An issue that has been the subject of intense studies in the Spiritist Movement concerns the existence or not of animals in the spiritual world.

A primary focus of this debate is centered on question 600 of “The Book of Spirits”. In fact, many confreres who claim that there are no animals in the spiritual world support this position by citing this question. Let's see:

600. Surviving the body in which it dwelt, is the animal's soul in a wandering state similar to that in which man finds himself after death?

A. It is in a kind of erraticity, since it is no longer united to the body, but it is not a Wandering Spirit. The Wandering Spirit is a being that thinks and acts of its own free will; that of animals does not have the same faculty. It is self-awareness that is the main attribute of Spirit. After death, the animal's Spirit is classified by the Spirits who are in charge of this task and used almost immediately; he doesn't have time to relate to other creatures”.

The “Phalange of the Spirit of Truth” emphasizes, right at the beginning of the answer, in a very clear and objective way, that the animal's soul “is in a kind of erraticity, since it is no longer united to the body...”. Therefore, the animal's soul (although some confreres prefer the expression “the intelligent principle of animals”, it is interesting to note that the Encoder himself uses the expression “the animal's soul” in the elaboration of question 600 and, therefore, we used it in this article) is in erraticity, that is, the souls of animals remain in the spiritual world.

Subsequently, continuing the answer to question 600, the Phalanx Spirits of the Spirit of Truth, who had already made it clear that there are animals in the spiritual world, prefer not to characterize the souls of animals present in erraticity with the expression “Wandering Spirit”. This apparently has nothing to do with the idea that there are supposedly no animals in the spiritual world. This was probably caused by the fact that the respective Phalange, in "The Book of Spirits", discussed a series of issues associated with Wandering Spirits exclusively as Spirits in a hominal condition, that is, Spirits that have already reached the minimum evolutionary condition of human beings.  In this context, if the souls of animals were labeled "Wandering Spirits", the text of "The Book of Spirits" would lose internal coherence, as some evolutionary characteristics only achieved in the human condition are not observed, obviously, in the behavior of animals. This is explicit in the answer to question 600, since the Spirits came to define “Wandering Spirit” in order to make it quite understandable why they do not characterize the souls of animals with this expression.

Let us see:

“...The Wandering Spirit is a being who thinks and acts of his own free will; that of animals does not have the same faculty. It is self-awareness that constitutes the main attribute of the Spirit...”.

The Spirits are explaining, therefore, that “the Wandering Spirit is a being that thinks and acts of his own free will...” and, for that reason alone, they would not characterize the souls of animals present in the spiritual world as “Wandering Spirits”. Indeed, the level of intellectual freedom and range of initiative is much lower in animals compared to humans.

Many reject the idea that there are animals in the spiritual world, justifying this position by the fact that the souls of animals could not be considered as “Wandering Spirits”, forgetting the forcefulness of the beginning of the answer.

Below, the text presents a very interesting comment:

“After death, the animal's spirit is classified by the Spirits who are in charge of this task and used almost immediately...”.

In addition to making it clear that there are Spirits with specific tasks associated with the care and referral of animals, the Phalange of the Spirit of Truth emphasizes that the spirit of the animal is “used almost immediately”. Being “used almost immediately” does not necessarily mean being “reincarnated almost immediately”. In fact, the Spirits are careful to state "almost immediately" and not just "immediately", denoting that yes, there are animals in the spiritual world, but that they are led to a specific type of treatment, probably well differentiated in relation to what often happens to human Spirits.

Furthermore, it would be a case of questioning how much time would correspond to this “almost immediately”, when it comes to disincarnating, adaptation to the spiritual world and reincarnation. Without further details, that is, without a minimum time scale, it is very difficult to say, based solely on question 600 of “The Book of Spirits”. Anyway, the expression “almost immediately” (and not just “immediately”) reinforces that, yes, there are animals in the spiritual world.

Could we suppose that the interval between animal reincarnations would, on average, be shorter than that of humans? Perhaps, despite the Phalange of the Spirit of Truth claiming that animal spirits are “used almost immediately” and not “reincarnated almost immediately”.

This supposed shorter period between incarnations would be reinforced by the last and most enigmatic sentence of the mentioned answer:

"...doesn't have time to get along with other creatures."

Therefore, except in cases of change of animal species, where a greater perispiritual preparation would be necessary, the reincarnations of animal souls in the same species tend to require a shorter time of erraticity (which does not mean, at all, that there are no animals in the spiritual world), as occurs with the most primitive human Spirits, which require less time, programming and preparation in erraticity than the more evolved human Spirits. Let's see what Andre Luiz explains to us in the Spiritist Yearbook of 1964 (republished in the Spiritist Yearbooks of 1992 and 2009):

“25. Are all reincarnations, even those of individuals linked to inferior conditions, the object of detailed planning by spiritual administrators?

A. There are almost automatic rebirths, especially if the creature is still bordering on animality, understanding that the more important the Spirit's task to embody, with Humanity, the more expanded and complex the reincarnation planning”.

When using the term "creatures" (final excerpt from the answer to question 600 of "The Book of Spirits"), the Spirits want to refer to all Spiritual entities, including humans or only to creatures of a similar Spiritual level to theirs, that is, other animal souls? Is it some kind of habitat alteration in which ecological relationships, such as predation, would not happen? Or would the time of erraticity be so small that a lifetime of relationship is not possible?

This impasse does not seem to be resolvable, based exclusively on question 600 of “The Book of Spirits”.

Anyway, some reflections about these questions can be elaborated.

Wouldn't the gigantic group of species that are considered animals need to be subdivided for a broader study? Wouldn't vertebrates be in a situation of animic evolution very different from invertebrates? Mammals, at least in part, would not show more advanced characteristics of Spiritual evolution compared to other groups of animals?

Allan Kardec himself, in a commentary juxtaposed to question 601 of “The Book of Spirits”, makes it clear that he was aware of these differences between species:

“...Let's take our most intelligent animals, the dog, the elephant, the horse and imagine them endowed with a conformation suitable for manual work. What would they not do under man's guidance?"

And, finally, it would be the case of asking: would all the multivariate and countless animal species stay in the Spiritual world for the same period of time?

What is worth to a dog would it be worth to an ant?

Would the situation in the erraticity of a chimpanzee or a gorilla (biologically very close to man) be the same as that of a flea or a tick?

In short, we can note that the Spirits were just beginning a discussion on a highly complex topic. As Allan Kardec did not insist much on evaluating the conditions of animals in terms of erraticity (probably, because it was not interesting to go deeper into this area at that historic moment of the initial effort to lay the foundations of Spiritism), it would not be possible to conclude on such an intricate issue. Even more if this conclusion is to affirm, in a simplistic way, that “there are no animals in the Spiritual world”, as some assert, which within the literality of the text does not seem a reasonable conclusion.

In this context, it would be appropriate to recall questions 85 and 86 of “The Book of Spirits”. Let's see:

85. Which of the two, the Spirit world or the corporeal world, is foremost in the order of things?

A. The Spirit world, which pre-exists and survives everything.

86. Could the corporeal world cease to exist, or never have existed, without altering the essence of the Spiritual world?

A. Yes; they are independent, and yet the correlation between them is incessant, because they incessantly react to each other.

It is evident, based on questions 85 and 86 of "The Book of Spirits", That to admit that animals do not exist in the spiritual world would be something startling because the spiritual world is the main world, compared with the corporeal world.

(This article will be completed next week.)