[UA] Topic: The House of Renunciation

[Alex Duncan]

On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 03:45:46PM -0600, Hammons, Jade wrote:
> ...
> In either case, an infant is either a tabula rasa or pretty close to it
> ...
> 
> 
> That's not a very UA attitude. Why are we assuming that a child is
> Tabula Rasa. Maybe the child is the reason the mother was dragged into
> the room to begin with. The innocent bystander in this case is the
> mother.

Well, that may be, but I was thinking in terms of the rooms that I have
seen described.  What is counsellor Dawn Miller of HBL going to do with
an infant?  What is an infant going to do in Cold Reflection except
starve, or else ignorantly sip from the pool and crawl away unchanged?
'Tabula Rasa' is a term of some controversy in philosophy, I realize,
which is why I qualified it.  But generally, what is an infant going to
have to Renounce, except for perhaps some latent constitutional
personality tendencies (and it would be tough to see much difference in
that case) or the karma of a past life (which doesn't normally exist in
the UA setting)?

> It's possible that death is a form of renunciation of the old life. If a
> soul somehow avoided that (escaped), then reality would have to wipe the
> old life out of the child after conception. Maybe a room of renunciation
> exists solely for this purpose. 
 
I've read that about half-a-dozen times and can't figure out what it's
saying.  Can you describe a scenario for me?

If there is a room of Renunciation for newborns, however it might work,
that wouldn't seem to have any effect on infants who somehow end up
being born or abandoned in other rooms, since nothing written so far
seems to suggest that the different rooms collude much at all or even
know about each other. 

--