HPB-SB-14-47

H. P. Blavatsky Scrapbooks

from Adyar archives of the International Theosophical Society

T i

vol. 14, p. 47	volume 14, page 47 vol. title: vol. period: 1882 pages in vol.: 174 A blue horizontal stroke runs across the closing quoted lines of the first letter. The writer has not been identified.
Legend HPB note HPB highlighted HPB underlined HPB crossed out <Editors note> <Archivist note> Lost or unclear SBT, DT Restored

<<   ☰   >>

eng • рус

LIGHT.
November 11, 1882.

IS MATERIALISATION A FACT?

Some parts of Mrs. Showers’s interesting letter are a little puzzling. “I am thankful,” she says, “to ‘S. W.’ for giving me the opportunity of stating openly that Spiritualists are gone rather too far in assuming, in my opinion, that the fact of materialisation has as yet been scientifically established. A very superficial survey [too superficial, I fear] will unveil the fact that, though much was asserted, nothing was ever scientifically proven.” Such an opinion, pronounced by a lady of so much reading and experience on the subject, cannot but be startling to some of us. But she proceeds: “For my part, but for that which I have witnessed in my own family, I would still be of the opinion I have expressed to Mr. Serjeant Cox in 1874, and which, fortunately for me now, he was good enough to publish in the Medium and Spiritualist—viz., that the so-called materialised form is but the medium entranced.” (The italics in each case are mine.)

But it is difficult to understand how the publication of such an opinion can be fortunate for her now, when, as she clearly implies, what she has witnessed in her own family tends to contradict it. But whatever happened to her, one thing is certain, namely, that Spiritualistic records supply an abundance of educated and trustworthy witnesses to the fact that, with different mediums and on various occasions, one or more materialised forms have been seen side by side with the medium, under test conditions. Also, that equally credible witnesses have seen the figure take the form from a mist on the floor, and, after speaking to and moving about among the sitters, dissolve or dematerialise before the eyes of all. I might refer also to Archdeacon Colley’s account, solemnly attested by himself, of what he witnessed more than once with Dr. Monck, without any cabinet.

With these facts before us, what can we think of Mrs. Showers’s curiously worded opinions? But once more she proceeds: “The admission, however, that a genuine materialisation has now and then taken place [surely one is enough to prove the fact] does not justify the acceptance of all the theories that are, fortunately, being debated, and which are so palpably evil that it is earnestly to be hoped they are only temporarily tolerated in the midst of the search for good, involving, as they do, either the advancement or the debasement of Spiritualism.” But if all these theories are palpably evil, how comes their discussion to be a fortunate thing; and, still more hard to understand, how can they involve the advancement, as well as the debasement, of Spiritualism?

But Mrs. Showers not only seems hostile to materialisation, she declares her disbelief that “our dead appear at séances, or give substantial proofs of their existence.” And yet, strange to say, she “has reason to believe that such proofs have been obtained”! But if not, where is the proof of immortality? What becomes of the happiness, so warmly dwelt upon, of realising communion with our loved ones gone before? What, in a word, is the raison d’être of Spiritualism?

A Puzzled Reader.

–––––––

<Untitled> (I infer from the letter of “S. W.”…)

I infer from the letter of “S. W.” in a recent number of “Light,” that he is not a believer in what are termed “materialisations”; were he, he could, I think, hardly write as he does.

I so entirely sympathise with many of the remarks in his letter (having at one time occupied a position closely resembling his own) that I venture to put before him the following from my own experience. After attending many séances, and witnessing many materialisations, I remained entirely unconvinced—was persuaded that in some way I had been imposed upon. No arguments, no theories, none of the experience of others influenced me in the least; when one evening, without any “test conditions,” with every possibility of fraud—for doors and windows were left unlocked and unfastened and the medium free—I saw in fair lamp-light, through the mediumship of Dr. Monck, a medium whom I thoroughly distrusted—a form imperfectly materialise itself. With the medium in sufficient light for me to see every movement—without cabinet or curtain—a most delicate substance, as of cloud or vapour (no “muslin;” shall we ever hear the last of “muslin”!) came out from his side, and gradually a form grew, then became confused in the cloud and vapour again, then grew again, and so on, until the medium appeared unable to stand any longer and was taken to a seat apparently exhausted, and the “materialisation” was at an end. Having been convinced, beyond all doubt, that I had witnessed a phenomenon of an abnormal nature, I became so far a believer.

I am quite aware that in one sense it is useless to describe all this. “S. W.” will not believe until his time comes; but he surely will be able to see that a person having arrived at the conclusion that materialisation is a fact, must write, and speak, and think differently to one who has not arrived at that conclusion. “Masks,” “muslin,” “beards,” &c., &c., avail nothing—“imposture” avails nothing—ridicule avails nothing. A different set of conditions, so to speak, have entered into one’s experience, one’s life, and although one may appear to defend dishonesty it is only that one feels “there are more things in Heaven and on earth than have hitherto been dreamed of in our philosophy,” and one does not draw such hard and fast lines. Should the day arrive in which “S. W.” finds himself in my present position, he will see how impossible it is that such men as Mr. Wallace should write according to his standard, or he should write after theirs. Has not every cause its “hysterical” or over-earnest, together with its stony-hearted or comparatively valueless, supporters, and is it not well that these learn from each other the virtue of that middle course in which Truth is so often found?—Yours truly,

S. A. B.

–––––––

LIGHT.
November 4, 1882.

<Untitled> (Another speculation…)

Another speculation. That which my friend sets forth as deducible from the molecular hypothesis of matter throws (as I propounded long ago) some light on that obscure phenomenon known to us as the passage of matter through matter. The case may be put thus:—“If a so-called solid meet another so-called solid the molecules appear to strike each other, though that that is not always the case is clear from the experiments on metals made with Whitworth’s planing machines, when two surfaces having been planed to an exceedingly high degree of smoothness, adhered so that some of the molecules of the one plane must have passed in among the molecules of the other, shewing that this passage is possible. Now, suppose A, B, C to be three molecules, A′, B′, C′,

three other molecules approaching them, the attractions between the molecules would, under ordinary circumstances, be such that A′, B′, C′ would hit A, B, C, and the ordinary contact-blow would be experienced—but now let some force capable of pulling A′ to A″, B′ to B″, and C′ to C″ be impressed on these molecules. If, then, A′, B′, C′ were made to approach A, B, C, they would pass between them, and the passage of matter through matter would take place. This would seem to have been done in the planing experiment mentioned above; but other intelligences, having greater power of vision, may know how to make this deflection more easily. Hence, the phenomenon so frequently observed when invisible intelligences, acting from a plane of knowledge with which we are unacquainted, manifest their power over matter—that roughly described as the ‘passage of matter through matter.’”

–––––––

<Untitled> (The extraordinary deliverance of the Pall Mall…)

The extraordinary deliverance of the Pall Mall on the dangers of Psychical Research draws forth criticism from various sources. Among other critics is one “Gilbert Venables,” who points out that “to find an enlightened and philosophic writer inveighing against the danger of free inquiry, should excite our special wonder.” And then he, in his turn, goes on to excite our special merriment by quoting some anonymous German philosopher who “has truly remarked that ‘when men cease to believe in God, they begin to believe in ghosts’!” So, then, to the pious Christian there are no ghosts, “neither angel nor spirit.” It is reserved to the Huxleys, and Tyndalls, and the omne genus of agnostic materialism to “give these airy nothings a local habitation and a name,” and to inform us of the genesis and habitat of spirit! Surely there must be a devil, if only that he may inspire otherwise sane men to talk such utter rubbish when they try to deal with Spiritualism. The close of this amusing letter is too good to be lost:—

“In the present day, the belief in what I may call a ‘supernatural’ God has very much gone out, and materialists have to be on their guard against a revived belief in ghosts. We must not expect a resuscitation of the mediæval miracle or witch, for such things were superstitious excrescences of belief in God and Devil. Things will be adapted to a highly scientific and rational age. We shall have the jargon of science and the vocabulary of pure reason, mixed with beliefs acceptable to nothing but the blindest credulity. Already the process is far advanced. The day before yesterday, it was mesmerism, electro-biology, and clairvoyance. Yesterday, it was Spiritualism. To-day, we have the divining-rod and psychical research. Before the end of this nineteenth century, there is a fair chance that we shall have arrived at downright witchcraft, managed, of course, not by aid of the Devil, but by subtle and obscure powers of psychic magnetism, resident in old women and black cats. The cry of alarmed materialism is not raised a moment too soon.”

Yesterday, we are to observe, it was Spiritualism! To-day and to-morrow, old women and black cats—and a certain Mr. Gilbert Venables.

M.A. (Oxon.)

Editor's notes

Sources

• 

  Light, v. 2, No. 97, November 11, 1882, p. 505

• 

  Light, v. 2, No. 96, November 4, 1882, p. 490