SpiritistPhilosophy.info  
Explanations and messages regarding the moral teachings of
Christ Jesus,
in accordance with Spiritism,
and their application in life.
       
Home page     General index     Contact us

222. "The dogma of reincarnation," it is sometimes objected, "is not new; it is a resuscitation of the doctrine of Pythagoras." We have never said that spiritist doctrine was of modern invention; on the contrary, as the inter-communication of spirits with men occurs in virtue of natural law, it must have existed from the beginning of time, and we have always endeavoured to prove that traces of this inter-communication are to be found in the earliest annals of antiquity. Pythagoras, as is well known, was not the author of the system of metempsychosis; he borrowed it from the philosophers of Hindoostan and of Egypt, by whom it had been held from time immemorial. The idea of the transmigration of soul was, therefore, in the earliest ages of the world, a general belief, equally admitted by the common people and by the most eminent thinkers of that period.

By what road did this idea come to them? Did it reach them through revelation or through intuition?

In regard to this point we know nothing; but it may be safely assumed that no idea could thus have traversed the successive ages of the worlds, and have commanded the assent of the intellects of the human race, if it had not been based on some solid ground of truth and reason. The antiquity of this doctrine should therefore be considered as an argument in its favour, rather than as an objection. But, at the same time, it must not be forgotten that there is, between the antique doctrine of metempsychosis and the modern doctrine of reincarnation, this capital difference, viz., that the spirits who inculcate the latter reject absolutely the idea that the human soul can pass into an animal, and vice versa.

The spirits, therefore, who now proclaim the dogma of the plurality of our corporeal existences reassert a doctrine which had its birth in the earliest ages of the world, and which has maintained its footing to the present day in the convictions of many minds; but they present this dogma under an aspect which is more rational, more conformable with the natural law of progress, and more in harmony with the wisdom of the Creator, through the stripping away of accessories added to it by superstition. A circumstance worthy of notice is the fact that it is not in this book alone that the doctrine in question has been inculcated by them of late years; for, even before its publication, numerous communications of a similar nature had already been obtained in various countries, and their number has since been greatly increased.

It may here be asked, why it is that the statements of all spirits are not in unison in regard to this subject? To this question we shall recur elsewhere.

Let us, for the present, examine the matter from another point of view, entirely irrespective of any assumed declarations of spirits in regard to it. Let us put the latter entirely aside for the moment; let us suppose them to have made no statement whatever in regard to it; let us even suppose the very existence of spirits not to have been surmised. Placing ourselves a moment on neutral ground, and admitting, as equally possible, both the hypotheses of the plurality and of the unity of corporeal existences, let us see which of these hypotheses is most in harmony with the dictates of reason and with the requirements of our own interest.

There are persons who reject the idea of reincarnation simply because they do not like it, declaring that their present existence has been quite enough for them, and that they have no wish to recommence a similar one. Of such persons we would merely inquire whether they suppose that God has consulted their wishes and opinions in regulating the universe ? Either the law of reincarnation exists, or it does not exist. If it exists, no matter how displeasing it may be to them, they will be compelled to submit to it; for God will not ask their permission to enforce it. It is as though a sick man should say, "I have suffered enough today; I do not chose to suffer tomorrow." No matter what may be his unwillingness to suffer, he will nevertheless be obliged to go on suffering, not only on the morrow, but day after day, until he is cured. In like manner, if it be their destiny to live again corporeally, they will thus live again, they will be reincarnated. In vain will they rebel against necessity, like a child refusing to go to school, or a condemned criminal refusing to go to prison. They will be compelled to submit to their fate, no matter how unwilling they may be to do so. Such objections are too puerile to deserve a more serious examination. Let us say, however, for the consolation of those who urge them, that the spiritist doctrine of reincarnation is by no means so terrible as they imagine it to be; that the conditions of their next existence depend on themselves, and will be happy or unhappy according to the deeds done by them in this world; and that they may even, by their action in this life, raise themselves above the danger of falling again into the mire of expiation.

 
Next: Considerations... (II)
  
Back to Spirits' Book's index
 

    

The vine-branch