Has Allan Kardec's book Genesis really been adulterated?
A few days ago, the channel Grupo Espírita Educare published a video very well produced, by the way, with great care and an aesthetic appearance to be envied. This video, entitled "WAS THE BOOK "THE GENESIS" REALLY ADULTERATED?", provides, despite so much care, half-baked information, leaving out details that are so indispensable for the legitimate discussion of the case about Allan Kardec's ultimate work.
In the video, they quote the following passage from a psychograph to Kardec, about the changes he wanted to make to Genesis:
"Allow me to give you some personal advice about your work Genesis. I think, like you, that it should undergo certain modifications that will make it more valuable from a methodical point of view; [...] this revision is a serious job, and I ask you not to wait too long before carrying it out."
There is, however, something substantial in the passage they omitted (in the ellipsis in brackets) which, not by chance, leads the viewer to the wrong conclusion: the communicating Spirit's repeated recommendation that Kardec should not change anything about the Doctrine and the ideas that were appearing for the first time:
Advice on Genesis
February 22, 1868.
Medium M. Desliens.Allow me to give you some personal advice about your book Genesis. I think that, as you do, it should undergo a rearrangement that will make it gain value in methodical terms; but I would also advise you to review certain comparisons in the first chapters, which, without being inaccurate, can be ambiguous, and which can be used against you in the finishing of words. I don't want to point them out in any particular way, but by carefully analyzing the second and third chapters, they will certainly surprise you. We'll take care of your research. It's only a matter of detail, no doubt, but details sometimes have their importance; that's why I thought it useful to draw your attention to this side.
Question. In the reprint we're going to do, I'd like to add a few things, without increasing the volume. Do you think there are parts that could be removed without inconvenience?
Answer. My opinion is that there is absolutely nothing to take away as doctrine; everything is useful and satisfactory in every respect; but I also believe that you could, without inconvenience, further condense certain ideas that don't need development to be understood, having already been outlined elsewhere; in your reorganization work, you will easily achieve this.
We should leave intact all the theories that appear for the first time in the public eye; don't remove anything as ideas, I repeat, but just cut out, here and there, developments that add nothing to clarity
You will be more concise, no doubt, but just as understandable, and it is the ground thus gained that you may have to add new and urgent elements. It's a serious job for this revision, and I urge you not to wait too late to do it, it's better to be prepared ahead of time than if I had to wait after you.
Above all, don't rush it. Despite the apparent contradiction of my words, you undoubtedly understand me. Start working promptly, but don't stay too long. Take your time; your ideas will be clearer and your body will be less fatigued.
You can download the original content of this letter by clicking on here.
Did Kardec go against the Spirit's wise advice?
Now, the adulteration of Genesis produced exactly that: it removed important passages that compromise understanding, leaving out doctrinal ideas and leading the reader to an understanding that is sometimes contrary to the previous version - the same thing they did with the adulteration of Heaven and Hell.
He quotes Henri Netto, in the article “In search of doubt: where is the truth?”:
The "new" texts, even if they appear to be true (because the intelligent hands that handled the editions posthumously picked out texts contained in the issues of the "Revue Spirite" (published from January 1858 to April 1869 by Kardec himself), sought the "appearance of truth" when put together with the others, with no basis in any of Kardec's publications. There are absurd passages that contradict not only other theses presented and reinforced by Kardec throughout his coherent and sequential literary production, but also the doctrinal body itself (principles and foundations). The biggest of these, without a shadow of a doubt, was to create a doubt, which didn't exist in the original version (first to fourth editions of "Genesis"), about the physical, material nature of Jesus' body. In this sense, the elimination of item 67 from Chapter XV of the aforementioned work, and the renumbering of item 68 as if it were 67, hides the logical assessment (albeit in terms of suppositions) about the fate of Yeshua's body envelope after his burial. What would be Kardec's reason, after repelling the docetist thesis ("fluidic body" of Jesus), and affirming his human nature, for suppressing his judicious considerations on the subject?
NETTO, Henri. In search of doubt: where is the truth? Published on the Espiritismo com Kardec – ECK website, on 12/24/2023. Available in comkardec.net.br/a-procura-da-duvida-onde-esta-a-verdade-por-henri-netto
He also quotes Paulo Henrique de Figueiredo in “Autonomia”:
There is an initial question from Allan Kardec, which is quite objective:
Question. In the reprint we're going to do, I'd like to add a few things, without increasing the volume. Do you think there are parts that could be removed without inconvenience?
In other words, it was Allan Kardec's initiative to make a change to his work, but which one? He wanted to add a few more things! Not take away. And he wanted to do this without increasing the volume of the book. The reason for your question to Demeure is to find out whether it would be possible to do this, according to the Spirit's vision. And the answer is quite objective and decisive. He answered, through the medium, while Kardec wrote it down:
Answer. My opinion is that there is absolutely nothing to take away as doctrine; everything is useful and satisfactory in every respect; but I also believe that you could, without inconvenience, further condense certain ideas that don't need development to be understood, having already been outlined elsewhere; in your reorganization work, you will easily achieve this.
Take anything away? Nothing about the Doctrine. Demeure was quite clear, but he went on to detail his proposal:
– We should leave intact all the theories that appear for the first time in the public eye; don't remove anything as ideas, I repeat, but just cut out, here and there, developments that add nothing to clarity. You'll be more concise, no doubt, but just as understandable, and it's on the ground thus acquired that you may have to add new and urgent elements.
This is definitely not what we find in the adulterated version of the 1872 work! There were hundreds of deletions. Words, phrases, paragraphs and even entire sections were removed, some of which altered the meaning of the rest of the text. Suffice it to say that the theory about the progressive conquest of free will, after the Spirit has developed self-awareness over hundreds of lives, was removed after being carefully elaborated by Kardec over many years in the Spiritist Review and finally presented in Genesis. Before, instinct dominated alone, but intelligence begins to develop, and little by little instinct weakens, so Kardec originally wrote: "With rational intelligence, free will is born, which man uses at will: then only, for him, does responsibility for his actions begin" (KARDEC, [1868] 2018, p. 100). This important passage, fundamental to Spiritist Moral Theory, was deliberately removed, against Kardec's wishes and the recommendations of the Spirits, a fact that we have now verified! In the pages of this book we detail several of these infamous and criminal forgeries.
FIGUEIREDO, Paulo Henrique de. Autonomy: the untold story of Spiritism. FEAL publisher.
Not only that, there is an extensive piece of research produced by Marco Milani, demonstrating the fact that the adulteration removed several important doctrinal ideas, as well as adding some exquisite ones, compromising the understanding of the work as a whole and in detail:
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2019/03/alteracoes-ocorridas-no-cap-1-da-5-ed.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2019/05/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-da-5.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2019/09/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-da-5.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2019/09/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-da-5_15.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2020/02/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-do-cap.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2020/03/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-de.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2020/03/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-da-5a.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2019/01/natureza-e-materia-nao-sao-sinonimos.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2018/09/comentarios-sobre-o-capitulo-xv-de.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2019/11/comentarios-sobre-as-alteracoes-da-5.html
https://educadorespirita1.blogspot.com/2018/12/inconsistencias-doutrinarias-da-5.html
As can be seen, various doctrinal ideas have been removed, even though the recommendation of the Spirit, who communicated to Kardec on the subject of the new edition, was not to remove anything related to these issues.
They don't want dialog to get to the truth, but imposition
When Leymarie created the book Obras Póstumas, he inserted into it the psychography presented earlier, but adulterated, removing precisely the Spirit's advice so that nothing concerning the Doctrine would be removed. All to give credit to his version, the fifth edition of Genesis was actually produced by Allan Kardec. Now, in the video mentioned above, the Grupo Espírita Educare channel does the same, but it doesn't stop there.
For Leymarie, the facts and the discussion about them didn't matter. In order to maintain his version of events, he sought to dominate the truth with various subterfuges. He tried to take control of Spiritist opinion and hid anything that might contradict his ideas. This is also how those who contradict the facts of the adulteration act with the "siren song", as Marcelo Henrique would say. That's how they finally hid my comments on that video from the public:
It's no coincidence that my comments don't appear to anyone else, as I was hidden on the channel. Apparently, they do not wish to discuss the facts and evidence, which they say are “summarily declassified”.
We can see, therefore, that the animated play is just another attempt to lead the public to the conclusion they want, even if they have to omit important information and make shallow statements. For our part, after encouraging the reader to study The Legacy of Allan Kardec, by Simoni Privato (link below), we can only hope that everyone comes to their own conclusions, in the face of the facts and evidence, of which there is plenty, despite the fallacy of the Spiritism CSI group that all the opposing arguments have been overturned (sic).