What is needed is to make our philosophy agree with our inner convictions, instead of contradicting them. If the consciousness of immortality in the young were preserved, and not destroyed by wrong teachings, the old would not have to spend so much time and energy in trying to solve problems that would never have arisen. We do not sufficiently realize what we owe to centuries of theological dogmatism and other forms of materialism; and consequently we underestimate the effect which would be produced if the rising generations were guided on higher, broader, and more generous lines of thought.
Theosophy justly claims that its philosophy enables us to interpret our own intuitions. Its teachings do not contradict our innate conviction of the justice of universal law. Theosophy may be called a science, inasmuch as it interprets nature, studying the effects and unraveling their causes, finding explanations that will account for the facts. It might also be called rationalism, since it imposes no dogmas but points out facts. But both science and reason must be understood in a vastly wider sense than the conventional one. Nature is not limited to her external manifestations; for the body is but the vesture of the soul within—whether in man or in the earth. Nor can the function of science be limited to physics.
The justice and harmony of a human life cannot be discerned if we regard that life separately—apart from its sequel and apart from that of which it is the sequel. This circumstance accounts for most of the strivings and strainings to reconcile faith with experience and to find a place for God in philosophy. But the idea of Reincarnation is so unfamiliar to Western culture and habits of thought that reasonable as it is it will take some time to win its appeal. The process of familiarizing this truth is rendered slower by the fact that much nonsense is talked about it, and reasonable inquirers thereby warned off. Yet it is possible to speak of Reincarnation in a sane and serious way.
What people most often forget is to distinguish properly between that which survives and that which does not, and this may lead them to expect proofs of a kind that cannot logically be demanded. They also confound memory with recollection, assuming, quite illogically, that where there is no recollection there can be no memory. But it is conceivable that memories may be stored up beyond our present reach, and yet be accessible to stronger efforts which we may be able to make at some future time. It may be true that we do not recollect our past lives, but we are not warranted in inferring that the memory is obliterated or that there never was any such record made. The recollection of past lives is a question of memory training; but it is probably unnecessary to say that anyone who should venture on such a task in the expectation of achieving speedy results by his own unaided efforts would be liable to disappointment and delusion. For this attainment lies a long way ahead of us on the Path.
If people were habituated from birth to regard their present life as only one of a series, a great benefit would accrue. The fear of death would disappear; in time it might come to be looked upon as a mere incident. The haste to achieve disproportionate material prosperity would be seen to be needless. There could never be any ground for the philosophy, "Let us eat, drink, and be merry; for tomorrow we die!" But, more important still, confidence and courage would be restored. It would never be too late to mend; the oldest man might begin a new study or enterprise. Things left undone in this life could confidently be left for completion in the future. Failings not entirely overcome would be left behind, and a clean start would be in prospect. We do indeed already act as though we believed in Reincarnation; for old men begin new studies, and in many other ways people behave as though they were not going to die for good. Our intuitions are better than our philosophy; they tell us true, but we give them the lie; hence we marvel at our "inconsistency" or say that "God moves in a mysterious way," when it is ourselves who are moving in a mysterious way, our wonders to perform. How much more reasonable it would be, if we could give up these dogmas and mold our philosophy into harmony with our inner perceptions. And, speaking of dogmas, be it remembered that there are dogmas and dogmas; and one of the latter is that nothing is true unless it can be shown to follow from certain arbitrary rules of reason.
Another mistake made in thinking of immortality consists in regarding it merely in relation to time. Yet the Soul exists all the time; and while the personality is living its temporal life, the Soul, free from the limitations of time and sense, is living its eternal life. Hence we may truly be said to be experiencing immortality while in the flesh; and though we but faintly realize it, we do so in different degrees, some people more than others.
A useful comparison is that between death and sleep, between a lifetime and a day. During the period of a day we pass through successive phases similar to youth, maturity, and old age. At night we cheerfully lay down our work, confident that we shall resume it. Each day is determined to a large extent by preceding days, and is in its turn the parent of following days. In every day our free initiative works amid conditions imposed by our actions on preceding days, and here we find an analogy with the workings of the law of Karma during a lifetime. If we but regard a lifetime as a longer day, the analogy will clear up many difficulties.
Continuing this analogy further, we find that as regards the successive days of our lifetime, our mind is conscious of them all; in fact our mind is in the same position with regard to the days as the Higher Mind is with regard to the successive lives. Knowing this, we do not make the mistake of scolding Providence for conditions which we know we have created ourselves. The only difference, in the case of a lifetime, is that we are not yet cognizant of the continuity of our existence, and find ourselves in circumstances whose origin we have forgotten. Yet these circumstances are the logical consequence of past actions. The opportunities we enjoy and the drawbacks under which we suffer were made by ourselves.
It is maintained by Theosophists that the doctrines of Karma and Reincarnation are perfectly adaptable to ordinary life; that they are not mere theories such as a scholar might amuse himself with; that they represent actual facts and constitute an interpretation—indeed the only logical interpretation—of things as they are. It may be regarded as certain that these tenets will eventually become generally adopted; there is great vitality behind them, and the human mind is at present in a fluid condition, during which it is rapidly assimilating new ideas. The future may be forecast by a comparison of present ideas with those of a few years ago. The important thing is to provide that the pure teachings, and not any absurd travesty of them, shall prevail.