Chief Editor: Corrado PIANCASTELLI
Silvio RAVALDINI, Clara and Riccardo CESANELLI, Teresa NAZZARO
Editors and Distributors in the UNITED STATES:
Edward and Tina Tungate
P.O. Box 2086, La Jolla, California 92038.
Editor and Distributor in AUSTRALIA:
Andrew Milani P.O. Box 626, Applecross 6153, W. Australia.
HEADQUARTERS OF THE C.I.P.: Via Poggio de' Mari, 16 -
80129 Napoli, ITALY.
From Article 1 of the Statute: "The CIP shall pursue the study of parapsychological phenomena and their causes following the methods of scientific research, and shall disseminate the results".
The Italian Centre of Parapsychology organises itself along at least four lines which also represent the most well-known aspects of contemporary parapsychology:
A) The dissemination of the doctrinal corpus and cultural work connected
with the phenomenon of Entity A.
B) The analysis of and reflections on classical parapsychology.
C) The development of humanist parapsychology, which is a new line of
approach that brings together all studies on altered states and inner states
The basic principle of humanistic parapsychology re-evaluates the inner self and the concept of Soul, considering all the higher activity and creativity of the human species as paranormal and connecting this great hope to scientifically-based working hypotheses.
Humanistic parapsychology (which indeed took form within the CIP) encompasses the phenomena of pre-death, the visions of the dying under the action of drugs, the study of sacred herbs, relaxation and regressive hypnosis, mystic ecstasies, etc.
D) Studies into developing the application of humanistic parapsychology with meetings aimed at personal growth and getting to know one another.
The communications in this review were transmitted by the remarkable mediumistic personality known as "Entity A" through the incorporation trance of an exceptional sensitive who has operated exclusively in Naples, initially for the Centro Cosmos (from 1946 to 1963) and then for the C.I.P. from 1963 to the present day.
The C.I.P. works independently of any technical interpretation (already
successfully taken care of by sophisticated scientific and university research
studies), to disseminate the "lessons of A" in the conviction that the
rare quality of his teachings represents a doctrinal model of immense cultural
import, bringing exceptional reassurance regarding life and death.
P.S. - There are two societies dedicated to paranormal phenomena :
On the one hand the sheer volume of these messages from another dimension exceeds some two thousand hours of recorded time and ten thousand written pages, covering every conceivable subject. This in turn is coupled with stringent scientific testing, cross checking and minutely detailed examination of all facets of the role played by Piancastelli in the transmission of this material.
Fascinating as this verification process is, it is completely subordinate to the spiritual and philosophical value of Andrea's information in all of its consistency, practicality and intensity.
Andrea's message and its absolute affirmation of a God embodied in our most intimate nature, challenges us to accept a much more meaningful relationship with ourselves. Over and over again, he reminds us that the only way for our particular Spirit to maximize its eternal development in the course of its sojourn in our individual body and lifetime, is for us to live intensely, embracing all of the facets of our earthly existence, excluding no available human experience. In this way the purpose of the Spirit's voyage through materiality, can best be served.
Vice-President, Australasian Society
For Psychical Research.
Tina Tungate (U.S.A.)
Andrew Milani (Australia)
Question - In other words, any victory should remind us that a defeat has taken place, and thus all this is pardoned by the intentions which lie behind our actions. If I may refer to your example, you could say that by and large, as I am here listening to you, I can offer something more to the same people whom I have taken some time away from.
Entity "A" - Yes, but I certainly did not give a very illuminating
example. What you say is surely the case, so let us take as an example
a research worker who spends night and day, his whole life in fact, in
a laboratory, neglecting his wife and children completely, yet who, upon
finishing his research, possibly discovers a vaccine which can cure a fatal
disease. Now how should we judge this person? There you are, beginning
with an unremarkable example, we have passed on to a more important one,
and remember that there are tens of thousands of such examples on Earth.
A completely different argument from this one can be inferred, however:
how badly organized you are, and how badly organized were we too when we
were here on Earth. In other words we were, like you, victims of particular
circumstances which forced us to create certain types of family units,
making up electrons around a nucleus so to speak, with the resulting lack
of independence for their various members. In this way it is really the
person who works, the person who runs the family economically speaking,
who is seen as a central figure around whom everything rotates and nothing
can be done without involving this nucleus. It is for this reason that
we are in an erroneous situation.
This naturally leads to the creation of family ties and more precisely those of a patriarchal type of family which rotates primarily round the man, creating obsessive links which end up fostering fictitious responsibilities.
The man in this type of patriarchal family in fact, by neglecting his children, eventually causes them harm, because they have been brought up to believe that their father was the nucleus around which they had to rotate their lives. If he, the nucleus, ceases to function properly, it is selfevident that that type of family will collapse.
In this way certain obsessive, violent and passionate feelings are nurtured. As a result the father is the master of the son and the son is the slave of the father. He is a slave not only as regards sentiment but also on an economical basis, one that is brought about by so exaggerated, so flaunted a relationship between his internal self and his paternal figure, that when a separation comes about it becomes a traumatic event.
But the situation before us has become pathological and absurd, implying therefore that our whole argument is similarly absurd. What general principles should we now take into consideration? Should we find this man guilty or not guilty? The man who was forced night and day, year after year, to stay in his laboratory, but who in the end, all things considered, discovered a vaccine which led towards the saving of, shall we say, millions of human lives, whilst at the same time destroying three or four his wife and children? Is he to blame? I do not think I could draw from this any universal principle at this stage. In other words this man truly had to press on and we should ask ourselves whether the others should really have pestered him. Where was it established that they had to hassle him? What doctrine lays down that children, wives and relations must necessarily rotate their lives around such a father/nucleus, sacrificing him and forcing him to sacrifice them?
The principle of autonomy and independence can even hold good maintaining the existence of family units, but they should not be closed. They should not be narrow and fettered like islands and personal worlds. This is the mistake you make and it is a mistake which has clear social and economical bases behind it, because family units did not evolve in this way, out of spite. They turned out the way they did because they were intended to do so, but this would be a very long argument and would require fuller discussion about both patriarchal and matriarchal types of family organization. And it is here that finally and fortunately we have death. I say "fortunately" because, at long last this poor Spirit, forced as it is into abnormal situations in which it does not believe, can escape from such neuroses, traumas and obsessions, and judge itself.
Yes, indeed, its eyes, so to speak, also examine the harm it has done to others, but it knows full well that although the others have suffered this harm, they have also had certain experiences - and they had already known about them beforehand when they in turn chose to incarnate in a particular historical moment in time which could not have resulted in anything else. In other words, we have foreknowledge and therefore no-one can be blamed for anything with the exception of a few peripheral facts. With respect to the example indicated above, these could include the following: having had such a vocation to do research night and day, was it really so necessary to have children? Could he not have done without?
This is a definite responsibility certainly. Obviously it was useless his making up a family unit, bearing in mind he knew what was in store in that historical, cultural and social moment. Thus other responsibilities spring forth. Then, if we admit that a mistake had been made, it would have been a double- or even triple-fold blunder because, having children, it was repeated more than once. Apart from this, on the other side of the coin, we should say that those Spirits have nonetheless had experiences. Then, I grant you, perhaps it was not vital for him to spend night and day working, to have gratified his special vocation in such a way. It could be that he actually did withdraw himself knowingly from the love of his children. You can see here how assessments become individualized and change from case to case.
Question - I think that the quality of love counts for more than material time.
Entity "A" - Love only counts if it is transferred, remember
that. Because you can love someone a great deal, but if you do not show
it and if you are not with that person, if you do not transfer your love
in such a way that the other person feels it, it is quite useless for you
to feel it at all, keeping it closed up inside you.
Entity "A" - What do you mean by moral limits of the Spirit?
We know very well that they do not exist. It begs the question and seems,
from the point of view of the Spirit, impossible to answer. It would be
like asking the Spirit if it indulges in moral or indeed immoral actions.
On the other hand, one can definitely say that it is "immoral" if we may employ such a term as this which you use on Earth for the Spirit to take part in any activity which restricts the freedom of another Spirit. In this way, "immorality" can be perceived as causing another Spirit to make a mistake, or doing things which alter its freedom and decisions. But "immorality", as far as the law of God is concerned, is quite impossible to commit. This is because we start with a general premise quite different from that of religions.
According to religions, the Spirit (and also Man in a certain sense) must abide by a law preestablished by God, and disobeying this law automatically brings the Spirit into a situation of, shall we say, "sin" or "immorality". It should be noted that this condition of universal life supports the dual view of the universe, governed by good and evil there is no escaping from it. If a Spirit does not observe God's law, it means that it conforms to another one. By logical assumption it must be a follower of someone else because, if it were a follower of God, it would necessarily be a party to the Latter's own law. Basically it would be dealing with weighing up its own actions, making them adhere as well as it could to the corresponding law of God. One can argue that it might choose another path: neither adhere to another law, nor follow God's. As an idea, this really lacks logic because, if this were the case, the Spirit would have at least three choices: follow God's law, ignore it and follow someone else's, or indeed follow neither and shut itself up passively in its own individuality. The passive situation in this instance would not be "sinful" as such, it would merely be a position of limbo, and here again various complications would come into play such as Time etc.
Be that as it may, I am stating that the Spirit always abides by the law of God, and it is impossible to imagine "immorality" with respect to that law. This is absolutely irrefutable if we acknowledge that there is only one God. This principle is not, however, valid in all circumstances. What I mean is that there are moments in the life of the Spirit in which, when coming to terms with a section of the universe which is made up in a different way (the Earth, for example), certain conflicts may arise which can be defined as "moral" or "immoral". I do not like using these terms because they conceal ambiguous meanings. "Morality" and "immorality" lead one to think about sin and guilt, taking us back once more to an argument which I do not feel able to support, bearing in mind the many things that have been said above.
However, we can take into consideration an action which complies with the law of God and another which, according to convention, as far as the transient nature of life on Earth is concerned, is in disaccord with it. This we have to admit.
In fact, for example, we say that every action (be it voluntary or involuntary) which brings suffering to others should not be carried out, because it is a negative action. It remains all the same an experience on account of our acceptance of such a value even as regards Man's socalled negative actions. These, in the moment in which they are qualified as experiences, become positive for the mere fact that they have been applied, whatever reactions to them may have been.
Suffering, feelings and pain are emotional issues or individual conflicts, if anything, and the law of God has no relevance here. If I cause you harm voluntarily and I realize it, it is I who suffer and there is no God and no Law which can force me to suffer or not because of it. This is because we are dealing with a personal dilemma of mine, with my individual makeup, which reacts in a certain way with respect to experience just as my structural condition reacts when faced with any other type of emotion and experience. The Spirit which, for example, incarnates and is subject to a traumatic ordeal, is linked to the particular technical detail, and the Law of God plays no part in this case either. Traumas can depend on the system of life which I had originally organized for myself and which for reasons of theoretical or experimental conflicts, can cause me a distinct type of suffering. They are individual circumstances and the law of God plays no part in them. Thus this is the general scheme of things as far as "morality" and "immorality" are concerned. However, I suppose you wished to refer to something more precise in human experience.
Question How is it possible that the Spirit can be guilty, when we all know that it can do little or nothing after it has incarnated?
Entity "A" We are naturally referring to those instances alone in which the Spirit plays a part, a tiny minority of the ones involved in human life. In all other cases, if a man does not specifically allow his Spirit to share his experiences, they will not be passed on to it.
Question You have taught us that only on rare occasions does the voice of the Spirit reach our consciousness. Once in a while it reaches our subconscious, but for many people even this does not happen. Therefore, if the Spirit cannot control the body, how can it be held responsible for actions which it has not willingly sponsored?
Entity "A" Matter behaves in a certain way and the Spirit is not responsible for this. On the other hand, there is no such thing as the responsibility of matter. All that the body does, without heeding the intentions of the Spirit, can in no way generate responsibility. You have organized society in such a fashion so as to regulate the use of your bodies. These laws were made for matter; they have no jurisdiction over the Spirit.
Question But on the other hand, if we had no laws, we would have chaos.
Entity "A" One cannot do without laws , that is true, but you have extended them to individuality, in such a way as to private Man of all freedom. You could get along very well without all the terms invented by your mental schemes. None of you bears sole responsibility for them.
Question We set off looking for something rational which sometimes ends up incoherent, and this causes continual twists and turns.
Entity "A" One cannot all of a sudden say to men and women: "This is the Truth; follow these guidelines" because these are slow processes, which may sometimes be hurried up a little, but the pace is undoubtedly slow. On the other hand, there are no rules to be enforced. Once a man reaches adulthood, the process of learning from scratch becomes laborious.
Question It could be argued that, insofar as a question of implicit rationality is concerned, the evolution of certain laws resulting from divine principles is envisioned in the simplest way possible. However, I feel that that does not happen when the subject under discussion regards the "technical" part (how can we call it?) of the separation of the Soul from the body at death, and so forth. In actual fact, all that we have been talking about here for years is relevant on a theoretical plane, but if we turn our attention to what actually happens, we find ourselves surrounded by a sea of suffering. This is largely due to such a method which, for "technical" reasons, is distressing and hampers a lasting cohesion with our views of the Soul, with monotheism, and with our attachment to the physical world. Clearly this is not negative, in the sense that it brings about a certain benefit to the Spirit, but...
Entity "A" You see, it is distressing, but for whom?
Question It is distressing for the being which is subjected to all these trials and tribulations. What I mean is that this delay in liberation to brave new planes of consciousness...
Entity "A" Yes, but I would not exactly use the word "distressing".
I would rather say that there are moments in which the Spirit can be uncertain,
where it can be perturbed, but it is the body or at least the Soul, rather
than the Spirit, which in the end has to undergo tribulations. The Spirit
has moments of uncertainty and can be bewildered by particularly critical
circumstances which arise, but I would not speak about real suffering,
because, as far as the "technical" fact in concerned, the Spirit itself
does not suffer. If anything, it is the intelligent component of the Spirit
which reacts in a certain way or distinctive manner according to the type
of experience involved, but there is no real and proper suffering.
After all, any suffering of the Spirit should be contemplated on a different plane than the one on which you think and imagine. Its suffering is always an exterior act which it intellectualizes in a certain fashion. The Spirit, whenever it completely lacks different structures other than itself (for example, the Soul, an energybased structure acting as an intermediary between the Spirit and the brain) is unable to suffer. It is eternal and immortal, whereas the Soul changes after death but we shall tackle this question in more detail elsewhere.
Entity "A" Generally speaking, as far as "responsibility" is
concerned, we should bear in mind the fact that the living being is made
up as we know by a body and a Spirit, and if it is true that our instincts
play a minor role because they are kept within certain limits, all the
same each individual is responsible for a spiritual heritage which he or
she must reveal in order not to be at fault. This spiritual heritage, the
essence of the Spirit, must not be presented according to Earth's moralistic
indications, following which Man is forced to do certain things resolutely,
not do others, show charity, practise piety, love his neighbour, listen
to and take part in religious rites, and as a rule not do any of the things
that his instinct tempts him into doing. Seen like this, the problem sounds
somewhat false. This is because the Spirit in actual fact manifests its
spiritual heritage through its matter, and therefore its "spiritual morality"
is created by the manner in which it governs such instincts, in other words
its body, and relates to the environment in which it finds it is living.
It does not give up its instincts, but for precise reasons it guides them
in such a way that they do not bring about harm to others. In this sense
the Spirit applies a principle of brotherhood, a spiritual principle, so
that it can steer its instincts not basing itself on their specific moral
or immoral use but on the relationship which these instincts have with
the surrounding world.
To put it another way, I can use a particular instinct if it does not do wrong or bring about harm specifically to another person. Of course this idea is out of step with earthly views of morality, particularly in its formal sense, that is the way in which instinct is crushed precisely because it is "base" instinct. But the Spirit comes to Earth mainly to use the body and develop experiences through it, not to give it up, because the greatest experience comes principally from the body and secondly from the relationship the latter has with society at large. When you speak (as we do too) about experiences of the Spirit in the world, you must intend above all the experience the body has with the world. There can be no experience without the body.
The Spirit can only live through its own physical body which, due merely to its being used, is the first organism to transfer to it a broad range of facts and knowledge. Therefore, the Spirit's responsibility lies in its not using its own body rationally and intelligently, because it is precisely in such a rapport with its body that the Spirit matures its greatest experience. The difference between one person and another, as far as a moral appraisal is concerned, is also due to this: the manner in which our Spirits govern our bodies so that others are not done wrong or harm, but on the contrary good. In this sense Man's actions within society are developed through Man himself and the Spirit always manifests itself through the body it possesses.
If it is true that Man has no knowledge of certain factors on a human level, such as his own memory and consciousness, it is also true, however, that there is a Spirit whose activity is by and large carried out "behind" each person. A Spirit which, from the moment of birth, from the planning stage of its life on Earth, knows what it wants to do and prepares its relationship channels with the body in such a way that through its subconscious it can always transmit specific controls, suggestions and stimuli directed at the sense organs of its own body. If this were not the case, the Spirit would truly be separate from the body and could not be held responsible for anything at all, which is what can happen when the brain has suffered serious damage in which case the Spirit cannot really be held responsible any more for the actions of the body. But when such an example does not present itself, you should understand that the Spirit always retains stimulus channels and, on the contrary, the point is the following: whenever you use your instincts legitimately for an action of yours, if appropriate censure, control, limitation or moral assessment stimuli do not reach your conscience, this could mean that the Spirit has not transmitted through the subconscious its "moral quality" which outlines and qualifies your behaviour and action.
In such an instance it is responsible. When you speak about responsibility, you must always give exclusive attention to the responsibility of the Spirit. You, as human beings, are nothing; you count for nothing and have no value whatsoever. In fact, as human beings you die; all the organs which permit you to speak, gesticulate, walk etc, die. It is always your Spirit which is responsible and when we speak about you, we intend you, as Spirits.
If the Spirit does not transmit a stimulus of moral censure, appraisal, or judgement, it is responsible. Once an action has been done, it cannot be undone; if some sort of moral criterion does not intervene within you, it is you Spirits which have failed to bring this about.
Question But then, apart from a formal, logical continuity of a certain argument which we as people began years ago in our relations with you Spirits, why do you bother informing our human consciences and desires about these facts? Clearly it would be much easier to suggest such things directly to our Spirits rather than to us as human beings.
Entity "A" I am, in fact, only giving you part of the teaching
here. However, I should like to correct a little what you have just said.
You, my listeners, are first and foremost Spirits which are inhabiting
bodies, and which, through your brains, psyches, culture and knowledge
etc, are preparing certain behavioural guidelines which can, to a greater
or lesser degree, benefit the lives of your Spirits on Earth. Your behaviour,
therefore, is the basis, the foundation through which your Spirits can
manifest themselves in varying nuances of clarity and obscurity. If you
therefore, as bodies in perfect union with a spiritual goal, prepare your
bodies in such a way that your Spirits can make their mark on you more
effectively, you will be doing something profitable. In this moment, by
listening to me and by taking part in this discussion, you participate
as Spirits too, and not merely as forms of intelligence or psyches which
live together with the Spirit. On Earth the relationship between the Spirit
and matter is more or less constant.
Remember one thing that I have already said and that is that in this moment you are predominantly flesh, or physical matter. The human being is almost totally matter and it behaves almost wholly like an animal. But, as is the case with some of you, or indeed with many, the fact that spiritual sensitivity indicates that the Spirit make its mark in a less formal yet more profound manner, means that it is your task, your duty, to reduce the distances lying between Spirit and matter; and these distances can only be shortened if you create suitable channels in which the Spirit can travel more incisively. The channels are those of knowledge and truth, that is those which allow your psyche to adapt itself better to spiritual reception. In this sense it is Man's duty to open up for the use of his own Spirit all possible channels of information, experience and transmission towards Earth.
Doing this the evolution of the Spirit is enhanced; it is better advised from within. And even if in this moment you feel more human beings than Spirits, you must in this way unceasingly give your Spirit the opportunity to live more detailed, more profound experiences, as far as the penetration of human experience is concerned. It seems to me that your dilemma is thus adequately clarified.
Question I am still somewhat confused in the back of my mind
as far as the dichotomy between Man and Spirit is concerned. It is the
same old argument regarding Man as a brain, body, psyche, soul and spirit.
Here we are dealing with something new. It is perhaps merely a nuance,
an almost imperceptible entity, but it is still something which I cannot
yet manage to fit in with everything else.
When you say that we humans work for our Spirits, it is like saying that we entrust to the least important part of our being the most important task which should on the contrary be the sole domain of the Spirit. That is, when you speak to us as humans, you speak directly to the part which you yourself have defined as inadequate and finite.
Entity "A" I am directing a certain argument towards you because I know that you can really only understand because you have a Spirit. If you did not have a Spirit, you would not be able to understand me. What I am saying would truly be beyond your comprehension.
Question Therefore it is a question of terminology: it is consequently never I, the man, who can help or give firmer foundation to my contacts with the Spirit, but it is always the Spirit through me, the man, which grasps something more steadfast.
Entity "A" Indeed, but your business is different from that of the Spirit. You should be paving the way for it in a certain sense and dealing with how to define your mental and physical makeup, your personality, structure, or capacity as a transmission or reception device. And you should also analyze the manner in which you make your body function, in which you preserve yourself, and how you might allow or restrict contacts between your Spirit and the human world.
Question But such a contact, such a predisposition of mine, always derives from my intelligence as a human being, therefore...
Entity "A" Yes, it is also dependent on your intelligence as a human being but for this reason I must make an impression on your human intelligence too, quite apart from doing so with your sensitivity as a Spirit. In fact my primary objective is to convince you on a human plane. Having obtained such an assurance, the dichotomy would be far more striking.
Question I could even say that in the end we come up with a technical fact: you must make your mark on human channels in order to facilitate what the Spirit has to do, and therefore the responsibility is not totally the Spirit's.
Entity "A" Of course, it is not totally the Spirit's, this is clear; we have said such a thing many times. Its responsibility is diminished whenever there is a great deal of resistance at a human level because, as we have often repeated, the body is really a barrier which puts up an enormous resistance to the Spirit, getting in its way and obstructing from time to time certain contacts, certain more emphatic messages.
Question To continue this line of argument, another question springs to mind. At the precise moment in which the body dies, or at any successive stage, is there a solution of continuity within the consciousness of the essential ego? Is there a sort of "jump" which the ego makes in order to find itself turned into a Spirit at a certain point, remembering only vaguely its experience as a man?
Entity "A" There would in fact be a "jump" if we did not have
postmortem lethargy. In practice, it is precisely this sort of lethargy
which diminishes the jump enormously.
In any case, let me state that nonetheless despite the lethargy, the Spirit is subjected to how can I put it? various requests which will no longer be of a strictly psychological nature. We undergo undeniable deformations, if only for particular stretches, until a genuine equilibrium can reestablish itself, a kind of unity or continuity.
Question Therefore we shall have to make some sort of effort to allow us to find ourselves again.
Entity "A" For the Spirit it is basically like coming out of a drunken stupor and it is traumatic even if it does not show obvious symptoms of real suffering.
Question All the same the continuity of selfknowledge never disappears completely.
Entity "A" No, it is never brought into question. There may be moments of depression in which certain changes take place but this continuity is forever present.
Question For some people the role of totally distancing themselves from desire can play an important part provided that they do not have it for their whole lives.
Entity "A" Naturally, whilst affirming your right to use instinct, I have nevertheless also stated that the latter should moreover be governed by reason. To this aim human desires should not be developed, at least until after they have been examined, until after they have been filtered by our reasoning. The resulting endproduct culminates in pouring away the bitterness of our desires, making them more malleable and channelling them in a more rational way. No instinct and no desire can be expressed without first passing through reasoning and intelligence. All such desires are then also bound to the structure of the nervous system, and each reacts in a different way to the same impulse.
Question Thus we can say that there are basically two forms of experience as far as matter is concerned: one consists in our entering into the selfsame matter, even through our desires; the other exists in the control of the matter, that is of the same material substance, on the part of our incarnated Spirits.
Entity "A" I agree, but look, the ideal is to live by immersing yourselves in the knowledge and use of matter, checking, however, that your employment of it does not bring about harm to others.
Question This can be found, for example, in works of art, even though artists only rarely manage to create great works which achieve participation and detachment at the same time.
Entity "A" It is a bit different from that. In your example there is no direct participation in life but simply the description of life or of its use, whereas in reality life is a very different thing.
Question I think you should act in a way that you do not have to suffer the rebuke of your own conscience, so that by contrast you can always be sure that you have acted well.
Entity "A" I would not talk about being rebuked by your consciences:
all this is a bit ambiguous. I should say rather, in a clearcut fashion,
that you must not bring about harm to others, quite apart from whatever
rebuke you might be given by your consciences, because you are unable to
analyze them properly. Such a rebuke is often motivated by a false idea
of upbringing which you have learnt from childhood, in other words by a
sort of pseudo conscience. Many of you believe that your conscience is
rebuking you but it is frequently just the echo of a false or erroneous
manner in which you were brought up. It is not your Spirit which is rebelling
but your sense of good manners. It is the way in which other people have
instilled certain ideas in you. Thus you end up by believing in a conscience
which is, after all, very fickle and which varies wildly.
Each one of you reacts to your conscience according to the family in which you were brought up, the environment in which you grew up, the country in which you were born etc. A great deal of elements add together to make up a sort of pseudo morality. Morality, as you well know, even changes from region to region in the same country. What therefore is the right one? Each individual inhabitant of the various regions will have his own "voice of conscience" different from that of his neighbour. Of course they are all wrong and nobody really understands what true morality is.
Prior to spelling out our synthesis, we should like to state beforehand
that the principal line of thought contained in Andrea's teaching is based
on the certainty of the existence of the Spirit. The latter is an energybased
structure made up in a way unknown to us and created by God; or rather
it is emanated by Him because nothing can be created, as everything already
forms a part of God. The Spirit is a free, independent being which starts
its trek as a "blank sheet" but which retains throughout this infinite
journey the necessary drive to elaborate on and expand the divine nature
within it. The "journey" which our Master makes reference to has two parallel
paths: an external one beyond itself, in other words both in the real and
conceptual universe, and an internal path which reconverts into knowledge
all that it garners from its analytical journey outside its own Self.
This cognitive "work" lasts for ever and this path also includes the cycle of human lives which make up brief moments in its infinite journey. No absolute truth is to be found. On the contrary, the Spirit's knowledge grows steadily because the universe is by and large a spiritualmechanical machine in a continual state of flux, a machine which draws nourishment and energy from the marvellous mystery which we men and women have given the name of God.
That being stated, our Master tells us:
1) GOD ALONE EXISTS - EVIL DOES NOT
What we define as "evil" is just an immature view of the only emanation
feasible, i.e. good.
However, as terms, both good and evil have human meanings and symbols. In the reality of the universe no antiGod can be conceived and so the devil cannot exist. If he did, he would have to have been conceptually created by God Himself who at this stage would be the sole cause of evil. In fact nothing can exist (not even His antithesis) which has not already been part of God. The devil would thus have been created by God Himself but we should then allow that God's mind could likewise shelter the rudiments of evil and such a thing is impossible.
2) THE SPIRIT WILL NEVER ARRIVE AT GOD
Only beings which encompass the same authority and majesty of God can
reach Him. The infinite being, which God is, cannot even be reached by
the Spirit despite the fact that the latter is also infinite. It is like
two parallel lines: two such infinites will never meet.
To reach God, the Spirit must be similar to Him. And in this case the Spirit would melt into Him, thereby destroying its own individuality. This would be like true death for the Spirit. But if the Spirit could reach God, we would have many Gods, each one of which of the same value, as all of them would be equal to one another. Furthermore, it is completely absurd to believe that the Spirit can contemplate God. Contemplation is never an intelligent act and, as such, does not fall into line with the behaviour of the Spirit which is, on the other hand, an active Being in a state of continual evolution. In short, the image of God, longing to be adored like a common or garden human being struck by narcissism, seems trite.
3) SPIRIT AND MATTER ARE INTERFACES
Both are created at one and the same time, but elements which bear the
stamp of independence, individuality, freethinking intelligence and selfconscious,
make up our real selves as spiritual beings. All other things created which
do not possess these characteristics become "universal matter".
The two planes are separate but the Spirit looks at that which is outside itself, in other words the universe, the world whose path it is to follow and get to know; but, structurally, matter and Spirit are both made of the same substance.
4) KNOWLEDGE AND BEHAVIOUR STEER TOWARDS EVOLUTION
There is no other way about it. Evolution is the consequence of knowledge
and the latter is brought about through experiencing and living existence
in other words life wherever and in whatever form it may be. Theories
are mere props and can never substitute the tangible work of true experience.
If theoretical periods of critical reflection exist, these must be corroborated by behaviour and experience. It is only in this way that the Spirit can increase its knowledge of God and universal Reality. For knowledge of God, we mean the proliferation of interior qualities which, in each of us, are already of a divine nature. In practice, evolution awakens in us our consciousness of belonging to the same nature as that of God. And it is in this manner that the long soughtafter, wonderful union with Him is brought about. But we are dealing with a mere flash of lightning and not a goal: the discovery, that is, that we are made as spiritual beings of a similar nature to that of God.
5) PRINCIPLE OF MATERIALITY
This is the logical consequence of the points described above and it
is one of the most revolutionary of Andrea's principles. According to our
Master, scouring both our external self (physical matter) and our internal
being (our true selves), we can achieve the knowledge of the reality and
truth of things. From this principle we can infer that human bodies must
be used and lived in intensely and not in an idealized way, as religions
have always established, because the Spirit can only come into contact
with the world through our bodies. If the body is extinguished by the oppression
of restrictions, existence becomes futile for the Spirit because our goal
in life mutates into such constraints and passive sacrifices.
The body, Andrea says, is the aerial of the Spirit and must be used as a transmitter of experiential signals.
6) THE BODY IS WORTHLESS SUBSTANCE
The body without the Spirit has no sacredness whatsoever. Our lives are intended for spiritual experience alone; only it can fulfil them as far as their significance and purpose are concerned.
We are reincarnated many times until our thirst for the knowledge of corporeity linked to the physical system of the Earth has been fully quenched. This principle of reincarnation confirms tacitly that the Spirit is in no way created by God at the moment of conception but that it was in existence before this date for a period of time quite unknown to us.
8) THE LANGUAGE OF THE SPIRIT
It is impossible for us, as humans, to understand the language of the Spirit, but we can get close to it by rediscovering our inner selves, the mysterious dwelling of the Soul which is present in every living person. What is required, to put it another way, is to create a new centre for the ego and include within it our spiritual consciousness. This is not be confused with an entirely different issue psychic consciousness which is housed in the brain. But, in order to attain a result of this kind, we must modify the ideological snare which forces us to be such enfeebled human beings with our rules, taboos, obligations and pseudopsychological moral constraints which make us utterly forget that we came to Earth to live for the sake of our Spirit and not to submit to human codes of conduct.
9) FREE WILL
Freedom is basically a quality of the Spirit, not of the body, as the
latter is mere matter prone to the laws of cause and effect.
Man, moreover, is subjected to psychological and social conditioning and is enslaved by the world.
But we can gain our freedom once more through moral disobedience which consists in giving ourselves individually an aim in life oriented towards the needs of the Spirit and not towards the will of other people. Being free means thinking with our own consciences and not with the ones set up for us by others since our coming to the world.
10) OUR PROGRAMME WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE SPIRIT BEFORE OUR BIRTH
But in order to implement it, however, the Spirit must struggle with all types of corporeal conditioning. Many acute existential neuroses and a high percentage of personality loss are not caused by people's internal and external stimuli but by their straying from their inner programme, by the fact that they live different lives and experiences from those which are vital to the Spirit.
11) DEATH DOES NOT EXIST
Nothing ever dies in the Universe. Why should the structure of our consciousness
be the only thing to die?
Our Master teaches us that the Spirit dies when it comes to Earth and not vice versa. The true home of the Spirit is not the Earth. Death is therefore merely a return to our Father's house.
12) ONLY OUR INNER SELVES SET US APART FROM ANIMALS
Our true life, our genuine conscious feeling, can be achieved only in
the acknowledgment of our inner nature to such an extent that we can see
within ourselves perfectly, because it is we who are our Spirit.
Outside this, Man is dominated by a loss of sense and meaning, since he lets himself live passively and thinks about the Spirit (if he ever does think about him!) as an outer being which he can at best define theoretically or admit through faith. Thus, as he lacks the background and experience gained from participating in the hunt for his own Soul, Man carries out mindless rites and is dominated by feelings of guilt and indifference towards any quest for truth.
13) TIME AND SPACE DO NOT EXIST
They clearly do not exist beyond human confines but even when we are living on Earth we can perceive their nonexistence.
14) DEFINITION OF GOD
Our Master has dedicated to God sublime, stirring lessons in which he
basically affirms that we are more acquainted with what God is not and
what He does not have than with His true nature which can only be perpetually
unknown to us. This derives from the fact that the infinite is unreachable
and as divine attributes such as intellect, power and truth are also infinite
and eternal, it will never be possible to comprehend His inner being.
Despite this, the presence of God is real and continues to dominate the universal scene because, as Andrea says, although we live our independent lives, we have never left the Father but are constantly in His midst. And all things are likewise in His midst, as there is no place or mental reality in the Universe in which God is not present.
Entity "A" First of all it draws experience from the actual
birth itself, from its approaching matter and subjecting itself to the
whole trauma involved, from its following the journey planned for it at
its incarnation. To put it another way, life itself, as such, is already
an experience for the Spirit. And it so much more so than death, because
death represents a minor event in the history of the Spirit, whereas coming
to Earth is a maximum one.
When we incarnate there is a change of condition, and basically we participate in the adventure of an experience which may or may not prove to adhere faithfully to the Spirit's original intentions, often ending up diverted by the many obstacles that the Spirit finds in its path. Death, on the other hand, is a return to its natural state.
But similar experiences are also to be had in incarnating a deformed body, or one which is mentally ill, where it seems that there is no room for tangible, clear and consequential experiences. Here, to put it in a nutshell, experiences are improvised and hardly ever passed over to the Spirit, as they lack the consciousness of experience, the "mental gesture", so to speak. But in these cases too the Spirit draws experiences from life in itself, rather than from experiences obtained from the way in which actions are carried out.
I should also add something else which is often forgotten and which has in part been forgotten here too. We uphold the principle of reincarnation, that the Spirit can return to Earth many times, because it represents an evolutive cycle, bearing in mind that the range of experiences possible can never be made in one life alone. But leaving aside all such philosophical, theological and similar considerations as far as this problem is concerned, I should say that many experiences which seem peculiar help the Spirit to be compensated, as a recognition of its experiences, from one life to another.
That is, the Spirit can sometimes be given the opportunity through life to correct previous experiences, or master them more satisfactorily, as it is like a child who tries and tries and tries again until he has succeeded. Living life in this way, many experiences or facts which occur on Earth may seem on face value to be absurd or inexplicable and they are in a certain sense if you compare those styles of life and experience with others around in that historical moment but they are no more absurd if they come to be considered as the culmination, the crowning of other interrupted experiences, or ones badly executed in past lives.
Question So there is a sort of cycle which completes itself as time goes by.
Entity "A" A cycle does exist, certainly. Millions of Spirits are wrapped up in it and it is clear that there cannot always be an identical relationship between them, so many of these effects from your point of view do not appear to be compensated for, whilst from ours they are most definitely.
Question Talking about death, can there be deaths from which no experiences can be drawn?.
Entity "A" Death is always an experience despite the fact that
it is not a great one. Differences in the experiences recorded are due
principally but not solely to the types of death involved.
You react to events in some way or another. It is not the event as such but really your attitude which is of real value. When we talk about experiences of the Spirit, we do not mean the news of the experience or its transcription either as a visual or linguistic image, but, on the contrary, we intend the transcription of its symbolism or meaning. The Spirit activates a phenomenon of apperception in other words it digests the experience set aside from its form. If it did not do so, your experiences would never affect the Spirit.
They develop in the physical manner common to types of organized matter and the Spirit draws certain meanings from them which, when they pass over to the Spirit, cause evolution. It is in this way, therefore, that death is not a significant event in itself, but it is rather Man's behaviour, as he participates in it fully, which qualifies or disqualifies the experience of death and sends these socalled information signals to the Spirit.
Question Can those people dear to us who are in your world comfort, guide, help or be close to us in any way?.
Entity "A" It depends on their spiritual dimension, on their
affinity or lack of it with you. Obviously those who leave you behind can
find themselves in the most diverse situations, not all of which are suitable
for them to come back and find you again, but on many occasions such circumstances
However, you should put out of your minds to some extent the fact of their guiding and helping you. It sometimes happens and it concerns above all a relationship between the Spirit and God, between the Spirit and the other life, but that spiritual beings can help you quite apart from the mechanism which you must feel within you and use to assist you in recovering from your grief is something which you should not advocate.
This is because, you see, each one of you must live his or her own life alone and cannot be helped. The law does not allow such a thing, except in a few instances. That it does happen on occasions, I should hasten to add, is due to the fact that Spirits have unlimited freedom of action and sometimes even break laws taking the responsibility for such action upon themselves, but the law as such has not agreed to relationships between spiritual and human beings. Naturally your loved ones, your "departed", those who have left you behind, can get in touch with you. And there is no reason why they should not. After all, it happens many times on many occasions you do not even realize it. But your Spirits do not have the mere function of giving or having something for you, and you should neither ask for, nor expect, a solution to the problems in your life by appealing to God or your dead.
You must stimulate in your innermost selves your own strength, your own will, your own capacity to look at problems in a more vivid and serene manner, so that once again you can find the inner peace or order which at times you need to resolve your conflicts and dilemmas. It is possible that after this some help may occasionally come your way. But, as Christ said, first you must have faith. Help will follow because having such faith is the equivalent of gaining your salvation.
Question Some people have said that when you die you go into another dimension.
Entity "A" All the same, you can still keep up contacts with
the Earth. In other words, a loved one who has left you can continue to
follow you and continue to know what is happening to you. But the fact
remains that he or she is almost always prevented from helping you.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED BY ENTITY "A"
According to Entity "A", this is an energybased structure which the Spirit makes use of to enable it to come into contact with its own body through its brain. In practice, it is the Soul which inhabits the brain and which is, in turn, inhabited by the Spirit.
This is the principle on the basis of which the Spirit rediscovers within itself the divine matrix which makes it up. To achieve this rediscovery, the Spirit "lives" in the Universe a journey of knowledge and experience. Both of these awaken in him their common belonging to the Father and this produces a change in outlook which is precisely the evolution aimed for. The Spirit's journey lasts for ever its life in a body is only one of the many moments in its existence. The trek never ends because, if it did, we would be absorbed into God and would consequently lose our conscious individuality.
Being the true core of divine origin, it is eternal, infinite, autonomous, individual and therefore cannot die. As it is of the same nature as God, the Spirit is not subject to transformation, but only to evolution. This is also due to the fact that it was emanated as a "tabula rasa", or "clean sheet", which nonetheless retained divine potential within itself. Evolution, or, to put it another way, the spiritual work of the Universe, allows the Spirit to progress from the "tabula rasa" stage to Knowledge by means of a process which will never end because God is infinite and the infinite cannot end.
What is meant by this term is the entire range of psychic concepts (such as moral standards, taboos, restrictions, rules, habits etc) which enslave Man in the human environment and thereby get in the way of the Spirit and the Soul, preventing them from implementing their own free will. To put it another way, the superstructure blocks the spiritual programme which the Spirit works out in order to further its own evolution. This is because the body becomes a human snare which forces body and mind to abide by social mores without having any respect for the inner, spiritual problems of the person involved. According to the principles of Entity "A" and the Italian Centre of Parapsychology based in Naples, in order to rediscover the traits of the Soul it is necessary to modify substantially the superstructure so that the structure lying beneath it can emerge. This is, of course, the Soul/Spirit partnership and can be found in each and all of us.
End of Volume 1
This page is maintained by Andrew Milani, for comments or reports you
can contact me by clicking firstname.lastname@example.org
Back to ASPR/UFORUM