Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00064)

Mauri wrote:

> prmoliveira wrote:
>
> > Identical twins are the outcome of a 
> >natural reproductive process and
> >even astrology (sorry to mention it 
> >again on this list) regards them
> >to be two completely distinctive 
> >individuals as far as their
> >psychological make up is concerned.
>
>
> (Bart)<<It's still a cloning process.>>
>
> But isn't there a significant enough 
> difference between "copies" and 
> "originals" ... 
That's kind of the point I've been trying to make. Clones are only 
identical on the DNA lavel, and even then, they will not have the 
environmentally generated mutations that exist in all of us from the 
moment of conception.

> Twins, for 
> example, in my HSO, could be said to be 
> either "copies" or "clones" (depending 
> on how one defines those terms more 
> specifically), but in my experience they 
> are not identical, or not identical 
> enough to be called the same person. 
Once again, that is the point I've been trying to make.

> In
> other words, as it tend to see it, an 
> attempt to clone HPB from DNA might, at 
> best, result in some sort of essentially 
> non-identical twin (outwardly similar 
> person). Such a twin might, I suspect, 
> take an interest in Theosophy, or, on 
> the other hand, the incarnating person 
> in the body might have very different 
> karmic influences. But I tend not to see 
> how one can "clone" (if that's meant as 
> "bring back") an "original" human 
> whether the body of that "original" is 
> alive or dead. 
EXACTLY!!!!

It would be an identical body, but NOT the same monad (or even, 
probably, the same aura, especially if one believes the aura to be the 
first root race body, and the carrier of karma from one incarnation to 
the next).

Bart