Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

A Synopsis of Baron du Prel's "Philosphie Der Mystik"

by Bertram Keightley
Reprinted from the Transaction of the ondon odge of the Theosophical Society Reprinted from "Theosophical Siftings" Vol!me " 1 " 1### The Theosophical P!$lishing Society, %ngland &'NT(S )riti*!e of P!re Reason is a most con+incing demonstration that no kno,ledge is possi$le for !s o!tside the limits of e-perience, since priori, and apart from e-perience, ,e can kno, only the a$stract forms of p!re tho!ght. the la,s imposed $y o!r nat!re on the e-ternal ,orld of phenomena as gi+en to !s in /int!ition0 1'nsha22ng34 Since, ho,e+er, these la,s are inherent in us and apply to that ,hich ,e call the /Not"self0 only in so far as our conscio!sness is concerned, it follo,s that the limits of tr!e kno,ledge are for !s the limits of o!r possi$le e-perience4
[Page 1

'd+ancing from this gro!nd, Dr4 D! Prel states the pro$lem ,hich his ,ork is an attempt to sol+e, the pro$lem ,hich lies at the root of all Mysticism, of all 5cc!ltism, nay, e+en of spirit!al progress itself, as follo,s. 6 7s o!r tr!e %go entirely contained in o!r self "conscio!sness 8 0 The e-tent of kno,ledge and self"kno,ledge possi$le to any organised $eing is determined $y the n!m$er of its senses, and $y the degree of stim!l!s to ,hich they respond, i.e., $y its psycho"physical limit of sensation4 7n $iological e+ol!tion this limit has al,ays $een +aria$le, and th!s, not only ha+e the senses $een differentiated in the s!ccession of li+ing forms, $!t the conscio!sness of their possessors has $een enlarged as ,ell40 These remarks s!ggest the follo,ing some,hat different statement of [Page ! the f!ndamental pro$lem. 7s not a man a $eing ,hose conscio!sness is disting!isha$le as d!al from the e-istence of a +aria$le limit of sensation9 the conscio!sness of the one form 1at present o!tside the range of o!r ordinary e-perience3 incl!ding that of the other9 ,hile the latter 1o!r normal conscio!sness3 is not distinctly cogni:ant e+en of the e-istence of their integral !nity 8 The pro$lem, th!s stated, is clearly a legitimate rider to the &antian philosophy, since it implies nothing more than an in*!iry into the possi$ility of any e-tension of the present limits of o!r e-perience and the conditions of s!ch e-tension4 That s!ch an enlargement of o!r field of o$ser+ation is possi$le is more than s!ggested $y the Theory of %+ol!tion, as ,ell as $y the past history of &no,ledge itself4 ' caref!l consideration of this $ranch of the Page 1

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

in*!iry +ery properly forms the 7ntrod!ction to the s!$;ect !nder consideration4 7n order to gi+e a clear idea of the method p!rs!ed, ,e shall analyse at some length one or t,o chapters9 translating freely from the te-t and adding only the connecting links4 The 7ntrod!ction consists of an in+estigation as to the possi$ility of a real gro,th of &no,ledge4 't the o!tset, Dr4 D! Prel remarks that the logical instinct of mankind al,ays leads them to adopt a line of cond!ct in harmony ,ith their conception of the riddle of e-istence, and that therefore men(s moral progress is necessarily dependent on the gro,th of kno,ledge9 and th!s, if kno,ledge admits of gro,th, ,e may hope to attain to a $etter state of things9 to a form of c!lt!re tinged at least ,ith loftier ideals4 <e then contin!es. 6 /No,, the most common of pop!lar ass!mptions is that kno,ledge not only can, $!t does, gro,4 =nfort!nately, ho,e+er, this $elief is largely colo!red ,ith misconceptions9 the first and most serio!s of ,hich is the idea that this gro,th proceeds solely in $readth, not in depth4 Tr!e progress e+er goes deeper9 yet each generation fancies that it lea+es merely s!rface ,ork to $e done $y its s!ccessors4 The second misconception lies in the e-pectation that the riddle of life ,ill $ecome more intelligi$le to !s thro!gh the increase of kno,ledge4 The contrary has in tr!th $een the case !p to the present, and ,ill $e for a long time to come9 altho!gh that e-pectation may some day $e realised40 >e ha+e, therefore, t,o *!estions to e-amine. 1st3 4 7n ho, far does the h!man mind progress in depth 80 ?nd3 >hat contri$!tion can it $ring to the sol!tion of the Riddle of the =ni+erse 80 'fter sho,ing $y the e-amples of )opernic!s and &ant that the real [Page " ad+ance of kno,ledge has $een in depth rather than in mere s!rface e-tension, the a!thor p!rs!es. The modern Theory of %+ol!tion follo,s, conscio!sly or not, the lines traced o!t $y &ant4 @iological %+ol!tion $egan ,ith the simplest oiganisms and has reached in the most complicated h!man $eing its highest point for the moment, Th!s, a tree stands in $!t +ery fe, and +ery simple relations to e-ternal nat!re9 it responds to s!nshine and rain, ,ind and ,eather, and !nfolds itself accordingly4 7n the animal kingdom these relations to the s!rro!nding e-ternal ,orld ha+e increased in n!m$er and e-tent9 and hand in hand ,ith organic, ad+ances also intellect!al e+ol!tion40 Arom the oyster to man, the gro,th of conscio!sness proceeds parallel ,ith that of organisation4 @!t e+en s!pposing the organic e+ol!tion had reached its close, the domain of h!man conscio!sness ,o!ld still recei+e additions thro!gh the ad+ance of the technical and theoretical sciences40 Th!s, from the standpoint of e+ery animal organism, e-ternal nat!re is di+ided into t,o !ne*!al parts, the ine*!ality of ,hich increases as the organism descends in the scale of life4 5n one side is that portion of nat!re ,ith ,hich its senses connect it9 ,hile the rest of nat!re is transcendental to it. i.e., the organism in *!estion stands in no conscio!s relation to that part of nat!re4 This frontier line has $een contin!ally p!shed $ack,ards and on,ards d!ring the progress of $iological e+ol!tion. the n!m$er of the Page ?

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

senses ha+ing increased, as ha+e also their ,orking po,ers40 Th!s, ,hat Aechner has termed the (psycho"physical threshold( has $een steadily p!shed $ack in proportion as the senses differentiated, and responded to e+er",eakening degrees of physical stim!l!s9 ,hile stim!li falling $elo, this threshold do not enter into conscio!sness at all4 So that the $iological ad+ance, as ,ell as the gro,th of conscio!sness implies a constant p!shing $ack of the frontier"line $et,een the realms of Tho!ght and Reality, at the e-pense of the transcendental and !nkno,n, and to the profit of the kno,n ,orld40 This is the +ie, of Dar,in, ,ho has pro+ed the necessary e-istence of a transcendental ,orld for e+ery organism4 7t is also that of &ant, ,ho demonstrated the same fact $y his distinction $et,een the (Thing in 7tself( and the ('ppearance( 04 The opposite of this is the +ie, held $y the materialists, ,ho regard the eye as simply a mirror for appearances4 'ccording to them, the ,orld e-ists in o!r $rain as it is in reality o!tside of !s4 Materialism, therefore, rests !pon an ass!mption ,ith ,hich it stands [Page # or falls9 viz4, that all that is real is percei+a$le $y the senses4 Th!s Ae!er$ach, one of the most consistent and philosophical thinkers of that school, ,rites. /The o$;ect of the senses, or the sens!o!s is alone tr!ly real, and therefore Tr!th, Reality, and sens!o!sness are one04 @!t this ass!mption that to e+ery force in nat!re there is a corresponding sense, stands in direct contradiction ,ith the fact that o!r conscio!sness is demonstra$ly a gro,ing prod!ct of $iological de+elopment4 Aor the forces of magnetism and electricity escape o!r sens!o!s preception, and their +ery e-istence ,o!ld $e !npro+a$le if they co!ld not transform themsel+es into e*!i+alent amo!nts of other forces ,hich do appeal to o!r senses4 The ,orld remains an !nsol+ed pro$lem, only $eca!se Percepti$ility and Reality do not coincide9 for ,ere they coincident, a fe, cent!ries ,o!ld s!ffice to disco+er all tr!th4 P!rs!ing this line of arg!ment, D! Prel ne-t reaches the follo,ing concl!sion. 5!r conscio!sness in its relation to the Real is therefore imperfect, $oth *!antitati+ely and *!alitati+ely9 *!antitati+ely, $eca!se ,e ha+e not as many senses as there are nat!ral forces ,hich act !pon !s9 *!alitati+ely, $eca!se o$;ects $ecome transformed in the process of sens!o!s cognition. th!s, ,hat in nat!re is ethereal +i$ration $ecomes in conscio!sness light9 ,hile aerial +i$ration $ecomes so!nd4 Therefore, not only are there more things than senses, $!t f!rther, the things themsel+es are different in Reality from o!r )onceptions of them4 7n other ,ords,/)onscio!sness does not e-ha!st its o$;ect, ,hich is the =ni+erse04 Passing then to the second $ranch of his pro$lem, he contin!es. >e ha+e dealt, hitherto, ,ith the first only of the t,o great riddles placed $efore the mind of man, the =ni+erse4 et !s no, consider the second, Man himself40 's the ,orld is the o$;ect of )onscio!sness, so is the %go that of Self"conscio!sness4 's )onscio!sness stri+es to penetrate its o$;ect, the ,orld, and to define it logically, so does Self" Page 3

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

)onscio!sness its o$;ect, the %go4 's regards conscio!sness and the !ni+erse, the materialistic +ie, has at least $een rep!lsed9 $!t materialism still flatters itself ,ith the hope of resol+ing all psychology into physiology4 @!t e+en ,ere this hope f!lfilled, there ,o!ld still remain the !nsol+ed pro$lem, ,hether self" conscio!sness does indeed e-ha!st its o$;ect40 S!ch a *!estion is *!ite as legitimate here as ,as a similar *!estion in regard to conscio!sness. and ,e ha+e e+ery gro!nd to s!ppose that $oth *!estions m!st $e ans,ered in the negati+e, and that the same relation o$tains $et,een self"conscio!sness and the %go, as $et,een conscio!sness and the ,orld4 @oth analogy and the history of e+ol!tion s!pport this +ie,9 for if Nat!re spent some ten million years in de+eloping man(s conscio!sness [Page $ to the point of realising the riddle of the !ni+erse, and the diffic!lty of its metaphysical pro$lems, it ,o!ld hardly seem likely that, in contrast thereto, self" conscio!sness sho!ld ha+e $een perfect in man from its +ery da,n, not s!scepti$le of de+elopment, $!t a finished prod!ct from its earliest appearance4 'nd this is ,hat is implied in the assertion that o!r self" conscio!sness em$races its o$;ect, o!r %go, in its entirety40 S!mming !p the arg!ments contained in the 7ntrod!ction or first chapter, ,e are led to the concl!sion that conscio!sness does not e-ha!st its o$;ect, $!t is, on the contrary, engaged in a ceaseless process of adaptation to it, ,hich is still +ery far from $eing e+en appro-imately completed4 Similarly, it ,o!ld seem at least highly pro$a$le that the adaptation of o!r Self"conscio!sness to its o$;ect, o!r tr!e %go, is also far from complete or perfect9 and that the fail!re, so far, to demonstrate the e-istence of a So!l in man, $y no means ,arrants the ass!mption that it does not e-ist at all4 7t has $een sho,n that the p!rely materialistic +ie, of science is incompetent to e-plain f!lly the +ery facts !pon ,hich science itself rests9 ,hile the a, of %+ol!tion, its last and greatest generalisation, re*!ires $y its f!ndamental ass!mption of the !n$roken contin!ity of nat!ral la,s, that man sho!ld $e capa$le of an indefinite amo!nt of f!rther progress 6 a res!lt ,hich can only $e achie+ed if kno,ledge can gro, in depth as ,ell as $readth9 implying there$y a f!rther de+elopment of man(s fac!lties of o$ser+ation4 The second chapter is occ!pied ,ith an in+estigation into the scientific importance to $e attri$!ted to /Dream04 No, dreaming itself implies mental acti+ity, ,hile it is an ackno,ledged fact, that dream pict!res differ +ery largely from the contents of o!r ,aking conscio!sness, a fact ,hich pro+es them to come from a region from ,hich ,e are sh!t o!t ,hen a,ake4 D! Prel, therefore, concl!des that the ner+e stim!li ,hich form the $asis of these dream"pict!res m!st lie, d!ring ,aking, $elo, the threshold of sensation, and hence that, d!ring sleep, this threshold m!st $e displaced4 No, the region th!s $ro!ght into sensation may lie either in o!rsel+es or in the o!ter ,orld4 7n the former case the heightened sensi$ility d!ring sleep ,o!ld $e of interest only for the physician9 $!t in the latter, sleep ,o!ld $eget a relation $et,een o!rsel+es and the o!ter ,orld different from that of ,aking, and ,hich might ,ell gi+e to dreams real meaning and importance4 >aking to e-ternal life is partly s!$;ecti+e, partly o$;ecti+e. it em$races o!r $odily sensations, and e-tends also to the ,orld ,itho!t !s4 7t may, therefore, nat!rally $e asked ,hether the internal a,akening Page B

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

of dream has also $oth characteristics9 i.e., ,hether the displacement of the [Page % threshold of sensation can gi+e rise to a relation ,ith the o!ter ,orld of ,hich ,e are not a,are in o!r ,aking moments40 The ans,er m!st $e affirmati+e4 Physiology has long since pro+ed that the contents of o!r ,aking conscio!sness come to !s thro!gh the senses9 $!t this conscio!sness is limited $y those +ery senses themsel+es4 There e-ists, therefore, a more intimate connection $et,een o!rsel+es and nat!re than ,e are a,are of4 There are so!nds ina!di$le to o!r ears9 rays, ,hich prod!ce no sensation of light in o!r eyes9 s!$stances, ,hich do not affect o!r taste or smell4 'ltho!gh, then, o!r sens!o!s conscio!sness disappears in sleep, ,e still remain immersed in the general life of nat!re, to ,hich ,e $elong as the part of the ,hole4 Sleep can only s!spend o!r relation to nat!re thro!gh the senses, $!t ne+er that relation of ,hich, tho!gh present, ,e remain !nconscio!s in o!r ,aking ho!rs4 The latter, sleep can $!t $ring into conscio!sness, since it displaces the limit 1Sch,elle3 of sensation40 Sleep has, therefore, not merely the negati+e aspect of s!spending the ,aking conscio!sness, $!t also a +ery positi+e one, in that it $rings into prominence a relation e-isting $et,een o!rsel+es and nat!re, of ,hich ,e are !nconscio!s ,hen a,ake4 A!rther, ,e find that the +ast ma;ority of dreams, especially those of deep sl!m$er, are totally forgotten9 ,hile, ,hen a,ake, ,e co!ld not possi$ly forget in an ho!r or t,o ,hat ,e ha+e clearly and distinctly seen4 This fact is physiologically incapa$le of any other e-planation than that o!r ,aking and dreaming conscio!sness are f!nctions of separate organs, or that, at least the dream of deep sleep depends on the action of other $rain"strata than those in acti+ity d!ring ,aking4 Aor, if from the identity of o!r conscio!sness on s!ccessi+e days, ,e infer an identity of the organ of conscio!sness9 then, from a difference of conscio!sness, ,e m!st infer a difference of organ4 @!t the fact that dreams are remem$ered at all implies a gro!nd common to $oth9 th!s the conf!sion and the illogical, meaningless character of s!ch remem$ered dreams 6 those of light and imperfect sl!m$er 6 may ,ell $e d!e to an admi-t!re of elements from o!r normal conscio!sness among the ordered and logical memories of the dream"state d!ring profo!nd sleep4 No, ,e fall asleep and a,aken grad!ally, and the dreams ,e remem$er $elong to the transition state $et,een the t,o, in so far as the organs acti+e in ,aking and dreaming are common9 s!ch dreams are, therefore, conf!sed, $eca!se they lack organic !nity, $eing the mi-ed prod!ct of the partial acti+ity of t,o organs4 S!ch remem$ered dreams ,ill, therefore, !s!ally consist of fragments from o!r ,aking tho!ghts9 of the tr!e prod!cts of the dream"organ itself9 and lastly, of pict!res arising from +egetati+e stim!li ,ithin o!r o,n organism40 [Page & 7n this middle state, then, $et,een ,aking and deep sleep, ,e4 m!st not e-pect to find the characteristic f!nctions of the p!re dream"organ4 Since, ho,e+er, as ,ill $e seen later, the co!rse of a dream $ecomes not only connected and logical, $!t e+en directed $y definite p!rpose, as soon as the ca!ses of dist!r$ance are remo+ed, ,e may assert that the foolish and meaningless part of dreams are d!e to the partial acti+ity of the organ, ,hose f!ll f!nctions are displayed d!ring ,aking9 ,hile its reasona$le and connected part proceeds from the !ndist!r$ed action of that organ ,hich is specially concerned ,ith Page C

Theosophical Siftings
dream"acti+ity4

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

7t remains to sho, the e-istence of connected, reasoned dreams, marked $y conscio!s p!rpose4 This D! Prel pro+es 61st, from the phenomena of sleep",alking, ,hen the dreamer translates his dream" tho!ghts into action and ?nd, from those of somnam$!lism, [The ,ords Somnambulism and9 Somnambule are not !sed in their etymological sense, $!t denote thro!gho!t this paper a state of mental acti+ity d!ring trance4 ,here the dreamer can e-press his tho!ghts in ,ords4 >e find, then, reason to attri$!te the irrationality of dreams in general to the action of e-ternal dist!r$ing ca!ses, and ,e sho!ld, therefore, e-pect that the deeper the sl!m$er and the more these so!rces of error are e-cl!ded, the more rational ,ill dream"tho!ght appear4 Airst, ho,e+er, ,e m!st sho, that thinking does still go on in deep 6 nay, in the deepest possi$le sl!m$er4 <ere somnam$!lism comes to o!r help4 >hether prod!ced $y mesmeric manip!lation, or, as sometimes happens, spontaneo!s, it is a condition of sleep to ,hich is !nited an internal a,akening, and in it ordered, connected and logical series of ideas made their appearance4 The connection ,ith the o!ter ,orld thro!gh the senses has +anished from the somnam$!le(s conscio!sness, ,hile his insensi$ility to physical stim!li has enormo!sly increased9 and in their place a ne, and ordered, tho!gh partially limited connection ,ith the o!ter ,orld has arisen4 The (7( of waking conscio!sness has disappeared from the self conscio!sness of the somnam$!le4 This self"conscio!sness, indeed, no, incl!des the contents of the former, in their entirety and in logical order, not in fragments merely, as in ordinary dreaming9 $!t these contents are not referred to the inner, ,aking ( 7(, $!t to another strange (7(4 The same (s!$;ect( is th!s split !p into t,o personalities9 a state of things also occasionally fo!nd in ordinary dreaming40 D! Prel th!s finds in somnam$!lism a dream"state s!scepti$le of acc!rate o$ser+ation, and one ,hich $ears o!t to some e-tent his former concl!sions as to /dream0 in general4 @!t, lea+ing a detailed in+estigation of its phenomena for a later section he passes on to consider the [Page ' metaphysical +al!e attaching to the e-istence of the dream"state itself4 'fter a general re+ie, of the position, D! Prel points o!t that reg!larity and logical order are o$ser+ed in s!ch dreams as, from the e-tremely short time they ha+e occ!pied, may fairly $e considered as, on the ,hole, free from o!tside dist!r$ance4 This sho,s that the organ acti+e d!ring dreaming prod!ces logical and connected representations, ,hich, ho,e+er, as a r!le, $ecome conf!sed in o!r remem$rance, o,ing to the admi-t!re of elements deri+ed from these organs ,hich $ecome acti+e as ,e a,ake4 <e cites Schopenha!er and Aechner in s!pport of his $elief in the e-istence of a special organ, ,hose acti+ity constit!tes dreaming9 and sho,s from n!mero!s instances the marked difference $oth in form and matter e-isting $et,een o!r dream"tho!ghts and those of ,aking life4 <e then pro+es that this state of things, of ,hich the e-istence is ,idely admitted $y in+estigators of +ery different schools, is in reality e*!i+alent to an alternation of t,o personalities ,ithin the limits of a single s!$;ect, and therefore $ears o!t the hypothesis of a transcendental %go e-isting in man4 Ne-t, he gi+es a clear and concise sketch of the res!lts arri+ed at hitherto in this direction, in their Page D

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

$earing !pon the t,o great philosophical pro$lems 6 Man and Nat!re9 and in analogy ,ith the definition of the /transcendental ,orld0, as that portion of Nat!re lying o!tside the domain of o!r conscio!sness, he s!ggests the term /transcendental s!$;ect0 in man 1/s!$;ect0 meaning the ,hole h!man $eing3 as proper to $e !sed in opposition to the /empirical or self"conscio!s %go09 remarking, ho,e+er, that the former can only $e considered as a /transcendental Ego0, if it $e sho,n to $e capa$le $oth of kno,ing and of self" conscio!sness4 7f no, the empirical or personal conscio!sness $e capa$le of de+elopment, it follo,s that the $o!ndary $et,een it and the transcendental s!$;ect cannot $e impassi$le9 and ,e sho!ld therefore e-pect to find occasional e+idences of the e-istence of this higher self4 @!t the thread ,hich holds together the personal conscio!sness is the fac!lty of memory, and hence any s!ch e+idence of the presence of fac!lties properly $elonging to the transcendental part of man o!ght to $e accompanied $y modifications of this fac!lty4 'nd th!s o!r !s!al forgetf!lness of s!ch dreams as occ!r in deep sleep is merely ,hat ,e o!ght to e-pect, and ,e shall find $!t seldom any signs of a$normal fac!lties !nder normal conditions9 and they m!st therefore $e so!ght in a$normal states, s!ch as somnam$!lism4 S!mming !p the concl!sions reached in this chapter, D! Prel indicates the priori conditions !nder ,hich s!ch a transcendental %go in man 1if it e-ists at all3 may $e e-pected to manifest itself, and the form ,hich s!ch [Page ( manifestations m!st necessarily take, as logical conse*!ences of its e-istence as defined4 These res!lts he stated as follo,s.6 7f a transcendental %go possessing self"conscio!sness and the capacity of kno,ing e-ists at all, the follo,ing facts m!st $e capa$le of logical, scientific proof. 6 13 The e-istence of a d!al conscio!sness in man4 ?3 ' reg!lar alternation of the t,o states of conscio!sness4 33 Modifications of the fac!lty of memory in connection ,ith this alternation4 B3 The f!nctions of &no,ing and >illing m!st operate in $oth states, and pro$a$ly s!$;ect to. 6 /C3 Modifications of the standards of space and time 1since these are kno,n to $e the special and characteristic modes of perception and tho!ght of o!r present, act!al conscio!sness340 Sho!ld these logical conse*!ences of the hypothesis $e fo!nd to fit in ,ith o$ser+ed facts, there ,ill then $e a great pro$a$ility in fa+o!r of the tr!th of the hypothesis itself4 The third chapter deals ,ith the dramatic aspect of dreaming !nder its t,o forms. 6 1st, as affecting o!r normal meas!re of time, $y s!$stit!ting in its place ,hat may $e termed a transcendental standard9 and Page E

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

?nd, as prod!cing a dramatic di+ision of the %go4 7t has often $een noticed, $oth $y patients and doctors 6 many of them practised and highly"trained o$ser+ers 6 that !nder the infl!ence of anaesthetics, either the mental processes go on at an enormo!sly greater rate, so that the patient seems to himself to ha+e li+ed thro!gh a series of e+entf!l years in a fe, short seconds9 or, on the other hand, he a,akes ,ith a merely general impression of ha+ing $een !nconscio!s for many ho!rs4 The a$normal rapidity and cro,ding together of tho!ght and feeling, pro+ed $y these o$ser+ations, ha+e also $een noticed and descri$ed $y opi!m and hashish eaters, as ,ell as $y many of those ,ho ha+e $een nearly dro,ned4 No, the in+estigators [See the ,orks of Volkelt, <ennings, emoine, Ma!ry Scherner, Richter, Steffens, Fc4 ,ho ha+e occ!pied themsel+es ,ith e-periments on dreaming ha+e s!cceeded in tracing many dreams to e-ternal ca!ses, and in most cases they ha+e fo!nd that the catastrophe of the dream, to ,hich its entire co!rse led !p, co!ld $e !nmistaka$ly identified ,ith the e-ternal stim!l!s ,hich ,oke the sleeper4 This seems to imply that the effect 6 the dream and its clima- 6 precedes its ca!se 6 the e-ternal stim!l!s a,akening the dreamer4 'nd this holds e*!ally good $oth in nat!ral dreams and those e-cited for e-perimental p!rposes9 so that it is a +ery common, almost nightly occ!rrence, and cannot, therefore, $e [Page 1) ascri$ed to chance coincidence4 >e ha+e th!s to sol+e the follo,ing pro$lem. 6 <o, can a dream, e-cited $y a gi+en e-ternal stim!l!s, and seeming to co+er a lapse of years, end ,ith a clima- ,hich is merely the original stim!l!s itself in disg!ise. the stim!l!s ,hich at the same time a,akens the sleeper9 the stim!l!s, and the seemingly prolonged dream leading !p to the clima-, and the a,akening at that clima-, $eing th!s all incl!ded in an impercepti$le 1to !s3 period of time 8 No, <elmholt: has pro+ed e-perimentally that ner+e"stim!li re*!ire a definite, meas!ra$le time for transmission9 and Aechner has also sho,n that their transformation into conscio!s sensation f!rther re*!ires an additional time4 'nd the only possi$le sol!tion of the a$o+e pro$lem is that, !nder certain conditions, the mental processes take place independently of this physiological time"meas!re9 so that the ,hole series of dream"e+ents, e-plaining, leading !p to, and c!lminating in the catastrophe ,hich ,akes the sleeper, are interposed $et,een the moment ,hen the stim!l!s in *!estion reaches the conscio!sness $y some direct a+en!e, and the moment ,hen the same stim!l!s reaches it thro!gh the normal channel 6 the ner+o!s and cere$ral system4 Since, then, conscio!s mental processes can th!s go on at a m!ch greater rate than the normal, physiological ner+e"time admits of, it follo,s that this mode at least of conscio!sness is independent of the physical ner+o!s system, and is s!$;ect to a different and m!ch smaller time"meas!re4 @!t this is practically to admit that o!r conscio!sness has t,o different la,s in t,o different states 6 i.e., that its f!nctions are d!al9 hence that it may itself $e regarded as a d!ality4 'gain, if dreams are not to $e regarded as inspirations, ,e m!st o!rsel+es $e their architects4 @!t dream places !s amidst e+ents !nfolding themsel+es dramatically9 so m!ch so, that e+ery dream in+ol+es dramatic di+ision of the %go, since ,hat ,e think dialog!es 1in dreams3 can $e in reality $!t monolog!es4 More still9 ,e are not only actors and spectators in the play"ho!se of dream, $!t a part of o!rsel+es goes into the stage itself, since the ,hole drama 6 scenery, actors, and spectators, are of o!r creation4

Page #

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

This s!spension of o!r s!$;ecti+e !nity, ho,e+er 6 this e-ternalisation of internal processes 6 is only possi$le so long as ,e do not conscio!sly grasp the fact of their $eing internal9 so long as ,e do not kno,ingly prod!ce, $!t ha+e them, as it ,ere, gi+en to !s4 'll, therefore, depends on the relation of these e-ternalised processes to conscio!sness9 and this relation m!st lie either in the mental or in the physical region4 No,, of internal physical processes the only ones ,hich can th!s $e pro;ected as o$;ecti+e, ,itho!t o!r recognising them as internal, are the [Page 11 a!tomatic and +egetati+e f!nctions of circ!lation, digestion, etc4 <ence, ,hen in dream the s!$;ect is split !p into se+eral persons, the plane of this clea+age, so far as it is prod!ced $y physical ca!ses, m!st $e that di+iding conscio!s and +ol!ntary from !nconscio!s and in+ol!ntary f!nctions and mo+ements4 'nd again, since e+ery stim!l!s m!st attain a certain minim!m limit $efore it can e-cite in !s conscio!s sensation 6 ,hich limit, as the line di+iding conscio!s from !nconscio!s thinking and feeling, is called the psycho"physical threshold or limit9 and since all internal stim!li ,hich pass this limit enter into conscio!sness, ,hile those falling $elo, it remain in the region of the !nconscio!s, it follo,s that in the dramatic di+ision of the s!$;ect in dream, the plane of this clea+age 6 so far as the di+ision is d!e to psychical changes 6 m!st $e this +ery psychophysical threshold or limit itself4 D! Prel then enters on a detailed and con+incing proof of these concl!sions $y an e-amination of the recorded o$ser+ations of the most famo!s scientific psychologists, some of them $elonging to the e-treme materialistic4 school4 The follo,ing are some of the instances. 6 Van %sk had a patient afflicted ,ith asthma, ,ho, on falling asleep, reg!larly s!ffered from the follo,ing dream. 6 <er deceased grandmother came in thro!gh the ,indo,, and kneeling on her chest, endea+o!red to s!ffocate her4 7n a case reported $y Schindler, a somnam$!le, in one of her illnesses, sa, her deceased a!nt enter the room ,ith the ,ords /This sick girl is in danger of dying, $!t ,ill reco+er ,ith my help04 S!$se*!ently, in a more ad+anced state of trance, the same patient characterised this +ision as a mere personification of her condition, ,hich had intensified itself from a +ag!e feeling into a dramatic pict!re4 This last case sho,s that the s!$;ecti+e meaning of s!ch +isions is only percei+ed ,hen ,e $ecome conscio!s of the difference $et,een the one state and the other4 Similarly ,e recognise, after each a,akening, o!r dream"pict!res as ill!sions, ,hile in the dream itself they are taken as realities4 >ith the change of state there comes a dis$elief in the reality of the perceptions of the pre+io!s state4 The e-istence of a standard of comparison does a,ay ,ith the ill!sion, $!t as a r!le the standard can only $e attained thro!gh a change of state, ,hich allo,s of a comparison $et,een the t,o sets of perceptions4 7n all conditions in ,aking, as in e+ery stage of sleep"life, man consists, as it ,ere, of t,o hal+es 9 as far as either his ,aking or his dreaming conscio!sness e-tends, so far e-tends his /70 1his self"conscio!sness34 >hate+er ,ells !p from the !nconscio!s, and crosses the threshold of conscio!sness, the dreamer concei+es as $elonging to the /Not"self04 Th!s the d!alism of conscio!s and !nconscio!s, the [Page 1! di+iding psycho"physical threshold, is the common ca!se $oth of the dramatic di+ision of the %go in dream and also of the ill!sion, in +irt!e of ,hich ,e hold the dream to $e real4 ' remarka$le ill!stration of this is afforded $y one of >erner(s somnam$!les, ,ho had prescri$ed for herself a ;o!rney for the $enefit of her health4 >erner asked her ho, she ,o!ld $e, ,hen a,ay on her ;o!rney, and she replied, /My Page G

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

'l$ert0 1in spirit!alistic phrase, her spirit"g!ide3 /cannot then approach me so closely, $eca!se yo! ,ill not $e there9 $!t still he ,ill come and help me as m!ch as possi$le04 Translated into physiological lang!age, and stripped of its dramatic gar$, this means that she ,o!ld miss the mesmeric treatment, $!t that the effects of that already !ndergone ,o!ld remain ,ith her4 The foregoing are cases of the dramatisation of physical conditions or states4 The follo,ing are cases ,hich take their origin in mental or psychic stim!li or conditions4 @os,ell relates of Dr4 Hohnson that the latter dreamt he ,as engaged in a contest of ,it ,ith a stranger, ,ho pro+ed himself Hohnson(s s!perior, m!ch to the Doctor(s annoyance4 5n this D! Prel remarks. /No ,onder9 the dreamer Hohnson ,as split !p into t,o persons along the clea+age plain of the threshold of conscio!sness9 of ,hom one, the stranger, ,orked ,ith !nconscio!s talent, the other, Hohnson, ,ith conscio!s reason9 and therefore got the ,orst of it04 'nother case is taken from Ma!ry, ,ho relates that once ,hen learning %nglish he dreamt of con+ersing ,ith some one in that lang!age9 and, ,ishing to tell him that he called !pon him the pre+io!s day, he !sed the ,ords, /7 called for yo! yesterday04 The other, ho,e+er, at once declared that the e-pression ,as ,rong and corrected it ,ith /7 called on yo! yesterday04 5n a,aking, Ma!ry looked !p the *!estion and fo!nd that his critic ,as right4 Then, taking the fact of this dramatic di+ision of the s!$;ect in dream as granted, and ass!ming also as pro+ed that the plane of clea+age is in all cases the plane 1for the moment3 di+iding the conscio!s from the !nconscio!s, D! Prel proceeds to dra, the follo,ing inferences, ,hich he deri+es $y analysis from the foregoing propositions. 6 1st4 7t is, therefore, psychologically possi$le that a s!$;ect sho!ld consist of t,o personalities, ,itho!t the latter recognising their m!t!al identity, or their identity ,ith the common s!$;ect9 or, in other ,ords, that man is psychically d!al4 ?nd4 7t is f!rther psychologically possi$le that $et,een the t,o personalities e-isting in a single s!$;ect, interco!rse sho!ld take place ,itho!t their recognising their o,n !nderlying identity4 The consideration of nat!ral sleep leads ine+ita$ly to that of its a$normal phenomena, and especially those of nat!ral and artificial somflahi$!lism4 [Page 1" 7n dealing ,ith the former of these, D! Prel cites a n!m$er of the $est a!thenticated cases of +ery protracted sleep $ro!ght on $y nat!re herself as a means of c!re, and lays ;!st and necessary emphasis !pon the need of al,ays $earing in mind the radical difference $et,een /causa0, and /conditio09 $et,een the ade*!ate ca!se of an occ!rrence, and the condition ,hich, tho!gh necessary for its appearance, is still not the prod!cer of it4 <e points o!t that the deep and prolonged sleep of nat!re, in ,hich clair+oyance sometimes makes its appearance in the indication of appropriate remedies, is the condition, not the cause, of that clair+oyance4 H!st as, in artificial somnam$!lism, the mesmeric passes are the mediate ca!se of the deep sleep ,hich ens!es9 $!t neither they nor the sleep itself are the ca!se, $!t merely the condition of the clair+oyance ,hich often accompanies that state4 D! Prel then considers at some length the recorded facts and conditions of mesmeric clair+oyance, Page 1I

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

pointing o!t that these a$normal fac!lties are clearly all!ded to in the Vedas, and that they afford the strongest e-perimental proof of the e-istence of a so!l in man9 a so!l, that is, not identical ,ith o!r present daily conscio!sness, ,hich, $eing $o!nd !p ,ith o!r physical organism, m!st $e modified if not destroyed ,ith it, $!t a so!l in the ,ider sense of a conscio!s transcendental %go4 7n s!pport of the gen!ineness and reality of clair+oyance itself, he *!otes the !nanimo!s report of a special commission of ele+en doctors of the Paris 'cademy of Medicine, ,hich in 1#3?, after prolonged and e-ha!sti+e in+estigation, f!lly confirmed the e-istence and gen!ineness of these a$normal fac!lties4 A!rthermore, D! Prel sho,s that all these phenomena do not appear s!ddenly or de novo in the somnam$!lic state, $!t that they are, on the contrary, merely e-tensions and modifications of phenomena ,hose presence and action may $e traced e+en in ordinary dreaming4 Then, after ref!ting Dr4 @raid(s <ypnotic e-planation of mesmerism $y opposing the e+idence of other o$ser+ers to his, he concl!des the chapter $y saying .6 7n fact, somnam$!lism f!rnishes the most con+incing proof of another order of things $esides the sens!o!s, as also that man is inter,o+en ,ith this transcendental order thro!gh that side of o!r conscio!sness ,hich lies $eyond the ken of o!r personal %go in its normal state4 Somnam$!lism pro+es that Schopenha!er and <artmann ,ere right in $asing that passing form kno,n as man !pon >ill and the =nconscio!s9 $!t it pro+es also that this >ill is not $lind, and that that of ,hich o!r personal %go is !nconscio!s is not in itself !nconscio!s9 and f!rther, that $et,een o!r personal sel+es and the =ni+ersal S!$stance, there m!st $e interposed a transcendental s!$;ect, a kno,ing and ,illing $eing4 Th!s man(s indi+id!ality e-tends $eyond his passing phenomenal form, and life on earth is $!t one of the forms of e-istence possi$le to his tr!e self04 [Page 1# 'mong the many strange phenomena of sleep, there occ!r cases in ,hich o!r dreams represent the state of o!r $odily organs, and these cases D! Prel considers in the fifth chapter, !nder the heading /Dream 6 a Physician04 7nstances are cited in considera$le n!m$er ,hich sho, that o!r state of health not only gi+es the keynote to o!r dreams, $!t e+en $ecomes sym$olically portrayed in them ,ith s!rprising acc!racy4 <ence he concl!des that in dream ,e are m!ch more +i+idly conscio!s of o!r $odily condition than ,hen a,ake9 a circ!mstance only e-plica$le from a displacement of the psycho"physical threshold or limit of sensation taking place d!ring sleep4 Then, passing to the diagnosis of their o,n and others peoples( diseases ,hich so often characteri:es somnam$!lic clair+oyance, he infers, after e-amination of a series of remarka$le instances of this fac!lty, that the +ag!e and !s!ally s!$"conscio!s feeling of o!r o,n physical condition $ecomes conscio!s and definite in somnam$!lism, o,ing to a displacement of the threshold of conscio!sness follo,ing the e-cl!sion of all e-ternal stim!li4 <ence the statements of clair+oyants as to matters not relating to their o,n $odily state sho!ld $e recei+ed ,ith great ca!tion, and sho!ld not $e enco!raged or so!ght after, since the so!rces of error to ,hich clair+oyants are e-posed m!st $e m!ch greater in dealing ,ith facts not in direct physical relation to their conscio!sness, than in taking cogni:ance of s!ch facts as present themsel+es spontaneo!sly, from the displacement of the psycho"physical threshold4 7n e-planation of the diagnosis itself, D! Prel o$ser+es that the most ad+anced scientists ha+e seen reason to ascri$e /sensi$ility0, i.e., the fo!ndation of conscio!sness itself, to the !ltimate atoms of ,hich their so"called /dead matter0 consists4 <e points o!t that the $rain and the solar ple-!s are t,o almost Page 11

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

anatomically distinct centres, each of ,hich may ,ell $e the seat of a form of conscio!sness, that of the solar ple-!s $eing in o!r ,aking state $elo, the le+el of o!r conscio!sness9 and he inclines, therefore, to the +ie, that the latter is the centre of that conscio!sness ,hich takes cogni:ance of o!r $odily states in detail, or at least is closely connected ,ith it4 'nd he finds a confirmation of this opinion $oth in statements of the clair+oyants themsel+es, and in the ancient records and traditions of the %ast4 'fter an e-ha!sti+e e-amination of the facts $earing on the s!$;ect, D!J Prel comes to the concl!sion that this ,hole series of facts is d!e in the main to t,o ca!ses4 1st3 To an alternating and m!t!al relationship $et,een >ill and 7dea9 and ?nd3 to a displacement of the psycho"physical threshold4 Th!s >ill, or desire, e-cites or calls !p an idea9 and, vice versa, an 7dea calls !p or e-cites the desire or ,ill to realise it4 >e are th!s $ro!ght to the concl!sion that o!r normal self"conscio!sness does not [Page 1$ e-ha!st its o$;ect, o!r Self, $!t em$races only one of the t,o personalities forming o!r s!$;ect4 Man is th!s a monistic and a d!al $eing. monistic as s!$;ect or indi+id!al9 d!al as person4 No, it is apparent on reflection that the e-istence of personal conscio!sness depends mainly on that of memory, and f!rther, that reasoning, tho!ght, and action depend for their +al!e on the clearness ,ith ,hich o!r memory retains past e-perience and on the presence of mind ,ith ,hich ,e dra, therefrom o!r concl!sions as to the f!t!re4 7t is, therefore, not too m!ch to say that in proportion as a creat!re rises in the scale of life its memory e-pands9 ,hile, on the other hand, e+ery dist!r$ance of the sense of personal identity in madness or mental disease is accompanied $y derangement of this fac!lty4 @!t in the chapter on Dream, it ,as pro+ed ded!cti+ely that if o!r %go is not entirely contained in self" conscio!sness, then some modification of the fac!lty of memory m!st accompany any manifestation of the inner kernel of o!r $eing4 'nd to denote this latter, the ,ord /so!l0, or /psyche0, may appropriately $e !sed, not in its theological, $!t in its p!rely philosophical sense9 not as opposed to /$ody0, $!t as denoting that element in !s ,hich lies $eyond o!r normal conscio!sness and is di+ided from the latter $y the psycho"physical threshold4 @efore proceeding to analyse the dist!r$ances ,hich ha+e $een o$ser+ed in the fac!lty of memory, ,e m!st dra, a distinction $et,een Memory, Recollection, and Reproduction4 The po,er of the psychic organisation to recall past sens!o!s impressions as images is memory4 This is the common root of $oth recollection and reprod!ction4 >hen an image rec!rs ,itho!t its $eing recognised, it is reprod!ction only9 recollection implying reprod!ction accompanied $y recognition as ,ell4 @!t memory does not em$race all the images and sensations of past life, and ,e may ,ell seek the reason and la, of their selection4 'ccording to Schopenha!er, ,hose opinion is no, ,idely accepted, the selection depends on the ,ill, ,hich he considers the indispensa$le $asis of memory4 >ith this opinion D! Prel agrees, so far as the ,ill is here regarded as determining the contents of memory9 $!t he points o!t that the possi$ility of reprod!ction and recollection pro+es that the forgetting of an image cannot $e e*!i+alent to its annihilation or total o$literation from o!r nat!re4 7t follo,s, therefore, that s!ch forgotten images and tho!ghts m!st as m!ch inhere in some $asis as those not forgotten inhere in the ,ill4 'nd as this $asis is not to $e fo!nd ,ithin o!r self"conscio!sness, it m!st $e so!ght ,itho!t it4 @!t the mere atomic and molec!lar changes in the physical $rain are ins!fficient to acco!nt for the facts, and hence the $asis so!ght m!st lie in a 1to !s3 !nconscio!s part of the so!l4 [Page 1%

Page 1?

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

D! Prel then sho,s that on Schopenha!er(s o,n premises he o!ght to ha+e recogni:ed in $rain and intellect the o$;ectified >ill to kno, the things of sense, and sho!ld therefore ha+e concl!ded that >ill in itself is not necessarily $lind, since, ;!st as the eye cannot see itself, so neither can o!r intellect see itself9 i.e., recognise in itself thro!gh pain and pleas!re more than a metaphysical aspect of >ill9 ,hile any second attri$!te of that >ill, ,hich Schopenha!er considers as the root of @eing, m!st remain !nkno,n and !npercei+ed $y the intellect as s!ch4 To apply this to memory4 'ss!ming that o!r metaphysical >ill has t,o aspects or attri$!tes 6 >illing and &no,ing 6 the >ill, as the $asis of intellect!al memory, ,o!ld decide its contents, i.e., those of o!r empirical conscio!sness9 ,hile in the latter attri$!te 6 &no,ing 6 ,o!ld $e fo!nd the real $asis of memory in general, the common receptacle of all images and tho!ghts ,itho!t distinction4 Aorgetf!lness ,o!ld therefore $e confined to o!r $rain"conscio!sness, and ,o!ld not e-tend to its transcendental side, ,hich alone, in !nion ,ith the ,ill, ,o!ld em$race o!r ,hole $eing4 @!t ,e ha+e sho,n that it is only d!ring sleep and analogo!s states that o!r transcendental %go can manifest itself, and ,e therefore no, pass on to consider the enhancement of memory and the e-tent and e+idence of its latent riches, in dream, mesmeric somnam$!lism, and other a$normal states4 5n all these s!$;ects ample e-perimental e+idence is add!ced $y D! Prel, from the p!$lished records of the most scientific o$ser+ers9 $!t as it ,o!ld re*!ire too m!ch space to deal ,ith it here in detail, ,e shall content o!rsel+es ,ith indicating the general concl!sions he arri+es at4 D! Prel demonstrates. 6 1st3 That the reach and clearness of memory is largely increased d!ring sleep4 ?nd3 That the latent ,ealth of memory is enormo!s, and that its e-istence has $een recognised $y many competent o$ser+ers in cases of madness, idiocy, fe+er, accident, etc4 3rd3 That these latent riches $ecome most apparent and striking in somnam$!lism, ,hile in that case the s!$se*!ent and complete forgetf!lness pro+es the pre+io!s a$sence from physical conscio!sness of these stored"!p treas!res of memory, ,hich are far too comple- and min!te to $e capa$le of preser+ation as mere molec!lar alterations of the $rain str!ct!re4 >e no, come to a class of cases in ,hich memory, ,hich links as $y a $ridge o!r s!ccessi+e states of conscio!sness into a !nited ,hole, is so completely ,anting, that, looking only to the difference $et,een the s!ccessi+e states of the same person, ,e may ,ell speak of /alternating conscio!sness04 These cases go far to,ards gi+ing an empirical and e-perimental [Page 1& proof that a single s!$;ect or %go can split !p into a d!al personality4 @esides the ,ell"kno,n a$sence of memory after mesmeric trance, the same phenomenon has fre*!ently occ!rred spontaneo!sly4 D! Prel cites and disc!sses the principal instances on record, $!t of these ,e shall *!ote only one, that of a Miss R"""""", gi+en $y Dr4 Mitchell in 7V4 'rchi+ fKr thierischen Magnetism!s4 Page 13

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

Miss R"""""en;oyed nat!rally perfect health, and reached ,omanhood ,itho!t any serio!s illness4 She ,as talented, and gifted ,ith a remarka$ly good memory, and learnt ,ith great ease4 >itho!t any pre+io!s ,arning she fell one day into a deep sleep ,hich lasted many ho!rs, and on a,akening she had forgotten e+ery $it of her former kno,ledge, and her memory had $ecome a complete tabula rasa4 She again learned to spell, read, ,rite, and reckon, and made rapid progress4 Some fe, months after,ards she again fell into a similarly prolonged sl!m$er, from ,hich she a,oke to her former conscio!sness, i.e., in the same state as $efore her first long sleep, $!t ,itho!t the faintest recollection of the e-istence or e+ents of the inter+ening period4 This do!$le e-istence no, contin!ed, so that in a single s!$;ect there occ!rred a reg!lar alternation of t,o perfectly distinct personalities, each $eing !nconscio!s of the other and possessing only the memories and kno,ledge ac*!ired in pre+io!s corresponding states40 This +ery remarka$le case is ill!strated and confirmed $y many others analogo!s to it, and f!lly ;!stifies !s in ass!ming at least the empirical possibility of a conscious indi+id!ality in man, of ,hich his normal self is totally !nconscio!s4 This hypothesis also goes far to e-plain many c!rio!s phenomena o$ser+ed in a$normal mental states ,hich hitherto ha+e defied e-planation4 D! Prel then proceeds to apply these facts and concl!sions to $!ild !p a consistent and ade*!ate theory of memory4 <a+ing cleared the gro!nd $y pro+ing the !tter inade*!ateness of the materialistic theory to e-plain e+en the facts ,hich it admits, let alone those of a$normal memory ,hich ,e ha+e ;!st e-amined9 p!tting aside the almost !nthinka$le attri$!tes ,ith ,hich the materialists find themsel+es forced to endo, their /atoms0 in order to make their mere com$inations and perm!tations the sole $asis of memory9 lea+ing aside e+en these glaring a$s!rdities, there still remains a resid!!m of admitted fact ,hich their theory cannot e-plain, +i:4, o!r recognition of pre+io!s images and sensations, the unity of o!r conscio!sness, and lastly, the fact that these t,o factors are in a great meas!re independent of each other, ,hich co!ld not possi$ly $e the case if $oth ,ere merely d!e to $lind atomic com$inations4 @!t a correct theory of memory m!st also e-plain /forgetf!lness04 No,, [Page 1' ,hat happens ,hen ,e forget 8 Simply a disappearance from o!r sens!o!s e+eryday conscio!sness4 This, ho,e+er, cannot imply the annihilation of ,hat is forgotten9 other,ise its reprod!ction ,o!ld $e and remain impossi$le4 'nd hence, as the theory of material traces on the $rain is considered $y D! Prel to $e !ntena$le, there m!st $e a psychic organ ,hich has the po,er of reprod!cing a mental image e+en ,hen that image, as a prod!ct of its past acti+ity, has $een annihilated9 and f!rther, this organ m!st lie ,itho!t o!r self" conscio!sness, and therefore can only $elong to the 1quo adnos3 =nconscio!s4 @!t, if this organ possessed merely and only the latent potentiality of reprod!ction, and did not rather take !p the mental image as a prod!ct into itself and there preser+e it !nchanged, then ,e sho!ld $e forced to disting!ish $et,een the conscio!s and the !nconscio!s ,ithin this organ itself4 Since, if not, the image ,o!ld, in $eing forgotten, merely sink $ack into the p!rely /=nconscio!s0, and no reason or e-planation co!ld $e gi+en ,hy or ho, this /=nconscio!s0 co!ld ret!rn on a s!dden to conscio!sness4 S!ch an e-planation ,o!ld $e none at all, and ,e are therefore dri+en to concl!de that this organ is not in itself !nconscio!s, and that accordingly it possesses not a merely latent potentiality of reprod!ction, $!t that it takes !p into its o,n conscio!sness the images ,hich disappear from o!rs4 This hypothesis, f!rther, has the ad+antage of e-plaining ho, an enlargement of the field of memory can take place thro!gh a simple displacement of the psycho"physical threshold, as is the case in mesmerism, etc4 Page 1B

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

et !s compare this theory ,ith that of the materialists4 The latter assert that e+ery tho!ght or image lea+es $ehind a material trace on the $rain4 <ence e+ery recollection ,o!ld $e e*!i+alent to an e-tension of the sensuous conscio!sness 6 the only one they recognise 6 $eyond its pre+io!s sphere, ,here$y the trace so left $ehind $ecomes /ill!minated0, ,hile it other,ise ,o!ld remain in /darkness04 @!t in reality ,e find that it is in sleep and similar states that the memory is enhanced, and that in proportion as sleep deepens, i.e., in proportion as sens!o!s conscio!sness gro,s fee$ler and disappears4 >hence it follo,s that memory cannot $e a mere e-tension of sens!o!s conscio!sness4 5n the other hand, ,hen ,e forget anything, o!r theory teaches that nothing is changed in its mental representation, ,hich neither $ecomes, in some ine-plica$le manner, !nconscio!s nor yet is annihilated, $!t there takes place an alteration in the s!$;ect or indi+id!ality of the man4 This s!$;ect has a d!al conscio!sness and 7s separa$le into t,o persons9 so that in forgetting, as in remem$ering, a simple transfer of the representation in *!estion takes place $et,een these t,o persons of the same s!$;ect4 [Page 1( The tho!ght does not $ecome !nconscio!s, $!t one of the t,o persons of o!r tr!e self, the /70 of e+eryday life, $ecomes !nconscio!s of the e-istence of that tho!ght4 >hat ,e forget is not annihilated as tho!ght9 ,hat ,e remem$er is not $egotten afresh as tho!ght, $!t merely transferred into sens!o!s conscio!sness4 >e ha+e no, reached the last chapter of this o!tline of a philosophy of Mysticism, in ,hich D! Prel applies the res!lts already o$tained to esta$lish the e-istence and indicate the nat!re of a monistic so!l or indi+id!ality in man4 7n spite of the ine+ita$le repetition ,hich it ,ill in+ol+e, ,e shall follo, at least the general o!tlines of his arg!ment, ,ith the hope of $ringing to a foc!s the proofs scattered thro!gho!t the $ook, and of enforcing the importance and +alidity of the a!thor(s concl!sions4 Airst, then, it m!st $e $orne in mind that man, like e+ery other organism in the scale of life, faces in t,o directions 6 ga:ing, as it ,ere, on the past and the f!t!re9 $earing ,ithin him the footprints and o!tlines of Nat!re(s past de+elopment and history, $!t sho,ing also the r!dimentary organs and dormant fac!lties ,hich he is destined to de+elop in the f!t!re4 'nd to these dormant fac!lties, promises, as it ,ere, of ne, ,orlds of e-perience and kno,ledge, $elong the so"called a$normal po,ers and senses ,hich ha+e already occ!pied o!r attention4 They are the germs of man(s transcendental capa$ilities, the re"actions of his so!l on impressions recei+ed from ,itho!t, ,hich, ho,e+er, !s!ally remain !nnoticed and !n" percei+ed $eca!se they fall $elo, the normal limit of sensation4 Second4 7n addition to the arg!ments already $ro!ght for,ard 1from the phenomena of memory, etc43 for the e-istence of a principle in man, $eyond and higher than the kno,n la,s of nat!re, it may $e !rged that the e-istence of organised matter pro+es the action of some agency, ,hich s!spends for the moment the operation of the !s!al la,s of chemical affinity, and $rings a$o!t atomic and molec!lar com$inations of the most !nsta$le and ephemeral character, ,hich co!ld ne+er come into e-istence ,ere the atoms free to follo, their normal affinities9 and this organising principle thro!gho!t nat!re may ,ell $e identified ,ith the transcendental s!$;ect of the organism !nder consideration4 Thirdly4 7t has $een sho,n that the %go, indi+id!ality, or S!$;ect in man em$races t,o distinct personalities, since in somnam$!lic and allied states the kno,ledge and memories present in the s!$;ect(s conscio!sness are radically different from those present in his normal state9 ,hile f!rther, the sense of indi+id!ality, far from $eing lost or ,eakened 6 as it o!ght to $e on the Pantheistic theory of Page 1C

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

<artmann 6 or fading a,ay into the =ni+ersal =nconscio!s, $ecomes, on the contrary, more strongly [Page !) marked, ,hile ne, psychic po,ers and fac!lties make their appearance in those states4 That ,e are, indeed, entitled to speak of t,o personalities in one and the same s!$;ect is f!lly $orne o!t $y the fact that the antagonism $et,een them often e-tends to the mode and contents of their acti+ity, e.g., ,hen a somnam$!le asleep prescri$es for himself, and insists !pon a remedy ,hich is a$horrent to him ,hen he a,akes4 S!ch instances sho, that the transcendental s!$;ect regards the man(s sit!ation from a p!rely o$;ecti+e, impersonal standpoint, and is as indifferent to his fate as to a stranger(s 6 as, indeed, sho!ld $e the case if the t,o sides of man(s nat!re are di+ided $y the threshold of sensation4 This +ie, is f!rther confirmed $y the dramatisation of dream"life already dealt ,ith4 >e are th!s led to consider that higher Self ,ithin !s 1of ,hich ,e are !nconscio!s3 as indi+id!al and conscio!s, $!t independent of o!r senses4 P!rs!ing f!rther the consideration of this transcendental s!$;ect and its f!nctions, the follo,ing tho!ghts s!ggest themsel+es4 The transcendental S!$;ect or %go $eing th!s interposed $et,een man and the synthetic !nity of e-istency called Lod, Nat!re, or the 5ne ife, ,e sho!ld e-pect some fresh light to $e thro,n on those f!ndamental contradictions, ,hich neither Theism, Pantheism, nor Materialism has $een a$le to interpret or e-plain. the contradiction, for instance, $et,een man(s !ndying desire for happiness and the misery and s!ffering of his e-istence4 No,, no +ie, of e-istence, ,hich regards man as called into $eing from nothingness at $irth $y a foreign e-ternal po,er 1i.e., as only then $ecoming an indi+id!al entity3, can possi$ly attri$!te these miseries and s!fferings to ca!ses generated $y himself4 To reconcile the contradiction ,e need a +ie,, ,hich, ,hile recognising to the f!ll the ills of life and the o+er$alance of its s!ffering and misery, shall regard man(s $irth and life as the free act of his +ery $eing itself9 a $eing ,hose indi+id!ality cannot, therefore, $egin ,ith $irth, and hence m!st ha+e more than a mere transient importance, m!st last $eyond the $rief moment of life(s passing4 7f, then, 7 am the creation of my o,n actions 6 as $oth Aichte and Schelling admit 6 there m!st then $e a d!ality of persons ,ithin me4 So, alone, can 7 $e the ca!se of myself, for my indi+id!ality can ,ell $e the ca!se and prod!cer of my earthly personality, pro+ided that only the sens!o!s, earthly personality takes its rise at $irth, and %arth"life ,o!ld th!s res!lt from the tendency of the indi+id!ality to,ards incarnation4 The act!al proof of this +ie,, ho,e+er, can only $e gi+en thro!gh real facts and arg!ments9 and D! Prel then proceeds to analyse the circ!mstances ca!sing the $irth of any gi+en indi+id!al, and to e-amine the metaphysical $asis of / o+e0 in its $earing on h!man e+ol!tion4 The e+idence th!s o$tained is most [Page !1 concl!si+e and s!ggests many lines of f!rther in+estigation, $!t is too long for *!otation, and too condensed to admit of a !sef!l s!mmary4 7n the )hapter on Memory it ,as pro+ed that the passage from )onscio!sness into the =nconscio!s really implied a passage from the personal memory into the transcendental s!$;ect or indi+id!ality4 't this point the materialistic theory of e+ol!tion loses sight of the process, and confesses its ina$ility to e-plain ho, ac*!ired mental ha$its and memories can $e transmitted hereditarily4 No,, ,hat is tr!e as to the passing of memories o!t of conscio!sness, m!st $e e*!ally tr!e of tho!ght and ideas in general, of ,hich the acc!m!lated contri$!tions constit!te o!r psychic talents and po,ers4 The indi+id!ality th!s appears as the heir of o!r psychic earnings d!ring life, and especially so of moral *!alities and de+elopment, since the forms of intellect!al kno,ledge 1space and time3 are the most Page 1D

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

modified $y death, ,hich does not e*!ally effect the moral nat!re4 1See the phenomena and o$ser+ations of the mesmeric death"trance and other states43 7n somnam$!lism ,e ha+e fo!nd e+idence that the process of life is not simply engaged in calling into e-istence ephemeral $eings and then annihilating them9 $!t that on the contrary, the o$;ect of earthly e-istence is the gro,th and strengthening of the indi+id!ality4 This m!st $e the reason ,hy it seeks incarnation, since physical man is the common point determining, on one hand, the e+ol!tion of the indi+id!ality, on the other that of the species4 @!t the stress of e+ol!tion m!st fall ,holly on the de+elopment of the species, if ,e ass!me, ,ith the materialists, that the ac*!ired talents and progress of the indi+id!al are only stored !p in his germ"cells, $y ,hich the type of the ne-t generation is determined9 ,hile the indi+id!al himself is finally annihilated $y death4 )learly this ass!mption contradicts that !ni+ersal la, of nat!re, admitted $y the thinkers of all schools alike, the 0le! parsimonioe0, the la, of least effort4 Aor ,o!ld not far less energy $e e-pended in prod!cing a gi+en progress, if the indi+id!al stored !p his o,n mental and moral progress in s!ccessi+e li+es for the f!t!re ad+antage of himself and the ,orld, instead of merely $e*!eathing the o$;ecti+e fr!its of his la$o!rs to s!cceeding generations 8 7f it $e not so, then nat!re is ,astef!l of her forces, careless of the means she employs, and acts in contradiction ,ith herself4 >e fo!nd, ho,e+er, in the transcendental s!$;ect, the physic fac!lties of normal ,aking life, and if, therefore, this higher indi+id!ality $!t stretches, as it ,ere, its feelers into the material ,orld thro!gh the senses, and if, as seems almost certain, o!r sens!o!s $eing is capa$le of psychic e+ol!tion, then so also m!st $e o!r tr!e Self, o!r 7ndi+id!ality4 7n other [Page !! ,ords the indi+id!ality m!st a$sor$ the essence of o!r conscio!s acti+ity, and gro,, as gro,s a tree"tr!nk from the no!rishment $ro!ght it $y leaf and $ranch4 This granted, it follo,s that the e+ol!tion of the indi+id!ality cannot $e confined to a single earth"life, $!t that the distinct personal and indi+id!al character, ,ith ,hich ,e come into the ,orld, m!st ha+e $een pre+io!sly ac*!ired $y the same means thro!gh ,hich it gro,s and e-pands in this life4 <ence o!r indi+id!ality or transcendental s!$;ect m!st ha+e gro,n into ,hat it act!ally is thro!gh a long series of s!ccessi+e e-istences4 Th!s, not only is the e-istence in general, $!t also the indi+id!ality of man metaphysically determined and sho,n to $e his o,n creation9 for as in o!r dreams ,e are !nconscio!sly the poets, managers and e+en scene"painters of the plays therein enacted, so also is o!r indi+id!ality or Self the Synthesis of the threads $y ,hich destiny g!ides !s thro!gh life, altho!gh the fact that this is so is not patent to o!r sens!o!s conscio!sness4 >e ,ill no, state in $rief this, at least partial, sol!tion of the pro$lems of life and death as a ,hole, and then pass on to consider its ethical $earing and the ans,er it gi+es to that mightiest of all *!estions 6 >hat is the p!rpose of life 8 The h!man psyche e-hi$its fac!lties ,hich are physiologically ine-plica$le, not d!ring the e-altation and Page 1E

Theosophical Siftings

"Philosophie Der Mystik"

Vol 1, No 3

greatest acti+ity of sens!o!s conscio!sness, $!t, on the contrary, d!ring its complete s!ppression4 <ence it follo,s that the so!l m!st $e something more than a mere prod!ct of the organism, and tho!ght something other than a mere secretion of the $rain4 Still the so!l can and m!st $e concei+ed of as material, $!t of a materiality lying as far a$o+e that of the $ody, as the materiality of the latter is remo+ed from that of a stone4 So!l and conscio!sness are not identical conceptions4 's $elonging to the transcendental ,orld the so!l is !nconscio!s, $!t not in itself, only in respect of the $rain"conscio!sness4 Th!s the mesmeric trance ,hich prod!ces on the one hand the phenomena of clair+oyance, is, on the other, attended $y so complete a s!ppression of the $rain"conscio!sness, that the most serio!s s!rgical operations can $e performed in it painlessly4 This relati+ely, $!t not in itself, !nconscio!s %go, as the tr!e s!$stance of the indi+id!al, is !nited together ,ith man(s personal %go, the $asis of o!r normal e+eryday conscio!sness, into one single s!$;ect, ,hich is, ho,e+er, di+ided into t,o personalities4 The man ,ho alternately sleeps and ,akes is one single s!$;ect, possessing, ho,e+er, t,o alternating forms of conscio!sness, ,hich ha+e $!t fe, points of contact $et,een them4 [Page !" <ence man is not called !pon to play his part in the history of the )osmos merely as a part of the species4 Man is no mere passing phantom, forced to ser+e another(s p!rpose $y some strange fatality, $!t, on the contrary, he himself, as an indi+id!al $eing, is capa$le of infinite progress to,ards a$sol!te perfection4 @!t ,hat is the p!rpose of life, the tr!e end and o$;ect of e-istence 8 >e ha+e seen that life(s s!fferings, sp!rring !s on to progress and deeds of lo+e and charity, th!s $ecome means to e-pand and de+elop o!r indi+id!ality4 @!t they ha+e an e+en more direct p!rpose, for in them lies that p!rifying po,er recogni:ed alike $y )hristian and pessimist, $y poets and thinkers4 >e can still say ,ith the pessimist that thro!gh earthly s!ffering the ,ill to li+e is checked and $ro!ght to rest9 remem$ering, ho,e+er, that this holds tr!e $!t of the desire for earthly life9 ,hile the Nir+ana ,e stri+e for is not a$sol!te annihilation, $!t transcendental @eing, and is to $e attained, not thro!gh *!ietism and idleness, $!t thro!gh !ntiring effort on the $attle"field ,hich ,e o!rsel+es ha+e chosen for o!rsel+es4 Therefore may ,e say ,ith %ckhard the Mystic, /The fastest steed to $ear ye to perfection is s!ffering0, or ,ith the ,ise <e$re,, the a!thor of %cclesiastes, /Sorro, is $etter than la!ghter, for thro!gh sadness is the heart made ,iser04 5ne thing alone is ackno,ledged $y all thinkers alike as the act!al res!lt of earthly e-istence 6 the gro,th and enhancement of the indi+id!ality4 'nd ,e shall attain earth(s tr!e o$;ect and f!lfil its highest p!rpose $y s!$ordinating o!r personal interests to those of o!r tr!e sel+es, o!r 7ndi+id!ality 6 in other ,ords, $y ser+ing the ca!se of =ni+ersal @rotherhood9 for the indi+id!ality is $!t an e-pression of the s!preme synthetic !nity4 The entire contents of ethics may $e s!mmed !p in the precept9 that the personality shall ser+e the indi+id!ality4 Th!s the highest r!le of cond!ct is impersonality and !nselfishness 6 lo+e and charity,

Page 1#