous incarnation.
This is the only explanation that we can give.
Does heredity explain such cases? No. These illustrations are
sufficient to disprove the theory of "cumulative heredity".
"Cumulative" means gradualness. The believers in this theory say that
a genius is the result of cumulative heredity, that is, it presents
itself by degrees from less genius to greater and still greater and so
on. In the whole history of the genealogy of geniuses, like Homer,
Plato, Shakespeare, Goethe, Raphael, there never was in their families
almost Plato, almost Shakespeare, or almost Goethe. Neither is it
possible to trace the extraordinary powers of any of these back to any
member of their ancestral line. Therefore we can say that no other
theory than that of Reincarnation can explain satisfactorily the
causes which produce geniuses and prodigies in this world.
Those who accept the truth of Reincarnation do not blame their parents
for their poor talents, or for not possessing extraordinary powers,
but they remain content with their own lot, knowing that they have
made themselves as they are to-day by their own thoughts and deeds in
their previous incarnations. They understand the meaning of the saying
"what thou sowest thou must reap," and always endeavor to mould their
future by better thoughts and better deeds. They explain all the
inequalities and diversities of life and character by the law of
"Karma," which governs the process of Reincarnation as well as the
gradual evolution of the germs of life from lower to higher stages of
existence.
This text was borrowed from Project Gutenberg. Contact the webmaster Rob Sullivan at bunyarra@hotmail.com. Anticopyright February 2007.
|
