Cancel Fullscreen
Print

Chapter XV - Using the Mentative Instruments

Chapter XV

Using the Mentative Instruments



In the use of the eyes for the purpose of conveying mentative currents, you should always remember that the feeling is the real power behind these currents of power, and that the brain is the dynamo from which the currents originate. The brain, you know, is the great transformer, or converter of the mentative energy, and acts just as does a dynamo in the direction of sending forth great waves of power. Consequently, if you wish to send out mentative currents for the purpose of inducing feeling in others, you must first have feeling generated in your mental dynamo.

It will be well for two people to practice the eye exercises together, but in the absence of a friend in whom you have confidence, you may obtain excellent results by practicing before your friendly mirror. In either case, you must first arouse in your mind the feeling that you wish to express in mentative currents. Put your feeling into your glance, and it will be felt.

Exercise I. Look into the eyes of your friend (or your own in the mirror) and then say mentally: “I am stronger than you.” Throw into your glance as much of the feeling of strength as you can.

Exercise 2. Say mentally: “I am more Positive than you—I am outgazing you,” throwing as much positivity as possible into your gaze, the same being inspired, of course, by our feeling.

Exercise 3. Say, and feel: “You are afraid of me—I am making you feel my strength,” throwing the feeling into your gaze. After you have acquired the faculty of making your strength felt by above exercises you may use the same upon other people when the occasion renders it advisable. If you are addressed by some person whom you think is trying to master you mentatively, or whose strong influence you wish to ward off, you may use the above method on him. As a rule the person who is doing the talking has a slight advantage over the listener, all else being equal. The speaker is the more positive because he is expressing more power. But you may counteract this, if you are the listener, by simply sending him a glance, accompanied by the feeling of “I scatter your force into bits—you cannot affect me!”

In resisting an attack of this sort, keep your mouth closed, with the jaws tight, for this “bite” denotes strength and firmness, and brings into play the parts of the brain manifesting these qualities, and thus charges your mentative currents with these feelings. At the same time gaze firmly and steadily into the eyes of the other, using the “Dynamic Gaze.” I would bid you remember that the person standing has an advantage over the one sitting. Avoid the sitting position when the other person is standing—do not give him this advantage, but take it yourself if you can.

In speaking to persons and requesting them to do something, you should accompany the verbal request by a mental command. For instance, if you say “You will do this for me, won’t you?” (this is the suggestive form of questioning, remember) you should accompany the question with the command (made mentally) with the proper glance, “You shall do this.” If you are the person requested to do something that you do not wish to do, you should answer, “No, I do not care to do this,” or “I do not see my way clear to do it,” or “I am unable to oblige you,” etc., etc., but at the same time you must send the mental answer, with its accompanying glance, “I will not do it, and you cannot make me.”

A well‐known teacher along these lines several years ago, taught his pupils to gaze into the eyes of persons whom they wished to affect, at the same time saying mentally: “I am looking at you. I am looking through your eyes into your brain. My will power is stronger than yours. You are under my control. I will compel you to do what I wish. You must do what I say. You shall do this. Do it at once.” It will readily be seen that this will generate a powerful mentative current, if there is a sufficiently strong feeling—will and desire—behind it. But right here I shall give you an antidote for this kind of influence. In all cases where you are attacked mentally in this way you may dissolve the Force by a positive denial. The positive denial is the powerful force that scatters into tiny bits the force directed against one. It is a destructive agent, just as is the positive statement a constructive or creative one. One who understands the scientific use of this destructive force may undo the mentative work of others, to a surprising degree. By a strong, positive denial, you may scatter and disintegrate any mentative influence directed against you. This formula will give you a general idea of it. Suppose that you are repelling a statement such as given above. In that case you should say mentally, accompanying it with the proper glance, with feeling back of it: “I deny positively your power over me. I deny it out of existence. I will not do your bidding, and I deny your right and power to command me. I deny your power, and I affirm my own.”

You may cultivate this power to use the positive denial by practicing on an imaginary person whom you may suppose is trying to influence you. Imagine the strong, positive person before you, trying to influence you and then start in to practice the positive denial on him, until you feel that you have beaten him off, and have sent him flying away in retreat. These imaginary mental battles will develop a great power of mentative resistance in you, and I advise you strengthen yourselves along these lines, if you feel that you are weak. You may improve on the above exercise, by imagining that after your enemy is in full retreat you follow him up and pour statement after statement into him, changing your position from a defender into an attacking force. These imaginary rehearsals will do more for one than people think possible. They are like stage rehearsals that make perfect the actors. They are the fencing lessons from which the swordsman gains skill, and strength. Practice, practice, practice makes perfect in everything—in mentative work as, well as physical. There are good psychological and occult reasons behind this method and practice, but I shall not enter upon that field at present—this book is intended to give you the “how” of the subject, rather than the “why.” In personal conversation with another you will find it of the greatest value to see as clearly as possible a mental picture, chart or map, of what you are saying to him. By so doing you will impress most forcibly upon his mind that which you wish him to see, and feel. In this statement is compressed the secret of effective speaking. In the degree that you see and feel the thought that you are expressing in words, will be the degree of impression made upon, and mentative induction produced in, the other person. The secret of course lies in the power of visualization.

You may find an evidence of your increasing mentative influence by trying the psychological experiment of “willing” people to move this way or that way, by gazing intently at them. In this experiment it is not necessary for you to gaze into their eyes. Gazing at their back, preferably at the upper part of the neck, at the base of the brain, will answer. You may try “willing” persons to look around on the street, or in public places, etc. Or you may “will” that they turn to the right or left of you, when approaching each other on the street. Or, in stores you may “will” that a certain clerk, from out of a number, will step forward to wait upon you. These and many similar experiments have an interest to the majority of students, and are accomplished with comparative ease, after sufficient practice. The whole theory and practice consists of a steady gaze, and the mental command, and will, that the person will act so‐and‐so, together with the earnest expectation that he will obey the command, and the mental picture of his doing so. That is all there is to it.

In the use of the eye as a mentative instrument, remember first, last, and all the time, that desire and will are the phases of the mentative energy, and that in the degree that desire is kindled, and will is exerted, so will be the power expressed by yourself, and impressed upon others. Read this book over a number of times, until you have fully grasped the underlying principles. Then commit its exercises and instructions to memory. Then practice frequently, and perfect yourself in the methods pointed out, until you render them “second nature.” You will be conscious of a gradual growth and development, along the lines of mentative power and influence. The flame of dynamic mentation once lighted, it will never die out—tend the flame carefully, keep the wick trimmed clean, and fill the lamp with oil, and it will ever burn bright and emit heat and light and power.

The last mentative instrument mentioned in a previous chapter is “the touch.” There was a time, in my early stages of experimentation and psychological research, when I laughed at the idea of the touch playing any real part in the work of mental influence. Of course I saw the effect of the touch in certain phases of psychological work, but I believed that it was all “merely suggestion,” but I soon learned that the touch was really a most potent instrument of mentative energy. I now explain it by the idea of the nerves being like the wires upon which the electric current travels. The brain is the dynamo, or converter of the energy, and while the latter travels in waves and currents without any wires (just as do the waves of the wireless telegraph) still if there is a wire to be had, then it follows the lines of least resistance and takes advantage of the nerve‐wire. Certain parts of the body have nerve‐cells very highly developed in them—are in fact miniature brains. In the cases of some persons of sensitive and trained touch, there exist little clusters of nerve cells at the ends of the fingers, that act like miniature brains. The lips are also highly developed in this respect, as the well known phenomena of “kissing” evidences. The fingers and hand are excellent polar mediums for conveying the mentative energy that pours down over the nerves from the brain, and through which it passes to the other person. The use of the touch of the hands as a channel for conveying mentative energy depends greatly upon the development of the hands by the individual. Those who understand this matter, develop the conductivity of the hands by “treating” them, as follows: Think of your hands as excellent conductors of mentative energy, and imagine that you can feel the energy pouring down the nerves of your arms, and out of your hands, obeying your will, when you shake hands with people. You will soon develop your hands to such a degree that some sensitive persons will actually “feel” the current passing into them. Always accompany the passage of the current with the thought or feeling that you wish to induce in the other person, just as you do when you use the “Dynamic Gaze.” In fact, the gaze and the hand‐clasp should be used together, when possible, for by so doing you double the effect.

When you shake hands with a person throw mind and feeling into it, and do not fall into the mechanical, lifeless method so common among people. Throw your feeling down to your hand, and at the same time make a mental command or statement appropriate to the case. For instance, grasp the person’s hand with feeling, and interest, saying, mentally, at the same time:

“You like me.” Then, when you draw your hand away, if possible let your fingers slide over the palm of his hand in a caressing manner, allowing his first finger to pass between your thumb and forefinger, close up in the crotch of the thumb. Practice this well, until you can perform it without thinking of it—that is, make it your natural way of shaking hands. You will find that this method of shaking hands will open up a new interest in people toward you, and in other ways you will discover its advantage. You never knew a “fascinating” person who did not have a good hand‐clasp. It is a part of the fascinating personality.

There are many persons, well grounded on the psychological principles underlying the subject, who use the hands as a medium for mentative energy, without shaking hands. For instance, they sit near the other person and place their hands so that their fingers will point toward him, at the same time willing that the current flow through the fingers and toward the other.

They also use their hands in conversation so as to have the tips of their fingers pointing toward the other. This last plan becomes highly effective when used with the appropriate gestures, for it is akin to the mesmeric “pass” of the hands. In this connection I would say beware of the person who is always trying to put his hands on you—beware of the “pawing over” process. Avoid it in the ordinary way, if possible, or else deliberately practice the positive denial toward the person, holding the idea and mental statement that “I deny the power of your magnetism—I scatter it by my denial.”

In concluding this chapter, I would especially caution young women, and older ones for that matter, against allowing men to be familiar with them in the direction of “holding hands,” or similar practices. Not only does this “familiarity breed contempt” but there are good psychological reasons why the practice is to be condemned. You have seen what part the hands play in “magnetizing” as it is called, and is it not clearly discernible how one may use the hands in this “petting,” and all that sort of thing, in order to psychologically affect another person? I am not speaking now of the caresses indulged in by honorable true lovers—for all the talk in the world would not change that sort of thing—but I am alluding to the indiscriminate “pawing over” on the part of strange men that some young girls allow. There is a danger in this sort of thing, and I want you to know it. If you have daughters, or young female relatives, warn them against this thing, and tell them the reason why. And the same thing is true of the man who is always patting other men on the shoulder, or resting his arm around them, or else “taking hold of them” in a friendly caressing way during a conversation. Such men may not know the psychology of the thing, but they have found out that this sort of “patting up” makes other men more impressible, and amenable to their influence, and so they practice it. Make them stop it, either by moving away, or by positive denial.

Now, once more, remember the power of this positive denial as a disperser, and disintegrator of adverse influence. If this book taught you nothing else, it would still be “worth while” to you because of this one point of instruction. For this positive denial is a mentative armor that will protect you—a mentative sword that will defend you—a mentative lightning flash that will clear the mental atmosphere. Learn the secret of positive statement, and positive denial, and you are clad in an invulnerable armor and are armed with the weapon of power—and so you may, like the “Warrior Bold” go “gaily to the fray.”

But, after all, the secret of influence in our dynamic individual lies in his mental states. The outer forms are but reflections of the inner. If you will cultivate the connection between your mind and the great Universal Will—the Universal Mind‐Power— then your will becomes so strong that the outward expressions will come of themselves. But in mounting the first steps of attainment, it becomes important for the student to pay attention to the outward characteristics, because by so doing he makes a clearer mental path for the acquisition of the desired mental states. By the very laws of mental suggestion he is able to imitate these outward expressions, and thus induce in himself the mental states, which, in time, become habitual. I do not mean that one should allow the suggestion of the other’s appearance to move him in this way—this is not the idea. What I mean is that one may by auto‐suggestion so reproduce the outward characteristics associated with a desired mental state or, quality, and by acting them out actually materialize into reality the mental states themselves. Remember the rule— mental states take form in action—and action reproduces their associated mental states! It is a rule that works both ways. The voice makes the phonographic record—and the latter reproduces the sound! Remember this illustration, for it will help you to get the right conception of the psychological law underlying the phenomenon.

There is a certain point to which I would direct your attention at this stage. I refer to the well‐known psychological fact that “mental states express themselves in physical action.” Every mental state has its associated physical action. And these actions when perceived by another person, are apt to induce similar mental states in that person, along the lines of mental suggestion. But there is another law, less understood by the public, and that is that “the manifestation of physical action tends to induce in the mind of the person performing it, the mental states generally associated with the production of the action.”

Let us take a common example, to illustrate the operation of these two related laws. Let us suppose that you are holding a mental state of anger, fight, combativeness, etc. In that case you will find that your brows will frown; your jaws will be fixed in a savage “bite,” and slightly protruded; and your hands will be clenched—the mental state has taken form in physical action. Very well, then—you all recognize this fact.

But there is the law reversed. If you will frown deeply; clench your fists savagely; fix your jaws in a fighting trim, etc., and will maintain that physical attitude for five minutes, at the same time allowing it to manifest in your walk, etc. (as it surely will) without interference, you will find yourself growing into a mental state of annoyance, combativeness, etc., and if you keep it up long enough, you will be “mad in earnest.” So true is this that if you carry the thing far enough, and run into someone else, you will be very apt to “get into a row” with him. And, still more remarkable is the fact, the person that you “run into” will be very apt to take up the mental suggestion of your manner, and will also “feel fighty.” It would not take much to stir up trouble between the two of you.

And, still more remarkable, if you continue this physical attitude until it produces the mental state, you will find that you are inducing similar mental states in those around you, by the agency of mentative currents. So you see the close connection between physical action, mental states, suggestion, and telementation! They act, and re‐act upon each other. What has been said of the mental state of anger applies equally to any intense feeling or mental state. Like begets like, along all the lines mentioned.

Now, all this means that the man who is possessed of a strong mental state will manifest, unconsciously, the physical actions which will affect others, along the lines of mental suggestion— he will not have to study the question of what suggestions to use, providing he “feels” sufficiently strong to automatically manifest the actions. But when a man does not “feel” sufficiently strong to manifest the suggestive actions, he may produce the same effect by “acting the part” (without being actually involved in it) by first reproducing the physical actions, which will thus induce a sufficiently strong mental state to manifest itself both along the line of suggestion, and also along the line of personal magnetism. Every good actor induces feeling in you in this way, along both these lines. And you may do the same if you want to—many dynamic people are doing it every day.

On this subject, so far as I have gone, I have given you a most important secret of psychological influence, in a plain, practical way—so simple in fact that there is a risk of many of you entirely overlooking its importance. Better go back over this part of the lesson again—many times—until you are able to catch its inner meaning, and are able to read between its lines. It’s quite worth while, I assure you. Of course, some of my kind critics will take me to task for teaching this “acting out” idea. They will call it “inculcating principles of deceit,” etc., etc.—and will then go on their way admiring “magnetic” personalities, and regretting the absence of “tact” in other persons who have rubbed them the wrong way. I have noticed that these hyper‐critical people are generally hypo‐critical as well.

I have known many good men who were not “dynamic,” and the world “turned them down,” and often “jumped all over them.” And I have known quite a number, not quite so good, who possessed quite a goodly degree of dynamic force, and the world received them with open arms, and showered its praises and rewards upon them. But this does not mean that one cannot be “good” and “dynamic” at the same time. There are plenty of “good” men who are highly “dynamic”—and there are plenty of “bad” men equally so. And there are plenty both good and bad, who lack “dynamic‐force.” But, note this fact, please— that the good men, and the bad men, who are highly “dynamic,” generally manage to “get there,” along their own line of life. And both the good and bad who lack “dynamic‐force” are generally stranded along the wayside. Dynamic‐force is neither good nor bad—it is a natural force—and is used by all. In this respect it is like any other natural force.

And, then again, this book is not for the purpose of teaching the “bad” use of “dynamic‐force,” rather than the “good.” It states the principles and the law, as they are. It is true that the bad man may take advantage of the law and use it for bad purposes; but so may the good man take advantage of it and make himself a greater power for good, “dynamic‐force” is just as effective in the “preacher” as it is in the “confidence man”— and just as effective in the salesman and business man, and everyday person, as it is in either the preacher or the confidence man. It is a natural quality, and has nothing to do with “good and bad”—any more than has elocution, oratorical ability, or personal appearance. If the good folk prefer to leave this important subject for the bad folk, that is their own concern, not mine. Personally, I feel like the old preacher, who was remonstrated with by some hide‐bound old parishioner regarding certain musical innovations that had been introduced in the church service. The old preacher looked kindly at the old veteran “conservative” of the flock, and said: “Well, brother, it may strike you in a different way, but to me it seems wrong to allow the Devil to monopolize all the good music—I believe in giving the Lord his share of it.” And I say “Amen!” to this idea.

If “dynamic mentation” was as much used to further the interests of right, as it has been to further the interests of wrong, the old world would get down to a little easier motion. If the preacher would make his talks as “dynamic” as the actor does his plays, and the lawyer does his appeals to the jury, there would surely be “something doing” in church work, and the prevailing emptiness of the pews would be cured. If “goodness” was made as attractive as “badness,” the Devil would be placed on the retired list.


Page last modified on Monday 21 of January, 2013 03:41:22 MST