Book 2 — WAS THE WORLD MADE OUT OF NOTHING?

The idea of creation may be symbolically represented under a variety of images: under that of the evolution of numbers from an original unity; that of the eradiation of light from an original light; or that of an expression of syllables and tones, answered for aught we know to the contrary, by an echo. The Hebrews seem to have preferred this last symbol. “In the beginning God created (Heb. BARA, brought forth) the heavens and the earth.” In the verb bara, the meaning create and cry are identified: for this reason, it is eminently adapted to denote a creation capable of being symbolically represented by a vocal utterance.

“The primary sense of create and cry”—says Noah Webster, and we are careful to adduce in this place the testimony of a man whom no one will suppose to have been led astray by ontological speculations—“is the same, to throw, to drive out, to bring forth, precisely as in the Shemitic BARA.” The Hebrew text may indeed be correctly but inadequately rendered: “In the beginning God bore (or bare, preserving in the English word the radical letters of the original BARA) the heavens and the earth.” For the same lexicographer says in another place, “The verb to bear, I suppose to be radically the same as the Shemitic BARA, to produce: the primary sense is, to throw out, to bring forth, to thrust, to drive along.”

The author of the epistle to the Hebrews says: “By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” These things which do not appear are real existences; for the apostle says, “the things which are seen are temporal, but the things that are unseen (that is, which do not appear,) are eternal.” The text therefore does not affirm that the worlds were made out of nothing, but implies, on the contrary, that they were framed out of invisible (that is, virtual or potential) things. Plato says: “Let us lay down two classes of being, the seen and the unseen; the unseen, eternal in their relations; the seen, never the same but ever changing.”

A cause which creates from nothing as material on which to operate, must of necessity itself stand as substance to its own creature: in such a case, the creator and the creature must be consubstantial. The dogma therefore that the worlds are created absolutely out of nothing, is Pantheism. The statement that the worlds are created out of nothing is not found in Scripture, neither is it possible that it should be found there; for the idea is absurd in itself, since out of nothing, nothing can come, and a universe absolutely created out of nothing would be a mere prolongation of Supreme Power; and moreover, there is no Hebrew word, nor known collocation of Hebrew words, capable of expressing such an absolute creation. The verb BARA, as we have seen, signifies something quite different.

Fabre d’Olivet, who has endeavored to reconstruct the Hebrew language from its biliteral roots, translates the passage, “The earth was without form and void (Heb. tho-hu va bo-hu)” as follows: “The earth was a contingent potentiality of being, and in a potentiality of being.” He affirms that the term hu is derived from hua (being, that which is,) and that it is formed of h, the letter of life, taken in connection with one of the signs of manifestation. The signs of manifestation are these, i, o, u, and are used in this way: u represents latent or virtual manifestation, i represents the passage from potentiality into actuality, o represents manifestation in its intensity and actual realization. Thus hu, in tho-hu va bo-hu, is latent or virtual being, while ho, in Jehovah, is Being in the fullness of actual existence. The blinding of the vowel in ho, which gives hu, represents the retrocession of being from the fullness of actuality into mere invisibility or potentiality; while on the contrary, the opening of the vowel in hu, that is, the changing of hu into ho, represents the opposite process, or the procession of being from potentiality into actuality. This same root appears again in the same verse in the word thehom, translated in our version by the term “deep.”

The Hebrew cosmogony is more scientific than that of India. The Hindoos tell us that the universe exists in two states, that it is sometimes visible and sometimes invisible; but they do not tell us by what process things come forth from the thehom or “deep,” and return again into the same. But in the Hebrew cosmogony all that is explained. According to the Hebrews, things are in this “deep” when they are not related to each other; and they come forth from this “deep” by coming into relations with each other. According to the Hebrews, things have no power in themselves to come into relations with each other, that is, to emerge from this “deep,” but must be brought into such relations by the Divine Energy: so it is the putting forth of the Divine Energy which causes this universe to appear, and the withdrawing of that Energy which causes it to disappear again. This may be illustrated. In order to the possibility of an act of vision, it is necessary not only that there should be some person capable of seeing and some object capable of being seen, but also that the light requisite in order that these two may be brought into relations should exist. Who can see in the dark? So long as there is no light, the seer and the seen exist to each other potentially only: but as soon as the light shines these two become related.

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Divine Powers, which bring finite existences into relations with each other, thus causing them to emerge from the thehom, or “deep,” are called—the Spirit of God. “Darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters.” This Divine Spirit, operating upon man in its ordinary measure, makes man to be what he is; operating beyond its ordinary measure, it becomes especial inspiration. The Hebrews supposed this universe would continue in visible existence so long as the Spirit of God should breath upon it, but that it would fall back into the the-hom the moment that spirit should withdraw its vivifying power.

We read in the speech of Elihu, reported in the book of Job:—

“There is a spirit in man:

And the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding. . . .

The Spirit of God hath made me,

And the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. . . .

Who hath given unto God a charge over the earth?

Or who hath disposed the whole world?

If He set his heart upon man—

If He gather unto Himself his Spirit and his breath;

All flesh shall perish together.

And man shall turn again unto dust.”

Also in the 104th Psalm:

“Thy creatures wait all upon thee;

That thou mayest give them their meat in due season.

That thou givest them, they gather:

Thou openest thine hand—they are filled with good.

Thou hidest thy face—they are troubled:

Thou takest away their breath—they die and return to their dust.

Thou sendest forth thy Spirit—they are (re-) created:

And thou renewest the face of the earth.”

Inspiration, therefore, does not consist in an intensification of the soul’s being, in the implanting of a new principle, or springing source in the centre of its substance, but it consists in a leading forth of the soul to a greater intensity of manifestation—to a greater distance from the original chaos, the-hom, or “deep.”

BETH.