The Spirits Book

The book itself deserves five stars. Existing English translations don't, however.EDIT: a new and far better translation was published by Luchnos after this review was written (green grapes on the cover): ISBN-13: 978-1950030019 (hardcover) and 978-1950030002 (paperback).The Spirits’ Book is the first and, in a way, most important book by Allan Kardec, in that it contains the foundations of the entire Spiritist system. As such, it is normally studied continuously in every Spiritist group or center. In the group that I have been part of, choosing one of the English translations available has been an ongoing debate forever.In my group, people own all the different versions of the work. By studying the book together, we have the opportunity to compare various translations, and have become aware of the marked differences (and shortcomings) that characterize each one of them.I list below the translations available on Amazon, according to the year when translations were first made public.Anna Blackwell/Discovery ISBN-13: 978-1788940016 (translated by Anna Blackwell, 1875). Because the copyright has expired, one can find several other editions of this translation as well.AKES ISBN-13: 978-8573601527 and 978-1732341401 (both paperback); translated by A. Bomfim and team. There are two different editions of this translation (1995 and 2003), one person in our group has the second edition.Edicei/FEB ISBN-13: 978-8598161181 (paperback) and 978-85-7945-084-6 (eBook); translated by Darrel Kimble (2006 with subsequent revisions up until the current fourth edition from 2013, which is the one I purchased). Several people in our group use this one.USSC ISBN-13: 978-0985279356 (paperback); translated by Nicole Alves, two editions (2014, 2016). Two people in our group use the last edition of this translation.A couple in our group are native French speakers, so they can read the original text in French. This is very handy when we run into passages that seem not to agree with each other when different English translations are compared.Of all the available translations, the one that sounds more like contemporary English is the AKES translation. Unfortunately, this is also the version that diverges most radically from the original text. Much information is deliberately excised (an example of that can be found as early as question #2). Many, many passages are paraphrased in a very whimsical fashion (sometimes showing a clear ideological bias on the part of translators), distorting the implied meaning of the original text to the point of saying the opposite, at times. I provide an example below, when I compare how each version translates an excerpt from question no. 811.Conversely, the version that sounds the least like modern English is--not surprisingly--Anna Blackwell’s translation from 1875. It includes some outdated expressions and odd vocabulary, for sure, but remains largely understandable. In fact, it gives a certain “Downton Abbey” flair to it. The issue with this version is that the translator paraphrases very frequently here as well, leading to the insertion of elements that do not exist in the original. Insertions, which, oddly enough, show up in other translations, too.Let’s take, for instance, question 914. The third clause in Blackwell’s translation—“and as they emancipate themselves from the thraldom of matter”—does not exist in the original! Well, versions of this addition appear both in AKES’ translation (“In freeing yourselves from the chains of matter”), as well as USSC’s version (“As they free themselves from the shackles of matter”).AKES’ and USSC’s version, as a matter of fact, seem to have used Blackwell’s translation as their base text at times, so frequent are the divergences in Blackwell’s text that a replicated in the other two. Take, for example, question no. 909, where “quelquefois” (at times/sometimes) is translated as “often” by both Blackwell and USSC. AKES prefers “most of the time” in this case, not much of consolation, either. Only EDICEI’s version uses the correction translation, “sometimes.” Other passages where USSC’s/AKES’ text clearly incorporates distortions from Blackwell’s translation include questions 886 (both USSC and AKES and in this case translate “entendre” as “use”; Blackwell as “employ”, Edicei translates it correctly as “understand”), 894, 907 (where Blackwell’s departs significantly from the original text), 917, and so on, all of which are examples that we came up with by comparing only a couple of chapters.It becomes quite clear at this point that Edicei’s version is the one that tries to stay closer to the French original. That’s great, except that other weaknesses make this translation problematic as well.Another user mentions that Edicei’s version mistranslates “bad” as “evil.” Well, that is the least of my concerns here. These two words have largely overlapping meanings. The closer association between “evil” and “devil” is a modern phenomenon. I would say that it represents a word choice that may sound off to some modern readers, but I would certainly not dismiss it as a mistake.But Edicei’s version does make, unfortunately, quite many actual translation mistakes. Just to mention a few, they translate “concurir” as “to concur” (instead of “to contribute”). “Consacrer” as “to consecrate” when it means “to sanction” or “to endorse.” They mistake “affiliation” for “filiation,” “civility” for “civilization,” “attributes” for “attributions.” My French friends in the group are under the impression that the translator does not have a very good command of French. Such mistakes are very basic, according to them, and the widespread occurrence of this type of problem is not at all excusable.A number of choices made by the translator add to the problem, in the case of this version. The decision not to use masculine articles in reference to “God” creates passages that sound like run-on sentences. In addition, the process of “sanitizing” the language transforms a number of enchanting passages into rather dull and uninteresting text. In question 918, for instance, the beautiful page written by Kardec about “l’homme de bien”, falls flat when translated as “moral individuals.” I don’t quite believe that disfiguring the original text benefits much the cause of Spiritism.Let us now compare how each version handles one very illustrative passage, the sub-question 811a. The original text in French is as follows:811a) Il y a pourtant des hommes qui croient que là est le remède aux maux de la société ; qu'en pensez-vous ?« Ce sont des systématiques ou des ambitieux jaloux ; ils ne comprennent pas que l'égalité qu'ils rêvent serait bientôt rompue par la force des choses. Combattez l'égoïsme, c'est là votre plaie sociale, et ne cherchez pas des chimères. »Specifically, let’s focus on how each edition translates the answer.Anna Blackwell: “They are framers of systems, or moved by ambition and jealousy; they do not understand that the equality they dream of would be speedily broken up by the force of things. Combat selfishness, for that is your social pest; and do not run after chimeras.”USSC: “Anyone who believes that is either motivated by both ambition and jealousy or is responsible for the creation of systems. They do not understand that the equality they dream of is quickly decimated by the circumstances of life. Fight selfishness, because that is the plague of your society and do not chase after pipe dreams.”Edicei: “Either they are framers of theories, or they are ambitious and envious. They do not understand that equality would be quickly broken by the very force of things. Fight selfishness, for that is your social plague. Do not run after chimeras.”AKES: “They are visionaries. They fail to understand that the equality they dream of would be short-lived. Our advice is to concentrate on combating selfishness, which is the greatest wrong, rather than dwelling on chimeras.”My French friends say that no one came up with a fully suitable translation in this case. The first tricky issue here is how to translate “systématiques,” which they claim to be a dated expression that means “hard-headed” or “having a tunnel vision.” Anna Blackwell writes “framers of system” which may perhaps convey a hint of the actual meaning. USSC (“creation of systems”) and Edicei (“framers of theories”) are clearly imitating her.Then, Blackwell continues with “moved by ambition and jealousy.” Notice that the verb form “moved” has no counterpart in the original text. USSC evidently follows the lead by saying “motivated by both ambition and jealousy.” The use of the word “decimated” in this passage seems to derive from Blackwell’s “broken up,” rather than the French original, “rompue,” which my friends feel as not being a forceful word, certainly not forceful to the point of requiring a word like “decimated!”The worst thing, however, is how AKES translates the first sentence of the answer. They replace the whole thing with “They are visionaries.” So, an obviously negative description—hard-headed, ambitious, jealous—becomes “visionary,” which means “having unusual foresight and imagination,” (as per Webster)? Really?But at the end of the day, we are forced to pick one of the existing translations in English, even if we have come to the conclusion that they all have problems. Unfortunately, all the recent versions did little to improve on Anna Blackwell’s translation, or, when they did, they incurred in other serious mistakes that are possibly worse than the original problems in Blackwell’s version. Despite its old Briticisms, hers is the version I still prefer. If I were to give marks to existing translations, I'd say Blackwell's version deserves four stars, and the others probably three.EDIT: the new English translation by Luchnos (ISBN 978-1950030002, green grapes on the cover) is now my favorite version by far.

This is a book that everyone should read. It gives a logical approach to understanding why we are here. Read it in Kindle because the built-in dictionary helps a lot with many exacting words that are no longer used. It ties together all those feelings of intuition, those dreams that feel so real, the reason for life, the existence of spirits, what is heaven and hell, why some people are the way they are, why some things happen, what happens to people who die in abnormal ways, how the morals of the world are ever progressing, why you think you know someone that you met for the first time, why certain people are gifted with unexplained talents,This book is not a preachy book trying to win over converts. It's more like a text book explaining physicsIt took me along time to read it because I was unable to read it straight through. I would read some and then put it down for a weeks or more and digest what I've read. contact me at wbramsey at optonline period netYou'll feel better as you read this a gain and understanding of life that you have always felt was right

This is the first book in the series of about 5 books written under the pseudo name of Allan Kardec. In The Book of Spirits, Kardec a French Intellectual, Professor and Scientist of his time (1860s), begins to reveal what had mostly up to that time been hidden of the very active world of Spirits around us.Many theological concepts will be challenged in these books, however, the discerning student will see the truth in the words which were given to Kardec by various Spirits through the use of Mediums.This book describes the hierarchy of the Spirit world and defines how Spirits communicate with humans. The reader will learn about their own Spirit self as well. Incarnate and Disincarnate Spirits what they can and cannot do. You will be interested most likely in learning that you have dedicated Guardian Angels to assist you in using your freewill during your life. How to protect yourself against intrusion by Spirits who do not have you best interest in mind.Anyone interested in learning about Spiritism presented from a Christian perspective would want to read these books in the order they were published.I gave this book 5 stars easily, even with minor misprints and mistranslations. Those are just small distractions that do not interfere with the interpretation of the material.Reading these books is not hard and I think application of common sense will go a long way toward personal validation of what is stated to the reader.I have concluded that for myself this codification of Spiritism in the books by Allan Kardec is the most important material I have ever read.

I came across this book a year after I had purchased his, "Collection of Selected Prayers" book. I will always have a discriminating eye on anything spiritual and this was no different. I enjoyed reading the book and still refer back to it when needed. Does anyone really, truly know the answers to why we are here, what happens when we die, or what about spirits in the afterlife? I don't know, but I feel this book is the closest I have come to what I perceive as the truth.

Bem explicado, simples.

This book is the most important book to be read. I would call it the book of all books. It brings a lot of great knowledge which has been hidden from us thousands of years.

Alla fine i fenòmeni di cui parla Kardec sono omologhi a quelli politici. In democrazia si ascoltano diverse opinioni, gli spiriti, le religioni, la scienza, l'arte, ecc. ognuna delle quali ha la sua community di sostenitori. Tutte vengono messe sullo stesso piano e poi si votano. Cosa si votano? Si votano visioni del mondo: individualiste, collettiviste, religiose, scientifiche, artistiche, e così via. A nostro avviso l'essenza dello spiritualismo riposa proprio in tale processo. Kardec intervista delle entità spirituali ognuna delle quali propone delle risposte su cui noi possiamo concordare o meno. Ed anche se il mondo è così come ce lo raccontano, lo possiamo cambiare se non ci va bene quando avremo in mano le chiavi per farlo. Anche Dio, in un paradigma democratico, diventa una voce come le altre. Riscontriamo ciò ovunque nel mondo in cui viviamo: c'è chi ha fiducia in un politico, chi in un altro, chi in un altro ancora. La vita è fatta di diversità.

Great book, sadly let down by the bad translation.

Over priced. Print is not that great.