Abortion – A Spiritual Perspective

The latest statistics from the World Health Organization reveal the following shocking and highly disturbing facts…

* In today’s world, nearly 25% of all pregnancies end in abortion.
* Each year, 40-50 million women around the world choose to terminate their pregnancy. The Orlando Women’s Center gives a recent annual figure as 42 million.
* There are approximately 125,000 abortions every day across the world.
* Since you started reading this article, around 20 abortions have taken place.

In this grossly materialistic world, which denies the existence and reality of soul and spirit without ever having been able to prove their non-existence, a human being is often considered to be little more than a soulless and ultimately purposeless collection of cells and molecules…a lump of matter, in other words. If this is the case, then what does it really matter in the whole scheme of things whether there are 50 million or 500 million abortions every year? A lump of matter doesn’t really amount to much after all, does it?

Sometimes the type of bluntness used in the above paragraph is necessary in order to show materialism in its true and horrific light. Materialism – the belief and conviction that everything is matter, everything is material, and that there is nothing spiritual or transcendental whatsoever – is soul destroying, life destroying, and world destroying. It should be added that the majority of people who hold materialistic views (atheists, in other words, and many agnostics) are thoroughly decent, good, loving people, often moreso than some religious people. Yet the concept and perception that they have of life and of existence – which is the prevailing concept and perception in the world today – is causing tremendous and increasing damage to humanity, on both seen and unseen levels.

For the vast majority of women who choose to have an abortion, it is no easy or casual decision. It involves much heartache, grief, and suffering…psychological, emotional, physical, and indeed spiritual. We all know that there can be many reasons why a woman, or both parents together, decide to abort the pregnancy that has come about. From the spiritual perspective, however, it is not merely a matter of aborting a “pregnancy” but of aborting the reincarnation of a soul and thus, to that extent, aborting LIFE.

H.P. Blavatsky (1831-1891), founder of the Theosophical Movement, is attributed with having changed the face of world spirituality forever, largely by introducing Eastern spirituality into the Western world and teaching and explaining both the practical and metaphysical sides of esoteric philosophy in her writings such as the highly renowned “The Secret Doctrine,” “Isis Unveiled,” “The Key to Theosophy,” and “The Voice of the Silence.” It was Madame Blavatsky who first introduced the vitally important concepts of KARMA and REINCARNATION to the West, emphasising that these are the two most important spiritual truths for humanity to clearly and accurately understand.

On this site are several articles which provide a brief overview and explanation of these twin teachings, such as Questions about Karma, A Right Understanding of Karma, A Right Understanding of Reincarnation, and 12 Things Theosophy Teaches. They can be read by clicking on these title links.

Although HPB said very little at all regarding abortion – or foeticide as it was often called in her day – the little she did say was so clear, firm, and to the point, that it is interesting and important to take note. When asked by a medical doctor to state the view of Theosophy on abortion, she prefaced her response by saying, “It is neither from the standpoint of law, nor from any argument drawn from one or another orthodox ism that the warning voice is sent forth against the immoral and dangerous practice, but rather because in occult philosophy both physiology and psychology show its disastrous consequence.”

Although the world abounds with many differing legal, moral, and religious views on abortion, HPB explains that the view of Theosophy on the matter is derived from none of these but from what we have elsewhere called “an intimate acquaintance with Ancient Wisdom, with Esoteric Philosophy, with Spiritual Science, and with a clear and profound knowledge of the unseen yet ever present Laws of Nature.”

In her response titled “Is Foeticide a Crime?” she describes it in terms of being murder, crime, a crime against nature, an immoral and dangerous practice, sin, and the “willful and sinful destruction of life.” These are very strong words indeed and, coming from one initiated into the timeless truths of the Eastern Esoteric Doctrine, it would be well for us to heed them.

In using the term “sin,” she clarifies that “the sin is not regarded by the occultists as one of a religious character.” Since the Mahatmas or Master Teachers, who were behind Blavatsky and her teachings and spiritual movement, asserted that there is no God (see the article Belief in God is Superstition which shows and explains the nontheistic nature of Theosophy), it is not a sin in the sense of something that is going to be punished by a God or in the sense of something that will send the perpetrator to hell. Rather, it is a sin and crime against Nature and against Life itself, not to mention against the incoming soul whose process of reincarnation on this Earth was halted so abruptly and brutally.

“The crime committed,” adds HPB, “lies precisely in the willful and sinful destruction of life, and interference with the operations of nature, hence – with KARMA – that of the mother and the would-be future human being.”

The fact is that all life is sacred, all life is precious, and all life is divine. All life is the ONE LIFE. There are some who say, purportedly from a spiritual perspective, that abortion is acceptable as long as it’s done before a certain stage of the pregnancy. It is true that the first proper “ensouling” of the growing astral-physical form (which medical terminology calls the foetus) in the womb does not occur until the completion of its seventh month in the womb, i.e. when it turns seven months old. This is when that particular part of the soul which has the task of animating the new personality for the impending new lifetime connects itself into the brain and senses of the foetus, as explained by HPB in “The Secret Doctrine Dialogues” and elsewhere.

It is explained that the higher and spiritual part of the soul, that part which we call the Higher Ego, does not fully unite itself with the new body until the child turns seven years old although it is engaged in a gradual and ongoing process of doing so from the moment of birth. One of the primary fundamentals of Esoteric Science is that all manifestation is of a septenary nature.

Does this mean then that it’s more or less permissible and OK to abort the pregnancy at some point during the first seven months? Theosophy answers with a resounding “NO!” Those first seven months are spent in the active and continual preparation and preliminary building of the astral body and the physical (its outer shell) in preparation for the entrance of the soul. Although the soul is at that time still in its “heavenly” state between lifetimes, it is in a certain way overshadowing the process right from the moment of conception.

When the Devachanic state – which some might call the “Heaven” state – finally begins to draw to a close, the consciousness of that state gradually and increasingly begins to fade out until the Ego falls again into a state of unconsciousness which precedes rebirth. This is the final “closing out” of that particular persona and personality, as the soul is soon due to take upon itself a brand new personality for a new lifetime. The Devachani’s increasing unconsciousness towards the end of the Devachanic period is due to the fact that it is now gradually involving itself in the formation of its new body and form, the form which will be its physical home during its next incarnation.

Now, considering again the chilling statistics, let us reflect on the fact that 125,000 of these birth processes – or rather re-birth processes – are aborted every single day. 125,000 a day…40,000,000 to 50,000,000 every year…a quarter of all attempts at reincarnation are aborted, halted, stopped, terminated, destroyed. It’s hard, as well as painful, to imagine it. But imagine just how hard and painful it is for all those souls, some of whom will no doubt end up being aborted several times before finally succeeding in beginning a new earth life. On both the physical and spiritual levels, it is murder, and any murder is a crime, whether recognised as such by the laws of the land or not. It is recognised as such by the Law of Karma, which is the impersonal, unerring, ever-adjusting Law of cause and effect, action and reaction, sequence and consequence.

HPB began her words about it by saying, “Theosophy in general answers: ‘At no age as under no circumstance whatever is a murder justifiable!’”

William Quan Judge, a co-founder with H.P. Blavatsky of the Theosophical Movement and her trusted friend and associate, once wrote, “It is the karma of the past that brings the child to that mother,” adding “The child has far-reaching karmic relations with the parents, as they also with the child. The discipline and joys that come through children are karmic on both sides. If the child is a wicked one, it is the Karma of the parents also. Again, the incoming Ego requires a certain line of family so as to get the needed sort of body. In many and various ways, then, parentage can be seen to be more than a mere door to this plane.”

What happens to the soul when abortion takes place? Although not going into specifics or saying whether there are ever any exceptions to the rule, HPB tells us a little about it in the first volume of “Isis Unveiled.” It is there explained that when “the laws of harmony of nature” are violated – as happens in abortion – those same laws automatically seek to restore their “disturbed equilibrium.” She writes, “Thus, in cases of abortion, … nature’s original design to produce a perfect human being has been interrupted. Therefore, while the gross matter … is suffered to disperse itself at death, through the vast realm of being, the immortal spirit and astral monad of the individual – the latter having been set apart to animate a frame and the former to shed its divine light on the corporeal organization – must try a second time to carry out the purpose of the creative intelligence.”

It would seem that the reincarnation process is immediately and automatically attempted once again. Every soul has past Karmic connections with thousands and no doubt tens or even hundreds of thousands of other souls and thus, since “it is the karma of the past that brings the child to that mother” and “the incoming Ego requires a certain line of family so as to get the needed sort of body,” the soul will begin the reincarnation process all over again as soon as another would-be mother – one who is suitably karmically connected with it – can be found in incarnation.

But none of this need happen in the first place. There are various understandable reasons why a baby may not be wanted by the parents but this is no reason to kill it! The baby, if undesired by its natural parents, can be placed into care and adopted by those who do want it, the adoptive parents themselves probably having a karmic connection with that particular newly reincarnated soul. Nearly 50% of all pregnancies are unintended and unwanted, according to World Health Organization statistics. This points plainly to the obvious fact that there is a lot of irresponsible sexual activity going on in the world today, something which is discussed to some extent in the article Theosophy on the Sex Problem.

This whole issue of pregnancy and abortion is certainly a far deeper and more intricate one than can even begin to be touched upon here. For example, what about pregnancies that occur as a result of rape? No-one but the mother can fully understand how she feels and how she views the situation…yet as Mr Judge taught, “it is the karma of the past that brings the child to that mother.” What about women who have had abortions and now regret it? Or those who have had abortions and become psychologically, emotionally, and even spiritually scarred and damaged as a result? Or that minority of truly hardened materialists who have had abortions and thought nothing of the matter, neither then nor since?

We should never judge anyone for their decisions, nor should we ever wish to, and this article has not been written with a view to judging or condemning anyone as individuals. In HPB’s “The Voice of the Silence” is the statement, “Compassion is the law of laws.” We should have the very highest compassion and very highest love for each and all, regardless of past, present, or future actions. What this article does condemn, however, is the murderous act of abortion itself. Our Karma – that is, our actions and every cause that we set in motion – is our own judge. In defending abortion, people often say, “The woman has the right to choose.” In response to this we would ask, “Is the right to choose greater than the right to live?”

Up to 50 million abortions every single year cannot happen without a corresponding darkening of the Karma of humanity as a whole, not to mention the Karma of all those directly involved with and personally affected by the whole process and procedure. It may be doubtful whether an article such as this will ever make a difference but, in the hopes that it can or will, we plead with all mothers: For your own sake and the sake of your unborn child, do not abort the babe growing and living within you, for in so doing you abort far more – infinitely more – than just a body, since none of us are bodies but all of us precious souls and radiant sparks of the One Divine Essence.

~ Blavatsky Theosophy Group UK ~

You may also like to read Theosophy on the Sex Problem.

The Truth about Abortion

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Chris Ray says:

    You state, “We should never judge [but you do] anyone for their decisions, nor should we ever wish to [but you do], and this article has not been written with a view to judging or condemning anyone as individuals [but you do]”. Then you state, ” What this article does condemn, however, is the murderous act of abortion itself.” You are calling the woman and doctor a murderers!
    Then you state, ” In defending abortion, people often say, “The woman has the right to choose.” In response to this we would ask [yes YOU ask – HPB does not – nor do the Adepts], “Is the right to choose greater than the right to live?” You’re are saying that in your view women do NOT have the right to choose.
    Are you really Theosophists? You sound as extreme as the far right in the US, who have gunned down doctors at abortion clinics. Remember Rosalind Rajagapol, Krishnamurti’s mistress, had to have several abortions or she would have died. Perhaps you would taking one life to save another is murder. In any case K approved and was relieved, was he a murderer too? Under you definition he would be.
    Is this English Theosophy democratic or is there just ONE moderator, ie, censor? You have a long way to go yet. We all do.
    Regards
    Chris Ray from Australia.

    • Chris, the reason for not responding to any of your previous comments thus far is because of their tone and nature. We welcome comments from people with sincere and polite questions born out of a genuine interest in the article, whereas all of your own comments have been merely critical and accusatory. You are perfectly within your right to hold to such an attitude but we are perfectly within our right to choose not to spend our limited time and energy responding to such comments.

      You will surely have noticed in the article that many of the points and statements which provoke you the most actually originate with H.P. Blavatsky and not with ourselves. For example, the paragraph:

      “In her response titled “Is Foeticide a Crime?” she describes it in terms of being murder, crime, a crime against nature, an immoral and dangerous practice, sin, and the “willful and sinful destruction of life.” These are very strong words indeed and, coming from one initiated into the timeless truths of the Eastern Esoteric Doctrine, it would be well for us to heed them.”

      If you have never read HPB’s article “Is Foeticide a Crime?” perhaps you might be willing to do so and then you may see that the main essence of your problems with our articles is probably more likely a problem with HPB and her teachings. As you have stated in previous comments that you agree with C.W. Leadbeater’s teaching of masturbation to boys and that Leadbeater purportedly simplified and explained HPB’s teachings, we can only assume that you are either very unfamiliar with HPB’s teachings (including their strong ethical and moral aspect) or that you simply prefer to view Leadbeater’s work as a more accurate presentation of “Theosophy.” We support and defend your right to hold to whatever ideas you like but at the same time it seems futile to try to argue with one who holds such an individual as Leadbeater in high regard.

      In a previous comment you were praising Leadbeater’s “Occult Chemistry.” In 1953, Grahame W. Barratt – then a member of The Theosophical Society – Adyar – exposed this book as a fraudulent plagiarism. It is no longer published in any form by the Theosophical Society. In recent times the vast majority of Leadbeater’s books and writings have been deliberately allowed to go out of print by the Adyar Society’s “Theosophical Publishing House,” whilst those kept in print have often been highly edited and abridged, as most of the Society’s leaders and members naturally feel embarrassed about publishing and promoting such nonsense, especially in light of the now inescapable facts about the true character and highly unsavoury nature – one might even say “criminal” nature – of this individual, who caused more harm for the Theosophical Movement than anyone else in its history.

      You’ve also often referred to Krishnamurti in such a way that implies that we should be automatically familiar with his various deeds and activities, simply because of our own involvement with Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement. We do not see any valid reason why this should be the case. Krishnamurti’s 20 years of Theosophical involvement – if it can be called that – were with a Society which is only 1/4 of the Theosophical Movement. There are four main branches of the Theosophical Movement (https://blavatskytheosophy.com/the-four-branches-of-the-theosophical-movement/) and three of these have never had the slightest thing to do with Krishnamurti, Leadbeater, Besant, etc., nor is there any reason why they should. And let us remember that Krishnamurti himself plainly declared that his teachings and work were not Theosophy. Why, then, should we have any interest in his teachings, his ideologies, his activities, or his personal life?

      We are afraid that if you find our articles to be “extreme” (the first time that any of the visitors to this site have ever said such a thing and we receive around 2,000 visitors a week from all over the world) you will find HPB to be more “extreme” – on various matters – if you choose to study and familiarise yourself in depth with her huge and voluminous mass of writings and teachings.

      We are sorry to have said all this but in light of your persistent comments we thought it better to finally say something rather than nothing.

      • Chris Ray says:

        Fair enough. You don’t need to be sorry, I am a guest. We Australians don’t take ourselves all that seriously. You have made a valiant effort, & I’ve done you the courtesy of reading your reply to my reply, all the way between UK & Australia. The wonders of modern technology! Looking back, I can see the Leadbeater site reply was a bit waffle-iferous. You can remove my reply above, as it is not reflective of your views & is unhelpful to you; I don’t wish to intrude & won’t be offended. Bear in mind I cared enough to reply, however I aim to be helpful not waste people’s time.
        Best wishes. Chris Ray Nov 2015

  2. Sue Williamson says:

    HPB was not dealing with a world where over population is a very serious problem. In fact so many of the problems we are facing today were not existing when she was alive. What’s interesting to me is the idea that the soul doesn’t really enter the body of the unborn until 7 months. That makes me even more convinced that, when other forms of birth control fail, abortion should be an option and it is not murder. But if one were to say that a soul was being stopped from entering this plane of existence, who’s to say that that isn’t the Karma of that soul? Perhaps it was only meant to exist on this plane for that very short period of time. And perhaps it will get to go on to another planet or galaxy. In reading Olcott’s Old Diary Leaves, he says that when the concept of reincarnation was taught to him by the Masters, it wasn’t about being reborn HERE on this planet but rather on other planets of either higher or lower consciousness. Furthermore, murder is about intention. Does a surgeon murder a patient if the patient dies during the surgery? Does a woman murder a child if she is saving it from a life of extreme poverty, or deprivation of other types? But ultimately, HPB would not want one to follow blindly whatever she said, And let’s face it. We are all murderers, if you say that ending any material life form on earth is murder. We are killing billions of life forms just by being alive and walking on this planet. To me it seems that taking an anti-abortion position is falling into the hands of an ultra right wing mentality that HPB would totally and completely repudiate!

    • Hello Sue, thank you for your comment.

      Although I happen to disagree with almost all of your points, I’d like to briefly explain the reasons for that disagreement; not as an attempt to change your way of thinking but simply as a means of explaining the perspective and stance taken in this article and by those Theosophists who are against abortion, which incidentally is all the Theosophists I know.

      * You say “HPB was not dealing with a world where over population is a very serious problem. In fact so many of the problems we are facing today were not existing when she was alive.”
      – True but do you think that the principles and teachings of Theosophy are based on contemporary world problems – i.e. the teachings and truths change as world problems and situations change – or on timeless Truth, Ageless Wisdom, which is not a set of ideas or temporary solutions but, as said by William Q. Judge on p. 1 of “The Ocean of Theosophy,” “is a knowledge of the laws which govern the evolution of the physical, astral, psychical, and intellectual constituents of nature and of man”?

      * You say “What’s interesting to me is the idea that the soul doesn’t really enter the body of the unborn until 7 months. That makes me even more convinced that, when other forms of birth control fail, abortion should be an option and it is not murder.”
      – It does not ENTER it until 7 months but it is CONNECTED with it right from the sacred moment of conception. As was said in the article:

      “Those first seven months are spent in the active and continual preparation and preliminary building of the astral body and the physical (its outer shell) in preparation for the entrance of the soul. Although the soul is at that time still in its “heavenly” state between lifetimes, it is in a certain way overshadowing the process right from the moment of conception. When the Devachanic state – which some might call the “Heaven” state – finally begins to draw to a close, the consciousness of that state gradually and increasingly begins to fade out until the Ego falls again into a state of unconsciousness which precedes rebirth. This is the final “closing out” of that particular persona and personality, as the soul is soon due to take upon itself a brand new personality for a new lifetime. The Devachani’s increasing unconsciousness towards the end of the Devachanic period is due to the fact that it is now gradually involving itself in the formation of its new body and form, the form which will be its physical home during its next incarnation.”

      If to undo and destroy all that “is not murder” it would certainly be something akin to it, wouldn’t you say? You later say that “if one were to say that a soul was being stopped from entering this plane of existence, who’s to say that that isn’t the Karma of that soul?” To this, we would say, “if the ‘other forms of birth control’ that you mention “fail,” then who’s to say that that isn’t the Karma of the mother to thus have and give birth to the child after all?”

      * You say “In reading Olcott’s Old Diary Leaves, he says that when the concept of reincarnation was taught to him by the Masters, it wasn’t about being reborn HERE on this planet but rather on other planets of either higher or lower consciousness.”
      – You may not be aware that neither Col. Olcott nor his “OId Diary Leaves” are held in very high regard by many Theosophists outside the Adyar Society. They purport to give the “true” history of the Theosophical Society but have been amply proven (such as in the books “The Theosophical Movement 1875-1925” and “The Theosophical Movement 1875-1950”) to be thoroughly misleading and based upon poor memory, gross inaccuracies, absurd misstatements, and chiefly upon his own personal opinion. It should be borne in mind that the period in which he wrote those volumes was the period when he, like Annie Besant and others, were strongly under the influence of G.N. Chakravarti. Olcott’s ideas and claims about what the Masters originally taught about reincarnation are not taken seriously by anyone who has done their own research into the matter.

      For your own interest, you may possibly like to read the articles “Did Blavatsky originally deny Reincarnation?” (https://blavatskytheosophy.com/did-blavatsky-originally-deny-reincarnation/), “Col. Olcott’s Disloyalty to H.P. Blavatsky” (https://blavatskytheosophy.com/col-olcotts-disloyalty-to-h-p-blavatsky/), and “Who was William Quan Judge?” (https://blavatskytheosophy.com/who-was-william-quan-judge/)

      As Judge (who was just as much a co-founder of the Movement with HPB as Olcott was and who was far closer to her in spirit and work, being described by her as “my ONLY friend”) wrote at the time of Olcott’s “Old Diary Leaves”: “It is of course to be regretted that Col. Olcott tries with labor to show H.P.B. ignorant of the law in 1875, but that only convicts him of not then knowing the doctrine himself and as not having referred to her full explanations of 1882 and 1886. … ______’s article strove to show that H.P.B. did not teach the doctrine of reincarnation in ’77, as she did later, which is quite true so far as the public was then concerned. But she did teach it to me and others, then as now. … H.P.B. told me personally many times of the real doctrine of reincarnation [i.e. in the early days of the Society, when the three main co-founders were all together in New York], enforced by the case of the death of my own child, so I know what she thought and believed.”

      * You say “Does a woman murder a child if she is saving it from a life of extreme poverty, or deprivation of other types?”
      – Just a few lines previously, you used Karma as a potential excuse and reason for abortion, saying that it may be the Karma of some souls to be aborted and prevented from getting through successfully to the physical plane. Does it not occur to you that if a child is destined to experience “a life of extreme poverty, or deprivation of other types” that THIS would be that soul’s Karma too? No-one can save or absolve a soul from its own Karma, which is its own self-created destiny, and which operates according to absolute immutable Law, not sentiment, wish, or emotion. Theosophy teaches that the Law of Karma is ONE with the Absolute Divine Principle. Abortion may delay the outworking of that soul’s Karma but it will still have to face and experience it sooner or later. The prolongation of the delay will not make the Karma any less intense, whether it be good or bad.

      * You say “We are all murderers, if you say that ending any material life form on earth is murder. We are killing billions of life forms just by being alive and walking on this planet.”
      – Unfortunately it’s true that none of us can live without causing loss of life but the only loss of life that we literally cannot avoid or help causing is that of the minutest and least developed life forms, which are certainly not self-conscious in any way and nowhere near approaching it; at least not according to Theosophy. Would you not agree that there’s a vast difference, an impassable abyss even, between a microbe and a human being? Is the life of a human being not ultimately more valuable, precious, and sacred – particularly in its potentialities for doing good in the here and now, than that of a microbe or insect? Those who have studied and understood “The Secret Doctrine” would certainly say so.

      * You say “But ultimately, HPB would not want one to follow blindly whatever she said … To me it seems that taking an anti-abortion position is falling into the hands of an ultra right wing mentality that HPB would totally and completely repudiate!”
      – Phrases such as “HPB would not want one to follow blindly whatever she said” have often been used over the past 100+ years by those who dislike the fact that there are students of Theosophy who present Theosophy in the same way that HPB did and not in the way that THEY would like it to be, i.e. corresponding exactly with their own personal ideas, opinions, and preferences. You’re right of course that she never sought or tolerated blind faith or unquestioning acceptance. But what makes you conclude that we are merely “following blindly” her words about abortion? Is there any evidence of this? Some accuse Theosophists of “blindly following” HPB in instances when both HPB and those Theosophists have presented and upheld something with which the accuser strongly disagrees. To some it would appear as little more than a “get out clause,” especially when one considers the extremely strong wording of HPB’s own article “Is Foeticide a Crime?” Forgive me for saying so but your last sentence is both offensive and wrong. One can be anti-abortion without being “ultra right wing” or even right wing at all. You are obviously an intelligent and insightful person so surely you can plainly see and read from the relevant passages that HPB herself held to an anti-abortion position and in no uncertain terms. You thus might as well have directed your last sentence at her, as this article is only based on her words and teachings.

      As she wrote, “It is neither from the standpoint of law, nor from any argument drawn from one or another orthodox ism that the warning voice is sent forth against the immoral and dangerous practice, but rather because in occult philosophy both physiology and psychology show its disastrous consequence.”

      The disagreement all comes down to the matter and the question of whether or not one believes HPB to have truly and correctly known and understood the Occult Philosophy. After years of perpetual in depth study and continual re-reading and re-thinking of everything she ever wrote and taught – and everything the Masters said and wrote about her – as well as closely familiarising ourselves with her biography and life’s work, we are persuaded that she did. But it’s not unreasonable that those who haven’t yet done the necessary or sufficient study and research may think otherwise. They are perfectly welcome to and welcome to express their conflicting opinions but they may expect a lengthy and possibly challenging response like this!

      Thank you again and please don’t mistake any of this for unfriendliness or unkindness, as it’s not written in an unkind or unfriendly spirit…just in one of strong but respectful disagreement.

  3. Maria Vilaz says:

    I found your article, and the site in general, very interesting. Can you please tell me, what are the consequences of making an abortion? For example, can a person lose a child, in this life or another life? Or maybe not being able to have children when they want to? And what happens\where do you go upon death after a life where you had an abortion? If possible, can you give a few more details about the karma or fate due to this wrongful action, just like you did on the Suicide article?

    • Thank you Maria. The Karmic consequences of having an abortion will undoubtedly vary from person to person, since every case is different and unique and each soul has its own self-created backlog of individual Karma which will express itself and come to fruition at different times and in different ways. So some of the things you suggest could possibly be Karmic consequences for this but we really cannot say…it’s too abstruse and complex a matter and not as rigid and clearcut as we might be inclined to think.

      Those who had an abortion will follow the same after-death states and processes as others, i.e. Kama Loka, the gestation state, and Devachan. For more about this, please see such articles as “Death and the Afterlife” (https://blavatskytheosophy.com/death-and-the-afterlife/) and “When We Die” (https://blavatskytheosophy.com/when-we-die/).

  4. This article was well written and answered so many questions as well as validated my view points on this sensitive subject. My husband and I believe we were unable to conceive children of our because we were meant to parent the six we adopted. To us it feels right in our very being. I felt instantly as we met our children that I knew them and felt my heart skip a beat as I held them the first time. The shear joy of it is overwhelming.

  5. It is good to know that Christians are not alone in their view on abortion. I only differ from you in my belief in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. I share your belief that all life is holy. I reserve all judgement to be God’s alone. Peace

    • Thank you for your comment Patricia. Indeed, Christians are not alone in their anti-abortion stance, although the various reasons and principles behind the anti-abortion stance of Theosophists and that of Christians are probably very different.

  6. Sufisue says:

    Not all Theosophists agree on an “anti-abortion stance”. I do not agree that anyone should be forced against their will to bear a child. All children should be wanted children. I don’t really think that anyone, including Blavatsky, has the right to tell another woman that she must bear a child. I doubt if it was put to Blavatsky today, in the face of the human race courting extinction due to overpopulation and ecological disaster, that she would take that same position.

    • Sue, in this repetition of your earlier comment you are just engaging in moral relativism.

      You say: “I doubt if it was put to Blavatsky today, in the face of the human race courting extinction due to overpopulation and ecological disaster, that she would take that same position.”

      In other words, you believe that HPB today would say things which agree with and endorse YOUR view and opinion on this matter. To repeat some of the points we made in our reply from last year:

      * “Do you think that the principles and teachings of Theosophy are based on contemporary world problems – i.e. the teachings and truths change as world problems and situations change – or on timeless Truth, Ageless Wisdom, which is not a set of ideas or temporary solutions but, as said by William Q. Judge on p. 1 of “The Ocean of Theosophy,” “is a knowledge of the laws which govern the evolution of the physical, astral, psychical, and intellectual constituents of nature and of man”?”

      * Phrases such as “HPB would not want one to follow blindly whatever she said” have often been used over the past 100+ years by those who dislike the fact that there are students of Theosophy who present Theosophy in the same way that HPB did and not in the way that THEY would like it to be, i.e. corresponding exactly with their own personal ideas, opinions, and preferences. You’re right of course that she never sought or tolerated blind faith or unquestioning acceptance. But what makes you conclude that we are merely “following blindly” her words about abortion? Is there any evidence of this? Some accuse Theosophists of “blindly following” HPB in instances when both HPB and those Theosophists have presented and upheld something with which the accuser strongly disagrees. To some it would appear as little more than a “get out clause,” especially when one considers the extremely strong wording of HPB’s own article “Is Foeticide a Crime?”

      * “As she wrote, “It is neither from the standpoint of law, nor from any argument drawn from one or another orthodox ism that the warning voice is sent forth against the immoral and dangerous practice, but rather because in occult philosophy both physiology and psychology show its disastrous consequence.”

      So…did she or did she not know what the Occult Philosophy teaches? And did she ever write anything which states that the principles of the Occult Philosophy have an expiration date and are liable to change as world and social conditions change?

      You say ” All children should be wanted children” and we strongly agree. If anything, this is all the more reason why sexual relations should be only for the purpose of procreation, which is what Theosophy advises. In such cases there would then be no unwanted children. The sensible, sane, and non-murderous solution to the pressing problem of the tens of millions of unwanted pregnancies every year is to inculcate and practise self-restraint, self-mastery, and moral purity, in relationships between men and women. Of course that’s probably extremely unlikely to happen in this present era but it’s still a far more reasonable and ethical approach than mass abortions and is an ideal to work for.

      You may like to read the compilation on “Theosophy on Sexual Relations, Procreation, and Purity” at https://blavatskytheosophy.com/theosophy-on-sexual-relations-procreation-and-purity/. On the other hand you may not, as you may consider it to be all out of date and may say that HPB, William Judge, and even the Masters would now have the opposite view of things.

  7. totally, i am initiated in Tao and there they say abortion is wrong too

%d bloggers like this: