The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 1 of 4

Part 3 — Footnotes (continued 2)

Reading edition

716.

Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, ch. xx. And very wisely have they acted.

717.

If he rejected it, it was on the ground of what he calls the “changes,” in other words, rebirths of man, and constant transformations. He denied immortality to the Personality of man, as we do, not to Man.

718.

He may be laughed at by the Protestants; but the Roman Catholics have no right to mock him, without becoming guilty of blasphemy and sacrilege. For it is over 200 years since Confucius was canonized as a Saint in China by the Roman Catholics, who have thereby obtained many converts among the ignorant Confucianists.

719.

The animals regarded as sacred in the Bible are by no means few in number; as, for instance, the Goat, the Azaz-el, or God of Victory. As Aben Ezra says: “If thou art capable of comprehending the mystery of Azazel, thou wilt learn the mystery of His [God's] name, for it has similar associates in Scriptures. I will tell thee by allusion one portion of the mystery; when thou shalt have thirty three years of age thou wilt comprehend me.” So with the mystery of the Tortoise. Rejoicing over the poetry of biblical metaphors, associating “incandescent stones,” “sacred animals,” etc., with the name of Jehovah, and quoting from the Bible de Vence (XIX. 318) a pious French writer says: “Indeed all of them are Elohim, like their God”; for, these Angels, “ ‘assume,’ through a holy usurpation, ‘the very divine name of Jehovah each time they represent him’.” (De Mirville, Des Esprits.) No one ever doubted that the Name must have been assumed, when under the guise of the Infinite, One Incognizable, the Malachim, or Messengers, descended to eat and drink with men. But if the Elohim and even lower Beings, assuming the God-name, were and are still worshipped, why should the same Elohim be called Devils, when appearing under the names of other Gods?

720.

Matth., xxiv. 28.

721.

Bryant is right in saying “Druid bardism says of Noah that when he came out of the ark (the birth of a new cycle), after a stay therein of a year and a day, that is 364 + 1=365 days, he was congratulated by Neptune upon his birth from the waters of the Flood, who wished him a Happy New Year.” The “Year,” or cycle, esoterically, was the new race of men, born from woman, after the Separation of the Sexes, which is the secondary meaning of the allegory; its primary meaning being the beginning of the Fourth Round, or the new Creation.

722.

From an unpublished MS.

723.

Or literally: “One Prâdhânika Brahma Spirit: That was.” The “Prâdhânika Brahma Spirit” is Mûlaprakriti and Parabrahman.

724.

Wilson, Vishnu Purâna, I. 73-5.

725.

Origen, Contra Celsum, VI. xxii.

726.

Timæus.

727.

“And the fourth creation is here the primary, for things immovable are emphatically known as primary”—according to a commentary translated by Fitzedward Hall in his editing of Wilson's translation.

728.

How can “divinities” have been created after the animals? The esoteric meaning of the expression “animals” is the germs of all animal life, including man. Man is called a sacrificial animal, that is, the only one among the animal creation who sacrifices to the Gods. Moreover, by “sacred animals” the twelve Signs of the Zodiac are often meant in the sacred texts, as already stated.

729.

Vishnu Purâna, ibid.

730.

Op. cit., I. ix.

731.

Myer's Qabbalah, 415-16.

732.

Contra Hær., I. xvii. 1.

733.

Ibid., I. xxx.

734.

Superior to the Spirits, or “Heavens,” of the Earth only.

735.

Ibid., I. v. 2.

736.

See Isis Unveiled, II. 183.

737.

See also King's Gnostics and their Remains, p. 97. Other sects regarded Jehovah as Ialdabaoth himself. King identifies him with Saturn.

738.

Ordinances of Manu, I. 33.

739.

Irenæus, op. cit., I. xxx. 6.

740.

Elsewhere, however, the identity is revealed. See supra the quotation from Iba Gabirol and his 7 heavens, 7 earths, etc.

741.

This must not be confused with precosmic “Darkness,” the Divine All.

742.

I. 2; and also at the beginning of II.

743.

The quotations that follow in treating of the seven Creations, except when otherwise stated, are all from Vishnu Purâna, Bk. I. Ch. i-v.

744.

I. 240.

745.

Brucker, ibid.

746.

Compare Genesis xix. 34-8 and iv. 1.

747.

Vishnu is both Bhûtesha, “Lord of the Elements,” and of all things, and Vishvarûpa, “Universal Substance” or Soul.

748.

Compare, for their “post-types,” the Treatise written by Trithemius, Agrippa's master, in the sixteenth century, “Concerning the Seven Secondaries, or Spiritual Intelligences, who, after God, actuate the Universe,” which, in addition to secret cycles and several prophecies, discloses certain facts and beliefs about the Genii, or the Elohim, which preside over and guide the septenary stages of the World's Course.

749.

From the first, the Orientalists have found themselves beset with great difficulties in regard to any possible order in the Purânic “Creations.” Brahman is very often confused by Wilson with Brahmâ, for which he is criticized by his successors. The Original Sanscrit Texts are preferred by Mr. Fitzedward Hall for the translation of the Vishnu Purâna, to the text used by Wilson. “Had Professor Wilson enjoyed the advantages which are now at the command of the student of Indian philosophy, unquestionably he would have expressed himself differently,” says the editor of his work. This reminds one of the answer given by one of Thomas Taylor's admirers to those scholars who criticized his translations of Plato: “Taylor might have known less Greek than his critics, but he knew more Plato.” Our present Orientalists disfigure the mystic sense of the Sanskrit texts far more than Wilson ever did, though the latter is undeniably guilty of very gross errors.

750.

Vâyu Purâna.

751.

Collected Works, III. 381.

752.

Professor Wilson translates as though animals were higher in the scale of “creation” than divinities, or angels, although the truth about the Devas is very plainly stated further on. This “Creation,” says the text, is both Primary (Prâkrita) and Secondary (Vaikrita). It is the Secondary, as regards the origin of the Gods from Brahmâ, the personal anthropomorphic creator of our material universe; it is the Primary as affecting Rudra, who is the immediate production of the First Principle. The term Rudra is not only a title of Shiva, but embraces agents of creation, angels and men, as will be shown further on.

753.

Neither plant nor animal, but an existence between the two.

754.

Five Years of Theosophy, p. 276, art., “Mineral Monad.”

755.

“These notions,” remarks Professor Wilson, “the birth of Rudra and the saints, seem to have been borrowed from the Shaivas, and to have been awkwardly engrafted upon the Vaishnava system.” The esoteric meaning ought to have been consulted before venturing such a hypothesis.

756.

See Sânkhya Kârikâ, v. 46. p. 146.

757.

Parâshara, the Vedic Rishi, who received the Vishnu Purâna from Pulastya and taught it to Maitreya, is placed by the Orientalists at various epochs. As correctly observed, in the Hindû Classical Dictionary: “Speculations as to his era differ widely, from 575 b.c. to 1391 b.c., and cannot be trusted.” Quite so; but they are no more untrustworthy than any other date, as assigned by the Sanskritists, so famous in the department of arbitrary fancy.

758.

They may indeed mark a “special” or extra “creation,” since it is they who, by incarnating themselves within the senseless human shells of the two first Root-Races, and a great portion of the Third Root-Race, create, so to speak, a new race: that of thinking, self-conscious and divine men.

759.

Hindû Classical Dictionary.

760.

Linga Purâna, Prior Section, lxx. 174.

761.

See Manu, I. 10.

762.

See Linga, Vâyu and Mârkandeya Purânas.

763.

Movers, Phoinizer, 282.

764.

Weber, Akad. Vorles, 213, 214, etc.

765.

IX. 850.

766.

Stromata, I. v. 6.

767.

The Gehenna of the Bible was a valley near Jerusalem, where the monotheistic Jews immolated their children to Moloch, if the word of the prophet Jeremiah is to be believed. The Scandinavian Abode of Hel or Hela was a frigid region—Kâma Loka again—and the Egyptian Amenti a place of purification. (See Isis Unveiled, II. 11.)

768.

I. vi. i.

769.

Cod. Naz., I. 47; see also Psalms, lxxxix. 18.

770.

I Cor., viii. 5.

771.

Concerning Divine Names, traduction Darboy, 364.

772.

See de Mirville, Des Esprits, ii. 322.

773.

The Correlation of Physical Forces, p. 89.

774.

Ibid., xiv.

775.

II Sam., xxii. 9, 11.

776.

Deut., iv. 24.

777.

Op. cit., III. 415.

778.

II Sam., xxii. 14, 15.

779.

Herodotus, Polymnia, 190, 191.

780.

viii. 24.

781.

Fa-hwa-King.

782.

See La Mission des Juifs.

783.

China Revealed, as quoted in Hargrave Jennings' Phallicism, p. 273.

784.

p. 202.

785.

Op. cit., p. 60.

786.

Ibid.

787.

O'Brien, Round Towers of Ireland, p. 61, quoted by Hargrave Jennings in his Phallicism, p. 246.

788.

Introduction to the Science of Religion, p. 332.

789.

Pantheon, text 3.

790.

Their intellection, of course, being of quite a different nature to any we can conceive of on Earth.

791.

See his Third Letter to Bentley.

792.

Concepts of Modern Physics, pp. xi, xii, Introd. to 2nd Ed.

793.

“Recherches expérimentales sur la relation qui existe entre la résistance de l'air et sa température,” p. 68, translated from Stallo's quotation.

794.

From the criticism of Concepts of Modern Physics, in Nature. See Stallo's work, p. xvi of Introduction.

795.

Mr. Robert Ward, discussing the questions of Heat and Light in the November Journal of Science, 1881, shows us how utterly ignorant is Science about one of the commonest facts of Nature—the heat of the Sun. He says: “The question of the temperature of the sun has been the subject of investigation with many scientists: Newton, one of the first investigators of this problem, tried to determine it, and after him all the scientists who have been occupied with calorimetry have followed his example. All have believed themselves successful, and have formulated their results with great confidence. The following, in the chronological order of the publication of the results, are the temperatures (in centigrade degrees) found by each of them: Newton, 1,699,300°; Pouillet, 1,461°; Tollner, 102,200°; Secchi, 5,344,840°; Ericsson, 2,726,700°; Fizeau, 7,500°; Waterston, 9,000,000°; Spoëren, 27,000°; Deville, 9,500°; Soret, 5,801,846°; Vicaire, 1,500°; Rosetti, 20,000°. The difference is as 1,400° against 9,000,000°, or no less than 8,998,600°!! There probably does not exist in science a more astonishing contradiction than that revealed in these figures.” And yet without doubt if an Occultist were to give out an estimate, each of these gentlemen would vehemently protest in the name of “exact” Science at the rejection of his special result.

796.

See Correlation of the Physical Forces, Preface.

797.

Soirées, vol. ii.

798.

Stallo's above-cited work, Concepts of Modern Physics, a volume which has called forth the liveliest protests and criticisms, is recommended to anyone inclined to doubt this statement. “The professed antagonism of science to metaphysical speculation,” he writes, “has led the majority of scientific specialists to assume that the methods and results of empirical research are wholly independent of the control of the laws of thought. They either silently ignore, or openly repudiate, the simplest canons of logic, including the laws of non-contradiction, and ... resent with the utmost vehemence every application of the rule of consistency to their hypotheses and theories ... and they regard an examination (of them) ... in the light of these laws as an impertinent intrusion of ‘à priori principles and methods’ into the domains of empirical science. Persons of this cast of mind find no difficulty in holding that atoms are absolutely inert, and at the same time asserting that these atoms are perfectly elastic; or in maintaining that the physical universe, in its last analysis, resolves itself into ‘dead’ matter and motion, and yet denying that all physical energy is in reality kinetic; or in proclaiming that all phenomenal differences in the objective world are ultimately due to the various motions of absolutely simple material units, and, nevertheless, repudiating the proposition that these units are equal.” (p. xix.) The blindness of eminent Physicists to some of the most obvious consequences of their own theories is marvellous. “When Prof. Tait, in conjunction with Prof. Stewart, announces that ‘matter is simply passive’ (The Unseen Universe, sec. 104), and then, in connection with Sir William Thomson, declares that ‘matter has an innate power of resisting external influences’ (Treat. on Nat. Phil., Vol. I. sec. 216), it is hardly impertinent to inquire how these statements are to be reconciled. When Prof. Du Bois Reymond ... insists upon the necessity of reducing all the processes of nature to motions of a substantial, indifferent substratum, wholly destitute of quality (Ueber die Grenzen des Naturerkennens, p. 5), having declared shortly before in the same lecture that ‘resolution of all changes in the material world into motions of atoms caused by their constant central forces would be the completion of natural science,’ we are in a perplexity from which we have the right to be relieved.” (Pref. xliii.)

799.

Stallo, loc. cit., p. x.

800.

Silliman's Journal, vol. viii. pp. 364 et seq.

801.

See Clerk Maxwell's Treatise on Electricity, and compare with Cauchy's Mémoire sur la Dispersion de la Lumière.

802.

Stallo, loc. cit., p. x.

803.

Nature, vol. xxvii. p. 304.

804.

Op. cit., p. xxiv.

805.

“Somewhat different!” exclaims Stallo. “The real import of this ‘somewhat’ is, that the medium in question is not, in any intelligible sense, material at all, having none of the properties of matter.” All the properties of matter depend upon differences and changes, and the “hypothetical” Ether here defined is not only destitute of differences, but incapable of difference and change—in the physical sense let us add. This proves that if Ether is “matter,” it is so only as something visible, tangible and existing, for spiritual senses alone; that it is a Being indeed—but not of our plane—Pater Æther, or Âkâsha.

806.

Veræ causæ for Physical Science are mâyâvic or illusionary causes for the Occultist, and vice versâ.

807.

Very much “differentiated,” on the contrary, since the day it left its laya condition.

808.

Op. cit., pp. xxiv-xxvi.

809.

Sept Leçons de Physique Générale, p. 38, et seq., Ed. Moigno.

810.

Defin. 8, B. I. Prop. 69, “Scholium.”

811.

See Modern Materialism, by the Rev. W. F. Wilkinson.

812.

“Attraction,” Le Couturier, a Materialist, writes, “has now become for the public that which it was for Newton himself—a simple word, an Idea” (Panorama des Mondes), since its cause is unknown. Herschell virtually says the same, when remarking, that whenever studying the motion of the heavenly bodies, and the phenomena of attraction, he feels penetrated at every moment with the idea of “the existence of causes that act for us under a veil, disguising their direct action.” (Musée des Sciences, August, 1856.)

813.

If we are taken to task for believing in operating Gods and Spirits while rejecting a personal God, we answer to the Theists and Monotheists: Admit that your Jehovah is one of the Elohim, and we are ready to recognize him. Make of him, as you do, the Infinite, the One and the Eternal God, and we will never accept him in this character. Of tribal Gods there were many; the One Universal Deity is a principle, an abstract Root-Idea, which has nought to do with the unclean work of finite Form. We do not worship the Gods, we only honour Them, as beings superior to ourselves. In this we obey the Mosaic injunction, while Christians disobey their Bible—missionaries foremost of all. “Thou shalt not revile the Gods,” says one of them—Jehovah—in Exodus, xxii. 28; but at the same time in verse 20 it is commanded: “He that sacrificeth to any God, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.” Now in the original texts it is not “God” but Elohim—and we challenge contradiction—and Jehovah is one of the Elohim, as proved by his own words in Genesis, iii. 22, when “the Lord God said: Behold the Man is become as one of us.” Hence both those who worship and sacrifice to the Elohim, the Angels, and to Jehovah, and those who revile the Gods of their fellowmen, are far greater transgressors than the Occultists or than any Theosophist. Meanwhile many of the latter prefer believing in some one “Lord” or other, and are quite welcome to do as they like.

814.

To liken the “immateriate species to wooden iron,” and to laugh at Spiller for referring to them as “incorporeal matter” does not solve the mystery. (See Concepts of Modern Physics, p. 165 et infra.)

815.

See Vossius, Vol. II. p. 528.

816.

De Carlo, I. 9.

817.

De Motibus Planetarum Harmonicis, p. 248.

818.

World-Life, Prof. Winchell, LL.D., pp. 49 and 50.

819.

Panorama des Mondes, pp. 47 and 53.

820.

Newton, Optics, III. Query 28, 1704; quoted in World-Life, p. 50.

821.

Ibid.

822.

When read in a fair and unprejudiced spirit, Sir Isaac Newton's works are an ever ready witness to show how he must have hesitated between gravitation and attraction, impulse, and some other unknown cause, to explain the regular course of the planetary motion. But see his Treatise on Colour (Vol. III. Question 31). We are told by Herschell that Newton left with his successors the duty of drawing all the scientific conclusions from his discovery. How Modern Science has abused the privilege of building its newest theories upon the law of gravitation, may be realized when one remembers how profoundly religious was that great man.

823.

The materialistic notion that because, in Physics, real or sensible motion is impossible in pure space or vacuum, therefore, the eternal Motion of and in Cosmos—regarded as infinite Space—is a fiction, only shows once more that such expressions of Eastern metaphysics as “pure Space,” “pure Being,” the “Absolute” etc., have never been understood in the West.

824.

From Winchell's World-Life, p. 379.

825.

Correl. Phys. Forces, p. 173.

826.

See Revue Germanique of the 31st Dec. 1860, art., “Lettres et Conversations d'Alexandre Humboldt.”

827.

Prof. Winchell.

828.

World-Life, p. 553.

829.

But see Astronomie du Moyen Age, by Delambre.

830.

See Isis Unveiled, I. 270, 271.

831.

World-Life, 554.

832.

Godefroy, Cosmogonie de la Révélation.

833.

The terms “high” and “low” being only relative to the position of the observer in Space, any use of those terms tending to convey the impression that they stand for abstract realities, is necessarily fallacious.

834.

Jacob Ennis, The Origin of the Stars.

835.

P. 99, note.

836.

If such is the case, how does Science explain the comparatively small size of the planets nearest the Sun? The theory of meteoric aggregation is only a step farther from truth than the nebular conception, and has not even the quality of the latter—its metaphysical element.

837.

Laplace, Système du Monde, p. 414, ed. 1824.

838.

Faye, Comptes Rendus, t. xc. pp. 640-2.

839.

Wolf.

840.

Panorama des Mondes, Le Couturier.

841.

World-Life, Winchell, p. 140.

842.

Sir William Thomson's lecture on “The latent dynamical theory regarding the probable origin, total amount of heat, and duration of the Sun,” 1887.

843.

Thomson and Tait, Natural Philosophy. And even on these figures Bischof disagrees with Thomson, and calculates that 350,000,000 years would be required for the Earth to cool from a temperature of 20,000° to 200° centigrade. This is, also, the opinion of Helmholtz.

844.

Coulomb's Law.

845.

Musée des Sciences, 15 August, 1857.

846.

Panorama des Mondes, p. 55.

847.

Revue des Deux Mondes, July 15, 1860.

848.

Cosmographie.

849.

Soirées.

850.

Discours, 165.

851.

p. 28.

852.

Des Esprits, III. 155, Deuxième Mémoire.

853.

Laing's Modern Science and Modern Thought.

854.

Ibid., p. 17.

855.

Heaven and Earth.

856.

Winchell, World-Life, p. 196.

857.

L'Univers expliqué par la Révélation, and Cosmogonie de la Révélation. But see De Mirville's Deuxième Mémoire. The author, a terrible enemy of Occultism, was yet one who wrote great truths.

858.

See Kabbala Denudata, II. 67.

859.

“Sur la Distinction des Forces,” published in the Mémoires de l'Académie des Sciences de Montpellier, Vol. II. fasc. i, 1854.

860.

P. 123.

861.

Der Weltæther als Kosmische Kraft, p. 4.

862.

See Popular Science Review, Vol. V. pp. 329-34.

863.

See Correlation of Physical Forces, p. 110.

864.

See Buckwell's Electric Science.

865.

Schelling, Ideen, etc., p. 18.

866.

Op. cit., p. 161.

867.

Princ., Def. iii.

868.

Philosophical Magazine, Vol. II. p. 252.

869.

Concepts of Modern Physics, xxxi., Introductory to the 2nd Edition.

870.

Loc. cit.

871.

J. P. Cooke, The New Chemistry, p. 13.

872.

“It imports that equal volumes of all substances, when in the gaseous state, and under like conditions of pressure and temperature, contain the same number of molecules—whence it follows that the weights of the molecules are proportional to the specific gravities of the gases; that therefore, these being different, the weights of the molecule are different also; and inasmuch as the molecules of certain elementary substances are monatomic (consist of but one atom each) while the molecules of various other substances contain the same number of atoms, that the ultimate atoms of such substances are of different weights.” (Concepts of Modern Physics, p. 34.) As shown further on in the same volume, this cardinal principle of modern theoretical chemistry is in utter and irreconcilable conflict with the first proposition of the atomo-mechanical theory—namely, the absolute equality of the primordial units of mass.

873.

Wundt, Die Theorie der Materie, p. 381.

874.

Nazesmann, Thermochemie, p. 150.

875.

Krœnig, Clausius, Maxwell, etc., Philosophical Magazine, Vol. XIX. p. 18.

876.

Philosophical Magazine, Vol. XIV. p. 321.

877.

Referring to the “Aura,” one of the Masters says in the Occult World: “How could you make yourself understood by, command in fact, those semi-intelligent Forces, whose means of communication with us are not through spoken words, but through sounds and colours in correlation between the vibrations of the two.” It is this “correlation” that is unknown to Modern Science, although it has been many times explained by the Alchemists.

878.

The Substance of the Occultist, however, is to the most refined Substance of the Physicist, what Radiant Matter is to the leather of the Chemist's boots.

879.

The names of the Seven Rays—which are, Sushumnâ, Harikesha, Vishvakarman, Vishvatryarchâs, Sannaddha, Sarvâvasu and Svarâj—are all mystical, and each has its distinct application in a distinct state of consciousness, for Occult purposes. The Sushumnâ, which, as said in the Nirukta (11, 6), is only to light up the Moon, is the Ray nevertheless cherished by the initiated Yogîs. The totality of the Seven Rays spread through the Solar System constitutes, so to say, the physical Upâdhi (Basis) of the Ether of Science; in which Upâdhi, light, heat, electricity, etc., the Forces of orthodox Science, correlate to produce their terrestrial effects. As psychic and spiritual effects, they emanate from, and have their origin in, the supra-solar Upâdhi, in the Æther of the Occultist—or Âkâsha.

880.

Leslie's Fluid Theory of Light and Heat.

881.

Buckle's History of Civilization, Vol. III. p. 384.

882.

On the plane of manifestation and illusionary matter it may be so; not that it is nothing more, for it is vastly more.

883.

Neutral, or Laya.

884.

Scientific Letters, Professor Butlerof.

885.

Ibid.

886.

Ibid.

887.

Ibid.

888.

Called the “drinker of waters,” solar heat causing water to evaporate.

889.

I. ii. (Wilson, I. 38.)

890.

Its founder, Râmânujâchârya, was born a.d. 1017.

891.

The Gandharva of the Veda is the deity who knows and reveals the secrets of heaven and divine truths to mortals. Cosmically, the Gandharvas are the aggregate Powers of the Solar Fire, and constitute its Forces; psychically, the Intelligence residing in the Sushumnâ, the Solar Ray, the highest of the Seven Rays; mystically, the Occult Force in the Soma, the Moon, or lunar plant, and the drink made of it; physically, the phenomenal, and spiritually, the noumenal, causes of Sound and the “Voice of Nature.” Hence, they are called the 6,333 heavenly singers, and musicians of Indra's Loka, who personify, even in number, the various and manifold sounds in Nature, both above and below. In the later allegories they are said to have mystic power over women, and to be fond of them. The Esoteric meaning is plain. They are one of the forms, if not the prototypes, of Enoch's Angels, the Sons of God, who saw that the daughters of men were fair (Gen., vi.), who married them, and taught the daughters of Earth the secrets of Heaven.

892.

Pp. 329-334.

893.

Not only “through space,” but filling every point of our Solar System, for it is the physical residue, so to say, of Ether, its “lining” (envelope) on our plane; Ether having to serve other cosmic and terrestrial purposes besides being the “agent” for transmitting light. It is the Astral Fluid or Light of the Kabalists, and the Seven Rays of Sun-Vishnu.

894.

What need, then, of etheric waves for the transmission of light, heat, etc., if this substance can pass through vacuum.

895.

And how can it be otherwise? Gross ponderable matter is the body, the shell, of Matter or Substance, the female passive principle; and this Fohatic Force is the second principle, Prâna—the male and the active. On our globe this Substance is the second principle of the septenary Element—Earth; in the atmosphere, it is that of Air, which is the cosmic gross body; in the Sun it becomes the Solar Body and that of the Seven Rays; in Sidereal Space it corresponds with another principle, and so on. The whole is a homogeneous Unity alone, the parts are all differentiations.

896.

Or the reverberation, and for Sound repercussion, on our plane of that which is a perpetual motion of that Substance on higher planes. Our world and senses are ceaselessly victims of Mâyâ.

897.

An honest admission, this.

898.

Yet it is not Ether, but only one of the principles of Ether, the latter being itself one of the principles of Âkâsha.

899.

And so does Prâna (Jîva) pervade the whole living body of man; but alone, without having an atom to act upon, it would be quiescent—dead; i.e., would be in Laya, or, as Mr. Crookes has it, “locked in Protyle.” It is the action of Fohat upon a compound or even upon a simple, body that produces life. When a body dies, it passes into the same polarity as its male energy, and repels therefore the active agent, which, losing hold of the whole, fastens on the parts or molecules, this action being called chemical. Vishnu, the Preserver, transforms himself into Rudra-Shiva, the Destroyer—a correlation seemingly unknown to Science.

900.

Verily, unless the Occult terms of the Kabalists are adopted!

901.

“Unchangeable” only during manvantaric periods, after which it merges once more into Mûlaprakriti; “invisible” for ever, in its own essence, but seen in its reflected coruscations, called the Astral Light by the modern Kabalists. Yet, conscious and grand Beings, clothed in that same Essence, move in it.

902.

One has to add ponderable, to distinguish it from that Ether which is Matter still, though a substratum.

903.

The Occult Sciences reverse the statement, and say that it is the Sun, and all the Suns that are from it, which emanate at the manvantaric dawn from the Central Sun.

904.

Here, we decidedly beg to differ from the learned gentleman. Let us remember that this Ether—whether Âkâsha, or its lower principle, Ether, is meant by the term—is septenary. Âkâsha is Aditi in the allegory, and the mother of Mârttânda, the Sun, the Devamâtri, Mother of the Gods. In the Solar System, the Sun is her Buddhi and Vâhana, the Vehicle, hence the sixth principle; in Kosmos all the Suns are the Kâma Rûpa of Âkâsha and so is ours. It is only when regarded as an individual Entity in his own Kingdom, that Sûrya, the Sun, is the seventh principle of the great body of Matter.

905.

To be more correct, let us rather call it Agnosticism. Brutal but frank Materialism is more honest than Janus-faced Agnosticism in our days. Western Monism, so-called, is the Pecksniff of modern Philosophy, turning a pharisaical face to Psychology and Idealism, and its natural face of a Roman Augur, swelling his cheek with his tongue, to Materialism. Such Monists are worse than Materialists; because, while looking at the Universe and at psycho-spiritual man from the same negative stand-point, the latter put their case far less plausibly than do sceptics of Mr. Tyndall's or even of Mr. Huxley's stamp. Herbert Spencer, Bain and Lewes are more dangerous to universal truths than is Büchner.

906.

Geology, by Professor A. Winchell.

907.

See Five Years of Theosophy, pp. 245-262—Arts. “Do the Adepts deny the Nebular Theory?” and “Is the Sun merely a Cooling Mass?”—for the true Occult teaching.

908.

Philosophie Naturelle, art. 142.

909.

Astronomie, p. 342.

910.

Commentary on Stanza IV, ante, pp. 126-7.

911.

Popular Science Review, Vol. IV. p. 148.

912.

And the central mass, too, as will be found, or rather the centre of the reflection.

913.

This “matter” is just like the reflection in a mirror of the flame from a “photogenic” lamp-wick.

914.

See Five Years of Theosophy, p. 258, for an answer to this speculation of Herschell.

915.

Ibid., p. 156.

916.

Paracelsus for one, who called it Liquor Vitæ, and Archæus.

917.

Alchemical “composition,” rather.

918.

“This vital force ... radiates around man like a luminous sphere,” says Paracelsus in Paragranum.

919.

Popular Science Review, Vol. X. pp. 380-3.

920.

De Generatione Hominis.

921.

De Viribus Membrorum. See Life of Paracelsus, by Franz Hartmann, M.D., F.T.S.

922.

P. 384.

923.

Ch. xiii; Telang's translation, p. 292.

924.

Ibid., ch. xxxvi; p. 385.

925.

The division of the physical senses into five, comes to us from a great antiquity. But while adopting the number, no modern Philosopher has asked himself how these senses could exist, i.e., be perceived and used in a self-conscious way, unless there were the sixth sense, mental perception, to register and record them; and—this for the Metaphysicians and Occultists—the seventh to preserve the spiritual fruitage and remembrance thereof, as in a Book of Life which belongs to Karma. The Ancients divided the senses into five, simply because their teachers, the Initiates, stopped at hearing, as being that sense which developed on the physical plane, or rather, got dwarfed and limited to this plane, only at the beginning of the Fifth Race. The Fourth Race already had begun to lose the spiritual condition, so preëminently developed in the Third Race.

926.

Ibid., ch. x: pp. 277, 278.

927.

Mundakopanishad, p. 298.

928.

Bhagavadgîtâ, ch. vii; ibid., pp. 73, 74.

929.

Ahamkâra, I suppose, that “Egoship,” or “Ahamship,” which leads to every error.

930.

The Elements are the five Tanmâtras of earth, water, fire, air and ether, the producers of the grosser elements.

931.

Anugîtâ, ch. xx; ibid., p. 313.

932.

The conductor in the sense of Upâdhi—a material or physical basis; but, as the second principle of the universal Soul and Vital Force in Nature, it is intelligently guided by the fifth principle thereof.

933.

And too great an exuberance of it in the nervous system leads as often to disease and death. If it were the animal system which generated it, such would not be the case, surely. Hence, the latter emergency shows its independence of the system, and its connection with the Sun-Force, as Metcalfe and Hunt explain.

934.

P. 387.

935.

Paragranum; Life of Paracelsus, by Dr. F. Hartmann.

936.

In a recent work on Symbolism in Buddhism and Christianity—in Buddhism and Roman Catholicism, rather, many later rituals and dogmas in Northern Buddhism, in its popular exoteric form, being identical with those of the Latin Church—some curious facts are to be found. The author of this volume, with more pretensions than erudition, has indiscriminately crammed into his work ancient and modern Buddhist teachings, and has sorely confused Lamaïsm with Buddhism. On page 404 of this volume, called Buddhism in Christendom, or Jesus the Essene, our pseudo-Orientalist devotes himself to criticizing the “Seven Principles” of the “Esoteric Buddhists,” and attempts to ridicule them. On page 405, the closing page, he speaks enthusiastically of the Vidyâdharas, “the seven great legions of dead men made wise.” Now, these Vidyâdharas, whom some Orientalists call “demi-gods,” are in fact, exoterically, a kind of Siddhas, “affluent in devotion,” and, esoterically, they are identical with the seven classes of Pitris, one class of which endow man in the Third Race with Self-consciousness, by incarnating in the human shells. The “Hymn to the Sun,” at the end of his queer volume of mosaic, which endows Buddhism with a Personal God (!!), is an unfortunate thrust at the very proofs so elaborately collected by the unlucky author. Theosophists are fully aware that Mr. Rhys Davids has likewise expressed his opinion on their beliefs. He said that the theories propounded by the author of Esoteric Buddhism “were not Buddhism, and were not esoteric.” The remark is the result of (a) the unfortunate mistake of writing “Buddhism” instead of “Budhaïsm,” or “Budhism,” i.e., of connecting the system with Gautama's religion instead of with the Secret Wisdom taught by Krishna, Shankarâchârya, and many others, as much as by Buddha; and (b) of the impossibility of Mr. Rhys Davids knowing anything of the true Esoteric Teachings. Nevertheless as he is the greatest Pâli and Buddhist scholar of the day, whatever he may say is entitled to respectful hearing. But when one who knows no more of exoteric Buddhism on Scientific and Materialistic lines, than he knows of Esoteric Philosophy, defames those whom he honours with his spite, and assumes with the Theosophists the airs of a profound scholar, one can only smile or—heartily laugh at him.

937.

The Human Species, pp. 10, 11.

938.

The Theosophist.

939.

Not only does it not deny the occurrence, though attributing it to a wrong cause, as always, each theory contradicting every other (see the theories of Secchi, of Faye, and of Young), the spots depending on the superficial accumulation of vapours cooler than the photosphere (?), etc., etc., but we have men of Science who astrologize upon the spots. Professor Jevons attributes all the great periodical commercial crises to the influence of the sun-spots every eleventh cyclic year. (See his Investigations into Currency and Finance.) This is worthy of praise and encouragement surely.

940.

Le Soleil, II. 184.

941.

World-Life, p. 48.

942.

Unfortunately, as these pages are being written, the “archebiosis of terrestrial existence” has turned, under a somewhat stricter chemical analysis, into a simple precipitate of sulphate of lime—hence, from the scientific standpoint, not even an organic substance! Sic transit gloria mundi!

943.

Vishnu Purâna, Wilson, I. 16, Fitzedward Hall's rendering.

944.

Popular Astronomy, p. 444.

945.

In his World-Life (page 48), in the appended footnotes, Professor Winchell says, “It is generally admitted that at excessively high temperatures matter exists in a state of dissociation—that is, no chemical combination can exist”; and, to prove the unity of Matter, would appeal to the spectrum, which in every case of homogeneity will show a bright line, whereas in the case of several molecular arrangements existing—in the nebulæ say, or a star—“the spectrum should consist of two or three bright lines”! This would be no proof either way to the Physicist-Occultist, who maintains that beyond a certain limit of visible Matter, no spectrum, no telescope and no microscope are of any use. The unity of Matter, of that which is real cosmic Matter to the Alchemist, or “Adam's Earth” as the Kabalists call it, can hardly be proved or disproved, by either the French savant Dumas, who suggests “the composite nature” of the “elements” on “certain relations of atomic weights,” or even by Mr. Crookes' “radiant matter,” though his experiments may seem “to be best understood on the hypothesis of the homogeneity of the elements of matter, and the continuity of the states of matter.” For all this does not go beyond material Matter, so to say, even in what is shown by the spectrum, that modern “eye of Shiva” of physical experiments. It is only of this Matter, that H. St. Claire Deville could say that “when bodies, deemed to be simple, combine with one another, they vanish, they are individually annihilated”; simply because he could not follow those bodies in their further transformation in the world of spiritual cosmic Matter. Verily Modern Science will never be able to dig deep enough into the cosmological formations to find the Roots of the World-Stuff or Matter, unless she works on the same lines of thought as the mediæval Alchemist did.

946.

Concepts of Modern Physics, p. vi.

947.

Book I. ch. II. p. 25. Vishnu Purâna, Fitzedward Hall's Translation.

948.

Vide in preceding Section VII., “Life, Force, or Gravity,” quotation from Anugitâ.

949.

The word “supernatural” implies above or outside nature. Nature and Space are one. Now Space for the metaphysician exists outside any act of sensation, and is a purely subjective representation, notwithstanding the contention of Materialism, which would connect it forcibly with one or another datum of sensation. For our senses, it is fairly subjective when independent of anything within it. How then can any phenomenon, or anything else, step outside, or be performed beyond, that which has no limits? But when spatial extension becomes simply conceptual, and is thought of in an idea connected with certain actions, as by the Materialists and the Physicists, then again they have hardly a right to define and claim that which can, or cannot, be produced by Forces generated within even limited spaces, as they have not even an approximate idea of what those Forces are.

950.

It is not correct, when speaking of Idealism, to show it based upon “the old ontological assumptions that things or entities exist independently of each other, and otherwise than as terms of relations” (Stallo). At any rate, it is incorrect to say so of Idealism in Eastern Philosophy and its cognition, for it is just the reverse.

951.

Independent, in a certain sense, but not disconnected with it.

952.

“By Fohat, more likely,” would be an Occultist's reply.

953.

The reason for such psychic capacities is given farther on.

954.

The above was written in 1886, at a time when hopes of success for the “Keely Motor” were at their highest. Every word then said by the writer proved true, and now only a few remarks are added with regard to the failure of Mr. Keely's expectations, so far, a failure now admitted by the discoverer himself. Though, however, the word failure is here used, the reader should understand it in a relative sense, for, as Mrs. Bloomfield-Moore explains: “What Mr. Keely does admit is that, baffled in applying vibratory force to mechanics, upon his first and second lines of experimental research, he was obliged either to confess a commercial failure, or to try a third departure from his base or principle, seeking success through another channel.” And this “channel” is on the physical plane.

955.

We learn that these remarks are not applicable to Mr. Keely's latest discovery; time alone can show the exact limit of his achievements.

956.

Theosophical Siftings, No. 9.

957.

This is also the division made by the Occultists, under other names.

958.

Quite so, since there is the seventh beyond, which begins the same enumeration from the first to the last, on another and higher plane.

959.

From Mrs. Bloomfield-Moore's paper, The New Philosophy.

960.

In answer to a friend, that eminent Geologist writes: “I can only say, in reply to your letter, that it is at present, and perhaps always will be, impossible to reduce, even approximately, geological time into years, or even into millenniums.” (Signed, William Pengelly, F.R.S.)

961.

Plato, in speaking of the irrational, turbulent Elements, “composed of fire, air, water, and earth,” means Elementary Dæmons. (See Timæus.)

962.

Plato in the Timæus uses the word “secretions” of turbulent Elements.

963.

Valentinus' Esoteric Treatise on the Doctrine of Gilgul.

964.

See Mackenzie's Royal Masonic Cyclopædia.

965.

See Isis Unveiled, II. 152.

966.

See Mackenzie, ibid., sub voc.

967.

Isis Unveiled, I. 317.

968.

Viveka Chudamani, translated by Mohini M. Chatterji, as “The Crest Jewel of Wisdom.” See Theosophist, July and August, 1886.

969.

The Tanmâtras are literally the type or rudiment of an element devoid of qualities; but esoterically, they are the primeval Noumena of that which becomes in the progress of evolution, a Cosmic Element, in the sense given to the term in Antiquity, not in that of Physics. They are the Logoi, the seven emanations or rays of the Logos.

970.

Ch. xxxvi; Telang's translation, pp. 387-8.

971.

See Theosophist, August, 1886.

972.

The now universal error of attributing to the Ancients the knowledge of only seven planets, simply because they mentioned no others, is based on the same general ignorance of their Occult doctrines. The question is not whether they were, or were not, aware of the existence of the later discovered planets; but whether the reverence paid by them to the four exoteric and three secret Great Gods—the Star-Angels, had not some special reason. The writer ventures to say there was such a reason, and it is this. Had they known of as many planets as we do now—and this question can hardly be decided at present, either way—they would still have only connected the seven with their religious worship, because these seven are directly and specially connected with our Earth, or, using esoteric phraseology, with our septenary Ring of Spheres.

973.

John, x. 30.

974.

Ibid., xx. 17.

975.

Ibid., xiv. 28.

976.

Matt., v. 16.

977.

Ibid., xiii. 43.

978.

1 Cor., iii. 16.

979.

Theosophist, Aug., 1886.

980.

These are planets accepted for purposes of Judicial Astrology only. The astro-theogonical division differed from the above. The Sun, being a central star and not a planet, stands, with its seven planets, in more occult and mysterious relations to our Globe than is generally known. The Sun was, therefore, considered the great Father of all the Seven “Fathers,” and this accounts for the variations found between the Seven and Eight Great Gods of Chaldean and other countries. Neither the Earth, nor the Moon, its satellite, nor yet the stars, for another reason, were anything more than substitutes used for Esoteric purposes. Yet, even with the exclusion of the Sun and the Moon from the calculation, the Ancients seem to have known of seven planets. How many more are known to us, so far, if we throw out the Earth and Moon? Seven, and no more: Seven primary or principal planets, the rest planetoids rather than planets.

981.

When one remembers that under the powerful telescope of Sir William Herschell, that eminent Astronomer—gauging merely that portion of heaven in the equatorial plane, the approximate centre of which is occupied by our Earth—saw in one quarter of an hour, 16,000 stars pass; and applying this calculation to the totality of the “Milky Way” he found in it no less than eighteen millions of Suns, one wonders no longer that Laplace, in conversation with Napoleon I, should have called God a hypothesis—perfectly useless to speculate upon for exact Physical Science, at any rate. Occult Metaphysics and transcendental Philosophy will alone be able to lift the smallest corner of the impenetrable veil in this direction.

982.

Numb., xi. 16.

983.

Deut., xxxii. 8, 9.

984.

Ibid., 9.

985.

C. W. King in The Gnostics and their Remains (p. 344), identifies it with “that summum bonum of Oriental aspiration, the Buddhist Nirvâna, ‘perfect repose, the Epicurean Indolentia’;” a view that looks flippant enough in its expression, though not quite untrue.

986.

See Origen's Copy of the Chart, or Diagramma of the Ophites.

987.

See also Section XIV.

988.

Abraham and Saturn are identical in astro-symbology, and he is the forefather of the Jehovistic Jews.

989.

John, viii. 37, 38, 41, 44.

990.

Matthew, v. 22.

991.

The Elemental Vortices inaugurated by the “Mind” have not been improved by their modern transformation.

992.

I have often been taken to task for using expressions in Isis denoting belief in a personal and anthropomorphic God. This is not my idea. Kabalistically speaking, the “Architect” is the generic name for the Sephiroth, the Builders of the Universe, as the “Universal Mind” represents the collectivity of the Dhyân Chohanic Minds.

993.

Timæus.

994.

I. 258.

995.

Researches on Light in its Chemical Relations.

996.

Modern Chemistry.

997.

Isis Unveiled, I. 137.

998.

Faraday Lectures, 1881.

999.

Thus, what the writer of the present work said ten years ago in Isis Unveiled was, it seems, prophetic. These are the words: “Many of these mystics, by following what they were taught by some treatises, secretly preserved from one generation to another, achieved discoveries which would not be despised even in our modern days of exact sciences. Roger Bacon, the friar, was laughed at as a quack, and is now generally numbered among ‘pretenders’ to magic art; but his discoveries were nevertheless accepted, and are now used by those who ridicule him the most. Roger Bacon belonged by right, if not by fact, to that Brotherhood which includes all those who study the Occult Sciences. Living in the thirteenth century, almost a contemporary, therefore, of Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, his discoveries—such as gunpowder and optical glasses, and his mechanical achievements—were considered by everyone as so many miracles. He was accused of having made a compact with the Evil One.” (Vol. I, pp. 64, 65.)

1000.

Just so; “those forms of energy ... which become evident ...” in the laboratory of the Chemist and Physicist; but there are other forms of energy wedded to other forms of matter, which are supersensuous, yet are known to the Adepts.

1001.

Presidential Address, p. 16.

1002.

It is just the existence of such worlds on other planes of consciousness that is asserted by the Occultist. The Secret Science teaches that the primitive race was boneless, and that there are worlds invisible to us, peopled as our own, besides the populations of Dhyân Chohans.

1003.

Five Years of Theosophy, p. 258 et seq.

1004.

Says Mr. Crookes in the same address: “The first riddle which we encounter in chemistry is: ‘What are the elements?’ Of the attempts hitherto made to define or explain an element, none satisfy the demands of the human intellect. The text books tell us that an element is ‘a body which has not been decomposed;’ that it is ‘a something to which we can add, but from which we can take nothing,’ or ‘a body which increases in weight with every chemical change.’ Such definitions are doubly unsatisfactory: they are provisional, and may cease to-morrow to be applicable in any given case. They take their stand, not on any attribute of the things to be defined, but on the limitations of human power: they are confessions of intellectual impotence.”

1005.

And the lecturer quotes Sir George Airy, who says (in Faraday's Life and Letters, Vol. II., p. 354): “I can easily conceive that there are plenty of bodies about us not subject to this intermutual action, and therefore not subject to the law of gravitation.”

1006.

The Vedântic philosophy conceives of such; but then it is not physics, but metaphysics, called by Mr. Tyndall “poetry” and “fiction.”

1007.

In the form they are now, we conceive?

1008.

And to Kapila and Manu—especially and originally.

1009.

Here is a scientific corroboration of the eternal law of correspondences and analogy.

1010.

This method of illustrating the periodic law in the classification of elements is, in the words of Mr. Crookes, proposed by Professor Emerson Reynolds, of Dublin University, who ... “points out that in each period, the general properties of the elements vary from one to another, with approximate regularity until we reach the seventh member, which is in more or less striking contrast with the first element of the same period, as well as with the first of the next. Thus chlorine, the seventh member of Mendeleef's third period, contrasts sharply with both sodium, the first member of the same series, and with potassium, the first member of the next series; whilst on the other hand, sodium and potassium are closely analogous. The six elements, whose atomic weights intervene between sodium and potassium, vary in properties, step by step, until chlorine, the contrast to sodium, is reached. But from chlorine to potassium, the analogue of sodium, there is a change in properties per saltum..... If we thus recognize a contrast in properties—more or less decided—between the first and the last members of each series, we can scarcely help admitting the existence of a point of mean variation within each system. In general the fourth element of each series possesses the property we might expect a transition-element to exhibit.... Thus for the purpose of graphic translation, Professor Reynolds considers that the fourth member of a period—silicon, for example—may be placed at the apex of a symmetrical curve, which shall represent for that particular period, the direction in which the properties of the series of elements vary with rising atomic weights.” Now, the writer humbly confesses complete ignorance of modern Chemistry and its mysteries. But she is pretty well acquainted with the Occult Doctrine with regard to correspondences of types and antetypes in nature, and to perfect analogy as a fundamental law in Occultism. Hence she ventures on a remark which will strike every Occultist, however it may be derided by orthodox Science. This method of illustrating the periodic law in the behaviour of elements, whether or not still a hypothesis in Chemistry, is a law in Occult Sciences. Every well-read Occultist knows that the seventh and fourth members—whether in a septenary chain of worlds, the septenary hierarchy of angels, or in the constitution of man, animal, plant, or mineral atom—that the seventh and fourth members, we say, in the geometrically and mathematically uniform workings of the immutable laws of Nature, always play a distinct and specific part in the septenary system. From the stars twinkling high in heaven, to the sparks flying asunder from the rude fire built by the savage in his forest; from the hierarchies and the essential constitution of the Dhyân Chohans—organized for diviner apprehensions and a loftier range of perception than the greatest Western Psychologist ever dreamed of, down to Nature's classification of species among the humblest insects; finally from Worlds to Atoms, everything in the Universe, from great to small, proceeds in its spiritual and physical evolution, cyclically and septennially, showing its seventh and fourth number (the latter the turning point) behaving in the same way as is shown in that periodic law of Atoms. Nature never proceeds per saltum. Therefore, when Mr. Crookes remarks on this that he does not “wish to infer that the gaps in Mendeleef's table, and in this graphic representation of it [the diagram showing the evolution of Atoms] necessarily mean that there are elements actually existing to fill up the gaps; these gaps may only mean that at the birth of the elements there was an easy potentiality of the formation of an element which would fit into the place”—an Occultist would respectfully remark to him that the latter hypothesis can only hold good, if the septenary arrangement of Atoms is not interfered with. This is the one law, and an infallible method that must always lead one who follows it to success.

1011.

A group of electricians has just protested against the new theory of Clausius, the famous professor of the University of Bonn. The character of the protest is shown in the signature, which has “Jules Bourdin, in the name of the group of Electricians, which had the honour of being introduced to Professor Clausius in 1881, and whose war-cry (cri de ralliement) is À bas l'Ether”—down with Ether, even; they want Universal Void, you see!

1012.

Smithsonian Contributions, xxi., Art. 1. pp. 79-97.

1013.

System of Logic, p. 229.

1014.

Beyond the zero-line of action.

1015.

Progymnasmata, p. 795.

1016.

De Stellâ Novâ in Pede Serpentarii, p. 115.

1017.

Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, p. 2, C. Wolf, 1886.

1018.

See Philosophical Transactions, p. 269, et seq.

1019.

Laplace conceived that the external and internal zones of the ring would rotate with the same angular velocity, which would be the case with a solid ring; but the principle of equal areas requires the inner zones to rotate more rapidly than the outer. (World-Life, p. 121.) Prof. Winchell points out a good many mistakes of Laplace; but as a geologist he is not infallible himself in his “astronomical speculations.”

1020.

Five Years of Theosophy, pp. 249-251, Art. “Do the Adepts deny the Nebular Theory?”

1021.

Had Astronomers, in their present state of knowledge, merely held to the hypothesis of Laplace, which was simply the formation of the Planetary System, it might in time have resulted in something like an approximate truth. But the two parts of the general problem—that of the formation of the Universe, or the formation of the Suns and Stars from the Primitive Matter, and then the development of the Planets round their Sun—rest on quite different facts in Nature and are even so viewed by Science itself. They are at the opposite poles of Being.

1022.

Aristotle's Physica, viii. 1.

1023.

Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, p. 3, Wolf.

1024.

Vol. I., p. 185, quoted by Wolf, p. 3. Wolf's argument is here summarised.

1025.

Note vii. Summarized from Wolf, p. 6.

1026.

Five Years of Theosophy, pp. 241, 242, and 239.

1027.

But the spectra of these nebulæ have never yet been ascertained. When they are found with bright lines, then only may they be cited.

1028.

Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, p. 3.

1029.

Mr. Crookes' Protyle must not be regarded as the primary stuff, out of which the Dhyân Chohans, in accordance with the immutable laws of Nature, wove our Solar System. This Protyle cannot even be the Prima Materia of Kant, which that great mind saw used up in the formation of the worlds, and thus existing no longer in a diffused state. Protyle is a mediate phase in the progressive differentiation of Cosmic Substance from its normal undifferentiated state. It is, then, the aspect assumed by Matter in its middle passage into full objectivity.

1030.

See Stanza III, Commentary 9, (p. 109) about “Light,” or “Cold Flame,” where it is explained that the “Mother”—Chaos—is a cold Fire, a cool Radiance, colourless, formless, devoid of every quality. “Motion as the One Eternal is, and contains the potentialities of every quality in the Manvantaric Worlds,” it is said.

1031.

Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, pp. 4, 5.

1032.

World-Life, p. 196.

1033.

Westminster Review, XX., July 27, 1868.

1034.

Vol. XIV. p. 252.

1035.

Hypothèses Cosmogoniques.

1036.

Which “Light” we call Fohat.

1037.

This is a mistake, which implies a material agent, distinct from the influences which move it, i.e., blind matter and perhaps “God” again, whereas this One Life is the very God and Gods “Itself.”

1038.

The same error.

1039.

Popular Science Review, Vol. X.

1040.

“Is the Jîva a myth, as Science says, or is it not?” ask some Theosophists, wavering between materialistic and idealistic Science. The difficulty of really grasping Esoteric problems concerning the “ultimate state of Matter” is again the old crux of the objective and the subjective. What is Matter? Is the Matter of our present objective consciousness anything but our sensations? True, the sensations we receive come from without, but can we really—except in terms of phenomena—speak of the “gross matter” of this plane as an entity apart from and independent of us? To all such arguments Occultism answers: True, in reality Matter is not independent of, or existent outside, our perceptions. Man is an illusion: granted. But the existence and actuality of other, still more illusive, but not less actual, entities than we are, is not a claim which is lessened, but rather strengthened, by this doctrine of Vedântic and even Kantian Idealism.

1041.

See Musée des Sciences, August, 1856.

1042.

Book II. of the Commentary on the Book of Dzyan.

1043.

Even the question of the plurality of worlds inhabited by sentient creatures is rejected, or is approached with the greatest caution! And yet see what the great astronomer, Camille Flammarion, says in his Pluralité des Mondes.

1044.

Nevertheless, it may be shown on the testimony of the Bible itself, and of such good Christian theologians as Cardinal Wiseman, that this plurality is taught in both the Old and the New Testaments.

1045.

See Plurality of Worlds, Vol. II.

1046.

See on this La Pluralité des Mondes Habités, par C. Flammarion, wherein is given a list of the many men of Science who have written to prove the theory.

1047.

World-Life, pp. 496-498, et seq.

1048.

World-Life.

1049.

The Book of Enoch. Trans. by Archbishop Laurence, Ch. LXXIX.

1050.

The Âtmâ, or Spirit, the Spiritual Self, passing like a thread through the five Subtle Bodies, or Principles, Koshas, is called “Thread-soul,” or Sûtrâtmâ in Vedântic Philosophy.

1051.

“The Septenary Principle,” Five Years of Theosophy, p. 197.

1052.

Pythagorean Triangle, by the Rev. G. Oliver, p. 36.

1053.

See Kant's Critique de la Raison Pure, Barui's transl., II. 54.

1054.

Plutarch, De Placitis Philosophorum.

1055.

In the Greek and Latin Churches—which regard marriage as one of the sacraments—the officiating priest during the marriage ceremony represents the apex of the triangle; the bride, its left feminine side, and the bridegroom the right side, while the base line is symbolized by the row of witnesses, the bridesmaids and best men. But behind the priest there is the Holy of Holies, with its mysterious containments and symbolic meaning, inside of which no one but the consecrated priests should enter. In the early days of Christianity the marriage ceremony was a mystery and a true symbol. Now, however, even the Churches have lost the true meaning of this symbolism.

1056.

New Aspects of Life and Religion, by Henry Pratt, M.D., p. 7. Ed. 1886.

1057.

Ibid., pp. 7, 8.

1058.

Ibid., p. 9.

1059.

Pythagorean Triangle, by the Rev. G. Oliver, pp. 18, 19.

1060.

P. 387.

1061.

P. 387.

1062.

In the World of Form, symbolism finding expression in the Pyramids, has in them both triangle and square, four co-equal triangles or surfaces, four basic points, and the fifth—the apex.

1063.

Pp. 385, 386.

1064.

Op. cit. By Isaac Myer. P. 174.

1065.

P. 175.

1066.

P. 175.

1067.

“The lowest designation, or the Deity in Nature, the more general term Elohim, is translated God.” (P. 175.) Such recent works as the Qabbalah of Mr. Isaac Myer, and of Mr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, fully justify our attitude towards the Jehovistic Deity. It is not the transcendental, philosophical, and highly metaphysical abstraction of the original Kabalistic thought—Ain-Suph-Shekinah-Adam-Kadmon, and all that follows—that we oppose, but the crystallization of all these into the highly unphilosophical, repulsive, and anthropomorphic Jehovah, the androgynous and finite deity, for which eternity, omnipotence, and omniscience are claimed. We do not war against the Ideal Reality, but the hideous theological Shadow.

1068.

Let not the word “Psychology” cause the reader, by association of ideas, to carry his thought to modern “Psychologists,” so-called, whose Idealism is another name for uncompromising Materialism, and whose pretended Monism is no better than a mask to conceal the void of final annihilation—even of consciousness. Here spiritual Psychology is meant.

1069.

“Vishvânara is not merely the manifested objective world, but the one physical basis [the horizontal line of the triangle] from which the whole objective world starts into existence.” And this is the Cosmic Duad, the Androgynous Substance. Only beyond this is the true Protyle.

1070.

T. Subba Row. See Theosophist, Feb. 1887.

1071.

By W. Crookes, F.R.S., V.P.C.S., delivered at the Royal Institution, London, on Friday, February 18th, 1887.

1072.

How true it is will be fully demonstrated only on that day when Mr. Crookes' discovery of radiant matter will have resulted in a further elucidation with regard to the true source of light, and will have revolutionized all the present speculations. Further familiarity with the northern streamers of the aurora borealis may help the recognition of this truth.

1073.

Genesis of the Elements, p. 1.

1074.

De Placit. Philos.

1075.

The Path, I. 10, p. 297.

1076.

P. 11.

1077.

Corresponding on the cosmic scale with the Spirit, Soul, Mind, Life, and the three Vehicles—the Astral, the Mâyâvic and the Physical Bodies (of mankind), whatever division is made.

1078.

Ibid. p. 16.

1079.

Vol. I, p. 429.

1080.

Ibid., p. 21.

1081.

“The Lord is a consuming fire.” “In him was life, and the life was the light of men.”

1082.

Which if separated alchemically would yield the Spirit of Life, and its Elixir.

1083.

Foremost of all, the postulate that there is no such thing in Nature as inorganic substances or bodies. Stones, minerals, rocks, and even chemical “atoms” are simply organic units in profound lethargy. Their coma has an end and their inertia becomes activity.

1084.

Ibid., p. 144.

1085.

The orthography of the name—as spelt by himself—is Leibniz. He was of Slavonian descent though born in Germany.

1086.

Monadologie, Introd.

1087.

“Leibnitz's dynamism,” says Professor Lachelier, “would offer but little difficulty if, with him, the monad had remained a simple atom of blind force. But....” One perfectly understands the perplexity of Modern Materialism!

1088.

The Path, I. 10, p. 297.

1089.

Leibnitz was an absolute Idealist in maintaining that “material atoms are contrary to reason.” (Système Nouveau, Erdmann, p. 126, col. 2.) For him Matter was a simple representation of the Monad, whether human or atomic. Monads, he thought (as do we), are everywhere. Thus the human soul is a Monad, and every cell in the human body has its Monad, as has every cell in animal, vegetable, and even in the so-called inorganic bodies. His Atoms are the molecules of modern Science, and his Monads those simple atoms that Materialistic Science takes on faith, though it will never succeed in interviewing them—except in imagination. But Leibnitz is rather contradictory in his views about Monads. He speaks of his “Metaphysical Points” and “Formal Atoms,” at one time as realities, occupying space; at another as pure spiritual ideas; then he again endows them with objectivity and aggregates and positions in their co-relations.

1090.

Examen des Principes du P. Malebranche.

1091.

The Atoms of Leibnitz have, in truth, nothing but the name in common with the atoms of the Greek Materialists, or even the molecules of Modem Science. He calls them “Formal Atoms,” and compares them to the “Substantial Forms” of Aristotle. (See Système Nouveau, § 3.)

1092.

Letter to Father Desbosses, Correspondence, xviii.

1093.

Monadologie, § 60. Leibnitz, like Aristotle, calls the “created” or emanated Monads (the Elementals issued from Cosmic Spirits or Gods)—Entelechies, Ἐντελέχειαι, and “incorporeal automata.” (Monadologie § 18.)

1094.

These three “rough divisions” correspond to Spirit, Mind (or Soul), and Body, in the human constitution.

1095.

Brother C. H. A. Bjerregaard, in the lecture already mentioned, warns his audience not to regard the Sephiroth too much as individualities, but to avoid at the same time seeing in them abstractions. “We shall never arrive at the truth,” he says, “much less the power of associating with these celestials, until we return to the simplicity and fearlessness of the primitive ages, when men mixed freely with the gods, and the gods descended among men and guided them in truth and holiness.” (P. 296.) “There are several designations for ‘angels’ in the Bible, which clearly show that beings like the elementals of the Kabbala and the monads of Leibnitz, must be understood by that term rather than that which is commonly understood. They are called ‘morning stars,’ ‘flaming fires,’ ‘the mighty ones,’ and St. Paul sees them in his cosmogonic vision as ‘Principalities and Powers.’ Such names as these preclude the idea of personality, and we find ourselves compelled to think of them as impersonal existences ... as an influence, a spiritual substance, or conscious force.” (Pp. 321, 322.)

1096.

Buddhist Catechism, by H. S. Olcott, President of the Theosophical Society, p. 51.

1097.

Ibid. 51, 52.

1098.

We refer those who would regard the statement as an impertinence or irreverence levelled at accepted Science, to Dr. James Hutchinson Stirling's work As regards Protoplasm, which is a defence of a Vital Principle versus the Molecularists—Huxley, Tyndall, Vogt, and Co.—and request them to examine whether it is true or not to say that, though the scientific premisses may not be always correct, they are, nevertheless, accepted, to fill up a gap or a hole in some beloved materialistic hobby. Speaking of protoplasm and the organs of man, as “viewed by Mr. Huxley,” the author says: “Probably then, in regard to any continuity in protoplasm of power, of form, or of substance, we have seen lacunæ enow. Nay, Mr. Huxley himself can be adduced in evidence on the same side. Not rarely do we find in his essay admissions of probability, where it is certainty that is alone in place. He says, for example: ‘It is more than probable that when the vegetable world is thoroughly explored we shall find all plants in possession of the same powers.’ When a conclusion is decidedly announced, it is rather disappointing to be told, as here, that the premisses are still to collect [!!].... Again, here is a passage in which he is seen to cut his own ‘basis’ from beneath his own feet. After telling us that all forms of protoplasm consist of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen ‘in very complex union,’ he continues: ‘To this complex combination, the nature of which has never been determined with exactness [!!], the name of protein has been applied.’ This, plainly, is an identification, on Mr. Huxley's own part, of protoplasm and protein; and what is said of one, being necessarily true of the other, it follows that he admits the nature of protoplasm never to have been determined with exactness, and that even in his eyes the lis is still sub judice. This admission is strengthened by the words, too, ‘If we use this term (protein) with such caution as may properly arise out of our comparative ignorance of the things for which it stands’ ” ... etc. (pp. 33 and 34, ed. 1872, in reply to Mr. Huxley in Yeast). This is the eminent Huxley, the king of physiology and biology, who is proven playing at blind man's buff with premisses and facts! What may not the “smaller fry” of Science do after this!

1099.

“The Cycles of Matter,” a name given by Professor Winchell to an Essay written in 1860.

1100.

World-Life, pp. 535, 548.

1101.

Quoted in Büchner's Force and Matter.

1102.

Men of Science will say: We deny, because nothing of the kind has ever come within the scope of our experience. But, as argued by Charles Richet, the Physiologist: “So be it, but have you at least demonstrated the contrary?... Do not, at any rate, deny à priori. Actual Science is not sufficiently advanced to give you such right.”—La Suggestion Mentale et le Calcul des Probabilités.

1103.

Lectures on the Philosophy of History, p. 26. Sibree's Eng. Transl.

1104.

Isis Unveiled, Vol. 1, p. 34.

1105.

This symbolism does not prevent these now seemingly mythic personages from having ruled the Earth once upon a time under the human form of actual living, though truly divine and god-like Men. The opinion of Colonel Vallancey—and also of Count de Gebelin—that the “names of the Kabiri appear to be all allegorical, and to have signified no more [?] than an almanac of the vicissitudes of the seasons—calculated for the operations of agriculture” (Collect. de Reb. Hibern., No. 13, Præf. Sect. 5), is as absurd as his assertion that Æon, Cronus, Saturn and Dagon are all one, namely, the “Patriarch Adam.” The Kabiri were the instructors of mankind in agriculture, because they were the Regents over the seasons and Cosmic Cycles. Hence it was they who regulated, as Planetary Spirits or Angels (Messengers), the mysteries of the art of agriculture.

1106.

“Who dread Karma-Nemesis,” would be better.

1107.

Dryden.

1108.

Not all, however, for there are men of Science awakening to truth. This is what we read: “Whatever way we turn our eyes we encounter a mystery ... all in Nature for us is the unknown.... Yet they are numerous, those superficial minds for whom nothing can be produced by natural forces outside of facts observed long ago, consecrated in books and grouped more or less skilfully with the help of theories whose ephemeral duration ought, by this time, to have demonstrated their insufficiency, .... I do not pretend to contest the possibility of invisible beings, of a nature different from ours and capable of moving matter to action. Profound philosophers have admitted this in all epochs, as a consequence of the great law of continuity which rules the universe. That intellectual life, which we see starting in some way from non-being (néant) and gradually reaching man, can it stop abruptly at man to reäppear only in the infinite, in the sovereign regulator of the world? This is little probable.” Therefore, “I no more deny the existence of spirits than I deny soul, while I yet try to explain certain facts without this hypothesis.” The Non-Defined Forces, Historical and Experimental Researches, p. 3. (Paris, 1877.) The author is A. de Rochas, a well-known man of Science in France, and his work is one of the signs of the time.

1109.

ix. 9.

1110.

xxxviii. 31, 32.

1111.

Astronomie Antique.

1112.

The Pleiades, as all know, are the seven stars beyond the Bull, which appear at the beginning of spring. They have a very Occult meaning in the Hindû Esoteric Philosophy, and are connected with Sound and other mystic principles in Nature.

1113.

See Astronomie Antique, pp. 63 to 74.

1114.

Temple de Jerusalem, Vol. II, Part II, Chap. xxx.

1115.

Ch. vii.

1116.

Quoted by De Mirville, Des Esprits, iv. p. 58.

1117.

Natural Genesis, ii. p. 318.

1118.

Proœm, 2.

1119.

Astronomy of the Ancients, Lewis, p. 264.

1120.

Natural Genesis, ii. p. 319.

1121.

Proclus, In Timæum, i.

1122.

Genesis, xlix.

1123.

Creuzer, iii. p. 930.

1124.

Cyropædia, viii. p. 7, as quoted in Des Esprits, iv. p. 55.

1125.

Des Esprits, iv. pp. 59, 60.

1126.

Origine de tous les Cultes, “Zodiaque.”

1127.

Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus Christ, I. p. 9.

1128.

Whether many nations have seen that identical star, or not, we all know that the sepulchres of the “three Magi”—who rejoice in the quite Teutonic names of Kaspar and Melchior, Balthazar being the only exception, and the two having little of the Chaldean ring in them—are shown by the priests in the famous cathedral of Cologne, where the Magian bodies are not only supposed, but firmly believed to have been buried.

1129.

This tradition about the “seventy planets” that preside over the destinies of nations, is based on the Occult cosmogonical teaching that besides our own septenary chain of World-Planets, there are many more in the Solar System.

1130.

Des Esprits, iv. p. 67.

1131.

The Mythological Astronomy of the Ancients Demonstrated; Part the Second, or The Key of Urania: pp. 23, 24. Ed. 1823.

1132.

Every scholar is aware, of course, that the Chaldeans claimed the same digits (432), or 432,000, for their Divine Dynasties as the Hindûs do for their Mahâyuga, namely 4,320,000. Therefore has Dr. Sepp, of Munich, undertaken to support Kepler and Wilford in their charge that the Hindûs borrowed them from the Christians, and the Chaldeans from the Jews, who, it is claimed, expected their Messiah in the lunar year of the world 4,320!!! As these figures, according to ancient writers, were based by Berosus on the 120 Saroses—each of the divisions meaning six Neroses of 600 years each, making a sum total of 432,000 years—they would appear to be peremptory, remarks De Mirville (Des Esprits, iii. p. 24). So the pious professor of Munich undertook to explain them in the correct way. He claims to have solved the riddle by showing that “the saros being composed, according to Pliny, of 222 synodial months, to wit, 18 years 6/10,” the calculator naturally fell back on the figures “given by Suidas,” who affirmed that the “120 saroses made 2,222 sacerdotal and cyclic years, which equalled 1,656 solar years.” (Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus Christ, ii. p. 417.) But Suidas said nothing of the kind; and, even supposing he had, he would prove little, if anything, by such a statement. The Neroses and Saroses were the same thorn in the side of uninitiated ancient writers as the apocalyptic 666 of the “Great Beast” is in that of the modern, and the former figures have found their unlucky Newtons, as have the latter.

1133.

See Isis Unveiled, ii. p. 132.

1134.

The reader has to bear in mind that the phrase “climacteric year” has more than the usual significance, when used by Occultists and Mystics. It is not only a critical period, during which some great change is periodically expected, whether in human or cosmic constitution, but it likewise pertains to universal spiritual changes. The Europeans called every 63rd year the “grand climacteric,” and perhaps justly supposed those years to be the years produced by multiplying 7 into the odd numbers 3, 5, 7 and 9. But 7 is the real scale of Nature, in Occultism, and 7 has to be multiplied in quite a different way and method than is as yet known to European nations.

1135.

Des Espirits; iv. p. 61.

1136.

ii. p. 490.

1137.

See Recueil de l'Académie des Inscriptions, 1853, quoted in Des Esprits, iv. p. 62.

1138.

Ruins of Empires, p. 360.

1139.

See pp. 54, 196, et seqq.

1140.

For a detailed scientific proof of this conclusion, see page 121 of M. Bailly's work, where the subject is discussed technically.

1141.

Why it should be “fictitious” can never be made plain by European Scientists.

1142.

Bailly's Traité de l'Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, pp. xx. et seq. Ed. 1787.

1143.

Ch. III. “On Matter.”

1144.

Lecture on Protoplasm, by Mr. Huxley.

1145.

Ganot's Physics, p. 68, Atkinson's Translation.

1146.

See Vol. I. pp. 338, 339, quoted from Le Mystère et la Science, Conférences, Père Félix de Notre Dame.

1147.

Behold the work of Cycles and their periodical return! Those who denied such “Entities” (Forces) to be bodies, and called them “Spaces,” were the prototypes of our modern “science-struck” public, and their official teachers, who speak of the Forces of Nature as the imponderable energy of Matter and as modes of motion, and yet hold electricity, for one, as being as atomic as Matter itself—(Helmholtz). Inconsistency and contradiction reign as much in official as in heterodox Science.

1148.

The Virgin of the World of Hermes Mercurius Trismegistus, rendered into English by Dr. Anna Kingsford and Edward Maitland. Pp. 83, 84.

1149.

“Hermes here includes as Gods the sensible Forces of Nature, the elements and phenomena of the Universe,” remarks Dr. A. Kingsford in a foot-note explaining it very correctly. So does Eastern Philosophy.

1150.

Ibid., pp. 64, 65.

1151.