does chance or justice rule our lives

8/9/2019 Does Chance or Justice Rule Our Lives

1/34

Does Chance or Justice Rule Our Lives?

Essay by

NILS A. AMNEUS

Author of LIFE'S RIDDLE

Originally published by Thomas Amneus, Los Angeles, CA. Theosophical University Press electronic

version ISBN 1-55700-156-1.

In the following discussion the "Law of Cause and Effect" refers to the orderly processeswhich operate in nature according to which the same cause always produces the same

effect. If this law operates in human affairs and we reap the effects of our own acts, our

lives are governed by justice; if not, they are governed by chance.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part 1

A Vital Problem

The Material World

The Mental Plane

A Universal Mind

Life Must Have a Meaning

Human Life

Law or Chance?

Part 2

Requirements of Theory

An Ancient Doctrine

Survival After Death

Existence Before BirthDelayed Effects

Is Reincarnation True?

Beneficial EffectsAre Ethical Teachings Practical?

Summary
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#vitalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#materialhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#mentalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#universalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#lifehttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#humanhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#lawhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htmhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#materialhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#mentalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#universalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#lifehttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#humanhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#lawhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htmhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm#vital


2/34

TUP On-line Menu

Theosophical University Press, publishing and distributing quality theosophical literature since 1886:

PO Box C, Pasadena, CA 91109-7107 USA; e-mail: [email protected]; voice: (626) 798-3378;fax: (626) 798-4749 Free printed catalogavailable on request. Visit the on-line TUP Catalog.

A VITAL PROBLEM

Conflict of Facts and Ideas

Our observations of everyday life show that there is a great deal of injustice and a great deal of chancein the world. We see many instances where the innocent suffer while the guilty escape; where the

honest fail while the dishonest prosper. We see many cases where the carelessness of some will cause

accidents that may bring misfortune and death to innocent victims. We see a great injustice in theuneven distribution of wealth and the opportunities of life. We see some children born healthy while

others are born invalids, some born to the most favorable circumstances, while others are born intowretched conditions. Is it any wonder, then, that we should ask ourselves the question: "Does Chanceor justice rule our lives?"

If we turn to the Christian scriptures for an answer we find such statements as the following: "Judge not

that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measures ye

mete, it shall be measured to you again." (Matt. vii, 1, 2.) and ". . . all they that take the sword shallperish with the sword." (Matt. xxvi, 52.) In Galatians vi, 7, St. Paul says: "Be not deceived; God is not

mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." Similar statements are also found in

other great religions of the world. From such statements we are led to believe that men's lives are

governed by justice. Man's intuitions and his sense of moral values also tell him that justice must rule,but our observations of life do not bear this out. On the contrary we see a contradiction, a clash, an

unbridgeable gap between the reign of law and justice that ought to be on the one hand and the facts

and experiences of every-day life on the other. This glaring contradiction ofwhat is and what ought to

bepresents a problem that has puzzled thoughtful people in all ages, and many have dropped it,

despairing of ever finding a solution.

Man's failure to demonstrate that justice rules in human affairs has led to very serious consequences. It

has undermined man's faith in religion and removed an important incentive to right action: theassurance of reward. A disbelief in justice is a belief in chance and this gives encouragement to

selfishness and all kinds of wrongdoing by holding out hope that the wrongdoer may escape the effect

of his evil deeds.

The selfishness of the individual, reinforced by the belief that he may escape the effect of his evil

doing, is the main cause of the disharmony, strife and warfare in the world today, for the action of thenation, the party, the small group is simply the collective action of individuals. The ideas that govern

individual action will eventually govern national action, and as nations act they determine the fate ofcivilization. We see the truth of Plato's statement: "Ideas rule the world." The idea that we can escape

the consequences of our acts has given free rein to selfishness, brutality and international lawlessness,

which threaten to destroy our Western civilization. A solution of the problem of injustice, then, is vital

to the world's welfare. As conditions in the world ultimately can be traced back to the thoughts andactions of individuals, let us study the effect that the unsolved problem of injustice has produced on the

individual.
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/tup-onl.htmhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/ts/tup.htmhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/tup-onl.htmhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/ts/tup.htm


3/34

The Individual Looks at Life

Let us take, for example, a young man who has finished his education and enters business life. We will

assume that he has had a good home, where high ideals, right action and nobility of character have been

emphasized. He has been told that honesty is the best policy and that it is more profitable thandishonesty. He has been taught to follow the Golden Rule in all his undertakings.

He now enters business life and tries to put his ideals into practice. He finds that in the world about him

most people are striving to accumulate money as a means of satisfying their various needs and desires.After the necessities are supplied the surplus goes to secure various pleasures and comforts, leisure,travel, social position, power, etc. The more money, the more of these desires can be satisfied, hence

everybody is working at top speed with this aim in view. It is a race to get rich and the quicker one

reaches the goal, the better.

There are certain ethical principles that are supposed to govern in business as elsewhere, but as helooks about he finds that very few people follow a strict moral code; in fact, he has to compete with

others who are tricky and dishonest. He also finds that selfishness and dishonesty often pay more than

right action. He frequently sees the unscrupulous prosper while the honest man fails. In brief, he seesnumberless instances where honesty does not pay while dishonesty does.

There is law and order throughout nature; his education has shown him that, and his sense of the"fitness of things" tells him that the same law and order should apply to all human dealings also. But he

sees many instances where this is not the case. The facts and experiences of everyday life do not alwaysbear out the teachings of religion. He recognizes the beautiful sentiment of the Golden Rule and other

ethical teachings, but, also, that there are no means for enforcing these. He knows that man-made laws

cannot be enforced unless they have "teeth"; that is, unless a violation of the law will be followed by asuitable punishment. But ethical laws evidently have no "teeth." We may follow these laws if we

choose to, but there is nothing to compel us to follow them if we do not want to do so. The realization

that honesty does not always pay, and sometimes may even be a hindrance to worldly success, is a

handicap in his honest endeavors and may in time lead him into dishonesty.

There is in man an innate sense of right, a moral force that urges him to do his duty by his fellows, and

it is indeed fortunate that so many follow this urge. Under normal conditions this may be sufficient to

influence men to right action, but occasionally temptations will present themselves which may prove

too strong. We know the old saying: "Everyone has his price," and while the price varies with differentindividuals, if it is really great enough we know that many would yield. There are those who would not

lower their standards under any circumstances, but even these will pause and wonder why it is that

justice often is so imperfect and how it can happen that the dishonesty of their competitor may bringhim prosperity, while their own honesty actually retards their success. Is it strange, then, that many

such good people in time give up their ideals and become cynical and indifferent and perhaps lower

their standards and become dishonest?

The selfish man is found in all pursuits: in business, in politics, in finance, and in common crime. His

methods may vary according to his situation, but his objective is the same in every case, namely to gainadvantages for himself with little or no regard for the rights of others. How is such a man, who is not

restrained by any moral considerations, affected by the apparent prevalence of chance in human life?He sees instances where others of his kind have enriched themselves by dishonest means without

suffering any apparent evil consequences as a result. He figures that where they succeeded he can

succeed. To him this seeming absence of justice is an invitation to try his luck. The usual aim is to getrich. If he could do this honestly it would be preferable, for it would involve less risk. But honest

methods are often slow and require hard work. A dishonest method may offer a short-cut to wealth and

require less labor. The only objection to the latter method is that he might get caught and punished. He


4/34

knows the law will reach out its arm and try to get him, but he also knows that it is possible to "beat the

law" and that this depends on good planning, luck, cleverness, daring, a position of power, money for

bribery, etc. If he succeeds in beating the Law, he may win a great stake, and he will not have to suffer

any evil effects. He weighs his chances of success and if they look favorable he goes ahead.

We see from the above how the unsolved problem of injustice has had an undermining influence on the

individual's behavior and how it has encouraged selfishness and a disregard for the rights of others.

Naturally, the effect will be the same on the social body and the various groups within it, and the sameapplies to whole nations. The motives, the ideologies of thousands and millions of individuals becomethe factors that determine the acts of nations. Is it any wonder, then, that selfishness and aggressiveness

have become so powerful in the world that they threaten the existence of our entire civilization?

Vain Appeals to Practice Ethics

The seriousness of this situation is well recognized by leaders of church and state. We hear appeals

from the pulpit, the lecture platform, from educators and from public officials. Here are a few taken atrandom from the public press:

"Put Christ in the marketplace." "How are we to evangelize economics?"

"Application of the Golden Rule would give the world international peace and individual well being.

What a sad commentary on our rationality, that we have not attained the wit to apply the principle!"

A member of the British Parliament once said: "I believe that the British Parliament and the British

nation, if they really believe in the Gospel and in doing to others as they would be done unto, couldlead the world in a new campaign."

A ruler in India says: "Scientists, doctors, engineers, social reformers, religious seers, all are making

things new, but selfishness, race hatred, narrow nationalism, and greed have thrown all into chaos. . . .

Our economic and political problems are ethical and spiritual problems."

One churchman says: "Application of the principles of Christ by 'civilized' nations would end the

existence of struggles with which we are now confronted." And another writes: "Until business isconverted and conducted in the sight of God, . . . no change in technique will be of paramount

value. . . . Moral standards everywhere have been challenged and sometimes discredited."

And what is the effect of these appeals?

We read on other pages of the same publications that crime is increasing. In the early thirties, the total

cost of crime in the United States was estimated at 13 billion dollars per year. In 1940 the figure had

risen to 15 billion. By way of contrast, the estimated total cost of all education from kindergartenthrough college, public and private, reported to the United States Office of Education in 1931-32 was

approximately 3 billion. The cost of crime was five times that of education.

The means used to reform criminals have not been successful. A large percentage return to crime after

release. One investigator reports that out of 923 boys, who had been given various kinds of reformtreatment by juvenile courts, 88% had continued their delinquency during the first five years after

treatment. In another case 510 men who had spent time in a reformatory were investigated and it was

found that 80% of them were still continuing their criminal careers.

A professor of pediatrics at one of our large universities expresses the opinion that a criminal is verymuch like an ordinary individual, who strives to satisfy his comforts and desires, but, failing to achieve

his purpose or to accept his limited circumstances, he resorts to aggressive methods. Many persons who

are situated in high places would do the same were it not for their favored position which gives them,

without the need for aggression, the comforts and pleasures that they desire.


5/34

It has been suggested that more education would solve our problems. Our public schools and colleges

are making great efforts to prepare youth for honest and useful lives and if it were not for these efforts

conditions in the world would undoubtedly be much worse than they are. But education has not solved

our ethical problems and has not proved a guarantee against wrong action. The knowledge acquiredthrough education can be used to promote selfishness as well as human welfare. The wrongdoer is not

always stupid or ignorant; he often shows a great deal of intelligence and in some cases he has had a

good education.The appeal to follow religion, to apply the Golden Rule in daily life may have some effect on thosewho are naturally inclined to right action, but it is evident that it has little or no effect on the selfish

type.

If these teachings had been effective, we would not have had a world war followed after a brief period

by a second one.

Why then do ethical teachings have so little effect in the world? Surely, the fault cannot lie in the

doctrines themselves for almost anyone will admit that the "Sermon on the Mount" and the "Golden

Rule" contain teachings which would transform this earth into a paradise if they were only applied in

daily life. Even a depraved nature would probably agree to this. Why is it, then, that in spite of the

efforts continued throughout the centuries they are no nearer to a realization than they were 2000 yearsago? Is it not precisely because of the unsolved problem of injustice? Is it not because men feel, when

they notice the injustice in human life, that the ethical teachings of religion, although beautiful, are nottrue since they fail to work in practice? If a good man has the courage to apply them, a selfish man will

take advantage of him. The unselfish will "sow good seeds" and the selfish will step in and reap a good

harvest without any sowing and so it does not seem to be true that "whatsoever a man soweth that shallhe also reap," and therefore men lose faith and give up trying.

We notice that ethical teachings are often given in the form of injunctions or commands, encouraging

unselfishness and right action. They seem to harmonize with the law of cause and effect, as for example

the statement: "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap," but they are not backed by anyphilosophical explanation of how the reaping is done. A spiritual appeal may be sufficient for

spiritually-minded people, yet the modern, inquisitive man wants to know the "why" and the "how"before he is willing to accept any idea and act upon it.

If we could only add to ethical teachings an explanation showing what they are based on, we wouldsatisfy man's inquisitive mind and thus make the ideas acceptable to the skeptic. If we could show that

man's actions are governed by laws that are just as sweeping and just as unerring as the laws that

govern material nature; if we could show that ethics have a philosophical as well as a spiritual basis,

then the appeal to man's spiritual nature would no longer be in vain, for it would also appeal to man'smind.

When is Selfishness Profitable?

If justice governs human life we shall reap what we sow. If we shall reap what we sow it is to our ownadvantage to sow good seeds. The more good seeds we sow the greater will be our harvest of good. In

due time our acts will return to us. If our acts are of a beneficial nature and helpful to others, the returnthat comes to us will be beneficial also. Under these conditions it is simply good business policy, plain

common sense to practice altruism. It may seem that this is putting ethics on a very low plane, but it

just cannot be helped that it "pays" to do right and that ethics and common sense coincide if justicegoverns our lives.

Again, if justice governs human life and we shall reap what we sow, it follows that selfishness or any


6/34

kind of wrongdoing can never be to our own advantage, for the evil effects of such actions will in the

course of time return to us and we ourselves shall have to experience the suffering we cause others. To

do an injury to another under such conditions is to do an injury to oneself. If we defraud others, we

shall become the victims of fraud. Whatever has been gained by such fraud must in the course of timebe returned to the victim. If we use violence and bring injury and death to others, exactly the same will

happen to us. We do not want to reap evil; no one in his right mind does. The only way to avoid reaping

evil is to avoid sowing evil. Under such circumstances any wrong doing, any act that will bring injuryand suffering on others, not only does not "pay," but is detrimental to our own self-interest. Any person

capable of straight thinking would shun such actions as he would shun the fire. Here, then, is an appeal

to the selfish man, which the selfish man can understand: "Do good: it is sure to bring dividends. Avoidevil and you will escape future trouble." Whatever push we give to the pendulum, the pendulum will

return to us.

A burglar would not break into a house if he knew that a dozen policemen were on the inside waiting to

catch him. A man would not try his luck at the gambling table if he knew that the roulette wheel wasfixed so that he could notwin. There would be nothing gained by trying in either case. A knowledge

that we shall reap what we sow would have the same restraining effect and keep man from doing wrong

for he would realize the folly of bringing trouble on himself.

Selfishness or any kind of wrongdoing can be profitable only if chance rules our lives; only if it ispossible to sidestep and avoid the effects of such wrong doing. In that case it would be possible to take

advantage of others and to reap benefits which we had not sown and to do harm to others without

having to experience the evil effects of such action. It is not difficult to see that those who practice

wrongdoing believe that chance rules their lives. A politician who betrays the trust placed in him, abusiness man or financier who defrauds others, a gangster who kills his rivals, a dictator who inflicts

suffering on his fellow men, an aggressor nation that oppresses its weaker neighbors, one and all base

their actions on a belief that they can escape the effects of their evil doing. If they realized that theywould have to suffer as they had caused others to suffer, they would act differently, for they would not

want to inflict this on themselves. Their actions are proof that they believe in chance and not in justice,

no matter what they may say to the contrary.

If men were convinced that their lives are governed by justice and not by chance, then the appeals ofethics and religion urging men to altruistic action would no longer be in vain. Man's innate, better

nature, which prompts him to unselfishness, would be reinforced by his knowledge that such action is

to his own advantage and that selfishness is to his disadvantage. Only a person lacking intelligence andcommon sense would act selfishly under such circumstances.

It may now be seen how vital to man's welfare and the future of civilization is a solution of the problem

of injustice, as all wrong-doing is based on a disbelief in justice. A belief in justice brings out the

advantages of unselfishness and the disadvantages of selfishness so clearly that it becomes an incentivefor right action, while at the same time it removes the incentive for wrongdoing. If then we can show

that justice rules our lives, we shall have taken the first step towards a solution of the problem of

selfishness and crime.

Let us now turn to the main question: "Does Chance or Justice rule our Lives?" and seek an answer byexamining nature and man and by reasoning from such data as we may be able to gather.

THE MATERIAL WORLD

From CHEMISTRY we learn that certain atoms of one element combined with a fixed number of


7/34

atoms of another element will produce a molecule of a new substance in a fixed relation to the original

elements. The same ingredients will produce the same result every time. The result never varies. The

same causes always produce the same effects.

In PHYSICS we learn that if a body falls in space its velocity will increase with a uniform acceleration.After a certain number of seconds we will have a certain velocity and after so many more seconds

another corresponding velocity, always the same for the same number of seconds. The force of gravity

follows definite laws.

Many of the laws of ELECTRICITY are known and the electric current is always found to act the sameway under the same circumstances. In other words, effect here also follows cause with absolute

regularity.

Examples could be multiplied almost indefinitely. Heat, light, sound, all are governed by laws well

known to any student of these subjects.

Turning to ASTRONOMY we find that the planets are moving in fixed orbits around the sun with suchregularity that their positions can be calculated far in advance. The sun, again, with its family of planets

moves in a greater orbit of its own, and further, our entire "home-universe," the Galaxy, seems to travel

on a still grander pathway.

As far as we have been able to investigate we have found a reign of law, order and harmony among thestars and planets in space. They all move in accordance with the law of gravitation. What may at first

appear as a departure from this law is found upon closer investigation to be in full accord with it. At

one time, for instance, Uranus was considered the outermost planet in the solar system. By carefulobservations and calculations, astronomers found that Uranus did not strictly follow the path that it

should have taken if influenced only by the sun and the other known planets. This aroused the

suspicion that there might be another, unknown body in the solar system which caused the irregularities

in Uranus' orbit. Calculations were then made to find the location and mass of a body which wouldproduce such irregularities, and the planet Neptune was discovered. What at first looked like a defect in

the operation of the gravitational force turned out to be a demonstration of its perfect dependability.

Astronomers tell us that gravitation acts throughout the whole of space, that every body in space exertsa pull on every other body, no matter how far apart they may be, and that its action is so perfect that wecannot move a finger but what this motion affects all the stars.

We are also told that the length of the day as determined from eclipse observations extending over

some 3000 years has not varied as much as one one-hundredth of a second during this long period.

There are many other interesting facts furnished us by Astronomy which demonstrate the extremeregularity with which the celestial bodies move in space and thus prove the reign of law in this

department of Nature.

Wherever man has been able to subject Nature's forces to rigid tests he has found that these forces obey

certain invariable laws and that under the same conditions they will always produce the same effect. It

has often happened in early experiments that irregularities appeared in the results, but that later andmore carefully conducted experiments showed that these irregularities were due to causes that were at

first overlooked and that when all contributing causes were taken into account, there were noirregularities in the entire process.

There are of course many phenomena of Nature that are not yet understood, but past experience

indicates that, as our knowledge increases it will be found that these phenomena are also governed by

the law of cause and effect.


8/34

THE MENTAL PLANE

It is not easy for man to determine what thoughts are or how they operate, for they are not of a material

nature and therefore cannot be examined by man's five senses. As a result our knowledge of the mental

plane is very limited as compared to that of the physical plane. Certain mental processes, however, suchas used in mathematical work, can be studied directly.

In GEOMETRY, for instance, by starting from a few axioms, or self-evident truths, we can demonstrate

certain other truths that are not so self-evident. The mental process is one of placing together certain

facts and showing that from these other facts must follow. In other words, the process is governed by alaw of cause and effect. Who would know, for instance, by simply looking at the figure of a right angle

triangle with squares drawn on its three sides, that the square on the hypotenuse equals the sum of the

squares on the other two sides? Yet this has been demonstrated from a few simple axioms by such a

step-by-step method of reasoning as above referred to. We are so sure of the absolute truth of thisproposition that, if we measure the areas referred to and find a slight inequality, we know that this error

is due to faulty measurements, and not to an error in the proposition. The latter is proved without a

chance for an argument.

To use another illustration: when we sit down to play a game of chess, we reason about the various

moves and the consequences that will follow from each. Every new move makes a new combination ofcauses and the possible effects are all in exact relation to the new set of causes. An experienced player

will be able to trace in his mind the chain of cause and effect for several moves in advance. Aninexperienced player will only see a few of the effects that follow from a certain move. The entire game

might be said to be a mental exercise with the visible pieces simply aids to the memory of what has

been done and furnishing starting points for the mind to work from. All the mental processes involvedconsist in tracing the relations between causes and their effects.

We can form some idea of the nature and operations of thoughts from the effects they produce on the

material plane.

An inventor holds in his mind a certain idea and builds around it a mental picture of a machine that will

make this idea workable. Then he proceeds to make drawings as the next step and finally he hasexperienced mechanics build the machine to these drawings. A change in the idea will result in a

change in the machine. Here, then, there is an orderly sequence of events: a cause on the mental plane,

a thought, expresses itself as an effect on the material plane, a machine.

Mathematics, or the science of numbers, is the basis of engineering, and engineering is the basis ofconstruction. A bridge or a skyscraper cannot be built without mathematical analysis and calculations.

Here it may be said that the physical forms are based on numbers.

The painting of the artist is but the physical effect of a thought or an image in the artist's mind.

In many instances we can trace relations between forms, sounds and other manifestations on one hand

and numbers or mathematical expressions on the other. Every algebraic expression can be represented

by a corresponding curve. A different expression will have a different curve, but each curve isinvariably fixed and determined by its own equation.

The musical scale is built upon a series of numbers. The variations in sound depend on varying wave

lengths and frequencies of vibrations. And again there is a relation between sounds and material forms.This may be seen if a thin metal disc, fixed at its center and sprinkled with fine sand, is caused to

vibrate by the bow of a violin drawn against its edge. If two points on the edge are kept stationary, the

sand will assume a certain pattern, a symmetrical and beautiful design. If the distance between the twostationary points is varied, the sand will assume a different pattern. Thus the form changes when the

vibration varies. The change in the vibration is directly related to the number of vibrations per second.


9/34

Here, then, is a relation between numbers or mental concepts and physical forms, the patterns in the

sand.

The tones of an organ will cause vibrations in a building that can be plainly felt. Low notes will cause

stronger vibrations than high ones. In the Alps, avalanches of snow have been started by the sound of ahuman voice. A steamer whistle blown in the neighborhood of a glacier will, by its vibrations, cause

immense blocks of ice to break off and drop into the ocean. A shrill sound would not produce the same

effect. In each of these instances a change in the number of vibrations produced a difference in theeffect, showing that there is a relation between numbers and effects on the physical plane.

The illustrations given above show that there is a relation between the mental plane and the material

plane and that phenomena on the material plane may be affected by causes on the mental plane. It

seems that we are beginning to trace vaguely the "laws" that govern the material plane back to some

underlying principles on the mental plane. Where we can make a theoretical calculation and check theresult by corresponding measurements on the physical plane, we find a close agreement. If the

calculation is based on a true theory we know that the calculated result is more accurate than the

measured one.

If the material plane is governed by law, as scientific investigation indicates, is it not reasonable to

assume that the mental plane, which seems to be the basis of the material plane, must also be governedby law?

The thought that the mental is the basis for the material has been held from remotest antiquity by some

of the greatest intellects. Pythagoras taught that "the Universe is built on numbers." Plato said: "Godgeometrizes." Sir James Jeans, the modern astronomer, suggests that "the Great Architect of the

Universe now begins to appear as a pure mathematician" and also that "the universe begins to look

more like a great thought than like a great machine."

We know that our thoughts affect our emotions, and medical science tells us that the emotions have apowerful influence on the body. A person may die from an excessive grief or joy. Happiness or anger

can be aroused by thinking of past events that were pleasant or unpleasant. These thoughts and

emotions, if harbored continually, will in time affect the expression of a person's face. Grief and worrywill lower the vitality and interfere with digestion.

In summarizing our observations on the mental plane, we find:

1st. -- Those mental processes which can be checked directly, such as used in mathematics, show an

absolute and most perfect relation between cause and effect.

2nd. -- Those actions on the mental plane, which can be traced by their effect on the physical plane,show a distinct relation between physical effect and mental cause.

3rd. -- Since theoretical calculations are known to be more exact than physical measurements, it seems

reasonable to conclude that the laws that govern the mental plane are, if possible, still more rigid, or at

any rate no less rigid than those which govern the material plane.

4th. -- There are cases where we are unable to trace effects of mental causes either on the mental ormaterial plane, on account of our limited knowledge. There is, however, nothing to prove that such

effects do not follow, even if they may be long delayed. Such researches as we have been able to make

show the mental plane to be governed by the Law of Cause and Effect.


10/34

A UNIVERSAL MIND

So far we have built our reasoning on more or less direct observation. There is some indirect evidence

which may be helpful to us.

Having found such wonderful reign of law and order in every field that we are capable of exploring, it

is only natural that we should ask ourselves the question: Who or What laid down the "plan" or "framedthe laws" or principles which seem to govern the processes of Nature? The orderly working of Nature

could not have sprung into existence spontaneously or accidentally. There must have been someone or

something, an intelligence or intelligences of a superior kind that did the planning, and formulated thelaws according to which Nature operates. We seem justified in this assumption, because we know from

our own experience on a small scale that even the simplest work requires planning. A heap of building

materials will not turn into a house without an architect to draw a plan and experienced builders to

shape the material and construct the building. On the contrary, we know for a fact that, if a beautifulbuilding is to be erected, first the design must be beautiful and then the workmanship must be perfect.

And we further know that if there is anything lacking in the plan or in the workmanship, the finished

building will show it.

A railroad system could not operate successfully without a time-schedule, train dispatchers and a vast

organization of cooperating officials and workers, and back of all this is a unified plan. This plan didnot come into existence by itself. It was the product of some mind or some minds that formulated it and

drew up the rules or "laws" of operation.

When we look at a building, the architect may not be on hand to answer our questions regarding it, butwe can judge something about him from the building itself. When we travel on a train we do not see the

operating staff, but we can judge something about this also by the service we receive. And so it is with

the Universe; we dwell in it; we are "passengers" on one of its planets, but the Power that planned it isnot on hand to answer our questions. However, if we could judge something about the architect by

examining the house, and something about the railroad management by observing its operation, it

should be possible for us to draw some conclusions regarding the Power back of the Universe by astudy of that Universe, for "the work reveals its Creator." We have to admit our inability to get a full

understanding of this Power or these Powers, for man's finite, limited mind cannot comprehendsomething so vastly superior to itself. This inability to get a full understanding should not, however,

prevent man from using such powers of observation and reason as he may possess to gain at least suchpartial understanding as he is capable of. People of all ages have sensed the existence of such Power or

Powers and referred to them under many different names. The Hindus call it BRAHMAN; Emerson

called it the OVERSOUL. Ancient philosophies state that it is infinite and hence cannot be personifiedor limited by any human description. While there are probably no two human beings that would fully

agree in their understanding of it, yet most people will in all likelihood grant that there must be such a

Power or Powers. Agreeing to disagree as to its exact nature, let us for the purpose of this discussionrefer to this power or these powers by the term: God.* Judging God,* then, by His work, we have seen

that He was able to lay down a plan according to which all nature works, from the miniature universe

of the atom to the star-clusters in space, millions of light-years distant. From the magnitude of thework, we cannot fail to recognize the infinite greatness and power of its Originator. We have further

seen that God* formulated unvarying laws that govern the operations of Nature so that there is always

an exact relation between cause and effect in these. From this we must conclude that order, law and

harmony are attributes of God.*

*In the following discussion the asterisk (*) is used with the word God* in order to call

attention to this footnote and to the fact that this word is not here used in any sectarian or

limited sense or as referring to a personal God, but is used for want of a better word to

allude to that Power or those Powers behind Time and Space, which man seems compelled


11/34

to postulate as the unseen Cause of the Universe.

A Power that can construct such a marvelous Universe, could just as well destroy it with all the life that

it contains, if it were so disposed. But the universe evidently has endured for countless ages -- andNature provides food and other necessities to sustain life. Therefore God* must be beneficent in His

purposes. These are some of the conclusions we can draw about God* by observing His work which we

see around us.May we not by analogy draw some further conclusions regarding other attributes of God?*

A cell in our body is a living entity with evidently a certain kind of intelligence and a certain degree of

free will, but in general regulating its life according to the laws that govern the body as a whole.

We can understand considerable about the cell, but the cellcan know very little about us. The lesser

cannot comprehend the greater in its fullness. Is it reasonable to assume that the cell possesses greaterqualities than the man of whose body the cell is a part? Is it not more reasonable to conclude that any

power which may be inherent in the cell will also be found in the man and found there in a much higher

degree of perfection?

Man is but a cell, or less than a cell, in the great body of the Universe. Is it not reasonable then to

assume that any faculty that exists in man must also exist in the "soul of the universe," in God*? Andfurther, is it not reasonable to suppose that the degree of perfection of the qualities of God* must be as

far superior to the degree of perfection of man's qualities as the "works" of God,* the Universe, are to

the works of man? God* then must possess all human virtues in their highest degree of perfection.Among human beings we respect such qualities as intelligence, justice, and love. A man who lacked

these characteristics would not be held in high esteem by his fellows. If these qualities are necessary in

the make-up of a good man, must they not also be necessary in the make-up of God*? To assumeotherwise would be to assume that man possessed qualities greater than God.*

For the purpose of the present discussion let us consider only one of these qualities -- that of justice.

In all ages justice has been considered one of the great virtues. We cannot think highly of a man who is

not just. From time immemorial all peoples have made laws and established courts for theadministration of justice. Man-made laws are imperfect; frequently their administration has beenimperfect also, but with all that, all men recognize justice as an ideal to be striven after.

If justice, then, is such a necessary quality in our ideal of a good man, is it not still more necessary to

our conception of God*? To assume the contrary would be to place God* on a lower level than a good

man.

Parents who love their children and desire their welfare, know how necessary it is to show justice and

impartiality in training them. They know that training cannot be successful if inconsistent and

contradictory methods are used. They know that certain rules of conduct, with suitable rewards and

punishments affixed, must be set up and consistently adhered to, until the children learn by repeated

experiences. They know that if they punished an act today and rewarded the same act tomorrow, thechild would become confused. It would not know what was right or wrong and would soon give up all

effort at self-improvement.

If this is true for the family, it is equally true for the human race as a whole. Absolute justice or aperfect reign of orderly laws of cause and effect are necessary for the growth and development of

human character. If justice were imperfect, or if chance ruled in human affairs, men would become

confused and discouraged. They would consider it useless to strive towards self-improvement if theirefforts counted for nothing and they would sooner or later give up trying.


12/34

If then man recognizes the necessity for justice in character development, must not this necessity be

still more fully recognized by God*? A God* without justice would be an absurdity, for it would

indicate such a flaw in His nature that it would place Him below the ideal for a good man. As man is

more perfect than the cell, so God* must be more perfect than man.

An assumption that God* might have wished to provide for justice in the world, but was unable to

formulate and establish laws of cause and effect that would be workable and binding in all details of

human life, is untenable. A God* that can lay down and enforce laws of cause and effect that operateunfailingly in the physical world has also the ability to lay down laws that will work unerringly inhuman life.

An assumption that justice rules in the world to a certain limited extent, but that it is not perfect in all

details, is also untenable. Imperfect justice is after all not justice. If it is justice at all, it must be 100%

perfect. This is man's ideal and nothing less can be the ideal of God.*

On the basis of this Universe being the result of intelligent planning, then, we are forced to the

conclusion that justice must be a part of the Universal Plan.

LIFE MUST HAVE A MEANING

We may not all agree that there must be some purpose in life, but probably most people feel that this is

so. It does not make sense to assume that the only purpose of life is for man to spend a few score ofyears here on earth, pass through some commonplace experiences and perhaps a few odd ones, and

then vanish without any permanent benefit resulting from the experience. Such performance would

seem so futile, so useless that it would probably be rejected by most people, who feel that there must be

some higher purpose in life. And what could such purpose be but growth, evolution, the gradual risinginto some higher state of consciousness and life, a pilgrimage towards perfection?

If we are to become perfect, if we are to learn by experience, law and order in the universe around us

are necessary for this purpose. We find that we are surrounded by law and order; but we are so

accustomed to the orderly processes of Nature that we often overlook their existence. We take them forgranted and do not recognize that life as we know it would be impossible if Nature did not operate

according to law.

Suppose gravitation suddenly ceased to act. If we dropped a stone, instead of falling to the ground it

might go up in the air, or remain suspended, or perhaps shoot off to one side, nobody knows in whatdirection. A railroad train might leave the track any minute and start off into space; water might run

uphill; buildings would not stay on their foundations, in fact they could not be built for there would be

no weight to keep one brick on top of the next. Complete chaos would result, for nothing would "stayput." It would be impossible to plan or provide ahead for anything, for no two times would the same

effect follow from the same cause and there would be no experience to be guided by.

On the basis that life has a meaning, that it is a school, wherein man learns by experience, the existenceof law and an orderly sequence of cause and effect are necessities.

HUMAN LIFE

Let us now turn our attention to the field of human relations; how men act towards one another and theeffects that follow their actions. Also to those events and experiences that life deals out to us, and over


13/34

which we have little or no control, such as circumstances of birth, inborn capacities, "luck," accidents,

etc. -- or what we might summarize under the term "Human Life."

Is there an orderly sequence of cause and effect here? Is there a reign of justice and law that governs

our lives? Do men's actions always and unerringly bring to men their just deserts?

The most important parts of a man's life are not his physical actions and experiences, but his thoughtlife, his aspirations and longings, feelings and emotions. None of these are directly visible to others,

except occasionally in their effects. To trace a chain of cause and effect in human life is therefore very

difficult, for men's motives and the links that connect causes with their effects are largely concealedfrom our view. Let us, however, consider some of the common experiences in life.

In certain cases of wrongdoing what would seem like appropriate effects follow, as when a person lives

a life of dissipation, or otherwise breaks the laws of health, disease often results. But this is by no

means always the case. It frequently happens that people violate many of the laws of health and abusetheir bodies without apparently being much the worse for it; whereas it frequently happens that people

who live with the most regular habits and take the best care of their bodies are overtaken by disease and

suffering, for which we can find no cause.

We often see persons who work hard all their lives to provide for their families and lay up a little store

for their old age. In many cases they are successful in their efforts, but they often meet unexpectedreverses and the work of a lifetime is lost. Other people may be shiftless and irresponsible; in that case

they usually do not get far, but it frequently happens that they have "good luck" and fare better than

many who work hard and conscientiously.

Occasionally we see striking examples of "luck," good or bad, as the case may be. One person will be

pursued by ill luck and will lose his fortune, perhaps accumulate another and then lose that also,

seemingly through no fault of his own. Another person makes no great effort to accumulate wealth, but

money seems to "fall into his lap." We have read of cases where the owner of some apparentlyworthless land became rich overnight when oil was discovered on his property.

Almost anyone can cite similar instances from his own knowledge.

Take the matter of acting according to one's conscience in, say, a case where a contrary action would

promise a better material reward. Here the person who follows his conscience will have a certainsatisfaction in the knowledge of having acted rightly, but the one who silenced his conscience and acted

contrary to its dictates, may as a result have enjoyed a material advantage in gaining wealth, position or

power. Here "luck" or chance seems to play a part, and if the wrong act is not found out, the actor may

end his days in full enjoyment of the respect of his fellow men plus the added wealth and position thatwould never have come to him if he had obeyed his conscience.

Consider the life of a criminal. In some cases the first act of wrongdoing is discovered and the man is

punished according to human law. Here again the personnel of the jury, the character of the judge, and

the ability of the attorneys may have a great influence on the severity of the sentence and thus the

punishment may be greater or less according to the court before which the prisoner happens to be tried.Another criminal may commit many crimes before he is discovered; or if he is very "lucky," as we say,

he may escape detection altogether and may end his days as a respected member of society.

In the illustrations given above it could be noticed that man's actions towards his fellows perhaps moreoften than not brought the results they merited, but it was equally noticeable that in many cases the

appropriate effects did not follow. In fact, wrong could often be done without the wrong-doer suffering

the consequences of his acts. From this it would seem quite possible at times to sow without having to

reap.


14/34

The circumstances in which men are placed at birth certainly have a great influence on their lives.

Some men are born into families where the moral atmosphere is of the best. The influence of the home

tends to build up and strengthen a noble character in the child. The financial circumstances may be

favorable and the child may receive a good education. Influential relations and friends will use theirpower to aid the individual and the combination of all these circumstances will certainly be a great help

towards an honorable life later on.

Other men may be born in circumstances which are the opposite of those cited. In their case the homeinfluence tends to degrade the character. The examples of the grownups may be an education in crimefor the child. His direction is wrong from the start. The circumstances were against him; "he had no

chance," we say.

It may be argued that a man's character is the greatest determining factor in his life, and that individuals

with strong characters have been born in the most degrading circumstances, but in spite of all obstacleshave lived noble lives and been of great service to their fellow men. But the fact remains that on less

strong characters these unfavorable circumstances have a very detrimental effect. Hence the

circumstances of birth constitute serious obstacles to faith in justice.

Children who are born and brought up under the same circumstances show great differences in health,

character, disposition and natural talents or gifts. Some of these differences may be modified byeducation, but even education cannot greatly alter the dissimilarities that exist from birth. In some cases

a child will be possessed of a healthy body, a strong character, an intelligent mind, and a pleasant,winning disposition which will prove a great aid on his path through life. Another child is born without

these gifts and may indeed be burdened with a sickly body, a weak, vacillating character, a dull mind

and a sullen, irritable disposition, all of which may be serious hindrances to a life of happiness andservice.

The circumstances outlined above have perhaps been the extremes in both the favorable and

unfavorable direction, but of course there are all grades and conditions between these two. Whether

extreme or moderate, such differences all indicate an element of injustice.

Accidents have a way of striking right and left without any apparent cause. Sometimes a recklessperson will meet with an accident, but very often the most cautious and careful individual will also be

struck. One person may go on some wild adventure and return without a scratch. Another may stay at

home, trip on a rug and break his neck. One person plans to take a trip on a certain steamer. There is atraffic jam on the way to the wharf which causes him to miss his connection. Another person had no

intention of taking this boat, but by some unexpected turn of events was caused to take the trip. The

steamer is wrecked and all on board are lost. Here chance seemed to be the deciding element.

Summarizing our observations of human life we note that whereas man's actions sometimes bringappropriate effects, they often do not.

Unless we choose to ignore the evidence, we must admit that within the span of one human life here on

earth perfect justice simply does not exist, but chance and injustice do play a large part.

LAW OR CHANCE?

Let us now review our earlier observations and see how the evidence stands.

In the material world we found a most perfect reign of the Law of Cause and Effect.

On the mental plane we found a perfect reign of law wherever we were able to investigate.


15/34

We found that if there is a God* and an intelligent plan back of the Universe, justice and law must be

parts of this plan.

We also found that if the purpose of life is evolution, growth and an advancement towards perfection,

law and justice are necessary to achieve this end.

In addition to this our moral nature, our sense of "the fitness of things," tells us that there must be lawand justice in the Universe.

When we consider human life we find on one hand that the majority of human actions are governed by

justice, but also on the other hand that much chance and injustice seem to operate in human affairs.

To summarize: we find that the evidence in favor of law and justice is overwhelming, but it is not

100%.

The injustice apparent in human life, then, is the "fly in the ointment," the flaw in what otherwiseseems such a perfect plan. It is this which undermines our faith in justice and in God.*

Two alternate theories present themselves in explanation of these injustices: either (1) these events

actually do happen without due cause, or (2) they are effects of causes which we cannot see.

1st Alternative

If the first proposition is true, then Human Life would be an exception to the general plan of Nature.

Even though we human beings are a part of Nature, our actions would be outside of the law and orderwhich governs the rest of Nature. Law, symmetry, harmony, order everywhere in Nature; but Human

Life in contrast to all the rest subject to disorder, confusion, chance. This would mean that the laws of

the Universe would not be universal; they would apply in spots but not everywhere.

Would we accept such a proposition in regard to other matters with which we are more familiar? Wouldwe not, for instance, consider it absurd to claim that gravitation works in parts of the Universe, but

breaks down and fails to operate in other parts?

When we turn the switch that controls the light in the ceiling we know that the electric current travels

over wires concealed in the wall and reaches the bulb where the light appears. We know that there is noaccident or chance connected with the entire operation. But suppose that a primitive man were

suddenly transported from his obscure jungle and placed in our midst; how would he view the sudden

appearance and disappearance of the light in the ceiling, especially if the switch were located in anotherroom? He would know nothing about the electric current, or the wires concealed in the wall. He might

think that the light came on or off by chance.

Not so long ago we too were ignorant of the laws governing electricity. How would the light

phenomenon have appeared to us then? With our present knowledge we are unable to trace theconnection between chance-events in Human Life and their causes, but shall we say that, because we

are unable to trace the wires hidden in the wall that there are no such wires and that there can be none?

Are we justified in smiling at the ignorance and lack of logic on the part of our jungle man if we take aposition similar to his? Would it not be more reasonable to take the stand that, since the Universe is

governed by the law of cause and effect in other departments, human actions and experiences must also

be governed by this law, and recognize that what to us appears as chance because we cannot see the

hidden cause, must be the result of the thoughts and acts of individuals, who thereby reap what theyhave sown in the past? Let us then consider the second alternative and see if it is not more logical than

the first.


16/34

2nd Alternative

A scientist, who is confronted with a phenomenon which he does not understand, will not accept

chance as an explanation. Knowing that it must follow certain laws, he starts to investigate and

experiment to discover these. If he is successful in his search he traces the event back to its cause. If heis not successful, he still does not believe that the phenomenon was the result of chance, but trusts that

future research will reveal the underlying cause.

A few centuries back man knew very little of the law that governs gravitation, but Sir Isaac Newton'sinvestigations resulted in his formulating this law. Of course this law existed from time immemorialand had been operating before it was discovered just as much as afterwards, but, as far as being

recognized by man is concerned, it was non-existent until formulated by Newton.

Newton's third law of motion states that: "to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction," and

this statement has been tested experimentally and found to be a fact in regard to material bodies. Inhuman affairs action and reaction would be equal and opposite if a man's acts returned to him,

meanness for meanness, service for service, injury for injury, kindness for kindness. If it is true in

material things that "action and reaction are equal and opposite," may not the same be true regardinghuman actions also, and how do we know but what some future "Isaac Newton" will find some way of

demonstrating this experimentally?Our astronomers tell us that the Universe (on its material side) is so marvelously balanced, that cause

and effect are so delicately and accurately adjusted, that if we move a finger, the effect of this motion isfelt on the farthest star in space.

If gravitation can bridge the inconceivable distances of space and, without visible connection, link a

cause on our earth with an effect on the farthest star, why should it be any more unreasonable to assume

that there is some other force or principle, attraction or repulsion, some invisible wiring that links ourthoughts and our deeds with their effects? If gravitation operates unaffected across space, why should

not this other force act independent of time and outward circumstances? Surely the latter assumption is

no more unreasonable than the former, and if Nature can provide the mechanism in one case, it can alsoprovide the mechanism in the other.

In human affairs we may have to leave the full explanation of how effect is linked to cause, the wire-

tracing, to future research. But may it not be possible that an advancing science will some day trace the

wires that are now concealed from us and solve this problem as it has solved so many others in thepast?

Perhaps investigators of the future will have at their disposal more sensitive instruments than we have,

or perhaps man will evolve faculties within his own nature that will enable him to see directly and

without the need of any instruments the connection between cause and effect everywhere.

In our present state of ignorance we have to admit our inability to follow the chain of causation and tolink the cause to the effect, but in view of all past experience is it not reasonable that we should

recognize that such a chain must exist?If, then, we accept the idea that such a chain of causation exists, and while we are waiting for a

complete demonstration of how it operates, let us use the method of the scientist who seeks to solve hisproblem. He examines all the known facts before him and then casts about for a theory or a working

hypothesis which fits these facts and also explains the phenomenon which he is investigating.

As new discoveries are made, the theory is checked with these and altered if it no longer fits the facts,

or perhaps it is completely discarded for a new and better theory.

If, then, the law of cause and effect governs human affairs, it should be possible to find a theory which


17/34

explains how it operates.

What are the requirements which such a theory must fulfill?

Does Chance or Justice Rule Our Lives? by Nils A. Amneus

Theosophical University Press Online Edition

Part 2

Requirements of Theory

An Ancient Doctrine

Survival After Death

Existence Before Birth

Delayed Effects

Is Reincarnation True?

Beneficial Effects

Are Ethical Teachings Practical?

Summary

Return to Part 1

REQUIREMENTS OF THEORY

If we examine the events of chance and injustice in human life we notice that they can be grouped

under two general headings:

1st -- "Uncontrolled events" or those over which the individual has no control, but which apparently

come to him without any action on his part, such as inherited health or disease, favorable orunfavorable circumstances of birth and inborn characteristics, that help or hinder him. To this group

belong accidents and also such experiences as are forced on us by the actions of other people, for weare often affected by the deeds of others, even though we have no control over them.

2nd -- "Controlled events" or those acts performed intentionally by the man himself, which were not

followed by their appropriate effects, such as wrongdoing that brought no suffering in its train, and

efforts for good that bore no fruit.

Let us first seek an explanation for the "uncontrolled events" of group 1.
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#requirementshttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#ancienthttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#survivalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#existencehttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#delayedhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#ishttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#beneficialhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#arehttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#summaryhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htmhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#requirementshttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#ancienthttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#survivalhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#existencehttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#delayedhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#ishttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#beneficialhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#arehttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj2.htm#summaryhttp://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/chance/dcj1.htm


18/34

Uncontrolled Events

Evidently there are two explanations possible if these events obey the law of cause and effect.

(a) Either the injustice of these events may be balanced in some existence after death;

(b) Or these events are the effects of acts performed by the individual himself during some existence

before birth.

Which is the more logical of these two explanations?

If the soul begins its existence with birth into a human body, then the individual is in no wayresponsible for the conditions in which birth places him. And yet, these conditions have a powerful

influence for good or ill on his destiny, and at death he is a better or a worse man partly due to these

conditions. Even if it is true that this injustice may be balanced in a future life, the man's character mayin the meantime have been made worse and this is a new injustice following from the first.

Further, we cannot help asking: What is the purpose of all this difference in opportunities? Why must

we endure all this injustice in the first place? Some people believe that it is the "will of God."* Could

that be true?

An average human being would not intentionally show such partiality, unfairness, and cruelty to hischildren even if he planned to adjust it later. It would be meaningless to do so.

A loving human father would at least try to do the best he could for his children, and if he could do well

by one he could do as well by the others also, and he would certainly give them allthe bestchance.

And surely a beneficent God* would do no less for His children. He would see to it that one and all ofHis children would have the best possible start in life.

We cannot therefore explain the inequalities that come to us at birth as "the will of God"* for this

would place God* below the level of even an ordinary human being. Further, it would be utterly

meaningless to impose such injustice first, only to balance it later. No intelligent human being wouldaccept responsibility for such a headless plan; how then could it be charged to God*?

Therefore, we have to admit that the inequalities of birth cannot be explained by a balancing after deathfor this would be both unjust and meaningless.

The only alternative now left open to explain the inequalities of birth and other "uncontrolled events" isthat the individual himself must have existed previous to birth. In that case all the chance-events of life

can be explained as the effects of actions which the individual himself performed during some such

previous existence.

There is no violation of justice in this proposition. In the light of this idea, the chain of cause and effectcan readily be seen. This will be developed more in detail later on.

Controlled Events

Next let us pass on to the "controlled events" under group 2. Under this heading come the acts of theman himself, which did not bring their appropriate effects in this life.

If justice is to be done in this case, then death cannot be the end of our existence for this would

preclude the balancing of justice. The wrongdoer would escape the results of his evil acts. The suicide

would be able to step out of the difficulties that surround him without having to face and solve hisproblems. There is only one possibility left open. If justice is to be balanced at all, this balancing must

take place in some future existence.

One version of this idea of delayed justice is the doctrine of heaven and hell. According to this


19/34

teaching, as usually given, a man enjoys bliss or suffers tortures for eternity for the acts committed

during his life on earth. If this were true, it could not be considered just, for the effect would be out of

all proportion to the cause. Even an ordinary human being would not be so unjust; how much less then

could a beneficent and just God* inflict such punishment on His children? Punishment of this kindwould be a greater injustice than to let the wrongs of one earth life remain unbalanced.

The doctrine of eternal bliss or suffering, then, does not offer a solution that accords with justice, but a

balancing of justice does require an existence after death during which we will reap the effects of thoseacts which do not come to a fruition in this life.

A theory of life, which is in accord with justice, must therefore include both an existence prior to birth

in our present bodies and a survival after the death of the body. It must have been during some such

pre-existence that man sowed the seeds which he reaps as the inequalities of birth. It must be during

some existence after death that unbalanced causes, which he has set in motion in this life, will bebalanced.

Such a theory of life should also satisfy man's higher aspirations and longings as well as his reason and

logic. It should accord with the idea of a just and beneficent God* and it should fit in with the scheme

of evolution and some worthy purpose in life. What theory will satisfy all these requirements?

AN ANCIENT DOCTRINE

There is a very ancient doctrine, traces of which are found all over the world. It appears in the great

religions of the past, and was held by some of the early Fathers of the Christian church. It is found

under some form or another in the great philosophies of the past and has been accepted by individual

philosophers throughout the ages from the great thinkers of antiquity down to modern times.

This doctrine teaches that man's present life here on earth is only one of many such existences; that he

has lived here on earth before as a human being and that he will live here again many times in the

future in human form.

Omitting all details, and briefly sketched, this doctrine teaches that there is in man a center ofconsciousness which is a part of the Universal Consciousness. This center of consciousness, which is

the real man, is engaged in a pilgrimage of evolution, in the course of which it is born repeatedly in

human form in order to learn and advance by means of the experiences that human life offers.

This center of consciousness, this "Pilgrim" or "Monad" as it is sometimes called, has lived in humanbodies an inconceivable number of times in the past and will do so again in the future.

According to this doctrine our present earth life is like a single page in a book with hundreds, perhaps

thousands, of pages. If this single "page" is read by itself without reference to what preceded it and

without reference to what follows, it does not "make sense." It just gives a few odd fragments in the

middle of a long story; it relates events whose causes have to be looked for on earlier pages, and itdescribes happenings which will culminate in some future chapter. In order to understand the contents

of this page it is necessary to read both what precedes it and what is to follow.

According to this doctrine of repeated earth-lives, our present circumstances are the direct results of ourown acts during some former life, and the circumstances of our future lives will be the results of our

thoughts and deeds in this life. Our thoughts and acts are seeds implanted in our character which

belongs to the permanent part of our nature. When the circumstances of life are favorable, the seeds

sprout and grow and the effect of the deed reacts on the doer. This effect may follow during the samelife as the act, or it may be delayed and follow in a later life. In either case, however, it is sure to come,


20/34

for the cause and the effect are inextricably interwoven in the man's character, and sooner or later he

will reap what he has sown whether it be good or evil.

Here, then, is a doctrine that harmonizes with the general plan of repetition, which is seen everywhere

in Nature. It recognizes the inequalities of existence but shows that they are in full accord with the lawof cause and effect, and not the result of injustice or chance. It satisfies our logic and reason, for it

shows that we shall reap what we sow and it explains how and where the reaping is done.

It fits in with the scheme of evolution for it shows that, as we have had infinite opportunities for growth

in the past, we shall have infinite opportunities in the future, and hence possibilities of rising towardsperfection. It accords with the idea of a just and beneficent God*, for it shows that man's misfortunes

are not inflicted on him from outside sources, but are of his own making. It shows man that he is

individually responsible for all his acts and hence teaches him the wisdom of beneficent and

harmonious action.

This doctrine of repeated earth-lives, then, is the missing key that solves the problem of injustice in the

world.

The various aspects of this teaching are purposely omitted here, since they fall beyond the scope of the

present discussion. The whole subject is reserved for separate treatment. Only enough has been given

here to show how the doctrine solves the problem of injustice.

This doctrine of repeated earth-lives is commonly known under the name "Reincarnation" from the

Latin: re = again; in = in; and carnis = flesh; or "again in flesh," thus referring to the idea that the

indwelling consciousness has again taken upon itself a body of flesh.*

*There is a great deal of misinformation current regarding the doctrine of Reincarnation,some people even taking it to mean that man's consciousness after death enters the bodies

of animals. This is not the doctrine of Reincarnation. Evolution tends to progress, not

retrogression. Once the consciousness has reached the human stage it cannot embody itselfin anything subhuman. -- The erroneous notion that man's consciousness enters animals

after death is due to a misunderstanding of the doctrine of Transmigration.

We have found in Reincarnation, then, a theory which shows what appeared to us as injustice andchance, when seen from the view-point of a single earth life, turns out to be justice and law when seen

from the viewpoint of repeated earth-lives. We have found a theory which solves the problem of

injustice and shows that everythingin Nature, human life included, is governed by the Law of Causeand Effect.

We notice that the doctrine of Reincarnation includes the following three propositions:

(1) Pre-existence.

(2) Survival after death.

(3) Effects do not always follow immediately upon the causes that produced them, but may

sometimes be delayed.

Let us now examine these propositions to see if there is anything fundamentally unsound about any of

them, anything that is unacceptable to reason and logic.

We shall begin with survival after death.


21/34

SURVIVAL AFTER DEATH

Relation of Consciousness to Body

No physical means can be applied to investigate after-death states, hence it is impossible to bring inproofs of a material nature that man's consciousness survives death. But let us not forget that it is

equally impossible to introduce material proofs that man's consciousness perishes at death. In our

present degree of evolution we know very little about consciousness in its various states, hence we arelargely limited to such proofs as reason and analogy furnish.

However, there are certain observations which may throw some light on the subject.

Man is a physical body plus something else. This something else includes, among other things, his

feelings, desires, aspirations, his mind, etc., and finally a center of consciousness, which sits like an

observer and, to an extent, a ruler of this little kingdom which we call a human being.

This center of consciousness, this spectator of the drama of life, is the most essential part of man and

our problem simmers down to this: can and does this center of consciousness survive death?

It is evident that consciousness must have a physical body in order to contact the physical plane, since

we who are conscious on this material plane do not observe any consciousness acting outside of anysuch body.

During sleep the consciousness temporarily abandons the body. The sleeping body is merely an

animated corpse, inert and unresponsive. Where is the consciousness in the meantime? Is it destroyed?

Evidently not, for upon awakening it again begins to function as it did before sleep. Evidently it musthave had some sort of existence, the nature of which we do not understand, else it could not have

returned exactly as it was before going to sleep. The unconsciousness of sleep, then, has been a

temporary disconnection of the consciousness from the material plane, but this disunion has not

destroyed the consciousness and has caused no change in it.

There are other conditions under which the consciousness temporarily abandons the body. In case of

injury to the brain and in certain fevers and other diseases, the consciousness is unable to functionthrough its disabled instrument. It is again shut off from contact with this plane, but as soon as the

instrument is repaired, the consciousness returns and resumes its activity where it left off before theinjury. The disability of the instrument prevented the consciousness from contact with this plane, but

did not destroy the consciousness, neither did it cause any change in it.

A common fainting spell may be induced by a mental shock, a sudden fright or some physical injury,

but when the body recuperates, the consciousness returns unchanged.

There are, then, a number of circumstances which may result in unconsciousness. They all have one

feature in common: they consist in changes in the instrumentof consciousness rather than in the

consciousness itself. When the instrument of consciousness, the brain, the body, the mind, are restored

to normal the consciousness returns unchanged and resumes its former activity. In every instance, then,unconsciousness was a withdrawal of consciousness, but it was not a destruction or annihilation of

consciousness. It was the passing of consciousness from the active, waking state that we are all familiar

with to some other apparently latent state, the nature of which we do not yet understand.

What might be the state of our consciousness during periods of so-called "unconsciousness"? There is agreat gap in our knowledge of other states of consciousness, but does such ignorance justify us in

saying that such other states of consciousness do not exist?

Dreams prove to us the existence of one such state, and who can say how many other similar or

different states there may be? We may not yet be able to prove the existence of other states, but neither


22/34

are we in a position to disprove them.

Death is usually preceded by a period of unconsciousness, sometimes very brief, other times lasting for

weeks or months. Sometimes death takes place during sleep. The unconsciousness of death, like that of

sleep or sickness, is induced by wear and tear or injury to the instrument, the body, brain, etc. So far,then, the various processes are all alike: they all consist in a withdrawal of consciousness induced by

damage to the instrument. They differ only according to the degree of damage produced in the

instrument. If the damage can be repaired, the consciousness returns, but if the damage is beyondrepair, the consciousness does not return.

Is there anything to show that the unconsciousness of death is any different from the unconsciousness

of sickness or of sleep, except that it must be of longer duration? Sleep and sickness did not materially

alter the nature of the consciousness itself. Is there anything to show that death would alter the nature

of the consciousness any more than did sickness or sleep? Sleep and sickness did not annihilate theconsciousness. Is there any more proof that death would annihilate the consciousness?

The action of electricity in manifesting as light resembles that of consciousness acting through a human

body. The electric current will manifest as light in a bulb as long as the contacts are good and the

filament wires inside the bulb are perfect. If we unscrew the bulb we break the contacts and the light

goes out. If the filament is injured, the light also goes out. The power plant is still running, but thecurrent cannot flow over the broken circuit and the light does not manifest. If we jiggle the bulb we

may cause the filament wires to touch inside of the bulb and the light again appears. But a time comeswhen the filament burns out completely, and this time no amount of jiggling will repair the bulb, which

now must be scrapped. This time we must have a new bulb if we want the light to reappear, but as soon

as the new bulb is provided the light manifests, showing that the source of the light was unaffected bythe injury or destruction of the bulb.

May it not be the same with the consciousness of man? When the body is healthy, the consciousness

manifests normally. In sleep we disconnect the consciousness from this plane the same as when we

unscrew the bulb, and the consciousness ceases to manifest. In sickness there is a bodily disorder thatshuts consciousness out the same as the broken filament shuts the light out. If health returns,

consciousness returns, as the light did with the repaired filament wires. At death the body is worn outand consciousness again disappears, and this time can no longer return to the worn-out body any more

than the light to the burnt out bulb.

As in one case the electric energy remained unaffected by the destruction of the bulb, may not the

consciousness of man remain unaffected by the death of the body, as in fact we know that it does

remain unaffected by sickness and by sleep?

Is there any more reason to think that the consciousness has ceased to exist when the body is destroyed,than there is to think that the electric energy is annihilated because the bulb is destroyed?

Matter and Energy Exist in Different States. Why Should Not Consciousness Do the Same?

By chemical action the appearance of substances may change so completely that the resulting product

in no way resembles the elements of which it is composed. For instance, chlorine is a yellowish,

greenish, poisonous gas. Sodium is a metallic substance resembling steel, but so soft that it can easily

be cut with a knife. When these two substances are combined chemically we have common table salt.

Hydrogen and oxygen are two invisible gases. A chemical combination of the two is water, a liquid.

The water can again be broken up and changed back into its two constituent gases.

Water can exist as an invisible vapor, as a colorless liquid, or as a solid block of ice. It can travel in the

atmosphere and produce rain; it forms our oceans and carries large ships; it forms our rivers and drives


23/34

power plants. It forms bridges over lakes and rivers, strong enough to carry heavy loads. Yet it is all the

same substance in different states, and it can easily be changed from one state into another and then

back again into the first.

Energy also exists in different states. It may be active or latent. Active electrical energy is changed in astorage battery into chemical energy and can then be stored in a latent state for long periods of time.

When the proper circuit is formed, the chemical energy will be transformed back into active electrical

energy.

The water behind a dam represents the stored energy of the sun. It will remain inactive as long as it isretained by the dam. If it is to be put to useful work, it must have a body through which it can be

transformed into an active state. The body in this case consists of the gate, penstock, turbine, generator,

etc., and finally the latent energy emerges as active energy: electricity.

A lump of coal represents solar energy which was stored thousands of years ago. This energy is latent,inactive, but if the coal is allowed to burn, the stored energy is released as heat and this heat in its turn

can be utilized in driving a steam engine, thus producing mechanical energy.

An explosive such as dynamite is latent or stored energy which remains inactive until the explosion

takes place, when the energy changes into an active state.

If matter, then, does exist in different states such as solid, liquid and gaseous, as well as in numberlesschemical combinations, why should it not be possible for consciousness to exist in different states also?

If energy does exist under different forms such as mechanical, electrical, chemical energy, etc., and if it

sometimes remains dormant and stored for long periods as latent energy and at other times is active,

why should it not be possible for consciousness to change from a state of activity to latency and back toactivity again? In fact, is not this exactly what takes place in sleep? Our consciousness is changed into

a latent state, the nature of which we do not understand, but when the "proper circuit" is formed, it does

again change back into a waking state. Who knows how many states of consciousness there are whichdiffer from our waking state? The field is almost entirely unexplored. Why should there not be as many

states of consciousness as there are states of matter and of energy?

Is there anything unnatural, then, in interpreting death as simply a change in our state of consciousness?

The awakening from this state will be considered further on.

Matter and Energy Are Indestructible. Why Should Not Consciousness Be the Same?

What is mind? What are thoughts? What is consciousness? Some say by-products of matter, results of

chemical or physical activities in the brain. Others look upon the subject differently and see inconsciousness and mental activities primary functions which ar

does chance or justice rule our lives

Documents