INTRODUCTION – XVI

Two objections still remain to be examined: the only ones that really deserve the label because they are supported by rational theories. Both accept the reality of all the material and mental phenomena, but they discount the intervention of spirits.
According to the first of these theories, all the manifestations attributed to spirits are merely effects of magnetism and mediums remain in a state known as waking somnambulism, a phenomenon witnessed by all who have studied magnetism. In this state, the mental faculties acquire an abnormal development and the circles of intuitive perception are extended beyond the limits of ordinary perception. In this state, mediums draw from themselves and their own lucidity all they say and all the ideas they transmit, even regarding matters that are foreign to them in their normal state.
We will not be the ones who contest the power of somnambulism since we have witnessed its wonders by having studied all its facets for over thirty-five years. In fact, we agree that many spirit manifestations may be explained in this way.
Nevertheless, extensive and conscientious observation has shown us a multitude of occurrences in which any participation by the medium, except as a passive instrument, is materially impossible.
To those who share in this theory we will therefore say, as we have already said to all others: Watch and observe, for you have certainly not seen everything yet. Next, we will contrast two considerations taken from their own doctrine. Where did the Spiritist theory come from? Is it a theory dreamed up by a few individuals in order to explain the phenomena? Not at all. But then who did reveal it? The very mediums whose lucidity they extol. However, if this lucidity is as great as they presume, why would these mediums have attributed to spirits what they supposedly produced themselves?
How could they have given such precise, logical and sublime information regarding the nature of supra-human intelligences?
One of two things applies: either they are lucid or they are not. If they are, and if we can rely on their truthfulness, then it would be contradictory to claim that they do not speak the truth. Second, if all the phenomena proceed from the mediums themselves, they should always be identical for the same individual, and we would not observe the same person communicating in different languages or alternately expressing matters that are completely contradictory.
This lack of unity in the manifestations obtained by the same medium proves the diversity of their sources, and since we cannot find all these sources in the medium, we must look elsewhere.
According to the second theory, mediums really are the source of the manifestations, but instead of producing them from within themselves, they draw them from their surroundings.
The medium is a kind of mirror, reflecting all the thoughts, ideas and knowledge of the other participants; thus, the medium reveals nothing that is not known to at least some of the others.
We cannot deny – and from this arises one of the fundamental principles of the Doctrine – the participants’ influence on the nature of the manifestations. But this influence is very different from what is assumed here, and there is a great distance between it and the medium being the mere echo of the thoughts of others, because thousands of occurrences have peremptorily shown just the opposite. Therefore, this theory contains a serious error, which once again proves the danger of premature conclusions. Since those who hold to this theory are unable to deny the existence of a phenomenon that ordinary science cannot explain, and since they cannot accept the intervention of spirits, they explain the matter in their own way. Their theory would be alluring if it could explain all the phenomena, but it cannot. And when the evidence obviously shows that some of the communications through the medium are entirely foreign to the thoughts, knowledge and opinions of any of those who are present, and that they are often spontaneous and contradict all preconceived ideas, our opponents are not bothered in the least by this fact. They respond that thought waves go far beyond the immediate circle, and that mediums are a reflection of all humankind. Thus, if they cannot receive inspiration from their immediate surroundings, they go in search of it elsewhere – in the city, the country, the entire world, and even on other spheres.
We do not believe that this theory offers a simpler and more plausible explanation than that given by Spiritism, since it supposes a much more incredible cause. The notion that universal space is full of beings who are in continuous contact with us and who communicate their ideas to us is no more shocking to our reason than the supposition of universal thought waves coming from every point of the universe to converge on the mind of a single individual.
We would repeat – and this is the crucial point that we must insist on – that the somnambulism theory and the one we may call the reflection theory were dreamed up by certain persons; they are individual opinions that were formulated to explain a phenomenon, while the Doctrine of the Spirits is not a human concept at all. It was revealed by the manifesting intelligences themselves when no one had even imagined it and when general opinion was opposed to it. Therefore, we must ask: Where did mediums come up with a doctrine that did not exist in the thought of anyone on earth?
Furthermore, is it not a strange coincidence that thousands of mediums scattered all over the entire globe, and who had never met one another before, all agreed on stating the same thing? If the first medium who appeared in France was influenced by opinions that had already been accepted in America, by what strange impulse did he go in search of ideas three thousand miles across the ocean and among people whose habits and language were foreign to him, instead of taking what was immediately around him?
There is another circumstance that has not received enough thought, however. The earliest manifestations in both France and America did not take place either by writing or by speech, but by raps corresponding to the letters of the alphabet to form words and sentences. This was the way the manifesting intelligences originally declared themselves to be spirits. Therefore, even if we were to assume the intervention of the medium’s own thought in the verbal or written communications, the same could not be said regarding the raps; their significance could not have been known beforehand.
We could cite numerous facts that demonstrate the presence of an obvious individuality with a completely independent will on the part of the manifesting intelligence. We invite our opponents to make a more careful observation. If they were to study the matter more closely, without prejudice, and not draw any conclusions before having seen all that is necessary, they would recognize the true ineffectiveness of their theory to explain all the facts. We will limit ourselves to proposing the following questions: Why does the manifesting intelligence, whatever it may be, refuse to answer certain questions regarding subjects that are perfectly known about, such as the name and age of the questioners, what they have in their hands, what they did yesterday, what they intend to do tomorrow, etc.? If the medium is only a mirror reflecting the thoughts of the participants, nothing should be easier to answer.
In response, our adversaries ask us why spirits – who must know everything – cannot answer such simple questions, according to the axiom, “Whoever can do the most can do the least.” Based on this, they conclude that the entities are not spirits at all. We in turn will respond by asking what would happen if an uneducated individual or a prankster appeared before a group of learned scholars and asked, for example, what makes the day so light at noontime. Do you think they would respond seriously, and would it be logical to conclude from the silence or the scorn directed at the questioner that they were all fools? It is precisely because such spirits are of a high order that they do not respond to idle or silly questions; they do not like to be cross examined. That is why they remain silent or advise us that they will only concern themselves with more serious matters.
Finally, we would ask why spirits come and go, often in an instant, and why neither prayer nor begging can make them return after they have gone. If a medium only acts under the mental impulse of the other participants, it would seem obvious that in such a circumstance the agreement of all the joined wills should be able to stimulate the medium’s clairvoyance. Therefore, if the medium cannot comply with the wishes of the other participants, even though concurring with his or her own will, it is because both the medium and the others are obeying an outside influence, and this influence is demonstrating its own independence and individuality.

Contents
Home