EDITORIAL

FIRST YEAR OF "THE SPIRITIST MESSENGER"

The present issue  commemorates  the  first  year  of  our  electronic periodical "The Spiritist Messenger". It is  not  easy  to  coordinate efforts and works toward  a  common  objective.  Perhaps  this  little journal does not represented everything that  some  subscribers  would like it represented. We really apologize for the mistakes or confusions that some of the issues eventually had brought.

Some of the great works of the past were not treated as such at  their times. Some of the nicest and most important works were performed  for free, their authors were not aware of  their  importance  or  had  not lived enough to see the fruits of their  cultivation.  (consider  some great artists of the past: Van Gohg, J. S. Bach, F. Schubert...).

We dare not suggest that  our  little  effort  in  the  form  of  this periodical slightly possess all the qualities or  properties  required for it to be among the great works of humankind.  But  it  is  a  step forward. It shares with those works the  important  virtue  of  making people awake and march forward. As an example of  the  present  needs, there is the important question of reincarnation (treat  by  Menikov's text below) which is so much ignored in our  world.  Our  highest  aim would be to reflect, partially indeed, the light of some of  humankind masters: Jesus, Moses, Buda and the community of evolved spirit beings to whom we own so much. This is not of course a   static  realization, on the contrary, it may grew and  evolve  like  everything  in  Nature created by God.

We feel like being at a special moment. There is a time border clearly separating two times. Part of the world is still unable to  understand or to feel the silent movement being  prepared.  There  is  a  turning point ahead. It is the slow but inexorable agony  of  materialism  and the  end  of  the  moral  vacuum  who  has  characterized  our  modern civilization.

And it is a very happy thing to join all those  (we  mean  the  global community of Spiritists and Spiritualist groups) who are  contributing to prepare such so special new era.

With best regards to all subscribers,

The Editors

One of the most important traits  of  Allan  Kardec's  conception  was admitting of the reincarnation dogma which, instead of  being  just  a dogma, was transformed into a theory confirmed  by  many  spirits both incarnate and discarnate. There are  two   questions   concerning  the subject which I just mention without going into their discussion:

- Did eastern religions influence Kardec when  he  was  including  the notion of reincarnation in his conception? ( I do not think so - there is no trace of it.)

- How is it possible to prove practically the obligatory reincarnation by dealing with messages from quite different spirits,  some  of  whom did not remember their previous lives? (  First  of  all  I  mean  the controversy  between   Kardec's   branch   of   Spiritism   and   many Spiritualists from the UK and USA.)

The main merit of  Allan  Kardec  was  that  he  proved  the  fact  of obligatory reincarnation for all kinds of spiritual beings on the base of the notion of God's Justice and by showing witnesses from the Bible confirming the fact that  reincarnation  was  originally  admitted  by Christianity what was however  totally  turned  down  in  its  further development. This  message  contains  some  new  evidences  for  Allan Kardec's point of view and polemic with the official  position  of the Church.

1) I begin with the statement taken from John 3,3:

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I  say  unto  thee, Except a man be born *again*, he cannot see the Kingdom of God."

The word between the asterisks is commonly translated both as  'again' and '(from) above' where the last alternative has no  references  with reincarnation. In the Greek original text the word "anothen" was  used
which has 3 main meanings:

- from above, from on high; - above, on high; -  from  the  beginning, from farther back; above, earlier.

The latin translation contains the word "denuo", 'again'. Later, words having the meaning 'again'  were  widely  replaced  by  those  meaning '(from) above' in many translations of the Bible into other languages. We can see that the Greek word "anothen"  generally  has  no  temporal meaning 'again'  or  'in  the  future'  -  only  the  ones  'from  the beginning' or 'earlier'. But how can we be born 'earlier', i.e. in the past? Only if we repeat the past, i.e. incarnate again. If the  author of the gospel were denying reincarnation and meaning  instead  'to  be born above', it seems strange that he  had  used  the  word  "anothen" instead of the synonymous word "ano" that has no   temporal   meaning. The meaning 'from above' is a tautological one, because  everyone   is born from above, i.e. from  God.  If  we  propose  the  meaning  'from above' we should admit that Jesus said:  "Except  a  man  is  born  he cannot se the Kingdom  of  God",  what  is  a   nonsense.   The   only logically   and semantically  suitable  meaning  of   the   expression with  the   word "anothen" is 'to be born earlier, to reincarnate'.

2) The following extract containing the conversation between Jesus  and Nicodemus gives another evidence for this  point  of  view.  Nicodemus asked Jesus after He said:

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3).

Nicodemus asked Him: "How can man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" (John 3:4).

If Jesus meant 'to be born in  the  kingdom  of  God'  Nicodemus  most probably should  not  bother  about  how  it  would  happen.  But  his wondering witnesses that he understood Jesus to speak about a birth on the earth. Jesus replied:

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

I do not know Christian symbolism, so I may just suppose that water is rather proper to the human world:

"This is that He came by water and blood, even Jesus  Christ;  not  by water only, by water and blood...And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood:  and  these  three agree in one." ( 1John 5:6,8).

May be that is why Jesus added:

"That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is  born  of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto  thee,  Ye  must  be born again." ( John 3:6-7).

Finally Jesus says:

"If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how  shall  ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" ( John 3:12).

If it was spoken about the birth in the kingdom of  God,  why  did  He say:

"If I have told you earthly things..."?

3) In 1993 a book entitled "Whereunto shall I liken this  generation?" was published in Russia. Its author is  an  orthodox  priest,  Evgenij Poljakov, who tried to show   that   contemporary   Christianity   was not  following  the  true Christian  way.  Here  below  I  expose  his arguments   proving   that  reincarnation  (  or   "palingenesia"   in Poljakov's terms) was  originally present in the  Christian  doctrine. The  main  point  of  the  polemic between Poljakov  and  clerics  are the extracts  from  the  Bible  about John the  Baptist  as  the  next reincarnation of Elijah:

"And he (John the Baptist) shall go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah." (Luke 1,17)

The opponents  hold  the  word  *spirit*  to  have  a  more  abstract, impersonal meaning as it is used in 1 Corintheans 12,4:

"Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit."

Poljakov  categorically  denies  any   reference   to   allegory   and abstraction,  pointing  out  that otherwise one should also treat  the coming of Jesus allegorically, what is absurd.

And if we read Malachi 4,5-6 we can see that the image of Christ is as concrete as that of Elijah-John:

"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming  of  the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and  the  heart  of  the  children  to  their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."

4) Then we turn to Mattheus 17. We see that  Elijah  appeared  in  his older shape rather than as John the Baptist. Why  so?  But  if  Elijah appeared as John the disciples' question to  Jesus  would  be  out  of place:

"And disciples asked Him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elijah must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them,  Elijah  truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I  say  unto  you,  That Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto  him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man  suffer  of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto  them  of  John the Baptist." (Matthew 17,10-13)

The question does not look like an occasional  one  and  there  is  no word "spirit" having many meanings. By the way Jesus spoke  simply and clearly in the most cases and always explained the disciples  parables tete-a-tete. If He meant that John the Baptist had not  been  Elijah's reincarnation  it seems quite strange  that  He  did  not  explain  it especially  in  the   case  which   he   should   categorically   deny reincarnation as the Church  holds Him to do.

5) The next argument of our opponents sends us to  the  chapter  where John the Baptist denies that he is Elijah:

"And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elijah? And he  saith,  I  am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No." (John 1,21)

Here we should apply to Poljakov again. He answers the opponents  that John the Baptist did not have the gift of discerning spirits, that  is why he did not recognize Christ:

"And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent  them  to  Jesus, saying, Art Thou He that should come? or look we for  another?"  (Luke 7,19)

John the Baptist did not possess the gift of discerning spirits,  what was not obligatory, although he had the gift of prophecy:

"For one is given by the Spirit the word of  wisdom;  to  another  the word of knowledge by the same spirit...to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits..." (1 Corinthians 12,8-10)

We know well that John was a prophet though  he  denied  it.  Poljakov concludes that John also denied that he was  Elijah  because,  without the gift of discerning the spirits, he would not remember  himself  as had been Elijah.

6) The last Poljakov's  witness  in  favour  of  reincarnation  is  an extract from John 9,1-2:

"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his  birth. And His disciples asked Him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?."

The fact that the disciples thought that it was possible to  commit  a sin  before  birth  doubtless  points  out  that   reincarnation   was originally proper to Christ's doctrine although it were not proclaimed openly. Here we cite, after Poljakov, what Jesus said, after  he  told the disciples that Elijah had come as John the Baptist:

"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." (Matthew 11,15); and His next words:

"But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, and saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented." (Matthew 11, 16-17)

Here Poljakov adds: "In these words  only  a  twice  blind  would  not recognize the traditional Christianity which  lost  itself  or  turned down of the Doctrine so much original and carried in so much human."

We  can  see  that the  doctrine  of  Allan  Kardec,   who   accepted reincarnation well, is the true continuation of the real  Christianity in its original purity. Another advantage of the Spiritist Doctrine is that mediumship phenomena were mostly registered  by  scholars  unlike numerous stories from the Bible which sometimes seem to be  as  unreal as fairy-tales. Spiritism is not a tale at all, it shows us  that  the other reality does exist and is closer to us than we could imagine.

Melnikov Andrei, Reykjavik

EDITOR NOTE

The reader should also consult: "The Gospel according to Spiritism" by A. Kardec. Chapter 4. As a  "home-work"  it would  be  interesting  to compare  Melnikov's  arguments  to  those  of Kardec.

In actual fact, incarnation does not have clearly defined limits if we are thinking only of  the  envelope  which  constitutes  the  physical covering of the Spirit since the materiality of this covering diminishes in proportion as the Spirit  purifies itself. In  certain worlds more  advanced  than  Earth,  this covering is already less compact, less heavy, more refined and consequently  less  subject  to vicissitudes. In worlds of still higher elevation  it  is  translucent and almost fluidic. It dematerializes by degrees and  finally  becomes absorbed in the perispirit. According to the kind of world in which it lives, the Spirit reclothes itself with a covering appropriate to that world.

The perispirit itself undergoes successive transformations. It becomes more and more etheric, until it reaches complete depuration which is the state of all pure Spirits. If special worlds are destined for more highly advanced Spirits, they do not remain prisoners there as in  the inferior worlds. The special state of detachment in  which  they  find themselves allows them to travel to any part of the Universe  to which they may be called on missions.

If we consider incarnation from the material view point, such as can be verified here on Earth, we can say that it is limited  to  inferior worlds. But it depends on each Spirit to liberate itself more or  less quickly, by working towards purification. We should also consider that in the discarnate state, that is  to  say  in  the  intervals  between bodily existences, the situation of each Spirit depends on the  nature of the world to which it is linked, by the degree  of  advancement  it has acquired. Thus in the spiritual world we are more or  less  happy, free or enlightened, according  to  the  degree  of  dematerialization achieved.

Saint Louis (Paris, 1859)
In "The Gospel according to  Spiritism", Chapter  4,  trans. by  J.Duncan.