Difference between revisions of "HPB-SB-4-142"
m |
m |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
{{Style P-HPB SB. Title continued |Speculations on Spiritual Agencies|4-141}} | {{Style P-HPB SB. Title continued |Speculations on Spiritual Agencies|4-141}} | ||
| − | ... | + | {{Style P-No indent|“Formerly the Court (of France) never went into mourning for children under six years old.’’}} |
| + | |||
| + | I have to apologise to Miss Kislingbury for speaking of her “advancing” any particular views. Her facts are irresistibly suggestive; but her letter proves that she investigates in too wise and cautious a spirit to form conclusions hastily. | ||
| + | |||
| + | A reference to dates in the letter of your correspondent, Mr. J. Carson, may be instructive. The ''stance ''was on the 18th of July; the letter mentioning that “Mr. Burt was killed off horseback during the month,” was dated Melbourne, 10th July, the accident being mentioned in Melbourne papers of 1st July, as having happened on the Saturday previous, which was the day before. The communication at the ''seance ''on the 18th is, “I ''am ''in great pain. I have been ''wounded''”—signed Burt. It will be said, I suppose, that the spirit was still ignorant of its changed condition three weeks after the event, and still in pain from the wound which caused death, probably on the spot. But must it not strike every one that Mr. Carson’s son, whose friend Burt was, is more likely to have been the source whence the spiritual telegram sped than Burt himself? Why should Burt, without even the knowledge that he was disembodied, and, therefore, without an intelligible motive for communicating with Mr. Carson, senior (who had never even heard of him), have been drawn to Bedford-place? If I was dead, I can conceive my going (if I''' '''could) to a stranger, sitting with a medium, to tell him so, because I am a Spiritualist, and should like to contribute evidence of spirit identity to other Spiritualists still in the flesh. But if I didn’t even know that I was “dead,” I can conceive nothing more improbable. This is just one of those cases which should open our eyes to the other agencies at work. The first words of the message were''' '''“son, son.” The idea of the accident, and of the pain, is suggested to''' '''the entranced or mesmerised medium through the psychic connection between father and son. The medium feels the pain (as evinced by the distortions of his body), just as the mesmeric subject feels any sensation suggested to him. And he personates the injured man, just as the mesmeric subject will personate under the influence of suggestion. Whether this is or is not the true explanation, the case is extremely interesting, for the medium was not ''en rapport ''with Mr. Carson’s son, otherwise than through Mr. Carson himself. Is Mr. Carson “mediumistic,” or is his son? or has the former mesmeric power? It is obvious that the spirit theory, no less than the mesmeric, requires a line of attraction from son to father.—Apologising for this too long letter, I am, sir, your obedient servant. | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{Style P-Signature in capitals|C. C. Massey.}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | January 6th. | ||
Revision as of 17:46, 8 February 2024
< Speculations on Spiritual Agencies (continued from page 4-141) >
“Formerly the Court (of France) never went into mourning for children under six years old.’’
I have to apologise to Miss Kislingbury for speaking of her “advancing” any particular views. Her facts are irresistibly suggestive; but her letter proves that she investigates in too wise and cautious a spirit to form conclusions hastily.
A reference to dates in the letter of your correspondent, Mr. J. Carson, may be instructive. The stance was on the 18th of July; the letter mentioning that “Mr. Burt was killed off horseback during the month,” was dated Melbourne, 10th July, the accident being mentioned in Melbourne papers of 1st July, as having happened on the Saturday previous, which was the day before. The communication at the seance on the 18th is, “I am in great pain. I have been wounded”—signed Burt. It will be said, I suppose, that the spirit was still ignorant of its changed condition three weeks after the event, and still in pain from the wound which caused death, probably on the spot. But must it not strike every one that Mr. Carson’s son, whose friend Burt was, is more likely to have been the source whence the spiritual telegram sped than Burt himself? Why should Burt, without even the knowledge that he was disembodied, and, therefore, without an intelligible motive for communicating with Mr. Carson, senior (who had never even heard of him), have been drawn to Bedford-place? If I was dead, I can conceive my going (if I could) to a stranger, sitting with a medium, to tell him so, because I am a Spiritualist, and should like to contribute evidence of spirit identity to other Spiritualists still in the flesh. But if I didn’t even know that I was “dead,” I can conceive nothing more improbable. This is just one of those cases which should open our eyes to the other agencies at work. The first words of the message were “son, son.” The idea of the accident, and of the pain, is suggested to the entranced or mesmerised medium through the psychic connection between father and son. The medium feels the pain (as evinced by the distortions of his body), just as the mesmeric subject feels any sensation suggested to him. And he personates the injured man, just as the mesmeric subject will personate under the influence of suggestion. Whether this is or is not the true explanation, the case is extremely interesting, for the medium was not en rapport with Mr. Carson’s son, otherwise than through Mr. Carson himself. Is Mr. Carson “mediumistic,” or is his son? or has the former mesmeric power? It is obvious that the spirit theory, no less than the mesmeric, requires a line of attraction from son to father.—Apologising for this too long letter, I am, sir, your obedient servant.
January 6th.
What is the Intelligence?
...
Hindu Psychology
...
<... continues on page 4-143 >
Editor's notes