PDA

View Full Version : Can a soul de-evolve on the ladder of creation?



nirotu
01 February 2007, 04:43 PM
Can a soul regress in its evolution from its karmic force? I mean, can a soul shift from human realm to animal realm in order to bear out the karmic debt? For the purpose of discussion, let us explore your ideas of it “can” or “cannot”. Give reasons to justify your position.

Blessings,

saidevo
01 February 2007, 09:57 PM
Namaste nirotu,


Can a soul regress in its evolution from its karmic force? I mean, can a soul shift from human realm to animal realm in order to bear out the karmic debt? For the purpose of discussion, let us explore your ideas of it “can” or “cannot”. Give reasons to justify your position.


Looks like a question in an examination! Theosophy has some information on this topic, but before you hear it, let me know what you think on this. Has the Bible any reference to it, though it doesn't deal with karma? Since you are well-read in Hinduism, I would like to hear any quotes you might give about this from Hinduism.

The information Theosophy has seems logical, but first let us hear you out.

nirotu
02 February 2007, 12:25 PM
Namaste nirotu,



Looks like a question in an examination! Theosophy has some information on this topic, but before you hear it, let me know what you think on this. Has the Bible any reference to it, though it doesn't deal with karma? Since you are well-read in Hinduism, I would like to hear any quotes you might give about this from Hinduism.

The information Theosophy has seems logical, but first let us hear you out.

Dear Saidevo:

Well, I knew someone would take this up on me. First of all, the Bible states that you die only once. It does not say that the same soul will reincarnate to take another bodily form. Hinduism takes an opposite view. If you were to argue from each side, there is no basis for argument at all! Now let us go on a theosophical stand and say that it does allow reincarnation. Given that premise the question now takes on a proper meaning!

In the creation do souls de-evolve ? How grotesque the level of sin has to be for the soul to regress into a lower species? Or does it ever regress? Using this as a point of debate, yes, I do have my view and that is:

As long as soul remains the spark of “Brahman” it cannot de-evolve in itself or in its nature from one realm to the other. However, it gets more buried under the veil of matter within human realm and that I consider de-evolution within creation (human realm) in the spiritual sense.

Both Hinduism and the Bible stress that the evolution has reached its apex in man (human). Man has become a suitable vehicle for the expression of God’s mind. It is said in the Bible, “God breathed spirit in man”. Such a creation was exclusively designed only for man. If, such is the value that God puts in our soul, why would He defile by having it go through animal realm. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such a created soul would de-evolve into animal realm!

Believe me; lot of hell is possible only in human realm. There is no end to psychological and emotional suffering which the lower species are bereft of. It is only the man who has created a material world through mind (science, technology) has also created a larger world capable of suffering. Man’s emphasis on his five sensory worlds has given rise to a whole world based on mind-matter, which are the basis for his true exile from the “Garden of Eden” and the basis for his suffering. When he is seeped deep into ego based material world, the spark that he has in his soul gets ever so feeble in its light, it gets buried under the veil of matter. That in itself is the cause of all suffering within the human realm. Thus, growth of mind in itself is a form of de-evolution in a spiritual terms.

Therefore, there is no reason to think that man’s soul takes on animal or other lower species in Reincarnation to bear the karmic debt! There is enough misery and suffering within the human realm. De-evolution does occur but remains within the human framework.



Blessings,

saidevo
04 February 2007, 06:52 AM
Namaste nirotu,

An Example of a Rebirth in an Animal Body

Here is a startling revelation from none other than Srila Prabhupada, founder of ISKCON:



...
Prabhupada started his discourse. He said that Nehru was re-born almost immediately after his death, a thing that happens only to the most sinful people. He did not even have a short-lived taste of heaven before he was born again. What was worse, is that Nehru was born this time in the form of a dog. He was a dog in a small town of Sweden. His master had another dog before the dog-Nehru was acquired by him and so the dog-Nehru had to share the love of his master with another dog.

Prabhupada explained that to be born as a dog, after having been born as a Kashmiri Brahmin in India, is a big fall. It indicated that Nehru had led a vile life, a very vile life, during his existence as a man in India. Also, Nehru's hatred for anything vaishnava did not make things any easier for him.


For more details, check http://india.krishna.org/Articles/2003/01/014.html.

The Hindu View

There are accounts in Hindu texts of humans reborn as animals for various reasons. Surprisingly, one of the reasons is the excessive and blind fondness shown towards a pet animal! Hinduism also says that the last deciding thought of a departing soul largely shapes its next birth.

Swami Sivananda in his book What Becomes of the Soul After Death gives a compilation of the subject under the major religious faiths. In this book, downloadable at http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm, he says:



1. King Bharata, son of Rishabha, renounced his kingdom and took to the path of an ascetic. One day he observed a small motherless deer in the forest. He took pity on the poor creature and he so passionately loved this little one that his thoughts were mainly centred on the deer and thoughts of God gradually waned away. At the time of his death the thought of the small deer harassed him much and he took the birth of a deer.

2. The Rishis of yore had power to curse wicked persons and bless the virtuous. The sons of Kubera became trees by the curse of Narada. Gautama cursed his wife Ahalya to become a stone. They do this out of compassion for those who go astray, leaving the feet of Lord Hari. It is not with any selfish motive or by becoming a victim to anger that they curse the wicked. Therefore, contact with a saintly personality is highly beneficial in changing one’s destiny.

Hindu scriptures say that a man may become a Deva or a beast or a bird or vegetable or stone according to his merit or demerit. The Upanishads also corroborate this statement. Kapila also agrees on this point.

But certain schools of Buddhism and some Western philosophers teach: "There is no more retrogression for a man when once he takes a human birth. There is no necessity for him to be born as an animal for the sake of demerit. He can be punished in a variety of ways in the human birth itself."


The Hindu Lokas (or Planes)

Apart from the Lokas such as the Preta Loka, Pitru Loka, Yama Loka, Indra Loka, etc. mentioned in Hindu texts, Swami Sivananda also speaks about the 'The Seven Planes' model of the Theosophy and correlates it to the Hindu view:



There are seven planes. They are Bhuloka (earth plane), Bhuvarloka (Antariksha or the astral plane), Svargaloka (heaven or the mental plane), Maharloka, Janaloka, Tapoloka and Satyaloka (Brahmaloka or the world of Brahma, the Creator). Tapasvins dwell in Tapoloka.

The astral plane, or Bhuvarloka, interpenetrates the earth plane and extends for some distance beyond it. The mental plane interpenetrates the astral but also extends further into space than does the latter. The vibrations of the astral world are more rapid or quicker than those of the physical plane. The vibrations of the mental plane are more rapid or quicker than those of the astral plane. The vibrations of the Satyaloka are more rapid or quicker than those of the mental plane. In each plane the soul develops a new and higher sense of power.

When you pass from one plane to another you do not move in space. You simply change your consciousness. You change your focus of consciousness.

In the dreaming state your astral body functions. In the deep sleep state your causal body functions. Even so, in the astral plane your astral body operates, in the mental plane your mental body operates, in the Brahmaloka your causal body functions. Each plane is formed by matter of different degrees of density. In the mental plane the matter is subtler than in the astral plane. In the causal plane the matter is subtler than the matter of mental plane. The planes occupy the same position in space. Heaven is here. Brahmaloka is here. Have a different vehicle or body and a different subtler eye. You can function in any plane.


Following this, he gives a brief of the type of life in the astral and other planes.

Retrogression Into Animal Births: A Theosophical View

From the book The Astral Body and Other Astral Phenomena by Arthur A. Powell

A human soul is clothed in a higher triad (atma-buddhi-manas) and a lower quartet (kama or desire, prana or vitality, etheric body, physical body). The kama or desire principle is usually known as the Lower Manas, which is a projection of the Higher Manas into grosser matter, giving raise to the "I" or the lower self. The real Self or Ego of a human is associated with the higher traid and resides on the higher mental plane and is affected only by unselfish thoughts.

Even though the most distinguishing characteristic of man is Manas, which has given him the very name 'man', the human mind is pulled by desire to associate with the lower self and intellect to associate with the higher Self.



The fourth principle Kama thus includes feelings of every kind, and might be described as the passional and emotional nature. It comprises all animal appetites, such as hunger, thirst, sexual desire: all passions, such as the lower forms of love, hatred, envy, jealousy; it is the desire for sentient existence, for experience of material joys.
...

Some people cling so desperately to material existence that at death their astral bodies cannot altogether separate from the etheric, and consequently they awaken still surrounded by etheric matter. Such persons are in a very unpleasant condition: they are shut out from the astral world by the etheric shell which surrounds them, and at the same time they are [Page 142] also, of course, shut off from ordinary physical life because they have no physical sense-organs.

The result is that they drift about, lonely, dumb and terrified, unable to communicate with entities on either plane. They cannot realise that if they would only let go their frenzied grasp on matter they would slip, after a few moments of unconsciousness, into the ordinary life of the astral plane. But they cling to their grey world, with their miserable half-consciousness, rather than sink into what they think complete extinction, or even the hell in which they have been taught to believe.

Sometimes an entity may be able to seize upon a baby body, ousting the feeble personality for whom it was intended, or sometimes even to obsess the body of an animal, the fragment of the group-soul which, to an animal, stands in the place of an ego, having a hold on the body less strong than that of an ego. This obsession may be complete or partial. The obsessing [Page 143] entity thus once more gets into touch with the physical plane, sees through the animal's eyes, and feels any pain inflicted upon the animal — in fact, so far as his his own consciousness is concerned, he is the animal for the time being.

A man who thus entangles himself with an animal cannot abandon the animal's body at will, but only gradually and by considerable effort, extending probably over many days. Usually he is set free only at the death of the animal, and even then there remains an astral entanglement to shake off. After the death of the animal such a soul sometimes endeavours to obsess another member of the same herd, or indeed any other creature whom he can seize in his desperation. The animals most commonly seized upon seem to be the less developed ones — cattle, sheep and swine. More intelligent creatures, such as dogs, cats and horses do not appear to be so easily dispossessed, though cases do occasionally occur.

All obsessions, whether of a human or an annual / body, are an evil and a hindrance to the obsessing soul, as they temporarily strengthen his hold upon the material, and so delay his natural progress into the astral life, besides making undesirable karrnic links.

In the case of a man who, by vicious appetite or otherwise, forms a very strong link with any type of animal, his astral body shows animal characteristics, and may resemble in appearance the animal whose qualities had been encouraged during earth life. In extreme cases the man may be linked to the astral body of the animal and thus be chained as a prisoner to the animal's physical body. The man is conscious in the astral world, has his human faculties, but cannot control the animal body nor express himself through that body on the physical plane. The animal organism serves as a jailer, rather than as a vehicle: and, further, the animal soul is not ejected, but remains as the proper tenant of its body.

Cases of this kind explain, at least partially, the belief often found in Oriental countries, that a man [Page 144] may under certain conditions reincarnate in an animal body.


Among the Astral Entities, both Human and Non-Human, that Powell speaks of, is the Vampire and Werewolf, on which he says:



6. The Vampire and Werewolf.—These two classes are today extremely rare; examples are occasionally found, chiefly in countries where there is a considerable strain of Fourth Race blood, such as Russia or Hungary.

It is just possible for a man to live such a degraded, selfish and brutal life that the whole of the lower mind becomes immeshed in his desires and finally separates from the higher ego. This is possible only where every gleam of unselfishness or spirituality has been stifled, and where there is no redeeming feature whatever.

Such a lost entity very soon after death finds himself unable to stay in the astral world, and is irresistibly [Page 173] drawn in full consciousness into “his own place”, the mysterious eighth sphere, there slowly to disintegrate after experiences best left undescribed. If, however, he perishes by suicide or sudden death, he may under certain circumstances, especially if he knows something of black magic, hold himself back from that fate by the ghastly existence of a vampire.

Since the eighth sphere cannot claim him until after the death of the body, he preserves it in a kind of cataleptic trance by transfusing into it blood drawn from other human beings by his semi-materialised astral body, thus postponing his final destiny by the commission of wholesale murder. The most effective remedy in such a case, as popular “superstition” rightly supposes, is to cremate the body, thus depriving the entity of his point d'appui.

When the grave is opened, the body usually appears quite fresh and healthy, and the coffin is not unusually filled with blood. Cremation obviously makes this sort of vampirism impossible.

The Werewolf can first manifest only during a man's physical life, and it invariably implies some knowledge of magical arts — sufficient at any rate to enable him to project the astral body.

When a perfectly cruel and brutal man does this, under certain circumstances the astral body may be seized upon by other astral entities and materialised, not into the human form, but into that of some wild animal, usually the wolf. In that condition it will range the surrounding country, killing other animals, and even human beings, thus satisfying not only its own craving for blood, but also that of the fiends who drive it on.

In this case, as so often with ordinary materialisations, a wound inflicted upon the astral form will be reproduced upon the human physical body by the curious phenomenon of repercussion (see page 242). But after the death of the physical body, the astral body, which will probably continue to appear in the same form, will be less vulnerable. [Page 174]

It will then, however, be also less dangerous, as unless it can find a suitable medium, it will be unable to materialise fully. In such manifestations, there is probably a great deal of the matter of the etheric double, and perhaps even some of liquid and gaseous constituents of the physical body, as in the case of some materialisations. In both cases this fluidic body seems able to pass to much greater distances from the physical than is otherwise possible, so far as is known, for a vehicle containing etheric matter.

The manifestations of both vampires and werewolves are usually restricted to the immediate neighbourhood of their physical bodies.


From the foregoing informations, it seems that while the principle "once a man, always a man" is true with most human souls, there are cases of degraded humans that may be reborn in animal bodies or occupy animal bodies and become dangerous to the human world.

nirotu
06 February 2007, 04:33 PM
Dear Saidevo:

Thank you so much for compiling various schools of thoughts. Among them, the most disturbing was from Prabhupada (ISKON). It is unfortunate that people, who are revered, can and are able to get away with comments like this. While ISKON may consider him a great and an enlightened one, don’t you think such remarks make one feel that it is pre-mature self-realization where ego still lingers?

Help me out here! Here is an article by Swami Sivananda that you posted a link to: http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm (http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm)
Notice, the article is compilation of self-contradicting philosophies.

Here is a small section

If a man does very heinous sins, he can get the maximum punishment while dwelling in this very physical body. In such extreme cases it is not necessary that he should wait to take the birth of an animal. Man suffers more for his sins while remaining in the body of a man than taking an animal birth. The sufferings of a leper, or a consumptive, a person suffering from syphilis, gonorrhea are beyond description. http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm (http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm)


. . . . The sayings of ancient writers that a cruel person will become a wolf, an avaricious person a cobra, a lustful person a bitch, etc. are all metaphorical statements.

. . . Man learns lessons through bitter and painful experiences in this world. However sinful, cruel and brutal a man may be, he corrects and educates himself through sufferings, pains, sorrows, troubles and difficulties and diseases, loss of property, poverty and death of dear and near relations. God moulds and corrects the sinners in a mysterious manner. Sufferings and pain act as useful educative forces. They serve as eye-openers in the case of evil-doers. They check them from falling back and pull them upwards. They begin to do good actions and seek the company of the saints. http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm (http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm)

Here, he is of the opinion that man’s soul does not regress into animal soul. Now upon reading the following passage that says:


A human birth is the result of mixed Karmas, viz., good and bad. When good Karmas outweigh the bad, man gets the birth of a Deva, Yaksha, Gandharva, and the like. When evil Karmas outweigh the good, he takes birth as an animal, devil, etc. He falls into a lower birth. When good and bad Karmas are more or less equal, he gets a human birth. By good Karmas man attains heaven, by bad Karmas hell, and by mixed Karmas he attains the world of men. http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm (http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/afterdeath.htm)

Here, he is of the opinion that contradicts the previous. I cannot help but wonder how can one take such mixed representations to imply any truth? When one tries to be inclusive the whole philosophy gets diluted. I don’t think one can have both ways!


Similarly, your conclusion is an indication to me that you support both modes for souls, which I respectfully disagree. This may be purely an academic debate. Nevertheless, I have hard time accepting both views. Man alone has reached the pinnacle of biological evolution in the scheme of creation. Therefore, man is the optimal vehicle for the expression of the soul. The Soul (Atman) is so precious to God that He gave only to the one who are truly created in His image. It is difficult to visualize how animals, which live on instincts and do not have the capability of discerning good from evil, will do any justice to that. If suffering is meant to bring about liberation of the soul, how can animal realize that aspect without having any faculty to discern? The suffering does not leave any room for painful awareness to the soul in the animal. That is because, they are not self-conscious let alone being conscious of higher-self.


If animal souls were of humans at one time or the other, why does God refer only to us as his children? Unless the soul is aware of its surrounding (body) and possibly in human, it has no way of connecting with God! Self-consciousness is the key to understanding the working of God in us. Animal do not have that. In the absence of such knowledge, I don’t believe animal soul will evolve in to human realm.


Blessings,

saidevo
08 February 2007, 08:27 AM
Namaste nirotu,

1.

While ISKON may consider him a great and an enlightened one, don’t you think such remarks make one feel that it is pre-mature self-realization where ego still lingers?


Personally, I don't subscribe to the religious or spiritual exclusivity advocated by ISKCON. However, I admire Srila Prabhupada for the enormous work he has done in fostering bhakti and think he is a jivan mukta, a Self-Realized soul while still in a human form. He is definitely on par with several other eminent Acharyas. Having read about Nehru and his family, I have no qualms about the revelation made or doubt the sincerity of the sage. How and why should a stark politician be above criticism for all his misdeeds?

2. Is the form of a human with six senses really superior to that of an animal? Can't a soul in a lower form in five senses think of God and attain salvation? Here is what Adi Shankaracharya says:

Naratvam devatvam nagavanamrigatvam masakataa
Pasutvam keetatvam bhavatu vihagatvaadi jananam
sadaa tvat paadaabja smarana paramaananda laharee
Vihaaraasaktam chet hridayamiha kimtena vapushaa.

"Let me be born as a man, as a god, as a bird, as a monkey which jumps from tree to tree, as mosquito, or even as a worm. I do not decline any janma if only it is given to me to enjoy the bliss of contemplating the Lotus Feet of Sri Paramesvara. What does it matter which form the body takes?" (Kimtena vapushaa?)

If Sankara is of the opinion that form does not matter for a sincere soul, who are we to find fault with it?

As SwamiJ says (http://www.swamij.com/lifestyle.htm) the lifestyle of a modern man has four basic urges: food, sleep, sex, self-preservation. These four urges are the same for a man and an animal, but man has an extra urge, to seek. But then even in the four baisc urges, the animal is more disciplined than the man.

We should not forget one thing here: it is all from the viewpoint and perspective of a man. Has any man really entered into the animal consciousness in its three stages of waking, dreaming and deep sleep to find out what the animal does in those stages? All we know about animals, birds and vegetation is what the physical scientists have discovered and documented.

If a man dies, no matter his status in life, his body will be cremated or interred. (Don't tell me about the exceptions such as Lenin). If an animal dies its body has value as food. A proverb in Tamil says, "The elephant is worth a thousand coins of gold, alive or dead."

Theosophy says that because man kills animals for food and tortures them for fun, the entire animalkind is hostile to man at a spiritual level. And because man destroys the environment, the nature sprites are also hostile to him and they don't reside in cities to do their service.

In God's creation, man is not exclusive to be called His child. All the beasts and birds and plants are also His children. Spiritually, the entire universe is God's body and all animated life are just bacteria in that body. Some are benevolent but several others, specially in human form, are malevolent.



Self-consciousness is the key to understanding the working of God in us. Animal do not have that. In the absence of such knowledge, I don’t believe animal soul will evolve in to human realm.


According to Theosophy and Buddhism, animals have group souls. Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami (of the Himalayan Academy: http://www.himalayanacademy.com) also supports this view. The experiences gained by the animals in the group pour back into the group soul, coloring it. An animal, by virtue of its association with man, gets its astral and mental bodies developed and eventually separates from the group soul into an individual soul and takes birth as a human being, getting an individual causal body.

3. But the point here, as you would say, is not an ordinary human soul, but a demented one taking a lower form. I think that Swami Sivananda in his compilation presents all kinds of viewpoints on a soul's retrogression without giving his own firm opinion, since the matter is highly subjective in nature.

It is true that man's worst sins manifest as loathsome diseases in successive births. Swami Sivananda provides a list of karmas and their equivalent diseases in his essay "Karmas and Diseases" (http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/karmadisease.htm).

But then apart from the Hindu texts speaking about retrogression into animal forms, it is the clairvoyantly investigated discoveries of Theosophy that speaks more emphatically about a human soul's retrogression, though Theosophy stresses the point that a human form is the highest form of Self-Realization and that an ordinary man never retrogrades.

The conclusion, I think could be that a demented human soul might retrograde into an animal form, but as Theosophy clarifies, this retrogression is not by rebirth but by possession. This seems logical enough, because once a soul individualizes as a human soul, it can't get back to a group soul. But nothing prevents it from possessing an animal soul (as part of its group soul) if it is bound to do it.

nirotu
08 February 2007, 07:13 PM
Personally, I don't subscribe to the religious or spiritual exclusivity advocated by ISKCON. However, I admire Srila Prabhupada for the enormous work he has done in fostering bhakti and think he is a jivan mukta, a Self-Realized soul while still in a human form. He is definitely on par with several other eminent Acharyas. Having read about Nehru and his family, I have no qualms about the revelation made or doubt the sincerity of the sage. How and why should a stark politician be above criticism for all his misdeeds?
Dear Saidevo:

Thank you for your response. I do respect the fact that you admire Prabhupada for his teachings. There is no denial in Prabhupada’s accomplishments. Also, no one denies the fact that Nehru’s lifestyle wasn’t something to emulate. But for anyone to make a claim that he is reborn as an animal is taking the experience bit too far. I do not consider him to be authoritative enough to know that. While I do not dispute his knowledge, such statements certainly jolt one’s confidence in that person. It just appears quite strange to me that’s all.

2. Here is what Adi Shankaracharya says:

Naratvam devatvam nagavanamrigatvam masakataa
Pasutvam keetatvam bhavatu vihagatvaadi jananam
sadaa tvat paadaabja smarana paramaananda laharee
Vihaaraasaktam chet hridayamiha kimtena vapushaa.

"Let me be born as a man, as a god, as a bird, as a monkey which jumps from tree to tree, as mosquito, or even as a worm. I do not decline any janma if only it is given to me to enjoy the bliss of contemplating the Lotus Feet of Sri Paramesvara. What does it matter which form the body takes?" (Kimtena vapushaa?)

If Sankara is of the opinion that form does not matter for a sincere soul, who are we to find fault with it?
With all due respects to you and Sage Shankara, let me say this:
You may have realized by now that lot of Shankara’s commentary is very poetical in nature. You have to be careful not to take metaphors as real. For example, in the above Shankara says, “regardless of the form I only enjoy the bliss of contemplating …” How can any animal contemplate? On what? How can an animal contemplate when there is no conscious awareness of that?

I believe, it is a metaphor for complete surrender! It is Shankara’s way of total surrender!! Attributes or features of animals have been used to signify spiritual attributes of man! This has been the hallmark of poets of par excellence such as Shankara, Yogananda etc,. Use of metaphors like –soaring bird, freedom of monkey etc. In fact, Yogananda uses “roaring lion” as a metaphor to describe a man who one day realizes who he is!!
Shankara’s description above, in my view, does not reflect the intention of transforming into those souls but to describe the eagerness to surrender to the will of the father to be molded any which way He pleases. That is why, I believe, one must use cautionary note in interpreting Shankara Philosophy.

Is the form of a human with six senses really superior to that of an animal? Can't a soul in a lower form in five senses think of God and attain salvation?
The picture you paint of an animal soul as if it has acquired necessary senses to know and worship God! I am sorry I just don’t get it! It is proven fact that animals do not have self-consciousness or conscious awareness of actions. In the absence of that how can it know right from wrong, good from bad? Next time, if your dog attacks a neighbor do you think the dog feels any remorse? Next time, when it knocks coffee off from your breakfast table does it feel sorry? Personally, I do not think so!

Animals live only on instincts. That instinct is to fulfill the need for survival. It only struggles to survive. Animals, however, love its own kind because it can identify the newborn as one of its kind. The social tendencies are developed as a part of behavior in response to surroundings.


Theosophy says that because man kills animals for food and tortures them for fun, the entire animalkind is hostile to man at a spiritual level. And because man destroys the environment, the nature sprites are also hostile to him and they don't reside in cities to do their service.
This is irrelevant to our discussion!

In God's creation, man is not exclusive to be called His child. All the beasts and birds and plants are also His children. Spiritually, the entire universe is God's body and all animated life are just bacteria in that body. Some are benevolent but several others, specially in human form, are malevolent.
Yes, God created every thing that is living and non-living, but He created only Adam in His image. He breathed His breath in to Adam. He did not do so in animals! At least, that is what the Bible says. By breathing His breath, He created a perfect vehicle to carry His divine blueprint. To carryout that mission, a perfect vehicle of high awareness that can overcome ego and ignorance. There was enough consciousness in man to perform that task. A man alone has achieved that status! That is why yoga, Tantra refers to Kundalini only in man alone. I have not heard of rising charkas in a dog!

Physical creation has occurred in man and animals and all creatures. All have outer physical shell called body. However, the evolution has occurred only in man that of subtle and causal body. That is what enabled him to be a carrier of soul!

The conclusion, I think could be that a demented human soul might retrograde into an animal form, but as Theosophy clarifies, this retrogression is not by rebirth but by possession. This seems logical enough, because once a soul individualizes as a human soul, it can't get back to a group soul. But nothing prevents it from possessing an animal soul (as part of its group soul) if it is bound to do it.

Absolutely! I agree with you. While man became the perfect vehicle for carrying out God’s intention, at the same time, he has not evolved to the point of completely losing animalistic instinctual urges! That actually forms the very basis of duality in mankind and becomes very nature of our spiritual quest. This duality swings like a pendulum and forms the basis for our journey we are here to take.

Blessings,