Theos-Talk Archives (January 1999 Message tt00358)

How are you definning "soul"? I thought a soul was simply a sheath. ???
Nancy

----------
> From: "Angie C." <elemental_fire@geocities.com>
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: A few questions on a touchy subject...
> Date: Thursday, January 28, 1999 4:01 AM
>
> In a discussion of the soul and reincarnation last night, I had brought
up a
> question - Cloning.  Would a clone have a soul, and how would karma and
> reincarnation work with them?  I'd like to throw out to you some
questions and
> theories I've come up with, and only ask that your replies not be to the
> rightness or wrongness of the act of cloning. That is a whole discussion
in
> itself. The point is, regardless of morals it will happen, and how do we
> handle it?
>
> To start, it was put forth that no, it would not have a soul.  But I must
> question this - Nature abhors a void.  From simply taking a scoop of
water out
> of a pool, to the endless ingress of matter to a black hole, nature in
some
> way or another fills a void.  And think on this, if I've read aright we
> believe that all matter, down to the tiniest piece is a part of the great
> universal light.  This being, even though not born conventionally, will
be
> created of the same matter as everything else. How then could it not be a
part
> of that universal light?
>
> Now, I think we can agree that the creators, right or wrong, will have to
deal
> with whatever karma they have earned.  But what of the child, and those
around
> it?  I'll start with a question for our group, in particular.  If we take
the
> tack that it has no soul, who among us would look a child in the face and
tell
> it that it is a soul-less abomination, that it should never have been
born?
> What karma do we create for those within our group if we teach such
ideas?
>
> As for the child, I have many questions.  Would it pick up part of the
spirit
> and karma of the one who donated the cells?  Or would it follow current
> thought, that each person has it's own karma?  And if it has it's own
karma,
> which of these would it be - A totally new spirit, taking it's very first
> steps on the karmic circles?  Or, with all the trials, and most certainly
> prejudice against the method of it's birth, would it be the reincarnation
of a
> soul that had built up so much karmic debt that it would need to work
through
> such adversity to move on?
>
> Another point raised was that when you get a transplant, or blood
transfusion
> you get some of the essence of that donor.  In natural conception, the
child
> shares the lifeblood of it's mother, and some of that essence, as well as
that
> from the seed of the father.  What of a child without either of those
> influences?  Would there be some deficiency of soul?  Or, since the donor
had
> these influences, and the clone is a copy, would it be similar to the
donor, a
> copy of a whole soul?  One thing I'm interested in learning is what
studies
> are out there of children born in test-tubes?  This may shed at least
some
> light on the question of parental influence.
>
> As for me, I still have too many questions to come to any solid
conclusions
> yet. I think you can guess that I am leaning towards them having some
sort of
> soul, but still I am not sure of this.  Morally right? Wrong? Soul or
None?  I
> find amidst all this I do have one firm belief.  So long as we treat them
as
> we would any other creature on this planet, with compassion, we cannot go
far wrong.
>
> -Angie
>
>