Chapter IV: Part 4

You are satisfied if you comprehend; yet a most important question you have failed to ask me—not you who have not tried, but the amateurs. I lead into hypnosis Mrs. Santanelli and tell her when she opens her eyes she will find in her lap an object which she will describe to me; to open her eyes; she does so, takes up the object and describes it. While she is describing it, I say, “all right” and clap my hands; she awakens, and I ask her what she has been doing and she has no memory whatever. I have her again take on hypnosis, ask her what she was doing in the last “hypnosis,” and she tells me. Why is it the hypnotized subject has no memory of what has taken place in “hypnosis” when he is actually awake, yet while in “hypnosis” has a memory of the previous hypnosis? Why this contradiction, what does it mean? How is it that the subject does not see his _present_ environment, but sees the environment of the picture I arouse for him? Why this contradiction? I will explain it to you.

[Sidenote: Memory defined]

Memory is the registration of ideas. The subject, having no memory, proves that nothing has been registered cerebrally; again, it is impossible to register through one sense that which the economy of man intended to be registered through another. Therefore, we put nothing in through the cerebrum. When I talk to a subject he does not hear me cerebrally, if he did he would always remember what I said to him. The subject only responds to me.

[Sidenote: Consciousness]

[Sidenote: Insulation]

[Sidenote: Decapitated]

Consciousness, realization, is cerebral. Sense-impressions pass through the cerebrum yet are actually registered in the Sympathetic System. _Every_ cerebral nerve is accompanied by a sympathetic nerve. Many sympathetic nerves are alone. This makes the so-called brain system a two-wire system. I believe it to be a _three-wire_ system. I say to a hypnotized subject, “You have no feeling in your finger” (touching the finger); the Sympathetic System immediately contracts the tissue over the cerebral nerve and insulates it; yet the Sympathetic System is conscious of any irritation that I make on the designated place, showing that it receives the impression free of the cerebrum. The Sympathetic System can work free and independently of the cerebral, but the cerebrum cannot work free of the sympathetic, because the sympathetic is the actual machinery that does the work, the cerebral brain simply being the realizing brain. In a hypnotized subject the cerebrum is inactive, as in hypnosis the impulse is received through and responded to by the Sympathetic System. The experiment made by all students of decapitating a frog, irritating a nerve-end and the “normal” action taking place, proves my affirmation. A hypnotized subject is as a _decapitated being_. Feeling is never eliminated until death. _Conscious_ feeling—yes. If the Abdominal Brain did not know what was taking place it would lose its control over the body, therefore, feeling as to the Sympathetic System cannot be obliterated.

[Sidenote: Hudson]

[Sidenote: One mind]

Hudson’s philosophy of objective and subjective mind will not hold water, inasmuch as it is based on the premise than man is a free agent and can discriminate. Now, this subject is so thoroughly illustrated in the barber story, the banjo story, the story of crime, that really it is not worthy of discussion, although the entire public has seemingly endorsed a most false theory, manufactured to explain a condition that the alleged “authority” was not capable of explaining. We have but _one_ mind; we are entirely creatures of our environment; our every action, our every thought, is simply the transforming into other action, of suggestion. The ability to discriminate is impossible.

Ofttimes men say that the ability to perform a mathematical problem is an example that man is a free agent and capable of thinking. Can a Fiji Islander, having no knowledge of figures, solve a mathematical problem? Can the son of the most brilliant mathematician do so until he has gone to school and had the ideas associated on his “cylinder?” Those who have the ideas properly registered will respond to the problem; they will all work it out in the same way, getting identically the same result, proving that the problem was simply a suggestion that forced into action ideas (actions) already associated.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] It is necessary for the subject to comprehend this, though not necessary for us to tell him in the foregoing specific manner.

MIND

[Sidenote: Law of nature]

Now, dear reader, if you have comprehended the foregoing, in which I have tried to demonstrate to you that man is simply a machine, forced into action by his environment—this I have learned through hypnosis, which I consider merely a side issue to the Law of Suggestion, a crude and tyrannical use of suggestion—we will go a step further and try to understand the body of man, which is his closest environment. To do so it will first be necessary to explain what you call the “law of nature” or “hand of God.” After I have made you comprehend that, I shall then be able to discuss mankind in general.

[Sidenote: Law of Suggestion]

If we drop a plum seed, peach seed, apple seed and a grape seed in six square inches of earth what will grow from them? Each of its kind. Why? One says the “law of nature,” another says the “hand of God.” I ask what is meant by these terms, as neither has affected me through my senses, and a sickly smile comes on your lips, and you say, “Don’t you know?” I plead ignorance and reply, “No,” then you won’t talk with me because I fail to know something that you do not know. Then you ask _me_ why, and I tell you the “Law of Suggestion.” You say, “Why, there must be an intelligence to respond to that law.” As it is impossible to conceive of anything happening without an intelligence (associated action) to guide it, every action of all matter is guided.

[Sidenote: All matter contains mind]

NOTE.—I will state that all matter contains mind (which word will be used from now on without the quotation marks), and all mind gives expression in matter. Matter is the expression of mind—transformed mind—the utterance of mind; it is the material reproduction of mind; there can be no matter without mind, no mind without matter. _Other than matter is incomprehensible._

[Sidenote: All changes are advancement]

This intelligence is acted upon by suggestion. There is mind in the rock, otherwise the rock would not disintegrate (respond to the suggestion of the elements). There is mind within wood. You say, “No, water rots wood.” Water does not rot wood. It forces (suggests) a latent (memory) action in wood to produce or transform into rot. As long as the suggestion is kept from the wood, that action will not take place; the moment the suggestion is applied, the intelligence within the wood responds. All changes are an advancement and good (natural response).

[Sidenote: Maturity]

[Sidenote: Mind defined]

All suggestions are transformed. You of the “law of nature” and the “hand of God” claim that intelligence is external and everywhere; I claim it to be internal and everywhere, that all matter contains within itself intelligence (mind). Then you ask me what is mind and in turn I ask you this question: What is maturity? When does a boy become a man, a girl become a woman, and when is fruit ripe? When the seed is accomplished. As the seed is the last thing accomplished to complete the entirety of all attributes required, all of the preceding actions, _i. e._, responses to suggestion of the development of the tree that has taken place are registered within the seed. Therefore, the complete memory must be in the last thing accomplished—the seed; and I will define mind to be _the consensus of all actions acquired during gestation_, not a so-called reasoning intelligence, but a memory of response to suggestion, as to heat, cold, different elements of the earth, to guide the commingling into the reproduction of its kind. If the natural suggestions do not occur, a _reproduction_ is an impossibility.

[Sidenote: Suggestion in lower life]

To illustrate, if plenty of sunshine is required and the suggestion of sunshine is lacking, the entire fulfillment of the suggestion required cannot or will not be accomplished. If iron or some certain element in the soil is necessary to force a certain action, and is lacking, the response necessary will not take place. In the spring time, when warmth, et cetera, surrounds the trees, the buds are forced out. If frosts occur, contraction takes place and the buds are pinched off, the entire action of the tree being in accordance with the environment (suggestion). To the degree of the suggestion is the degree of response, identical with the action of man.

Genesis, Chapter XXX, 37-40, reads as follows:

[Sidenote: Jacob knew of the law]

37. And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods.

38. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.

39. And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled and spotted.

[Sidenote: Darwin]

[Sidenote: As of their environment]

This simple law, the law of environment (suggestion), was in some degree known to Jacob. Therefore, what is, was, and always will be. There is nothing new in the world, only new to our comprehension. Darwin showed us that animals most like their environment, or those which responded closest to (were part of) their environment survived, while the others were destroyed. Man, being a creature of his environment, survives to the degree he responds to or is part of that environment. In the Arctic region animals are white as of their environment; in the reeds they are striped, therefore look like the reeds and are not easily distinguishable from them; up in the tree tops they are spotted. The negro from exposure to the sun was made black. If the white man goes into the sun he becomes what we call “tanned”; that tan can, in time, become very dark. The negro, therefore, is black only as a result of his environment.

[Sidenote: Energy]

[Sidenote: Energetic waves]

[Sidenote: Life]

[Sidenote: Death]

Man, not being a perpetual motion machine, must obtain energy elsewhere than through or from his food as our scientists (?) tell us. The energy required to digest the food must be greater than all the energy in the food, otherwise it could not overcome the resistance; therefore, it is self-evident that our energy does not come from the food. Any condition that overcomes resistance sends out an energetic wave; every time we breathe, blink our eye, talk or move, we send out an energetic wave, which can be transmitted only through matter. _Life is energy_, always moving and being reinforced as it passes through new matter; and I believe those energetic waves are received in the spleen, passed to the solar plexus and from the solar plexus passed to the extremities through the Sympathetic System. It is through the absorption of this energy—which is life—that keeps man going. When a man dies the machinery of his body—the Sympathetic System—fails to respond, to receive, to exert, or transform the energy.

[Sidenote: Ovum of the female]

[Sidenote: Element of the male]

The first part of a child formed is the Sympathetic System. A girl has reached maturity when she can reproduce; _i. e._, when she monthly gives forth an egg. In that egg is a memory action of building the Sympathetic System, when fertilized by an element of the male. Bear in mind that the element of the male is only a _fertilizer_.

The Sympathetic System centers are developed at the end of eight weeks. (See Gray.)

[Sidenote: Building of mind in man]

Now each ganglion acquires a specific memory from the same ganglion of the mother, and out of the blood of the mother builds over itself the form of the child. Therefore, when the child is born it contains within itself the intelligence that built it; _i. e._, mind. Every six months this intelligence rebuilds the entire tissues of the body.

[Sidenote: No cerebral knowledge]

The child when born has no cerebral knowledge. It must learn to see, hear, smell, feel and taste. It has no reflexes other than of contraction. All other actions are acquired after birth. The heart action was learned from the mother; also the respiration, which action can very easily be changed. It must learn to take the breast. It has no control over its bowels or bladder. The pupil of the eye does not dilate, contract, nor blink at light. The child’s limbs will not draw away from heat or irritation. If the rectal sphincter be severely dilated a response in the throat will occur. This same action can always be repeated with a chloroformed patient, showing that the noise is simply a response at the other end of the nerve.

[Sidenote: All things are learned]

From the taking of the breast the child must learn to digest food, to respond to its environment. The moment a child readily does so, it is said to have displayed intelligence.

Physicians differ as to the length of the period after children are born into the world before they can see, hear, smell, feel and taste. There is much discussion, and many volumes have been written as to the length of time after a child is born before its senses are established. After much reading, I finally ask what is meant by seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling and tasting; and none of the writers have comprehensively answered. Therefore, why this discussion? What are they talking about?

[Sidenote: Definition of the senses]

I will define the senses to be the correlation of the different nerve-end stimuli. Give a new-born child soft, sweet, soothing sound-stimulus, then harsh, discordant sound-stimulus, and the moment a memory of these two extreme nerve-end contacts with sound waves is established, the child will be able to give expression to the degrees of all subsequent stimuli of the auditory nerve-ends. The same with smelling, tasting, et cetera. Sight, unless associated with feeling, conveys no form expression. A child, to be taught the meaning of round, must not only see it but feel it. The same with other forms. The child is now learning to respond to its environment.

[Sidenote: Mind a tenant]

Mind is the tenant of the house it lives in—the body. That house is always wasting; mind rebuilding it. When mind rebuilds correctly, we have a healthy body; when incorrectly, we have what is called sickness. Mind can only build as of itself, as it responds to its environment, and consequently must be a reproduction of that environment, modified by the acquired memory learned from the mother. Therefore, the house in which it dwells is the exact representation of its tenant—matter being the expression of mind.

[Sidenote: Food]

Food is taken into the body to rebuild the house. If a man takes possession of a new brick house and starts in to replace with bad bricks as it wastes away, at the end of six or seven months he will live in a bad brick house. If he replaces with rotten lumber he will live in a rotten lumber house at the end of a period. Hence, man partakes of the nature of the food he eats.

Now, if mind be worried so that he builds awry, his house will be awry; and if his house be awry and he finds his error and corrects it, he will re-establish the symmetry of his dwelling. (Rational treatment—the orificial surgeon and personal suggestion.)

[Sidenote: Error]

Thus mind rules and builds the body, but a time may come when the body becomes so awry that it rules the tenant. In health, mind rules; after severe illness the body may. Mind cannot choose to correct its error, it can only respond; the suggestion must change. Error can only be distinguished, when _known_, in comparison with good. Unhealthy surroundings must be changed. The closest environment—the body, may require the knife.

[Sidenote: Mind rules]

It is inconceivable for anything to happen without an intelligence to guide it. I have shown the intelligence that built the body—that keeps rebuilding the body—but our learned (?) physicians seem to think that the body of man is a dunghill in which seed may be sown and foul vegetation grow, forgetting that nothing in the body can happen without an intelligence to guide it—that the body is a result, and there is _no cause within the tissue itself_.

[Sidenote: Nerve-ends]

_Every nerve has two ends._ When there is an irritation at one end, there is a response, or so-called reflex, at the other. Oh! why has this thought never occurred to our “learned authorities?” Our worthy doctors are forever trying to remove the effect, never reaching the cause. If a man’s blood is out of order, does the bad blood cause illness, or is the illness and bad blood the result of the imperfect transforming of food by the intelligence whose duty it is to perform such functions?

[Sidenote: Three pulsations]

When I first showed my ability to produce in a hypnotized subject three pulsations at one time, the doctors declared it to be a trick; that it was an impossibility; that the heart _only_ controlled the circulation. If our most learned (?) men would only think (and such a thing were possible), they would readily see the futility of such claims. If I am rightly informed, there are several miles of vascular piping in the body, and the heart of itself is not strong enough to pump the blood that distance; if it were, the frame of the body is not strong enough to maintain the resistance to such an action. The truth of the matter is, that the heart is simply the governor, _i. e._, regulator, that starts the rhythm of the pumping, and different nerve centers (mind) take up and carry on the action. Our doctors tell us that a man dies because the heart stops beating. No, he dies because the intelligence that forces the heart to beat stops working.

[Sidenote: Man a tube]

Man is a tube lined with a series of insulated electric wires. These wires run from orifice through ganglia of Abdominal Brain to orifice. Every nerve has two ends; irritate one end and through the action of its ganglia a response will occur at the other. Our doctors treat the response, paying no attention to the cause, although they talk nothing but cause.

[Sidenote: Body rebuilt every six months]

From a series of experiments that I have made, I am satisfied that the body is rebuilt every six or seven months. The Abdominal Brain in the embryonic child is complete at the end of _two_ months; and, as the child is born at the end of _nine_ months, the first attempt of the Sympathetic System, the Abdominal Brain (mind) built a complete child in _seven_ months; although a child born at eight months is seemingly complete. If mind in its first attempt can build a child in seven months, why should it take longer to build a second time, particularly when it has a freer hand and environment to work in?

[Sidenote: “Bugs”]

[Sidenote: Rebuilding]

Our doctors start on the premise that man’s eyes, lungs, heart and all vital organs live forever, unless bugs get in and destroy them. I cannot accept any such statement. For the sake of argument we will say that all organs and tissue are rebuilt every six months. I care not if every six years, but we will assume that they are rebuilt every six months, constantly wasting and constantly being replaced. The doctors will tell us that a cataract _grows_ on our eye. I deny that, maintaining that the eyes are replaced every six months, and when there is a cataract, the ganglion of the Abdominal Brain (mind) is so irritated that it builds an imperfect eye, an eye with a cataract. The doctor with his knife removes the cataract, and ninety-nine times out of a hundred _it grows (?) back_. The Mental Scientists, the Christian Scientists, the Faith Curists and the Hypnotists remove the cataract. How? By causing the mind to stop building the cataract and resume its previous building of a healthy eye. I have cured dozens of cases of astigmatism and myopia, and several cases of cataract simply through personal suggestion and orificial surgery.

Many people come to me saying “Mr. Santanelli, I have been wearing eye-glasses for a year. Can you cure me?”

“Yes.”

“How many hypnoses will it take?”

“None.”

“Why, what will you do?”

“I will take you to my surgeon, and have the proper orificial work performed.”

“And will that cure me?”

“Certainly.”

Another comes to me and says, “Mr. Santanelli, can you cure me?”

“How long have you been wearing glasses?”

“Ten years.”

“How old were you when you began wearing glasses?”

“Twenty years.”

“Yes, I can cure you.”

“How long will it take?”

“I do not know.”

“What will you do with me?”

[Sidenote: Nerve habit]

“I will send you first to an orificial surgeon and have the cause removed. Then I will break up the nerve habit.”

“What is that,—the nerve habit?”

[Sidenote: Greatest use for hypnotic suggestion]

“Why, I mean this, that until you were eighteen, your ganglia (mind) built good eyes, when, through an irritation, it developed into building a pair of bad eyes, called astigmatism, myopia, et cetera. You get two pairs of eyes a year, in eighteen years you get thirty-six pairs of eyes; and up to that time the ganglia (mind) has the memory of building good eyes, in twelve years it builds twenty-four pairs of eyes; after the cause of building bad eyes is removed, I must force the memory of thirty-six to overcome the memory of twenty-four, which is not a very difficult task; but if you came to me ten years later, it would be nearly impossible for me to cause a memory of thirty-six to overcome a memory of forty-four. Where the nerve habit or new memory is not too pronounced, through personal suggestion I can readily revive the first memory. It is through the lack of knowing how to overcome this that our orificialists fail in many cases. This is the greatest use of so-called hypnotic suggestion—the breaking up of nerve habits.”

The same argument holds good as to the lungs, and in all early stages of heart trouble, et cetera.

[Sidenote: Consumption]

The doctors tell us that when we have consumption, bugs are nesting in and eating our lungs; but why, most wise (?) gentlemen? Life is indestructible, and if you will use microscopes powerful enough you will always find life (bugs). When man is most dead (?) and burned to a handful of ashes, drop a little acetic acid on them and you will find there is life, movement; and life is simply energy.

I maintain that man gets a new pair of lungs every six months, and when the ganglion that controls the building of the lungs transforms the food into healthy lungs, we lack consumption; that when it makes an imperfect transformation we have the so-called diseased lung, the germ, which is the mal-transformation of food containing life or energy.

[Sidenote: Circumcision]

But few male Jews have consumption, _although they are improperly circumcised_. _Circumcise all consumptives, both male and female_, and see how quickly you will achieve a result.

[Sidenote: Undeveloped bust]

I will show a genital lesion in every woman with an undeveloped bust. Amputate the labia minora of a young woman and see how quickly her bust will develop and her respiration be facilitated—a marked result in less than two weeks.

I treat all eye trouble by removing the irritation from the other end of the nerve. It is a rare case where the cause and effect are at the same place. The fool ideas offered as to light, printing, et cetera, in our schools, being the cause of so much bad eyesight among the students, is all rot. Circumcise them, our mothers are breeding a sexually irritated generation of both sexes. If the Jews had properly circumcised their women there now would be no necessity of doing so with the men.

[Sidenote: Law of Moses]

Moses insisted on two laws. The Jews to-day cannot tell you why those laws are enforced. As to the pork I will explain later, as to the circumcision they have not been able to offer a rational explanation.

[Sidenote: Jews]

Why is it there are so few Jews in the penitentiaries, insane asylums, who are cancerous or consumptive among the males? Why are the Jews a money-making race? Oh, they inherit it. _No._ A Jew is but a human being, he is the same as you and I; he is ruled by the same Law of Suggestion. It is first, because he is circumcised, secondly, because he is clean, and third, his Abdominal Brain (mind) is not worried or irritated. Consequently, he is full of life and energy, and his brain works in a “normal” manner. He eats clean food, producing the same result and, therefore, is equipped to do business with a “normal” mind, he is free from the “abnormal,” therefore, not a criminal, not a candidate for the insane asylum; his thoughts are healthful and therefore he looks forward to a long life, to a large family, to the care of them, and to the necessity of acquiring the means whereby they can live: he is nearly “normal.” The law of Moses, although unexplained by his followers, was a law of health; a healthy mind is always the result of a healthy body, or a healthy body is the result of the healthy mind, impossible to find one each way.

[Sidenote: Bad blood]

When food is impure, the ganglia whose duty it is to transform and make pure blood, is working awry, and nothing done to the blood will purify it as to the health of man. Inasmuch as the ganglia will continue to make bad blood, why treat the blood?

[Sidenote: Drugs are suggestions]

A man’s bowels are constipated and the doctor gives him a drug. Does the drug empty the bowel? No, the drug does not. Why is the bowel not working properly? Because the ganglia that control secretion and peristalsis are not doing their duty, and nothing but those ganglia can empty the bowel. Therefore, _the drug is simply a suggestion_ that stimulates these ganglia and causes them to renew their action of secretion and peristalsis. Catarrh, asthma, heart trouble, rheumatism and functional diseases are all a result of irritation at the other end of the nerve. The idea of trying to drug or treat the heart for its imperfect action is ridiculous.

My intelligent reader now asks where the other end of these nerves are? How is it the doctor has not discovered them? I will tell you why, my good reader.

[Sidenote: Too scientific]

[Sidenote: Reasoning]

[Sidenote: Clean (?) people]

[Sidenote: Modesty]

Our doctors have failed to discover the end of the nerve, inasmuch as they are “scientific” and do not know how to “think.” They reason _deductively_, which is not reasoning. From a true premise no deduction should be necessary, inasmuch as the cause and effect are perceptible. Reasoning, so-called, is required when only an effect is perceptible, and one has to go back to the cause. The moment the cause is found no more reasoning is required. The cause and effect are so closely associated that when we comprehend the cause, we must comprehend the effect. Inductive reasoning is the only _true_ reasoning, and our scientists (?) know nothing of this, they much prefer to _assume_ a cause and force a deduction to fit the effect known. How many inductive reasoners has the world produced? Not fifty, and I include all great thinkers in the fifty. Our doctor is a good, clean (?) man; his patients are good, clean (?) people, and they greatly dislike to think of anything that is “naughty,” forgetting that all “naughty” things are a perversion of good things; and that the being who appears the most “nice,” at heart is the worst. Little children are taught that it is awful to hear anything mentioned about their privates. In many states physiology is barred from the public schools, as it is something awful for man to understand himself. As everything suggests positive for or positive against, the _real modest_ person is simply the positive opposite to the real vulgar person, both having the same thought, only one gives action in blushing, et cetera—alleged modesty—while the other gives action in vulgar expressions. The truly pure being would be neutral—no ideas associated as to bad.

Dear reader, one can have no thought without its expression (for that is all a thought is), and alleged modesty deceives no one, least of all one versed in human nature.

In all my years of experience (and I can read a face like a book—I know my nerve-ends), I have met but three really healthy women, and they were Southerners; and no healthy men.

[Sidenote: Not] [Sidenote: “Bad” defined]

Some one speaks in public of a woman’s leg, many cast their eyes down and others blush; some laugh. The sexual look appears in the eyes of others. Let us analyze the thoughts of these four classes of people. When “leg” is mentioned, the first party would not cast his eyes down unless he had “bad” ideas associated; the second would not have blushed if he had good ideas associated; the third would not have laughed, nor the sexual look have appeared in the eyes of the fourth, had they not all proportionately associated the same ideas. Now, the ideas are mostly acquired,—particularly in the first three—by the parents telling them _not_ to think of this, _not_ to do that, and the entirely false thought of modesty, or something “bad” was associated and placed in their minds through their “bad” mother telling them they must _not_ do or think of these things. Remember, all things in the world are good, and man has created the bad. Life keeps moving onward, which is good, and no matter which way it moves it is always onward and always good, and the “bad” is produced by the “not’s,” the “don’t’s,” and the “mustn’t’s.” Therefore, I define “bad” to be perverted good.

The nerve-ends of all the upper orifices and the heart and lungs, terminate in the genitals and the rectum. You will rarely find only one orifice of the head responding to nerve-end irritations. I always find two—the eyes and ears, eyes and nose, et cetera.

I have cured stutterers, all classes of eye trouble, all kinds of nervousness in both sexes by removing the sexual irritation; but as this book is written simply to give the reader a general idea of suggestion, I will keep this subject for a book to be written later, intended for doctors and mothers only.

In 1895, while claiming in my lectures that we must have an Abdominal Brain—otherwise there was no logical explanation as to many of the conditions I was producing through hypnosis, in Lansing, Michigan—Doctor William D. Cooper drew my attention to the wonderful results Dr. E. H. Pratt, of Chicago (the father of orificial surgery), was attaining by operating on the lower orifices, and intimated that perhaps he was reaching the Abdominal Brain. This intimation prompted me to visit Dr. Pratt and learn of his work, which in time resulted in my believing that the Sympathetic System was my much sought Abdominal Brain, and much study and experiment has resulted in the foregoing synopsis.

[Sidenote: Environment]

[Sidenote: Sin (?) a disease]

If man is ruled by his environment, it naturally follows that his body must be his closest environment; as the body is, so is the “mind;” as is the “mind,” so the body. Therefore, blackguarding, sensuality and prostitution are physical diseases. If man’s thoughts are forced on him through his five senses, it follows that, if he has a sexual irritation, sexual thoughts will always dominate. Therefore, instead of passing laws against those “sins,” hospitals should be established and convicted _invalids_ sent there to be properly treated.

_Prostitution is a curable disease._ The orificial surgeon can remove the physical suggestion, and the hypnotist can break up the _nerve habit_.

If we put a clean woman in a dirty house, and keep the house dirty for a certain length of time, that woman will become disgusted and have no desire to clean up. Put a dirty woman in a clean house, keep the house clean for a period, and that woman will become ashamed and acquire habits of neatness. So it is with the mind and the body. When the body becomes foul, the mind degenerates and _vice versa_. The food is the material out of which the body is made, and foul food builds a foul body and “mind,” notwithstanding the false theories of our alleged scientists.

[Sidenote: Food]

Man’s stomach is the hopper of a mill, made to grind and digest certain foods. If man partakes of food to re-establish his body, his present eating must be radically wrong, because at least three-fourths of the food taken into the stomach is passed off through the bowels; if he ate proper food, ninety-five per cent of it should be turned into tissue and the waste should be correspondingly small. What fool man does to-day is to put all kinds of indigestible food (?) into his hopper, and when the mill tries to grind, it breaks down; he then sends for his doctor and expects him—if he could—to repair the mill so that he can go on trying to grind flint with machinery intended to grind wheat only.

[Sidenote: Flesh-eating]

Remember this, a child’s stomach is gradually taught to digest coarse food. In other words, it must learn to transform the different foreign elements passed into the stomach. No argument offered can substantiate the necessity of flesh-eating. The strongest animals in the world, proportionately, are the ox, the ass and the elephant, strict vegetarians; and each and every pound of their flesh represents an equal proportion of vegetable strength, a concentration of many times its bulk of vegetable matter, and vegetable life was before animal life. The vicious animals in the world are the lion, the tiger, and all flesh-eating animals. In certain parts of the Orient are horses that eat flesh, and are so vicious that only the most expert can handle them. If you desire to make your dog vicious, chain him up and feed him on flesh.

The life of modern man is one of confinement, and in every pound of flesh he eats he takes into his system _a hundred times more energy_ than it is possible for him to give voice to. Being possessed of this concentrated energy, he can get rid of it only by giving it a counter-irritant or energy absorber in the form of liquor, sensuality and brutality.

During the Greco-Turkish war, the non-meat-eaters and abstainers from alcohol paid but little attention to wounds similar to those that sent the meat-eaters to the hospital. Similar wounds that sent them to the hospital, caused the death of the others.

[Sidenote: The hog]

[Sidenote: All fat is filth]

The hog is a scavenger, living on filth and transforming filth into its body, which is simply a concentrated form of filth. Lazy man takes this filth into his stomach, transforms it into his flesh, and wonders why he is syphilitic, cancerous, diseased, lazy and sluggish. I have given health to many families by causing them to cut pork and lard from off their bills of fare. _All fat is filth._ All four-legged scavengers easily go to fat. Feed kine on “slops” and they go to fat.

The lady with the blotched face goes to her physician, and he advises her to avoid eating pastry. For Heaven’s sake! What can be healthier than flour and fruits? What, then, must be the only thing that is detrimental? Why, the lard, the shortening in the pastry.

[Sidenote: Lazy]

My experience and investigations have shown me that the majority of the poor people, who can barely get money enough together to buy a little “sow-belly” and meal, are always the lazy, indolent, worthless class of people, whose entire tissue is made up of hog meat, and consequently have very sluggish brains. I have yet to meet a confirmed pork-eater with an active mentality.

For three years I abstained from eating flesh, two years of which was the most delightful existence I ever experienced. Having a clean tenant in a clean house, my thoughts were pure, my actions pure; but found I lacked the energy to keep up the race with the over-wrought, pell mell, flesh-eating environment. I firmly believe that there is no case of syphilis so severe but proper dieting will re-establish a healthy condition.

[Sidenote: Fasting]

Since my experiments of putting subjects to sleep for seven days, many dyspeptics have taken up the fast cure and have demonstrated beyond all question that much good is consummated by total abstinence from food. Our doctors are daily killing their patients by feeding them. When mind requires food, food will be demanded. _There is never danger of a patient starving to death._

[Sidenote: Small-pox]

Mind responds to the suggestion of matter. Our doctors tell us that we are vast sewers, filled with bugs that are devouring one another; that the more chemicals, the more putrid matter they can put into us the better we are. First, they warn us to beware of the pus of a sore, yet take the pus of cow-syphilis—cow-pox—and put it into the pure body of a helpless babe to prevent its getting a harmless disease, a disease that any first-class homeopath laughs at, small-pox—a disease that is non-contagious, non-infectious, as is proven by vaccination, which fails to produce small-pox—Oh! the scientists (?). This was demonstrated beyond all question last summer by a physician in Wisconsin eating the virus and spreading it all over his face; he fed it to at least thirty of his patients and none contracted the disease. _Small-pox decreases with the advancement of sanitation._

[Sidenote: Pointer for the doctors]

Strange to say, our doctors marvel at the increase of syphilitic affections, of tubercular conditions of the body and of the bones, of the prevalence of hip disease, yet fail to see that it comes from the inoculation of these innocent children with cow-syphilis. I would unhesitatingly kill any member of a board of health or any officer who would enforce the inoculation of any of my family with this syphilis, and the jury does not live that would convict me. The body being rebuilt every six months, the so-called immunizing could only be effective for that period. Now, my scientific (?) friends, as I have taught you something that is irrefutable, have the boards of health force a law that all shall be poxed every six months. What a lot of idle doctors would be kept busy.

These philosophers (?), these scientists (?), fill horses with disease and take the serum, fill it full of drugs to keep it from spoiling (?), “shoot” it into the arms of helpless babes to cure them of diphtheria, and when they die of lockjaw and other diseases produced by the poison so injected into their blood, the doctors suddenly discover that they got hold of the wrong toxin, otherwise the children would have recovered. Never! A lie given to protect a fool theory.

[Sidenote: Germs]

[Sidenote: Remove the cause]

Now, as the body is rebuilt every six months, and there is an intelligence building the body, an intelligence that is making the blood, an intelligence than is transforming this blood so made into tissue, what in the mischief have bugs to do with disease? The germ is life; impossible to find life without germs or germs without life, and the germ is simply a transformation of form of life; if the intelligence within the body is surrounded with suggestions of health, forcing it to perform its functions in a natural and proper way, it will make the correct transformation which is known as health; but if the rhythm of its work is interfered with, it will make mal-transformations which are recognized as germs of this, that, and the other disease. The removing of the germ is of no consequence, inasmuch as the intelligence (mind) still builds more germs. Remove the cause, allow the intelligence that built to rebuild correctly, and the “specific” germs will disappear. Killing the germs is like to a man who is annoyed by a hen laying an egg on his porch every morning, and he sends the servant out to destroy the egg. If you want to stop the laying of the egg on the porch, remove the hen.

[Sidenote: Body a result]

Good blood and bad blood are results of the building of the intelligence (mind) that makes the blood, and any bugs or anything of that kind you find in your blood are simply the badly or goodly made blood. Our doctors seem to think that man is built and rebuilt without an intelligence to guide that building; that he is a compost heap in which seeds lie that in time develop and grow, overlooking that the body is a result, that anything on or in the body is a result, and that the entire result is guided by the all-wise intelligence of mind, this mind being subservient to and part of the Law of Suggestion—its environment.

=Mineral, vegetable, animal, human mind is the same (either singly or collectively); i. e., a conditional reproduction of its environment (suggestion). (1), The primitive element (environment), forces (suggests) a reproduction in (2), vegetable result; 1 and 2 forces (suggests) a result (3),—animal life; and 1 plus 2 plus 3 forces (suggests) a result (4),—man. Thus the Law of Suggestion keeps up an individual and combined transformation, always progressing yet ever in variable form, resulting from the individual changes in the several attributes (suggestion) back of or lower than itself.=

=“Man is made in the image of his Creator.” Yes; but, dear reader, not as you interpret it. Man is the interpretation, the consensus, the result of the transforming of his environment, the exemplification of the Law of Suggestion; he is good, God. Mind, the intelligence within, learned from the mother, responds to the external forces, suggestion, the all, God, that forces material life ever onward into something else. We are but one of the MANY forms of God, good, the Law of Suggestion that embraces ALL. Remove from or add one atom to this world and it will end, a thing incomprehensible. What is, was, and always will be.=

[Sidenote: Blister test]

[Sidenote: Only memory actions can be revived]

I place a cantharides plaster on the left arm of a man and blister him. In time the blister heals. I afterward hypnotize him, put a postage stamp on his left arm and tell him that it is a cantharides plaster, and in twenty-four hours or less I have the blister. What made the first blister? What made the second? Well, the first blister was made by the cantharides plaster. No, sir; it was not. The first blister was suggested by the plaster, which caused the ganglion that built the tissue of that area of the arm to accomplish a condition called a “blister,” that action, being associated with the cerebral memory of the name “cantharides plaster,” was aroused in the hypnosis through the word “plaster” and the ganglion built the second blister as it did the first. Can I reproduce this blister on the right arm? No. Why not? Because the ganglion of the right arm has no such memory. I can only produce it on the place where the memory was established through its proper channels, through feeling. Here is where the mistake has been so often made by operators trying to perform the blister test; trying to revive a memory where none exists.

[Sidenote: Reaching mind]

A man has a wart on his finger; the doctor says the wart grew there. No, it did not grow there. It is a result. It is burned off with an acid or caustic, and grows (?) back; then the doctor says he did not get to the roots (?), that if he had taken the roots out, it would stop growing. (Just as if a man was a well-manured heap, and you could grow things in him.) An old woman comes along, cuts a few white hairs out of a black cat’s tail, mutters some cabalistic words over it, and behold, in time the wart disappears! Why? Because she reaches the mind. The mind stopped building the wart and began building healthy tissue. The doctor cuts it off, but seldom reaches the mind.

No result can be produced in the body until the mind is reached. Drugs are nothing but suggestions. We will assume that a man’s bowels are constipated and the doctor gives him a dose of calomel. Does the calomel move the bowels? Yes. Good. If I put into a glass jar some food with some calomel, will it “move”? What is constipation? Why, it is lack of secretions, lack of peristalsis. Does the peristalsis work of itself? Does the secretion work of itself, or is there an intelligence that guides and makes the secretions, that guides and forces the peristalsis? This being a fact, the intelligence that guides or rules the secretions and peristalsis has ceased to do its work, and the calomel simply irritates these ganglia or brain centers and stimulates them to renew their _former action_. If they accept this suggestion the patient is cured; if they fail to do so, more suggestion must be given, and in many cases the ganglia refuse to accept the suggestion at all and the doctor looks wise and gives you a handful more of “stuff.”

[Sidenote: Mental science]

The Mental or Christian Scientist, or hypnotist can cure constipation. How does he do it? Let us first analyze and find the attributes of constipation. First, there is the cerebral attribute, its name, constipation; associated with that are the two mind actions of peristalsis and secretion. Those three are now associated in the “mind” of man, and the law is that if I lock a thought in the “mind” and start it in action, every one of its attributes in its proper place is bound to act. Therefore, if I will lock into the mind of a hypnotized subject the thought that his bowels are loose, or will move, or arouse any thought there that has associated with it the action of peristalsis and secretions, and hold that thought there long enough, the result is certain. It is for this reason that a personal suggestion or an inspiration in hypnosis has but little effect on a young child. The moment it has cerebral attributes associated with sympathetic attributes, and the operator knows how to emphasize them, he can get the desired result.

[Sidenote: Christian scientists]

[Sidenote: Certainty of action]

The Christian Scientists tell the patient that he is not sick; then if his mind could reason it would say, “If I am not sick, in what condition am I?” But you should say to your patient, “You are sick, and so and so will happen,” and if the memory is there to be aroused the action will take place. Remember, in hypnosis or any mental treatment, you can only revive memories, words of themselves mean nothing, hence skill is required to force the proper thought; but just as certain as the proper thought, _no matter how aroused_, is put in force just that certain will the action take place.

[Sidenote: Cure for cancer]

I believe that the only cure for cancer is personal suggestion, inasmuch as the cancer does not grow in the body of man, but the mind that is building that area of the body is building cancerous, instead of healthy, tissue; that a suggestion or an inspiration will be found that will re-establish the original healthy building. Our doctor cuts the cancer out and says it grows back. It does not _grow_ back.

[Sidenote: Attributes of a “mental healer”]

Personal suggestion, when attempted, must affect the _proper_ senses; in hypnosis the operator _names_ the sense-pictures. When we _talk_ health to a patient, we must _look_ and _act_ health, as well as show it in our _tone_. If we doubt, we are wasting our time, inasmuch as we can only _do_ as we think. Faith, confidence and sincerity are the principal attributes of a “mental healer.”

HEREDITY

When our neighbors desire to account for there being a black sheep in the family, having charity towards all, they immediately state that he inherited it—whatever that may mean. They travel back generation through generation and if they go _far_ enough they can always find what they want, and claim that this taint came from a forefather. For Heaven’s sake, if we are the epitome or digest of all the good and ill that our forefathers have been doing, clear from the time they were monkeys, what a conglomeration we should be at the present time.

According to our alienists; a very good word, it always reminds me of foreign—strange, I don’t know—and they are strong on heredity, we inherit (?) insanity, ill health, goodness, badness, et cetera. Heredity is a word that means nothing, therefore explains nothing, and is a very good word to use by our scientific (?) friends when somebody asks a pertinent question.

The Abdominal Brain of the child learns from the same brain (mind) of the mother to reproduce as of the mother, modified by the material out of which to build (condition of the mother’s blood), and the present external environment (suggestion) of the mother.

[Sidenote: Cerebral impressions]

[Sidenote: As to features]

As is proven by birthmarks, cerebral impressions have a positive effect on the Abdominal Brain action. A child looks like its father simply through the sense-impression on the mother. A mother may bear a child having the features of her husband’s dearest friend and yet be a physically pure woman. A child having the features of a woman’s husband is not proof that he is its father. I would go even a step farther, and say if I were on a jury to pass judgment on a white woman who gave birth to a black child, and it was shown that the woman was of proper moral character, et cetera, I would unhesitatingly believe and decide in favor of the woman being physically pure, although the child was black.

[Sidenote: Produce life (?)]

The story of Jacob illustrates this, and breeders of animals prove it, year after year. If I dared, here, to discuss this subject properly, I could quote instances without number all tending to prove my claim. The element of the male is only a fertilizer, nothing more, and nothing is inherited from the father, _per se_. The egg of the mother contains a memory (mind) of building the Abdominal Brain, which action is aroused by the element of the male. The moment the Abdominal Brain (Sympathetic System) is built, _it acquires its intelligence direct from the Sympathetic brain centers of the mother_, tempered by cerebral impressions. It is for this reason that our alleged scientists fail to “produce” life.

Why is it that two children of the same mother possess absolutely different traits? They both have the same (?) environment? How is this possible? The environment is not the same. First, the external environment is always changing, if in nothing else, there is the change of the seasons. The food differs, the mental state of the mother differs, etc. In fact, at no time are we the same, we are always changing, moving on, nillynally, reflecting the constant change of our suggestion.

[Sidenote: The same impossible]

In a piano factory one hundred pianos are turned out, seemingly built of the same material, by the same hands, and yet no two are identically the same in value or quality. How is this? No two things are the same. After the pianos are completed a man assorts them, then a more skillful one; and last, the expert comes in and decides on the relative value of the instruments. So it is with children born, each varying and time assorts them. Those born with superfine feeling nerve-ends will quickly learn to withdraw from coarse wraps, while those born with dulled nerve-ends will be attracted to the contact of the rough wraps, each through its natural state (mind) responding positively to the suggestion.

[Sidenote: Musicians]

A child born with the nerves of hearing super-sensitive, will gather more ideas as to sound and develop itself into a musician; the same with sight, a child super-acute as to distinguishing form and color, is certain to develop into a painter, draftsman, or enter some pursuit that will give expression to his superabundance of ideas of this one sense.

[Sidenote: Here is the heredity]