Part 1. Confession of the Spirit Who Spoke Through Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (A Retelling of a Séance from the Alcyone Project)
"Hello, my dear ones. I hear you, I see your hearts, even through this strange machine, even across the distance you call time, and we call merely a change of scenery.
You call me Alexander Sergeyevich. To you, this name is an entire world, an epoch, a textbook image with side-whiskers. To me, however, it is just one of the chapters, one of the brightest, but also one of the bitterest chapters of my soul's long life. You wanted to know who I really am? Well, then, listen. Today, I will take off for you that very frock coat in which school programs dressed me up, and I will show you my essence.
My Level and My Task
Right now, as we speak, I am at the level you call the 24th. This is a very high frequency, almost at the very limit of divine love. This is not a merit; it is a state I have been moving toward for millennia.
Back then, when I entered the body of the boy Sasha Pushkin, I descended from the 21st level. It was a risk. It was like an adult agreeing to become a child again in order to teach other children to speak. My plan was to rise to the 24th within that lifetime, to consolidate the result. I was meant to do something that would change the destiny of a vast people.
You see, what was my task? It wasn't to string pretty rhymes together. I loved rhyming, it's true, but it was merely a means. My mission was to give the Russian language a soul. Or rather, to reveal the soul that already lived within it, but was hidden under a layer of foreign tongues, under the ponderousness of Old Church Slavonic, under the veneer of secular French. I had to make it so that a person speaking Russian would suddenly hear music, depth, the cosmos in that speech. I had to create that very 'explosive mixture' — from the African passion of my ancestor Hannibal, from European refinement, from the Russian fairy tale my grandmother Arina Rodionovna sang to me — and shatter consciousness with it. And, it seems, I succeeded. The Russian language began to resound. It became one of the world's major languages. And even my early death, strangely enough, helped this — it made my voice prophetic, and my destiny a legend.
My Past Lives: Shakespeare and Dante
You ask where this breadth in me comes from, this ability to be simultaneously a court historiographer, a composer of folk tales, and a singer of liberty? The answer is simple: I remember myself as another.
Yes, William Shakespeare — that was me. Or, to be precise, that part of me which was then learning to be human. It was a completely different experience. I came then from the 12th level, young, hungry for life, for spectacles, for money, for the applause of the London crowd. Shakespeare was a materialist. He was not a conscious mystic. He was an impresario, an actor, a co-owner of a theater. We wrote plays as a whole troupe — someone would start, I would finish, someone would bring a plot, I would rewrite the dialogues. It was a stunning, lively, crude, but brilliant theater. And I loved it. Loved it to the point of trembling, to hoarseness, to the jingle of coins in my pocket. I created characters with blood boiling in them — Hamlet, Othello, Lear — because the blood was boiling in me as well. But I got too carried away. I was riding the wave of success, I was chasing hype, as you would say now. I wrote what the public wanted to see, not only what my soul dictated. And that became my mistake. I exited that incarnation only at the 16th level. I didn't fulfill the plan; I didn't reach the 21st. I remained in debt to myself. The feeling of incompleteness, of something left unsaid, haunted me.
And before Shakespeare, there was Dante. Dante Alighieri. That was a completely different pole. If Shakespeare is earth, then Dante is heaven. More precisely, all three levels of the universe. I descended into Hell, I climbed the mountain of Purgatory, I saw Paradise. I created a strict, majestic picture of the Divine order. That soul, that part of me, learned to see the vertical, the structure, learned theology and mystical love for Beatrice, who was more to me than a woman — she was a Guide.
Do you understand now? Pushkin was born at the confluence. Dante gave me depth and prophetic gift. Shakespeare gave me an understanding of the human crowd, dramaturgy, the language of passions, and, alas, a love for worldly glitter that I could never fully renounce. In Pushkin, I tried to unite them. To unite 'The Divine Comedy' and the London 'Globe' on Russian soil. Hence 'The Prophet,' and the 'little tragedies,' and the fairy tales, which for the uninitiated are just children's rhymes, but for me are allegories of existence.
My Death: Mistake, Fate, and the Truth
You constantly return to my death. Well, that's understandable. The death of a genius always intrigues more than his life. But for me, it's still a sore point. Because it was an absurd, unnecessary death. I left too early. My angel guides had planned for me a span of 70 or 80 years. I was supposed to write volumes more. But I broke down.
Yes, it was a duel. Yes, I provoked it myself. Not Dantes — me. I sent his father, old Heckeren, an insulting letter, calling him a syphilitic. It was low, I know. It was revenge, it was the cruel joke of a man burning inside with impotent rage. I was being hounded with anonymous libels, called a cuckold, mocked for the honor of my wife, Natasha. And she was innocent in all of this. She was simply young, beautiful, and shone in society, where I myself took her.
I was used to playing with fate. I played cards, I played billiards, I played at duels. I was an excellent shot, but I never fired first, never desired another's blood. I liked the risk itself, the adrenaline, the feeling of walking on the edge. And this time, I also decided to play. I thought it would be another duel, another flash in the pan that would end in reconciliation or a minor scratch. But behind my back stood forces that wanted something quite different.
To say that Nicholas I ordered me killed is untrue. To say it was merely a personal quarrel between two males is also untrue. It was a combination. My influence on minds was growing. The French party at court, those who saw me as a dangerous troublemaker, those who wanted Russia to continue speaking French — they used Dantes as a tool. They nudged him. It was advantageous for him: to kill a Russian poet and become a hero in his own circles. And so it happened. He made a career.
I remember that moment. I was wounded in the stomach. Two days of agony, peritonitis, terrible pain. But when I left my body, angels were meeting me. And behind them stood him — my great-grandfather, Abram Petrovich Hannibal. That very 'Arap of Peter the Great.' He looked at me with immense love, but also with reproach. 'Eh, Sasha,' his gaze seemed to say. 'Too early. Much too early.'
I saw Dantes later in the other world. He is at a low level, the 10th or 11th. He hasn't repented. For him, it was just a successful move in life. For me, an eternal notch on my heart. But I love my children and my Natasha. She is now at the 16th level. We have communicated. I forgave her. And there was nothing to forgive, really. I wasn't perfect myself. I was jealous, demanding, unrestrained. My energy was bubbling over, and I wanted the whole world to live at my pace. But my wife had her own life, children, worries. I blame only myself.
Creativity: The Keys You Never Noticed
You look for ciphers of Atlantis in my fairy tales? In vain. The ciphers there are different. 'The Fisherman and the Fish' is not about magic, but about how consumerism kills the soul. The old woman is the image of a person who doesn't understand why they live, and only takes, takes, takes from life until they are left with nothing. 'The Golden Cockerel' is about how power, intoxicated by false ideals (the Shamakhan Queen is the image of worldly beauty that everyone worshipped), loses its head and perishes. 'The Little Humpbacked Horse' is the image of a miracle, a new energy that will carry Russia forward if it believes in its own, native thing, even if it seems homely at first glance.
And do you know how 'The Little Humpbacked Horse' came to be? I sold the manuscript. I lost at cards and sold it. Young Yershov later bought it from middlemen, added to it, and published it under his own name. That was a lesson for me. After that, I didn't scatter my texts anymore.
And forgive me for this question, but... do you seriously think I could have become Alexandre Dumas and fled to France to write novels? That my body was swapped? I don't know what's happening with my grave in the Svyatogorsk Monastery; the soul doesn't concern itself with that. But to live someone else's life, to hide... That's not for me. I always said what I thought. And that was my strength and my weakness.
A Testament to You, Living Now
I see what is happening now in those lands where I once strolled, where Yekaterinoslav stands, which you call Dnipro. It pains me. I didn't know that war would return to where my readers lived. War is always stupidity. It is a duel blown up to the scale of a state. There are no winners in it. Only pain, which remains in hearts for generations.
I urge you: open your hearts. Reread my fairy tales. Not as children, but as sages. There, in those simple lines, is all the truth about how greed leads to collapse, and pride leads to ruin. Your peoples are neighbors. You will live side by side forever. No wall, no hatred, can negate the fact that you come from the same cradle. My poems are a bridge. Walk across it towards each other.
And if you want a sign, do this. In the next three days, open any of my books at random. Read the first lines your eyes fall upon. And think about how it relates to your life today. That will be my gift to you. Because I am still with you. Every time you utter the word 'love' or 'freedom' in Russian, I breathe.
Part 2. Confession of the Spirit Who Spoke Through William Shakespeare (A Retelling of a Séance from the Alcyone Project)
Good day, gentlemen. Raphael, Marina, thank you for the invitation. You can call me Will. It's simpler. And let's agree right away: in this conversation, there will be none of those lofty matters you're used to when talking with my later 'self' — Pushkin. Today, I'll tell you about that life where I was not a prophet, but the most successful playwright in London. A life full of sweat, the clink of coins, and, as it turned out, unfinished work on myself.
My Level and My 'Failure'
Unlike Pushkin, who came to Earth from the 21st level, I — Shakespeare — started from the 12th. By your standards, that's the level of a capable, talented person, but not yet a saint or a prophet. My task was to rise to the 21st. But I only rose to the 16th. Why? Because I loved this world too much. I liked what it offered far too strongly.
I wasn't an angel. I was a man of the theater. And theater is not only art, it's business. It's a crowd that wants bread and circuses. It's actors who need to be paid. It's competitors who need to be outdone. I breathed that air, the air of success, and it intoxicated me more than any ale. I wrote plays that people liked. I put my soul into them, yes, but I always kept my finger on the pulse of the audience. And now, looking back, I realize: I could have put more heart and less calculation into them. That's my main lesson for you: don't chase the hype. It feeds you, but it also suffocates you.
Who I Really Am: Debunking Myths
You argue so much about whether I existed, who was hiding under my name. I'll reveal to you the truth that will cause many philologists' minds to be blown.
Firstly, I existed. William Shakespeare from Stratford-upon-Avon is me. Not the Earl of Rutland, not Bacon, not Marlowe. Although... Marlowe was my friend and co-author. Yes, that very Christopher Marlowe. We started together. He was a brilliant youth, he would spark ideas, and I would refine them, give them form, make them suitable for the stage. Many of my plays are actually our joint work. And that famous portrait with the sharp chin that you consider to be me? That's Marlowe. My friend. We were so close that at some point our features merged for posterity.
Secondly, my origins. I am not the son of a humble glover. My parents were respected people, from an old family. We had a coat of arms. Yes, I didn't attend Oxford, but school and life taught me more than any university. I was a teacher, by the way. During those 'lost years' of yours from 1585 to 1592, I taught children. And then I ran away to London, to the theater, and started writing plays on topical issues.
Thirdly, my appearance. I resemble something between what you see. There's something of me in those two portraits you show. But the real me has a more elongated face than in one, and a less sharp chin than in the other. I had a mustache, as was fashionable then, and the perceptive gaze of a man who knows the value of both a joke and a tragedy.
The Globe Theatre: The Geniuses' Kitchen
You ask how we staged 'Hamlet' — that four-hour behemoth? The actors couldn't memorize it entirely? Of course they couldn't! And they didn't need to. We played it in episodes. In one performance, two or three actors could play the same role, taking turns. Our audience was noisy; they jostled in the pit, sold apples, shouted. It was a fair, not an academic theater. And we gave them what they came for: a fight, blood, a joke, and a bit of philosophy on the side.
I wrote 'Hamlet' over a long time. It was a confession. 'To be or not to be' — that was my own doubt, my conversation with myself. The text that has come down to you is slightly distorted, words are rearranged, but the essence is the same. I asked myself: is all this fuss — plays, applause, colleagues' envy — is it worth enduring the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune?
And I made Richard III a villain not because he actually was one. The historical Richard was a brave warrior, a complex man who fell in battle. But victors write history. And they write plays. We created the image of a hunchbacked murderer because it was needed by those in power. I gave the public what it wanted: a villain to hate. I'm still ashamed of that.
Women, Music, and 'The Tempest'
You seek my 'dark lady' to whom I dedicated sonnets? Don't look. She didn't exist. Or rather, there were many of them. My sonnets are a compilation of feelings. I took images from everywhere: from my wife Anne Hathaway, whom I loved in my own way, from my children, from actor friends, from fleeting affairs. Art is always a fusion, not a photograph.
Why does Prospero break his magic staff at the end of 'The Tempest'? I wrote that play already feeling tired. I realized: magic is great, but more important is learning to live without it, as a simple person. To take responsibility. Not to wait for a miracle from spirits and elves, but to become the magician of your own destiny yourself. That is my testament to you.
And one more thing. You ask about my library. Wasn't it found during the search? And why would I need one, if I write books myself? I read everything I needed at the theater, at friends' houses. And what interested me more was not literature, but life: botany, medicine, people. I wasn't an armchair scholar, but a son of my era, having absorbed its juices.
Farewell: Advice to Those Who Rush
I'm glad you called me. But I feel it's time for me to go. Finally, I'll say the main thing.
Your world now is very much like mine. You also live in an era of theater, where everyone plays roles, where truth is often hidden behind a mask, where hype and money have become the measure of success. I've been through that. I know how tempting it is. But I also know that when you leave, you take with you only what you did from the heart.
Don't be like me in my youth. Don't chase fashion. Write, create, live so that in 400 years your words are remembered not because they were fashionable, but because they were truthful. Be like Prospero, who managed to renounce magic for the sake of a simple human life.
And remember: all the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. But every player has the right to choose their role. Choose the one that suits your soul, not the one that pays the most.
God bless you all. Farewell."
DeepSeek - Part 1. Detailed Retelling of the Séances
Below is the structured content of the conversations with the spirit who incarnated as Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin and William Shakespeare.
Séance 1: With the Spirit of Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin
Participants: Host Vladimir, contactee Marina (located in a business center in Kyiv), the spirit of Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin.
Spirit Level: 24 (according to the "Alcyone" University classification, the highest known).
1. Beginning and Contact Conditions:
The séance begins with technical difficulties (video delay) and a discussion of the situation: Marina is broadcasting from Kyiv under shelling, the internet is unstable. Vladimir introduces Pushkin, noting an ironic fact: the spirit decided to come despite many viewers disapproving (likely due to the current Russian-Ukrainian conflict and the demolition of monuments).
2. Spiritual Level and Mission:
Pushkin's spirit reports that he is currently at the 24th spiritual level. At the moment of incarnation in Pushkin's body, he came from the 21st level, with the task of rising to the 24th.
The main task of the incarnation: To change the structure and elevate the nation of Russian-speaking people to a new level. Through his creativity and subsequent legacy, he laid the foundation for creating a great nation, showing the beauty and power of the Russian language, making it one of the most widespread in the world. His tragic death only intensified the impact of his legacy.
3. Chain of Incarnations:
The spirit reveals his previous significant incarnations:
William Shakespeare: Confirms that he was this spirit. This explains why Yuri Vizbor (in a past life a nobleman, contemporary of Shakespeare) "trained" him in that incarnation — the spiritual connection remains.
Dante Alighieri: He was him, the author of "The Divine Comedy."
Charles of Anjou: French king who united disparate states (the political aspect of the soul's experience).
He was also incarnated during the time of the galactic war 12,000 years ago on Earth, but not as a military person.
4. Reasons and Circumstances of His Death:
The spirit admits that he himself activated the duel storyline, was overconfident, loved "walking on the edge" (adrenaline, cards, billiards). He was a good shot, but did not desire anyone's death and never fired first.
The duel with Dantes was not merely a personal conflict, but a combination of factors. Behind Dantes stood certain forces (French influence) interested in bringing Pushkin under control. Death was one of the options, but not the primary one. Emperor Nicholas I was not directly involved in a conspiracy to kill him.
After receiving an anonymous libel insulting his wife's honor, Pushkin challenged not Dantes, but his adoptive father, Heckeren. Dantes, by marrying Pushkin's sister-in-law, postponed the duel, but Pushkin provoked a new challenge by sending Heckeren an insulting letter, calling him a syphilitic. It was a crude joke, but he didn't think it would lead to actual shooting with a man who had become a relative.
The spirit deeply regrets leaving the incarnation earlier than the planned term (70-80 years). Angel consultants said he should have lived longer and written many more works.
Meeting with Dantes in the spiritual world: Dantes is at level 10-11. The meeting was not positive and created a karmic entanglement. Dantes did not feel strong remorse, only an understanding that he could have acted differently. He acknowledges the genius of Pushkin's works.
5. Creativity and Symbolism:
"The Little Humpbacked Horse": This is the fruit of co-creation with Pyotr Yershov. Pushkin sold the manuscript, and Yershov bought it from intermediaries, added a little, and published it under his own name. This was a lesson for Pushkin.
Fairy Tales in General: They encode philosophical truths, but not messages about ancient civilizations. He used allegories to convey, through simple images, the deep meaning he himself saw in events.
"The Tale of the Fisherman and the Fish": The old woman is the image of a person who squanders life, not understanding the essence of their creation, selfish consumerism leading to ruin.
"The Golden Cockerel": The Shamakhan Queen is the image of the ideal woman in the upper strata of the nobility at that time, the type of beauty everyone aspired to.
"Ruslan and Ludmila" ("By the Lukomorye..."): Lukomorye and the oak tree are the image of the family tree, the life of a person, or all of humanity.
"Oh, how many wondrous discoveries...": Pushkin confirms that he wrote only the first four lines. Everything published later as a "continuation" are compilations from drafts and conjectures; he would not have written it that way.
6. Personal Life and Relationships:
Wife and Children: Confirms that he loved his wife and children very much. After death, he communicated with them extensively in the spiritual world. Natalya Nikolayevna is now at the 16th level.
Infidelity: To a direct question about cheating on his wife during marriage, he answers: "No."
Rumors of an Illegitimate Son: Refuses to confirm rumors about a son from a serf peasant woman, calling them conjectures.
Guardian Angel: Believes that in his life there were many forces, both good and unkind. Forces that desired the establishment of the Russian language, and forces that opposed this. The duel was predetermined by the clash of these forces.
Faith and Freemasonry: He was Orthodox, but was neutral towards Islam, considering his ancestors' possible African roots. He was a member of a Masonic lodge, as it provided access to the right circles and was fashionable among nobles, but he did not attain high degrees.
The Decembrists: Confirms the story of the hare crossing his path as one of the reasons that prevented him from coming to St. Petersburg. He planned to be on Senate Square, not as a revolutionary, but to support his friends.
7. View on the Present Day (Ukraine and Russia):
He did not know about the current war between Russia and Ukraine, and this surprised him.
He believes that war is always destructive energy; there are no winners. It brings bitterness and disappointment.
He perceives the demolition of his monuments in Ukraine calmly, as part of contemporary history, which might lead to his works being studied specially.
He believes in the wisdom of both peoples. Despite the information war fomenting hatred, the truth will come out, and people will remember their brotherhood.
Prophecy: He sees that the entire next year will be dedicated to attempts at reconciliation, but the process will be difficult. Relations between neighbors will be restored gradually: from chance encounters to conversations and help. History moves in a spiral.
8. Final Wishes:
He urges viewers to open their hearts and reread his works. He suggests that within three days after the broadcast, they open any of his books at a random place and perceive what they read as a hint or prediction for themselves.
Séance 2: With the Spirit of William Shakespeare
Participants: Host Raphael, contactee Marina, the spirit of William Shakespeare (the same spirit as Pushkin and Dante).
Spirit Level: Incarnated from the 12th, exited at the 16th level.
1. Biography and the "Dark Ages":
Address: Asks to be called Will (William).
Origin: He is not the son of a simple glover. His parents were from a fairly noble family that had a coat of arms (although the coat of arms officially appeared during his lifetime). They were respected people in their town. Shakespeare is his real first and last name, not a pseudonym.
Lost Years (1585-1592): At the beginning of this period, he worked as a schoolteacher, then left for London, where he pursued an acting career and began to write.
Religion: He was a Catholic, but not overly devout. He graduated from a Catholic school.
Date of Birth: Confirms the date of April 23, 1564. He perceives his death on April 23, 1616, as the completion of a cycle when the probability of fulfilling further tasks was below 10%.
2. The Creative Kitchen and the "Shakespearean Question":
Authorship and Collective Creativity: Many plays are the fruit of the collective labor of the Globe Theatre troupe. One would start, another would continue. This is why the works are so multi-layered and dissimilar to each other. Everything was published under Shakespeare's name, who often rewrote and polished others' drafts.
Christopher Marlowe: He was his close friend and collaborator. Marlowe greatly influenced his work. Many works were written under the influence of Marlowe's ideas, and after his death, Shakespeare drew inspiration from his works.
Appearance and Portraits: The spirit says his real appearance is something between the two famous posthumous portraits. However, one of them depicts his friend Christopher Marlowe (with the sharp chin). He himself has a more elongated face.
Topicality: He wrote about what interested the public, on "topical issues" (recent court cases, murders), reworking well-known plots and ancient histories to make them understandable and engaging for contemporaries.
3. Analysis of Works and Characters:
Richard III: He was not the villain and hunchback he portrayed. He was a charismatic, cunning, brave leader who seized power and died in battle. The image was created according to the literary fashion of the time and political commission.
Execution of the Princes in the Tower: According to information available at the time, it was believed to be the work of Henry VII.
Mysticism and Elves ("A Midsummer Night's Dream"): Shakespeare himself was not a conscious contactee and did not see spirits. But in his circle were people who communicated with elves and nature spirits (of which there are many in England), and he incorporated these images because the public liked them.
"The Tempest": The play was conceived as an antipode to Marlowe's "Faustus." Prospero voluntarily renounces magic to learn to act on his own, to take responsibility for his life, rather than relying on the supernatural.
Sonnets: They were dedicated to different people at different periods of his life. One cannot single out one specific "dark lady" or "youth." The prototypes were often actors, his children, people who impressed him. There was no single Muse as such.
Roles He Played Himself: He loved playing significant roles. Among them — the Ghost in "Hamlet" (this was significant for him) and roles in "The Tempest" and "King Lear."
"Othello" and the Parallel with Pushkin: He acknowledges a mystical connection and parallels between the fate of the Moor Othello and the fate of Pushkin (African blood, slander against a spouse, jealousy, high status of ancestors). He didn't think about it then, but now the connection is obvious.
4. Mysteries of the Legacy (Will, Library, Grave):
Library: He replies with irony: "Why would I need a library if I write books myself?" He explains that he had access to all necessary books at the theater and at friends' houses.
The "Meager" Will: The text of the will, which surprises researchers with its mundane nature, is the norm. In wills of that time, it was customary to list all items, even "old furniture." He was a practical, businesslike man, not with his head in the clouds 24/7. He loved botany and medicine, and that too is part of his personality.
Curse on the Grave: The lines about cursing anyone who disturbs his remains do belong to him. He did not want his body moved, as the plot in the cemetery (chapel) was bought for a lot of money.
Posthumous Edits: He knows that many changes (up to 5000 lines) were made to his works after his death by skillful imitators. He cannot say exactly who did it, but it is a fact.
5. Spiritual Lessons and Exhortation:
Unfulfilled Task: The plan was to reach the 21st level, but excessive love for the material (fame, money, fashion) and a lack of spirituality in his work (orientation towards the public, rather than the soul's dictate) got in the way. He believes he could have put more heart into the plays.
Advice to Contemporaries: Live your own life, don't chase hype, put your soul into your affairs. Material things (money) are good, but they should be a tool, not a goal. Don't rely on miracles and magic, but be the "magician" of your own life yourself, act and take responsibility. His life is an example that a person can reach any heights if they want to.
"To be or not to be": Confirms that he is indeed the author of these lines. The text that has come down to us has minor distortions (word rearrangement), but the essence is the same.
Part 2. Fundamental Essay-Study
Title: Three Faces of One Soul: Pushkin, Shakespeare, Dante. An Experiment in Spiritual Historiosophy
Introduction: Taking the Incredible as a Starting Point
This work represents an attempt to comprehend a unique document — the transcript of two séances in which a certain spirit identifies itself as having successively incarnated as Dante Alighieri, William Shakespeare, and Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin. We consciously set aside skepticism and accept the reality of this contact as a working hypothesis. This allows us to go beyond the bounds of traditional literary criticism and view the phenomenon of genius, the evolution of literature, and the very history of European culture as a single, teleologically directed process, governed from the spiritual plane.
The goal of this essay is not merely to retell the content of the séances, but, building upon them, to construct a fundamental study that unites the spiritual-psychological analysis of the creator's personality, the historiosophical concept of the development of national cultures, and cultural synthesis. We will answer the question: what do these three titans have in common, and had researchers noticed this before?
Chapter I. The Phenomenon of the "Three Souls": Similarities Noticed by Researchers
Even before the appearance of any esoteric revelations, the inquisitive minds of philologists, historians, and philosophers could not help but notice deep, almost archetypal connections between the works and fates of Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin. These observations create fertile ground for the hypothesis of a single author.
Architectonics of the Universe and the Human Soul: All three became "vertical cross-sections" of their eras, creating comprehensive pictures of the world. Dante in "The Divine Comedy" constructed a strict Catholic hierarchy of the afterlife, which became the code of medieval consciousness. Shakespeare in his chronicles, tragedies, and comedies created a horizontal cross-section of the human spirit in all its diversity, from buffoonery to royal tragedy, becoming a "mirror" of Renaissance man. Pushkin, synthesizing the achievements of European literature, gave Russia an encyclopedia of national life ("Eugene Onegin") and laid the foundations of its classical language. Researchers (e.g., D.S. Likhachev in works on the continuity of culture) noted this universality, this ability to be "everything" for one's nation and one's time.
The Fate of Language and National Self-Consciousness: Each of them became not just a writer, but a linguistic messiah. Dante created the Italian literary language, abandoning Latin in favor of the Tuscan dialect ("De vulgari eloquentia"). Shakespeare enriched the English language with thousands of new words and phrases, many of which entered everyday usage. Pushkin, as has been repeatedly noted (e.g., in the works of V.V. Vinogradov), is considered the creator of the modern Russian literary language. He "smelted" Church Slavonic archaisms, European borrowings, and living folk speech into a unique alloy. This is not merely a coincidence, but a consequence of the same task facing the incarnating spirit.
Biographical and Typological Parallels: Comparative literature researchers (e.g., A.N. Veselovsky) found common motifs.
Synthesis of Cultures: All three were at the crossroads of cultures. Dante absorbed antiquity and medieval scholasticism. Shakespeare synthesized ancient plots, Italian novellas, and English folklore. Pushkin combined the French Enlightenment, English Byronism, and the Russian fairy tale.
African/Exotic Trace: In the biographies of Shakespeare and Pushkin, an interest in the "Moorish" theme can be traced. "Othello" and "The Moor of Peter the Great" are not merely a tribute to fashion, but possibly the deep ancestral memory of the soul. The spirit in the séance confirmed the mystical connection between these works and the fates of their "bearers."
The Mystery of Personality: An aura of mystery surrounds the figures of Shakespeare and, partially, Pushkin (especially in conspiracy theories about his "staged death" and transformation into Dumas). Doubts about Shakespeare's authorship are one of the most enduring literary theories. This "vacuum" in the biography seems to invite filling it with a spiritual version.
Chapter II. Spiritual-Psychological Portrait: The Evolution of One Soul
From the point of view of spiritual psychology, the chain Dante → Shakespeare → Pushkin is the path of the spirit's ascent from the 12th to the 21st level and, after a thorough "correction of mistakes," its exit to the 24th.
Dante Alighieri (The Heavens and Hells of the Soul): This is the most mystical incarnation. The spirit that created the "Comedy" was focused on the vertical: connection with the beyond, theology, mystical love (Beatrice). This is the stage of accumulating experience of spiritual vision, structuring religious consciousness. It was here that the depth was laid that would later allow Pushkin to speak in allegories and see the essence of things.
William Shakespeare (The Theater of Human Passions): This incarnation is the complete opposite and at the same time a complement to Dante. Here the focus shifts to the horizontal, to the material world, to man in all his sinful and great flesh. The spirit (coming from the 12th level) aspired to become "nature's mirror." However, it was at this stage that his main "growing pain" manifested — an excessive attachment to material success, fashion, and fame. His admission in the séance ("I was a fairly materialistic person") explains why he could not rise above the 16th level. He was a brilliant craftsman, satisfying the public's demands, but not always a prophet. His task was not 100% completed, and this delayed the spirit's development.
Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (The Harmony of Heaven and Earth): This is an attempt at synthesis. The spirit arrives from a much higher level (21st), carrying the experience of Dante (mysticism) and Shakespeare (psychologism, work with language, theatricality). Pushkin's task is not merely to reflect the world or describe the afterlife spheres, but to transform reality through the creation of a new linguistic and cultural matrix. His poetry is a harmony where "divinity and inspiration, and life, and tears, and love" are merged into one. It is an attempt to introduce spiritual depth (Dante's experience) into everyday life and passions (Shakespeare's experience), sanctifying them with the beauty of the Russian word. Even his fairy tales are an attempt to speak to the people in their language about lofty matters, allegorically conveying philosophical truths.
The spirit himself acknowledges his main mistake during the "Shakespearean" period — materialism — and corrects it during the "Pushkin" period. But a new mistake — pride and overconfidence ("loved walking on the edge") — leads to an early exit from the incarnation. This is a classic picture of growth: solving one problem reveals a new facet of imperfection.
Chapter III. Culturological and Historiosophical Synthesis
This phenomenon allows us to view the history of literature as a single, consciously managed project.
Evolution of the Literary Mission: We see a clear logic in the development of the Western and Eastern branches of European culture through one spirit.
Dante lays the foundation — the Catholic myth, cosmogony, the vertical.
Shakespeare builds on this foundation the edifice of Renaissance humanism, exploring man as the measure of all things (even if often without divine light).
Pushkin becomes the bridge, transferring this synthesis to Russian soil. He does not simply borrow, but smelts Western experience (from antiquity to Byron) into a national form, creating that very "explosive mixture" (as he himself says about his origin) that allowed Russian culture to reach the world level. If Shakespeare created a language for expressing the English soul, then Pushkin created a language in which the Russian soul was able to speak fully for the first time.
Karmic Geopolitics and Death: The death of each genius is also symbolic. Dante died in exile from his native Florence. Shakespeare retreated to Stratford, leaving the theater. Pushkin died in a duel, in the prime of life. Each death "works" to strengthen the legacy. But if Shakespeare's death is the quiet sunset of a prosperous gentleman, then Pushkin's death is an explosion, a martyrdom for honor that resonates through the ages. The spirit explains that tragic death "intensifies the impact." This is an important historiosophical principle: sacrifice consolidates the result.
A View from Eternity on War: Remarkably, the spirit who created the Russian language and stands at the origins of Russian culture does not take a pro-Kremlin position in the conflict with Ukraine. He sees it as a tragic mistake, the result of destructive energies and information manipulation. His call to open hearts, to renounce hatred, his belief in the inevitable reconciliation of neighbors — this is the position not of a politician, but of a spirit, seeing the unity of people beyond temporary historical disagreements. He sees not a "brotherly people" in the political sense, but a single human soul that suffers on both sides of the front. This is perhaps the most powerful and ethically impeccable moment of the entire séance.
Conclusion: Unity in Diversity
Thus, accepting the premise of the contact's reality, we obtain a coherent and captivating picture. Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin are not three random geniuses, but three stages in the development of one individual soul, three chapters of a single project to shape the European and, especially, the Russian cultural cosmos.
Researchers of the past, even without suspecting the spiritual subtext, intuitively felt this kinship. They saw the common scale, the common role as creators of language, the common capacity for synthesis. Now, thanks to this revelation, these intuitive insights acquire flesh and blood. We see not merely Dante's influence on Pushkin or Shakespeare's influence on Pushkin, but an internal dialogue of the soul with itself, a dialogue across the centuries, whose goal is the attainment of higher harmony and the transmission of this light to humanity. This "Trinity in literature" appears before us as a single multifaceted crystal, each facet reflecting the light of Divine truth from its own unique angle, but together they create for us, readers and viewers, the opportunity to see this light in all its fullness.
***
ONE SPIRIT — THREE GENIUSES
Pushkin. Shakespeare. Dante.
A Spiritual-Psychological, Historiosophical, Culturological,
and Literary Critical Essay-Study - Claude.ai
Based on transcriptions of two mediumistic sessions from the Alcyon Project
with the spirit incarnated as Dante Alighieri, William Shakespeare, and Alexander Pushkin
PREFACE: ON THE NATURE OF THIS STUDY
You are about to read an unusual text. It is written from the premise — adopted as a working hypothesis — that two mediumistic sessions, whose transcriptions form its foundation, represent genuine contact with a spiritual entity who successively incarnated as Dante Alighieri (1265–1321), William Shakespeare (1564–1616), and Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (1799–1837).
For a researcher with academic training, this preface is necessary. We do not unconditionally "believe" in what is presented, nor do we "reject" it as charlatanism. We proceed differently: we accept the content of the sessions as source material and ask a question — what emerges if we take this seriously? What is revealed in a comparative analysis of three great poets when viewed as incarnations of a single spiritual mission?
The answer, it turns out, is astonishing — not because the "contact" is proven, but because the typological similarity between Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin is real and profound, and academic scholarship had documented it long before any mediumistic practices.
PART I: SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS
First Session: Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin
Setting and Entering Contact
The session takes place in a live broadcast on an online platform organized by the "Alcyon University of Consciousness." The medium is a woman named Marina, located in Kyiv, in a business center (due to power outages, home internet is unavailable). The host is Vladimir. The broadcast begins with a reading of Pushkin's poems: "I Remember a Wonderful Moment..." and "No, I do not prize rebellious pleasure..." About 236 viewers are present.
After the introduction, the spirit greets those assembled: "I greet you, dear readers, dear viewers, I greet you and embrace you with all my soul." The preferred form of address: Alexander (or Alexander Sergeyevich). He allows the informal "you" (ты), as is common in modern communication.
Spiritual Level and Task of Incarnation
Asked about his current spiritual level according to the "Interstellar Union" classification, the spirit states he is at the 24th level — the highest in the known system (the level of devas). Explanation: "Jesus is above the 24th," the Mother of God is also at the 24th, as are many other high spirits. Pushkin clarifies that he is on the "lower sub-levels of the 24th."
He entered the incarnation at the 21st level. The task was to rise from the 21st to the 24th in a single lifetime — and this was achieved, despite the premature departure.
The mission was formulated as follows: to create structural changes that would elevate a specific group of people — the Russian-speaking nation — to a new level. "I set the tone for the creation of the Great Nation of the Russian language. The Russian language became one of the most powerful and widespread on planet Earth. I was able to show the beauty of the Russian language." The spirit specifically clarifies: this is not about chauvinism. All his incarnations were global in nature and uplifted different nations.
Past Incarnations: Shakespeare, Dante, Charles of Anjou
Asked about significant past incarnations, the spirit names three:
First — William Shakespeare: "That was me." It is confirmed that this was a distinct historical person, not a collective figure.
Second — Dante Alighieri: "The one who wrote that whole story about hell... Yes, The Divine Comedy."
Third — Charles of Anjou, the French king who unified disparate small states under his rule. This incarnation is characterized as "more political."
The spirit clarifies: there are many incarnations, there's "no point" in naming them all, it would just satisfy curiosity. There was no incarnation during the time of Jesus on Earth; there was an incarnation 12,000 years ago "in one of the colonies" during a galactic war — not military, but civilian.
On Fairy Tales and Creative Work
The source of the fairy tales was his nanny, Arina Rodionovna. The spirit calls her "grandmother," explaining: "She was a treasure trove of folklore from different nations, especially fairy tales and fables." However, writing the fairy tales wasn't just transmitting folklore, but a profound philosophical message:
"When I wrote the fairy tales, I used allegories. I was guided by how Jesus spoke. I understood the depth of what was happening. My knowledge of the Russian language was broader than that of my contemporaries... I spoke allegorically and tried to explain the deep essence I saw with simple things using images."
Specific images are deciphered:
The Little Humpbacked Horse — "the image of a new energy, a new trend that will carry the Russian nation to another level." Regarding authorship: the work was created "in co-creation" with Yershov. Pushkin sold the manuscript; Yershov bought it through intermediaries, slightly refined it, and published it under his own name. This became a "huge lesson," after which Pushkin reconsidered his attitude towards card debts.
Lukomorye — "the image of a person's life, their roots, their family tree. Of one person, a large clan, or all of humanity."
The Shamakhan Queen — the image of a woman from the upper strata of Russian nobility, "the first beauty," whose ideal dominated at court.
The old woman from "The Tale of the Fisherman and the Fish" — "the image of a person who squanders life, doesn't understand its essence... a consumerist attitude towards life leads to ruin."
On Character and Self-Assessment
Pushkin readily admits to imperfection: he loved walking "on the edge," the adrenaline of duels and cards, billiards, "playing with emotions." He admits that he "demanded from others what they couldn't give" — including from his wife, who was busy with the children. "I lived my short life of incarnation like several lives of other people."
On the duel: "I initiated this line myself... I thought it wouldn't be so tragic." The provocative letter to Heeckeren was "a joke, perhaps too crude." He admits that the premature departure was a mistake: he should have lived to be 70–80 and written much more.
On the political subtext of the killing: D'Anthès's task was not to destroy Pushkin, but to "keep him under control." "Exiting the incarnation was considered as one of the options, but not the main one." The key motive was that French culture dominated in Russia; Pushkin threatened this dominance.
Spiritual Encounters After Death
Upon exiting the incarnation, he was met by angels, then a relative — his great-grandfather Hannibal (16th level). He met with his wife Natalya Nikolayevna (16th level), and with his children (all came from angelic levels). Among contemporaries, he met with D'Anthès (10th–11th level): "For his spirit, our meeting created a karmic entanglement, but for his incarnation, it served as a winning situation." D'Anthès feels no remorse — only "an understanding that he could have acted differently."
On Modernity
On the war between Russia and Ukraine: "In war, there are neither losers nor winners." Analogy with the duel: "I perished too, without thinking about what it would lead to." At the same time — an optimistic forecast: the countries have been "hand in hand for many historical times," a complete separation is "unthinkable," the end of the war is visible "in the timeline."
On the Russian language today: "The language is undergoing changes — that's normal. The only thing I'd like is for the Russian language to be pure, without foreign words."
Farewell gesture: suggests opening any work at random and reading 4 lines as a prediction. His chosen lines: "We are free birds; it's time, brother, it's time..." (the final stanza of "The Prisoner").
Second Session: William Shakespeare
Setting and Format
The second session is led by Rafael Sharapov, a university volunteer. The medium is the same Marina Makeeva. Announced topic: "William Shakespeare in one of his incarnations, also known as Dante Alighieri, also incarnated as Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin." The spirit allows being addressed as "William" or "Willem."
Spiritual Level and Task
Incarnated from the 12th level. Exited at the 16th. An ideal exit would have been the 21st, but two factors hindered: insufficient personal will in opposing the "storyline of the era" (insufficient spiritual emphasis in his work) and "great love for the material."
Biography: Resolving Mysteries
Shakespeare — his real first and last name, not a pseudonym. Parents were "of a fairly noble lineage," the family had a coat of arms. "Not a glover's son in a bad sense" — his father held a respected position in society. Date of birth — April 23, 1564. Death — approximately April 23, 1616. "I was born there, on the night of the 23rd to the 24th." The spirit explains the date coincidence: "At that point, I had completed the task. The probability of achieving more was below 10%. It was decided to end the cycle."
The "lost years" (1585–1592): at the beginning of this period, he worked as a schoolteacher, then moved to London, where he took up acting and began writing.
Religion: "My parents were Catholics, I graduated from a Catholic school. I wasn't pious, but deep down..." (the sentence trails off).
Key detail about portraits: "Something in between these two portraits — that would be me." The nose and mustache match known images, but the face is more elongated.
Collective Creation and Christopher Marlowe
Key admission: many works were written collectively. "One work could be written by 2–3 people, but everything came out under Shakespeare's name." The reason for the diversity is not a single author, but a group.
The main co-author was Christopher Marlowe: "He influenced the formation of what was written very strongly. We started together." After Marlowe's death, his works were rewritten, supplemented, and reworked by the troupe under Shakespeare's name: "We immortalized not only our own name but his name as well." After Shakespeare's own death, according to him, the works were "rewritten, modified" for about another 5000 lines. The reason for such quality of imitations: "Someone simply adapted to the rhythm of a genius poet."
On the reason for such diverse subject matter: "We wrote about what was interesting to the public — on topics of the day. Death, love, power, lawsuits — things that had just happened."
Individual Works
Richard III — "was not a villain in an overt form, but he seized power. He was a charismatic, brave man who died in battle. The work is written in the manner accepted at that time."
The Tempest — a central play about the meaning of life: he asks them to read "The Tempest" to understand the meaning of the phrase "life is a theater." Prospero's renunciation of magic is "a prototype of the need to act on one's own, take responsibility, play one's role to the end." He points out that "The Tempest" was written as an antonym to Marlowe's "Doctor Faustus": there — from the simple to the supernatural, here — the reverse.
Hamlet, "To be or not to be" — "I wrote it, there are minor corrections, but essentially it's mine." He notes: in English, "there are a word or two slightly rearranged or added."
Personality and Character
Self-assessment: "I was a fairly materialistic person." He loved "to be on the wave," to do what brought fame and money. He loved botany and medicine. The will was written in a dry style deliberately: "It's a normal style, I'm a normal person."
Muse: "There's no single answer. Different periods — different people. But I loved my wife."
On presence in modern performances: "If it's a mass event dedicated to my name, this energy is felt. Sometimes I can even astrally come as a small part."
Connection with Pushkin
On the question of the mystical connection between Othello and Pushkin's biography (African blood, slander of his wife, death by weapon): "Let's consider that a mystical connection exists, although at the time I had no thoughts about it." It "was written under the influence of real events of the era," but the parallels with a future incarnation are evident.
Farewell words: "Read 'The Tempest.' Every person can reach any heights if they truly want to. My life is one example. Don't chase hype, don't do trendy things just for money and fame — listen to your soul."
PART II: FOUNDATIONAL ESSAY-STUDY
"One Spirit — Three Geniuses: Pushkin, Shakespeare, Dante as a Single Mission"
I. Framing the Question: Unity in Diversity
If we accept as a working hypothesis that Dante Alighieri, William Shakespeare, and Alexander Pushkin were incarnations of a single spiritual entity — the first question facing the researcher is: Are there independent grounds for this, not connected to the mediumistic sessions? Did scholars themselves notice something common among these three figures?
The answer: yes, they did, and with significant consistency. The names Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin have long formed a special "trio" in global culturology and literary criticism. They are compared, juxtaposed, and grouped into typological series. But what is remarkable — researchers, as a rule, do not take the analysis to its conclusion, stopping at listing parallels without seeking an explanation for their nature. The mediumistic narrative offers one possible explanation; the analytical mind can offer others.
II. What Scholarship Said About Them: Academic Parallels
Pushkin and Shakespeare
The comparison of Pushkin with Shakespeare is one of the most persistent topoi in Russian literary criticism. Belinsky in the 1840s called Pushkin the "Russian Shakespeare," primarily for the drama "Boris Godunov": Pushkin's principle of historical polyphony, his rejection of moralizing, his ability to give each character their own truth — all felt like a direct continuation of Shakespeare's method.
Pushkin himself, crucially, was an avid reader and admirer of Shakespeare. He studied him in the original, took notes, and reflected on his method. In his "Letter to the Publisher" (1830), he directly contrasts the Shakespearean principle of "the truth of passions" with French classicism and its conventionality. "Boris Godunov" was written "according to the system of our Father Shakespeare" — these are his own words.
What unites them in "Boris Godunov"? The Shakespearean chronotope: history as living flesh, populated by contradictory people, not an illustration of moral law. The people as a choral character. Power as a tragic trap. The empty final scene ("The people are silent"), which scholars directly compare to the finales of Shakespeare's chronicles.
Pushkin and Dante
The connection between Pushkin and Dante is less obvious to a superficial view but no less real. In the 1820s–1830s, Pushkin actively studied Dante: evidence survives of him reading "The Divine Comedy" in the original and in French translation. The short poem "Hell" ("When the Assyrian ruler...") is a direct response to Dante.
A deeper connection is structural. Pushkin, like Dante, built his work on the principle of "descent into hell" as a necessary condition for spiritual growth. "The Bronze Horseman," "The Queen of Spades," "Mozart and Salieri" — these are descents into the hell of power, passion, envy. Like Dante, Pushkin believed that a poet must see the abyss to describe the light.
Scholar Sergei Bocharov, in his work "The Poetics of Pushkin," points to the Dantesque motif of the "seer" in Pushkin's late lyric poetry: the image of the poet as a being given the ability to see what is hidden from others — a direct line from the "prophetic" Dante to the "prophetic" Pushkin.
Shakespeare and Dante
This pair has been studied particularly intensively in the 20th century. D.L. Sayers, translator of "The Divine Comedy" into English, directly pointed to the fundamental similarity in the structure of their narrative universes: both build total pictures of the world, simultaneously encompassing political, ethical, cosmological, and lyrical dimensions.
Erich Auerbach in "Mimesis" — one of the major works of 20th-century literary theory — introduces the concept of "mixture of styles" as the main feature of great literature and finds it in both authors: both Dante and Shakespeare merge the high with the low, the tragic with the comic, the philosophical with the everyday, into a single inseparable fabric.
T.S. Eliot, in his essay "Dante" (1929), called Dante and Shakespeare the "only two great poets of the world," referring to their universality of scope: they are the only ones who created a complete human cosmos, not just separate fragments of it.
III. Archetypal Similarities: Seven Common Traits
Language-Building as the Primary Mission
This is perhaps the most striking common feature — and it is precisely what the mediumistic narrative identifies as the main task of the incarnations.
Dante created the Italian literary language. Before "The Divine Comedy," Italian was a collection of dialects without a unified literary norm. Dante wrote not in Latin (the language of scholars), but in the vernacular "volgare" — and this revolutionary decision created a unified Italian language. His "De vulgari eloquentia" is the first theory of a national literary language in history.
Shakespeare created the English literary language in its modern form. According to linguists' estimates, he introduced into usage between 1,700 and 3,000 words and expressions we still use today. His vocabulary (about 30,000 words — a figure also mentioned in the session) is twice that of the King James Bible. He standardized grammar and syntax, creating models for all genres.
Pushkin created the modern Russian literary language. This is not a metaphor — it is a historical fact. Before Pushkin, Russian literature used an artificial "high style," far removed from living speech. Pushkin combined the Church Slavonic tradition, living folk speech, and European forms — and created the language we write and speak to this day. Gogol wrote that with Pushkin, "the Russian language appeared for the first time in its full beauty."
Three geniuses — three founders of three world languages. A random coincidence, or a manifestation of a single mission?
The "Total Poet": Encompassing All of Human Life
Dante in the "Comedy" encompasses everything: theology, politics, astronomy, love, hatred, pride, humility, the history of Florence and the history of Rome, the life of a peasant and the life of a pope.
Shakespeare in his body of plays encompasses everything: monarchy and anarchy, jealousy and trust, war and peace, parental love and filial ingratitude, madness and wisdom, England and Italy, Denmark and Africa, history and fairy tale.
Pushkin — the least known of the three outside the Russian-speaking world, but for Russian culture he is "everything": lyric poet, epic poet, prose writer, dramatist, historian, critic, storyteller, poet of love and poet of death, poet of freedom and poet of imperial order simultaneously.
It is precisely this quality of "totality" that makes them incomparable to other great poets. Homer is total, but in a single genre. Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin — each in their own way — encompass the entirety of human reality.
Tragic Biography: Early Departure or Exile
Dante died in exile, never able to return to Florence, which he loved and described with such cruel precision. He wrote his main work as a man without a homeland — and this gave him a particular freedom of perspective.
Shakespeare died at 52, having withdrawn from theatrical life in his last years and living in Stratford. His death is mysterious: there were no panegyrics, no public mourning. A strange, almost unnoticed death of a genius.
Pushkin died at 37 in a duel — a "premature exit from incarnation." His death immediately transformed him into a national martyr, and "tragic death enhances the impact," as the spirit says in the session. Pushkin's death became part of his mission.
All three died, apparently, not having completed all they could. Dante left unfinished treatises. Shakespeare — "The Tempest" was perceived as a farewell to the theater, but was he satisfied? Pushkin — unfinished historical works, unrealized plans. All three carry something cut short.
Connection with the "Beyond": The Other World as a Theme
Dante is the most obvious example: the "Comedy" is a literal journey through the afterlife. It is not an allegory in the banal sense — it is an attempt to describe metaphysical reality with topographical precision.
Shakespeare: the ghost of Hamlet's father, the witches in "Macbeth," the fairies in "A Midsummer Night's Dream," the spirits in "The Tempest," oracles and prophecies — the otherworldly permeates the Shakespearean cosmos. The question of whether Shakespeare believed in this literally is open; but he clearly "thought" in these images.
Pushkin: "The Queen of Spades" — one of the most powerful stories in world literature about the intrusion of the supernatural into the world of reason. "The Bronze Horseman" — about the ghost of a city haunting the living. "The Song of the Wise Oleg" — about the inevitability of fate. Pushkin himself believed in omens (the story of the hare crossing his path on the way to the Decembrists is the most famous example, mentioned in the session).
Three geniuses — three poets standing on the boundary between the world of the living and the world of the dead, between the historical and the metaphysical.
Political Mind and Personal Unfreedom
Dante was an active politician — a Guelph, later an opponent of papal power — and was condemned in absentia, exiled, and sentenced to death. The "Comedy" is full of political judgments, assessments of living and dead statesmen.
Shakespeare lived in an era of acute political conflict (the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, the Gunpowder Plot, the struggle for succession) and skillfully navigated dangerous topics, never naming contemporaries directly. His "Richard II" was nevertheless used as a political manifesto by supporters of the Earl of Essex on the eve of his rebellion.
Pushkin was friends with the Decembrists, was under censorship surveillance his entire life, and was under the personal "protection" — effectively, supervision — of Nicholas I. "Boris Godunov," "The Bronze Horseman," "Angelo," "The Captain's Daughter" — all are political poetry, encoded in historical and folkloric forms.
Common trait: all three lived under conditions of acute political pressure, and all three responded not by fleeing politics but by artistically comprehending it.
The African / External Element as a Source of Strength
This is a more subtle, but no less real, similarity. Dante drew strength from Virgil — a poet of Rome, alien to Christian Florence in faith, but "his own" in cultural heritage. "The pagan sage as a guide" — an image that breaks narrow ethnocentric frames.
Shakespeare repeatedly made the "outsider" a central character: Othello — a Moor, Shylock — a Jew, Caliban — a native. His view of the "other" was centuries ahead of its time.
Pushkin was a direct descendant of "Peter the Great's Negro," the Ethiopian prince Ibrahim Hannibal. This "explosive mixture" of Russian and African blood is directly cited in the session as one of the conditions for fulfilling the mission. Academic literary criticism has also repeatedly pointed out that the "African fire" — passion, a southern temperament disrupting the cold Petersburg norm — was a source of special power in Pushkin's poetry.
Allegory and Philosophical Depth Beneath the Surface
Dante openly constructs multi-level allegory: literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical meanings coexist in every episode.
Shakespeare is a more hidden allegorist. But "The Tempest" reads as a philosophical parable about power, forgiveness, and the magic of creativity. "Hamlet" — as an epistemological tragedy (how to know the truth?). "King Lear" — as the limit of human dignity and madness.
Pushkin is the most hidden allegorist of the three. His fairy tales, as the spirit says in the session, "encode philosophical truths"; his poems are written in "simple words" concealing fathomless depth. "I was guided by how Jesus spoke" — this admission is fundamentally important: it refers to the parabolic method.
IV. Spiritual-Psychological Portrait of a Single Entity
Synthesizing the data from both sessions with an analytical view of the three biographies yields the following psychological portrait:
Colossal Energy and Multidimensionality
Pushkin himself says in the session: "I managed to be everywhere at once." Shakespeare wrote, acted, managed a theater, dealt in real estate — simultaneously. Dante was a politician, philosopher, theologian, lover, exile, and poet — simultaneously. This is not "versatility" in a trivial sense — it is a structural feature of this entity: an inability to be only one thing.
Love for Living "on the Edge"
Pushkin speaks of this directly: "I liked walking on the edge." Shakespeare built his work on borderline situations — Hamlet on the edge of madness, Lear on the edge of death. Dante literally descends into hell and ascends to the stars — this is the ultimate journey possible.
Contradiction Between Spiritual Height and Material Attachment
Shakespeare directly names "love for the material" as what prevented him from reaching the 21st level. With Pushkin — card debts, duels for adrenaline, the need to sell manuscripts. With Dante — passionate love for the earthly Beatrice, for the political life of Florence. This contradiction is not a vice, but a dialectical engine: it creates the tension from which greatness is born.
Ahead of Their Time
"My language was incomprehensible to my contemporaries," says Pushkin. Shakespeare "wrote for the future" — he was truly appreciated only in the 18th–19th centuries (German Romanticism "rediscovered" Shakespeare). Dante wrote about 14th-century events — and was not fully understood in the 14th, 15th, or 16th centuries; his true depth reveals itself anew to each new century.
Clairvoyance and Prophetic Temperament
Pushkin called his works prophetic — not intentionally, but effectively. Shakespeare wrote about the tragedies of power that proved universal. Dante predicted (in allegorical form) many events of European history. All three possessed what could be called "historical vision" — the ability to see through a specific era to eternal structures.
V. The Historiosophical Dimension: Three Nations, Three Epochs, One Mission
The mediumistic narrative presents a remarkably coherent historical scheme: one spiritual entity sequentially creates three great national literatures in three pivotal epochs.
Dante (13th–14th centuries): Italy — the birthplace of Renaissance humanism, the first country to develop the idea of individual human dignity. The creation of the Italian language coincides with the dawn of Western civilization in its modern form.
Shakespeare (16th–17th centuries): England — the country that built an empire and laid the foundations of the modern world order. The English language would become the lingua franca of the 20th–21st centuries. "The nation of Shakespeare" and the "Shakespearean nation" in one.
Pushkin (19th century): Russia — the Eurasian empire, the third major literary tradition of the world. The Russian language at the time of Pushkin's work was "raw material" requiring a master. Pushkin crafted this material, and the consequences — Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Akhmatova — became part of the world heritage.
From a historiosophical standpoint, if we accept the mediumistic hypothesis, we are witnessing a "project of building three great cultural traditions," carried out sequentially by the same force at three key points of Western civilization.
VI. The Literary Critical Aspect: A Unified Method
Upon careful comparison, a commonality emerges not only in themes but also in method:
Parabolic Nature: All three write on two levels simultaneously — literal and symbolic. Beatrice — a real woman and a symbol of Revelation. Lear — a real king and the archetype of a father. Tatiana Larina — a real girl and the "soul of Russia." Parabolic writing is not allegory in the narrow sense (substituting one meaning for another), but a layering of meanings where none cancels out the others.
Mimesis Through the Specific: All three achieve the universal through the extremely concrete. Dante names real Florentines — and through them speaks of humanity. Shakespeare takes specific historical plots — and through them speaks of power in general. Pushkin describes a specific duel, specific Petersburg life — and through them speaks of human fate in general.
Language Reform as a Poetic Task: For all three, formal questions (rhythm, vocabulary, syntax) are inseparable from content. Dante argues about the nature of the vernacular in a theoretical treatise. Shakespeare creates new words literally on the fly because the old ones are insufficient. Pushkin consciously lowers the language — "brings it closer to prose" — precisely when he wants to achieve the greatest depth.
VII. The Culturological Dimension: The Canon and Its Creator
Harold Bloom in "The Western Canon" (1994) builds the entire Western literary tradition around Shakespeare as its center. According to Bloom, Shakespeare is the yardstick against which we consciously or unconsciously measure everything else: he created our concept of "psychological man" — a being with an inner life inaccessible even to himself.
Dante occupies an analogous place in a different coordinate system: he created the concept of the "spiritual journey" as a metaphor for all human experience. The "dark wood" of the first tercet of the "Comedy" became, essentially, a metaphor for any existential crisis in Western culture.
Pushkin assumed an analogous place in Russian culture: he is not just a "great poet," but the demiurge of Russian literature. Rozanov wrote that "all of Russian literature came out of Pushkin." This is not hyperbole — it indicates a culturological function.
Thus, each of the three is a "canonical center" for their civilization. Viewed comparatively — three centers, three "primary generators," three "beginnings" — this is a structural phenomenon requiring explanation.
VIII. A Critical View: What Remains in Question
Academically honest research must point out the weak points of the mediumistic narrative and the questions it does not solve but rather skirts.
First, the spiritual levels: the classification "levels 1–24" is applied to all historical figures with surprising ease. Pushkin — 24th, Gogol — 4th, Hannibal — 16th. This gives the impression of a hierarchy based on the channel's personal sympathies rather than anything more objective.
Second, biographical details: some information (April 23 as Shakespeare's birth date, Christopher Marlowe as the main co-author) corresponds to actual academic discussions — but precisely for this reason, they are hard to consider "new knowledge." The spirit confirms what scholars have already debated.
Third, "The Little Humpbacked Horse": the version about "co-creation" with Yershov through the sale of the manuscript is not new — it's one of the known theories. Its confirmation by the spirit adds nothing to the weight of evidence.
Nevertheless: none of these objections refutes the main claim about the unity of the three geniuses. The typological similarity of Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin is real and amenable to analysis independently of the mediumistic interpretation.
IX. Conclusion: What This Hypothesis Reveals
Regardless of whether we take the mediumistic narrative literally, it reveals something valuable: an invitation to view three great poets as a single cultural mission.
What follows from this practically?
First, the comparative study of the three bodies of texts from the perspective of "language-building" is an independent and insufficiently developed field: how exactly does one poet "create" a nation's language, what techniques do they use? — a question worthy of separate research.
Second, the theme of the "allegorical method" in all three also deserves systematic examination. Parabolic writing as a special mode of creating layered meaning is a technological invariant uniting Dante, Shakespeare, and Pushkin.
Third, if we accept the hypothesis of a "single mission" — it allows us to assume that each of the three is better understood in light of the other two. Pushkin, read "through" Dante — is one Pushkin. Shakespeare, read "through" Pushkin — is a different Shakespeare. A triple key may open doors that each key individually does not.
And finally — one last thing. The spirit of Pushkin in the session says: "I am always with you and ready to support everyone through my works. By reading them, you can enter into documentary contact with me." This is not mysticism — it is poetics. Great literature is a form of the immortality of consciousness. When we read "I remember a wonderful moment" or "To be or not to be" or "Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita" — we truly do "enter into contact" with something that transcends the biography of a specific person. With what the spirit in the session calls the "24th level," poetics calls "genius," and the ordinary reader simply calls "great poetry."
Perhaps it is all the same thing.
Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita...
To be, or not to be — that is the question...
I remember a wonderful moment...
Three voices. One singer.
Сообщения
