You are in:
The Spiritist review — Journal of psychological studies — 1858 > November
November
Spiritist controversy
We have been asked many times why we do not respond, in our Review, to the attacks of
several tabloids against Spiritism as a whole, against its adepts and sometimes even against us.
We believe that in certain cases silence is the best answer. Furthermore, there is a kind of
controversy from which we normally abstain: the one that can degenerate into personal attacks.
That not only disgusts us but would also take such an amount of time that we cannot uselessly
spare, besides being of little interest to our readers that subscribe to the Review for their
instruction and not to be able to read more or less witty diatribes. Moreover, once we had
entered into such a path it would be difficult to exit. That is why we prefer not to start. We shall
never satisfy the scandal lovers.
However, there is controversy and then there is controversy. There is one before which we shall never retreat – it is the serious discussion of the principles that we profess. Nevertheless, even here there is a distinction to make. If handling only general attacks addressed to the doctrine, without a determined objective other than criticizing, and if they come from people that systematically reject everything that they cannot understand, those do not deserve our attention. The terrain daily conquered by Spiritism is a peremptory answer and should demonstrate to them that sarcasm has not granted them great results. One should also notice that the endless jests that have victimized the adepts of the Doctrine are gradually extinguishing. It is the case of asking if there are reasons to laugh at so many eminent persons for having adopted the new ideas. Some may hardly smile these days, just out of habit, while others absolutely no longer laugh and wait.
We should also notice that among the critics there are a lot of people who speak without knowing what they are talking about and that do not even make the effort to learn. In order to respond to them it would be necessary to restart the most elementary explanations and repeat what we have already written, which seems useless to us. That is different with those who studied it and did not understand all of it and those that really want to enlighten themselves, and that raise objections in good faith and with previous knowledge. We accept the controversy in such a terrain, without the presumption of resolving all questions. The Spiritist science is in its beginning and has not yet revealed all of its secrets, however great the already unveiled wonders might be. Which science does not have mysterious and inexplicable facts? Let us thus confess, without any shyness, our insufficiency about the points that we cannot explain yet. Therefore, far from repelling the objections and questions, we ask for them, as long as they are not irrelevant and do not make us uselessly waste time with frivolousness, since this is a means of our enlightenment.
That is what we call useful controversy and it will be useful whenever it takes place among serious people that are respectful enough not to lose decency. We can think differently without diminishing our mutual respect.
However, there is controversy and then there is controversy. There is one before which we shall never retreat – it is the serious discussion of the principles that we profess. Nevertheless, even here there is a distinction to make. If handling only general attacks addressed to the doctrine, without a determined objective other than criticizing, and if they come from people that systematically reject everything that they cannot understand, those do not deserve our attention. The terrain daily conquered by Spiritism is a peremptory answer and should demonstrate to them that sarcasm has not granted them great results. One should also notice that the endless jests that have victimized the adepts of the Doctrine are gradually extinguishing. It is the case of asking if there are reasons to laugh at so many eminent persons for having adopted the new ideas. Some may hardly smile these days, just out of habit, while others absolutely no longer laugh and wait.
We should also notice that among the critics there are a lot of people who speak without knowing what they are talking about and that do not even make the effort to learn. In order to respond to them it would be necessary to restart the most elementary explanations and repeat what we have already written, which seems useless to us. That is different with those who studied it and did not understand all of it and those that really want to enlighten themselves, and that raise objections in good faith and with previous knowledge. We accept the controversy in such a terrain, without the presumption of resolving all questions. The Spiritist science is in its beginning and has not yet revealed all of its secrets, however great the already unveiled wonders might be. Which science does not have mysterious and inexplicable facts? Let us thus confess, without any shyness, our insufficiency about the points that we cannot explain yet. Therefore, far from repelling the objections and questions, we ask for them, as long as they are not irrelevant and do not make us uselessly waste time with frivolousness, since this is a means of our enlightenment.
That is what we call useful controversy and it will be useful whenever it takes place among serious people that are respectful enough not to lose decency. We can think differently without diminishing our mutual respect.
After all, what are we all looking for in such a thrilling and fecund question of Spiritism?
Enlightenment! We look for light, before anything else, from wherever it may come, and if we
express our own way of seeing things it is not a personal opinion that we intend to impose on
others. We open that to discussion, prepared to renounce to them if demonstrated that we are in
error.
We daily sustain such a controversy in our Review, through the answers or the collective refutations that we publish with respect to this or that article. Those who honor us with their letters will always find the answers to their questions, whenever it is not possible to respond in a particular letter, fact that is not always physically possible. Your questions and objections always constitute another group of study cases, that we personally utilize; and we feel happy to extend such a benefit to the readers, as long as facts, which are correlated to those questions, are presented.
We feel also happy to give verbal explanations to the persons that honor us with their visits and in the public conferences, characterized by a common understanding, in which we mutually clarify ourselves.
We daily sustain such a controversy in our Review, through the answers or the collective refutations that we publish with respect to this or that article. Those who honor us with their letters will always find the answers to their questions, whenever it is not possible to respond in a particular letter, fact that is not always physically possible. Your questions and objections always constitute another group of study cases, that we personally utilize; and we feel happy to extend such a benefit to the readers, as long as facts, which are correlated to those questions, are presented.
We feel also happy to give verbal explanations to the persons that honor us with their visits and in the public conferences, characterized by a common understanding, in which we mutually clarify ourselves.
Plurality of the existencesfirst article
From all doctrines professed by Spiritism the most controversial is undoubtedly that of
reincarnation and the plurality of corporeal existences. Although this opinion is presently shared by
a large number of people and that we have discussed it on several occasions, we consider our duty
to examine it in more detail, given its extraordinary importance and to respond to several objections
that were raised.
Before diving deep into the question we must make some observations that seem indispensable to us. The dogma of the reincarnation is not new to many people: it is resurrected from Pythagoras. We have never said that the Spiritist Doctrine is a modern invention. As a consequence of a natural law, Spiritism must have existed since the origin of times, and we always strive to demonstrate that its traces are found in the remotest antiquity. Pythagoras is not the author of the metempsychosis system, as well known. He has taken them from the Indian philosophers and the Egyptians, with whom it existed since immemorial times. Thus, the idea of the transmigration of the soul was a vulgar belief, admitted by the most eminent celebrities. Where has it come from? Has it come by revelation or intuition? We don’t know. Nevertheless, however it might have been, an idea doesn’t cross the ages and isn’t accepted by the highest intelligences if it does not have a serious side. Therefore, its ancient character is more of a proof than an objection. However, there is an important difference between the old doctrine of metempsychosis and the modern doctrine of reincarnation, as it is also known: the spirits absolutely reject the idea of transmigration of man’s soul to the animals and vice-versa.
No doubt, some contradictors say, you had such prior ideas and that is why the spirits agreed with your way of seeing things. This is a mistake that demonstrates, once more, the danger of hastily judgments, without proper examination. If, before passing judgment, those persons had their homework done and had studied what we have written about Spiritism, they would have spared themselves from the embarrassment of such a frivolous objection. We repeat what we have already said about it, that when we were taught the doctrine of the reincarnation by the spirits it was so far off from our thoughts that we had envisioned a completely different system about the antecedents of the soul. A system that is,in fact, shared by several people.
Regarding this subject the doctrine of the spirits has surprised us. We go further: it contradicted us, since it knocked our own ideas down. Hence, it is far from being a reflection of those ideas.
That is not all. We did not give in at the first clash. We fought back; defended our opinion; raised objections and only surrendered before the evidence and when we noticed the insufficiency of our system to solve all questions related to this issue.
To the eyes of some people the use of the word evidence may seem singular with such a subject; however it would not be improper to anyone used to analyze the spiritist phenomena. There are facts to the careful observer that, although not of absolutely material nature, they are not less truthful evidence, at least moral evidence.
This is not the place to explain those facts, only understandable through a continuous and perseverant study. Our objective was only to deny the idea that this theory is nothing but a translation of our thoughts.
We have still to make another refutation: that such a doctrine was not taught only to us; that it was vented in many places, in France as well as abroad: in Germany, in the Netherlands, in Russia, etc and all that even before the publication of the Spirits’ Book.
We shall add to that the fact that since we have devoted ourselves to Spiritism we have had communications from more than fifty mediums, writing, speaking, clairvoyants etc, more or less instructed; of normal, more or less limited intelligence; some completely illiterate hence totally alien to the philosophical subjects and yet in not a single case have the spirits contradicted themselves on that point. The same applies to all circles that we are familiar with and that profess such a principle. We know that this argument is not irrefutable thus we shall not insist on anything else but the reasoning.
We will examine the question from another point of view, abstracting from any intervention of the spirits, who we will keep aside for the time being. Suppose that this theory has nothing to do with them; that we have never even considered the existence of the spirits. Thus let us momentarily position ourselves on neutral grounds, admitting the same degree of likelihood to either one of the hypotheses, that is the unity and the plurality of the corporeal existences, and let us see where our reason and own interest fall.
Some people reject the idea of reincarnation by the simple fact of inconvenience. They say that a single existence is enough and that they do not wish to restart another one. We even know some to whom the idea of reappearing on Earth infuriates them. The question is if God has taken their advice or consulted with them before creating the Universe. Well, it is one out of two possibilities: there is or there isn’t reincarnation. If there is they will be upset but will have to submit to that, as God has not asked for their permission. We can even hear an ailing person saying: “I have suffered a lot for the day. I want no more suffering tomorrow.” Irrespective of their mood they will not suffer less tomorrow or the day after until they are healed.
Therefore, if they have to be physically reborn they will be; they will reincarnate. There is no point in revolting like a child does, not wanting to go to school or like a person who has been sentenced that does not wish to go to prison: they will have to go. Such puerile objections do not deserve serious examination. We say, however, that the Spiritist Doctrine is not as terrible about reincarnation as they may think and had they seriously studied it they would not be so much terrified. They would know that the conditions of a new existence depend on oneself; that one will be happy or unhappy according to what one had done here on Earth; and that they can elevate so much since this existence that they should not fear a setback into the marshland.
We assume here to be talking to individuals that believe in a future after death and not to those who have the perspective of nothingness or wish to dive their souls into a universal wholeness, with no individuality, like the drop of rain into the ocean that is practically the same thing. Then, if you believe in any future, you will certainly believe that it will not be the same for everyone, otherwise what would be the utility of goodness? Why constrain oneself? Why not give rise to all passions, all desires, even if to the detriment of others, if none of that would have any meaning at all?
Do you believe that such a future will be more or less fortunate according to our deeds during this life? Do you then long for a happy as possible future, since it is for eternity? However, do you by any means have the presumption to be the most perfect person that has ever lived on Earth and thus having the right to supreme happiness of the elected ones? No. You then admit that there are persons that are more worthy then you and that have the right to a better place than you, without you being condemned for that.
Well then, place yourself, through your thoughts, in the median situation, considering that you have agreed with that, and suppose that someone tells you:
Let us make a more prosaic comparison. If a man who lives in deprivation, although not in absolute misery, as a consequence of his faults, were told: “Here, there is an immense fortune; you can have it but you have to work very hard for one minute.” Even if that were the laziest person on Earth he would unhesitantly say: “Let me work one minute, two, one hour, one day if needed. What is that if my whole life is going to end up in abundance?”
Well, what is the corporeal life in presence of eternity? It is less than a minute, less than a second.
We have heard the following reasoning: How can God, who is sovereignly good, force man to restart a series of miseries and tribulations? Would God find more benevolence in the condemnation of a man to a perpetual suffering as a consequence of a few moments of error than to provide him with the means of repairing his own faults?
“Two factory owners had each an employee who could aspire to become partner. As it happened one day those workers did not do their duties and deserved to lose their jobs. One employer fired his worker out right, despite his supplication. He died in misery, as he could not find another job. The other employer told his worker: You lost one day and owe me one, in compensation; by badly executing your duties you owe me amends. I allow you to restart. Go and do well and I shall keep you, and you can always aspire the superior position that I promised you.”
We ask what is the philosophy or theosophy that can resolve such problems. Either the souls are equal at birth or they are not, no doubt. If they are equal why do they show such diverse aptitudes? Some will say that it depends on the organism. But this will then be the most monstrous and immoral of all doctrines. Man would be nothing but a machine and a little toy of matter; would not have the responsibility for his acts; he could attribute everything to his physical imperfections. If they are unequal it is because God so created them. But then why is such an innate superiority given to some? Would that partiality be in accordance with God’s justice and to the love that He equally dedicates to all his creatures?
Let us admit, on the contrary, a series of previous progressive existences and it will all be explained. Since birth, men bring the intuition of what they have acquired. They are more or less advanced, pending on the number of experienced existences and how far they are from the starting point. Absolutely like a congregation of people of all ages, each will show a development that is proportional to the number of years that they have lived. The successive existences will be to the life of the soul what the years are to the life of the body.
Assemble one-day individuals from one to eighty years old. Suppose that a veil is cast over their pasts and that, out of your ignorance, you think they were all born on the same day. You shall naturally ask how come some are big and others tiny, some old and others young, some instructed and others ignorant. However, once the cloud that hides their past is withdrawn and you realize that some lived more than others, all will be explained.
In His fairness, God could not have created some souls that are more perfect than others; however, with the plurality of the existences, the inequalities that we observe will contain nothing contrary to the most rigorous justice. We see only the present and not the past. Will such an argument rest on a gratuitous system or supposition? No. We start from a patent and incontestable fact: the inequality of aptitudes and of the moral and intellectual development, fact that we find inexplicable in every existing theory, whereas its explanation is simple, natural and logic by this theory. Is it natural to prefer those that do not explain to the one that does explain?
With respect to the sixth question above some may argue that the tribal man comes from an inferior race. We then ask if he is a man or not? If he is then why has God disinherited him and his race from the privileges given to the Caucasian race? If he is not a man why are we trying to turn him into a Christian? The Spiritist Doctrine is broader than all that. To that Doctrine there isn’t such a thing as different species of men; there are simply man whose spirit is more or less advanced, susceptible however to progress. Wouldn’t that be in more agreement with God’s justice?
We have just seen the soul in its past and its present. If we consider the soul in its future, we will find the same difficulties.
Is there a doctrine that can solve those questions? Admit the successive existences and everything shall be explained in conformity to God’s justice. What cannot be done in one existence will be done in the next. Thus, nobody will escape the law of progress and everyone will be compensated according to their real merit and nobody will be excluded from the supreme happiness, that all can aspire, whatever the obstacles found in their routes.
Those questions could be multiplied to infinity as the moral and psychological problems whose solution is found in the plurality of the existences are countless. We limited to the more general ones. Nevertheless some will perhaps say that the Church does not accept the doctrine of reincarnation; that it would be the end of religion. Our objective is not to handle such a subject at this point: it is enough to have demonstrated that that doctrine is eminently moral and rational. Later we will demonstrate that religion is closer to that than thought and that it would not suffer with this doctrine more that it had done with the discovery of the movements and geological periods of Earth that, at first sight, seemed to deny the sacred texts. The teaching of the spirits is eminently Christian. It is based on the immortality of the soul, on the future penalties and awards, on man’s free-will and on Christ’s moral. Thus, it is not anti-religious.
As we have said, the proposed reasoning was developed abstracting from the whole teaching of the spirits that, for some people, have no authority. If we have adopted, as many others have, the opinion of the plurality of the existences, it was not because it came from the spirits to us, but because it seemed the more logical and the only one capable of resolving problems hitherto unsolvable.
Had it come from a simple mortal and we would have adopted it, not hesitating to renounce to our own ideas. Since an error has been demonstrated the self-esteem has more to lose than to gain with the stubborn persistence on a false idea.
Accordingly, we would have repelled it, even if coming from the spirits, had it sounded contrary to reason, as we have proceeded with many others, for we know from experience that one should not blindly accept everything that come from them, or even from men.
We now have to examine the issue of the plurality of the existences from the point of view of the teaching of the spirits; how should we understand it and, finally, respond to the most serious objections that may be raised against it. This is what we shall do in a next article.
Before diving deep into the question we must make some observations that seem indispensable to us. The dogma of the reincarnation is not new to many people: it is resurrected from Pythagoras. We have never said that the Spiritist Doctrine is a modern invention. As a consequence of a natural law, Spiritism must have existed since the origin of times, and we always strive to demonstrate that its traces are found in the remotest antiquity. Pythagoras is not the author of the metempsychosis system, as well known. He has taken them from the Indian philosophers and the Egyptians, with whom it existed since immemorial times. Thus, the idea of the transmigration of the soul was a vulgar belief, admitted by the most eminent celebrities. Where has it come from? Has it come by revelation or intuition? We don’t know. Nevertheless, however it might have been, an idea doesn’t cross the ages and isn’t accepted by the highest intelligences if it does not have a serious side. Therefore, its ancient character is more of a proof than an objection. However, there is an important difference between the old doctrine of metempsychosis and the modern doctrine of reincarnation, as it is also known: the spirits absolutely reject the idea of transmigration of man’s soul to the animals and vice-versa.
No doubt, some contradictors say, you had such prior ideas and that is why the spirits agreed with your way of seeing things. This is a mistake that demonstrates, once more, the danger of hastily judgments, without proper examination. If, before passing judgment, those persons had their homework done and had studied what we have written about Spiritism, they would have spared themselves from the embarrassment of such a frivolous objection. We repeat what we have already said about it, that when we were taught the doctrine of the reincarnation by the spirits it was so far off from our thoughts that we had envisioned a completely different system about the antecedents of the soul. A system that is,in fact, shared by several people.
Regarding this subject the doctrine of the spirits has surprised us. We go further: it contradicted us, since it knocked our own ideas down. Hence, it is far from being a reflection of those ideas.
That is not all. We did not give in at the first clash. We fought back; defended our opinion; raised objections and only surrendered before the evidence and when we noticed the insufficiency of our system to solve all questions related to this issue.
To the eyes of some people the use of the word evidence may seem singular with such a subject; however it would not be improper to anyone used to analyze the spiritist phenomena. There are facts to the careful observer that, although not of absolutely material nature, they are not less truthful evidence, at least moral evidence.
This is not the place to explain those facts, only understandable through a continuous and perseverant study. Our objective was only to deny the idea that this theory is nothing but a translation of our thoughts.
We have still to make another refutation: that such a doctrine was not taught only to us; that it was vented in many places, in France as well as abroad: in Germany, in the Netherlands, in Russia, etc and all that even before the publication of the Spirits’ Book.
We shall add to that the fact that since we have devoted ourselves to Spiritism we have had communications from more than fifty mediums, writing, speaking, clairvoyants etc, more or less instructed; of normal, more or less limited intelligence; some completely illiterate hence totally alien to the philosophical subjects and yet in not a single case have the spirits contradicted themselves on that point. The same applies to all circles that we are familiar with and that profess such a principle. We know that this argument is not irrefutable thus we shall not insist on anything else but the reasoning.
We will examine the question from another point of view, abstracting from any intervention of the spirits, who we will keep aside for the time being. Suppose that this theory has nothing to do with them; that we have never even considered the existence of the spirits. Thus let us momentarily position ourselves on neutral grounds, admitting the same degree of likelihood to either one of the hypotheses, that is the unity and the plurality of the corporeal existences, and let us see where our reason and own interest fall.
Some people reject the idea of reincarnation by the simple fact of inconvenience. They say that a single existence is enough and that they do not wish to restart another one. We even know some to whom the idea of reappearing on Earth infuriates them. The question is if God has taken their advice or consulted with them before creating the Universe. Well, it is one out of two possibilities: there is or there isn’t reincarnation. If there is they will be upset but will have to submit to that, as God has not asked for their permission. We can even hear an ailing person saying: “I have suffered a lot for the day. I want no more suffering tomorrow.” Irrespective of their mood they will not suffer less tomorrow or the day after until they are healed.
Therefore, if they have to be physically reborn they will be; they will reincarnate. There is no point in revolting like a child does, not wanting to go to school or like a person who has been sentenced that does not wish to go to prison: they will have to go. Such puerile objections do not deserve serious examination. We say, however, that the Spiritist Doctrine is not as terrible about reincarnation as they may think and had they seriously studied it they would not be so much terrified. They would know that the conditions of a new existence depend on oneself; that one will be happy or unhappy according to what one had done here on Earth; and that they can elevate so much since this existence that they should not fear a setback into the marshland.
We assume here to be talking to individuals that believe in a future after death and not to those who have the perspective of nothingness or wish to dive their souls into a universal wholeness, with no individuality, like the drop of rain into the ocean that is practically the same thing. Then, if you believe in any future, you will certainly believe that it will not be the same for everyone, otherwise what would be the utility of goodness? Why constrain oneself? Why not give rise to all passions, all desires, even if to the detriment of others, if none of that would have any meaning at all?
Do you believe that such a future will be more or less fortunate according to our deeds during this life? Do you then long for a happy as possible future, since it is for eternity? However, do you by any means have the presumption to be the most perfect person that has ever lived on Earth and thus having the right to supreme happiness of the elected ones? No. You then admit that there are persons that are more worthy then you and that have the right to a better place than you, without you being condemned for that.
Well then, place yourself, through your thoughts, in the median situation, considering that you have agreed with that, and suppose that someone tells you:
-
- You suffer; you are not as happy as you could be; however, you have before your eyes beings
that enjoy the purest happiness. Would you like to change place with them?
-
- No doubt! - You will answer. What do we have to do?
-
- Nothing else than restart doing right what you did wrong, striving to be better.
Let us make a more prosaic comparison. If a man who lives in deprivation, although not in absolute misery, as a consequence of his faults, were told: “Here, there is an immense fortune; you can have it but you have to work very hard for one minute.” Even if that were the laziest person on Earth he would unhesitantly say: “Let me work one minute, two, one hour, one day if needed. What is that if my whole life is going to end up in abundance?”
Well, what is the corporeal life in presence of eternity? It is less than a minute, less than a second.
We have heard the following reasoning: How can God, who is sovereignly good, force man to restart a series of miseries and tribulations? Would God find more benevolence in the condemnation of a man to a perpetual suffering as a consequence of a few moments of error than to provide him with the means of repairing his own faults?
“Two factory owners had each an employee who could aspire to become partner. As it happened one day those workers did not do their duties and deserved to lose their jobs. One employer fired his worker out right, despite his supplication. He died in misery, as he could not find another job. The other employer told his worker: You lost one day and owe me one, in compensation; by badly executing your duties you owe me amends. I allow you to restart. Go and do well and I shall keep you, and you can always aspire the superior position that I promised you.”
Is it still necessary to ask which one of the two owners was more humane? Would God, who is the
clemency Himself, be more inexorable than that man?
The thought that our fate is forever determined by a few years of trial, when reaching perfection on
Earth has not always depended on us, has something of pungent, whereas the contrary idea is
eminently consoling, for it gives us hope.
Thus, without pronouncing in favor or against the plurality of the existences; without showing
preference for one hypothesis or the other, we shall say that had we been given the choice, nobody
would prefer a trial without an appeal.
A philosopher has said that if God did not exist it would be necessary to invent him for the
happiness of human kind. The same could be said about the plurality of the existences. However, as
we mentioned, God does not ask us for permission; does not consult our taste. It is or it isn’t.
Let us see on which side the probabilities fall and let us face the problem from another point of
view, always making abstraction of the teachings of the spirits, considering it as a philosophical
study only.
It is obvious that without reincarnation there is only one corporeal existence. If our current
existence is the only one, each soul is created at birth, unless its preexistence is admitted. In such a
case, one has to ask what the soul was before and if that state did not constitute an existence, in
some way. There is no middle ground: Either the soul did exist or did not exist before the body. If it
existed, what was its situation? Was it aware of its own existence? If not aware, it is as if it did not
exist. If aware, the individuality was progressive or stationary? In either case what was its level on
reaching the body? Admitting, according to the vulgar belief, that the soul is created with the body
or, which is the same, that before its incarnation it only had negative faculties, we raise the
following questions:
- Why does the soul show so diverse aptitudes and independent from the ideas acquired by education?
- Where does the supernormal aptitudes towards Science and Art, in children of early age come from, while others remain mediocre or inferior their whole life?
- Where do the innate ideas, which some present and others don’t, come from?
- Where do premature instincts of vices or virtues; innate feelings of dignity or inferiority, in certain children come from, contrasting with the environment where they were born?
- Abstraction made of education, why certain men are so more advanced than others?
- Why are there savages and civilized men? If you take a tribal man in his diapers and educate him in the best colleges, will you turn him into a Laplace or Newton?
We ask what is the philosophy or theosophy that can resolve such problems. Either the souls are equal at birth or they are not, no doubt. If they are equal why do they show such diverse aptitudes? Some will say that it depends on the organism. But this will then be the most monstrous and immoral of all doctrines. Man would be nothing but a machine and a little toy of matter; would not have the responsibility for his acts; he could attribute everything to his physical imperfections. If they are unequal it is because God so created them. But then why is such an innate superiority given to some? Would that partiality be in accordance with God’s justice and to the love that He equally dedicates to all his creatures?
Let us admit, on the contrary, a series of previous progressive existences and it will all be explained. Since birth, men bring the intuition of what they have acquired. They are more or less advanced, pending on the number of experienced existences and how far they are from the starting point. Absolutely like a congregation of people of all ages, each will show a development that is proportional to the number of years that they have lived. The successive existences will be to the life of the soul what the years are to the life of the body.
Assemble one-day individuals from one to eighty years old. Suppose that a veil is cast over their pasts and that, out of your ignorance, you think they were all born on the same day. You shall naturally ask how come some are big and others tiny, some old and others young, some instructed and others ignorant. However, once the cloud that hides their past is withdrawn and you realize that some lived more than others, all will be explained.
In His fairness, God could not have created some souls that are more perfect than others; however, with the plurality of the existences, the inequalities that we observe will contain nothing contrary to the most rigorous justice. We see only the present and not the past. Will such an argument rest on a gratuitous system or supposition? No. We start from a patent and incontestable fact: the inequality of aptitudes and of the moral and intellectual development, fact that we find inexplicable in every existing theory, whereas its explanation is simple, natural and logic by this theory. Is it natural to prefer those that do not explain to the one that does explain?
With respect to the sixth question above some may argue that the tribal man comes from an inferior race. We then ask if he is a man or not? If he is then why has God disinherited him and his race from the privileges given to the Caucasian race? If he is not a man why are we trying to turn him into a Christian? The Spiritist Doctrine is broader than all that. To that Doctrine there isn’t such a thing as different species of men; there are simply man whose spirit is more or less advanced, susceptible however to progress. Wouldn’t that be in more agreement with God’s justice?
We have just seen the soul in its past and its present. If we consider the soul in its future, we will find the same difficulties.
- If our future is uniquely decided by our present existence, what is going to be the position of a savage as compared to a civilized man? Will they be on the same level or far apart in the summation of all eternal happiness?
- A man that has strived his whole life to become better shall be on the same level as the other who remained inferior not for his fault but because he did not have time neither the conditions to improve?
- A man who has done evil deeds because he did not have the possibility to enlighten himself is subjected to circumstances that did not depend on him?
- Despite the efforts to instruct, moralize and civilize men, to each one that is enlightened there are millions that daily disappear before the light gets to them. What is their destiny? Are they treated as outcasts? If not, what have they done to deserve the same level as the others?
- What shall be the fate of the children that die at an early age, before they are able to do the good or evil deeds? If they find themselves among the elected ones, why such a favor, as they have not done anything to deserve that? Based on which privilege have they been released from life’s tribulations?
Is there a doctrine that can solve those questions? Admit the successive existences and everything shall be explained in conformity to God’s justice. What cannot be done in one existence will be done in the next. Thus, nobody will escape the law of progress and everyone will be compensated according to their real merit and nobody will be excluded from the supreme happiness, that all can aspire, whatever the obstacles found in their routes.
Those questions could be multiplied to infinity as the moral and psychological problems whose solution is found in the plurality of the existences are countless. We limited to the more general ones. Nevertheless some will perhaps say that the Church does not accept the doctrine of reincarnation; that it would be the end of religion. Our objective is not to handle such a subject at this point: it is enough to have demonstrated that that doctrine is eminently moral and rational. Later we will demonstrate that religion is closer to that than thought and that it would not suffer with this doctrine more that it had done with the discovery of the movements and geological periods of Earth that, at first sight, seemed to deny the sacred texts. The teaching of the spirits is eminently Christian. It is based on the immortality of the soul, on the future penalties and awards, on man’s free-will and on Christ’s moral. Thus, it is not anti-religious.
As we have said, the proposed reasoning was developed abstracting from the whole teaching of the spirits that, for some people, have no authority. If we have adopted, as many others have, the opinion of the plurality of the existences, it was not because it came from the spirits to us, but because it seemed the more logical and the only one capable of resolving problems hitherto unsolvable.
Had it come from a simple mortal and we would have adopted it, not hesitating to renounce to our own ideas. Since an error has been demonstrated the self-esteem has more to lose than to gain with the stubborn persistence on a false idea.
Accordingly, we would have repelled it, even if coming from the spirits, had it sounded contrary to reason, as we have proceeded with many others, for we know from experience that one should not blindly accept everything that come from them, or even from men.
We now have to examine the issue of the plurality of the existences from the point of view of the teaching of the spirits; how should we understand it and, finally, respond to the most serious objections that may be raised against it. This is what we shall do in a next article.
Moral problems: about suicide
QUESTIONS ADDRESSED TO ST. LOUIS THROUGH MR. C..., PNEUMATOPHONY (ORAL COMMUNICATION) AND CLARVOYANT MEDIUM, IN THE SESSION OF THE PARISIAN SOCIETY OF SPIRITIST STUDIES, ON OCTOBER 12th, 1858.
1. How come a man who has the firm intention of killing himself rebels against the idea of
being killed by someone else and who would defend himself against the attacks, on the very
moment that he would accomplish his intents?
- Because man always fears death. The suicidal is always super excited, his mind is disturbed, thus he accomplishes his intent without fear or courage and, so as to say, without the knowledge of his action, whereas had he been able to reason we would not see so many suicides. Man’s instinct leads him to defend his own life and, during the elapsed time since another man approaches to kill him and the proper act he has always an instinctive repulsive reaction to death, leading him to repel that ghost, only terrifying to the guilty spirit. A man that commits suicide does not experience such a feeling since he is surrounded by spirits that push him towards that, who help him with his desires, inducing him to completely erase the memory of anything different from himself, like those of his parents, those who love him, and of another existence. At such a moment man is only selfishness.
2. Someone that is not satisfied with life but does not wish to commit suicide and wishes that his death may serve to something, will bear the culpability if seeking death in the battlefield, defending his country?
- Always! Man has to follow the impulse given to him. Whatever his career; whatever his lifestyle, he is always assisted by spirits that guide him, in spite of him. Thus, acting against their advice is a crime because they are there to drive us, always ready to help us whenever we want to act. However, if man wants to act by himself by leaving this life he is then abandoned. Later he shall recognize his fault when is obliged to restart in another existence.
Man has to be proven in order to elevate. By impeding his action and blocking his free will it would be like going against God and in this case the trials would become useless because the spirits would not make mistakes. The spirit was created simple and ignorant. In order to achieve the happy spheres it is necessary that the spirit elevates in knowledge and wisdom. It is only through adversity that he acquires an elevated heart and better understands God’s greatness.
3. One of the assistants observed that a contradiction was noticed between these last words from St. Louis and the preceding ones, when he said that man can be dragged to suicide by the spirits that encourage him to do that. In such a case he would be giving in to a foreign impulse.
- Because man always fears death. The suicidal is always super excited, his mind is disturbed, thus he accomplishes his intent without fear or courage and, so as to say, without the knowledge of his action, whereas had he been able to reason we would not see so many suicides. Man’s instinct leads him to defend his own life and, during the elapsed time since another man approaches to kill him and the proper act he has always an instinctive repulsive reaction to death, leading him to repel that ghost, only terrifying to the guilty spirit. A man that commits suicide does not experience such a feeling since he is surrounded by spirits that push him towards that, who help him with his desires, inducing him to completely erase the memory of anything different from himself, like those of his parents, those who love him, and of another existence. At such a moment man is only selfishness.
2. Someone that is not satisfied with life but does not wish to commit suicide and wishes that his death may serve to something, will bear the culpability if seeking death in the battlefield, defending his country?
- Always! Man has to follow the impulse given to him. Whatever his career; whatever his lifestyle, he is always assisted by spirits that guide him, in spite of him. Thus, acting against their advice is a crime because they are there to drive us, always ready to help us whenever we want to act. However, if man wants to act by himself by leaving this life he is then abandoned. Later he shall recognize his fault when is obliged to restart in another existence.
Man has to be proven in order to elevate. By impeding his action and blocking his free will it would be like going against God and in this case the trials would become useless because the spirits would not make mistakes. The spirit was created simple and ignorant. In order to achieve the happy spheres it is necessary that the spirit elevates in knowledge and wisdom. It is only through adversity that he acquires an elevated heart and better understands God’s greatness.
3. One of the assistants observed that a contradiction was noticed between these last words from St. Louis and the preceding ones, when he said that man can be dragged to suicide by the spirits that encourage him to do that. In such a case he would be giving in to a foreign impulse.
There is no contradiction. When I said that man who is impelled to suicide was
surrounded by spirits that solicit him to do that I was not referring to the good spirits that
make all efforts to persuade him from doing that; this should be inferred. We all know
that we have a guardian angel or, a familiar guide if you like. Well, man has his free-
will; if despite the good advices given to him he perseveres in that criminal intent, he so
does seconded by the frivolous and impure spirits that surround him and that feel happy
to see that the incarnated spirit also lacks the courage to follow the advices from his
good angel, and sometimes from the spirits of dead relatives that are around him,
particularly in those circumstances.
Family conversations from beyond the grave
Mehemet-Ali, second communication
1. In the name of the Almighty God, I ask the spirit of Mehemet-Ali to come to communicate with us.
- Yes, I know the reason.
2. You promised to come to instruct us. Will you be kind to listen to us and answer?
- I don’t promise, as I have not committed to doing that.
3. Let us replace the “promised us” by “you made us wait”
- You mean: to satisfy your curiosity. Never mind! I will make myself useful.
4. Considering that you lived in the times of the Pharaohs, can you tell us what was the reason for the construction of the pyramids?
- They are burial chambers. Tombs and temples. Great manifestations took place there.
5. Did they also have a scientific interest?
- No. The religious interest absorbed everything.
6. It was necessary that the Egyptians were well advanced in mechanical engineering so as to realize tasks that required so considerable forces. Can you give us an idea of the means they employed?
- Masses of men moaned under the weight of those stones that crossed the centuries. The machine was man.
7. Which class of men was employed into such great work?
- Those that you call people.
8. Were the people on a state of slavery or did they receive a salary?
- Forced.
9. Where did the Egyptians get their taste for colossal things from, rather than the gracious ones that distinguished the Greeks, considering their common origin?
- The Egyptian was touched by God’s greatness. Wanted to equal him, overcoming his own forces. Always man!
10. Since you were a priest on those days, kindly tell us something about the Egyptian religion. What was the people’s belief with respect to the Divinity?
- Corrupted. They believed their priests. Their gods were those who kept them under the oppression.
11. What did they think about the soul after death?
- They believed in what they were told by the priests.
12. Had the priests a more sound idea than the people about God and the soul?
- Yes. They had the light in their hands and although hiding it from the others, they still saw it.
13. The celebrities of the state shared the priest’s or the people’s beliefs?
- They were between the two.
14. What was the origin of the cult to the animals?
- They wanted to deviate man from God by reducing him to their level, offering inferior beings as gods.
15. One can understand, up to a point, the cult to useful animals; but to dirty and harmful ones like the serpents, crocodiles, etc!
- Man adores what he fears. It was a kind of oppression to the people. The priests could not believe in gods made by their hands!
16. Isn’t that strange that at the same time that they adored the crocodile and reptiles they also adored the ichneumon and the ibis that destroyed them?
- Aberration of the spirit. Man seeks gods everywhere to hide what he actually is.
17. Why was Osiris represented with a hawk’s head and Anubis with a dog’s head?
- The Egyptian liked to personify under the form of clear emblems: Anubis was good; the ruthless hawk represented the cruel Osiris.
18. How can one reconcile with the respect to the Egyptians by the dead with their disdain and horror for those who buried and mummified them?
- The cadaver was an instrument of manifestations. According to their thoughts, the spirit would return to the body it had once animated. Since it was one of the instruments of their cult, the body was sacred and the disdain followed those who dared to violate death’s sanctity.
19. Did the conservation of the body allowed for a larger number of manifestations?
- Longer, that is, the spirit would return for longer times, since the instrument was docile.
20. Wouldn’t the conservation of the body also carry an issue of salubrity, considering the floods of the Nile?
- Yes, the bodies of the people.
21. Did the initiation into the mysteries in Egypt go through as much rigorous practices as in Greece?
- Even more rigorous.
22. What was the aim of imposing conditions that were so much difficult to accomplish to the initiated?
- To have only superior souls. Those who know how to understand and remain quiet.
23. Have the teachings about the mysteries had the revelation of the extra-human things as their only objective or the principles of moral and love to the neighbor were also taught?
- All that was much corrupted. The intent of the priests was to dominate, not to instruct.
Dr Muhr *
1. Evocation.
- I am here.
2. Would you kindly tell us where you are?
- I am wondering.
3. Has your death occurred on June 4th of this year?
- No, of last year.
4. Do you remember your friend, Mr. Jobard?
- Yes, I am frequently by his side.
5. When I transmit your answer to him, he will be pleased since he speaks highly of you.
- I know. He is one of my most sympathetic spirits.
6. What did you think about gnomes during your life?
- I supposed they were capable of materializing and assuming fantastic forms.
7. Do you still believe in that?
- More than ever. Now I am sure. But gnome is a word too much related to magic. Now I prefer to say spirit instead of gnome.
NOTE: During his life, he believed in the spirits and their manifestations. He just called them gnomes whereas now he prefers the generic denomination of spirits.
8. Do you still believe, that the spirits, which during your life you called gnomes, can take fantastic material forms?
- Yes, but I know this does not always happen as some people could go crazy if they saw the appearances that those can take.
9. Which appearances would that be?
- Of animals, of devils.
10. A tangible, material appearance or just appearance, like in dreams and visions?
- A little more material than in dreams. The apparitions that could scare us cannot be tangible. God would not allow it.
11. The apparition of the spirit of Bergzabern, under the form of man or animal, could be of such a nature?
- Yes, it is of that kind.
NOTE: We don’t know if during his life he admitted that the spirits could take a tangible form but it is evident that now he refers to the vaporous form of the intangible apparitions.
12. Do you believe that you are going to reincarnate in Jupiter?
- I will go to a planet that is not like Jupiter yet.
13. Is it your own choice that takes you to a world inferior to Jupiter or is it because you still do not deserve to go to that planet?
- I prefer to believe that I don’t deserve it and need to accomplish a mission in a less advanced world. I know I will reach perfection and that is why I prefer modesty.
Note: This answer is a demonstration of the superiority of that spirit and it is in agreement with what Father Ambrose says: there is more merit in requesting a mission in an inferior world than to wish to advance too much in a superior world.
14. Mr. Jobard wishes to know if you were happy with the eulogy that he wrote to you.
- Jobard gave me demonstration of sympathy by writing this eulogy. I am thankful and wish that the picture, which were somehow exaggerated, that he painted about my virtues and skills may serve as an example to those of you who follow the path of progress.
15. Considering that you were a homeopathic physician, what do you think about homeopathy now?
- Homeopathy is the beginning of the discovery of the latent fluids. But other discoveries equally precious will happen and will form a harmonious whole that will lead your globe to perfection.
16. How do you evaluate your book Le Medecin du Peuple (The People’s Doctor)?
- It is the worker’s stone carried to the construction yard.
Note: The answer that the spirit gave about homeopathy supports the idea of the latent fluids, already given by the spirit of Mr. Badet about his photographed image. ** As it seems there are fluids whose properties are unknown to us or go unnoticed, since its action is not ostensive although not less real. Humanity shall be enlightened along the way by the new knowledge of its properties, made available by the circumstances.
_____________________
* He is thought to be a very elevated spirit. He was a homeopathic physician, a true spiritist apostle. He died on June 4th, 1857 in Cairo. He should be in Jupiter, evoked by the request of Mr. Jobard (see Spiritist Magazine, last July, reference made in a letter from Mr. Jobard dated June 22nd, 1858, in the section Correspondence). The difference in the writing is in the original. However, the Muhr form seems more adequate.
** See Spiritist Magazine, July issue.
Madam de Stäel
On September 28th, 1858 at the Parisian Society of Spiritist Studies, the spirit of Madam Stäel, spontaneously and without being evoked communicated through the hand of Ms. E..., psychographic medium, leaving the following words:
“Living is suffering, yes, but won’t hope follow suffering? Hasn’t God placed a larger dose of hope in the hearts of the unfortunate? Child, pleasure and disappointment go along with birth but hope marches before that, by saying: Move on! Happiness waits at the end. God is merciful.
Why, ask the strong spirits, why do you come to teach us a new religion, when Christ had established the basis of such charity; of such certain a happiness? We do not wish to alter what the great reformer has taught. No. We came only to strengthen consciences and increase hopes.
The more civilized the world gets the more it should have confidence and even greater the need to sustain it. We don’t want to change the face of the Universe. We came to help to make it to become better. If we had not come to support man in this century, he would be really unhappy by the lack of confidence and hope.
Yes, we say to the wise man that reads others, seeks to know what is not important to you, and stays away from what is central to you. Open your eyes and do not despair. Don’t say that the nothingness can be possible, when deep in your heart you should feel otherwise. Come sit around this table and wait; you will be enlightened with respect to your future and you will be happy. Here there is bread to all. Spirit, you will improve; body, you will be fed; suffering, you will be diminished; hope, you will sprout and beautify the truth to make it supportable.
Stäel
Note: The spirit referred to the table where the mediums were sitting.
- Ask and I will respond to your questions.
1. We were not waiting for your visit that is why we don’t have a prepared subject.
- I know very well that I cannot respond to special questions. There are, however, general things that can be asked even to a woman that had some spirit and now has a lot of heart!
At that point a lady who was present at the session kind of fainted but it was only with excitement and not painful at all. It was really pleasing to her. Someone offered to magnetize her, but then the spirit of Madam de Stäel spontaneously said:
- No. Leave her alone. Allow the influence to act upon her. Then, addressing the lady she said:
Be confident since a heart awakes by your side; she wishes to speak with you; the day will come... let us not precipitate emotions.
Then the spirit who was communicating through that lady, who was her sister, spontaneously wrote: “I will come back.”
Still addressing the lady, Madam de Stäel wrote:
- A word of consolation to a heart that suffers. Why these tears from a woman for her sister? Why does she go back to the past when all your thoughts should be addressed to the future? Your heart suffers; your soul has the need to go beyond. Then, may these tears be of relief, not produced by sorrow! She who loves you and for whom you cry is happy and venturous! Wait for that day when you shall be together. You don’t see her but for her there is no separation, since she can always be by your side.
2. Can you tell us what you presently think of your writings?
- One word only will clarify you: If I could return and restart, I would modify two thirds and keep only one.
3. Could you point out what is it that you disapprove?
- I am not very demanding; other writers will change whatever is unfair. I was too masculine for a woman.
4. What is the primary cause of such a virile character that you showed in life?
- That depends on the phase of our existence.
In the following session, on October 12th, the questions below were addressed to her through
Mr. D...., a psychographic medium:
5. The other day you came spontaneously through Ms. E... Could you tell us the reason that made you favor us with your presence, since we did not call you?
- The sympathy that I have towards all of you. It is also a duty imposed on my current existence or even better, my transient existence, since I am called to reincarnate: that is, by the way, the destiny of all spirits.
6. Is it more pleasant to you to come spontaneously or by evocation?
- I prefer to be evoked as it is a demonstration that you think of me, but also know that it is pleasing to a free spirit to come to talk with the spirit of man. That is why you should not be surprised that I suddenly came to your center.
7. Would there be any advantage in evoking rather than waiting for the spirits to come, out of their own initiative?
- By the evocation there is an objective. By allowing them to come there is a great risk of imperfect communication on several aspects, since the evil as well as the good spirits may come.
8. Have you already communicated in other centers?
- Yes but they made me show up more than I wanted. In other words, many times they have taken my name.
9. Could you kindly come sometimes to bring us your beautiful thoughts, that we would have the pleasure to reproduce for the general instruction?
- Gladly. I feel happy to be among those that seriously work on their instruction. My visit with you the other day is a proof of that.
“Living is suffering, yes, but won’t hope follow suffering? Hasn’t God placed a larger dose of hope in the hearts of the unfortunate? Child, pleasure and disappointment go along with birth but hope marches before that, by saying: Move on! Happiness waits at the end. God is merciful.
Why, ask the strong spirits, why do you come to teach us a new religion, when Christ had established the basis of such charity; of such certain a happiness? We do not wish to alter what the great reformer has taught. No. We came only to strengthen consciences and increase hopes.
The more civilized the world gets the more it should have confidence and even greater the need to sustain it. We don’t want to change the face of the Universe. We came to help to make it to become better. If we had not come to support man in this century, he would be really unhappy by the lack of confidence and hope.
Yes, we say to the wise man that reads others, seeks to know what is not important to you, and stays away from what is central to you. Open your eyes and do not despair. Don’t say that the nothingness can be possible, when deep in your heart you should feel otherwise. Come sit around this table and wait; you will be enlightened with respect to your future and you will be happy. Here there is bread to all. Spirit, you will improve; body, you will be fed; suffering, you will be diminished; hope, you will sprout and beautify the truth to make it supportable.
Stäel
Note: The spirit referred to the table where the mediums were sitting.
- Ask and I will respond to your questions.
1. We were not waiting for your visit that is why we don’t have a prepared subject.
- I know very well that I cannot respond to special questions. There are, however, general things that can be asked even to a woman that had some spirit and now has a lot of heart!
At that point a lady who was present at the session kind of fainted but it was only with excitement and not painful at all. It was really pleasing to her. Someone offered to magnetize her, but then the spirit of Madam de Stäel spontaneously said:
- No. Leave her alone. Allow the influence to act upon her. Then, addressing the lady she said:
Be confident since a heart awakes by your side; she wishes to speak with you; the day will come... let us not precipitate emotions.
Then the spirit who was communicating through that lady, who was her sister, spontaneously wrote: “I will come back.”
Still addressing the lady, Madam de Stäel wrote:
- A word of consolation to a heart that suffers. Why these tears from a woman for her sister? Why does she go back to the past when all your thoughts should be addressed to the future? Your heart suffers; your soul has the need to go beyond. Then, may these tears be of relief, not produced by sorrow! She who loves you and for whom you cry is happy and venturous! Wait for that day when you shall be together. You don’t see her but for her there is no separation, since she can always be by your side.
2. Can you tell us what you presently think of your writings?
- One word only will clarify you: If I could return and restart, I would modify two thirds and keep only one.
3. Could you point out what is it that you disapprove?
- I am not very demanding; other writers will change whatever is unfair. I was too masculine for a woman.
4. What is the primary cause of such a virile character that you showed in life?
- That depends on the phase of our existence.
In the following session, on October 12th, the questions below were addressed to her through
Mr. D...., a psychographic medium:
5. The other day you came spontaneously through Ms. E... Could you tell us the reason that made you favor us with your presence, since we did not call you?
- The sympathy that I have towards all of you. It is also a duty imposed on my current existence or even better, my transient existence, since I am called to reincarnate: that is, by the way, the destiny of all spirits.
6. Is it more pleasant to you to come spontaneously or by evocation?
- I prefer to be evoked as it is a demonstration that you think of me, but also know that it is pleasing to a free spirit to come to talk with the spirit of man. That is why you should not be surprised that I suddenly came to your center.
7. Would there be any advantage in evoking rather than waiting for the spirits to come, out of their own initiative?
- By the evocation there is an objective. By allowing them to come there is a great risk of imperfect communication on several aspects, since the evil as well as the good spirits may come.
8. Have you already communicated in other centers?
- Yes but they made me show up more than I wanted. In other words, many times they have taken my name.
9. Could you kindly come sometimes to bring us your beautiful thoughts, that we would have the pleasure to reproduce for the general instruction?
- Gladly. I feel happy to be among those that seriously work on their instruction. My visit with you the other day is a proof of that.
The painting medium from the USA
Extracted from the Spiritualist of New Orleans
Extracted from the Spiritualist of New Orleans
Not everybody can be convinced by the same type of spiritist manifestations, thus the need for the
development of mediums of many kinds. In the USA there are those who draw pictures of people
who have been deceased from a long time ago that they had never seen before. Sensible persons
who witness those paintings promptly convert, since the similarities are immediately identified. The most remarkable of those mediums is perhaps Mr. Rogers who we have already mentioned *, a
Columbus resident, tailor by profession, with no other professional habilitation.
Some educated men who have repeatedly said this about the spiritist manifestations: “Resorting to the spirits is nothing more than a hypothesis; an attentive examination demonstrates that it is not the most rational neither the likeliest”, to those, above all, we offer the following summary of a translated article published on July 27th last, by Mr. Lafayette R. Gridley, from Attica, Indiana, to the editors of the Spiritual Age, who have published the integral version in their August 14th edition.
“Last May, Mr. E. Rogers from Cardington, Ohio, a well-known painting medium that makes portraits of people who are no longer in this world, came to spend a few days in my house. During his short visit he was influenced by an invisible artist that used the name Benjamin West. He painted some beautiful life-sized portraits, as well as some others of somewhat inferior quality. Here are some particularities with respect to a couple of those portraits.
Mr. Rogers painted these portaits in my house in a dark room. There was a time when, during this event,the medium was under no influence. During this break that lasted about another hour and a half, I used this time to examine his work.. Then Rogers fell again in a state of trance, finalizing the paintings.
Although there had been no reference as to the individuals who were portrayed in the paintings, one of the pictures was immediately recognized as being my grandfather, Elias Gridley. My wife, my sister, Mrs. Chaney, followed by my father and my mother, all were unanimous in acknowledging the great similarity: it was a facsimile of the old man, with every detail of his vast hair, his shirt, etc.
As for the other portrait, none of us recognized it. I hung it on the wall in my store, visible to everyone, where it remained for a week without any identification. We expected that someone would tell us that it was from an old inhabitant of Greece. I had almost lost hope of identifying the person in the picture when in that afternoon, during a spiritist session that took place in my house, a spirit manifested giving me the following communication:
“My name is Horace Gridley. I have left my corporal body more than five years ago. I lived in Natchez, Mississippi, for several years, where I was the sheriff. My only daughter still lives there. I am your father’s cousin. You can get more information about me from your uncle, Mr. Gridley from Brownsville, Tennessee. The portrait that you have in your store is mine, from the time I lived on Earth, short before I passed on to this other existence, more elevated, better and happier. The picture resembles me, at least as much as I was able to return to the looks of that time, since that is indispensable while we are being portrayed. We do our best to remember that appearance, according to the conditions of the moment. The portrait in question is not finished as I wished it to be. There are some slight imperfections that Mr. West says are due to the condition of the medium. In spite of that send the picture to Natchez, so as it may be examined. I do believe they will identify it.”
The facts mentioned in this communication were completely ignored by me and by all inhabitants of the surroundings. Although many years ago I had once heard that my father had a relative on that side of the Mississippi, none of us knew his name, the place where he had lived; not even if he was alive. It was only several days later that I heard from my father, who lived in Delphi, forty miles from here, that it was the place of residence of his cousin, from whom he had hardly heard over the last sixty years.
We not even thought of requesting family pictures. I had just put a note, in front of the medium, with the names of about twenty former residents of Attica, from whom we wished to obtain the portraits.
Thus, any reasonable person would admit that neither the portrait, nor the communication of Horace Gridley, could be the result of our thoughts transmitted to the medium. As a matter of fact, Mr. Rogers has never known any of the persons that he portrayed and probably never heard about them, since he is an English man; he came to the USA ten years ago and has never traveled south beyond Cincinnati, while Horace Gridley, as far as I know, has never traveled north beyond Memphis, Tennessee, over the last thirty five years of his life. I ignore if he had ever visited England for one day, however this could have happened before Rogers’ birth, since he is not more than twenty eight to thirty years old. Regarding my grandfather, who died about nineteen years ago, he has never left the USA and he has never had a picture taken.
After receiving the communication above I wrote to Mr. Gridley, from Brownsville. His answer came to confirm what we had heard through the communication of the spirit. I also got the name of the only descendent of Horace Gridley, Mrs. L. M. Patterson, still residing in Natchez, where her father lived for many years. He died, according to my uncle, about six years ago, in Houston, Texas.
I then wrote to Mrs. Patterson, my recently found cousin, and sent her a daguerreotyped copy of the portrait, supposedly of her father. In the letter to my uncle of Brownsville I did not say anything about the main objective of my investigation, not saying anything to Mrs. Patterson either: the reason for sending her the picture or how I had obtained it or who the portrayed person was. I just asked my cousin if she recognized the image. Her response was that she could not say for sure but assured me that it resembled her father at the time of his death. Later I wrote again saying that we also thought it had been taken from her father, not telling her however how it had been obtained. My cousin’s response, in short, indicated that everybody had recognized her father in the picture, before I had told her who it actually represented. Nevertheless, she seemed really surprised that I had a picture of her father while she herself did not have any and that her father had never told her that he had a picture taken of him, from wherever. She always thought that there was no picture taken of her father and was really happy with my mail, particularly because of her children who had real veneration for the memory of their grandfather.
I then sent her the original painting, authorizing her to keep it, in case she liked it, but did not tell her how it was obtained. These are the main lines of her answer:
“I received your letter and the picture of my father which you allowed me to keep if I find that it does look like him. Truly, it is a lot like him, I will then keep this one for which I am very grateful to you, since I had never had any other image of him, although I think he was better looking when he was healthy.”
Before receiving the two last letters from Mrs. Patterson, and out of pure chance, Mr. Hedges, currently living in Delphi but who was an old resident of Natchez, and Mr. Ewing, recently arriving from Vicksburg, Mississippi, saw the picture and recognized it as being of Horace Gridley, with whom both had been acquainted.
I find these facts very significant to be left unknown; therefore I considered a duty to reveal them, so as to give them publicity. I assure you that when I was writing this article I took the utmost care with its absolute accuracy.”
NOTE: We already know the painting mediums. In addition to the remarkable drawings that we gave a sample of, but that represent things whose accuracy is impossible to verify, we have seen mediums, absolutely aliens to that art, executing before our eyes easily recognizable sketches of deceased persons that they had never met. But from there to a finely finished portrait, according to all rules, there is a great distance. Such a faculty is associated to a very curious phenomenon, which we are witnessing right now. We shall report that very soon.
Some educated men who have repeatedly said this about the spiritist manifestations: “Resorting to the spirits is nothing more than a hypothesis; an attentive examination demonstrates that it is not the most rational neither the likeliest”, to those, above all, we offer the following summary of a translated article published on July 27th last, by Mr. Lafayette R. Gridley, from Attica, Indiana, to the editors of the Spiritual Age, who have published the integral version in their August 14th edition.
“Last May, Mr. E. Rogers from Cardington, Ohio, a well-known painting medium that makes portraits of people who are no longer in this world, came to spend a few days in my house. During his short visit he was influenced by an invisible artist that used the name Benjamin West. He painted some beautiful life-sized portraits, as well as some others of somewhat inferior quality. Here are some particularities with respect to a couple of those portraits.
Mr. Rogers painted these portaits in my house in a dark room. There was a time when, during this event,the medium was under no influence. During this break that lasted about another hour and a half, I used this time to examine his work.. Then Rogers fell again in a state of trance, finalizing the paintings.
Although there had been no reference as to the individuals who were portrayed in the paintings, one of the pictures was immediately recognized as being my grandfather, Elias Gridley. My wife, my sister, Mrs. Chaney, followed by my father and my mother, all were unanimous in acknowledging the great similarity: it was a facsimile of the old man, with every detail of his vast hair, his shirt, etc.
As for the other portrait, none of us recognized it. I hung it on the wall in my store, visible to everyone, where it remained for a week without any identification. We expected that someone would tell us that it was from an old inhabitant of Greece. I had almost lost hope of identifying the person in the picture when in that afternoon, during a spiritist session that took place in my house, a spirit manifested giving me the following communication:
“My name is Horace Gridley. I have left my corporal body more than five years ago. I lived in Natchez, Mississippi, for several years, where I was the sheriff. My only daughter still lives there. I am your father’s cousin. You can get more information about me from your uncle, Mr. Gridley from Brownsville, Tennessee. The portrait that you have in your store is mine, from the time I lived on Earth, short before I passed on to this other existence, more elevated, better and happier. The picture resembles me, at least as much as I was able to return to the looks of that time, since that is indispensable while we are being portrayed. We do our best to remember that appearance, according to the conditions of the moment. The portrait in question is not finished as I wished it to be. There are some slight imperfections that Mr. West says are due to the condition of the medium. In spite of that send the picture to Natchez, so as it may be examined. I do believe they will identify it.”
The facts mentioned in this communication were completely ignored by me and by all inhabitants of the surroundings. Although many years ago I had once heard that my father had a relative on that side of the Mississippi, none of us knew his name, the place where he had lived; not even if he was alive. It was only several days later that I heard from my father, who lived in Delphi, forty miles from here, that it was the place of residence of his cousin, from whom he had hardly heard over the last sixty years.
We not even thought of requesting family pictures. I had just put a note, in front of the medium, with the names of about twenty former residents of Attica, from whom we wished to obtain the portraits.
Thus, any reasonable person would admit that neither the portrait, nor the communication of Horace Gridley, could be the result of our thoughts transmitted to the medium. As a matter of fact, Mr. Rogers has never known any of the persons that he portrayed and probably never heard about them, since he is an English man; he came to the USA ten years ago and has never traveled south beyond Cincinnati, while Horace Gridley, as far as I know, has never traveled north beyond Memphis, Tennessee, over the last thirty five years of his life. I ignore if he had ever visited England for one day, however this could have happened before Rogers’ birth, since he is not more than twenty eight to thirty years old. Regarding my grandfather, who died about nineteen years ago, he has never left the USA and he has never had a picture taken.
After receiving the communication above I wrote to Mr. Gridley, from Brownsville. His answer came to confirm what we had heard through the communication of the spirit. I also got the name of the only descendent of Horace Gridley, Mrs. L. M. Patterson, still residing in Natchez, where her father lived for many years. He died, according to my uncle, about six years ago, in Houston, Texas.
I then wrote to Mrs. Patterson, my recently found cousin, and sent her a daguerreotyped copy of the portrait, supposedly of her father. In the letter to my uncle of Brownsville I did not say anything about the main objective of my investigation, not saying anything to Mrs. Patterson either: the reason for sending her the picture or how I had obtained it or who the portrayed person was. I just asked my cousin if she recognized the image. Her response was that she could not say for sure but assured me that it resembled her father at the time of his death. Later I wrote again saying that we also thought it had been taken from her father, not telling her however how it had been obtained. My cousin’s response, in short, indicated that everybody had recognized her father in the picture, before I had told her who it actually represented. Nevertheless, she seemed really surprised that I had a picture of her father while she herself did not have any and that her father had never told her that he had a picture taken of him, from wherever. She always thought that there was no picture taken of her father and was really happy with my mail, particularly because of her children who had real veneration for the memory of their grandfather.
I then sent her the original painting, authorizing her to keep it, in case she liked it, but did not tell her how it was obtained. These are the main lines of her answer:
“I received your letter and the picture of my father which you allowed me to keep if I find that it does look like him. Truly, it is a lot like him, I will then keep this one for which I am very grateful to you, since I had never had any other image of him, although I think he was better looking when he was healthy.”
Before receiving the two last letters from Mrs. Patterson, and out of pure chance, Mr. Hedges, currently living in Delphi but who was an old resident of Natchez, and Mr. Ewing, recently arriving from Vicksburg, Mississippi, saw the picture and recognized it as being of Horace Gridley, with whom both had been acquainted.
I find these facts very significant to be left unknown; therefore I considered a duty to reveal them, so as to give them publicity. I assure you that when I was writing this article I took the utmost care with its absolute accuracy.”
NOTE: We already know the painting mediums. In addition to the remarkable drawings that we gave a sample of, but that represent things whose accuracy is impossible to verify, we have seen mediums, absolutely aliens to that art, executing before our eyes easily recognizable sketches of deceased persons that they had never met. But from there to a finely finished portrait, according to all rules, there is a great distance. Such a faculty is associated to a very curious phenomenon, which we are witnessing right now. We shall report that very soon.
___________________________
* Vol. I, page 239 of the “Spiritualist” of New Orleans
Somnambulistic independence
There are many people now that accept magnetism and have for a long time contested the
somnambulistic lucidity. Truly, that faculty knocked down every notion that we had with respect to
the perception of the material world. However, for a long time we have had the example of the
natural somnambulists who enjoyed similar faculties that, by a bizarre contradiction, had never
being investigated. Today the somnambulistic clairvoyance is an established fact and if it is still
contested by some people it is due to the fact that it takes long for the new ideas to ingrain,
particularly when it proves necessary to abandon the old ones that we cherished for so long.
Many people believed, as some still do today with respect to the spiritist manifestations, that somnambulism could be experienced like one does with a machine, without taking into account the special conditions of the phenomenon. That is why they have concluded by the denial in the first opportunity since satisfactory results have not been achieved. Such delicate phenomena require a lengthy, frequent and perseverant observation so that the most subtle nuances can be captured. Also due to the incomplete observation of the facts certain people admit the clairvoyance of the somnambulists, but contest their independence. Their vision, they say, do not go beyond the thought of those who interrogate them. Some even say that there is no vision but simply intuition and transmission of thoughts, citing numerous examples to support these ideas.
No one doubts that the somnambulist may capture the thought, translate it and sometimes operate as its echo. No one contests the fact either that, in certain cases, thought may influence them. By only admitting that the phenomenon is limited to that, wouldn’t this alone be a curious fact, worthy of observation? Thus the problem is not to determine if a somnambulist is or can be influenced by an alien thought, what in itself is not questioned, but if she is always influenced and if that results from experimental investigations. If the somnambulist only says what you already know then it is unquestionable that she only translates your thoughts. But if in certain cases she says something that you don’t know; if what she says is contrary to your opinion and to the way you may see things, her independence and the fact that she follows her own impulses become evident.
For that kind of phenomenon a well characterized case would be enough to prove that the somnambulist is not absolutely subjected to someone else’s thought. Well, there are thousands of examples so that we will mention two among those that we are aware of, as follows:
Mr. Marillon, a Bercy resident, Rue Charenton 43, disappeared last January 13th. Every effort to find any trace of him proved useless. None of this friends and colleagues had seen him. None of his business could be associated to such a prolonged absence. His position, character and mental state ruled out any suicide attempt. The remaining hypothesis was that he could have been a victim of a crime or an accident. In the latter case, however, he could have been easily identified and taken back home or even to the morgue. All likelihoods then indicated a crime. That idea gained support particularly considering the fact that he left home to make a payment. But where and how such a crime would have taken place? That was the question. Then, his daughter resorted to a somnambulist, Mrs. Roger, who had given demonstration of a remarkable lucidity in many other circumstances that we ourselves had the opportunity to verify.
Mrs. Roger tracked Mr. Marillon since he left his house, around three pm, up until seven pm, when he was ready to return home; she saw him walking down the Seine banks due to an imperious biological need; according to her, he then had an episode of apoplexy and fell head first on a rock, breaking his head open, falling into the waters. There was no crime or suicide. She even saw money and keys in one pocket of his jacket. She indicated the place of the accident but said that the body was no longer there as it had been dragged by the currents and would be found in another given location.
Everything happened according to her description. The man had a wound on the head, the money and keys in his pocket and besides, his clothes left no doubt as for the reason that had taken him to the river bank.
Where could one find the transmission of any thought by analyzing so many details?
Another fact where the somnambulistic independence is not less evident is given below.
The Belhomme couple, ranch owners from Rueil at Rue Saint-Denis 19, had saved about 800-900 francs. For security reasons, Mrs. Belhomme hid the money in a closet which was used to keep new clothes on one side as well as worn out on the other. She placed the money where the new clothes were hanging. Someone suddenly showed up forcing Mrs. Belhomme to quickly shut the closet’s door. Since she needed the money later, Mrs. Belhomme went back to recover the cash, assured to have placed it among the old, worn clothes; this was her intention from the beginning, for being less tempting to an eventual thief. However she misplaced the money due to the unexpected arrival of the visitor the other day. She was so much convinced that she had the money among the shabby clothes that she did not even bother to look somewhere else. The place was empty, she had the unsolicited visit then, she thought, she had been seen hiding the money and consequently robbed; her suspicions then naturally fell onto the visitor.
Meanwhile, Mrs. Belhomme knew Ms Marillon, the daughter of the disappeared man that we mentioned above, telling her about her unfortunate loss. Ms Marillon in turn told her the story of her father and how he had been found, advising her to seek the somnambulist’s help, before taking any other action. The Belhoummes went to Mrs. Roger place, convinced that they had been robbed, hoping that they could have the thief’s name confirmed; it could not be that of anyone else but the unexpected visitor. It was their only thought.
Well, after a lengthy description of the place the somnambulist said: “You were not robbed; your money remains untouched in the closet; you thought that you had it among the worn clothes; it is among the new clothes. Go home to find it.” That is exactly what happened.
Reporting these two cases – and we could mention many others – our aim was to demonstrate that the somnambulistic clairvoyance is not always the reflection of a foreign thought. Hence the somnambulist can have her own lucidity, absolutely independent. This leads to consequences of paramount importance from the physiological view point. We have here the key to more than one problem that we shall examine in due course, when we will then analyze the relationships between somnambulism and Spiritism, shedding an entirely new light onto the issue.
Many people believed, as some still do today with respect to the spiritist manifestations, that somnambulism could be experienced like one does with a machine, without taking into account the special conditions of the phenomenon. That is why they have concluded by the denial in the first opportunity since satisfactory results have not been achieved. Such delicate phenomena require a lengthy, frequent and perseverant observation so that the most subtle nuances can be captured. Also due to the incomplete observation of the facts certain people admit the clairvoyance of the somnambulists, but contest their independence. Their vision, they say, do not go beyond the thought of those who interrogate them. Some even say that there is no vision but simply intuition and transmission of thoughts, citing numerous examples to support these ideas.
No one doubts that the somnambulist may capture the thought, translate it and sometimes operate as its echo. No one contests the fact either that, in certain cases, thought may influence them. By only admitting that the phenomenon is limited to that, wouldn’t this alone be a curious fact, worthy of observation? Thus the problem is not to determine if a somnambulist is or can be influenced by an alien thought, what in itself is not questioned, but if she is always influenced and if that results from experimental investigations. If the somnambulist only says what you already know then it is unquestionable that she only translates your thoughts. But if in certain cases she says something that you don’t know; if what she says is contrary to your opinion and to the way you may see things, her independence and the fact that she follows her own impulses become evident.
For that kind of phenomenon a well characterized case would be enough to prove that the somnambulist is not absolutely subjected to someone else’s thought. Well, there are thousands of examples so that we will mention two among those that we are aware of, as follows:
Mr. Marillon, a Bercy resident, Rue Charenton 43, disappeared last January 13th. Every effort to find any trace of him proved useless. None of this friends and colleagues had seen him. None of his business could be associated to such a prolonged absence. His position, character and mental state ruled out any suicide attempt. The remaining hypothesis was that he could have been a victim of a crime or an accident. In the latter case, however, he could have been easily identified and taken back home or even to the morgue. All likelihoods then indicated a crime. That idea gained support particularly considering the fact that he left home to make a payment. But where and how such a crime would have taken place? That was the question. Then, his daughter resorted to a somnambulist, Mrs. Roger, who had given demonstration of a remarkable lucidity in many other circumstances that we ourselves had the opportunity to verify.
Mrs. Roger tracked Mr. Marillon since he left his house, around three pm, up until seven pm, when he was ready to return home; she saw him walking down the Seine banks due to an imperious biological need; according to her, he then had an episode of apoplexy and fell head first on a rock, breaking his head open, falling into the waters. There was no crime or suicide. She even saw money and keys in one pocket of his jacket. She indicated the place of the accident but said that the body was no longer there as it had been dragged by the currents and would be found in another given location.
Everything happened according to her description. The man had a wound on the head, the money and keys in his pocket and besides, his clothes left no doubt as for the reason that had taken him to the river bank.
Where could one find the transmission of any thought by analyzing so many details?
Another fact where the somnambulistic independence is not less evident is given below.
The Belhomme couple, ranch owners from Rueil at Rue Saint-Denis 19, had saved about 800-900 francs. For security reasons, Mrs. Belhomme hid the money in a closet which was used to keep new clothes on one side as well as worn out on the other. She placed the money where the new clothes were hanging. Someone suddenly showed up forcing Mrs. Belhomme to quickly shut the closet’s door. Since she needed the money later, Mrs. Belhomme went back to recover the cash, assured to have placed it among the old, worn clothes; this was her intention from the beginning, for being less tempting to an eventual thief. However she misplaced the money due to the unexpected arrival of the visitor the other day. She was so much convinced that she had the money among the shabby clothes that she did not even bother to look somewhere else. The place was empty, she had the unsolicited visit then, she thought, she had been seen hiding the money and consequently robbed; her suspicions then naturally fell onto the visitor.
Meanwhile, Mrs. Belhomme knew Ms Marillon, the daughter of the disappeared man that we mentioned above, telling her about her unfortunate loss. Ms Marillon in turn told her the story of her father and how he had been found, advising her to seek the somnambulist’s help, before taking any other action. The Belhoummes went to Mrs. Roger place, convinced that they had been robbed, hoping that they could have the thief’s name confirmed; it could not be that of anyone else but the unexpected visitor. It was their only thought.
Well, after a lengthy description of the place the somnambulist said: “You were not robbed; your money remains untouched in the closet; you thought that you had it among the worn clothes; it is among the new clothes. Go home to find it.” That is exactly what happened.
Reporting these two cases – and we could mention many others – our aim was to demonstrate that the somnambulistic clairvoyance is not always the reflection of a foreign thought. Hence the somnambulist can have her own lucidity, absolutely independent. This leads to consequences of paramount importance from the physiological view point. We have here the key to more than one problem that we shall examine in due course, when we will then analyze the relationships between somnambulism and Spiritism, shedding an entirely new light onto the issue.
Forgotten night or Manouze, the witch
(the thousand second night of the Arabic talesdictated by the spirit of Frédéric Soulié)
Preface by the Editor
(the thousand second night of the Arabic talesdictated by the spirit of Frédéric Soulié)
Preface by the Editor
During the year of 1856 the experiments with the spiritist manifestations held in Mr. B... house at
the Rue Lamartine attracted a select and large crowd of people. The communicating spirits in that
circle were more or less serious. Some have said things of remarkable wisdom, of notable depth, as
one can judge from the Spirits’ Book that was initiated and in its most part accomplished there.
Others were less serious: their cheerful humor was given to jester, but fine and never inconvenient
jester. Among those was Frédéric Soulié who came on his own, unsolicited, but whose unexpected
visits were always an enjoyable pastime to everyone. His conversation was witty, fine, vivacious,
opportune, having never denied the author of the “Mémoires du Diable” as a matter of fact, he
never attributed importance to himself and when enquired about complex philosophical issues he
frankly confessed his insufficiency to solve them, saying that he was still too much attached to
matter and that he preferred the funny things to the serious ones. Vide capítulo XII, número 154.
(NT).
The medium who served him as interpreter was Ms Caroline B..., one of the daughters of the owner of the house, a medium of the exclusively passive kind, who had no consciousness about what she wrote, being able to talk and laugh her head off, what she used to do with pleasure, while her hand jotted the words on the paper. The mechanical means used for a long time was the planchettes with a pencil, described in The Mediums’ Book. Later the medium used the direct psychgraphy.
Some may ask what proof do we have that the communicating spirit was of Frédéric Soulié and that it was not someone else. This is not the place to discuss the subject of identity of the spirits. We shall say only that Soulié’s identity was confirmed by a thousand and one details that cannot escape a careful examination. Several times a word, a gesture, a reported personal fact came to confirm that yes, it was him, and on several occasions he left his signature, which was confronted with the original. One day someone asked for his picture; therefore the medium, that could not draw and had never seen him, made a sketch of impressive similarity.
Nobody in the session had had any relationship with him during his life. Why then would he come uninvited? The fact is that he had associated himself to one of the participants, never revealing the reason: he only showed up when that person was present; he would come and leave with that person, hence when that person was not there he would not come either and – interesting thing! – When he was there it was difficult, if not impossible, to have communications from other spirits. Even the familiar spirit of the house would yield to him, saying that he would do the honors of the house, out of pure kindness.
One day he announced that he would bring us a romance, using his marked style. Indeed, soon after he started a story that had a very promising beginning. The theme was druidic and the facts that took place in the Armorica during the Roman Empire. Unfortunately he stopped before the task was initiated, as the constant work was not his strong point; he seemed to be feeling well in his kind of lazy life. After dictating a few pages he stopped the work but said that he would write another one, less troublesome. That was when he wrote the tale whose publication we started. More than thirty people witnessed that production and can attest its origin. We do not take it as a highly philosophical piece of work but as an original sample of a hard work obtained from the spirits.
It is remarkable how everything is articulated, connected through an impressive art. The most extraordinary is the fact that the theme was resumed over five or six different occasions and sometimes after breaks of two or three weeks. Well, on every restart the subject continued as if written at once, without any obliterations, reticence or the need to recover what had been said before.
We published it as it came out from the medium’s writings, without changing anything, neither the style, nor the ideas or the connection of the facts.
Some repetition of words as well as typos was observed, and then Soulié himself assigned the correction to us, saying that he would assist us in the task.
When all was finished he wanted to review everything, making occasional changes of minor importance, and then authorizing us to publish it as we wished, gladly passing the copyright to us. Nevertheless, we thought appropriate to introduce it in the Review only with the approval of the deceased friend, who held the actual rights, hence we owe him the current production from beyond the grave, for his presence and request. The title was given by the spirit of Frédéric Soulié himself.
The medium who served him as interpreter was Ms Caroline B..., one of the daughters of the owner of the house, a medium of the exclusively passive kind, who had no consciousness about what she wrote, being able to talk and laugh her head off, what she used to do with pleasure, while her hand jotted the words on the paper. The mechanical means used for a long time was the planchettes with a pencil, described in The Mediums’ Book. Later the medium used the direct psychgraphy.
Some may ask what proof do we have that the communicating spirit was of Frédéric Soulié and that it was not someone else. This is not the place to discuss the subject of identity of the spirits. We shall say only that Soulié’s identity was confirmed by a thousand and one details that cannot escape a careful examination. Several times a word, a gesture, a reported personal fact came to confirm that yes, it was him, and on several occasions he left his signature, which was confronted with the original. One day someone asked for his picture; therefore the medium, that could not draw and had never seen him, made a sketch of impressive similarity.
Nobody in the session had had any relationship with him during his life. Why then would he come uninvited? The fact is that he had associated himself to one of the participants, never revealing the reason: he only showed up when that person was present; he would come and leave with that person, hence when that person was not there he would not come either and – interesting thing! – When he was there it was difficult, if not impossible, to have communications from other spirits. Even the familiar spirit of the house would yield to him, saying that he would do the honors of the house, out of pure kindness.
One day he announced that he would bring us a romance, using his marked style. Indeed, soon after he started a story that had a very promising beginning. The theme was druidic and the facts that took place in the Armorica during the Roman Empire. Unfortunately he stopped before the task was initiated, as the constant work was not his strong point; he seemed to be feeling well in his kind of lazy life. After dictating a few pages he stopped the work but said that he would write another one, less troublesome. That was when he wrote the tale whose publication we started. More than thirty people witnessed that production and can attest its origin. We do not take it as a highly philosophical piece of work but as an original sample of a hard work obtained from the spirits.
It is remarkable how everything is articulated, connected through an impressive art. The most extraordinary is the fact that the theme was resumed over five or six different occasions and sometimes after breaks of two or three weeks. Well, on every restart the subject continued as if written at once, without any obliterations, reticence or the need to recover what had been said before.
We published it as it came out from the medium’s writings, without changing anything, neither the style, nor the ideas or the connection of the facts.
Some repetition of words as well as typos was observed, and then Soulié himself assigned the correction to us, saying that he would assist us in the task.
When all was finished he wanted to review everything, making occasional changes of minor importance, and then authorizing us to publish it as we wished, gladly passing the copyright to us. Nevertheless, we thought appropriate to introduce it in the Review only with the approval of the deceased friend, who held the actual rights, hence we owe him the current production from beyond the grave, for his presence and request. The title was given by the spirit of Frédéric Soulié himself.
A Forgotten Night
In Bagdad there was a woman from the times of Aladdin. I will tell her story.
In one of the suburbs of Bagdad, not far from the Sultan Sheherazade’s palace, lived an old woman
named Manouze. She was a motive of horror to the whole town as she was a witch of the most
terrible kind. Scaring things happened at night in her house; so much that after sunset nobody
ventured to pass by her doorway, except some lover trying to find a potion for his rebel partner or an
abandoned woman looking for some remedy for the wound inflicted by her lover, after leaving her.
One day, when the Sultan was more upset than usual and there was great desolation in town, the Sultan wanted to kill his favorite wife and following his example all husbands were unfaithful to their wives, a young man left the magnificent solar, located by the side of the favorite lady’s palace. The man wore a tunic and a turban of somber colors but under the simple outfit he sustained an air of great distinction. He tried to go unnoticed along the houses, like a thief or a lover, afraid of being caught by surprise, moving towards the region where Manouze the witch’s house was located. He showed great anxiety on his face, denouncing an unsettling concern. The man walked quickly but cautiously through the streets and squares.
As he arrived at her door he hesitated for a few moments, later deciding to knock. For a quarter of an hour he went through a fatal anguish since he heard noises that the human ear had never heard before: a pack of fiercely barking dogs; groaning outcries and chants from men and women after an orgy and, to illuminate all that upheaval, lights running from top to bottom of the house, like the will-o-the-wisp of all colors. Then, out of the blue, it all went quiet. The lights were out and the door opened.
II
The visitor hesitated for a moment, not knowing if he should proceed through the somber corridor
extending before his eyes. After walking and groping for about thirty steps he found himself in front
of a door, yielding to a room only illuminated by a cooper lamp of three tips, hanging from the
ceiling, at the center of the room.
The house, which should be inhabited by a large number of people, given the noise heard from the streets, had now a deserted look. The huge room that, by its construction, should be the basis of the edifice was empty, not to mention the stuffed animals of all kinds that guarded the place.
In the middle of the room there was a small table covered by witchcraft books and across from the table, sitting on a large armchair, was an old lady only three feet tall. She was covered by her turban and scarves to the point that her face was almost completely covered. As the stranger approached, she raised her head revealing the most terrible looks that one can imagine.
- Here you are Mr. Nuredin – she said, staring at the young man with her hyena’s eyes. Come! Since a few days ago my crocodile of ruby’s eyes has announced your visit. Tell me if it is potion that you miss or if it is a fortune. But, what am I saying? Fortune! Wouldn’t yours make the Sultan himself jealous? Aren’t you the richest as you are the most handsome? It is a potion that you are likely looking for. Who is then the daring woman, so cruel to you? I should not say anything. I know nothing. I am ready to hear your whining and to give you the needed remedy, as long as my science can be useful to you. But why that look in your face and why you don’t say anything? Are you afraid? Do I scare you? You now see me this way but I was beautiful once; the nicest of all women in Bagdad. It was the suffering that made me so ugly. But why bother with my sufferings? Come close, I shall hear you. I cannot give you more than ten minutes, make it fast!
Nuredin did not feel safe. However, not willing to give away his perturbation before the old lady that kept him unsettled, he stepped forward and said:
- Woman, I have come for a serious thing. My fate is in your hands. You shall decide between my happiness and my death. This is what I have to tell you:
The Sultan wants to kill Nazara and I love her. I will tell you about the origin of such love since I came here not to alleviate my pain but to save her from such an unfortunate fate, for I do not wish to see her dead. You know that my palace is next door to the Sultan’s palace and that our gardens share a border line. About six moons ago I was strolling in my gardens when I heard an enchanting music following the most delicious female voice I have ever heard. I wished to figure out where it came from thus I got closer to the neighbor’s garden to realize that it was coming from a green pergola, occupied by the favorite of the Sultan. Several days passed and I was absorbed by those melodious sounds. Day and night I dreamed of the unknown beauty, whose voice had seduced me for in my mind she was beautiful. Every evening I strolled through the same paths from where I had heard that enchanting harmony. For five days it was all in vain. Finally, on the sixth day I heard the music again. Then, not being able to contain myself any longer, I approached the fencing wall only to realize that I could easily escalate it. I hesitated for a few moments and took the firm decision: I then climbed the wall, passing to the neighbor’s garden.
It was then when I saw, not a woman but a houri, a favorite houri of Mohammed, a true wonder! She did not show much of a surprise by seeing me but I threw myself at her feet, begging that she should not be afraid but listen to me instead. I told her that her singing had attracted me and I assured her that my attitude was profoundly respectful. She kindly listened to me. We spent the first night talking about music. I also sang and offered to accompany her. She consented so that we set up a date for the next day, at the same time.
She was more relaxed then. The Sultan was in his Council so that the vigilance was somewhat diminished. The first two or three nights were dedicated to music. But music is the voice of the lovers and from the fourth day on we were no longer strange to one another.
The house, which should be inhabited by a large number of people, given the noise heard from the streets, had now a deserted look. The huge room that, by its construction, should be the basis of the edifice was empty, not to mention the stuffed animals of all kinds that guarded the place.
In the middle of the room there was a small table covered by witchcraft books and across from the table, sitting on a large armchair, was an old lady only three feet tall. She was covered by her turban and scarves to the point that her face was almost completely covered. As the stranger approached, she raised her head revealing the most terrible looks that one can imagine.
- Here you are Mr. Nuredin – she said, staring at the young man with her hyena’s eyes. Come! Since a few days ago my crocodile of ruby’s eyes has announced your visit. Tell me if it is potion that you miss or if it is a fortune. But, what am I saying? Fortune! Wouldn’t yours make the Sultan himself jealous? Aren’t you the richest as you are the most handsome? It is a potion that you are likely looking for. Who is then the daring woman, so cruel to you? I should not say anything. I know nothing. I am ready to hear your whining and to give you the needed remedy, as long as my science can be useful to you. But why that look in your face and why you don’t say anything? Are you afraid? Do I scare you? You now see me this way but I was beautiful once; the nicest of all women in Bagdad. It was the suffering that made me so ugly. But why bother with my sufferings? Come close, I shall hear you. I cannot give you more than ten minutes, make it fast!
Nuredin did not feel safe. However, not willing to give away his perturbation before the old lady that kept him unsettled, he stepped forward and said:
- Woman, I have come for a serious thing. My fate is in your hands. You shall decide between my happiness and my death. This is what I have to tell you:
The Sultan wants to kill Nazara and I love her. I will tell you about the origin of such love since I came here not to alleviate my pain but to save her from such an unfortunate fate, for I do not wish to see her dead. You know that my palace is next door to the Sultan’s palace and that our gardens share a border line. About six moons ago I was strolling in my gardens when I heard an enchanting music following the most delicious female voice I have ever heard. I wished to figure out where it came from thus I got closer to the neighbor’s garden to realize that it was coming from a green pergola, occupied by the favorite of the Sultan. Several days passed and I was absorbed by those melodious sounds. Day and night I dreamed of the unknown beauty, whose voice had seduced me for in my mind she was beautiful. Every evening I strolled through the same paths from where I had heard that enchanting harmony. For five days it was all in vain. Finally, on the sixth day I heard the music again. Then, not being able to contain myself any longer, I approached the fencing wall only to realize that I could easily escalate it. I hesitated for a few moments and took the firm decision: I then climbed the wall, passing to the neighbor’s garden.
It was then when I saw, not a woman but a houri, a favorite houri of Mohammed, a true wonder! She did not show much of a surprise by seeing me but I threw myself at her feet, begging that she should not be afraid but listen to me instead. I told her that her singing had attracted me and I assured her that my attitude was profoundly respectful. She kindly listened to me. We spent the first night talking about music. I also sang and offered to accompany her. She consented so that we set up a date for the next day, at the same time.
She was more relaxed then. The Sultan was in his Council so that the vigilance was somewhat diminished. The first two or three nights were dedicated to music. But music is the voice of the lovers and from the fourth day on we were no longer strange to one another.
We were in love. How beautiful she was! How beautiful was her soul too! We foresaw our
escape several times. Ah! Why haven’t we done that? I would not be so unhappy now and
she would not be about to succumb. Such a beautiful flower would not be about to be
decimated by the sickle that would have denied a ray of light to those eyes.” (Continue in
the next issue)
Varieties - General Marceau
The Gazette of Cologne published the following story, sent by its correspondent in Koblenz, which
nowadays is a compulsory subject of all conversations. The fact was also reported by the Patrie of
November 10th, 1858.
“It is a known fact that below Emperor Francis’ fortress, just off the road to Cologne, there is the monument to the French general Marceau, fallen in Altenkirchen, and buried in Koblenz, at Mount St. Peter, where the main part of the fortress is located. The monument to the general, a truncated pyramid, was later removed when the fortification of Koblenz started. However, by expressed order of the late King Frederic III, it was reconstructed in the place where it stands today.”
“Mr. de Stramberg, who in his Reinischen Antiquarius, provides a very detailed biography of Marceau, saying that many people have allegedly seen the general riding his horse at night and for several times, wearing the white mantle of the French hunters.”
“Since some time now the word around in Koblenz was that Marceau would leave his burial and many people have attested to have seen him. A few days ago a soldier guarding the Petersberg (Mount St. Peter) saw a white knight, riding a white horse. He shouted: “Who is that?” As he did not get any answer back, after three enchanges he shot the apparition and then passed out. “Hearing the shooting a patrol hurried to help and found the sentinel unconscious. He was taken to the hospital, gravely ill, where he was nevertheless able to report what he had seen. Another version says that the soldier died as a consequence of the adventure. This is the story that can be confirmed by everyone in Koblenz.”
ALLAN KARDEC
“It is a known fact that below Emperor Francis’ fortress, just off the road to Cologne, there is the monument to the French general Marceau, fallen in Altenkirchen, and buried in Koblenz, at Mount St. Peter, where the main part of the fortress is located. The monument to the general, a truncated pyramid, was later removed when the fortification of Koblenz started. However, by expressed order of the late King Frederic III, it was reconstructed in the place where it stands today.”
“Mr. de Stramberg, who in his Reinischen Antiquarius, provides a very detailed biography of Marceau, saying that many people have allegedly seen the general riding his horse at night and for several times, wearing the white mantle of the French hunters.”
“Since some time now the word around in Koblenz was that Marceau would leave his burial and many people have attested to have seen him. A few days ago a soldier guarding the Petersberg (Mount St. Peter) saw a white knight, riding a white horse. He shouted: “Who is that?” As he did not get any answer back, after three enchanges he shot the apparition and then passed out. “Hearing the shooting a patrol hurried to help and found the sentinel unconscious. He was taken to the hospital, gravely ill, where he was nevertheless able to report what he had seen. Another version says that the soldier died as a consequence of the adventure. This is the story that can be confirmed by everyone in Koblenz.”
ALLAN KARDEC