Spirit Incarnation

132. What is the aim of the incarnation of spirits?

132. What is the purpose of spirits being incarnated?

"It is a necessity imposed on them by God, as the means of attaining perfection. For some of them it is an expiation; for others, a mission. In order to attain perfection, it is necessary for them to undergo all the vicissitudes of corporeal existence. It is the experience acquired by expiation that constitutes its usefulness. Incarnation has also another aim—viz., that of fitting the spirit to perform his share in the work of creation; for which purpose he is made to assume a corporeal apparatus in harmony with the material state of each world into which he is sent, and by means of which he is enabled to accomplish the special work, in connection with that world, which has been appointed to him by the divine ordering. He is thus made to contribute his quota towards the general weal, while achieving his own advancement."

"God requires spirits to be incarnated as a way to achieve perfection. For some, it is an act of atonement. For others, it is a mission. To achieve perfection, they must go through all the ups and downs of bodily existence. The experience gained through atonement is what makes it useful. Incarnation also has another purpose. It prepares the spirit to do his share in the work of creation. For this purpose, he is given a body suited to the material conditions of each world to which he is sent. This body enables him to carry out the special work appointed to him in that world by divine order. In this way, he contributes his share to the common good while making progress himself."

The action of corporeal beings is necessary to the carrying on of the work of the universe; but God in His wisdom has willed that this action should furnish them with the means of progress and of advancement towards Himself. And thus, through an admirable law of His providence, all things are linked together, and solidarity is established between all the realms of nature.

The actions of beings with physical bodies are necessary to carry on the work of the universe. But God, in his wisdom, has willed that these actions should also help them progress and advance toward him. Through this admirable law of his providence, all things are linked, and solidarity is established among all the realms of nature.

133. Is incarnation necessary for the spirits who, from the beginning, have followed the right road?

133. Is incarnation necessary for spirits who have followed the right path from the beginning?

"All are created simple and ignorant; they gain instruction in the struggles and tribulations of corporeal life.

"All are created simple and ignorant. They learn through the struggles and hardships of physical life.

God, being just, could not make some of them happy, without trouble and without exertion, and consequently without merit."

Because God is just, he could not make some of them happy without trouble or effort, and therefore without merit."

—But if so, what do spirits gain by having followed the right road, since they are not thereby exempted from the pains of corporeal life?

But if so, what do spirits gain by following the right path? They are still not spared the pains of physical life.

"They arrive more quickly at the goal. And besides, the sufferings of life are often a consequence of the imperfection of the spirit; therefore, the fewer his imperfections, the less will be his sufferings. He who is neither envious, jealous, avaricious, nor ambitious, will not have to undergo the torments which are a consequence of those defects."

"They reach the goal more quickly. Besides, life's suffering is often a result of the spirit's imperfections. So the fewer imperfections a spirit has, the less it will suffer. A person who is not envious, jealous, greedy, or ambitious will not suffer the torment those flaws cause."

134. What is the soul?

134. What is the soul?

"An incarnate spirit."

"A spirit in a body."

—What was the soul before its union with a body?

What was the soul before it joined a body?

"A spirit."

"A spirit."

— Souls and spirits are, then, the very same thing?

So, are souls and spirits the same thing?

"Yes; souls are only spirits. Before uniting itself with a body, the soul is one of the intelligent beings who people the invisible world, and who temporarily assume a fleshly body in order to effect their purification and enlightenment."

"Yes, souls are simply spirits. Before joining a body, the soul is one of the intelligent beings that inhabit the invisible world. These beings temporarily take on a physical body to purify themselves and become enlightened."

135. Is there in man anything else than a soul and a body?

135. Is there anything more to a person than a soul and a body?

"There is the link which unites the soul and the body."

"There is the link that connects the soul and the body."

—What is the nature of that link?

What is that link like?

"It is semi-material—that is to say, of a nature intermediate between soul and body, as it must necessarily be, in order that they may be enabled to communicate with each other. It is by means of this link that the spirit acts upon matter, and that matter acts reciprocally upon the spirit."

"It is semi-material, meaning its nature lies between soul and body. It must be this way so that soul and body can communicate with each other. Through this link, the spirit acts on matter, and matter acts in turn on the spirit."

Man is thus formed of three essential elements or parts:—1st. The body, or material being, analogous to the animals, and animated by the same vital principle; 2d. The soul, or incarnated spirit, of which the body is the habitation; 3d. The intermediary principle, or perispirit; a semi-material substance, which constitutes the innermost envelope of the spirit, and unites the soul with the body. This triplicity is analogous to that of the fruit, which consists of the germ, the perisperm, and the rind or shell.

A person is therefore made up of three essential parts: 1. The body, or material being, which is like that of animals and is animated by the same vital principle. 2. The soul, or incarnated spirit, which lives in the body. 3. The intermediary principle, or perispirit, a semi-material substance that forms the spirit’s innermost covering and connects the soul to the body. These three parts are like those of a fruit, which consists of the germ, the perisperm, and the rind or shell.

136. Is the soul independent of the vital principle?

136. Is the soul independent of the vital principle?

"The body is only the envelope of the soul, as we have repeatedly told you."

"The body is only a covering for the soul, as we have told you many times."

—Can a body exist without a soul?

Can a body exist without a soul?

"Yes; but it is only when the body ceases to live that the soul quits it. Previous to birth, the union between the soul and the body is not complete; but, when this union is definitively established, it is only the death of the body that can sever the bonds that unite it to the soul, and thus allow the soul to withdraw from it. Organic life may vitalise a body without a soul, but the soul cannot inhabit a body deprived of organic life."

“Yes, but the soul leaves the body only when the body stops living. Before birth, the union between the soul and the body is not complete. But once this union is fully established, only the body’s death can break the bonds and allow the soul to leave. Organic life can give life to a body without a soul, but the soul cannot inhabit a body without organic life.”

— What would our body be if it had no soul?

What would our body be without a soul?

"A mass of flesh without intelligence; anything you choose to call it, excepting a man."

"A mass of flesh without intelligence. Call it anything you like, except a man."

137. Can the same spirit incarnate itself in two different bodies at the same time?

137. Can the same spirit be incarnated in two different bodies at the same time?

"No; the spirit is indivisible, and cannot simultaneously animate two different beings." (Vide, in The Medium's Book, the chapter on Bi-corporeality and Transfiguration.)

"No. The spirit cannot be divided, and it cannot animate two different beings at the same time." (See the chapter on Bi-corporeality and Transfiguration in The Medium's Book.)

138. What is to be thought of the opinion of those who regard the soul as being the principle of material life?

138. What should we think of the view that the soul is the principle of material life?

"That is a question of definition; we attach but slight importance to mere words. You should begin by agreeing among yourselves as to the exact meaning of the expressions you employ."

"That is a question of definition. We attach little importance to words alone. You should first agree among yourselves on exactly what the terms you use mean."

139. Certain spirits, and certain philosophers before them, have defined the soul as "An animated spark that has emanated from the Great Whole;" why this contradiction?

139. Some spirits, and some philosophers before them, have defined the soul as "A living spark that came from the Great Whole;" why this contradiction?

"There is nothing contradictory in such a definition. Everything depends on the meaning you attribute to the words you use. Why have you not a word for each thing?"

"There is nothing contradictory about that definition. It all depends on what you mean by the words you use. Why don't you have a word for each thing?"

The word soul is employed to express very different things. Sometimes it is used to designate the principle of life; and in this sense it is correct to say, figuratively, that the soul is an animated spark that has emanated from the Great Whole. These latter words designate the universal source of the vital principle, of which each being absorbs a portion, that returns to the general mass after its death. This idea does not exclude that of a moral being, a distinct personality, independent of matter, and preserving its own individuality. It is this being which, at other times, is called the soul, and it is in this sense that we speak of the soul as an incarnate spirit. In giving different definitions of soul, the spirits who have given them have spoken according to their various ways of applying that word, and also according to the terrestrial ideas with which they are more or less imbued. This apparent confusion results from the insufficiency of human language, which does not possess a specific word for each idea; an insufficiency that gives rise to a vast number of misapprehensions and discussions. It is for this reason that the higher spirits tell us to begin by distinctly defining the meaning of the words we employ.⁹

The word soul is used to mean very different things. Sometimes it means the principle of life. In this sense, it is correct to say, figuratively, that the soul is a living spark from the Great Whole. These last words mean the universal source of the vital principle. Each being absorbs a portion of this principle, which returns to the general mass after the being’s death. This idea does not rule out the existence of a moral being with a distinct personality. Such a being is independent of matter and keeps its own individuality. At other times, this being is called the soul, and it is in this sense that we speak of the soul as an incarnate spirit. The spirits who have defined soul differently have spoken according to their different uses of the word. They have also spoken according to the earthly ideas that have influenced them to varying degrees. This apparent confusion results from the limits of human language, which has no specific word for every idea. This limitation gives rise to a great many misunderstandings and discussions. That is why the higher spirits tell us to begin by clearly defining the words we use.⁹

140. What is to be thought of the theory according to which the soul is subdivided into as many parts as there are muscles in the body, and thus presides over each of the bodily functions?

140. What should we think of the theory that the soul is divided into as many parts as there are muscles in the body, and thus controls each bodily function?

"That, again, depends on the meaning attached to the word soul. If by soul is meant the vital fluid, that theory is right; if the word is used to express an incarnate spirit, it is wrong. We have already told you that a spirit is indivisible; it transmits movement to the bodily organs through the intermediary fluids, but it undergoes no division."

"Again, that depends on what you mean by soul. If soul means the vital fluid, that theory is right. If it means a spirit in a body, the theory is wrong. We have already told you that a spirit cannot be divided. It transmits movement to the body's organs through intermediary fluids, but it does not divide."

—Nevertheless, there are spirits who have given this definition.

But some spirits have given this definition.

"Spirits who are ignorant may mistake the effect for the cause."

"Spirits who lack knowledge may mistake the effect for the cause."

The soul acts through the intermediary of the bodily organs, and those organs are animated by the vital fluid which is distributed among them, and more abundantly in those which constitute the centres or foci of movement for each organism. But this explanation becomes inadmissible when the term soul is employed to designate the spirit which inhabits the body during life and quits it at death.

The soul acts through the body's organs. These organs are animated by the vital fluid distributed among them. More of this fluid goes to the organs that form the centers or foci of movement in each organism. But this explanation does not hold when the term soul means the spirit that inhabits the body during life and leaves it at death.

141. Is there any truth in the opinion of those who suppose that the soul is exterior to the body and environs it?

141. Is there any truth to the belief that the soul is outside the body and surrounds it?

"The soul is not shut up in the body like a bird in a cage. It radiates in all directions, and manifests itself outside the body as a light radiates from a glass globe, or as sound is propagated from a sonorous centre. In this sense the soul may be said to be exterior to the body, but it is not therefore to be considered as enveloping the body. The soul has two envelopes; the first, or innermost, of these, of a light and subtle nature, is what you call the perispirit; the other, gross, material, heavy, is the body. The soul is the centre of both these envelopes, like the germ in the stone of the fruit, as we have already said."

"The soul is not confined to the body like a bird in a cage. It radiates in all directions and reveals itself outside the body. It does so as light radiates from a glass globe, or as sound spreads from its source. In this sense, the soul may be said to exist outside the body. But this does not mean that it surrounds the body. The soul has two coverings. The first, or innermost, is light and subtle. It is what you call the perispirit. The other is coarse, material, and heavy. It is the body. The soul is at the center of both coverings, like the germ in a fruit's stone, as we have already said."

142. What is to be thought of that other theory according to which the formation of the soul of the child is carried on to completion during the successive periods of the human lifetime?

142. What should we think of the other theory? It says that a child’s soul develops fully over the successive stages of human life.

"The spirit is a unit; and is as entire in the child as in the adult. It is only the bodily organs, or instruments of the manifestations of the soul, that are gradually developed and completed in the course of a lifetime. Here, again, you mistake the effect for the cause."

"The spirit is one whole, and it is as complete in a child as in an adult. Only the bodily organs, which allow the soul to express itself, gradually develop and mature over a lifetime. Here again, you mistake the effect for the cause."

143. Why do not all spirits define the soul in the same way?

143. Why don't all spirits define the soul in the same way?

"All spirits are not equally enlightened in regard to these matters. Some spirits are still so little advanced intellectually as to be incapable of understanding abstract ideas; they are like children in your world. Other spirits are full of false learning, and make a vain parade of words in order to impose their authority upon those who listen to them. They, also, resemble too many in your world. And besides, even spirits who are really enlightened may express themselves in terms which appear to be different, but which, at bottom, mean the same thing, especially in regard to matters which your language is incapable of expressing clearly, and which can only be spoken of to you by means of figures and comparisons that you mistake for literal statements of fact."

"Not all spirits are equally enlightened about these matters. Some are still so intellectually undeveloped that they cannot understand abstract ideas. They are like children in your world. Other spirits are full of false learning and show off with words to impose their authority on their listeners. They, too, resemble too many people in your world. Besides, even truly enlightened spirits may use words that seem different but mean the same thing. This is especially true of matters that your language cannot express clearly. Spirits can only speak to you about these matters through figures of speech and comparisons. You mistake these for literal statements of fact."

144. What is to be understood by the soul of the world?

144. What does “the soul of the world” mean?

"The universal principle of life and intelligence from which individualities are produced. But, very often, they who make use of these terms do not know what they mean by them. The word soul is so elastic that every one interprets it according to his own imaginings. Certain persons have also attributed a soul to the earth, which must be understood as indicating the assemblage of devoted spirits who direct your actions in the right direction when you listen to them, and who are, as it were, the lieutenants of God in the administration of your globe."

"The universal principle of life and intelligence from which individuals arise. But very often, people who use these terms do not know what they mean by them. The word soul is so flexible that everyone interprets it according to their own imagination. Some people have also said that the earth has a soul. This must be understood as the group of devoted spirits who guide your actions in the right direction when you listen to them. They are, as it were, God's lieutenants in the administration of your planet."

145. How is it that so many philosophers, both ancient and modern, have so long been discussing psychological questions without having arrived at the truth?

145. Why have so many philosophers, both ancient and modern, discussed psychological questions for so long without finding the truth?

"Those men were precursors of the eternal truths of the true spiritist doctrine, for which they have prepared the way. They were men, and therefore subject to error, because they often mistook their own ideas for the true light; but their very errors have served the cause of truth by bringing into relief both sides of the argument. Moreover, among those errors are to be found many great truths which a comparative study of the various theories thus put forth would enable you to discover."

"Those men were forerunners of the eternal truths of the true spiritist doctrine. They prepared the way for it. They were human, and therefore prone to error, because they often mistook their own ideas for the true light. But even their errors served the cause of truth by bringing out both sides of the argument. Moreover, many great truths can be found among those errors. You could discover them by comparing the various theories they put forward."

146. Has the soul a circumscribed and determinate seat in the body?

146. Does the soul have a specific, limited location in the body?

"No; but it may be said to reside more especially in the head, in the case of men of great genius and of all who think much, and in the heart, in the case of those who feel much, and whose actions have always a humanitary aim."

"No. But it may be said to reside mainly in the head of people of great genius and all who think deeply. It may also be said to reside mainly in the heart of those who feel deeply and always act to help humanity."

—What is to be thought of the opinion of those who place the soul in a centre of organic life?

What should we think of the view that the soul is located in a center of organic life?

"The spirit may be said to inhabit more especially such a part of your organism, because it is to such a part that all the sensations converge; but those who place it in what they consider to be the centre of vitality confound it with the vital fluid or principle. Nevertheless, it may be said that the soul is more especially present in the organs which serve for the manifestation of the intellectual and moral qualities."

"The spirit may be said to live especially in one part of your body, because all sensations come together there. But those who place the spirit in what they consider the center of life confuse it with the vital fluid or principle. Nevertheless, the soul may be said to be especially present in the organs that express intellectual and moral qualities."

147. Why is it that anatomists, physiologists, and, in general, those who apply themselves to the pursuit of the natural sciences, are so apt to fall into materialism?

147. Why are anatomists, physiologists, and people who study the natural sciences generally so prone to materialism?

"The physiologist refers everything to the standard of his senses. Human pride imagines that it knows everything, and refuses to admit that there can be anything which transcends the human understanding. Science itself inspires some minds with presumption; they think that nature can have nothing hidden from them."

"The physiologist judges everything by his own senses. Human pride imagines it knows everything and refuses to admit that anything can be beyond human understanding. Science itself makes some people overconfident. They think nature can have nothing hidden from them."

148. Is it not regrettable that materialism should be a consequence of studies which ought, on the contrary, to show men the superiority of the intelligence that governs the world?

148. Isn't it regrettable that these studies lead to materialism? Instead, they should show people the superiority of the intelligence that governs the world.

"It is not true that materialism is a consequence of those studies; it is a result of the imperfection which leads men to draw a false conclusion from their studies, for men may make a bad use of the very best things. The idea of annihilation, moreover, troubles those who profess to hold it more than they will allow to be seen; and those who are loudest in proclaiming their materialistic convictions are often more boastful than brave. The greater number of the so-called materialists are only such because they have no rational ground of belief in a future life. Show a firm anchor of rational belief in a future state to those who see only a yawning void before them, and they will grasp it with the eagerness of drowning men."

"Materialism is not a consequence of those studies. It results from the human imperfection that leads people to draw false conclusions from their studies. People can make bad use of even the best things. Moreover, the idea of annihilation troubles those who claim to believe in it more than they admit. Those who proclaim their materialist convictions most loudly are often more boastful than brave. Most so-called materialists are materialists only because they have no rational grounds for believing in life after death. Give those who see only a vast emptiness ahead a firm anchor of rational belief in life after death. They will grasp it as eagerly as drowning people."

There are those who, through an aberration of the intellect, can see nothing in organised beings but the action of matter, and attribute to this action all the phenomena of existence. They have seen, in the human body, only the action of an electrical machine; they have studied the mechanism of life only in the play of the bodily organs; they have often seen life extinguished by the rupture of a filament, and they have seen nothing but this filament. They have looked to see whether anything still remained, and as they have found nothing but matter that has become inert, as they have neither seen the soul escape from the body nor been able to take hold of it, they have concluded that everything is reducible to the properties of matter, and that death is consequently the annihilation of all thought. A melancholy conclusion, if such were really the case; for, were it so, good and evil would be alike devoid of aim; every man would be justified in thinking only of himself, and in subordinating every other consideration to the satisfaction of his material instincts. Thus all social ties would be broken, and the holiest affections would be destroyed for ever. Happily for mankind, these ideas are far from being general. Their area may even be said to be a narrow one, limited to the scope of individual opinions; for nowhere have they been erected into a system of doctrine. A state of society founded on such a basis would contain within itself the seeds of its own dissolution; and its members would tear each other to pieces like so many ferocious beasts of prey.

Some people, through a distortion of the intellect, see only the action of matter in living beings. They attribute all the phenomena of existence to this action. They have seen the human body as nothing more than an electrical machine. They have studied life only through the workings of the bodily organs. They have often seen life end when a filament breaks, and they have seen nothing but the filament. They have looked to see whether anything remained, but found only matter that had become inert. They have neither seen the soul leave the body nor been able to grasp it. So they have concluded that everything can be reduced to the properties of matter. They have also concluded that death therefore destroys all thought. If this were really true, it would be a sad conclusion. Good and evil would serve no purpose. Everyone would be justified in thinking only of themselves and putting the satisfaction of their material instincts above everything else. All social ties would be broken, and the most sacred affections would be destroyed forever. Fortunately for humanity, these ideas are far from widespread. Their reach may even be said to be narrow, limited to individual opinions. Nowhere have they been made into a system of doctrine. A society founded on such ideas would contain the seeds of its own destruction. Its members would tear one another to pieces like ferocious beasts of prey.

Man has an intuitive belief that, for him, everything does not end with the life of his body; he has a horror of annihilation. No matter how obstinately men may have set themselves against the idea of a future life, there are very few who, on the approach of death, do not anxiously ask themselves what is going to become of them; for the thought of bidding an eternal adieu to life is appalling to the stoutest heart. Who, indeed, could look with indifference on the prospect of an absolute and eternal separation from all that he has loved? Who, without terror, could behold, yawning beneath him, the bottomless abyss of nothingness in which all his faculties and aspirations are to be swallowed up for ever? Who could calmly say to himself, "After my death there will be nothing for me but the void of annihilation; all will be ended. A few days hence, all memory of me will have been blotted out from the remembrance of those who survive me, and the earth itself will retain no trace of my passage. Even the good that I have done will be forgotten by the ungrateful mortals whom I have benefited. And there is nothing to compensate me for all this loss, no other prospect, beyond this ruin, than that of my body devoured by worms!"

People have an intuitive belief that their existence does not end with the life of their body. They are horrified by the thought of annihilation. No matter how stubbornly people have rejected the idea of an afterlife, very few face death without anxiously asking what will become of them. The thought of saying goodbye to life forever is terrifying, even to the bravest person. Who could be indifferent to the prospect of being separated forever from everyone they have loved? Who could look without terror into the bottomless abyss of nothingness beneath them? There, all their abilities and aspirations would be swallowed up forever. Who could calmly say to themselves, "After my death, there will be nothing for me but the emptiness of annihilation. Everything will be over. In a few days, those who survive me will have forgotten me completely, and the earth itself will bear no trace of my passing. Even the good I have done will be forgotten by the ungrateful people I have helped. And nothing will make up for all this loss. Beyond this ruin, there is no prospect except that of my body being eaten by worms!"

Is there not something horrible in such a picture, something that sends an icy chill through the heart? Religion teaches us that such cannot be our destiny; and reason confirms the teachings of religion. But the vague, indefinite assurance of a future existence, which is all that is given us either by religion or by reason, cannot satisfy our natural desire for some positive proof in a matter of such paramount importance for us; and it is just the lack of such proof, in regard to a future life, that, in so many cases, engenders doubt as to its reality.

Is there not something horrible about such a picture, something that sends an icy chill through the heart? Religion teaches us that this cannot be our destiny, and reason confirms what religion teaches. But religion and reason give us only a vague, uncertain assurance of a future existence. That cannot satisfy our natural desire for definite proof in a matter so important to us. And it is precisely the lack of proof of a future life that so often makes people doubt its reality.

"Admitting that we have a soul," many very naturally ask, "what is our soul? Has it a form, an appearance of any kind? Is it a limited being, or is it something undefined and impersonal? Some say that it is 'a breath of God;' others, that it is 'a spark;' others, again, declare it to be 'part of the Great Whole, the principle of life and of intelligence.' But what do we learn from these statements? What is the good of our possessing a soul, if our soul is to be merged in immensity like a drop of water in the ocean? Is not the loss of our individuality equivalent, so far as we are concerned, to annihilation? The soul is said to be immaterial; but that which is immaterial can have no defined proportions, and therefore can have no reality for us. Religion also teaches that we shall be happy, or unhappy, according to the good or the evil we have done; but of what nature are the happiness or unhappiness thus promised us in another life? Is that happiness a state of beatitude in the bosom of God, an external contemplation, with no other employment than that of singing the praises of the Creator? And the flames of hell, are they a reality or a figure of speech? The Church itself attributes to them a figurative meaning; but of what nature are the sufferings thus figuratively shadowed forth? And where is the scene of those sufferings? In short, what shall we be, what shall we do, what shall we see, in that other world which is said to await us all?"

“Suppose we have a soul,” many people quite naturally ask. “What is our soul? Does it have a form or any kind of appearance? Is it a distinct, bounded being, or is it something undefined and impersonal? Some say it is ‘a breath of God.’ Others say it is ‘a spark.’ Still others say it is ‘part of the Great Whole, the principle of life and intelligence.’ But what do these statements tell us? What good is a soul if it merges into immensity like a drop of water in the ocean? For us, isn’t losing our individuality the same as being destroyed? “The soul is said to be immaterial. But something immaterial can have no definite dimensions and therefore can have no reality for us. Religion also teaches that we will be happy or unhappy according to the good or evil we have done. But what kind of happiness or unhappiness awaits us in another life? Is happiness a state of bliss in God’s embrace, a state of external contemplation? Will we have nothing to do but sing the Creator’s praises? And are the flames of hell real, or are they a figure of speech? The Church itself says they are figurative. But what kind of suffering do they represent? And where does that suffering take place? In short, what will we be, what will we do, and what will we see, in that other world said to await us all?”

No one, it is averred, has ever come back to give us an account of that world. But this statement is erroneous; and the mission of spiritism is precisely to enlighten us in regard to the future which awaits us; to enable us, within certain limits, to see and to touch it, not merely as a deduction of our reason, but through the evidence of facts. Thanks to the communications made to us by the people of that other world, the latter is no longer a mere presumption, a probability, which each one pictures to himself according to his own fancy, which poets embellish with fictitious and allegorical images that serve only to deceive us; it is that other world itself, in its reality, which is now brought before us, for it is the beings of the life beyond the grave who come to us, who describe to us the situations in which they find themselves, who tell us what they are doing, who allow us to become, so to say, the spectators of the details of their new order of life, and who thus show us the inevitable fate which is reserved for each of us according to our merits or our misdeeds.

People claim that no one has ever returned to tell us about that world. But this claim is false. The mission of spiritism is precisely to enlighten us about the future that awaits us. Within certain limits, it enables us to see and touch that future. It does so not merely through reasoning, but through the evidence of facts. Thanks to communications from the people of that other world, it is no longer a mere assumption or possibility. It is no longer something each person imagines according to their own fancy. Nor is it something poets decorate with fictional and symbolic images that only deceive us. Instead, that other world itself is now brought before us as it really is. Beings from the life beyond the grave come to us and describe the situations they find themselves in. They tell us what they are doing and allow us, so to speak, to observe the details of their new life. In this way, they show us the inevitable fate awaiting each of us, according to our merits or misdeeds.

Is there anything anti-religious in such a demonstration? Assuredly not; since it furnishes unbelievers with a ground of belief, and inspires lukewarm believers with renewed fervour and confidence.

Is there anything anti-religious about such a demonstration? Certainly not. It gives unbelievers a reason to believe and inspires lukewarm believers with renewed passion and confidence.

Spiritism is thus seen to be the most powerful auxiliary of religion. And, if it be such, it must be acknowledged to exist by the permission of God, for the purpose of giving new strength to our wavering convictions, and thus of leading us back into the right road by the prospect of our future happiness.

Spiritism is therefore religion's most powerful aid. And if it is, we must acknowledge that it exists by God's permission. Its purpose is to strengthen our wavering convictions and lead us back to the right path through the prospect of future happiness.