(Jodi). A further condition necessary for the distinct development of hallucinations in a hypnotic subject is a complete change in his state of consciousness. Here the fifth fact of human mental life - viz., that we have a dream-consciousness completely distinct from the waking consciousness. These states of consciousness differ from one another in two respects (Wundt). In the first place, the remembered ideas in dream-consciousness have a hallucinatory character - i.e. we try in dreams to objectify the images of memory; we do not recognize that they are images of memory as we do in waking life, but believe that we see, feel, etc., the real object to which they correspond: in the same way sense-impressions do not produce normal perceptions, but illusions. In the second place, in dreams apperception is changed - i.e.t the power of judging the experiences of which we are conscious is essentially altered. It is just this peculiarity of the dream-consciousness mentioned by Wundt which is found in the consciousness of such hypnotic subjects as are accessible to suggested sense-delusions. I need not enter into details on this point, as it has been thoroughly discussed in the chapters on "Symptoms" and "Cognate States." The chief point is the hallucinatory character of the images of memory; faintly imitated in normal states, in dream-consciousness it is extremely plain, and appears in hypnosis in connection with illusions, to which dream-consciousness is also favourable.

But we must remember that there is nothing strange in such a dream-consciousness, since it is often found in ordinary sleep and is always a potential phenomenon of sleep.

The production of this peculiar dream-consciousness is one of the chief points in hypnotizing. An explanation of hypnosis need not include an explanation of the state of dream-consciousness in general; to make such a demand would be unreasonable and impossible of fulfilment as well, because we are quite unable to explain even the dream-consciousness of ordinary sleep. An explanation of hypnosis is only called upon to demonstrate the connection between the means employed to induce the hypnosis and the dream-consciousness of the person hypnotized. For this purpose I need only mention that apart from hypnosis dream-consciousness is often brought about in a similar way. Since we know that children may be talked to in sleep, and in adults dream-consciousness in hypnosis only appears when some similar influence is at work, the whole process should appear less mysterious. Indeed, if we further consider that the ordinary sleep of adults in which dream-consciousness is almost habitual is in many cases induced mentally - e.g., by autosuggestion - then we have made considerable progress towards understanding this particular state in hypnosis.

I do not, however, go so far as Forel, Liebeault and many others who say that natural sleep is the immediate result of auto-suggestion. I much more readily admit that without any such mental intervention sleep may have a chemical origin - e.g., the accumulation of the products of tissue-waste in the body, or may be produced by purely physiological processes. But it is a fact that we sometimes fall asleep because we are convinced by a purely mental process that we shall sleep. I have already mentioned that people often fall asleep when they believe that they have taken a sleeping draught. That this mental process is very often the result of another person's influence is explained by the first and second facts of human mental life stated by me earlier in this chapter. And here I will again point out that one person is frequently able to exert an immense influence on the whole state of consciousness of another in other ways as well. The priest and the popular orator, for example, sometimes under the influence of strong emotion, often produce an effect upon their audience analogous to hypnosis.

It is true that in many cases dream-consciousness in hypnosis can be apparently induced by means which have nothing to do with the induction of sleep. When a hypnotic subject fixes his gaze and his eyes finally close, this does not appear to be the induction of a state of sleep. On this point, however, I refer the reader to my remarks on hypnosigenesis in Chap. II. It is very probable that the idea of sleep is induced by such physical means, even when it is not purposely suggested. Sleep may be brought about by the feeling of heaviness in the eyes, through association of ideas (Forel); for we know that some people are in the habit of staring fixedly at some point in order to tire their eyes out and bring on ordinary sleep. For these reasons, I believe that when a hallucination happens in hypnosis some means of inducing dream-consciousness have always been used, and that such means apparently need not have anything to do with the induction of sleep. Even the fact that sense-delusions sometimes happen without previous closing of the eyes does not contradict this, since the dream-consciousness is not necessarily connected with the closing of the eyes.

It sometimes comes on when the eyes are open, as is seen in cases of spontaneous somnambulism.

From what has been said we are able to find an explanation of sense-delusions in the analogy between these hypnotic states and the dream-state. Without entering into any discussion of the theories that have been advanced to explain the sense-delusions of ordinary sleep, we shall find that it will provisionally help us in examining hypnosis if we take the state of consciousness of the hypnoses in which there are pronounced sense-delusions as completely corresponding to the dream-consciousness of ordinary sleep. In both states certain impressions (memory-images, or mere stimulation of the senses) induce sense-delusions.

These conclusions lead to the discussion of rapport, especially isolated rapport. This rapport causes the subject to be more influenced by certain impressions than by others, and to respond to them by corresponding sense delusions. I shall speak of rapport briefly, as I have elsewhere1 dealt with it at length. According to Noizet and Bertrand, who have been joined lately by Liebeault, Bernheim, Forel, and others, rapport, as already mentioned, is a state of sleep in which the attention of the subject is fixed exclusively on the hypnotizer, so that the idea of him is constantly present in the subject's memory during the hypnosis. Bernheim compared these processes to the falling asleep of a mother by her child's cradle. She continues to watch over it in sleep, but over it alone; she wakes at the least sound it makes, but hears no other sounds, even the loudest. An analogous phenomenon may be observed in waking life when several mothers are present at a children's party. Each mother's interest is centred in her own child, and it is particularly noticeable that, though deaf to the prattle of other people's children, she never misses any of her own little one's clever (?) sayings.