Theos-Talk Archives (March 1996 Message tl00028)

KEY20.TXT

On the Source of the Human Soul

Q. How, then, do you account for man being endowed with a Spirit
and Soul? Whence these?

A. From the Universal Soul. Certainly not bestowed by a personal
God. Whence the moist element in the jelly-fish? From the Ocean
which surrounds it, in which it lives and breathes and has its
being, and whither it returns when dissolved.

Q. So you reject the teaching that Soul is given, or breathed
into man, by God?

A. We are obliged to. The "Soul" spoken of in Genesis is, as
therein stated, the "living Soul" or Nephesh (the vital, animal
soul) with which God (we say "nature" and immutable law) endows
man like every animal. Is not at all the thinking soul or mind;
least of all is it the immortal Spirit.

Q. Well, let us put it otherwise: is it God who endows man with
a human rational Soul and immortal Spirit?

A. Again, in the way you put the question, we must object to it.
Since we believe in no personal God, how can we believe that he
endows man with anything? But granting, for the sake of
argument, a God who takes upon himself the risk of creating a
new Soul for every new-born baby, all that can be said is that
such a God can hardly be regarded as himself endowed with any
wisdom or prevision. Certain other difficulties and the
impossibility of reconciling this with the claims made for the
mercy, justice, equity and omniscience of that God, are so many
deadly reefs on which this theological dogma is daily and hourly
broken.

Q. What do you mean? What difficulties?

A. I am thinking of an unanswerable argument offered once in my
presence by a Singhalese Buddhist priest, a famous preacher, to
a Christian missionary, one in no way ignorant or unprepared for
the public discussion during which it was advanced. It was near
Colombo, and the Missionary had challenged the priest
Megattivati to give his reasons why the Christian God should not
be accepted by the "heathen." Well, the Missionary came out of
that forever memorable discussion second best, as usual.

Q. I should be glad to learn in what way.

A. Simply this: the Buddhist priest premised by asking the padre
whether his God had given commandments to Moses only for men to
keep, but to be broken by God himself. The missionary denied the
supposition indignantly. Well, said his opponent, B you tell us
that God makes no exceptions to this rule, and that no Soul can
be born without his will. Now God forbids adultery, among other
things, and yet you say in the same breath that it is he who
creates every baby born, and he who endows it with a Soul. Are
we then to understand that the millions of children born in
crime and adultery are your God's work? That your God forbids
and punishes the breaking of his laws; and that, nevertheless,
he creates daily and hourly souls for just such children?
According to the simplest logic, your God is an accomplice in
the crime; since, but for his help and interference, no such
children of lust could be born. Where is the justice of
punishing not only the guilty parents but even the innocent babe
for that which is done by that very God, whom yet you exonerate
from any guilt himself?

The missionary looked at his watch and suddenly found it was
getting too late for further discussion.

Q. You forget that all such inexplicable cases are mysteries,
and that we are forbidden by our religion to pry into the
mysteries of God.

A. No, we do not forget, but simply reject such impossibilities.
Nor do we want you to believe as we do. We only answer the
questions you ask. We have, however, another name for your
"mysteries."

---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL:
Ancient Wisdom for a New Age