|
SPIRITS FROM WITHIN Can "evil spirits" be summoned on demand? Can such "devils" be conjured up by certain people? The answer, it would appear, is Yes. But the further question is whether or not one conjures up a "real" devil (or angel), or whether such is merely a manifestation from the mind of the conjurer: is it real, or simply that our minds make it appear? An interesting book was published in 1976 by Iris Owen (with Margaret Sparrow) which addressed this issue: Conjuring Up Phillip (Harper & Row). As the introduction makes clear, this phenomenon has less to do with "spirits" or poltergeists than the people to whom such events occur: that certain people, more open to the psychic energy of psychokinesis, bring about what was formerly attributed to the poltergeist. Traditional explanations go back centuries to the German origin of poltergeist, "noisy ghost." Such tradition, however, illustrates only that we've been long ignorant of the true cause of this eerie effect. "This is why the term 'poltergeist' is still used," Owen writes, "although most of the scientists who study this kind of happening do not think of it as caused by poltergeists or spirits but as a form of (self-generated) psychokinesis." Can people actually do such things -- make objects move, write on walls without touching them, etc.? That answer, again, is Yes. 2 It should be clarified that except for minor exceptions, this talent or power is not actually effectable "on demand," but quite removed from conscious volition. Unlike the documented ability for clairvoyance or clairaudience, the conscious capacity for psychokinesis is limited to a modest few documented cases where small objects were moved around on a table (matches, e.g.), machines were altered from a distance, instruments affected though "hidden" in a glass box, and a few other recorded examples, demonstrated by the remarkable Russian, Nina Kulagina. Perhaps the best known agent of psychokinesis is Uri Geller, an Israeli phenomenon famous for bending spoons or keys and repairing "broken" watches over the TV airwaves in the 1970's. So convincing was his encouragement, so effective, that a large number of viewers, mostly children, would later illustrate that they too could now bend a spoon or key simply because of watching Geller once on TV. Despite the unequivocal support of such evidence and from scientists at Stanford Research Institute, Geller was continually assaulted in the seventies by those who could not accept his unique talent. Many would do their best to copy his amazing feats with sleight-of-hand or other trickery, begging fame as "exposer" simply because of their own unique talent to deceive. "Despite some minor controversy about Uri Geller (which seems to have been inspired entirely by the professional jealousy of stage magicians)," Owen relates, "the result of metal bending 'breaking out all over' and being witnessed by 3 so many excellent witnesses and being filmed and videotaped ad libitum, has been to establish, once and for all, the abundant reality of psychokinesis as a scientific fact," and, we might add, the validity of Uri Geller. The aim of those involved in the "Phillip" experiment was to tap that universal energy within us and "conjure up" its effects. As noted on the flyleaf: "In Toronto, Canada, eight men and women of average pursuits, nonspiritualists, set out to create a psychic phenomenon. Foregoing the typical setting of the traditional seance, they chose a well-lit room and met at different times of the day. They placed their hands upon a sturdy table and concentrated their thoughts on bringing forth a force of energy. And they did not call out to the spirit of a known person who had once lived. "Instead the group believed, and set out to prove, that their collective will could produce a psychical phenomenon. If they were successful, their experiment would shed new light on parapsychology, on spiritualism, and on the theory of what constitutes a ghost. "To give their efforts a focus they invented a man named Phillip, decided on his personality and physical characteristics, and gave him a time to have lived, a background with names and dates, a loveless marriage and a tragic romance with someone named Margo. Their fanciful story kept them together over months of trial and error ... but what took place was not fanciful. 4 "They called to Phillip and something answered. Although the group continues to meet and communicate with Phillip, no one knows what is responding. The answers come in a simple code -- the force produces a rap on the table -- one rap for 'Yes,' two for 'No.' But the table cannot be confined. It has flung itself across the room, followed members about, and has exhibited a unique, sometimes playful 'personality.' " Accounts of the Phillip experiment excited interest among physicists, who came to observe. To measure the intensity of the rappings, an electrically wired metal plate was hung in the room and the group was asked to try to transfer the responses from ... the table to the metal plate." Evidently that request by the physicists was successful, for "The quality of the recorded sounds is accoustically different from other noise. The force has not been identified, nor has it been explained. But something exists." As the authors note, "a second group of people was formed and another fictional 'spirit' invented (Lilith) ... within five weeks, similar results were reported from their efforts!
"The authors believe that it is possible to repeat this phenomenon anywhere, with any determined group.... An arch skeptic has remarked: 'If there were a Nobel Prize for parapsychology, the Phillip experiment should receive it.' " 5 Continuing from page 214, the group "tried to concentrate on producing a cool breeze, and succeeded in doing so. A witness who was called into the room confirmed that it felt as if a fan were blowing. Following work done with Uri Geller and with Matthew Manning, the Phillip group became interested in metal bending, and had success on the few occasions that they attempted it. A delayed effect was typical. For example, a thin metal medallion kept on the table during a Phillip session bent only slightly at the edges, but about half an hour later when they had all left, (member) George Owen, entering the room, found it totally crumpled. "An interesting confirmation of our theory that a suitably trained group of people can generate raps as apparent answers from any imaginary character they choose, occurred at a Christmas party in 1974. Phillip's room, like the rest of the house, had been pressed into service, and a number of the guests, including members of the Phillip and Lilith groups, happened to be there. Someone, speaking in jest, put hands on 6 the table and said, 'Is anyone there?' A loud rap came in reply. 'Are you Father Christmas?' asked someone. One rap came for 'Yes.' A long conversation with 'Santa Claus' then followed. The answers to questions about reindeer, presents, chimney pots, and the climate at the North Pole were all entirely 'in character.' The episode was a perfect example of the child-like approach to the phenomena that we recommend, and a beautiful illustration of the fact that in these situations 'you get what you expect.' " As confirmed by Dr. Raymond Moody, the results of the "Phillip" experiment offer convincing evidence that these phenomena commonly known as "spirits, ghosts, or poltergeists" have their origin not from any outside agency, whether considered "angel" or "devil," but as a direct result of unconscious input from human emotions, preconception, and expectation. A question does arise, however: If we subconsciously create ghosts and spirits, etc., how does one explain those entities which "haunt" particular places for many years and are seen by countless witnesses, most of whom have no connection to the site whatsoever? This question becomes especially intriguing in consideration of the fact that some of these "spirits" are much older than the percipients.
|