There is
a form of suggestion which tends to arouse
activities in the imaginative regions of the
minds of people. Of course, the imagination
plays a part in all manifestations of
suggestion, but in this particular form its
action is especially apparent. I call this class
of phenomena "Induced Imagination."
The term
"imagination," you know, means "the power of the
mind to create mental images of objects of
sense; the power to reconstruct or recombine the
materials furnished by experience, memory or
fancy; a mental image formed by the faculty of
imagination," etc., etc. The word is derived
from the English word "image," which in turn has
for its root the Latin word "imatari," meaning
"to imitate."
The
imagination is creative in its nature and works
with the plastic material of the mind. The
writers usually make a distinction between what
is called "imagination proper," on the one hand,
and what is called "fancy" on the other.
By
"imagination proper" is meant the higher forms
of activity of the image-creating faculty, such
as is manifested in the creation of literature,
art, music, philosophical theory, scientific
hypothesis, etc. By "fancy" Is meant the lighter
forms of the manifestation of the image-creating
faculty, such as the ideal fancies and
day-dreams of people; the arbitrary and
capricious imaginings; fantasy, etc,
"Imagination proper" may be considered as a
positive phase, and "fancy" as the negative
phase, of the image-creating faculty.
Imagination
in its positive phase is a most important
faculty of the human being. It lies at the basis
of active mental manifestations. One must form a
mental image of a thing before he can manifest
it in objective form. It is distinctly creative
in its nature, and really forms the mould in
which deeds and actions are cast--it forms the
architect's plan, which we use to build our life
of action and deeds.
And, mind
you this, it
is the faculty used in "Visualization," which is
spoken of in other chapters. Positive
imagination is very far from being the fanciful,
capricious, light, whimsical thing that many
suppose it to be--It is one of the most positive
manifestations of the mind.
Not only
does it precede, and is necessary to, the
performance of objective acts, and the producing
of material things--but it is also the faculty
by which we impress our mental-images upon the
minds of others by mentative induction, and by
the uses of desire and will.
Positive
imagination is the mother of "ideas." An "idea"
is but "an image formed in the mind"; and the
imagination is the faculty in which the "image"
(or "idea") is formed. And in proportion to the
activity of the imagination, so is the strength
of the image or idea. And as is the strength of
the image or idea, so is the degree of its power
to impress itself upon the minds of others. So
you see, imagination, in its positive phase is a
strong, real thing. But it is largely with its
negative phase that we shall have to deal with
here.
You know
that your negative imagination, or fancy, may be
aroused by outward persons or things. You hear a
piece of music, and before you know it your
fancy is running along painting all sorts of
pictures in your mind, and inducing all sorts of
feelings.
A
picture may affect you in the same way. A piece
of poetry, or poem, may lift you out of yourself
on the wings of fancy. A book may carry you
along in a world of fantasy and unreality, until
you forget the actual world around you--have you
not had this experience! And, more marked than
any of the above mentioned cases, is the effect
of a perfect stage performance, in which the
world and characters of the play take such a
hold upon you as to seem reality itself, and you
laugh and cry with the characters of the play.
You
scowl at the villain, and tremble at the danger
of the heroine. You glory in the hero's success,
and shed tears at the sorrows and trials of the
suffering characters. And you feel these things
in proportion that your negative imagination or
fancy is called into activity by induction, But
remember this--the actors, poet, writer,
composer, or artist created his effect
by the exercise of his or her positive
imagination; while the effect upon you is
induced in your negative imagination. The first
is an act of positive creation, while the second
is merely a reflection impressed upon
your mind, by either the suggestion, or the
mentative energy of the actor.
In your
consideration of the above, remember what I have
said about suggestion, in an earlier chapter.
Suggestion is merely the presentation of the
outward symbol of the inner feeling.
The
radical wing of the school of suggestionists
pooh-pooh at the idea of mentative energy having
anything to do with the phenomena which we are
now considering.
They
claim that "suggestion" is sufficient to account
for it all. Without going deeply into a
discussion of this matter, I would ask these
gentlemen: Why is it that the same words,
uttered in the same tone, by two different
suggestors, produce widely different degrees
of effect? Also: What is that peculiar
personal force that we feel when certain persons
suggest, that is absent in the suggestions of
others?
My
answer is that the difference lies in the degree
of feeling called into activity in the mind of
the suggestor--the degree of mentative energy
released by him. And I think that any
careful investigator will agree with me in this,
if he will open his mind to all the impressions
received during his investigations, instead of
tying himself to a previously conceived theory.
The
theories of suggestion are not contrary to those
of mentative energy and induction, when properly
understood. The facts of the suggestionists are
undoubted, but they make the mistake of ignoring
the mental states of the suggestionist. They
think that their effects are produced by
suggestion alone, and forget the mental state
behind the suggestion which is the real motive
force. If their theories be true, why is it that
two men using the same words of suggestion, upon
the same subject, produce varying degrees of
effect? It is because the mental states or
dynamic mentation of the two men vary in quality
and degree.
In
connection with this subject of negative
imagination or fancy, I would call your
attention to a class of phenomena, along the
same general lines, in which certain states of
imagination, or fancy, are self induced.
Nearly
all races of men have discovered that there are
means possible to people whereby they may
produce in themselves abnormal conditions, known
as the "trance," "dream-states"; "transcendental
condition"; etc. And men, from the dim past to
the present time, have seen fit to indulge in
these deplorable practices. The means by which
these states are obtained are various, the
favorite methods being the gazing at a bright
object; fixing the gaze at the root of the nose;
staring at the umbilicus, staring at a drop of
ink; inhaling vapors; listening to weird music,
etc., etc.
Much
mock-occultism, which is really "psychism,"
depends upon these methods for its results,
manifestation and phenomena. The Hindu "fakirs"
and the Arab dervishes indulge freely in these
methods, and produce results which while highly
esteemed by themselves, are viewed with disgust,
horror and repulsion by true occultists of all
lands, who regard these practices as harmful,
and the phenomena resulting therefrom as bogus
and misleading.
And much
of the latter-day western psychism is also based
upon the same practices, and brings about like
results. In this connection I would say that
some of the practices adopted by some of the
"New Thought" people belong to this class. I
have seen certain methods advised for "Going
into the Silence," in which the student is
advised to focus his gaze on the root of his
nose, etc., which is the identical method used
by Braid to produce hypnotic conditions, and
which is also used by the Hindu "fakirs" to
produce "trance" conditions. Is it not time that
the truth regarding these things should be
known?
This
"trance" phenomena, whether produced by mesmeric
processes or by other means, are abnormal,
unhealthy, and undesirable phases of mental
condition. I cannot speak too strongly against
the encouragement of, and instruction in, the
development (I had almost said the
"Devil-opment") of these abnormal states, either
by self-practice or by means of hypnotic or
mesmeric methods. It is high time that someone
should call the attention of the public to the
dangers of this so-called "psychism."
I know
positively that
this kind of "psychism" is not the desirable
thing that it is supposed to be. I know, also, that
it is very far from true occult development. This
kind of "psychism," when compared with true
occultism, is but as the baleful glare of the
moon, as contrasted with the bright, warm,
life-giving rays of the sun.
This
false occultism, which is not occultism at all,
but merely a negative form of "psychism," has
deluded many into its folds, and has led its
followers on to planes which are akin to mental
quagmires and swamps, following the ignis
fatuus, or "will-o'-the-wisp" of this
pseudo-spirituality which is but a negative form
of psychism.
These
self-induced abnormal conditions may be produced
by hypnotic methods, by leading the subject into
the ''deeper stages,'' which some authorities
speak of as if they were "highly spiritual," but
which are nothing more than the miserable,
abnormal, deplorable ''trance'' conditions just
referred to. These conditions may be produced by
hypnotic methods, simply because any mental
state may be so produced, and not because
of any mystic process, or knowledge, or
connection.
They
resemble the so-called "sleepconditions" of
hypnotism. The only difference is that the
operator induces the condition by mental
influence, and suggestion, just as he would
induce any other mental state--instead of the
subject inducing it in himself. It is the same
old abnormal, harmful practice, in another
guise. And anything that is said against the
self-induced condition is equally applicable to
the operator-induced one. They are the same
thing! It is all hypnosis, or auto-hypnosis.
I shall
not describe the conditions at further length,
nor shall I give any instructions in the
production of them. I consider them essentially
harmful, and my object in speaking of them here
is to warn off and caution people not to allow
themselves to be placed in this condition by
experimenters. The practice is weakening to the
will, for the reason that it depends upon the
tiring of the attention by straining the eyes or
other organs of sense.
Practitioners
of menial influence in all ages have recognized
this fact and have employed objects calculated
to tire out the attention. Bright objects to
stare at and thus tire out the sense of sight
have been employed; monotonous sounds ending in
"um-m-m-m-m" are used by the Orientals to tire
out the sense of hearing by its monotonous and
soothing sound; vapors and perfumes and incense
are used to overcome the sense of smell--all
tending to tire out the will, and to reduce it
to a passive, non-resisting stage.
Then
when the will has been rendered passive, or
tired, the mind becomes receptive and
impressionable, and, in extreme cases, becomes
as wax in the hands of the operator.
Let me
urge upon you to avoid this abnormal''
psychism"--put it away from you as you would a
poisonous cobra, for it seeks to strike at the
heart of your will, and would thus paralyze your
mentality. Beware of all that tends to make you
weak. Beware of the claims of "soul-development"
or "spiritualunfoldment" that are accompanied by
these methods, for they are but psychism
masquerading as occultism or spiritual
development. Remember my test: "Does this
make me strong?" Apply the touch-stone,
and then govern yourself accordingly.
Concluding
this part of the subject, I would say that if
any of you are disposed to question the
correctness of my above statement, then you have
but to examine the types of "psychics" seen on
all sides. Are they not all
hyper-impressionable; excessively sensitive;
neurotic; hysterical; passive; negative people?
Do they not become as mere psychic harps, upon
which the passing mental breezes play, producing
weird sounds?
Remember,
now, I am speaking of genuine psychics, not the
bogus psychics, who "are out for the money,''
and who are a shrewd, cunning lot, far from
being impressionable, and in reality using their
mesmeric power to impress and influence the
credulous persons coming under their influence.
I am not
alluding to these people, but to the poor,
frail-willed, negative sensitives, who are as
impressionable as the photographer's
"negative"--and to whom also the "development"
means but the bringing out of impression from
outside. I pray you, be a human positive,
not a human negative!
Next
