Is it possible to induce a deep trance without saying a single word? It is — and it has been done, and written down, for two and a half centuries. Before hypnosis had a name, the magnetizers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were bringing people into deep trance with the eyes first, then the hands. Their sequence is precise, it is recorded in their manuals, and it is practised today in the school of Mesmerismus® of Prof. Dr. Marco Paret, the first modern school of this art: a method that obtains deep trances and psychosomatic results beyond any other, because it works on the body — the place where change actually happens, and the angle that spoken hypnosis leaves largely untouched. This page follows that sequence step by step, from the primary sources, for hypnotists who are curious about where their craft comes from, and about what it left on the way that they can add to their practice for truly astonishing results.

If you have ever induced a trance and felt that the words were only the surface — that something in your posture, your stillness and your eyes was doing the real work — you have already touched what the ancient magnetizers built their whole method on, and you can understand why it is truly something of value. Words do a great deal. The non-verbal does more.

Why are hypnotists rediscovering the methods of the ancient magnetizers?

Because modern hypnosis, for all its refinement of language, makes too little use of bodily attention — the key to psychosomatic results and to many long-term changes, since the body is where change takes place. This is precisely where many hypnotists feel something is missing. For the modern hypnotist it means having a second channel: speaking to the person’s mental representation is one thing; working directly on their bodily experience of the state is another. And then comes the discovery: what began as a second channel becomes the first, and some operators end up working only non-verbally.

Mesmer in 1779, Puységur in 1784, Deleuze in 1825, Du Potet in 1846, Lafontaine across Europe in the 1840s, Regazzoni in Italy, Wall in London in 1871: each of them set down a way of working in which the operator’s state, his intense and magnetic gaze, and his hands came first, and speech came last, if at all [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Magnetic sleep was not ordinary sleep, nor is it today: they and countless witnesses regularly reported effects they classified as higher states — telepsychia, hypersensitivity, clairvoyance — and Puységur obtained somnambulism with magnetic passes alone [7][8]. The tradition has never stopped: in Italy it passed through Donato, Erminio Di Pisa and Master Virgilio Torrizzano, who initiated Prof. Dr. Paret, and it is taught today at Mesmerismus® [9][10]. A hypnotist who learns this sequence gains a layer beneath his inductions that words cannot give.

What came first: how does the magnetizer look?

The eyes. The ancient manuals agree: before the hands move, the magnetizer collects himself and fixes the person with his gaze, steady, with attention and will [2][3]. Lafontaine made this the heart of his public demonstrations, and it was watching him in Manchester, in November 1841, that the surgeon James Braid saw a subject who, strangely, could not open his eyes — and went home to study fixation of the gaze, from which he built “nervous sleep” and, two years later, the word hypnotism [6][11]. This is an important historical fact: Braid’s hypnotism was born after his encounter with a mesmeric demonstration. Magnetism came first; hypnotism arose historically, in part, from the attempt to explain with another theory phenomena the magnetizers were already producing. The magnetic gaze, in other words, is the place where hypnosis itself was born — and as we present it here, it goes well beyond Braid.

The magnetizers also knew a distinction that hypnotism later flattened. The hypnotic gaze opens the door of hypnosis and trance, and it has two faces. The pure hypnotic gaze fixes and blocks — the way the snake holds the small bird. The magnetic gaze fascinates and attracts: the person is drawn towards the operator, not frozen. Prof. Dr. Paret’s training manual describes fascination in the style of Lafontaine as perhaps the simplest way of inducing the magnetic state [9], and Erminio Di Pisa taught a whole school of hypnosis through the gaze alone [10]. The first exercise is the same in every generation, and something similar is practised in the East as well: in front of a mirror, look between your own eyes, without blinking, and notice what changes in your sensations [9]. What you find there is what the person in front of you will receive. For the deeper side of this work, see the page on the secret power of the hypnotic gaze and the exercises for developing the hypnotic gaze.

Then the hands: how do the passes deepen the state?

Once the gaze has opened the door, the hands carry the person through it. The classic instruction, from Deleuze, is almost disarming: sit in front of the person, collect yourself, let the hands descend slowly from the head along the arms and the body, keep the movement even, and repeat it for a long time without hurry [2]. The manuals then distinguish many kinds of pass, and the operator learns to choose among them. Wall’s Private Instructions lists them like a grammar: longitudinal passes, lengthwise down the body; transverse passes, to the right and left; local passes over one area; reverse passes, upwards; drawing passes and repelling passes; direct passes; frictions and strokings; and the great-current passes, passes aux grands courants, from head to feet [5]. Deleuze already separated the slow, descending passes that calm and deepen from the quick, transverse ones that bring the person back [2]. Regazzoni added that a rapid upward movement can carry the somnambulist into ecstasy [4]. All of this is explained, with its mechanisms, in the companion page on what mesmeric passes are and how they work; here what matters is the order — gaze first, passes second — and the fact that the passes are alive and practised today, exactly as in the demonstrations on film.

What holds it together: will, attention and presence

Every author says the same thing in his own words: the hands are only the visible part. Puységur placed the magnetizer’s will at the centre, and insisted that he must exercise good will to be effective [7]. Wall warned the beginner who thinks that once control is established no more will is needed: this is an error, and the magnetic will must be employed, assisted by passes, the whole time [5]. Du Potet and Lafontaine said that what the person receives is the operator’s attention, steadiness and presence [3][6]. The ancient alchemists would have called the whole operation a circulatio: something set in motion and kept in motion by the operator’s own state.

An image may help. Think of a tuning fork struck and held near a second one: the second begins to sound by itself, and it sounds true only if the first is held still and clean.

Here lies something the manuals point to and few teach: in Mesmerismus® the operator first learns to produce and hold a quality of state in himself, through specific inner techniques that, among other things, increase his inner security and his charisma — and only afterwards lets gaze and hands guide the other person towards a corresponding change. A hesitant hand is felt as hesitant; a wandering gaze is felt as absent. This is why the gesture is taught live, corrected on your own hands and eyes, and why it grows out of a presence you build first. Whoever practises magnetism shows it in his gesture, in his speech, in his being.

How to close: touch and the transverse passes

A magnetizer never leaves a person half-way. To deepen, a touch on the forehead, the shoulders or the plexus closes the circle of gaze and passes. To bring the person back, transverse passes, quick and to the sides, and reverse passes upwards, until the eyes open and the ordinary state returns [2][5]. Regazzoni described standing behind the subject to open the lids and drawing upwards [4]. The care given to the ending is the same as the care given to the beginning — a discipline modern practice does well to keep.

What is felt — and what does neuroscience say?

Here the page opens to a double reading, the traditional and the neurological, and both are real for those who practise.

The traditional reading. Feeling is a first reality. Mesmer interpreted these phenomena through the existence of a real universal fluid, capable of passing through and connecting living organisms [1] — an idea close to what Chinese medicine calls Chi, Indian tradition Prana, and what many practitioners of natural medicine today mean by “quantum”. He held the fluid to be real, and Puységur retained the notion even as he moved the emphasis to will [7]. The fluidist current has never stopped investigating what is felt: warmth, current, pressure, energy passing between two people [12]. And the tradition had already distinguished, by experience, what research is only now beginning to separate in the laboratory: working on the body does not mean one single thing. The magnetic gaze, distance, approach, rhythm, warmth, contact and the direction of movement speak to the nervous system through different channels.

The neurological reading. Modern research lets us name at least three doors the ancient sequence knocks on. The gaze first: direct eye contact is processed by dedicated networks and raises autonomic arousal before any interpretation — the body reacts to being looked at [13][14][18]; and sustained fixation narrows attention, which is what Braid recognised in 1841 and turned into a method [11]. Then the hands, through two distinct doors: when the hand moves close to the body without touching it, it enters peripersonal space, the brain’s special map of what approaches us [15][16][19]; when the pass slowly brushes the skin, the system of affective touch is added, with the C-tactile fibres that carry the pleasant, bodily quality of gentle contact [17][20]. Above all three stands the level described today by polyvagal theory: face, eyes, hands and voice belong to a system that signals safety or danger beneath every conscious decision, and the operator’s state regulates the state of the person in front of him [21][22].

The two readings are not rivals; they are two descriptions of one fact. If, entering the subjective space, the person’s body tells them that something is there — warmth, a current, a pull towards the operator — then some receptor or neural process is at work, and a reality is present [23].

What can a modern hypnotist take from this today?

Three things, in the order the magnetizers used them. First, the gaze: learn to hold it, and learn the difference between the gaze that blocks and the gaze that attracts — the hypnotic and the magnetic. Second, the passes, as a subtle instrument that can strengthen any hypnotic procedure you already use. Third, and beneath both, your own state: the presence the person reads before you speak. None of this travels in books. Like swimming, it is learned by doing it beside someone who already knows, in live training where gaze and hands are corrected on your own body — the Mesmerismus® training, with its preparation exercises and the story of its founder. Demonstrations are on our YouTube channel, where the sequence is shown rather than described.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did the ancient magnetizers really induce trance without any words?

Yes. The manuals of Deleuze, Du Potet, Lafontaine and Wall describe inductions made with gaze, passes and touch alone, and Puységur obtained somnambulism with magnetic passes. Words are sometimes added afterwards, once the state is established, never as the engine.

Which comes first, the gaze or the passes?

The gaze. The magnetizer collects himself, fixes the person with attention and will, and only then begins the passes. This order is why the gaze is the natural entry point for a hypnotist who wants to learn the ancient methods.

Is the magnetic gaze the same as the hypnotic gaze?

They are two faces of one instrument. The pure hypnotic gaze fixes and blocks; the magnetic gaze fascinates and attracts. The magnetizers used both and knew which they were using. Both are taught, and the difference is felt on your own body before it is understood.

Is any of this safe or scientific?

The states produced are receptive absorption and deep rest, taught in our School as an art of self-knowledge, communication and presence, and only to people who undertake to use them for the good. The neurological reading above — eye contact, peripersonal space, affective touch, autonomic regulation — is documented in the notes; it does not replace the traditional reading, and neither is closed.

In the Mesmerismus® of Prof. Dr. Marco Paret this heritage is taught as an art of self-knowledge, communication, well-being and personal growth. It is not a medical treatment and makes no therapeutic claims.

Notes and References

1. Mesmer, F. A. (1779). Mémoire sur la découverte du magnétisme animal. Mesmer asserts a real universal fluid, distinct from mineral magnetism and from electricity; he does not present it as a metaphor.
2. Deleuze, J. P. F. (1825). Instruction pratique sur le magnétisme animal — the classic description of the passes and of the distinction between slow descending passes (to calm and deepen) and quick transverse passes (to bring back).
3. Du Potet, J. (1846). Manuel de l’étudiant magnétiseur.
4. Regazzoni, A., as reported in nineteenth-century accounts of his demonstrations: the operator standing behind the subject to open the eyelids, the upward drawing of the fluid, and the rapid upward movement associated with ecstasy.
5. Wall, T. (1871). Private Instructions in the Science and Art of Organic Magnetism. London. Contains the systematic classification of passes and the warning that the magnetic will must be employed throughout, assisted by passes.
6. Lafontaine, C. (1847). L’art de magnétiser. On his Manchester demonstrations of 1841 and their effect on Braid, see also note 11.
7. Crabtree, A. (1993). From Mesmer to Freud: Magnetic Sleep and the Roots of Psychological Healing. Yale University Press — on Puységur’s emphasis on the magnetizer’s will and good will, on magnetic sleep as a state distinct from ordinary sleep, and on the higher states reported by the magnetizers and their witnesses.
8. Puységur, A. M. J. de (1784). Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire et à l’établissement du magnétisme animal. Puységur writes as a practitioner and witness, recording what he observes case by case; his Mémoires are a field record, and he does not claim for them the completeness of a scientific treatise. That is precisely their value as a primary source.
9. Paret, M. (2011). Training Manual: Mesmerismus – Fascination – Presence. ISI-CNV. On fascination in the style of Lafontaine as perhaps the simplest way of inducing the magnetic state, on the inner techniques of state, and on the mirror exercise.
10. Prof. Erminio Di Pisa — Ipnosi con lo sguardo: the Italian school of hypnosis through the gaze, from which the present teaching descends (wiki.marcoparet.com).
11. Braid, J. (1843). Neurypnology; or, the Rationale of Nervous Sleep, Considered in Relation with Animal Magnetism. London: Churchill. Braid’s own account of attending Lafontaine’s demonstration in Manchester in November 1841 and of his subsequent experiments on fixation of the gaze. The chronology is Braid’s own: the mesmeric demonstration comes first, the theory of hypnotism after.
12. Méheust, B. (1999). Somnambulisme et médiumnité. Les Empêcheurs de penser en rond — on the fluidist current and its history.
13. Senju, A., & Johnson, M. H. (2009). The eye contact effect: mechanisms and development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(3), 127–134. In technical terms: direct gaze modulates activity in a network of social-brain regions and affects concurrent cognitive processing. In plain words: being looked at changes what the brain is doing, before we decide anything about it.
14. Helminen, T. M., Kaasinen, S. M., & Hietanen, J. K. (2011). Eye contact and arousal: electrodermal responses to eye contact and averted gaze in live conditions. Biological Psychology, 88(1), 122–126. In technical terms: live direct gaze produces greater skin-conductance responses than averted gaze. In plain words: another person’s eyes on you raise the body’s arousal measurably — the magnetizer’s first tool acts on the body first.
15. Serino, A. (2019). Peripersonal space (PPS) as a multisensory interface between the individual and the environment. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 99, 138–159. In technical terms: fronto-parietal multisensory networks represent the space immediately around the body. In plain words: the brain keeps a special map of what comes near us, and reacts to an approaching hand before it lands.
16. Brozzoli, C., Gentile, G., Petkova, V. I., & Ehrsson, H. H. (2011). fMRI adaptation reveals a cortical mechanism for the coding of space near the hand. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(24), 9023–9031.
17. McGlone, F., Wessberg, J., & Olausson, H. (2014). Discriminative and affective touch: sensing and feeling. Neuron, 82(4), 737–755. In technical terms: a second tactile system carries the affective quality of gentle contact. In plain words: the skin has one channel that tells you what touched you and another that tells you how it felt.
18. On the gaze as first door: the eye-contact findings of notes 13 and 14 concern a face looking at you, live. This is exactly the condition of the magnetizer’s opening moment, and it is distinct from the effects of the hands. The ancient sequence — eyes, then hands — follows the order in which the body is reached.
19. Why the pass at a distance and the pass in contact are two different things: the C-tactile fibres of note 17 respond to real touch; a hand moving five centimetres away belongs to peripersonal space (notes 15 and 16). The manuals’ many kinds of pass map onto distinct neural doors — a distinction the magnetizers made by experience.
20. Löken, L. S., Wessberg, J., Morrison, I., McGlone, F., & Olausson, H. (2009). Coding of pleasant touch by unmyelinated afferents in humans. Nature Neuroscience, 12(5), 547–548. In technical terms: C-tactile afferents respond best to slow, gentle stroking at skin temperature. In plain words: a slow, warm hand on the skin is the very stimulus these fibres are built for — which is why every manual insists on slowness.
21. Porges, S. W. (2011). The Polyvagal Theory. W. W. Norton.
22. Grossman, P. (2026) and Porges, S. W. (2026), Clinical Neuropsychiatry, 23(1) — the debate on the polyvagal model is open; we cite it as a framework for understanding, not as settled fact.
23. On subjective reality: a sensation reported by the person — warmth, current, the pull of the gaze — is not “only” subjective. If the body registers it, some receptor or neural process is at work, and something real is present. Feeling is a first reality; this is the ground on which the traditional and the neurological readings meet.

Eyes first, then hands, then touch, and beneath all of them the operator’s own state: this is how the ancient magnetizers induced trance without words, and this is how it is taught today. For a hypnotist it is the layer beneath the words — the one the person feels before anything is said. Modern hypnosis has developed language enormously, while the body still holds possibilities that remain relatively little explored. Posture, gaze, distance, rhythm, breath, contact and bodily perception can add to any induction a layer that does not need to be explained verbally in order to be felt — and it already exists inside everyone.