The Gaelic Manuscripts
by Betty White
with Stewart Edward White

 

Chapter 18
The Technique of Communication

1. Typical beginner's experience

The main trend of Gaelic’s instruction, or discourse, has always been toward spiritual expansion, and explorations of those things which underlie spiritual expansion. He has never gratified our inquisitiveness as to names; he has steadfastly refused to assist in decisions. Other curiosities he has seemed willing to gratify, but only to the extent that would enable him to set them aside.

Especially in the beginning of experience in psychics, any intelligent, alert-minded person is bubbling over with questions as to what is going on.

What is it all about? How is it done? Taking then for what they purport to be, why is it that so many of those alleged ‘messages’ ordinarily received through automatic writing, or ouija, or what-not, are so random and irrelevant? Why do so many insignificant people entertain William James, or Julius Caesar, or Roosevelt, or Faraday, or similar celebrity? Why so much indirection, in getting at that should be a plain statement of fact; why the reluctance to say a plain ‘yes’ or ‘no’ that would settle the question? Why, if this is actual ‘communication’, all the fumbling?

And how – again assuming the genuineness of the phenomenon – can we distinguish the genuine content? How are we going to say how much is ‘coloring’ from the station’s subconscious? How do we know the whole thing is not a product of the station’s subconscious?

Then again there is the question of what we call ‘interference'. As is well known to anybody who has experimented in this subject at all, there come times when, apparently, disturbing, interfering, sometimes malicious entities take over the channel. Statements are made which prove false; predictions are confidently stated that never come out. The result is confusion and disgust. If this is interference on the part of such entities, how does it happen? Why is it permitted? How does it become possible? How can it be avoided? If, on the other hand, it is plain cussedness of the station's subconscious, what does one do about that?

Such questions, at one stage of experience, are not merely curious; they are vital. Some sort of answer is necessary. Ordinarily people ease into an interest in all these things somewhat in the following manner:

Some personal experience starts them off. It may not be much of' an experience; but it is sufficient merely because it is personal. Most often it is some such thing as automatic writing. We will take that as an example. The pencil in the beginner's hand, moves, makes marks, perhaps even scrawls words or simple sentences. He knows, as he says, that he didn't do it himself. Who should know better? That is where his mind stops. He is amazed, perhaps even awe-stricken, simply because the whole subject has been outside his normal field of thought,

That is the first stage. The second is blind acceptance of face values. He did not do it; he knows that. Something did. That something claims to be a discarnate entity. What else could it be? Everything received, no matter how nonsensical, is taken as gospel. If the subject is sufficiently enthusiastic and unanalytical, he is likely to delude himself with the notion that all this is of world-shaking importance; that he has been especially ‘chosen’. The delusion is likely to build itself up through the subconscious, for it is a flattering delusion. Who could avoid a sense of distinction when such big-wigs as James and Julius Caesar and what-not take time off from eternity to spend long evenings with him? The content of the ‘messages’ reflects this. They impress him with the high and holy honor conferred upon him; his obligation to impart to the world the revelations vouchsafed him. A great many people do not emerge from this stage. The consequence is the publication of an astounding mass of balderdash.

Fortunately the majority do so emerge. Common sense and judgment do assert themselves. Discrepancies and false statements cannot be dodged. It just plain isn’t so!

This in most cases rounds out the experience. It is abandoned in disgust. A few, however, are of more robust curiosity. In spite of discrepancies, nonsense and obvious intervention of the subconscious, they seem to discover an ‘irresolvable residue’. Those go on experimenting; but with aroused discrimination.

2. The purpose of first communications

Why are so many of those first communications, assuming that they have some genuine content, so inconsequential?

"The content of the first messages, through new stations," we were told, "is important only as it serves to retain interest and does not discourage by too complete irrelevancy. We are rarely at first attempting to say anything. We are merely trying to get a reaction to stimulus. If this could be fully understood, it would be as effective to convey a single irrelevant word, or, indeed, more meaningless sounds. From our point of view the whole importance of a considerably extended period of first work is in the reaction to any impression on the part of the station. Often in a long alleged message a small phrase, a single word, or even a solitary syllable or sound is all that actually emanates from us.

"The rest of the message, so called, is a mere carrying out of what the station himself unconsciously imagines to be the purport. That minute response is, however, completely satisfactory to us, as it indicates success in actually impinging upon our neophyte’s receptivity. We have no particular concern with the rest of it, unless, as I said at first, it may affect the probability of an abandonment of the experiments because of nonsense or discrepancy or contradiction. Since our major interest is thus fixed upon the process, while your interest is naturally fixed on the content, our aims must at first be diverse. And since at first we see the trend of progress while you do not, we are naturally reluctant to divert our purpose any more than is absolutely necessary.

"Therefore we give our attention and force to complete accuracy or to the production of what you call evidential only when our hand on the pulse of your interest or belief indicates a slowing down, below the danger point. Our object, you see, is to develop an instrument of receptivity capable of something more worth while than could be possible in crude beginnings.

"Now we try to start, naturally, with the apparatus that is most simple, both in manipulation and in range, that it is possible to devise. The simplest of all is, of course, a single reaction, a single impulse, resulting in a single phenomenon. We tip a table according to an almost childish prearrangement, or cause you to thrust a thing about in a limited number of directions, like the ouija board. These manipulations require, as one might say, a mere touch on the button.

"Generally the next step is coherent language, generally through automatic writing. This requires, however rapid it may seem, the choice among only twenty-six different things. You will notice, if you remember your experience, that after a little and at times, you occasionally anticipated a whole word in your own minds, a fraction of a second before it was put down, That writing was – in process slowed down – an impression of one out of twenty-six things only.

"This you can understand, was quite a different matter and a much easier matter than selecting one out of the several thousand things which constitute your vocabulary equipment. The latter is what must be done in the case of even fairly developed spoken communication.

"There is a curious reciprocity about this relationship. We can only reach – take advantage of effort, and you have to supply the effort. We generally in the beginning have to snatch at chance effort. You happen to be at a friend’s house tipping a table. There is our chance. But we might shout at you ten years. Try every technique you hear about, provided that if it does not seem promptly to work, you will not become discouraged with the whole business. There are no two things in the universe absolutely alike. In coarser adjustments wider dissimilarities will respond to identical method. As the adjustment becomes finer the individual differences exercise more influence, and the method must cease to be standard and itself becomes individual. When this is the case, careful and slow experiment is necessary on both sides, until the method is determined."

3. The assembling of conditions

That seemed sensible; and covered the situation. But we had, naturally, other curiosities. How was the thing done? What were the reasons for the very evident difficulties? Why the circumlocutions, the dodging of direct issues? Why not answer a direct question directly? This was rarely done. Certainly, assuming the genuineness of the thing, it was not from mere contrariness. And what about all these false ‘messages’; these apparently mischievous or actually evil entities that butt in? Why are they not kept out? These things throw people off the subject.

For some time we obtained no satisfaction. The source we call Gaelic seems to prefer to stick to his consciousness-expanding, and rarely condescends to gratify our desire for details. We early learned that it was well to do no more than suggest. Insistence did not work,

"You have been told, and rightly", he came to the subject at last, "that the basis of the process consists of an impression on what has been designated as your subconscious mind. The Intelligence, in this case, is that of the communicator. He assembles the conditions favorable for the conception of any given and desired idea; and, by the law, that idea or conception is automatically manifested in the subconscious mind of the recipient. Or, to adopt for our purpose another figure, we may conceive the equipment of any individual lying level (evidently meaning, inert, flat, undifferentiated) – in the pool of the subconscious mind.

"By the magnetizing of the required conditions, certain portions possessing affinity in it, for things magnetized, rise up from that level into relief. And as things in relief attract the attention, so to speak, of the conscious mind, a desire and necessity are born in that mind for their examination and interpretation.

"Thus the communicator is dependent upon several extremely inaccurate elements:
1. The skillful and understanding assembly of just the proper conditions to manifest the desired result through law.
2. The existence in the level pool of the subconscious (of the station) of elements capable of magnetic attraction by that manifestation.
3. The experience-equipment the conscious individual by which accurate interpretation or translation is possible.

"Beside the inaccuracy and incoherence due to these elements, and their manipulation, by the unskilled on either side, there is still another possible source of confusion.

"Once the pool is sensitized by the desire, the expectation, or the practice of the process just described, it becomes exceedingly responsive to influences either accidentally or purposely placed within its field of action.

"Your communicator, let us say for illustration, has assembled the conditions for the manifestation of the idea, through the communication of which he desires to transmit information. If he would hold his message pure, he must go further. He must eliminate from the field of response all other conditions. Otherwise, from our level of the subconscious, will arise in relief other things than those desired responding automatically to the chance conditions that exist in the field and have not been swept away.

"And these will be interpreted along with the rest.

"This source of confusion may be readily turned into an inimical influence, by the carnate individual himself. The precise method must remain in detail somewhat obscure. It is sufficient to say for this moment’s purpose, that a large part of the formation and maintenance of what we have called the Field is normally dependent on the station himself; – not through conscious knowledge or action on his part but by the maintenance of stable desire, unswerving faith and single-minded purpose. For the simple reason that the carnate mind is also capable, though to a lessor degree, of assembling the conditions of manifestation in the substance of thought. That, as well as chance, can clutter up the field: and from his own creations, so to say, can obtain from the elements of his own subconscious mind magnetic responses which, again in turn, he interprets. This completed vicious circle, is nine times in ten the whole of what you have called ‘interference'."

4. The broadcast idea – impersonations

We were beginning to get an idea. It was not quite so simple as talking into a telephone. There appeared to be several types of material to be conveyed, each with its appropriate technique.

Gaelic has always insisted that his talks are not intended as proof of anything but as directing help toward understanding.

"That aid", said he, "is applied more by directing effort than by word. The stream of life – of quality – of spirit – flows by continuously. In each deal of that current is everything there is; every element of every quality. There needs only the proper filter. The determining sense (of selection) must come from the individual soul’s self recognition – whether comprehended intellectually or intuitively. In the normally constituted soul such true recognition awakens desire: and with true desire – and only with true desire – does cooperation begin. Only then can those who would help prepare the conditions for the action of the necessary law. Is that clear?

"Very well. Let us now consider this general principle as related to what you call communication. Communication is essentially the same process.

"The stream of Idea – of potential Idea, if you please, can be turned toward the individual consciousness. There remains still the selecting and the diversion of such portions – or trickles, let us call them – as fit the moment's need, by the Intelligence desirous of communicating.

"In the case of communication of what for the moment's convenience we will call General Wisdom, as distinguished from merely personal or recognitional material, the process is long and complicated. Perhaps you can more nearly image this process by considering a rushing torrent. Near the fountain head roughly a quarter is diverted; but that is too much, and another working party lower down takes still a quarter of that; and lower still yet another party divides the dwindling stream to another third. And so on on long series – until at last, perhaps some man turns aside the wee bit trickle that suits the capacity.

"And mind you, every diversion means an Intelligence – a directing, and observing, a selecting Intelligence.

One of us rather humorously remarked that he was getting more and more diffident in claiming as his own idea anything at all!

"No," Gaelic disclaimed this. "That is not exactly right. We divert certain masses of things toward your awareness-mechanism – yes. Except in certain special circumstances, like the present, or sometimes slightly similar case to the present, it is not too common that we impress a specific rounded Idea upon you. We divert to you a certain mass or class of impression, and as much of it, or such specific elements or parts of it, flow through your actual consciousness as your individual capacity or ability of that moment selects. So it is your thought. We have given you a favorable opportunity for that thought.

"That is a broad statement. There are many times, especially when there is a close bond, when a specific thought can be inserted; but the general mechanism of influence is just this broad diverting process of mass, from which you take magnetically, so to speak.

"But ye ken, that this is a communion also, and a satisfactory communion at that – of personality. In that sense, I talk to you, and I enjoy talking, to you, and you and I touch. It might be that what I diverted, what I thought worth diverting, if it were big enough and important enough, might flow through or about many other of my friends. I would hold a rout, and not make a single call! But my personal interest are affection are none the less. I have invited guests at my rout.

"Or perhaps I make a personal call and drop in for a chat betwixt cronies".

In other words a sort of broadcast for those tuned in, by their need. We caught here a glimpse of one possible explanation to the ubiquity of William James! About three in five of the ‘psychics’ we knew claimed to be personal pupils of William James.

This was suggested and was acknowledged to be a tenable, but only a partial explanation. There were other factors. The station himself is likely, and in all honesty, to supply them. Someone tried to induce Gaelic to attach an identity to himself.

"Strangely enough," said he, "such details are very difficult to get through a station at all. I can start the impression and invariably something will go through; and once it is started, I cannot stop that something from going through. And if it goes through, it makes a groove from which that impression can never be diverted. If I should say I was John Smith, and this station had a friend John Smith and a friend Jasper Jones; and he was reminded of Jones, and said Jones; thereafter every impression of Smith would bring from him the word Jones. And what is the use of taking such risks?

"That is the basis of so much that comes from this side – especially in half-controlled or developed stations. I doubt very much if Plato or Socrates or Swedenborg know how many times they have spoken through various people; and only because perhaps a perfectly honest communicator has been so unwise as to attempt to reveal his identity by forcing through a mere name. The station has one chance in many of translating, that impression into the correct name; and if some connotation of that name suggests another – perhaps of historical importance – ever after the impression of that communicator’s consciousness upon that station will arouse in the latter mistaken ideas of identity. So that if ever again that communicator attempts to speak through that station, he's got to masquerade perhaps as Julius Caesar – or keep quiet."

5. Distinguishing true from false

Assuming that, at least sometimes, genuine and actual communication does take place; communication that is not wholly self-induced, how is one to tell what is real and what is false? Leaving aside for the moment any ‘interference’ from other supposed outside entities, mischievous or otherwise, how can we distinguish ‘coloring’ the activities of the station's own sub-conscious?

Gaelic offered no sure test in answer to the first question. Take what comes from whatever sources and place it on file. Do this without prejudice one way or another. Leave it. "And," says Gaelic, "after an interval, prepare yourselves in a way to be permeable and read it over. If it is important, we try then by exactly the same process to impress you with the truth, and to cast into your mind a rejection of that which is not truth."

There is no communication he urged, extending over a whole evening's work, that would not include, in fact, material from the station’s own personality.

"But," he insisted, "it is possible for an expert possessed of much power and long experience not only to suggest action – outward movement – to the station, but also by vigilance to suggest suppressions, or at least partial inhibition. At such times we do our best to reproduce the original impression, in your mind. In the long run nothing gives you the ‘satisfied equation’ unless it is as we originally intended it". And again, "The underlying truth is and must be a real thing. The underlying truth you can never fail ultimately to recognize. If you entertain, in an attitude of receptivity what comes to you, you are receiving the sunlight, and that must have its effect in development.


"What dust and chaff comes to you at the same time will be disposed of and pass away. By maintaining the willingness to receive – not to criticize at first – all that which is intrinsically true will insensibly become part of you, and you will ultimately and most unexpectedly find yourself possessed of a belief that will be a certainty. This does not mean that one should try to accept unquestioningly nor that he should inanely refuse intellectual examination. It merely means a willingness to receive and place on file for future reference, so to speak, what cannot immediately be accepted. It implies a willingness to leave the question open; neither to seek far-fetched explanation, nor to attempt an unripe credence.

"If quite honestly one can do this – with entire self-honesty – the event can be safely left to – I was going to say us, but I will say time. You see ‘us’ may be Subconscious Sub-one or Sub-two."