Degrees of Trance and the Changing Experience of Participation
Trance does not occur in one fixed form. During one sitting, the medium may remain relatively close to familiar waking involvement. During another, ordinary self-direction may recede much more substantially. Yet even this does not create a single scale. Thought may become less prominent while the surrounding environment remains accessible. Bodily sensation may change considerably while speech still feels relatively close to ordinary expression. The sense of personally initiating what occurs may diminish without every other aspect of the sitting changing to the same degree. Terms such as “light trance” and “deep trance” can be useful shorthand for describing these differences. They become misleading when they are treated as levels of achievement. The degree of alteration describes how the medium’s involvement changed. It does not, by itself, establish the quality of the communication, the strength of Spirit influence, or the value of the work.
Book Five: Trance Mediumship
A Common Question
What is deep trance?
Answer
“Deep trance” is a descriptive term commonly used when the medium’s ordinary self-directed involvement has changed substantially.
Deliberate thought may become less prominent.
Speech may unfold with little sense of personal formulation.
Bodily experience may alter.
The surrounding environment may carry far less immediate importance.
These features do not have to occur together.
One may change considerably while another remains relatively familiar.
For that reason, deep trance should not be understood as a fixed level that every medium is expected to reach.
It describes the extent or character of change within a sitting.
It does not establish spiritual advancement, superior mediumship, or stronger Spirit influence.
Introduction
The language of trance often suggests depth.
A medium enters light trance.
Then deeper trance.
Eventually perhaps deep trance.
At first glance, the language seems harmless.
It gives people a way to describe noticeable differences between sittings.
The difficulty begins when description becomes direction.
If light and deep are imagined as opposite ends of one scale, the medium can easily conclude that development should involve steady movement toward the deeper end.
A greater departure from familiar waking involvement begins to look like greater achievement.
That assumption creates problems very quickly.
Description Can Become Hierarchy
Suppose one medium remains conscious of the room, hears what is being said, and retains some ordinary thought.
Another becomes far less concerned with the surroundings and experiences very little deliberate involvement in speech.
If the only question is “Who was deeper?” the second medium appears to have advanced farther.
But the comparison has already assumed that all relevant features of trance move together and that more alteration is inherently better.
Neither assumption is necessary.
The first medium may have experienced a substantial change in the sense of initiating speech while remaining environmentally responsive.
The second may have experienced a pronounced bodily shift while still contributing considerable deliberate direction to what was being said.
The word depth can conceal those differences.
The Better Question Is More Specific
Instead of asking:
“How deep was I?”
the medium can ask:
How much ordinary self-direction remained?
How prominent was deliberate thought?
How closely did I feel involved in initiating expression?
How familiar did the body feel?
How available were the surroundings?
These questions do not have to produce one score.
Their value lies in separating features that can change independently.
Once those features are separated, depth becomes less useful as a universal measurement.
It can still remain useful as shorthand.
But shorthand should not become architecture.