Theosophical University Press Online Edition
Secret Doctrine References

References — SD Volume 1

 

— Title Page —

“There is no Religion higher than Truth.”
see: “Introductory”: “There is no religion (or law) higher than truth” — “SATYĀT [Satyān] NĀSTI PARO DHARMAH” — the motto of the Maharajah of Benares, adopted by the Theosophical Society.” — SD 1:xli
see: Mahabharata, “Çanti Parva” [tr. K. M. Ganguli], 1890: “There is no duty [dharma] which is higher than Truth . . .” — p. 526 (§ clxii)

Preface

— vii —

the history of occultism
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic: A Digest of the Writings of Éliphas Lévi, 1886: “Occult philosophy seems to have been the nurse and godmother of all intellectual forces, the key to all divine obscurities . . . It reigned in Persia with the Magi . . . it endowed India with the most wonderful traditions . . . it civilised Greece . . .” — p. 1
the Aryan Race
see: H. P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, 1888: “The occult doctrine admits of no such divisions as the Aryan and the Semite . . . The Semites, especially the Arabs, are later Aryans . . . To these belong all the Jews and the Arabs.”  “The Aryan races, for instance, now varying from dark brown, almost black, red-brown-yellow, down to the whitest creamy colour, are yet all of one and the same stock . . .” — 2:200, 249
The third volume is entirely ready . . .
see: Boris de Zirkoff, “The Secret Doctrine — Volume III, as Published in 1897: A Survey of its Contents and Authenticity,” H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, v. 14, pp. xxv-xliv.
      [Volumes III and IV of The Secret Doctrine were never published by H. P. Blavatsky, and completed manuscripts of them were never found.  After HPB’s death, a “Third Volume” was compiled in part from unused portions of the early drafts of The Secret Doctrine and other leftover material.  Most of this material is now available in volumes 12 and 14 of H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings.]
“Isis Unveiled”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled: A Master-Key to the Mysteries of Ancient and Modern Science and Theology, 1877.

— viii —

this book is not the Secret Doctrine in its entirety
see: Godfrey Higgins, Anacalypsis, 1836: “How can any one consider these striking circumstances and not see that almost all ancient history and epic poetry are mythological, — the secret doctrines of the priests, disguised in parables, in a thousand forms?” — 1:366
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “In the ancient Secret Learning were teachings as to the Deity, Its essence and Nature . . . It also contained secret doctrines, as to the creation and governance of the world by the Deity and the spiritual energies . . . These doctrines were kept secret to prevent any misconceptions and misuse of them, by the unlearned and unmetaphysical minds . . .” — p. 222
Dzyan
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The word Ch‘an (in old Chinese, jan and dan), originally signifying ‘resign,’ had not the meaning to ‘contemplate’ (now its commonest sense), before the Buddhists adopted it to represent the Sanscrit term Dhyana.  The word in Chinese books is spelt in full jan-na, and is explained, ‘to reform one’s self by contemplation or quiet thought.’ ”  “We are told that when the use of books was carried to excess, and the true nature of humanity veiled from view, Bodhidharma arrived with a tradition of his own teaching, that men by becoming conscious of their own nature would attain the state of Buddha.  He became the chief founder of the esoteric schools . . . The common word for the esoteric schools is dan, Sanscrit Dhyana, now called in the modern sound given to the character, ch‘an.” — pp. 129 fn., 155-6
De minimis non curat lex
see: B. V. Abbott, Dictionary of Terms Used in Jurisprudence, 1879: “De minimis non curat lex.  The law does not concern itself about trifles.” — 1:345

Introductory

— xvii —

“Gently to hear, kindly to judge”
p/q: William Shakespeare, Henry V: “Piece out our imperfections with your thoughts . . . Gently to hear, kindly to judge . . .” — Prologue, lines 23, 34
“neither esotericism nor Buddhism”
p/q: T. W. Rhys Davids, “Theosophy and Buddhism,” July 24, 1886: “It also calls its doctrines Esoteric Buddhism.  But, however interesting, two things may be said of them without fear of mistake, and these are that they are not esoteric, and that they are not Buddhism.” — p. 989 (The Spectator, v. 59)
Mr. Sinnett’s work
see: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 5th edition, “Annotated and Enlarged by the Author,” 1885.

— xviii —

the difference between “Buddhism” . . . and Budha . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘. . . Verily, thou art wise.’  And, hence, his name was Budha {‘He who knows.’  Much erroneous speculation has originated in confounding this Budha, the son of Soma, and regent of the planet Mercury, — ‘he who knows,’ ‘the intelligent,’ — with Buddha, any deified mortal, or ‘he by whom truth is known’; or, as individually applicable, Gautama or Śākya . . . The two characters have nothing in common}.” — 4:4, 4-5 fn. (iv.6)
we did our best to correct the mistake.  (See Theosophist, June, 1883 [1884].)
see: The Theosophist, Vol. V, No. 9, June, 1884: “. . . the name of Esoteric Buddhism was given to Mr. Sinnett’s latest publication, not because the doctrine propounded therein is meant to be specially identified with any particular form of Faith, but because Buddhism means the doctrine of the Buddhas, the Wise, i.e., the Wisdom-Religion. — D. K. M. [Damodar K. Mavalankar]” — p. 225 note
      “We are in a position to state that Mr. Sinnett never intended to maintain that Buddhism, as popularly conceived, is the nearest approach ever made to the ancient Wisdom-Religion. . . . — T. S. [T. Subba Row]” — p. 225 note
“two years ago . . . neither I nor any other European living . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 5th ed., 1885: “Two years ago, neither I, nor any other European living, knew the alphabet of the science here for the first time put into a scientific shape . . . the science of Spiritual Causes and their Effects . . .” — p. xxiii (“Preface to the Original Edition”)

— xix —

Adhi Budha . . . an appellation given by the earliest Aryans to the Unknown deity
see: Franz Hartmann, Magic White and Black, 1886: “. . . without beginning and without an end, penetrating and pervading all, from the endless and unimaginable periphery to the invisible and incomprehensible center (in Man) is Parabrahm (Adi-Budha or God) . . . Its highest manifestation is Supreme Wisdom . . .” — p. v
used by Aryâsanga in his Secret treatises
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . Āryāsanga . . . who founded the Yogāchārya school {Āryāsanga is said to have been taught his doctrine by the future Buddha Maitreya . . . from whom he received back the five short treatises in verse known in Tibet as ‘the five books of Maitreya’} . . .” — p. 32
the word “Brahmâ” not being found in the Vedas and the early works
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The name Brahmā is not found in the Vedas and Brāhmaṇas, in which the active creator is known as Hiraṇya-garbha, Prajāpati, &c. . . .” — p. 57
“the primeval uncreated cause of all”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. H. H. Wilson, ed. Fitzedward Hall, 1864-77: “Before (the evolution of) the mundane egg, existed Brahmā, who was Hiraṇyagarbha, the form of (that supreme) Brahma which consists of Vishṇu as identical with Rig-, Yajur-, and Sāma-(Vedas); the primeval, uncreated cause {Ādibhūta} of all worlds.” — 3:230 & fn. (iv.1)
the “Buddha of Wisdom unmoved”
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “. . . after passing worlds equal in number to the dust of ten of these kingdoms, there is one termed the golden-coloured world.  The Buddha of ‘wisdom unmoved’ presides there.” — p. 231
Buddhi is the faculty of cognizing . . . the discernment of good and evil
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Buddhi is that which communicates to soul the knowledge of good and evil.” — 1:32 fn.
“When Buddhi absorbs our Ego-tism (destroys it) . . .”
see: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, July 1886: “Manas being the organ of doubt or the production of multiplicity of concepts in relations to the one and the same objective reality . . . if the manas attains tranquillity, the world of illusions is destroyed.  For then the buddhi having no hypothetical concepts with regard to the one objective reality to deal with, reflects that reality and the ahankara [egoity] is destroyed by the destructions of its limitations, and becomes merged in the absolute self.” — p. 663 fn. (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— xx —

Saptaparna cave . . . the Cheta cave of Fa-hian
see: Fā-Hien, A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms, tr. James Legge, 1886: “Going on still to the west . . . they found the cavern called Śrataparṇa, the place where, after the nirvāṇa of Buddha, 500 Arhats collected the Sūtras.” — p. 85

— Footnotes

the word Janna is defined as “to reform one’s self by meditation and knowledge”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The word in Chinese books is spelt in full jan-na, and is explained, ‘to reform one’s self by contemplation or quiet thought.’ ” — p. 129 fn.

— xxi —

His Secret Doctrine . . . differed in no wise from that of the initiated Brahmins
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “On most points of doctrinal speculation, Buddhism is still but one aspect of the older Brahmanism. . . . Buddhism is perfectly intelligible as one outcome of that play of thought on high spiritual topics, which in its other . . . manifestations, we see in the Upanishads and the Gītā.” — p. 25 (Introduction)
The Buddha was . . . a disciple of the “twice-born” (the initiated Brahmins)
see: Ernest Eitel, Hand-book of Chinese Buddhism, 1888: “Kāśyapa Buddha . . . The 3rd of the 5 Buddhas of the Bhadra Kalpa . . . a Brahman, born at Benares. . . . Śākyamuni was formerly (as Prabhāpāla) his disciple . . .” — p. 73
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The full Initiates in the mysteries the re-generated among men were denominated the twice-born . . . The Brahman as the ‘Twice-born’ is assimilated to the divinity on this ground.” — 1:550

— xxii —

Dzyan (or “Dzan”)
see: A. Bastian, Der Buddhismus, 1882: “Lastly, he completed the meditation which is devoid of all pleasure and pain, and is absolute knowledge. {The dzan or meditation . . . Djnana (durch Dhyana erlangt) schliesst Mokscha ein} [Wisdom (attained through abstract meditation) invests one with freedom from the bonds of material life].” — p. 264 & fn.

— xxiii —

the destruction of the Alexandrian Library
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “At the time of the contest for the throne, in 51 b.c., between Cleopatra and her brother Dionysius Ptolemy, the Bruckion, which contained over seven hundred thousand rolls, all bound in wood and fire-proof parchment, was undergoing repairs, and a great portion of the original manuscripts, considered among the most precious, and which were not duplicated, were stored away in the house of one of the librarians.  As the fire which consumed the rest was but the result of accident, no precautions had been taken at the time.  But they add, that several hours passed between the burning of the fleet, set on fire by Caesar’s order, and the moment when the first buildings situated near the harbor caught fire in their turn; and that all the librarians, aided by several hundred slaves attached to the museum, succeeded in saving the most precious of the rolls.” — 2:27

— Footnotes

no bribes or threats of Akbar could extort from the Brahmans . . .
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “Yet, how small was the collection of sacred books that even an Emperor of India could command not more than 300 years ago, compared to what may now be found in the library of any poor scholar!  We have the original text of the Veda, which neither the bribes nor the threats of Akbar could extort from the Brahmans.” — p. 23 (First Lecture)

— xxiv —

Badáonì . . . had an undisguised horror for Akbar’s mania for idolatrous religions
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . the following extracts from the Ain i Akbari, the Muntakhab at Tawarikh, and the Dabistān, may be of interest . . . They are taken from Dr. Blochmann’s new translation of the Ain i Akbari . . . Abulfazl, the author of the Ain i Akbari, writes as the professed friend of Akbar, whose Vizier he was; Badāonī writes as the declared enemy of Abulfazl, and with an undisguised horror at Akbar’s religious views.” — p. 68

— Footnotes

“His majesty relished inquiries into the sects . . .”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “ ‘. . . His Majesty relished enquiries into the sects of these infidels (who cannot be counted, so numerous they are, and who have no end of revealed books . . .).’ ” — p. 92
see: Abul Fazl ’Allami, The Ain i Akbari, Vol. I, tr. H. Blochmann, 1873, p. 180
“As they . . . surpass other learned men in their treatises on morals . . .”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “ ‘Moreover, Sumanīs and Brahmins managed to get frequent private interviews with His Majesty.  As they surpass other learned men in their treatises on morals, and on physical and religious sciences, and reach a high degree in their knowledge of the future, in spiritual power and human perfection, they brought proofs, based on reason and testimony . . . and inculcated their doctrines so firmly, and so skilfully represented things as quite self-evident which require consideration, that no man, by expressing his doubts, could now raise a doubt in His Majesty, even if mountains were to crumble to dust, or the heavens were to tear asunder.’ ” — p. 90
see: Abul Fazl ’Allami, The Ain i Akbari, Vol. I, tr. H. Blochmann, 1873, pp. 179-80
This work “was kept secret . . . till the reign of Jahângir.”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . Badāonī . . . His work, the Muntakhab at Tawarikh, was kept secret, and was not published till the reign of Jahāngīr.” — pp. 68-9

— xxv —

He is said to have written 930 books on Ethics . . . and seventy on magic
see: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “Lao-tse . . . is reported to have written a large number of books: no less than 930 on different questions of faith, morality and worship, and 70 on magic.” — pp. 114-15
see: Le Livre de la Voie et de la Vertu . . . par le philosophe Lao-Tseu, tr. Stanislas Julien, 1842: “Il composa neuf cent trente livres pour enseigner à vivre dans le siècle [He composed nine hundred and thirty books to teach how to live in that age].” — p. xxvii
His great work . . . has in it . . . only “about 5,000 words”
p/q:  Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “His principal work, however, the Tao-te-king . . . consists only of about 5,000 words . . .” — p. 115
see: Le Livre de la Voie et de la Vertu . . . par le philosophe Lao-Tseu, tr. Stanislas Julien, 1842: “In-hi le pria . . . de lui enseigner sa doctrine, et alors Lao-tseu la lui exposa en cinq mille mots [In-hi begged him . . . to teach him his doctrine, and then Lao-tzu disclosed it to him in five thousand words].” — p. xxxi
      “. . . Sse-ma-thsien rapporte, dans ses Mémoires historiques, que le livre de Lao-tseu renfermait un peu plus de cinq mille mots [Sse-ma-thsien reports, in his historical Memoires, that the book of Lao-tzu contained a little more than five thousand words] . . .” — p. xxxv
“the text is unintelligible without commentaries . . .”
p/q:  Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . the text is unintelligible without copious commentaries, so that M. Julien had to consult more than sixty commentators for the purpose of his translation, the earliest going back as far as the year 163 b.c.” — p. 115
see: Le Livre de la Voie et de la Vertu . . . par le philosophe Lao-Tseu, tr. Stanislas Julien, 1842: “nombre et caractère des éditions et commentaires de lao-tseu.  Tsiao-hong rapporte les titres de soixante-quatre éditions de Lao-tseu [number and character of the editions and commentaries of lao-tzu.  Tsiao-hong reports the titles of sixty-four editions of Lao-tseu . . .” — p. xxxvi
      “Édition A. — Cette édition renferme le commentaire composé, sous la dynastie des Han, par Lo-tchin-kong . . . On rapporte que, l’an 163 av. J. C. il présenta son commentaire à l’empereur Hiao-wen-ti [Edition A. — This edition contains the commentary, put together during the Han dynasty, by Lo-tchin-kong . . . It is reported that he presented his commentary to emperor Hiao-wen-ti in the year 163 B.C.] . . .” — p. xxxix

— Footnotes

“If we turn to China . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “If lastly we turn to China, we find that the religion of Confucius is founded on the Five King and the Four Shu — books in themselves of considerable extent, and surrounded by voluminous commentaries, without which even the most learned scholars would not venture to fathom the depth of their sacred canon.” — p. 114

— xxvi —

Written in Greek by Berosus, a priest of the temple of Belus . . .
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “We have no reason to doubt the accuracy of Berosus in describing the religion of the Babylonians . . . He was a Babylonian by birth, a priest of the temple of Belus, a contemporary of Alexander the Great.  He wrote the History of the Chaldeans, in Greek, evidently intending it to be read by the Greek conquerors . . .” — pp. 48-9
from the astronomical and chronological records . . . covering a period of 200,000 years
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . and he states in his first book that he composed it from the registers, astronomical and chronological, which were preserved at Babylon, and which comprised a period of 200,000 years . . .” — p. 49
Alexander Polyhistor made a series of extracts from it . . .
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The history of Berosus is lost.  Extracts from it had been made by Alexander Polyhistor, in the first century before our era; but his work too is lost.” — p. 49
Eusebius used these extracts in writing his Chronicon . . .
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “[Berosus’ History] still existed, however, at the time when Eusebius (270-340) wrote his Chronicon, and was used by him in describing the ancient history of Babylon.” — p. 49
Bunsen charges him with mutilating history
see: Christian C. J. Bunsen, Egypt’s Place in Universal History, 1848-67: “The first author . . . was Eusebius, the celebrated historian, Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, in the time of Constantine.  He had undertaken a comprehensive scheme of adjustment between the Scripture dates and those of all the other ancient nations.  He is, therefore, the originator of that systematic theory of synchronisms which has so often subsequently maimed and mutilated history . . .” — 1:206

— Footnotes

George Smith (vide his “Chaldean account of Genesis”)
see: George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, “containing the description of the Creation, The Fall of Man, the Deluge, the Tower of Babel, the Times of the Patriarchs, and Nimrod; Babylonian Fables, and Legends of the Gods; from the Cuneiform Inscriptions” (1876).

— xxvii —

A few facts that were contained in the Berosian History are given in Part II of Vol. II
see: “The Gods of Light Proceed from the Gods of Darkness,” SD 2:483-92.
the Rig-Veda contains only “about 10,580 verses, or 1,028 hymns”
see: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The hymns of the Rig-veda . . . are only 1,028 in number, consisting of about 10,580 verses.” — pp. 107-8
each volume . . . “weighing from four to five pounds”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The Tibetan edition of the Buddhist canon, consisting of two collections, the Kanjur and Tanjur, numbers about 325 volumes folio, each weighing in the Pekin edition from four to five pounds.” — p. 113
the sacred canon of the Southern Church is said to contain 29,368,000 letters . . .
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The text and commentaries of the Buddhist canon contain, according to a statement in the Saddharma-alaṇkāra {Spence Hardy, The Legends and Theories of the Buddhists, p. 66}, 29,368,000 letters.” — p. 113 & fn.
“five or six times the amount of the matter contained in the Bible” . . .
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “But if we consider that the English Bible is said to contain about three millions and a half of letters {3,567,180} . . . five or six times that amount would hardly seem enough as a rough estimate of the bulk of the Buddhist scriptures.” — p. 113 & fn.
(in reality there are 333, Kanjur comprising 108, and Tanjur 225 volumes)
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The Kanjur consists of one hundred and eight large volumes . . . The Tanjur comprises 225 volumes . . .” — p. 78
“the translators . . . have interwoven them with their own commentaries . . .”
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “But it is to be regretted that the translators, instead of supplying us with correct versions, have interwoven them with their own commentaries, for the purpose of justifying the dogmas of their several schools.” — pp. 76-7
“according to a tradition . . . 84,000 tracts . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “According to a tradition preserved by the Buddhist schools of the South and of the North, the sacred canon comprised originally 80,000 or 84,000 tracts, but most of them were lost, so that there remained but 6,000.” — p. 114

— xxviii —

Buddhist Arhats began . . . propagating the new faith . . . as early as the year 300 before our era
see: Keith Johnston, A Physical, Historical, and Descriptive Geography, 1881: “In about 300 b.c. the faith was carried by zealous missionaries over all parts of eastern Asia . . . About 65 a.d. it was acknowledged by the Chinese Emperor as a third religion, and from the fourth century a.d. onward during six centuries a stream of Buddhist pilgrims continued to flow from China to India.” — p. 275
in the year 61 a.d. when Kashyapa, at the invitation of the Emperor Ming-ti . . .
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “It was the year A.D. 61, that the Chinese emperor Ming-ti . . . sent messengers to India to ask for . . . Buddhist books and teachers.  A native of Central India named Kashiapmadanga, with others, accompanied them back.” — pp. 87-8

— Footnotes

Lassen . . . shows a Buddhist monastery erected in the Kailas range in 137 B.C.
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . the monastery . . . is reported to have been erected in the year 137 B.C. on the slopes of the Kailās range {Lassen, ‘Ind. Altertumskunde,’ Vol. II., p. 1072} . . .” — p. 63 & fn.
see: Christian Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, 1866-74: “Auch in der Richtung jenseits des grossen Schneegebirges, wo am Kailāsa ein Buddhistisches Kloster vor dem Jahre 137 vor Chr. G. bestand [Also in the direction beyond the great snowy mountains, where there was a Buddhist monastery at Kailasa before the year 137 B.C.] . . .” — 2:1091
and General Cunningham, earlier than that
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “According to Cunningham, Buddhism was introduced into Ladak about the year 240 b.c. . . .” — p. 71

— xxviii-xxix —

“. . . we see still standing the Pyramids . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “Along the shores of the ancient Nile we see still standing the Pyramids, and the ruins of temples and labyrinths, their walls covered with hieroglyphic inscriptions, and with the strange pictures of gods and goddesses. . . . Yet though much has been deciphered in the ancient records of that mysterious race, the main spring of the religion of Egypt and the original intention of its ceremonial worship are far from being fully disclosed to us.” — p. 118

— xxix —

“there is a natural connection between language and religion” . . .
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “We found, first of all, that there is a natural connexion between language and religion . . . We found, secondly, that there was a common Aryan religion before the separation of the Aryan race; a common Semitic religion before the separation of the Semitic race; and a common Turanic religion before the separation of the Chinese and the other tribes belonging to the Turanian class.” — pp. 215-16
“three ancient centres of religion” and “three centres of language”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “We found, in fact, three ancient centres of religion as we had before three ancient centres of language, and we have thus gained, I believe, a truly historical basis for a scientific treatment of the principal religions of the world.” — p. 216
Odin “was worshipped . . . anterior to the age of the Veda and of Homer.”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “Odin . . . was worshipped as the supreme deity during a period long anterior to the age of the Veda and of Homer.” — p. 318 (“On False Analogies in Comparative Theology”)

— xxx —

“fragments of a primeval revelation . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . that some fragments of a primeval revelation, granted to the ancestors of the whole race of mankind, had been preserved in the temples of Greece and Italy.” — p. 283
the theory “that there was a primeval preternatural revelation . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The theory again, that there was a primeval preternatural revelation granted to the fathers of the human race . . . would find but few supporters at present . . .” — pp. 40-1

— xxxi —

Missionaries . . . were silly enough to maintain that “the Hindus were even now almost Christians . . .”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “ ‘. . . one or two missionaries have been absurd enough . . . to urge, “that the Hindus were even now almost Christians, because their Brahmā, Vishnu, and Mahēsa, were no other than the Christian Trinity”. . .’ ” — pp. 288-9
see: William Jones, “On the Gods of Greece, Italy, and India,” 1798, p. 272 (Asiatick Researches, v. 1)
facts cited by the Oxford Professor . . . concerning the now famous interpolations
see: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . for several years essay after essay appeared in the Asiatic Researches, with extracts from Sanskrit MSS., containing not only the names of Deukalion, Prometheus, and other heroes and deities of Greece, but likewise the names of Adam and Eve, of Abraham and Sarah, and all the rest.”  “At last, however, the coincidences became too great.  The MSS. were again carefully examined; and then it was found that a clever forgery had been committed . . .” — pp. 296, 299 (“On False Analogies in Comparative Theology”)
Rawlinson shows an undeniably Vedic influence in the early mythology of Babylon
see: George Rawlinson, The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World, 1881: “Such, in outline, is the earliest phase of Arian religion, and it is common to both branches of the stock, and anterior to the rise of the Iranic, Median, or Persian system.” — 2:323-4
Babylonia was . . . the seat of Sanskrit and Brahman learning
see: Vans Kennedy, Researches into the Nature and Affinity of Ancient and Hindu Mythology, 1831: “In composing my former work . . . it naturally occurred to me that the argument which I maintained in it would have been greatly corroborated, could I have at the same time evinced that the original seat of the mythology which prevails in India at the present day was Babylonia . . .” — p. iii (Preface)

— Footnotes

the clever forgery . . . of all that the Pundits of Col. Wilford had heard from him . . .
see: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “Convinced that the Brahmans possessed in their ancient literature the originals, not only of Greek and Roman mythology, but likewise of the Old Testament history . . . [Wilford] held out the hopes of ample rewards for any extracts from their sacred literature . . . the Pandits yielded . . . and for several years essay after essay appeared in the Asiatic Researches . . .”  “At last, however, the coincidences became too great.  The MSS. were again carefully examined; and then it was found that a clever forgery had been committed . . .” — pp. 295-6, 299

— xxxii —

the Mother of Mercury . . . was Maïa, the mother of Buddha (Gautama), also Mâyâ . . .
see: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “. . . the fact that the mother of Mercury was called Maia, and the mother of Buddha Māyā, could therefore, have had no bearing whatever on the name assigned to the Indian Wednesday [Budhavāra].” — p. 314.
see: “The Zodiac and Its Antiquity”: “Laplace is said to have felt struck with amazement at the idea of the days of Mercury (Wednesday), Venus (Friday), Jupiter (Thursday), Saturn (Saturday), and others being related to the days of the week in the same order and with the same names in India as in Northern Europe.” — SD 1:652
since Bopp has “laid down his code of phonetic laws”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “These principles and these cautions were hardly thought of in the days of Sir William Jones and Colonel Wilford, but they ought to be thought of at present.  Thus, before Bopp had laid down his code of phonetic laws . . . one cannot be very much surprised that Buddha should have been identified with Minos . . .” — pp. 304-5
Hurricanes may “tear up the sands . . .”
p/q: Joseph Addison, Cato; A Tragedy in Five Acts, 1816:
      “. . . hurricanes descend,
Wheel through the air, in circling eddies play,
Tear up the sands, and sweep whole plains away.” — p. 47 (Act Two)

— xxxiii —

“Not a pool, not a bush, not a house is seen . . .”
p/q: Many Thoughts of Many Minds, comp. Henry Southgate, 1862:
“Not a pool, not a bush, not a house is seen,
  And the mountain-range forms a rugged screen
  Round the parch’d flats, spread as a lake between. — Methuen.” — p. 158
The Russian traveller . . . Prjevalsky, found . . . the ruins of two enormous cities
see: N. M. Prjevalsky, From Kiakhta to the Sources of the Yellow River [Russian text], 1888.  [A long excerpt from this book, translated into English, appears in the following work:]
      Folke Bergman, Archaeological Researches in Sinkiang, 1939: “ ‘At Charchan there are, in the middle of the desert . . . traces of an old culture — ruins of towers and houses and old canals.  According to local tradition two cities existed here at different epochs.’ ” — p. 205
“The natives often find copper and gold coins, melted silver ingots . . .”
see: Folke Bergman, Archaeological Researches in Sinkiang, 1939: “ ‘Here they find coins of copper and gold, silver bars, gold ornaments, jewellery, iron objects and copper vessels, and, oddly enough sherds of glass . . .’ ” — p. 205 (Prjevalsky, From Kiakhta to the Sources of the Yellow River)
“Coffins . . . within which beautifully preserved embalmed bodies are found . . .”
see: Folke Bergman, Archaeological Researches in Sinkiang, 1939: “ ‘They also excavate tombs containing wooden coffins.  In these the corpses are very well preserved, thanks to the extreme dryness of the ground and the air.’ ” — p. 205 (Prjevalsky, From Kiakhta to the Sources of the Yellow River)
“The male mummies are all extremely tall . . .”
see: Folke Bergman, Archaeological Researches in Sinkiang, 1939: “ ‘The men are of very high stature and have long hair . . . Once a tomb was discovered with twelve male corpses in a sitting position.’ ” — p. 205 (Prjevalsky, From Kiakhta to the Sources of the Yellow River)

— xxxiii – xxxiv —

“Another time . . . a young girl was discovered . . . Her eyes were closed with golden discs . . .”
see: Folke Bergman, Archaeological Researches in Sinkiang, 1939: “ ‘Another time a young girl was discovered in her coffin.  Her eyes were covered with leaves of gold, and her head was wound round with a gold ribbon from chin to crown.  She had been dressed in a long garment, now totally decayed, but on the breast were some thin stars of gold; her feet were bare.’ ” — p. 205 (Prjevalsky, From Kiakhta to the Sources of the Yellow River)

— xxxiv —

The Secret Doctrine was the universally diffused religion . . .
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “There is an invisible universe within the visible one, a world of causes within the world of effects. . . . There is a world of soul within a world of matter, and the two are one, and caused by the world of spirit. . . . this ancient science, which the moderns ignore, is perhaps as old as the world.  It was known to the ancient prophets, to the Arhats and Rishis of the East, to initiated Brahmins, Egyptians, and Greeks.  Its fundamental doctrines are found in the Vedas as well as in the Bible.  Upon these doctrines rest the fundaments of the religions of the world.” — pp. x-xi

— xxxv —

such secrets as the Vril
see: Edward Lord Lytton, The Coming Race, 1886: “These people consider that in vril they have arrived at the unity in natural energetic agencies, which has been conjectured by many philosophers . . . These subterranean philosophers assert that, by one operation of vril, which Faraday would perhaps call ‘atmospheric magnetism,’ they can influence the variations of temperature — in plain words, the weather; that by other operations . . . they can exercise influence over minds, and bodies . . .” — pp. 53-4
or the rock-destroying force, discovered by J. W. Keely
see: Mrs. [Clara] Bloomfield-Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “Keely shows us . . . what magnetism is.  By neutralizing or overcoming gravity, he proves to us that he understands its nature . . . and, in the disintegration of quartz, he demonstrates that cohesive force, like gravity, is an ever-existing force, holding together all molecular masses by the infinite velocity of its vibrations; which, were these vibrations to cease for one instant, would fall apart . . .” — p. 149

— xxxvi —

the days when Freemasonry . . . flourished unimpeded in Russia
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . the earliest notice of regular lodges we possess points to the Lodge of Silence in the capital, and the North Star Lodge at Riga, about 1750.  In 1763, the Empress Catherine II. declared herself patroness of the order.” — 2:639

— xxxvi - xxxvii —

Therefore is Confucius . . . “emphatically a transmitter, not a maker”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “But Confucius, though he is called the founder of a new religion, was really but the new preacher of an old religion.  He was emphatically a transmitter, not a maker.  He says himself, ‘I only hand on; I cannot create new things.  I believe in the ancients, and therefore I love them’ {Lün-yü (§ 1.a); Schott, Chinesische Literatur, p. 7}.” — pp. 156-7 & fn.
see: James Legge, The Life and Teachings of Confucius, 1867: “ ‘A transmitter and not a maker, believing in and loving the ancients . . .’ ” — p. 153 (vii.1)

— xxxviii —

the sacred books . . . “were all but unknown . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “The study of Sanskrit brought to light the original documents of three religions, the Sacred Books of the Brahmans, the Sacred Books of the Magians, the followers of Zoroaster, and the Sacred Books of the Buddhists.  Fifty years ago, these three collections of sacred writings were all but unknown, their very existence was doubted, and there was not a single scholar who could have translated a line of the Veda, a line of the Zend-Avesta, or a line of the Buddhist Tripiṭaka.” — 1:24 (“Lecture on the Vedas”)
work of the highest antiquity whose ‘preservation amounts almost to a marvel’
p/q: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “. . . in the Aryan world, the Veda is certainly the oldest book, and its preservation amounts almost to a marvel.” — 1:5 (“Lecture on the Vedas”)
“The said key must be turned seven times . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The said key must be turned seven times before the whole system is divulged.  We will give it but one turn, and thereby allow the profane one glimpse into the mystery.  Happy he, who understands the whole!” — 2:461

— xxxix —

the ancient Mysteries . . . the arcane doctrines were allegorically enacted . . .
see: Samuel Evans, “The Ancient Charges,” Dec. 1864: “All the ancient religions were embodied in the ‘mysteries’ which to the mass of mankind were enacted allegories, the symbolical sense of which was only fully revealed to the initiated.” — p. 77 (Masonic Monthly, 2:2)

— xl —

Volume III of this work
see: Boris de Zirkoff, “The Secret Doctrine — Volume III, as Published in 1897: A Survey of its Contents and Authenticity,” H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, v. 14, pp. xxv-xliv.
      [Volumes III and IV of The Secret Doctrine were never published by H. P. Blavatsky, and completed manuscripts of them were never found.  After HPB’s death, a “Third Volume” was compiled in part from unused portions of the early drafts of The Secret Doctrine and other leftover material.]
bulwarks against . . . religions of the Past . . . the “New Dispensation”
see: Albert Barnes, Notes on the Gospels, 1847: “. . . a rite of baptism, or washing . . . was done to signify that they renounced the errors and worship of the Pagans . . . John [the Baptist] found this custom in use; and as he was calling on the Jews to a new dispensation, to a change in their form of religion, he administered this rite of baptism . . .” — 1:41

— xli —

“ . . . the sun like blood, the earth a tomb . . .”
p/q: George Gordon Byron (Lord Byron), Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, 1818:
“Or, it may be, with demons, who impair
  The strength of better thoughts . . .
  Making the sun like blood, the earth a tomb,
  The tomb a hell, and hell itself a murkier gloom.” — p. 20 (4:xxxiv)
“witness to the wonderful speeches of a free-thinker who belongs to a thousand sects”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “Take Faizi’s Dīwān [poems of Faizi] to bear witness to the wonderful speeches of a free-thinker who belongs to a thousand sects. . . . ‘In the assembly of the day of resurrection, when past things shall be forgiven, the sins of the Ka’bah will be forgiven for the sake of the dust of Christian churches.’ ” — pp. 256-7
“The sins of Islam are . . .”
p/q: F. Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The sins of Islam are as worthless as the dust of Christianity.  On the day of resurrection, both Muhammadans and Christians will see the vanity of their religious doctrines.  Men fight about religion on earth; in heaven they shall find out that there is only one true religion, the worship of God’s spirit.” — p. 257 fn.
“There is no religion (or law) higher than truth”
see: Mahabharata, “Çanti Parva” [tr. K. M. Ganguli], 1890: “There is no duty [dharma] which is higher than Truth . . .” — p. 526 (§ clxii)

— xlii —

races that preceded . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . the theory of a prior creation and destruction of worlds is amply illustrated in Kabbalistic philosophy.  The Zohar says: ‘There were old worlds, which perished . . . the primordial worlds which could not continue . . . Because the Man, represented by the ten Sephiroth, was not as yet.’ ” — 2:407-8
our “Adamic” Humanity
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “So is the Holy Aged an absolute light . . . concealed and incomprehensible.  We can only comprehend Him through those luminous emanations . . . In their totality and unity, the ten Sephiroth represent the Archetypal Man, Adam Kadmon . . .” — 2:406
Volume I of “Isis” begins with a reference to “an old book”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “There exists somewhere in this wide world an old Book . . .” — 1:1

— xliii —

the many volumes of Kiu-ti
see: Francesco Orazio Della Penna, “Del Regno del Thibet (1730),” Nov. 1834: “Questi volumi dividonsi in due specie di leggi, l’una della quali contiene settanta libri, che chiamano leggi del Dotè {Dho dhè . . . les Soûtras}, e l’altra che consiste in trent’otto volumi li chiamano Khiutè {Ghiou dhè . . . les Tantras} [These volumes are divided into two kinds of ordinances, one of which contains seventy books, which they call the Laws of Dotè {Dho dhè . . . the Sûtras}, and the other which consists of thirty-eight volumes called Kiu-tè {Ghiou dhè . . . the Tantras}].” — pp. 420-1 & fns. (Nouveau Journal Asiatique, v. 14)
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The principal rites and formulæ of [Tibetan] mysticism . . . are laid down in two series of works, which are known under the collective titles of Dhāranīs (in Tibetan Zung), and Tantras (in Tibetan Gyut).”  “Phonetic Transcription: Gyut . . . Transliteration: rGyud.” — pp. 48, 379
Sepher Jezirah, the work attributed by the Hebrew Kabalists to their Patriarch Abraham
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “The Book of Creation or Jetzira.  This marvellous and famous document pretends to be a monologue of the patriarch Abraham . . .” — p. 65
the Chaldean Book of Numbers
see: H. P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, 1888: “It is certain that Ibn Gebirol based his doctrines upon the oldest Kabalistic sources, namely, the ‘Chaldean Book of Numbers’ . . .”  “. . . the genuine ‘Chaldean Book of Numbers,’ which is not extant.” — 2:461 fn., 626 fn.
see: Gerald Massey, A Book of the Beginnings, 1881: “In the Chaldean Kabbala the gods are each designated by a number in a series that ranges from one to sixty.  A tablet in the library of Nineveh gives a list of the chief gods, together with the mystical number of each.” — 2:508
there was a time when its language . . . was known to Initiates of every nation
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Language, Universal. — This consists in certain signs and tokens conveyed from one to another in silence, and is irrespective of country, race, or creed, and indeed can really constitute the only universal method of communication between diverse members of the human family.” — 2:440
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “We can imagine a language in its first beginnings, in which every act and operation of the mind, every idea and relation, was expressed by a matter-image or symbol . . . its words only mental pictures . . .”  “The early writing comprised more especially the essence, and fundamental indicia of knowledge, and its symbols were incomprehensible to the uninitiated.” — pp. xi-xii, 175

— Footnotes

Rabbi Jehoshua Ben Chananea . . . openly declared that he had performed “miracles”
see: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “Selon le Thalmud de Jérusalem, un docteur bien plus ancien, R. Jehoschoua ben Chanania, se vantait lui-même d’opérer, à l’aide du Livre de la création, des miracles à peu près semblables [According to the Jerusalem Talmud, a very old scholar, Rabbi Jehoshua ben Chananea, boasted that he himself could perform more or less similar miracles with the aid of the Book of Creation].” — p. 76
Franck . . . names two other thaumaturgists . . .
see: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “ ‘Pendant chaque veille du sabbat, dit le Thalmud de Babylone, rabi Chanina et rabi Oschaia s’asseyaient pour méditer sur le Livre de la création, et ils produisaient une génisse de trois ans qui leur servait ensuite de nourriture [During every evening before the Sabbath, says the Babylonian Talmud, Rabbi Chanina and Rabbi Oschaia tried to meditate on the Book of Creation, and they produced a three-year-old heifer which they then used as nourishment].’ ” — pp. 75-6
the late modern Magus, Eliphas Lévi, publicly asserts it in print
see: Eliphas Levi, The Paradoxes of the Highest Science, 1883: “The Science of Magism is contained in the books of the Kabala, in the Symbols of Egypt and of India, in the books of Hermes Trismagistus, in the oracles of Zoroaster, and in the writings of some great men of the Middle Ages . . . The works of Magic are divination or prescience, Thaumaturgy or the use of exceptional powers, and Theurgy or rule over visions and spirits.” — pp. 68-9 (Theosophical Miscellanies, no. 2)

— xliv —

Origen, Synesius, and even Clemens Alexandrinus, had themselves been initiated
see: F. W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, 1881: “Both Clemens and Origen avowed that they had certain esoteric doctrines . . . In the Stromata, St. Clemens says that there were some things which he was afraid to write . . . Origen speaks of ‘hidden mysteries of God which must not be committed to paper . . . because they are known to the learned, and can never be known to the unlearned.’ . . . Synesius, when he accepted the bishopric of Ptolemais . . . held the Platonic distinction between exoteric and esoteric truth, and merely pledged himself not to teach in public any acknowledged heresy.” — p. 297

— xlv —

one fountain head, the ever-flowing perennial source
see: Emile Burnouf, The Science of Religions, 1888: “A closer attention paid to these great religions will discover that the fundamental theory upon which they all are built was drawn from a common source.”  “. . . all religions proceed from one common source . . . there is at the bottom of all orthodoxies an amount of common dogmas which represents the primitive religion . . .” — pp. 176, 230

— xlvi —

“I have here made only a nosegay . . .”
p/q: Michel de Montaigne, Essays of Montaigne, tr. Charles Cotton, 1877: “Truly, it is much more easy to speak like Aristotle, and to live like Caesar, than to speak and live as Socrates did . . . our faculties are not so trained up; we do not try, we do not know them; we invest ourselves with those of others, and let our own lie idle; as some one may say of me, that I have here only made a nosegay of culled flowers, and have brought nothing of my own but the thread that ties them.” — 3:364 (“Of Physiognomy,” ch. xii)

— xlvi-xlvii —

the famous law of probabilities . . . If two persons give their evidence to a fact . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . cette fameuse loi des probabilités . . . Si deux personnes rapportent un fait et lui donnent chacune en particulier 5/6 de certitude, le fait aura alors 35/36 de certitude, c’est-à-dire que sa probabilité sera à sa non-probabilité dans le rapport de 35 à 1.  Si trois témoignages se réunissent, la certitude sera de 215/216. . . . [that famous law of probabilities . . . If two persons give their evidence to a fact, and thus impart to it each of them 5/6 of certitude, that fact will then have 35/36 of certitude, that is, its probability will bear to its improbability the ratio of 35 to 1.  If three such evidences are joined together, the certitude will become 215/216. . . .” — 2:52-3

Proem

— 1 —

(see Part II., “The Mundane Egg”)
see: SD 1:359-68.

— Footnotes

The “Unconscious,” according to von Hartmann . . . “superior to all consciousness”
see: Eduard von Hartmann, Philosophy of The Unconscious, tr. William C. Coupland, 1884: “Of this unconscious clairvoyant intelligence we have come to perceive that in its infallible purposive activity, embracing out of time all ends and means in one . . . it infinitely transcends the halting, stilted gait of the discursive reflection of consciousness, ever limited to a single point, dependent on sense-perception, memory, and inspirations of the Unconscious.  We shall thus be compelled to designate this intelligence, which is superior to all consciousness, at once unconscious and super-conscious.” — 2:247

— 2 —

one self-existing reality . . . “a chaos to the sense, a Kosmos to the reason”
see: B. F. Cocker, Christianity and Greek Philosophy, 1870: “What, then, is that which is at once single and multiple, identical and diversified — which we perceive as the combination of a thousand elements, yet as the expression of a single spirit — which is a chaos to the sense, a cosmos to the reason?  What is it but harmony — proportion — the one governing the many, the many lost in the one?” — p. 303
“Deity is an arcane, living (or moving) fire . . .”
see: Tennemann & Morell, Manual of the History of Philosophy, 1870: “God is a living fire . . . he is named also πνεῦμα or spirit; he fashions, produces, and permeates all things . . .”  “. . . the world was produced by the action of fire, when the four elements [fire, air, water, earth] . . . were separated from primeval matter . . .” — pp. 137, 138

— Footnotes

Plato . . . in Cratylus . . . θεός is derived . . .
see: Plato, The Cratylus, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1793: “It appears to me, that the most ancient of the Greeks . . . considered those only as gods, which are esteemed such at present by many of the Barbarians; I mean, the sun and the moon, the earth, the stars, and the heavens.  As they therefore perceived all these running round in a perpetual course, from this nature of running they called them gods . . .” — p. 29
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . mais appliqué à tous les dieux en général . . . le mot θεός, comme nous l’apprend Platon, vient du verbe θεῖν, courir, le cercle signifiait le mouvement ou la course de ce dieu [but applied to all the gods in general . . . the word θεός, as Plato teaches us, comes from the verb θεῖν, to run, the circle meant the movement or the course of this god].” — 3:265
(See Book II., “Symbolism of the Cross and Circle.”)
see: “The Symbolism of the Mystery-Names Iao and Jehovah, with their Relation to the Cross and Circle,” SD 2:536-62.

— 3 —

“The esoteric doctrine teaches, like Buddhism and Brahminism . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The esoteric doctrine, then, teaches, like Buddhism and Brahmanism, and even the persecuted Kabala, that the one infinite and unknown Essence exists from all eternity, and in regular and harmonious successions is either passive or active.  In the poetical phraseology of Manu these conditions are called the ‘day’ and the ‘night’ of Brahma.  The latter is either ‘awake’ or ‘asleep.’  The Svābhāvikas, or philosophers of the oldest school of Buddhism (which still exists in Nepaul), speculate but upon the active condition of this ‘Essence,’ which they call Svabhāvāt, and deem it foolish to theorize upon the abstract and ‘unknowable’ power in its passive condition.” — 2:264

— Footnotes

“it is impossible . . . to form the abstract idea of motion . . .”
p/q: George Berkeley, A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, 1887: “And it is equally impossible for me to form the abstract idea of motion distinct from the body moving . . . and the like may be said of all other abstract general ideas whatsoever.” — p. 178 (Introduction, §10)
This will be answered . . . in the Addendum to this Book
see: “Occultism versus Materialism,” SD 1:477-81; and “Is Gravitation a Law?” SD 1:490-9.
“Has science revealed anything . . .”
p/q: Edward Clodd, Science and the Emotions, 1885: “. . . has science revealed anything that weakens or opposes itself to the ancient words in which the essence of all religion, past, present, and to come, is given — ‘to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly before thy God?’  Provided we connote by the word God, not the crude anthropomorphisms which are still the backbone of our current theology, but the symbolic conception of that which is the life and motion of the universe, to know which in the physical order is to know time past, present, and to come, in the existence and successions of phenomena, to know which in the moral order is to know what has been, is, and will be, within the human consciousness.” — p. 13 (South Place Discourses)

— 3-4 —

“Hence they are called atheists . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Hence they are called atheists by both Christian theology and modern scientists; for neither of the two are able to understand the profound logic of their philosophy.” — 2:264

— 4 —

“The former will allow of no other God . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The former will allow of no other God than the personified secondary powers which have blindly worked out the visible universe, and which became with them the anthropomorphic God of the Christians — the Jehovah, roaring amid thunder and lightning.  In its turn, rationalistic science greets the Buddhists and the Svābhāvikas as the ‘positivists’ of the archaic ages.  If we take a one-sided view of the philosophy of the latter, our materialists may be right in their own way.  The Buddhists maintain that there is no Creator but an infinitude of creative powers, which collectively form the one eternal substance, the essence of which is inscrutable — hence not a subject for speculation for any true philosopher.  Socrates invariably refused to argue upon the mystery of universal being, yet no one would ever have thought of charging him with atheism, except those who were bent upon his destruction.” — 2:264
“Upon inaugurating an active period . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Upon inaugurating an active period, says the Secret Doctrine, an expansion of this Divine essence, from within outwardly, occurs in obedience to eternal and immutable law, and the phenomenal or visible universe is the ultimate result of the long chain of cosmical forces thus progressively set in motion.  In like manner, when the passive condition is resumed, a contraction of the Divine essence takes place, and the previous work of creation is gradually and progressively undone.  The visible universe becomes disintegrated, its material dispersed; and ‘darkness,’ solitary and alone, broods once more over the face of the ‘deep.’  To use a metaphor which will convey the idea still more clearly, an outbreathing of the ‘unknown essence’ produces the world; and an inhalation causes it to disappear.  This process has been going on from all eternity, and our present universe is but one of an infinite series which had no beginning and will have no end.” — 2:264-5
“The Days and Nights of Brahmâ” in Part II.
see: SD 1:368-78.
“Aditi in That” (Rig Veda)
see: Rig-Veda-Sanhita, tr. F. Max Müller, 1869: “Aditi . . . is in reality the earliest name invented to express the Infinite . . . the visible Infinite, visible by the naked eye, the endless expanse beyond the earth, beyond the clouds, beyond the sky.  That was called A-diti, the un-bound, the un-bounded [Tat, “that”] . . . the Infinite, as the mother of the principal gods [Deva-Matri] . . .” — p. 230 (Verse 12, note 4: “Aditi, the Infinite”)
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . that — i.e., Brahma — which is beyond reasoning, creation and the like . . .” — 1:44 fn.

— 5 —

as a “Thor’s hammer,” the Jaina cross
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “It is an emblem of activity, as it typifies the continual revolution of the Earth upon its axis; and it also represents the four elements, which, in a mystical sense, constitute the fabric of the Earth. . . . it likewise refers to the Smaragdine Tablet of Hermes . . . The two hands, in their several positions, remind us that that which is above is as that which is below . . . It was the hammer of Thor, celebrated in the mythology of the Norse nations, and the tradition ran that when Thor threw this golden cross, it struck, and, like the boomerang, returned again to his hand.” — 1:352-3
or simply Svastica
see: Edward Balfour, Cyclopædia of India, 1885: “The Greeks adopted the Indian symbol of Swastika, as the pottery from the Kamiras and the prototype of Crete show.  It is said to be the filfat of the Buddhists . . . It is conjectured that this symbol must have been brought to China, Japan, and Mongolia by Buddhist priests . . . The Swastika appears in ancient Teutonic and Scandinavian mythology under the name of Thor’s hammer . . . It has also been discovered on ancient coins of Indo-Germanic nations.  From all this it is concluded that the Swastika was the common symbol and chief magic charm of the Aryan races before they separated.” — 3:789

— Footnotes

“sacr’,” from which “sacred,” “sacrament,” are derived
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “It is the phallus which is the vehicle of enunciation; and truly enough, as the sacr, or carrier of the germ, its use passed down through ages to the sacr-factum of the Roman priest, and the sacr-fice and sacr-ment of the English-speaking race.” — p. 236 (Appendix IV, § 92)

— 6 —

“It is that which is supreme, and not supreme . . .” . . . Mandukya [Muṇḍaka] Upanishad
see: Muṇḍaka Upanishad, tr. E. Röer, 1853: “The bond of the heart is broken; all doubts disappear, and his works cease (to bear fruit), when (the being) who is supreme and not supreme, is seen.” — p. 160 (ii.2.8, Bibliotheca Indica, v. 15)
It is “Supreme” as CAUSE, not supreme as effect.
p/q: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. Major G. A. Jacob, 1881: “ ‘Supreme and not supreme.’  ‘Supreme’ as cause, ‘not supreme’ as effect . . .” — p. 120
a “Secondless Reality,” the all-inclusive Kosmos
p/q: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. Major G. A. Jacob, 1881: “It might be rendered, ‘The First and the Last,’ that is, the all-inclusive entity. . . . ‘the secondless Reality’ . . .” — p. 120
“the one true Existence, Paramarthika”
see: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. Major G. A. Jacob, 1881: “The Vedānta postulates three kinds of existence, which it terms true (pāramārthika), practical (vyāvahārika), and apparent (prātibhāsika).  Brahma is the sole representative of the first. . . . to him who has true knowledge, the first alone is real.” — p. 3
Chit . . . cannot be a cognizer . . .”
see: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “Intelligence (chit or chaitanya).  This is the most common synonym of Brahma, but he is also spoken of — as, for example, in the Taittirīya Upanishad (p. 56) — as ‘cognition’ or ‘knowledge’ (jnāna).  It must, however, be clearly understood that he is not a cognizer or intelligent.” — p. 3
“for that can have no subject of cognition” . . .
see: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “In commenting on the passage of the Upanishad just referred to, Śankarāchārya says: — ‘Knowledge is here an abstract, indicating cognition, not the cognitive subject, being predicated of the ultimate along with truth and infinity.  Truth and infinity would be incompatible with it did it imply a subject of cognition. . . .’ ” — pp. 3-4
This Essence is “the life and light of the Universe . . .”
see: George Berkeley, Works, 1871: “. . . there is an occult fire or spirit diffused throughout the universe . . . The Platonic philosophers do wonderfully refine upon light . . . from flame to light; from this visible light to the occult light of the celestial or mundane soul, which they supposed to pervade and agitate the substance of the universe . . .” — 2:441 (Siris, § 210)
“the visible fire and flame are destruction, death, and evil”
see: George Berkeley, Works, 1871: “. . . Plato teacheth that the figure and motion of the particles of fire dividing the parts of our bodies produce that painful sensation we call heat.”  “Change and division were esteemed defects or bad.  Evil scatters, divides, destroys.” — 2:488, 499 (Siris, §§ 316, 342)
“Fire and Flame destroy the body of an Arhat, their essence makes him immortal.”
see: Mémoires sur les Contrées Occidentales, tr. Hiouen-Thsang & Stanislas Julien, 1858: “En ce moment, le grand Kia-che-po (Kâçyapa) . . . fit paraître un feu ardent qui consuma son corps, et il entra aussitôt dans le Nirvāṇa. . . . (obtinrent la dignité d’Arhat) [At that moment, the great Kia-che-po (Kāśyapa) . . . made a blazing fire appear, which destroyed his body, and he immediately entered Nirvana. . . . (obtaining the dignity of an Arhat)].” — 2:9
(Bodhi-mur . . .)
see: Emil Schlagintweit,  Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Tsongkhapa himself published systematic works of a most voluminous character; his principal works are the Bodhi-mur, the Tarnim-mur, the Altanerike, and the Lamrim . . . Many learned Tibetans also used the vernacular in composing their numerous commentaries on Buddhist dogmas and history; and in writing in Tibetan they were followed even by the Mongolians . . .” — p. 77
see: L. Austine Waddell, Buddhism of Tibet, 1895: “[There are] several volumes explanatory of the Madhyamikā philosophy (of Nāgārjuna) . . . Under this heading would also come the later commentaries, such as the Bodhi-patha (in Mongolian — Bodhi Mur).” — pp. 164-5
“The knowledge of the absolute Spirit . . .”
p/q: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “. . . Śankarāchārya says . . . ‘The knowledge of the absolute spirit, like the light of the sun, or like heat in fire, is nought else than the absolute essence itself.’ ” — pp. 3-4
IT — is “the Spirit of the Fire,” not the fire itself
see: George Berkeley, Works, 1871: “This pure spirit or invisible fire is ever ready to exert and shew itself in its effects . . .”  “. . . pure fire, or the spirit of the universe, which is perceived only by means of some other bodies, on which it operates . . .” — p. 421 (Siris, §§ 157, 159)
“the attributes . . . heat or flame, are not the attributes of the Spirit . . .”
see: George Berkeley, Works, 1871: “This pure fire, æther, or substance of light was accounted in itself invisible and imperceptible to all our senses, being perceived only by its effects, such as heat, flame . . .”  “A notion of something Divine in fire, animating the whole world . . . the sovereign principle or cause of all things . . .” — pp. 425, 429 (§§ 169, 180)

— Footnotes

“the value of the Jehovah name . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “It will be shown that the, or one of the, values of the name Jehovah, was that of the diameter of a circle . . .” — p. 163
the one Principle whose “Unity admits not of multiplication . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “ ‘Thou art One, but not as an element of numerations; for Thy Unity admits not of multiplication, change, or form.’ ” — 1:261 (Kether-Malchut)

— 7 —

“In the beginning this was the Self, one only (Aitareya Upanishad) . . .”
p/q: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “. . . the opening words of the Aitareya Upanishad are, ‘In the beginning this was the self, one only. . .’ ” — p. 8.
Sankaracharya explains that “this” referred to the Universe (Jagat) . . .
p/q: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “Śankarāchārya says that ‘this’ refers to ‘the universe’ (jagat), and that ‘in the beginning’ means ‘before production’ (prāgutpatteh).” — pp. 7-8
the Upanishads . . . do not deny a Creator, or rather a collective aggregate of creators
see: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “It should be very distinctly understood that God . . . is the collective aggregate of all animated things . . .” — p. 54
the Vedantin postulates attributes . . . “Iswara plus Maya,” and Avidya
see: Hand Book of Hindu Pantheism — The Panchadasi, tr. Nandalal Dhole, 1886: “The material cause of phenomena with its three attributes satwa, raja, and tama is called Prakriti . . . Prakriti is respectively transformed into Maya and Avidya.  Now the reflected shadow of intelligence of (Brahma) in Maya is Iswara . . .” — p. 139 fn.
(Agnosticism and Nescience rather than ignorance)
see: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “The ‘real’ is Brahma . . . without a second.  The ‘unreal’ is the whole mass of unintelligent things, beginning with ignorance.”   “ ‘Ignorance’ . . . This is here synonymous with Nescience (avidyā) and Illusion . . .” — p. 41 (§ III) & note (p. 43)
Narayana moving on the (abstract) waters of Space
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Waters are called nārāh, for they are the offspring of Nara; and since they were his first abode (ayana), he thence is called Nārāyana.” — p. 2 (i.10 )

— Footnotes

See . . . “The Aphorisms of Śândilya,” translated by Cowell, p. 42
see: The Aphorisms of Śāṇḍilya, tr. E. B. Cowell, 1878: “Matter . . . is subject to change; but not so Brahman . . . he throws a veil before himself in the form of his māyā-power or matter, [on which he works]; and therefore he himself is not subject to change . . .”  “. . . the Śruti proves the reality of the cause from the reality of the effect . . . we consider that the existence of this māyā-power as the one eternal concomitant [to the Deity] is established.” — pp. 39, 42
this Vedantic thought: — “Omnis enim per se divom natura necesse est . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Perfect being is void of all qualities . . .
Omnis enim per se divom natura necesse est
Immortali ævo summa cum pace fruatur.” — 1:44 fn.
p/q: Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, tr. H. A. J. Munro, 1866: “. . . omnis enim per se divom natura necessest / immortali aevo summa cum pace fruatur [for the very nature of divinity must necessarily enjoy / immortal life in the deepest peace].” — p. 107 (II.646-7)

— 8 —

if Manu has any authority in this matter . . . the death of Brahmâ . . . a periodical rest.
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “But a thousand of (such) divine yugas in number is to be known to be a day of Brahmā, and a night also is the same (in length). . . . At the end of His day and night, He, being asleep, awakes, and awaking creates mind, which is and is not.” — p. 10 (i.72, 74)
the idea of the absolute all creating or even evolving the “Golden Egg” . . .
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Then the self-existent Lord became manifest . . . Wishing to produce different beings from his own body, he having desired, first created water alone; in that he cast seed.  That became a golden egg, like in splendour to the thousand-rayed (sun); in that was born spontaneously Brahmā, the grand parent of all the worlds.” — p. 2 (i.6-9 )
Locke’s idea that “. . . neither resistance nor Motion”
p/q: John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 1828: “. . . our idea of solidity is distinguished both from pure space, which is capable neither of resistance nor motion; and from the ordinary idea of hardness.” — 1:107 (Bk. II, iv:3)
no difference in the Christian Apostle’s “In Him we live . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . he is not far from each one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being . . .” — p. 183 (Acts, 17:27-8)

— Footnotes

from the word Brih . . . (see Calcutta Review)
see: John C. Nesfield, “The Functions of Modern Brahmans In Upper India,” No. I, Jan. 1887: “Now ‘Brahma’ (neuter) . . . is derived from the root brih, which signifies to grow, to expand. . . . the same word was used to signify the cosmic soul, the world-evolving spirit, the plastic power that causes all the changes and processes of nature, being itself causeless and unchangeable.” — p. 261 (Calcutta Review, v. 84)
Vishnu, from the root Vis
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Because this whole world has been pervaded by the energy of the deity, he is entitled Vishṇu, from the root Viś, ‘to enter,’ or ‘pervade’; for all the gods, the Manus . . . the Indras, the sovereigns of the gods, all are but the impersonated might {Vibhūtayaḥ, ‘potencies’} of Vishṇu.” — 3:19 (iii.1)

— 8-9 —

“The Universe lives in, proceeds from, and will return to, Brahma (Brahmâ)”
see: Māṇḍukya Upanishad, tr. E. Roer, 1853: “It is in this state, that Brahma becomes creator, that all things proceed from him, and are again absorbed in him.” — p. 165 (“Introduction,” Bibliotheca Indica, v. 15)

— 9 —

for Brahma (neuter), the unmanifested, is that Universe in abscondito
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “This (All) was darkness, imperceptible, without definite qualities, undiscoverable, unknowable . . .” — pp. 1-2 (i.5)
and Brahmâ, the manifested, is the Logos, made male-female
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Then the self-existent Lord became manifest, making this undiscrete (All) discernible . . .”  “That which is the undiscrete Cause, eternal, which Is and Is not, from It issued that male who is called in the world Brahmā.”  “Having divided his own body into two, he became a male by half, by half a female: on her that Lord begot Virāj.” — pp. 2, 3, 6 (i.6, 11, 32)

— Footnotes

“This unknown something . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “This unknown something, thus recognized as and identified with the primary embodiment of simple unity, is invisible and impalpable; and, because invisible and impalpable, therefore incognizable.  And this incognizability has led to the error of supposing it to be a simple void, a mere receptive capacity.  But, even viewed as an absolute void, space must be admitted to be either self-existent, infinite and eternal; or to have had a first cause outside, behind and beyond itself.” — p. 4
“And yet could such a cause be found and defined . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “And yet, could such a cause be found and defined, this would only lead to the tranferring thereto of the attributes otherwise accruing to space, and thus merely throw the difficulty of origination a step further back, without gaining additional light as to primary causation.” — pp. 4-5
Space . . . a “Substantial Unity” — the “living Source of Life” . . .
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886:
Space, a substantial Unity.
Space, the unknown First Cause.
Space, the living Source of Life.
Force and Matter, Potencies of Space.
Force and Matter, unknown Revealers of the Unknown.
Force and Matter, inseparable.
             — pp. 3-9 (subheadings)

— 10 —

— Footnotes

Matter is dual . . . As Mulaprakriti . . . as Vyakta . . .
see: The Bhagavad-Gītā, tr. J. Cockburn Thomson, 1855:
      “1. Nature: the material essence . . . is called by the following names, Prakṛiti, or Mūlaprakṛiti . . . Avyakta (the undeveloped principle) . . . This principle has no cause, no origin, is not produced by anything; but eternal, universal, immutable . . . With these nine attributes, it produces
      2. Matter: the developed principle, which emanates from it, is called Vyakta . . .” — p. lxi (Introduction)
Matter is dual . . . according to the Svetasvatara Upanishad, I. 8
see: The Upanishads, Part II, tr. F. Max Müller, 1884: “The Lord (īsa) supports all this together, the perishable and the imperishable, the developed and the undeveloped.” — p. 235 (Svetāsvatara-Upanishad, i.8)
the Four Lectures on the Bhagavad Gita
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita,” Theosophist, v. 8: Feb., March , April, & July 1887.
“From its (the Logos’) objective standpoint . . . a sort of veil thrown over it.”
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes of the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Parabahman is an unconditioned and absolute reality, and Mulaprakriti is a sort of veil thrown over it.  Parabrahman by itself cannot be seen as it is.  It is seen by the Logos with a veil thrown over it, and that veil is the mighty expanse of cosmic matter.  It is the basis of all material manifestations in the cosmos.” — p. 304 (Theosophist, v. 8)

— 11 —

(See Book III, Gupta Vidya and the Zohar)
see: H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, “The Eastern Gupta Vidyā and the Kabalah,” 14:167-91.
“The Great Breath”
see: Hugo Grotius, The Truth of the Christian Religion, tr. John Clarke, 1805: “ ‘The Theology of the Phœnicians supposes the Foundation of the Universe to have been . . . the Breath of a dark Air, and a dismal Chaos, covered with thick Darkness; that these were infinite, and had no Bounds for many Ages.  But when this Spirit or Breath placed its Desire or Love on these first Principles . . . This was the Beginning of the Creation of all Things.’ ” — p. 27 (I, xvi)
“The One is an unbroken Circle . . . with no circumference . . .”
see: Rev. G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “The universal symbol by which this great Being was designated, viz., the point within a circle . . . Hermes Trismegistus . . . describes the Maker of the universe as ‘an intelligible sphere whose centre is everywhere, and whose circumference cannot be defined,’ because the universe is boundless . . .” — p. 37

— 12 —

— Footnotes

“motion as well as matter, being fixed in quantity . . .”
p/q: Herbert Spencer, First Principles, 1880: “Motion as well as Matter being fixed in quantity, it would seem that the change in the distribution of Matter which Motion effects, coming to a limit in whichever direction it is carried, the indestructible Motion thereupon necessitates a reverse distribution.  Apparently, the universally co-existent forces of attraction and repulsion, which, as we have seen, necessitate rhythm in all minor changes throughout the Universe, also necessitate rhythm in the totality of its changes — produce now an immeasurable period during which the attractive forces predominating, cause universal concentration, and then an immeasurable period during which the repulsive forces predominating, cause universal diffusion — alternate eras of Evolution and Dissolution.” — pp. 536-7 (ch. 23, §183)

— 13 —

“Nature is a perpetual circulatory worker . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “ ‘Perhaps the whole frame of nature may be nothing but various contextures of some certain ethereal spirits or vapors . . . Thus, perhaps, may all things be originated from ether.’ ”  “ ‘For nature is a perpetual circulatory worker, generating fluids out of solids, fixed things out of volatile, and volatile out of fixed; subtile out of gross, and gross out of subtile . . .’ ” — pp. 51, 50
see: Isaac Newton, “An Hypothesis explaining the Properties of Light discoursed in my several Papers,” Dec. 7, 1675, pp. 250, 251 (“Letter to Henry Oldenburg,” History of the Royal Society, v. 3, 1757)

— 14 —

in the words of the Mandukya, “unthinkable and unspeakable”
p/q: A. E. Gough, The Philosophy of the Upanishads, 1882: “ ‘This Self is the lord of all, this the internal ruler, this the source of all things . . . invisible, intangible, characterless, unthinkable, unspeakable . . .’ ” — p. 71 (Māndūkya, 7)

— 15 —

the esoteric and Vedantin tenet
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “All Vedantic writers of old have formulated the principle that Parabrahmam is the one essence of almost everything in the cosmos. . . . which, though not itself an object of knowledge, is yet capable of supporting and giving rise to every kind of object and every kind of existence which becomes an object of knowledge.” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 16 —

The Absolute . . . which is, as Hegel says, both Absolute Being and Non-Being.
see: G. W. F. Hegel, Encyclopädie, 1827: “Das Absolute ist die allgemeine und Eine Idee . . .”  “. . . die Einheit des Ideellen und Reellen, des Endlichen und Unendlichen [The Absolute is the Universal and One Idea . . . the Unity of the ideal and the real, of the finite and the infinite] . . .” — p. 196 (§§ 213-14)
      “Die wahrheit des Seyns so wie des Nichts ist daher die Einheit beider [The truth of Being and Non-Being is therefore the Unity of the two].” — p. 101 (§ 88)

— 17 —

the Hindus say that the Universe is Brahma and Brahmâ
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “Just as light is diffused from a fire which is confined to one spot, so is this whole universe the (diffused) energy of the supreme Brahma.  And as light shows a difference . . . according to its nearness or distance from the fire, so there is a variation in the energy of Brahma.  Brahmā, Vishṇu and Śiva are his chief energies.” — 4:263 (Vishṇu Purāṇa, i.22, 28-40)

— Footnotes

The Vedantins call it Sutratma (Thread-Soul)
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — II,” March 1887: “Birth after birth a new physical body comes into existence, and perishes when earthly life is over. . . . But karana sarira [causal body] . . . is capable of existing independently of the astral body.  Its plane of existence is called Sutratma, because, like so many beads strung on a thread, successive personalities are strung on this karana sarira . . .” — p. 361 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 18 —

See . . . Addendum “Gods, Monads and Atoms”
see: SD 1:610-34.
and also “Theophania” [the many appearances of the Divine One]
see: “The Four Elements”: “It was the god of fire . . . as Jove or Agni; the god of water . . . as Varuna, Neptune, etc.; the god of air . . . as Vayu and Indra; and the god or spirit of the earth . . . Pluto, Yama, and so many others.  These were the Cosmic gods, ever synthesizing all in one . . .” — SD 1:462-3
“Bodhisatvas and Reincarnation”
see: “On the Elements and Atoms”: “In the esoteric, and even exoteric Buddhism of the North, Adi Buddha . . . the One unknown . . . emits a bright ray from its darkness.  This is the Logos (the first) . . . As the Lord of all Mysteries he cannot manifest, but sends into the world of manifestation . . . the ‘diamond heart’ . . . This is the second logos of creation, from whom emanate the seven . . . Dhyani Buddhas. . . . These Dhyani Buddhas emanate, or create from themselves . . . the super-human Bodhisattvas.  These incarnating at the beginning of every human cycle on earth as mortal men, become . . . Bodhisattvas among the Sons of Humanity . . .” — SD 1:571
Hiranyagarbha, Hari, and Sankara — the three hypostases
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The three hypostases of Vishṇu.  Hiraṇyagarbha is a name of Brahmā . . . Hari is Vishṇu; and Śankara, Śiva.” — 1:13 fn.
“Spirit of the Supreme Spirit” (by which title Prithivi . . . greets Vishnu . . .)
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Pṛithīvī (Earth). — Hail to thee [Vishṇu], spirit of the supreme spirit; to thee, soul of soul; to thee, who art discrete and indiscrete matter; who art one with the elements and with time.” — 1:59-60 (i.4)

— 18-19 —

that which “does not perish with created things” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Or Achyuta . . . a common name of Vishṇu . . . ‘he who does not perish with created things’.” — 1:15 fn.

— 19 —

Bhrantidarsanatah — “false apprehension” . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Bhrāntidarśanataḥ, ‘false appearances,’ {Preferably: ‘Conceived of, by reason of erroneous apprehension, as a material form’}.” — 1:16 fns.
“That Brahmâ in its totality . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1866-77: “ ‘That Brahma, in its totality, has, essentially, the aspect of prakṛīti, both evolved and unevolved, and also the aspect of spirit, and the aspect of time.  Spirit, O twice-born, is the leading aspect of the supreme Brahma.  The next is a twofold aspect, viz., prakṛiti, both evolved and unevolved; and time is the last.’ ” — 1:18 fn.
Kronos is shown in the Orphic theogony as being also a generated god or agent
see: The Hymns of Orpheus, [tr. Thomas Taylor], 1792: “Great Heav’n [Ouranos] . . . Father of all, from whom the world arose . . . All-seeing Heav’n, progenitor of Time [Chronos] . . .” — pp. 116-17 (Hymn 3, “To Heaven”)
“the Union of the Rose and Cross,” the great mystery of occult generation
see: Arthur Edward Waite, The Real History of the Rosicrucians, 1887: “. . . the Crux Ansata . . . came to signify the divine creative energy which fecundated the obscure matrix of the primeval substance and caused it to bring forth the universe.  The simple union of the Rose and the Cross suggests the same meaning as the Crux Ansata . . .” — p. 24

— Footnotes

“that which persists unchanging in quantity . . .”
p/q: Herbert Spencer, “Mozley on Evolution,” Oct. 1882: “That which persists, unchanging in quantity, but ever changing in form, under these sensible appearances which the universe presents to us, transcends human knowledge and conception — is an unknown and unknowable power, which we are obliged to recognize as without limit in space and without beginning or end in time.” — p. 772 (Popular Science Monthly, v. 21)

— 20 —

Brahma (neuter) is called Kalahansa . . . and so is Brahmâ, the Creator
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “BRAHMA, BRAHMAN (neuter).  The supreme soul of the universe, self-existent, absolute, and eternal, from which all things emanate . . . It is sometimes called Kala-hansa.”  “BRAHMĀ (masculine). . . . the supreme spirit manifested as the active creator of the universe. . . . His vehicle is a swan or goose, from which he is called Hansa-vāhana.” — pp. 56-7
Brahma (neuter) . . . ought to be referred to as Hansa-vahana (He who uses the swan as his Vehicle)
see: Monier Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1872: “haṇsa . . . a goose, gander, swan . . . the supreme Soul or universal Spirit (= brahman . . . resolvable into aham sa, ‘I am that’ [or ‘it’], i.e. the supreme Being) . . .” — p. 1163

— 21 —

spoken of in the Purânas as the “Seven Creations”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The first creation was that of Mahat or Intellect, which is also called the creation of Brahmā.  The second was that of the rudimental principles (Tanmātras) . . . The creation of the Arvāksrotas beings was the seventh, and was that of man.” — 1:74-5 (i.5)

— 22 —

spoken of in Hindu mythology as the “Creation” of the Gods
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . and a third creation appeared, abounding with the quality of goodness, termed Ūrdhwasrotas. . . . This, termed the creation of the immortals, was the third performance of Brahmā . . .” — 1:72-3 (i.5)

— 23 —

Tho-ag
see: Graham Sandberg, “Philosophical Buddhism in Tibet,” Feb. 1890: “This region . . . is presided over by a supreme deity, who in Sanskrit is styled Adi-Buddha, and by the Tibetans is known as T’og-ma Sang-gye . . .” — p. 264 (Contemporary Review, v. 57)
Tho-ag in Zhi-gyu slept seven Khorlo.
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Letters of HPB to A. P. Sinnett [1880 – 1887], comp. A. T. Barker, 1925: “Zhi gyu (cosmic matter), Thog (space), Nyng (duration), Khor wa (motion), all one.” — p. 379 (“Cosmological Notes” by M. and K.H.)
Zodmanas zhiba.
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . Zodmanas zhiba (viz. nothing has manifested itself in any form) . . .” — p. 33
All Nyug . . . Konch-hog not; Thyan-Kam not
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Letters of HPB to A. P. Sinnett [1880 – 1887], comp. A. T. Barker, 1925: “Thyan Kam (= the knowledge of bringing about) giving the impulse to Kosmic energy . . .”  “Kon Chhog (Uncreated Principle) . . . Narayan — Spirit brooding over the waters . . . Universal Mind.”  “Nyng (Duration in eternity or space).” — pp. 376, 378 (“Cosmological Notes” by M. and K.H.)
Lha . . . Tenbrel . . . Dharmakaya
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Dharmakāya . . . the Nirvāna without any remains.”  “. . . composition, Tenbrel . . .”  “. . . the Lha, ‘spirits, higher beings, gods’ . . .” — pp. 38, 43, 91
Tgenchang . . . and Ssa
see: H. A. Jäschke, A Tibetan-English Dictionary, 1881: “Animated being . . . sems c[h]an.”  “Earth sa.” — pp. 613, 627
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Letters of HPB to A. P. Sinnett, 1925: “Sem-Chan (Animated Universe) S. Sa — earth, as an element.” — p. 378 (“Cosmological Notes” by M. and K.H.)
Barnang
see: H. A. Jäschke, A Tibetan-English Dictionary, 1881: “bar-snáṅ . . . atmospherical space.” — p. 367
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Letters of HPB to A. P. Sinnett, 1925: “The Akasa (Bar-nang) or Kosmic atmosphere, or Astral light, or celestial ether, which . . . surrounds and interpenetrates all matter in motion . . .” — p. 377 (“Cosmological Notes” by M. and K.H.)
in Ngovonyidj
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Sākyamuni is said to have connected this dogma with the consideration ‘that no existing object has a nature, Ngovonyid . . .’ ” — p. 33
alone Tho-og Yinsin
see: Samuel Beal, A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, 1871: “. . . the idea of a universally diffused essence (dharmakaya) was accepted . . . And from this consideration appears to have proceeded . . . the several names Vairochana (the Omnipresent), Amitābha (for Amrita) the Eternal, and Adi-Buddha (yih-sin) the ‘one form of existence.’ ” — p. 373
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “. . . the manifested ‘Voice’ (or Logos) . . . ‘the Self manifested in Self — Yih-sin, the ‘one form of existence,’ the child of Dharmakaya (the universally diffused Essence) . . .” — p. 346 (K.H., Letter LIX, about July 1883)
Yong-grub (Parinishpana)
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . Parinishpanna (Tib. Yong grub). . . . Parinishpanna, ‘completely perfect,’ or simply ‘perfect,’ is the unchangeable and unassignable true existence . . . the absolute.” — p. 34

— 24 —

the many Scientific hypotheses past, present and future, some exploded
see: Edward L. Youmans, A Class-Book of Chemistry, 1880: “We are not to regard past theories as mere exploded errors, nor present theories as final.  The living and growing body of truth has only moulted its old integuments in the progress to a higher and more vigorous state.” — p. 4

Part I — Cosmic Evolution

— 26 —

“Nor Aught nor Nought existed . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, 1860:
“Nor aught nor naught existed; yon bright sky
  Was not, nor heaven's broad woof outstretched above.
  What covered all? what sheltered? what concealed?
  Was it the water's fathomless abyss?
  There was not death — hence was there naught immortal,
  There was no confine betwixt day and night;
  The only One breathed breathless in itself,
  Other than it there nothing since has been.
  Darkness there was, and all at first was veiled
  In gloom profound, — an ocean without light. —
  The germ that still lay covered in the husk
  Burst forth, one nature, from the fervent heat. . . .
  Who knows the secret? who proclaimed it here,
  Whence, whence this manifold creation sprang? —
  The gods themselves came later into being. —
  Who knows from whence this great creation sprang? —
  He from whom all this great creation came.
  Whether his will created or was mute,
  The Most High seer that is in highest heaven,
  He knows it, — or perchance e’en He knows not.” — pp. 563-4 (Rig-veda, X.129)
“Ere the foundations of the earth were laid . . .”
p/q: John Gay, “A Thought on Eternity,” Poetical Works, 1854:
“Ere the foundations of the world were laid . . .
  Thou wert; and when the subterraneous flame
  Shall burst its prison, and devour this frame . . .
  Thou still shalt be; still as thou wert before
  And know no change, when time shall be no more.
  Oh, endless thought, divine Eternity!” — 2:302

— 27 —

Time was not . . . Darkness alone filled the boundless all . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “In the beginning was a great abyss; neither day nor night existed. . . . Allfather, the Uncreated, the Unseen, dwelt in the depth of the abyss . . . in immeasurable space where dwell darkness and icy cold . . .” — p. 22 (“Creation of the World”)
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘There was neither non-entity nor entity, no atmosphere nor sky above . . . There was no distinction of day or night . . . In the beginning darkness existed enveloped in darkness.’ ” — 2:45 (Rig Veda, x.129)
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “First was Chaos and Night, and black Erebus and vast Tartarus; and there was neither Earth, nor Air, nor Heaven . . .” — p. 293 (Aristophanes, Aves, 698)

— 28 —

Darkness radiates light . . . one solitary ray . . . shoots through the virgin egg . . .
see: Institutes of Hindu Law, tr. Sir William Jones, 1796: “This universe existed only in the first divine idea yet unexpanded, as if involved in darkness . . . Then the sole self-existing power . . . appeared with undiminished glory, expanding his idea, or dispelling the gloom. . . . [and] first with a thought created the waters, and placed in them a productive seed: The seed became an egg bright as gold, blazing like the luminary with a thousand beams . . .” — pp. 1-2 (i.5-6, 8-9)
see: Isaac Preston Cory, Mythological Inquiry, 1837: “. . . the Egyptians held Kneph . . . ‘as the idea of the Spirit of God which moved upon the face of waters.’ ”  “Phthah . . . was the creative power, who sprung from the Egg, produced from the mouth of Kneph.  He was the god of Light.” — pp. 39, 41-2

— 29 —

Father-Mother spin a web . . . this web is the universe spun out of the two substances made in one . . .
see: J. Lempriere, Bibliotheca Classica, 1833: “Now Kneph, the creator, who is all light and all life, who is at once male and female, wishing to exercise his creative power, united with the divine word, and produced the second Demiurgos, the god of fire and of life, Phtha . . .” — 1:55
see: Chuang Tzū, tr. Herbert Giles, 1889: “Heaven and earth are the father and mother of all things.  When they unite, the result is shape. . . . ‘Vitality’ is the subtle essence, the immaterial informing principle which, united with matter, exhibits the phenomenon of life.” — p. 230

— 30 —

the ray of the ever-darkness — sprung in space the re-awakened energies . . .
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “Who first sprung from Mind / Clothing fire with fire . . .”  “Omniform ideas: which flying out from one fountain / They sprung forth . . . being by intellectual fire distributed . . . An intellectual, incorruptible pattern, the print of whose form / Is promoted through the world . . .” — pp. 244, 248 (Proclus, Parmenidem)
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, 1847: “Ormuzd created the universe by pronouncing the living word Honover; first his own abode of light . . . then the Genii, or deities of Light, in three classes.  The first class consists of the seven Amshaspends . . . In the second class are . . . the elementary deities . . . The third class consists of the Fervers; these are the vivifying principles of nature . . .” — pp. 472-3

— 31 —

The Primordial Seven . . . produce . . . the Fiery Whirlwind
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “He created 7 heavens Above . . . and in all of these heavens are chariots . . . some of them are a flaming fire . . .”  “They shall shine a shining which shines by lighting a splendor . . . That brilliant Light which is hidden, the Spark of all the Sparks, and of All Lights . . . This shining Light comes out from the Supreme Lighted Well . . .” — pp. 415, 428
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “Thence a fiery whirlwind . . . Flashing into the cavities of the worlds; for all things from thence / Begin to extend downwards their admirable rays.” — p. 244 (Proclus, Theologiam Platonis)

— 32 —

By the power of . . . Kwan-shai-Yin
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “. . . Kwan-shai-gin is the universally manifested Word, coming from the unmanifested Absolute by the power of its own will . . .” — p. 201 fn.
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “All the various kinds of forces that we know of, all the various modes of consciousness with which we are acquainted, and life manifested in every kind of organism, are but manifestations of one and the same power, the power being the one that springs from the Logos originally.” — pp. 305-6 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
Fohat . . . seats the Universe on these Eternal Foundations
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — III,” April 1887: “You must look upon this light, or Fohat, as a kind of energy eternally beneficent in its nature . . .”  “This light is the foundation of the better side of human nature . . .  ‘This Daiviprakriti [Fohat] is the one life by which the whole Universe is supported.’ ” — p. 436 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 33 —

the “mind-born” sons of the first Lord; the shining seven
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — III,” April 1887: “In speaking of himself [as the Logos] Krishna says, (chapter x, verse 6): — ‘The seven great Rishis . . . partaking of my nature, were born from my mind . . .’  He speaks of the sapta rishis . . . as his manasaputras, or mind-born sons . . .” — p. 444 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 34 —

The spark . . . journeys through the seven worlds . . . a stone . . . a plant . . .
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “The unique Athanor, the philosophic and moral alchemy, is the transmutation of darkness into light, in the intellectual order . . . of dead substances into substances quickened by the energies of veritable life, of the mere animal into the conscious man, and of man into God.  ‘The stone becomes a plant, the plant an animal, the animal a man, and man greatens into Deity.’ ” — p. xxxv
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “. . . Paracelsus looks upon the continually evoluting forms as necessary vehicles of a continually progressing living spiritual principle, seeking higher modes for its manifestation. . .” — p. 55

— 35 —

The Hindus call it Mulaprakriti . . . it is the basis . . . of every phenomenon
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Parabrahmam is an unconditioned and absolute reality, and Mulaprakriti is a sort of veil thrown over it. . . . that veil is the mighty expanse of cosmic matter.  It is the basis of all material manifestations in the cosmos.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 36 —

“The number seven,” says the Kabala, “is the great number of the Divine Mysteries”
see: Éliphas Lévi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 1861: “. . . le grand nombre religieux et cabalistique qui représente la synthèse universelle et qui constitue le septénaire sacré [the great religious and Kabbalistic number which represents the universal synthesis and constitutes the sacred septenary].” — 2:113

— Footnotes

“By immortality is meant existence to the end of the Kalpa”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “By immortality is meant existence to the end of the Kalpa {This, according to the Vedas, is all that is to be understood of the immortality of the gods: they perish at the period of universal dissolution}.” — 2:269 & fn.

— 37 —

“time” known as the present, comes from the . . . succession of glimpses . . .
see: Hermann Lotze, Metaphysic, 1887: “It is by the succession of moments that every section of Time comes into being.”  “. . . it is not Time that precedes the process of Becoming and Activity, but this that precedes Time . . . or the appearance in us of there being such a thing.” — 1:324, 334 (§§ 143, 148)

— 38 —

The seven ways to bliss (Moksha or Nirvana)
see: P. Bigandet, The Life or Legend of Gaudama, 1880: “the seven ways to neibban . . . observances to be attended to in order to reach the goal of quiescence.” — 2:189
      “The word Neibban, in Sanscrit Nirvana, according to its etymology, means what is no more agitated, what is in a state of perfect calm.” — 2:70 fn.
      “If it be admitted that the perfected being retains in Neibban his individuality, it must be inferred that he becomes, as it were, merged into the abstract truth in which he lives and rests . . .” — 2:72 fn.

— Footnotes

The “12” Nidanas . . . the chief causes of existence
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The source of existence is no longer demonstrated from the four truths only, but also from the twelve Nidānas (in Tibetan Tenbrel chugnyi) . . . the theory of the causal connection, or concatenation of the causes of existence . . .” — pp. 22-3

— 39 —

The twelve Nidanas . . . based upon the four truths . . . of the Hînayâna System . . .
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The following details may be quoted as particularly characteristic of the Hīnayāna system {see Wassiljew, pp. 97-128, 149}.  It distinguishes itself . . . in the mode of explaining the principle of Buddhism: that the world must be abandoned because it entails upon man existence, pain and death.  The source of existence is no longer demonstrated from the four truths only, but also from the twelve Nidānas . . . which are based upon the four truths.” — pp. 22-3 & fn.

— Footnotes

See Wassilief on Buddhism
see: W. Wassiljew [Vasily Pavlovitch Vasil’ev], Der Buddhismus, seine Dogmen, Geschichte und Literatur, 1860.

— 40 —

“Darkness is Father-Mother: light their son”
see: Confucian Cosmogony, tr. Thos. McClatchie, 1874: “. . . Darkness or Night is the Mother of the Gods. . . . The firstborn . . . is the Light . . .”  “ ‘Heaven and Earth are the Father and Mother of all things.’ ” — p. 144

— 41 —

“Karana” — eternal cause — was alone.
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “That Parabrahmam (the supreme spirit) is the only One Truth . . . ”  “It is said to be Eternal . . . Infinite in point of time and space . . . It is the material cause (Upādānakārana), the instrumental cause (Nimittakārana), as well as the auxiliary cause (Sahakarikārana), of the universe.” — §§ 63, 64
(See Part II . . . “Days and Nights of Brahmâ.”)
see: SD 1:368-78.

— 42 —

“Paranishpanna” is the absolute perfection . . .
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Parinishpanna, ‘completely perfect’ . . . is the unchangeable and unassignable true existence, which is also the scope of the path, the summum bonum, the absolute.” — p. 34
how Non Ego, Voidness, and Darkness are Three in One and alone Self-existent and Perfect
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The Mahāyāna schools demonstrate the doctrine of voidness by the dogma of the three characteristic marks . . . enumerating the properties of any existing object . . . Parikalpita . . . Paratantra . . . Parinishpanna . . .”  “. . . then only — as a natural consequence — he arrives at a right understanding of the Non-ego, and to a knowledge of how the voidness is alone self-existent and perfect.” — pp. 33-4, 35

— 43 —

the breathing of the Unknowable Deity . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “. . . an expansion of the Divine essence . . . and the phenomenal or visible universe is the ultimate result . . . In like manner, when the passive condition is resumed, a contraction of the Divine essence takes place, and the previous work of creation is gradually and progressively undone. . . . an outbreathing of the ‘unknown essence’ produces the world; and an inhalation causes it to disappear.” — 2:265
“The Past time is the Present time, as also the Future . . .” . . . Prasanga Madhyamika teaching
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The three periods: the present, the past, and the future, are compounds, correlative to each other.  The Buddha has declared: ‘A harsh word, uttered in past times, is not lost (literally destroyed), but returns again;’ and, therefore, the past time is the present time, as is also the future, though as yet it has not come into existence.” — p. 44 (“The Prasanga-Madhyamika School”)

— Footnotes

Dzungarian “Mani Kumbum”
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . the Mani Kambum, an ancient historical work the authorship of which is attributed to king Srongtsan Gampo.”  “The book Mani Kambum . . . or literally Mani bka’ ’bum, ‘a hundred thousand precious commandments’ . . .”  “The Mani Kambum has been translated into Mongolian and into Dsungarian . . . by a Dsungarian Lama who had resided for several years in Lhāssa . . .” — pp. 83, 84, 88.

— 44 —

“I feel irritated at having to use . . . Past, Present, and Future . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “I feel even irritated at having to use these three clumsy words — past, present and future!  Miserable concepts of the objective phases of the Subjective Whole, they are about as ill adapted for the purpose as an axe for fine carving.” — p. 29 (K.H., Letter VIII, about Feb. 20, 1881)

— Footnotes

Samvriti, or the “origin of delusion” . . . Svasam-vedana, or “the reflection which analyses itself”
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Samvriti is that which is the origin of illusion, but Paramārtha is the self-consciousness {Sanskrit Svasamvedana, ‘the reflection which analyses itself’} of the saint in his self-meditation, which is able to dissipate illusions, i.e., which is above all (parama) and contains the true understanding (artha).” — pp. 35-6 & fn.

— 45 —

the Initiate . . . directs the “Eye of Dangma” toward the essence of things
see: H. A. Jäschke, A Tibetan-English Dictionary, 1881: “dwaṅs-ma [dwangs-ma]: ‘the spirit, the soul’ . . . when purified from every sin . . . to be compared to a clear and limpid fluid, in which every heterogeneous matter has been precipitated.” — p. 249

— 46 —

Prabhavapyaya, “the place . . . into which is the resolution of all things”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Prabhavāpyaya, ‘the place whence is the origination and into which is the resolution of all things.’ ” — 1:21 fn. (i.2)
Jagad Yoni . . . is scarcely so much “the Mother of the World” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Jagad-yoni . . . is scarcely so much ‘the mother of the world,’ or ‘the womb of the world,’ as ‘the material cause of the world.’  The commentator explains it by kāraṇa, ‘cause’.” — 1:21 fn. (i.2)
the Vedanta . . . having been “evoked by the teachings of the Buddhists”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The Vedānta (Uttara-mīmānsā) . . . is supposed to have been evoked by the teachings of the Buddhists.” — p. 82

— 47 —

Dreamless sleep . . . the individual is conscious in a different plane of his being
see: J. D. Buck, “The Planes of Consciousness,” Dec. 1888: “Now what becomes of consciousness during dreamless slumber?  Either it continues or it does not.  If it continues, then it must be upon another plane and under different conditions . . .” — p. 287 (The Path, v. 3)

— Footnotes

“Originally, Buddhism set its face against all solitary ascetiscism . . .”
p/q: Monier Monier-Williams, Mystical Buddhism in connexion with the Yoga Philosophy, 1888: “Originally Buddhism set its face against all solitary asceticism and all secret efforts to attain sublime heights of knowledge.  It had no occult, no esoteric system of doctrine which it withheld from ordinary men.” — p. 2
“. . . When Gautama Buddha began his career . . .”
p/q: Monier Monier-Williams, Mystical Buddhism in connexion with the Yoga Philosophy, 1888: “. . . when Gautama Buddha began his career, the later and lower form of Yoga seems to have been little known. . . . We learn from Lalita-vistara that various forms of bodily torture, self-maceration, and austerity were common in Gautama’s time.” — p. 4
“the Hindus were in this instance the teachers, not the learners”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “It is a question whether Hindu philosophy is or is not indebted to Greek teaching . . . Mr. Colebrooke, the highest authority on the subject, is of the opinion that the ‘Hindus were in this instance the teachers, not the learners.’ ” — p. 82

— 48 —

the “Over-Soul” of Emerson
see:  Ralph Waldo Emerson, Works, 1883: “. . . that Unity, that Over-soul, within which every man’s particular being is contained and made one with all other; that common heart . . . that overpowering reality . . . within man is the soul of the whole . . .” — p. 59 (“The Over-Soul”)
one with Alaya . . . even the man strong in the Yoga . . .
see:  Emil Schlagintweit,  Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “This idea of the soul, Ālaya, is the chief dogma of the Yogāchārya system, which is so called because ‘he who is strong in the Yoga (meditation) is able to introduce his soul by means of the Yoga into the true nature of existence.” — p. 40
(Aryâsanga, the Bumpa school)
see: Emil Schlagintweit,  Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . [This] line of arguments already instanced is ascribed to Āryāsanga. . . . the Nāgarjuna school with the principles taught by it (. . . had been adopted by the Madhyamikas, Tib. Bumapa) . . .” — p. 40
Alaya . . . the Voidness . . . it reflects itself in every object . . . “like the moon in clear tranquil water”
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . the most important dogma established by this theory is decidedly the personification of the voidness, by supposing that a soul, Ālaya (Tib. Tsang, also Nyingpo), is the basis of every thing.  This soul exists from time immemorial, and in every object; ‘it reflects itself in every thing, like the moon in clear and tranquil water.’ ” — p. 39
Paramârtha . . . that which is also dependent upon other things
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “A difference prevails between the Yogāchāryas and the Madhyamikas with reference to the interpretation of Paramārtha; the former say that Paramārtha is also what is dependent upon other things (Paratantra); the latter say that it is limited to Parinishpanna, or to that which has the character of absolute perfection.” — p. 35
“No Arhat, oh mendicants, can reach absolute knowledge before he becomes one with Paranirvana.”
see: T. W. Rhys Davids, Buddhism, 1886: “The path of the Arahants, the men set free by insight . . .”  “ ‘They who by steadfast mind have . . . immersed themselves in that ambrosia, have received without price, and are in the enjoyment of Nirvāna. . . . That mendicant conducts himself well, who has conquered error by means of insight . . . who, free from yearning . . . has attained unto, Nirvāna.’ ” — pp. 109, 111
Parikalpita (in Tibetan Kun-ttag) is error, made by those unable to realize . . .
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Parikalpita (Tib. Kun tag) . . . is the supposition, or the error. . . . to which those beings adhere who are incapable of understanding that every thing is empty . . . believing a thing existing which does not, as e.g. the Non-ego . . .” — p. 34

— Footnotes

“Paramârtha” is self-consciousness . . . Svasamvedana . . . “self-analysing reflection”
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . Paramārtha is the self-consciousness {Sanskrit Svasamvedana, ‘the reflection which analyses itself’} of the saint in his self-meditation . . .” — pp. 35-6 & fn.
Paramârthasatya is Dondampaidenpa . . . The opposite . . . is Samvritisatya . . .
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “We now come to the two truths.  They are: Samvritisatya (Tib. Kundzabchi denpa) and Paramārthasatya (Tib. Dondampai denpa), or the relative truth and the absolute one. . . . Samvriti is that which is the origin of illusion . . .” — p. 35

— 49 —

Paratantra is that . . . which exists only through a dependent or causal connexion
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Paratantra is whatever exists by a dependent or causal connexion; it forms the basis of the error.” — p. 34
In the Yogâchârya system . . . Alaya is . . . the Universal Soul
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The Contemplative Mahāyāna (Yogāchārya) system . . . the most important dogma established by this theory is . . . supposing that a soul, Ālaya . . . is the basis of every thing.” — p. 39
and the Self of a progressed adept.  “He who is strong in the Yoga . . .”
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “This idea of the soul, Ālaya . . . is so called because ‘he who is strong in the Yoga (meditation) is able to introduce his soul by means of Yoga into the true nature of existence.’ ” — p. 40
The “Alaya has an absolute eternal existence”
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The Ālaya has an absolute eternal existence; those treatises do not teach the right doctrine which attribute to it only a relative existence.” — p. 44

— Footnotes

Aryâsanga was a pre-Christian Adept . . .
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Aryāsanga is said to have been taught his doctrine by the future Buddha Maitreya . . . Csoma places him in the seventh century, but . . . the remarks of Wilson . . . on the period when the principal works still extant in Sanskrit were written, may be quoted . . . He believes it now ‘established, that they have been written at the latest, from a century and a half before to as much after, the era of Christianity.’ ” — p. 32 fn.

— 50 —

“that which is the unevolved cause . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “That which is the unevolved cause is emphatically called, by the most eminent sages, pradhāna, original base, which is subtile prakṛiti, viz., that which is eternal, and which at once is and is not, or is mere process.” — 1:20 fn.
the nous (νοῦς), the principle that . . . is absolutely separated and free from matter . . .
see: William Enfield, History of Philosophy, 1837: “[Anaxagoras] concluded that there must have been, from eternity, an intelligent principle, or infinite mind, existing separately from matter, which, having a power of motion within itself, first communicated motion to the material mass . . . Anaxagoras maintained an infinite mind to be the author of all motion and life . . .” — p. 87

— Footnotes

“The indiscreet cause which is uniform . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘The indiscrete cause, which is uniform, and both cause and effect, and whom those who are acquainted with first principles call Pradhāna and Prakṛiti, is the uncognizable Brahma, who was before all.’ ” — 1:21 fn. (Vayu Purāṇa, I, iv, 17)

— 51 —

“the merging of the individual in the universal consciousness”
see: Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Grundlage der Gesammten Wissenschaftslehre, 1794: “Die absolut entgegengesezten (das endliche subjektive, und das unendliche objektive) sind vor der Synthesis etwas bloss gedachtes . . . [Before their merging, the absolute opposites (the finite subjective and the infinite objective [the individual and the universal]) are only thoughts] . . .” — p. 194
the Finite cannot conceive the Infinite . . .
see: Albert Schwegler, Handbook of the History of Philosophy, tr. James Hutchison Stirling, 1868: “What is said [by Fichte] about the universal ego, as substituted . . . for the empirical ego, is not satisfactory.  Let us generalize as much as we please, we still know no ego but the empirical ego, and can refer to none other.” — pp. 427-8 (Stirling’s “Annotations,” xxvii)
“Spirit and Matter, or Purusha and Prakriti are but the two primeval aspects of the One . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This Prakṛiti is, essentially, the same, whether discrete or indiscrete; only that which is discrete is, finally, lost or absorbed by the indiscrete.  Spirit {Puṃs}, also, which is one, pure, imperishable, eternal, all-pervading, is a portion of that supreme spirit which is all things. . . . Nature (Prakṛiti) . . . and spirit {Purusha} . . . both resolve into supreme spirit.” — 5(I):199-200 & fns. (vi.4)

— 52 —

(See Part II, “Primordial Substance”)
see: Part II, Section III, “Primordial Substance and Divine Thought,” SD 1:325-41.
The term Anupadaka, “parentless”
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “By the name of Dhyāni Buddha, ‘Buddha of contemplation,’ or by the term Anupadaka, ‘without parents,’ celestial beings are designated corresponding to the human Buddhas teaching upon earth, who are called ‘Mānushi Buddhas.’ ” — p. 51
The “Concealed Lord” (Sangbai Dag-po)
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “As Vajradhara he is epitheted ‘the supreme Buddha . . . the lord of all mysteries’ {Sangbai Dagpo, ‘concealed lord,’ in Sanskrit Guhyapati}.” — p. 50 & fn.

— Footnotes

Vajra — diamond holder. . . . The explanation . . . given in the Kala Chakra
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Kāla Chakra is also the title of the principal work of this system; it stands at the head of the Gyut division of the Kanjur . . .”  “This first of the Buddhas is called in the Tantras Vajradhara . . . and Vajrasattva (in Tibetan Dorjesempa) {‘holding the diamond (Vajra)’}.” — p. 50 & fn.
“the essence of man is spirit . . . only by stripping himself of his finiteness . . .”
p/q: G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, tr. J. Sibree, 1857: “. . . the essence of man acknowledged to be Spirit, and the fact proclaimed that only by stripping himself of his finiteness and surrendering himself to pure selfconsciousness, does he attain the truth.  Christ — man as man — in whom the unity of God and man has appeared, has in his death, and his history generally, himself presented the eternal history of Spirit, — a history which every man has to accomplish in himself, in order to exist as Spirit . . .” — p. 340

— 53 —

Paranishpanna . . . is the summum bonum, the Absolute
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Parinishpanna . . . is the unchangeable and unassignable true existence . . . the summum bonum, the absolute.” — p. 34

— Footnotes

“Mother of the Gods,” Aditi, or Cosmic Space
see: Rig-Veda-Sanhita, tr. F. Max Müller, 1869: “Aditi . . . is in reality the earliest name invented to express the Infinite . . . the visible Infinite, visible by the naked eye, the endless expanse beyond the earth, beyond the clouds, beyond the sky.  That was called A-diti, the un-bound, the un-bounded . . . the Infinite, as the mother of the principal gods [Deva-Matri] . . .” — p. 230 (Verse 12, note 4: “Aditi, the Infinite”)

— 54 —

only “with a mind clear and undarkened by personality . . .” that one gets rid of personal existence . . .
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . only that which enters the mind clear and undarkened . . . that his mind may become free from all that would attract his attention . . . then only — as a natural consequence — he arrives at a right understanding of the Non-ego, and to a knowledge of how the voidness is alone self-existent and perfect.” — pp. 34-5

— Footnotes

The One secondless Existence is adwaita . . . and all the rest is Maya
see: Papers on Indian Reform, comp. J. Murdoch, 1889: “A Vedantist’s creed is comprised in the well-known formula of three words from the Chhandogya Upanishad (ekam evadvitiyam, one only without a second).  This does not mean that there is no second God, but that there is no second anything. . . . Nothing really exists but the one impersonal spirit, called Atma, or Brahm . . . Hence the doctrine of the Vedanta is called Adwaita, non-dualism. . . . When this impersonal unconscious Spirit assumes consciousness and personality . . . it does so by associating itself with Maya, the power of Illusion.” — p. 19 (“Religious Reform,” Part II)

— 55 —

See “Chaos, Theos, Kosmos,” in Part II.)
see: SD 1:342-9.
Brahmâ (or Hari) . . . “accomplished the Creation” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Thus Hari, the four-faced god, invested with the quality of activity, and taking the form of Brahmā, accomplished the creation.  But he (Brahmā) is only the instrumental cause of things to be created . . .” — 1:65 (i.4)
When a translator says, “And from him proceed the potencies . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . and from him proceed the potencies to be created, after they have become the real cause.” — 1:66 fn.
Save that one . . . ideal cause there is no other . . . “worthiest of ascetics . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Save that one ideal cause, there is no other to which the world can be referred.  Worthiest of ascetics, through its potency — i.e., through the potency of that cause — every created thing comes by its proper nature.” — 1:66 fn.
in the Vedanta and Nyaya, nimitta is the efficient cause . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In the Vedānta and Nyāya, nimitta is the efficient cause, as contrasted with upādāna, the material cause.  In the Sānkhya, pradhāna implies the functions of both.” — 1:66-7 fn.

— 56 —

We call absolute consciousness “unconsciousness” . . .
see: Eduard von Hartmann, Philosophy of The Unconscious, tr. William C. Coupland, 1884: “Of this unconscious clairvoyant intelligence . . . embracing out of time all ends and means in one . . . it infinitely transcends the halting, stilted gait of the discursive reflection of consciousness . . . We shall thus be compelled to designate this intelligence, which is superior to all consciousness, at once unconscious and super-conscious.” — 2:247

— 57 —

the seed of all phanerogamous plants . . .
p/q: Joseph B. Gross, The Heathen Religion, 1856: “It deserves to be remarked in reference to the lotus, that the seed of all phænogamous [phanerogamous] plants or plants of a higher grade bearing proper flowers, contain an embryo plantlet ready formed.” — p. 195 fn.
(See Part II., “The Lotus Flower as an Universal Symbol.”)
see: SD 1:379-86.

— Footnotes

(See Part II., “Primordial Substance and Divine Thought.”)
see: SD 1:325-41.

— 58 —

“. . . the Power which acts within the root of a plant . . .”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . the metaphor of the tree with its roots (the Ten Sephiroth) in the earth and its numerous branches, twigs, leaves, veins, fruits . . . which all are derived from each other, and yet all draw from the marrow of the tree, and thus all collectively form a complete and unbroken unity . . . because they all are of, and point to, one and the same essential source.” — p. 252

— 59 —

“The Deity is one, because it is infinite.  It is triple, because it is ever manifesting.”
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “The Infinite Prince in creating speaks of Himself to Himself. . . . Unity to become active must reproduce itself. . . . Thus He is really one in His essence and triple in our conception . . .” — pp. 67-8 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)

— 59-60 —

“It is called the ‘Man even Jehovah’ Measure . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July 1885: “. . . it is called the ‘Man Even Jehovah’ measure; and this is obtained in this way, viz.: 113 x 5 = 565, and the value 565 can be placed under the form of expression 56.5 x 10 = 565.  Here the man number 113 becomes a factor of 56.5 x 10, and the reading of this last number expression is jod hé vav hé, or Jehovah.” — p. 327 (Masonic Review, 63:6)

— 60 —

“The expansion of 565 into 56.5 x 10 . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July 1885: “The expansion of 565 into 56.5 x 10 is purposed to show the emanation of the male (jod) from the female (Eva) principle; or, so to speak, the birth of a male element from an immaculate source, in other words, an immaculate conception.” — p. 327 (Masonic Review, 63:6)

— 61 —

In the Ekasloka-Shastra of Nagârjuna . . . the Yih-shu-lu-kia-lun
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The author of the original work . . . was the patriarch ‘Nagarjuna’ (or Lung-shu) . . . It is called Yih-shu-lu-kia-lun, the ‘Shastra of One shloka.’ ” — p. 302 (ch. 19, “The Ekashloka Shastra”)
Yeu is “Being” or “Subhâva” . . .
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “All kinds of action (or existence) . . . are different in name, but the same in meaning.  Whichever of these we speak of, the only difference between them is in the word yeu, ‘to be.’  This word yeu is, in the original language, subhava.  It is translated in several ways, as ‘the substance which gives substance to itself,’ or as ‘without action and with action,’ or as ‘the nature which has no nature of its own.’ ” — pp. 308-9
Subhâva . . . is composed of two words: Su . . . and bhava . . .
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “. . . subhava {This word is a compound of su, ‘good,’ and bhāva, one of the twelve causes [of] ‘being.’} . . .”  “ ‘Here the term bhava means ‘states of being.’ ” — pp. 308, 317
the Mysterium Magnum of Paracelsus
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “Mysterium magnum . . . essentially of the inner nature . . . All forms come originally from the Mysterium magnum, and all return to it in the end . . .” — p. 37
(See Part II., “Primordial Substance and Divine Thought.”)
see: SD 1:325-41.

— 62 —

unconditionally eternal and universal Time and a conditioned one (Khandakala)
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Vishishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Time . . . is eternal, universal and unconditioned.  Conditioned time (Khandakala) is not eternal, and is reckoned by the rotation and revolution of planets . . .” — § 81
Mahat is “the first-born” of Pradhâna (undifferentiated substance . . . the root of Nature) . . .
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Vishishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887:
“Nature is the material basis . . . of the universe . . . It has no origin, it is self-existing, eternal, universal . . . It is called Prakriti, Pradhana, Mulaprakriti . . . and Māya. . . .
Q. What does it first evolve?
A. Mahat (intellect).” — §§ 82-4
the Absolute nirguna (Parabrahm . . . “devoid of attributes and qualities” . . .)
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Vishishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887:
“Q. But is not Brahmam said in the scriptures to be nirguna (devoid of attributes and qualities)?
  A. Yes . . . Brahmam is devoid of those qualities of Prakriti to which mankind is subject . . .” — § 73

— 63 —

Orientalists and their Dictionaries tell us that the term “Manu” . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “MANU. (From the root man, to think.) . . . This name belongs to fourteen mythological progenitors of mankind . . . each of whom holds sway for the period called a Manwantara . . .” — p. 199

— 64 —

This . . . made Democritus assert . . . all were atoms and a vacuum
see: William Enfield, History of Philosophy, 1837: “The first idea of the atomic system was suggested by Leucippus; it was improved by Democritus . . . The Universe, which is infinite, is in part a plenum, and in part a vacuum.  The plenum contains innumerable corpuscles or atoms . . . which falling into the vacuum, struck against each other . . . till at length atoms of similar forms met together, and bodies were produced.” — p. 245
“Nature abhors a vacuum”
p/q: Blaise Pascal, Oeuvres de Blaise Pascal, 1819: “. . . tous les disciples d’Aristote assemblent tout ce qu’il y a de fort dans les éscrits de leur maître . . . que la nature abhorre le vide [all the disciples of Aristotle bring together all the bits of strong reasoning in the writings of their master . . . that nature abhors a vacuum] . . .” — 4:281

— 65 —

“the promise and potency” of all the Universe
p/q: “Mr. Tyndall at Belfast,” Irish Monthly Magazine, v. 2, Oct. 1874: “. . . Mr. Tyndall’s formula of materialistic faith: ‘in that matter which we, in our ignorance, have covered with opprobrium,’ are contained ‘the promise and potency of every form of life.’ ” — p. 570
the symbolical circle of Pascal . . . “whose centre is everywhere . . .”
p/q: Blaise Pascal, Thoughts, Letters and Opuscules, tr. O. W. Wight, 1869: “All this visible world is but an imperceptible point . . . in comparison with the reality of things.  It is an infinite sphere, of which the centre is everywhere, the circumference nowhere. . . . it is the greatest discernible character of the omnipotence of God . . .” — pp. 158-9 (ii.2)
(See Part II. “Tree and Serpent and Crocodile Worship.”)
see: SD 1:403-11.

— 65-6 —

The Golden Egg was surrounded by seven natural elements . . . translated “Envelopes”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “And this egg was externally invested by seven natural envelopes; or by water, air, fire, ether, and Ahaṃkāra, the origin of the elements . . .” — 1:40 (i.2)

— 66 —

(see Part II. on “The Mundane Egg.”)
see: SD 1:359-68.
the triple hypostases . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The three hypostases of Vishṇu.  Hiraṇyagarbha is a name of Brahmā; he who was born from the golden egg.  Hari is Vishṇu; and Śankara, Śiva. . . . In the capacity of Brahmā, he creates the worlds; in that of Rudra, he destroys them; in that of Vishṇu, he is quiescent.  These are the three Avasthās (lit., hypostases) of the self-born.” — 1:13 fn.
the Number is to Mind the same as it is to matter: “an incomprehensible agent”
p/q: Honoré de Balzac, Oeuvres de H. de Balzac, v. 3, Séraphita, 1837: “Le nombre est à votre Esprit ce qu’il est à la Matière, un agent incompréhensible [The number is to your mind the same as it is to Matter, an incomprehensible agent].” — p. 477 (ch. 4)

— 66-7 —

“The smallest as the most immense creations . . .”
p/q: Honoré de Balzac, Oeuvres de H. de Balzac, v. 3, Séraphita, 1837: “Les plus petites comme les plus immenses créations ne se distinguent-elles pas entre elles par leurs quantités, leurs qualités, leurs dimensions, leurs forces, tous attributs enfantés par le Nombre?  L’infini des Nombres est un fait prouvé pour votre Esprit, dont la Matière ne peut se donner aucune preuve à elle-même [The smallest as well as the most immense creations, are they not distinguished from each other by their quantities, their qualities, their dimensions, their forces, all attributes engendered by Number?  The infinitude of Numbers is a fact proven to your mind, but of which no physical proof can be given].” — p. 477 (ch. 4)

— 67 —

“The mathematician will tell us that . . .”
p/q: Honoré de Balzac, Oeuvres de H. de Balzac, v. 3, Séraphita, 1837: “Le mathématicien vous dira que le Nombre existe et ne se démontre pas.  Dieu . . . est un nombre doué de mouvement, qui se sent et ne se démontre pas . . . Comme l’Unité, il commence les nombres avec lesquels il n’a rien de commun; car l’existence du Nombre dépend de l’Unité qui, sans être un Nombre, les engendre tous.  Dieu . . . est une magnifique Unité qui n’a rien de commun avec ses créations, et qui néanmoins les engendre! [The mathematician will tell you that Number exists but cannot be demonstrated.  God . . . is a number endowed with motion, to be felt but not proved . . . Like the indivisible Unit, it begins the numbers with which it has nothing in common; because the existence of Number depends on the indivisible Unit, which, without being a Number, begets them all.  God . . . is a magnificent indivisible Unit that has nothing in common with his creations, and who nonetheless brings them forth!] . . .” — p. 477 (ch. 4)
“What! unable either to measure the first abstraction . . .”
p/q: Honoré de Balzac, Oeuvres de H. de Balzac, v. 3, Séraphita, 1837: “Hé! quoi! vous ne pouvez ni mesurer la première abstraction que Dieu vous a livrée, ni la saisir, et vous soumettez à votre mesure les fins de Dieu!  Que serait-ce donc, si je vous plongeais dans les abîmes du Mouvement, cette force qui organise le Nombre?  Ainsi quand je vous dirais que l’univers n’est que Nombre et Mouvement . . . Que serait-ce si j’ajoutais que le Mouvement et le Nombre sont engendrés par la Parole? ce mot, la raison suprême des Voyants et des Prophètes qui jadis entendirent ce souffle de Dieu [What! you can neither measure the first abstraction that God has yielded to you, nor grasp it, and you want to apply to your standards the purposes of God!  What if I plunged you into the depths of Motion, that force which organizes Number?  And what if I were to tell you that the universe is only Number and Motion . . . What if I added that Motion and Number are begotten by the Word? that word, the supreme intelligence of Seers and Prophets who in the days of old heard that breath of God] . . .” — p. 477 (ch. 4)
“churning of the ocean” by the Hindu gods . . . “the fountain of milk and curds”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Being thus instructed by the god of gods, the divinities entered into alliance with the demons . . . and commenced to churn the ocean for the Amṛīta. . . . From the ocean, thus churned by the gods and Dānavas, first uprose the cow Surabhi, the fountain of milk and curds . . .” — 1:143-4 (i.9)
the churning of the “Ocean of Milk” took place in the Satya Yug . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The germ of this Avatāra [Vishṇu] is found in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa . . . Vishṇu appeared in the form of a tortoise in the Satya-yuga, or first age, to recover some things of value which had been lost in the deluge.  In the form of a tortoise he placed himself at the bottom of the sea of milk . . . The gods and demons . . . churned the sea until they recovered the desired objects.” — p. 36

— Footnotes

The “Fourteen precious things”
see: J. Murray Mitchell, Hinduism Past and Present, 1885: “The gods and demons then . . . churned the ocean . . . Fourteen precious things were churned out . . . among which are a marvellous horse, an elephant, the cow of plenty, the moon, nectar . . .” — p. 111

— 68 —

the “War in Heaven,” and the fall of the Angels
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon . . . And the great dragon was cast out . . . and his angels were cast out with him.” — pp. 329-30 (Revelation, 12:7, 9)
Oeaohoo . . . the septenary root from which all proceeds . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “. . . the Egyptians expressed the name of the Supreme God by the seven vowels thus arranged — ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ.”  “. . . the mystery of the Seven Vowels . . . ‘no name is more excellent than all these (Vowels), a Name wherein be contained all Names and all Lights and all Powers.’ ” — pp. 200-1 (Pistis Sophia, 378)

— Footnotes

The original for Understanding is Sattva . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The original for understandings is sattva, which Śaṇkara renders to mean antaḥkaraṇa.  ‘Refined,’ he says, ‘by sacrifices and other sanctifying operations.’  In the Kaṭha at p. 148 sattva is rendered by Śaṇkara to mean buddhi — a common use of the word.” — p. 193 fn. (Sanatsujātīya, vi)

— 68-9 —

Parabrahmam . . . pure knowledge . . . eternal (Nitya) unconditioned reality or sat (Satya)
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Vishishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “That Parabrahmam . . . is said to be Eternal (Nitya), Unconditioned Reality (Satya), Eternal and Infinite Knowledge . . .” — §§ 63-4

— 70 —

“Chaos, from this union with Spirit . . . produced the Protogonos (the first-born light)”
see: Isaac Preston Cory, Mythological Inquiry, 1837: “In the Orphic fragments, the generation of the universe and of the gods is . . . described as proceeding from the Ether and Chaos.  From these two principles . . . shot forth the Light, which was Phanes {Hymn to Protogonus — Hermias in Phædon, 141} . . .” — p. 24 & fn.
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “I invoke Protogonus [First-born], of a double nature . . . rejoicing in thy golden wings . . . Who bringest forth the pure and brilliant light, wherefore I invoke thee as Phanes [Light] . . . Come, then, blessed being, full of wisdom and generation, come in joy . . .” — p. 295 (“Orphic Hymn to Protogonus,” Hermias in Phæd.)
Damascius calls it Dis in “Theogony” — “The disposer of all things”
p/q: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “. . . the third subsistence of this triad is dark Erebus [Darkness], and its paternal principle and summit Ether . . . and the middle derived from it is boundless Chaos. . . . from these proceeds the third Intelligible triad. . . . But the third god of this third triad, the theology now under discussion celebrates as Protogonus (First-born), and calls him Dis, as the disposer of all things . . .” — pp. 313-14 (“From Damascius”)
“Light and Darkness are identical in themselves . . .”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “Light and Darkness are identical in themselves, being only divisible in the human mind . . .” — p. 212
“Darkness adopted illumination . . .”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “. . . according to Robert Fludd, Darkness adopted illumination in order to make itself visible.” — p. 212
see: Robert Fludd, Mosaicall Philosophy, 1659: “By this therefore it appeareth, that as before the separation . . . of light from darknesse, which was brought to passe by the divine word, all things were one and the same without distinction and difference . . . All things were abstrucely hidden and in secret, but . . . nothing was so occult and obscure, but was to be revealed, and made to appear unto sight, by the penetrating operation of the admirable word Fiat . . .” — p. 143
Even in . . . Genesis, light is created out of darkness . . .
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” — p. 1 (Genesis, 1:2)
“In him (in darkness) was life . . . And the light shineth in the darkness . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “In him was life; and the life was the light of men.  And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” — p. 120 (John, 1:4-5)
The devil . . . is called the “Son of God”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.” — p. 662 (Job, 1:6)
the bright star of the early morning, Lucifer
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!” — p. 894 (Isaiah, 14:12)

— Footnotes

See “Kwan-Shai-Yin”
see: Part II, Section XV, SD 1:470-3.

— 71 —

the Incorporeal man who contains in himself the divine Idea
see: Philo Judæus, Works, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1854-5: “But man, made according to the image of God, was an idea . . . incorporeal, neither male nor female, imperishable by nature.” — 1:39 (“On the Creation of the World,” § xlvi)
the “Blazing Dragon of Wisdom”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . the ‘serpent of the Great Sea’ . . . was also the deity of Wisdom, the culture god of primitive Babylonia. . . . Note in this connection, the Great Azure Dragon of the Chinese.” — p. 235

— Footnotes

“Tri-dasa,” or three times ten . . .
p/q: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “TRIDAŚA.  ‘Three times ten, thirty.’  In round numbers, the thirty-three deities — twelve Ādityas, eight Vasus, eleven Rudras, and two Aświns.” — p. 319
2 Aswins — the twin sons . . .
p/q: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “AŚWINS . . . Two Vedic deities, twin sons of the sun or the sky.” — p. 29

— 72 —

Kwan-Shai-Yin . . . Avalôkitêshwara . . . represented with female attributes . . .
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Kwan-shï-yin p‘u-sa (Avalôkitêshwara) . . . This fabulous Bodhisattwa has in China been usually represented with female attributes. . . . When Kwan-yin is translated, not inappropriately, ‘Goddess of mercy,’ it should be remembered that female attributes are only temporarily assumed by the Bodhisattwa in question.” — pp. 208-9
Kwan-Yin . . . is the patron deity of Thibet . . .
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Kwan-yin is the patron deity of Thibet and also of P‘u-to, leading to a peculiar arrangement of the images in the monasteries, and the substitution of this deity for Shakyamuni Buddha in the centre of the great hall.” — p. 259

— Footnotes

the higher gods of antiquity are all “Sons of the Mother” before they become those of the “Father”
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The earlier gods, Sut (or Sevekh), Shu, Taht, and the first Horus, were children of the mother alone.  They were created before there was any father in heaven . . .” — 1:456
The Logoi, like Jupiter or Zeus . . . as male-female . . . Venus is made bearded
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “There is in Cyprus an image of the bearded Venus with the body and dress of a woman . . .”  “Valerius Soranaus calls Jupiter the Mother of the Gods.” — 1:512, 514
      “Horus was the lamb of either sex; Mithras was the lamb of both sexes.  The human child being of either sex, the divine was of both.  This mythical type could only be fulfilled in nature by an hermaphrodite. . . . It is one mode of describing the biune being of either or both sexes, corresponding to the feminine ‘paps’ of the ‘Son of Man,’ the supposed Messiah of ‘Revelation.’ ” — 1:516-17
St. John’s vision in Revelation . . . now connected with Jesus — is hermaphrodite
see: J. Cynddylan Jones, Studies in the Gospel According to St. John, 1885: “. . . St. John ascribes to him [Jesus] the ‘breasts’ of a woman . . . ‘And in the midst of the candlesticks I saw one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle’ [Rev. 1:13].  ‘Paps’ — μαστοῖς, the very word used to denote the breasts of a woman . . .” — p. 61
The Gnostic Sophia . . . the mother of the seven planetary powers
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “. . . the Gnostic Pleroma of the Eight, consisting of Sophia the genitrix and her seven sons . . . ‘These are the seven forms of the Mother of all Beings, from whence all that is in this world is generated.’ . . . The student of Böhme’s books finds much in them concerning these Seven ‘Fountain Spirits,’ and primary powers, treated as seven properties of Nature . . .” — 1:317-18

— 73 —

“His name is Echod”: say the Rabbins.
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July 1885: “. . . it is the numerical value of the circumference of a circle whose diameter is one; hence the Biblical expression by the rabbins: ‘His name is Echod,’ or One.” — p. 327 (Masonic Review, 63:6)
The “One” and the Dragon . . . Logoi . . . the Serpent or Dragon that tempted Eve . . .
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “. . . the Serpent became a type of Wisdom, Knowledge, occult influence . . . Amongst the types of the ‘Elementaries’ perceived as active forces of the material universe, the Serpent naturally rose to supremacy . . . Hence, in Egypt, it became the one universal symbol of the Gods.” — 1:304
      “When Augustine declares that certain of the Ophites identified the serpent that seduced Eve with Jesus Christ, it is as a symbol of the Logos . . .” — 2:339
Jehovah . . . is also the Serpent or Dragon that tempted Eve
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “ ‘Ildabaoth, the God of the Jews . . . cast down his eyes upon the lower layer of Matter, and begat a Virtue, whom they call his Son.  Eve, listening to him as the Son of God, was easily persuaded to eat of the Tree of Knowledge.’ ” — pp. 102-3 (Epiphanius)
The primitive symbol of the serpent . . . had always stood for psychical Regeneration . . .
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The serpent was the great emblem of Mystery in the Mysteries . . . on account of its sloughing and self-renewal, and the symbol of re-clothing and re-birth in the Mysteries was its final phase.” — 1:340
Hence, also, the Hindu serpent Sesha or Ananta, “the Infinite” . . .
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The Sesha-Naga of India . . . is clothed with jewels, as heaven is with Stars. . . . As Ananta it typifies the Vague Infinite. . . . The Serpent with Seven heads forms the support of Vishnu in the Abyss of the Waters when he dreams or muses in the Intervals of Creation . . .” — 1:350

— Footnotes —

Sesha or Ananta, “the couch of Vishnu” . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ŚESHA, ŚESHA-NĀGA.  King of the serpent race or Nāgas . . . A serpent with a thousand heads which is the couch and canopy of Vishṇu whilst sleeping during the intervals of creation. . . . He is also called Ananta, ‘the endless,’ as the symbol of eternity.” — pp. 291-2
The gnostic Ophis
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “. . . they are called ‘Naaseni’ (i.e. Ophites, or Serpent-worshippers) . . . For they say the Serpent signifies the element Water; and with Thales of Miletus contend that nothing in the Universe can subsist without it, whether of things mortal or immortal, animate or inanimate.  All things are subject unto him . . . as he pervades all things . . .” — p. 224
the same triple symbolism in its seven vowels . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “. . . the [Gnostic] Egyptians expressed the name of the Supreme God by the seven vowels thus arranged — ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ.  But this single mystery was soon refined upon, and made the basis of other and infinitely deeper mysteries. . . . when therefore, ‘the seven thunders uttered their voices,’ the seven vowels, it is meant, echoed through the vault of heaven . . .” — p. 200

— 74 —

“Be ye wise as serpents”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” — p. 13 (Matthew, 10:16)
“In the beginning . . . the fiery Dragon moved in the infinitudes alone”
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The Sesha-Naga of India begins in the Dragon of Darkness. . . . As Ananta it typifies the Vague Infinite. . . . The Dragon that was cast out of Heaven had been the base of all beginning, and in India it was continued as a foundation of the later Solar Creation.” — 1:350
Sarparâjni, “the Serpent Queen,” and “the Mother of all that moves”
p/q: Aitareya Brahmanam, tr. Martin Haug, 1863: “They chant the verses (seen) by the Queen of the Serpents (Sarpa-rājnī); because the earth (iyam) is the Queen of the Serpents, for she is the queen of all that moves (sarpat).” — 2:358-9 (V.4.123)
“a long trail of Cosmic dust . . . moved and writhed like a serpent in Space”
see: McClintock and Strong, Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature, 1889: “Such are the innumerable fables in Hindū lore . . . the primeval astronomy which placed the serpent in the skies, and called the Milky Way by the name of Ananta and Sesha Naga . . .” — 9:581
see: John Owen, A Discourse Concerning the Holy Spirit, 1841: “As to [the creation of] the heavens, ‘by his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens, his hand hath formed the crooked serpent’ [Job, 26:13] {By the crooked serpent, the Hebrews understood the Galaxy, or Milky Way, which to the eye represents the writhing of a serpent}.” — p. 56 & fn.
Pymander . . . appears to Hermes in the shape of a Fiery Dragon of “Light, Fire, and Flame”
see: Theological and Philosophical Works of Hermes Trismegistus, tr. John D. Chambers, 1882: “Speaking this, he was changed in the form . . . having become dreadful and horrible, sinuously terminated . . . giving forth smoke as if from fire, and emitting a certain sound ineffable . . . the voice of Light.” — p. 2 (“Poemandres,” i.4)
“The Light is me, I am the Nous . . . I am thy God . . .”
p/q: Hermès Trismégiste, tr. Louis Ménard, 1867: “Cette lumière . . . c’est moi, l’Intelligence, ton Dieu, qui précède la nature humide sortie des ténèbres.  La parole lumineuse (le Verbe) qui émane de l’Intelligence, c’est le fils de Dieu [That light . . . is me, the Mind, your God, who precedes the Waters of Space that have come forth from the Darkness.  The resplendent Word (the Logos) which emanates from Intelligence, it is the Son of God].” — p. 5

— 74-5 —

“All that thus sees and hears in thee is the Verbum of the Master . . .”
p/q: Hermès Trismégiste, tr. Louis Ménard, 1867: “. . . ce qui en toi voit et entend est le Verbe, la parole du Seigneur; l’Intelligence est le Dieu père.  Ils ne sont pas séparés l’un de l’autre, car l’union est leur vie [all that thus sees and hears in you is the Verbum, the Word of the Lord; the Intelligence is God the Father.  They are not separated one from the other, for the union is their life].” — p. 5

— 75 —

the “Eternal and Ceaseless Breath of the All”
see: Jacob Behmen [Boehme], Works, 1781: “For this visible World was generated and created . . . out of the dark Essence . . . as an out-spoken Breath out of the Being of all Beings . . . out of the Breathing forth . . . of the Eternal Essence . . .” — 4:134 (Signatura Rerum, xvi.16)
The Mahat . . . before it manifests itself as Brahmâ . . .
p/q:  The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The self-existent Vishṇu is the Lord in the primary creations {The Mahat first manifests itself as Vishṇu before it manifests itself as Brahman or Śiva (Sānkhya-sāra, p. 16), hence he is said to be the Lord in the primary creation}.” — p. 333 & fn. (Anugītā, xxv)
“That Mahat which was first produced . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “That Mahat which was first produced, is (afterwards) called egoism; when it is born as (the feeling itself) {I.e. when the Mahat develops into the feeling of self-consciousness — I — then it assumes the name of egoism} I, that is said to be the second creation.” — p. 333 & fn. (Anugītā, xxvi)

— Footnotes

Thus Shoo is the god of creation
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Shou, le dieu de la création [Shu, the god of creation] . . .”  “. . . il avait séparé la terre du ciel [he had separated the earth from heaven] . . .” — pp. 59, 157
and Osiris is, in his original primary form, the “god whose name is unknown”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Salut à toi, Osiris . . . maître de l’éternité . . . dieu dont le nom est inconnu [Hail to you, Osiris . . . master of eternity . . . god whose name is unknown] . . .” — pp. 49-50

— 76 —

“There exists a universal agent . . .”
see: Éliphas Lévi, La Science des Esprits, 1865: “Ob, c’est la lumière passive, car les kabbalistes hébreux donnent trois noms à cette substance universelle, agent de la création qui prend toutes les formes en s’équilibrant par la balance de deux forces [Ob is the passive light, for the Hebrew Kabbalists give three names to this universal substance, the agent of creation, assuming all forms, while equilibrating itself by the counterpoise of two forces].” — pp. 179-80
“Od, Ob, and Aour, active and passive . . .”
see: Éliphas Lévi, La Science des Esprits, 1865: “Active, elle se nomme Od; passive elle se nomme Ob; équilibrée, on l’appelle Aour [When active, it is called Od; when passive, it is called Ob; in equilibrium, it is termed Aour].” — p. 180
the Kabala figures it with the Hebrew letter Teth ט . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “I therefore append a table showing at a glance the ordinary Hebrew and Chaldee alphabet . . . (9 . . . ט . . . Teth. Serpent.) . . . by which I have expressed . . . their names, powers, and numerical values.” — pp. 2-4 (Introduction)
the fifty portals or gateways . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The 50 Gates of Understanding were asserted to have 5 Chief Gates, each of which comprehended ten.  The first three, included the knowledge of the first prinicples of the Things.  At the Fourth Gate was the planetary world and all the wonders of astronomy . . .” — p. 314
It is the magical agent par excellence . . .
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “the Great Magic Agent . . . This agent . . . is precisely what the mediæval adepts called the first matter of the magnum opus. . . . This ambient and all-penetrating fluid . . . which we call the Astral Light and the Universal Agent . . . is represented on ancient monuments . . . by the serpent devouring its own tail . . .” — pp. 74-5 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
“Thou shalt separate the earth from the fire . . .”
p/q: Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “Separate the earth from the fire, the subtle from the gross . . . Ascend with the greatest sagacity from the earth to heaven, and then again descend to the earth, and unite together the powers of things superior and things inferior. . . . This has more fortitude than fortitude itself, because it conquers every subtle thing, and can penetrate every solid.  Thus was the world formed.” — p. ix

— 76-7 —

Zeno . . . who taught that the Universe evolves, when its primary substance is transformed . . .
see: William Enfield, History of Philosophy, 1837: “Zeno . . . maintained that they [God and Matter] were so essentially united, that their nature was one and the same.”  “Matter, or the passive principle, in the Stoical system, is destitute of all qualities, but ready to receive any form . . .”  “Since the active principle is comprehended within the world, and with matter makes one whole, it necessarily follows, that God penetrates, pervades, and animates matter, and the things which are formed from it . . . that he is the Soul of the universe.” — pp. 190, 191, 192

— 77 —

Heracleitus . . . The intelligence that moves the Universe is fire
see: Heraclitus, Fragments of Heraclitus, tr. G. T. W. Patrick, 1889: “The life principle of the universe, as of the human organism, is fire.  This fire is everywhere present, so that ‘everything is full of gods and souls’ . . . The elemental fire carries within itself the tendency toward change . . . This impulse of Nature towards change is conceived . . . as ‘intelligence.’ ” — pp. 14-16
the “It of the Kalahansa, the Kala-ham-sa”
see: Monier Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1872: “haṇsa . . . a goose, gander, swan . . . the supreme Soul or universal Spirit (= brahman . . . resolvable into aham sa, ‘I am that’ [or ‘it’], i.e. the supreme Being) . . .” — p. 1163

— 78 —

“Hansa-Vahana” . . .
see: Monier Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1872: “Haṇsa-vāhana . . . ‘borne on a Haṇsa,’ Brahmā.” — p. 1163
The three pronouns . . . He, Thou, I . . . symbolize the ideas of Macroprosopus and Microprosopus
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . the word ANI, Ani, ‘I’ . . . referreth to the Microprosopus . . .”  “(Now, indeed, Macroprosopus is not so closely known by us as to address us in the first person; but he is called in the third person, HVA, Hoa, he.)”  “(Therefore in the third person, HVA, Hoa, is He called who is the Concealed One . . .)” — pp. 77-8 (Book of Concealed Mystery, ii.61, 62, 63)
     “And since in Him beginning and end exist not, hence He is not called AThH, Atah, Thou; seeing that He is concealed and not revealed.  But HVA, Hoa, He, is He called.” — p. 279 (Lesser Holy Assembly, § 204)
the Qabalah of the Nine Chambers, which is a form of the exegetical rule of Temura
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “Termura is a permutation.  According to certain rules, one letter is substituted for another letter . . . There is one more very important form, called the ‘Qabalah of the Nine Chambers’ . . . Sometimes this is used as a cipher [example shown: cipher chart of the ‘Nine Chambers’].” — pp. 9-10 (Introduction)

— 79 —

an influence which . . . “is proper to it, beneficent or maleficent . . .”
p/q: Ély Star, Les Mystères de l’Horoscope, 1888: “. . . une influence qui lui est propre, bénéfique ou maléfique, et cela d’après l’Esprit Planétaire qui les régit, lequel est susceptible d’influencer à son tour les hommes ou les choses qui se trouvent être en harmonie avec lui, ou avec lesquels il a une affinité quelconque [an influence which is proper to it, beneficent or malevolent, and this, after the Planetary Spirit which rules it, who, in his turn, is capable of influencing men or things which are found in harmony with him or with which he has any affinity].” — p. xiii
“Hansa” . . . “One Veda, One Deity, One Caste”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “HANSA.  1. This, according to the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, was the name of the ‘one caste,’ when, in olden times, there was only ‘one Veda, one God, and one caste.’ ” — p. 116
There is also a range . . . north of Mount Meru, called “Hamsa”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The principal mountain ridges which project from the base of Meru . . . on the north, Śankhakūṭa, Ṛishabha, Haṃsa, Nāga, and Kālanjara.” — 2:117 (ii.2)

— 80 —

Brahma, the neuter, is called by them Kala-Hansa
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “BRAHMA, BRAHMAN (neuter).  The supreme soul of the universe, self-existent, absolute, and eternal, from which all things emanate . . . It is sometimes called Kala-hansa.” — p. 56
and Brahmâ, the male, Hansa-Vahana
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “BRAHMĀ (masculine) . . . the supreme spirit manifested as the active creator of the universe. . . . His vehicle is a swan or goose, from which he is called Hansa-vāhana.” — pp. 56-7
(See Part II. “The Hidden Deity and its Symbols and Glyphs.”)
see: Part II, § V, “On the Hidden Deity, its Symbols and Glyphs,” SD 1:349-58.

— Footnotes

the symbol of the Eighteenth Degree of the Rose Croix . . . the Pelican . . .
see: Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopædia of Freemasonry, 1874: “The pelican feeding her young with her blood is a prominent symbol of the eighteenth or Rose Croix degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite . . .” — p. 565
Moses forbids eating the pelican and swan . . . and permits eating “bald locusts, beetles . . .”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And these ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle . . . and the swan, and the pelican . . .”  “Yet these may ye eat . . . the bald locust after its kind, and the beetle after its kind, and the grasshopper after its kind.” — p. 143 (Leviticus, 11:13, 18, 21-2)
see: “But these they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle . . . and the swan, and the pelican . . .” — p. 254 (Deuteronomy 14:12, 16-17)

— 81 —

penetrating into the Mundane Egg, it emerges from it . . . as Brahmâ . . .
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Then the self-existent Lord . . . created water alone; in that he cast seed.  That became a golden egg, like in splendour to the thousand-rayed (sun); in that was born spontaneously Brahmā, the grand parent of all the worlds.” — p. 2 (i.6, 8-9)
separating himself into two halves . . .
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Having divided his own body into two, he became a male by half, by half a female . . .” — p. 6 (i.32)

— 82 —

The first primordial matter, eternal and coeval with Space . . . Hyle
see: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “For some Theists have supposed . . . an ‘incorporeal first matter;’ out of which . . . they conceived the essence of body to have been compounded . . . Neither was this incorporeal Hyle, or matter, a novel opinion . . . Again, others seem to have been the more prone to think matter or body to have been self-existent and unmade, because they both conceived it to be really the same thing with space . . .” — 3:122-4

— 83 —

“As a spider throws out and retracts its web . . .”
p/q: Mundaka Upanishad, tr. E. Röer, 1853: “As a spider casts out and draws in (its web), as on the earth the annual herbs are produced . . . so is produced the universe from the indestructible (Brahma).” — p. 151 (I.1.7, Bibliotheca Indica, v. 15)
The same idea has been beautifully expressed by Goethe . . .
see: Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Faust, 1883: “So schaff’ ich am sausenden Webstuhl der Zeit / Und wirke der Gottheit lebendiges Kleid [(translated in following reference)].” — p. 24 (i.1) [Goethe’s German and the following English translation are both quoted in Royal Masonic Cyclopædia, p. 410]
“Thus at the roaring loom of Time I ply . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopædia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “ ‘Tis thus at the roaring Loom of Time I ply, / And weave for God the garment thou seest Him by.’ ” — p. 410
see: Thomas Carlyle, Sartor Resartus, 1849, p. 185 (III.9, “Earth Spirit’s Song” [in Goethe’s Faust])

— 84 —

“by losing heat, a gaseous body contracts . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Professor Simon Newcomb . . . speaking of the possible cause of the perpetuation of the sun’s heat, says: ‘. . . By losing heat a gaseous body contracts, and the heat generated by the contraction exceeds that which it had to lose in order to produce the contraction.’ {Then certainly the body is growing hotter and consequently expanding while it contracts from cooling! — unless, meantime, the surplus heat is lost by radiation}.” — p. 83 & fn.
to assume that the temperature is not lowered . . .
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “To assume that the temperature is not lowered in correspondence with a decrease of volume when the pressure is constant, is in conflict with the well established law of Charles.” — p. 85
but contraction (from cooling) is incapable of developing the whole amount of heat . . .
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “But it is not true that contraction (from cooling) can have developed the whole amount of heat at any time existing in the mass, or can even maintain a body at a constant temperature.” — pp. 86-7

— 85 —

“May it not be . . . simply a repulsion among the molecules . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “This curious paradox was rendered rational by a learned investigation published by Mr. J. Homer Lane . . .”  “That is, the elastic force which equilibrates the excess of pressure is in part at least, something besides heat. . . . May it not be simply a repulsion among the molecules, which varies according to some law of the distance?” — pp. 83, 85

— 86 —

“I will state the times . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “I will state the times . . . at which devotees departing (from this world) go, never to return, or to return. . . . These two paths, bright and dark, are deemed to be eternal in this world.  By the one, (a man) goes never to return, by the other he comes back.” — pp. 80-1 (Bhagavadgītā, viii)
We often speak of the Hierarchy of “Flames” (see Book II.)
see: Stanza II, 8: “The ‘Flames’ are a Hierarchy of Spirits parallel to, if not identical with, the ‘burning’ fiery Saraph (Seraphim) mentioned by Isaiah (vi. 2-6) . . .”  “The flames, or ‘Fires,’ represent Spirit, or the male element, and ‘Water,’ matter . . . And here again we find, in the action of the Spirit slaying the purely material form, a reference to the eternal struggle, on the physical and psychic planes, between Spirit and Matter . . .” — SD 2:63, 64
Sankarachârya . . . says that fire means a deity which presides over Time
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Śankara . . . suggests that fire means a deity presiding over time.  I [the translator Telang] own I have no clear notion of the meaning of these verses.” — p. 81 fn. (Bhagavadgītā, viii)

— 87 —

The Agnishwatha, the Kumara . . . are the “fashioners of the Inner Man” (See Book II.)
see: “Creation of the First Races,” SD 2:86-108.
“The Lord is a consuming Fire”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget . . . and make you a graven image . . . For the Lord thy God is a consuming fire . . .” — p. 240 (Deuteronomy, 4:23-4)
“The Lord (Christos) shall be revealed with his mighty angels in flaming fire”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire . . .” — p. 271 (2 Thessalonians, 1:7-8)
The Holy Ghost descended on the Apostles like “cloven tongues of fire”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire . . . And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost . . .” — p. 156 (Acts, 2:3-4)
Vishnu will return on Kalki, the White Horse . . . amid fire and flames
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Kalkī or Kalkin.  ‘The white horse.’  This incarnation of Vishṇu is to appear at the end of the Kali or Iron Age seated on a white horse, with a drawn sword blazing like a comet . . .” — p. 38
“And I saw heaven open and behold a white horse . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True . . . His eyes were as a flame of fire . . . and his name is called The Word of God.” — p. 337 (Revelation, 19:11-13)
“The fire of knowledge burns up all action . . .”
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . see all beings, without exception, first in yourself, and then in me . . . so the fire of knowledge reduces all actions to ashes.” — p. 62 (Bhagavadgītā, iv)
“those who have acquired it and are emancipated, are called ‘Fires’ ”
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “I have no attachment to the fruit of actions. . . . Knowing this, the men of old who wished for final emancipation, performed action. . . . The wise call him learned, whose acts are all free from desires . . . whose actions are burnt down by the fire of knowledge. . . . Brahman is in the fire . . .” — pp. 59-61 (Bhagavadgītā, iv)
Speaking of the seven senses symbolised as Hotris
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . the sacrificial priests [Hotris] were seven by (their) nature.  State how the great principle is that there are verily five sacrificial priests {the five chief Hotṛis only are stated}.” — p. 270 & fn. (Anugītā, viii)
“Thus these seven . . . are the causes of emancipation . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Smell, and taste, and colour, sound, and touch as the fifth, the object of the mental operation and the object of the understanding, these seven are causes of action. . . . And I am here devoid of qualities.  Thus these seven are the causes of emancipation {It is these seven from which the self is to be emancipated.  ‘I’ must mean the self, not the Brāhmaṇa who speaks}.” — p. 278 & fn. (Anugītā, x)
“All is One Number issued from No Number”
see: Honoré de Balzac, Oeuvres de H. de Balzac, v. 3, Séraphita, 1837: “Dieu . . . est un nombre doué de mouvement . . . l’existence du Nombre dépend de l’Unité qui, sans être un Nombre, les engendre tous [God . . . is a number endowed with motion . . . the existence of Number depends on the indivisible Unit, which, without being a Number, begets them all].” — p. 477 (ch. 4)

— 88 —

we, who descend from the Primordial Seven . . . This is explained in Book II.
see: “On the Identity and Differences of the Incarnating Powers,” SD 2:88-90; and “Seven Classes of Pitris,” SD 2:91-8.
they are, of course, all one; but their aspects . . . are different (See Part II . . .)
see: “The Theogony of the Creative Gods,” SD 1:424-45.
those who refuse — as Michael did . . .
see: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “. . . this Archangel Saint Michael is the invincible sexless, celestial ‘Energy’ . . . the invincible ‘Virgin Combatant’ . . . armed, in the denying mail of the Gnostic ‘refusal to create.’ ” — p. 213
as did the eldest “Mind-born sons” of Brahmâ
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Sanandana and the other Sons of Brahmā {Vedhas} . . . were without desire . . . undesirous of progeny.” — 1:100-2 & fn. (i.7)

— 89 —

According to Manu, Hiranyagarbha is Brahmâ the first male . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “According to Manu [The Laws of Manu], Hiraṇya-garbha was Brahmā, the first male, formed by the undiscernible eternal First Cause in a golden egg resplendent as the sun.” — p. 121
“That, the one Lord of all beings . . .” arose in the beginning . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “In the Ṛig-veda Hiraṇya-garbha ‘is said to have arisen in the beginning, the one lord of all beings, who upholds heaven and earth, who gives life and breath, whose command even the gods obey, who is the god over all gods, and the one animating principle of their being.’ ” — p. 121

— 90 —

“The Three, the One, the Four, the One, the Five” . . . the numerical hierarchy of the Dhyan-Chohans
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Cabbalah — No. XI,” Oct. 1887: “. . . the power and force of the name Elohim by numerical use . . . its first manifestation being that of 31415, circumference of a circle whose diameter is One.” — p. 138 (Masonic Review, 68:3)
the inner or circumscribed world . . . the great circle of “Pass not”
see: Stanza V, 6: “. . . those who have been called Lipikas, the Recorders of the Karmic ledger, make an impassible barrier between the personal Ego and the impersonal Self . . . They circumscribe the manifested world of matter within the Ring ‘Pass-Not.’ ” — SD 1:129

— Footnotes

a value of Jehovah, viz., 1065 . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July 1885: “Now the numbers 1065 are the significant ones of Jehovah’s name, viz: jod, vav, hé, or 10 and 6 and 5 . . .” — p. 326 (Masonic Review, v. 63)
“Ten is the Mother of the Soul . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “This number TEN is the mother of the soul, and the Life and the Light are there united; since the number One is born from the SPIRIT thus the unity has made the TEN, the TEN the unity. — Hermes, xiv. 54.” — p. 57 fn.
“the unity has made the ten; the ten the unity” (Book of the Keys)
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “. . . ‘the unity has made the ten, the ten the unity’ {Book of Numbers, or Book of the Keys’}.” — 2:298 & fn.
      “. . . the Chaldean Book of Numbers . . . is certainly not to be found in libraries, as it formed one of the most ancient Books of Hermes . . .” — 1:32-3
By the means of the Temura . . . and the knowledge of 1065 . . . a universal science may be obtained . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July, 1885: “Now the numbers 1065 are significant ones of Jehovah’s name, viz: jod, vav, hé, or 10 and 6 and 5, which the rabbin’s extol so beyond all other numbers and say that by their uses and permutations, under the law of T’ mura, the knowledge of the entire universe may be had.” — p. 326 (Masonic Review, 63:6)
an American Kabalist has now discovered the same number for the Elohim
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July, 1885: “. . . we have the great God-word Elohim.  The running characterizing small numbers of this name, in Hebrew, are 13514, which, placed on the bounds of a circle, will serve to give expression to the measure of the same; for they can be read as 31415 . . .” — p. 327 (Masonic Review, 63:6)

— 91 —

Skinner . . . reads the Hebrew word Alhim [Elohim] in the same number values . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “Now, this use is determined by the use of the full word form Elohim . . . used numerically . . . place the word in a circle, and then reading the values from left to right, we have 31415 . . .” — p. 182
Prajapati is called the first procreating male, and “his Mother’s husband”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “DAKSHA . . . is one of the Prajāpatis, and is sometimes regarded as their chief. . . . In the Ṛig-veda it is said that ‘Daksha sprang from Aditi, and Aditi from Daksha.’ . . . Roth’s view is that Aditi is eternity, and that Daksha (spiritual power) is the male energy which generates the gods in eternity. . . . As son of Aditi, he is one of the Ādityas . . .” — p. 76
Anna (the name of the Mother of the Virgin Mary) . . .
see: John R. Beard, The Confessional, 1859: “The earliest thought was to declare Anna, the apocryphal mother of Mary, to have been conceived without sin.  If she were sinless her daughter would be sinless.  This, the invention of the oriental church, did not find favour with the western; which contented itself with the theory that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was conceived without sin.” — pp. 76-7
derived from the Chaldean Ana, heaven . . . hence Anaitia
see: J. G. R. Forlong, Rivers of Life, 1883: “. . . the great Asyrian goddess . . . the progenitor of all ‘Virgin Maries’ . . . called Goola, Ana-Melek or ‘My Lady Ana,’ and she was the Queen of heaven . . .” — 2:66
      “Skye possesses a Tempoul-na-Anait . . . who was of course the Anaitis of Asyria . . . Strabo describes her worship in Persia under the name Anæa . . .” — 2:239

— Footnotes

Mout . . . “She was no less the mother than the wife of Ammon . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “La déesse Mout . . . Son nom signifie la mère et marque le rôle qu’elle joue dans la triade: elle était moins la femme d’Ammon que sa mère, et l’un des titres principaux du dieu était Mari de sa mère [The goddess Mut . . . Her name signifies mother and indicates the role she plays in the triad: she was no less the wife of Ammon than his mother, and one of the main titles of the god was husband of his mother].” — p. 168
The goddess Mout, or Mût, is addressed as “our lady,” the “queen of Heaven,” and of “the Earth” . . .
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Elle est appelée dame du ciel, reine de la terre, et se confond avec les autres déesses mères, Isis, Hathor, etc. [She is called lady of heaven, queen of the earth, and shares these titles with the other mother goddesses, Isis, Hathor, etc.].” — p. 168

— 91-2 —

Devi-Durga, the wife of Siva, is also called Annapurna, and Kanya, the Virgin
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ANNA-PŪRṆA . . . A form of Durgā . . . Cf. the Roman Anna Perenna.” — p. 17
      “DEVI . . . ‘the great goddess;’ wife of the god Śiva . . . In her milder form she is Umā, ‘light’ . . . In her terrible form she is Durgā, ‘the inaccessible’ . . .”  “She is Kanyā, ‘the virgin’ . . .” — pp. 86-7

— 92 —

“Uma-Kanya” . . . “Virgin of light”
see: Shoshee Chunder Dutt, Works, 1884: “. . . regarding Umā, or ‘Light,’ the chief of the Sactis . . . One Pourānic account . . . makes her the energy of all the gods . . . Of Umā the virgin name was Kanya Kumāri . . .” — 4:56 (India; Past and Present)
“God engraved in the Holy Four the throne of his glory . . .”
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “ ‘In it [the Holy Four] He engraved the throne of His glory, the Ophanim, the Seraphim, the sacred animals, and the ministering angels, and from these three he formed His habitation . . .’ ” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I.ix)
Thus was the world made “through three Seraphim — Sepher, Saphar, and Sipur”
see: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “(Sephar) . . . toutes ces choses sont réglées par la nombre. . . . (Sipur) . . . c’est la parole divine . . . (Sépher) signifie l’écriture.  L’écriture de Dieu, c’est l’œuvre de la création [Sephar . . . all these things are regulated by number. . . . Sipur . . . is the divine Word . . . Sepher signifies writing.  The writing of God, it is the work of creation].” — p. 146

— Footnotes

“Ten numbers . . . the spirit of the living God . . . who liveth in eternities!  Voice and Spirit and Word . . .”
p/q: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “This decade is divided . . . and thereby is shown the gradual development of the world . . . ‘One is the spirit of the living God . . . who liveth for ever! voice, spirit, and word, this is the Holy Ghost.’ ” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I.ix)
Two: Spirit out of Spirit.  He designed . . . twenty-two letters of foundation
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “The creative air, represented by number two, emanated from the Spirit . . . ‘In it He engraved the twenty-two letters.’ ” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I.ix)
three Mothers and seven double and Twelve single, and one spirit out of them
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “. . . ‘the twenty-two letters, by means of which God . . . formed the souls of everything that has been made, and that shall be made.’  These twenty-two letters of the alphabet are then divided into three groups, consisting respectively of, 1, the three mothers, or fundamental letters . . . 2, seven double . . . and 3, twelve simple consonants . . .’ ” — p. 69 (Sepher Jetzira, II.ii)
Three: Water out of Spirit . . .
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “The water again, represented by the number three proceeded from the air [spirit] . . . ‘In it He engraved darkness and emptiness, slime and dung.’ ” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I.ix)
Four: Fire out of water.  He designed . . . the throne of glory, and the wheels, and the seraphim . . .
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “Whilst the ether or fire, represented by the number four, emanated from the water . . . ‘In it He engraved the throne of His glory, the Ophanim [wheels], the Seraphim, the sacred animals, and the ministering angels, and from these three he formed his habitation . . .” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I, ix)
as it is said, He makes his angels spirits and his servants fiery flames!
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “O Lord my God . . . Who maketh his angels spirits, His ministers a flaming fire . . .” — p. 786 (Psalms, 104:1, 4)
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “. . . as it is written — ‘He maketh the wind his messengers, flaming fire his servants.’ ” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I.ix)

— 93 —

As beautifully expressed by P. Christian . . . the word . . . as well as the name of, every individual . . .
p/q: P. Christian, Histoire de la Magie, 1870: “La plus haute antiquité savante croyait à cette alliance mystérieuse du nom et de l’être qui s’en revêt comme d’un talisman divin ou infernal, pour éclairer son passage sur la terre ou pour l’incendier [The oldest sages of antiquity believed in this mysterious alliance between a name and the person who clothes himself with this name as with a divine or infernal talisman, to lighten his passage on the earth, or to set fire to it].” — p. 176
“When our Soul . . . creates or evokes a thought . . .”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Quand l’âme évoque une pensée, le signe de cette pensée s’écrit de lui-même dans la lumière [When the soul evokes a thought, the sign of that thought inscribes itself automatically in the Astral Light].” — p. 205
“The sign expresses the thing: the thing is the . . . virtue of the sign.”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Le signe exprime la chose.  La chose est la vertu du signe [The sign expresses the thing.  The thing is the virtue of the sign].” — p. 205
“To pronounce a word is to evoke a thought, and make it present”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Dire un mot c’est évoquer une pensée et la rendre présente [To say a word is to evoke a thought and make it present].” — p. 205

— 94 —

“Yes, names (and words) are either beneficent or maleficent . . . venomous or health-giving”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Les paroles sont donc par elles-mêmes bonnes ou mauvaises, vénéneuses ou salutaires [Thus words are of themselves good or bad, poisonous or healthful] . . .” — p. 206
the One . . . proceeding from . . . Satarupa “of the hundred forms”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then Brahmā created, himself, the Manu Swāyambhuva . . . and the female portion of himself he constituted Śatarūpā . . . {Śatarūpa . . . from Śata, ‘a hundred’, and . . . ‘form’}.” — 1:104-6, 107 fn. (i.7)
In the Anugîtâ a conversation . . . on the origin of Speech and its occult properties
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Both speech and mind went to the self of all beings and spoke (to him thus), ‘Say which of us is superior . . .’  Thereupon the lord positively said to speech, ‘Mind (is superior). . . . there are two minds, immovable and also movable.  The immovable, verily, is with me; the movable is your dominion.’ . . .”  “Hence the mind is distinguished by reason of its being immovable, and the goddess [Speech] distinguised by reason of her being movable.” — pp. 263-4, 266 (Anugītā, vi)
The Brâhmana tells her that the Apâna . . . becoming lord . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The Brāhmaṇa said: The Apāna becoming lord changes it into the state of the Apāna in consequence.  That is called the movement of the mind, and hence the mind is in need (of it).” — p. 263 (Anugītā, vi)

— Footnotes

Anugîtâ forms part of the Asamedha Parvan . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . the Anugītā is one of the numerous episodes of the Mahābhārata. . . . It forms part of the Aśvamedha Parvan . . . it affords an interesting glimpse of sundry old passages of the Upanishad literature . . . it professes to be a sort of continuation, or rather recapitulation, of the Bhagavadgītā.” — p.197 (“Introduction to Anugītā”)

— 94-5 —

a dialogue between Speech and Mind.  “Both went to the Self of Being . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “But since you ask me a question regarding speech and mind, I will relate to you a dialogue between themselves.  Both speech and mind went to the self of all beings and spoke (to him thus), ‘Say which of us is superior; destroy our doubts, O lord!’  Thereupon the lord positively said to speech, ‘Mind (is superior).’  But speech thereupon said to him, ‘I, verily, yield (you) your desires.’ ” — p. 263 (Anugītā, vi)

— 95 —

“Thereupon, again, the Self told her that there are two minds . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Know, that (in) my (view), there are two minds, immovable and also movable.  The immovable, verily, is with me; the movable is in your dominion.  Whatever mantra, or letter, or tone goes to your dominion, that indeed is the movable mind.  To that you are superior.  But inasmuch, O beautiful one! as you came personally to speak to me (in the way you did), therefore, O Sarasvatī! you shall never speak after (hard) exhalations.” — p. 264 (Anugītā, vi)
“The goddess Speech . . . verily, dwelt always between the Prâna and the Apâna . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The goddess speech, verily, dwelt always between the Prāṇa and Apāna.  But, O noble one! going with the Apāna wind, though impelled, (in consequence of) being without the Prāṇa, she ran up to Prajāpati, saying, ‘Be pleased, O venerable sir!’  Then the Prāṇa appeared again nourishing speech.  And therefore speech never speaks after (hard) exhalation.  It is always noisy or noiseless.  Of those two, the noiseless is superior to the noisy (speech).” — pp. 264-5 (Anugītā, vi)
“The (speech) which is produced in the body . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The (speech) which is produced in the body by means of the Prāṇa, and which then goes into the Apāna, and then becoming assimilated with the Udāna leaves the body . . . then (finally) dwells in the Samāna.  So speech formerly spoke.  Hence the mind is distinguished by reason of its being immovable, and the goddess distinguished by reason of her being movable.” — pp. 265-6 (Anugītā, vi)
This chapter of the Anugîtâ explains . . . regulation of the breath in Yoga practices
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Arjuna Miśra says, the last chapter explained Prāṇāyāma . . . the restraint of the life-winds . . . according to the Yoga philosophy.” — p. 266 fn. (Anugītā, vii)

— 96 —

Pratyâhâra (the restraint and regulation of the senses . . .), Prânâyâma . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Prāṇāyāma is the restraint of the life-winds, Pratyāhāra that of the senses, according to the Yoga philosophy.” — p. 266 fn. (Anugītā, vii)
The Brâhmana speaks in it “of the institution of the seven sacrificial Priests . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The Brāhmaṇa said: On this, too, O beautiful one! they relate this ancient story, (which shows) of what description is the institution of the seven sacrificial priests.  The nose, and the eye, and the tongue, and the skin, and the ear as the fifth, mind and understanding, these are the seven sacrificial priests separately stationed.  Dwelling in a minute space, they do not perceive each other.” — pp. 266-7 (Anugītā, vii)
For mind says: “The nose smells not without me . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The mind said: The nose smells not without me, the tongue does not perceive taste, the eye does not take in colour, the skin does not become aware of any (object of) touch. . . . I am the eternal chief among the elements.  Without me, the senses never shine, like an empty dwelling, or like fire the flames of which are extinct.  Without me, all beings, like fuel half-dried and half moist, fail to apprehend qualities or objects, even with the senses exerting themselves.” — p. 268 (Anugītā, vii)
“You are all greatest and not greatest” . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “ ‘You are all greatest, and not greatest {‘Not greatest because none of them is independent of the other.  ‘Greatest’ Arjuna Miśra renders by ‘superior to objects’}.  You are all possessed of one another’s qualities.  All are greatest in their own spheres, and all support one another.  There is one unmoving (life-wind). . . . My own self is one only, (but) accumulated in numerous (forms).” — pp. 273-4 & fn. (Anugītā, viii)

— 97 —

there is no rest or cessation of motion in Nature . . . the “Conservation of matter”
see: Ludwig Büchner, Force and Matter, 1884: “It follows hence with absolute certainty that motion is as eternal and uncreatable, or as beginningless, endless and originless as force and matter.  Conservation of force, conservation of matter, ceaseless change of motion . . .” — p. 80

— Footnotes

“It is to be regretted that the advocates of this (nebular) theory . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “Rev. W. B. Slaughter says: ‘It is to be regretted that the advocates of this (nebular) theory have not entered more largely into the discussion of it [the origin of rotary motion].  No one condescends to give us the rationale of it.  How does the process of cooling and contracting the mass impart to it a rotary motion?’ ” — p. 94 fn.
see: Rev. W. B. Slaughter, The Modern Genesis, 1876, p. 48

— 98 —

the “Holy Aged” (Sephira and Adam Kadmon)
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “At first the En Soph, or the Aged of the Aged . . . or the Holy Aged . . . sent forth from his infinite light one spiritual substance or intelligence.  This first Sephira . . . is called — I, the Crown . . . II, the Aged . . . III, the Primordial Point . . . IV, the White Head . . . V, the Long Face, Macroprosopon . . . because the whole ten Sephiroth represent the Primordial or the Heavenly Man [Adam Kadmon] . . .” — pp. 7-8
Brahmâ, the Creator, called also Sanat
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “BRAHMĀ . . . the supreme spirit manifested as the active creator of the universe.”  “Brahmā is also called . . . Sanat, ‘the ancient’ . . .” — pp. 56, 59

— 98-9 —

the Kabalistic “Archetypal World,” from whence proceed . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . the Sephiroth are also called the World of Emanations, or the Atziluthic World, or archetypal world . . . and this world gave birth to three other worlds . . . the world of creation . . . world of formation . . . world of matter . . .” — pp. 29-30 (Introduction)

— 99 —

Aditi . . . “the visible infinite, visible by the naked eye . . .”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ADITI.  ‘Free, unbounded.’ . . . or, according to M. Müller, ‘the visible infinite, visible by the naked eye; the endless expanse beyond the earth, beyond the clouds, beyond the sky.’  In the Ṛig-veda . . . Aditi is called Deva-mātṛi, ‘mother of the gods’ . . .” — p. 3
“Eight Sons were born from the body of Aditi . . .”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ ‘Eight sons were born from the body of Aditi; she approached the gods with seven but cast away the eighth, Mārttāṇda (the sun).’ These seven were the Ādityas.” — p. 3

— 100 —

“Eight houses were built by the Mother . . .”
see: George Rawlinson, Religions of the Ancient World, 1883: “[Anu] constructed dwellings for the great gods. . . . made dwellings for the planets, for their rising and their setting. . . . placed along with them the dwellings of Bel and Hea . . . Moreover, in the center he placed luminaries. . . . (Anu) set the sun in his place in the horizon of heaven.” — pp. 67-8
the “rejected Son” being our Sun
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “. . . Aditi had eight sons, of whom she only presented seven to the gods, casting out Mārttāṇḍa, the eighth, though she is said to have afterwards brought him forward. . . . Sūrya is, in a few places, spoken of as an Āditya . . . identified with Agni, he is said . . . to have been placed by the gods in the sky.” — 5:54
Surya . . . is called Loka-Chakshuh, “the Eye of the World”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “SŪRYA.  The sun or its deity.”  “He is Savitṛi, ‘the nourisher;’ Vivaswat, ‘the brilliant’ . . . Loka-chakshuh, ‘eye of the world’ . . .” — pp. 310, 311

— Footnotes

“Occult Sciences having discovered . . . that the number of the planets must be seven . . .”
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Mais les sciences occultes et les calculs ayant révélé que les planètes devaient exister au nombre de sept, les anciens ont été entraînés à faire entrer le soleil dans le clavier des harmonies célestes, et à lui faire occuper la place vacante.  Alors, toutes les fois qu’ils observaient une influence qui ne dépendait d’aucune des six planètes connues, ils l’atrribuaient au soleil [But the occult sciences and calculations having revealed that the number of the planets must be seven, the ancients were led to introduce the Sun into the scale of the celestial harmonies, and make him occupy the vacant place.  Thus, every time they perceived an influence that did not pertain to any of the known planets, they attributed it to the Sun] . . .” — p. 447 fn.
“The error only seems important . . .”
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Cette erreur paraît importante, pourtant elle est insignifiante dans la pratique des résultats, si dans les tables des anciens astrologues, on met Uranus à la place du Soleil . . . un astre central, pivotant et relativement immobile, qui règle le temps et la mesure, et qui ne devait pas être détourné de ses véritables fonctions [This error only seems important, but is insignificant in practical results, if in the tables of the ancient astrologers Uranus was put in the place of the Sun . . . a central star, rotating and relatively motionless, regulating time and measure, and which cannot be diverted from its true functions].” — p. 447 fn.
“The Sun-Day ought to be Uranus-day (Urani dies, Urandi)”
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . le jour du soleil (dimanche) devrait être le jour d’Uranus (Urani dies, Urandi) [the sun-day ought to be Uranus-day] . . .” — p. 447 fn.

— 101 —

The Vedas . . . teach . . . “that the fire verily is all the deities”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Nārada said: ‘. . . It is the teaching of the Veda, that the fire verily is all the deities . . .’ ” — pp. 275-6 (Anugītā, ix)
(Aitareya-Brâhmana of Haug also . . .)
p/q: Aitareya Brahmanam, tr. Martin Haug, 1863: “Agni, among the gods, has the lowest, Vishṇu the highest place; between them stand all the other deities {Agni was the first of the deities assembled, (and) Vishṇu the last}. . . . For Agni is all the deities . . .” — 2:1, 3 & fn. (i.1)

— 102 —

systems “are gradually changing by atmospheric additions . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “W. R. Grove . . . In his essay on the Correlation of the Physical Forces, published in 1843, he suggested that ‘worlds or systems’ ‘are gradually changing by atmospheric additions or subtractions, or by accretions or diminutions arising from nebulous substance, or from meteoric bodies’ (p. 81).” — pp. 52-3
“the Sun may condense gaseous matter as it travels in Space . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “Professor W. R. Grove . . . suggested that this diffused matter my become a source of solar heat, ‘inasmuch as the sun may condense matter as it travels in space and so heat may be produced.’ {Address as President of the British Association, 1866}.” — pp. 52-3 & fn.
Mr. W. Mattieu Williams suggested that the diffused matter or Ether . . .
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Similar views . . . were put forth in 1870, by Mr. W. Mattieu Williams . . . He suggested that this diffused matter or ether which is the recipient of the heat radiations of the universe, is thereby drawn into the depths of the solar mass.  Expelling thence the previously condensed and thermally exhausted ether, it becomes compressed and gives up its heat, to be in turn itself driven out in a rarefied and cooled state, and to absorb a fresh supply of heat which he supposes to be in this way taken up by the ether, and again concentrated and redistributed by the suns of the universe.” — pp. 55-6

— Footnotes

Very similar ideas in Mr. W. Mattieu Williams’ “The Fuel of the Sun”
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . Mr. W. Mattieu Williams {The Fuel of the Sun} . . . conceived, as Grove had done in 1866, that the sun’s heat is maintained by his condensation of attenuated matter everywhere encountered in his motion through interstellary space.” — pp. 55-6 & fn.
in Dr. C. William Siemen’s “On the Conservation of Solar Energy” . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Dr. C. William Siemens in a recent memoir of extraordinary interest, On the Conservation of Solar Energy {Nature, xxv, 440-4, March 9, 1882} . . . has followed Grove in seeking through its condensation the source of solar heat . . .” — p. 57 & fn.
in Dr. P. Martin Duncan’s “Address of the President of the Geological Society” . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Mr. Williams’ suggestion was adopted by Dr. P. Martin Duncan {In an address as President of the Geological Society, London, May, 1877} who, in 1877, also without the knowledge of Grove’s priority . . . conceived the sun to be slowly attracting to itself the earth’s atmospheric envelope . . .” — p. 56 & fn.

— 103 —

life from primæval Chaos (now the noumenon of irresolvable nebulæ) by aggregation and accumulation
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . nebular history begins with the aggregaton of cold matter . . . there would naturally arrive a time when, by collision . . . heat would be developed.”
      “A. Continuous fire mist.  The nebular mass remains homogeneous . . . irresolvable nebulæ . . .
      B. Discontinuous fire mist . . . Nebula undergoing segregation and accumulation around local nuclei . . .” — pp. 532, 540

— 104 —

“A shadow never falls upon a wall without leaving thereupon a permanent trace . . .”
p/q: John William Draper, History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, 1875: “A shadow never falls upon a wall without leaving thereupon a permanent trace, a trace which might be made visible by resorting to proper processes. . . . The portraits of our friends or landscape views, may be hidden on the sensitive surface from the eye, but they are ready to make their appearance as soon as proper developers are resorted to.  A spectre is concealed on a silver or glassy surface until, by our necromancy, we make it come forth into the visible world.  Upon the walls of our most private apartments, where we think the eye of intrusion is altogether shut out and our retirement can never be profaned, there exist the vestiges of all our acts, silhouettes of whatever we have done.” — pp. 132-3
Drs. Jevons and Babbage believe . . . that “each particle of the existing matter . . .”
p/q: W. Stanley Jevons, The Principles of Science, 1874: “In some passages of that most remarkable work, the Ninth Bridgewater Treatise, Mr. [Charles] Babbage has pointed out that if we had power to follow and detect the minutest effects of any disturbance, each particle of existing matter must be a register of all that has happened.” — 2:454-5
The forty “Assessors” who stand in the region of Amenti as the accusers of the Soul before Osiris
see: George Rawlinson, History of Ancient Egypt, 1886: “It is usual to attach to the ‘four genii of Amenti’ the ‘forty-two’ who are known as ‘the assessors.’  In representations of Osiris upon the judgment-seat, the assessors usually appear, standing or sitting in two or more rows above him or behind him . . . They were thus not merely judges, but accusers and punishers of crime.  Guilty souls were handed over to them by Osiris, but to be ‘tortured’ only, not destroyed.” — 1:188

— Footnotes

These [“Scribes”] are the four “Immortals” which are mentioned in Atharva Veda . . .
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “In the Atharva-veda i. 31, 1, four immortals are spoken of as the guardians of the four quarters of the sky.” — 5:12 (note 16)

— 105 —

The Hindu Chitra-Gupta who reads . . . from his register, called Agra-Sandhani
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “In the epic poems Yama . . . is the god of departed spirits and judge of the dead.  A soul when it quits its mortal form repairs to his abode in the lower regions; there the recorder, Chitra-gupta, reads out his account from the great register called Agra-sandhānī . . .” — p. 374
“Now that photography has revealed to us . . .”
p/q: Ély Star, Les Mystères de l’Horoscope, 1888: “Maintenant que la photographie nous a révélé l’influence chimique du système sidéral, en fixant sur la plaque sensible de l’appareil des milliers d’étoiles et de planètes que les plus puissants télescopes actuels ne découvraient point, il nous sera plus facile de comprendre comment notre système solaire peut, à la naissance d’un enfant, influencer son cerveau — vierge de toute impression extérieure — d’une manière déterminée, et d’après la présence au Zénith, de telle ou telle constellation Zodiacale [Now that photography has revealed to us the chemical influence of the Sidereal system, by fixing on the sensitized plate of the apparatus thousands of stars and planets that today’s most powerful telescopes could not discover at all, it becomes easier to understand how our solar system can, at the birth of a child, influence his brain — virgin of any outer impression — in a definite manner and according to the presence on the zenith of such or another zodiacal constellation].” — pp. x-xi

— 106 —

the Unconscious evolved . . . “in the hope of attaining clear self-consciousness,” of becoming . . . man
see: G. S. Morris, “The Theory of Unconscious Intelligence, as Opposed to Theism,” June 19, 1876: “Of the Hegelian system . . . it represents the universe as the gradual evolution of an unconscious, ideal principle . . . which attains to self-consciousness only in man . . .” — p. 261 (Transactions of the Victoria Institute, v. 11)

— 107 —

God . . . making the wind his messenger and his “ministers a flaming fire”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . God, thou art very great . . . Who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh his angels spirits; His ministers a flaming fire . . .” — p. 786 (Psalms, 104:1, 3-4)
Wallace . . . holds that the evolution of man was directed and furthered by superior Intelligences
see: Alfred Russel Wallace, Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection, 1870: “. . . a superior intelligence has guided the development of man in a definite direction . . . to aid in the production of what we can hardly avoid considering as the ultimate aim and outcome of all organized existence — intellectual, ever-advancing, spiritual man.  It therefore implies, that the great laws which govern the material universe were insufficient for his production, unless we consider . . . that the controlling action of such higher intelligences is a necessary part of those laws . . .” — pp. 359-60

— 108 —

Dzyu . . . dealing with eternal truths . . . Dzyu-mi . . . deals with illusions
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett [1880 – 1887], comp. A. T. Barker, 1925: “The real (Dgyu) and the unreal (Dgyu-mi).  Dgyu becomes Fohat when in its activity . . . Real knowledge deals with eternal verities and primal causes.  The unreal only with illusory effects.  Dgyu stands independent of the belief or unbelief of man.  Dgyu-mi requires faith — rests on authority.” — p. 376 (“Cosmological Notes” by M. & K.H.)
five Dhyanis . . . “celestial” Buddhas, of whom the human Buddhas are the manifestations . . .
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Thus, to each human Buddha belongs a Dhyāni Buddha and a Dhyāni Bōdhisattva . . . unlimited [in] number . . . Out of this vast number the five Buddhas of the actual period of the universe are particularly worshipped.”  “Dhyāni Buddhas, celestial Buddhas, [are] the manifestations of the human Buddhas in the world of forms . . .” — pp. 52, 399
Esoterically, however, the Dhyani-Buddhas are seven . . .
see: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “A Buddha visits the earth for each of the seven races of the great planetary period.  The Buddha with whom we are occupied was the fourth of the series, and that is why he stands fourth in the list quoted by Mr. Rhys Davids . . . The fifth, or Maitreya Buddha, will come after the final disappearance of the fifth race . . . The sixth will come at the beginning of the seventh race, and the seventh towards the close of that race.”  “. . . five are practically identified in exoteric, and seven in esoteric, teaching . . .” — pp. 171, 173
Amitâbha is the Dhyani-Buddha of Gautama Sakyamuni . . .
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “Amitābha, the Dhyāni Buddha, corresponding to Sākyamuni . . .” — p. 397
Amitâbha . . . incarnates on earth as He did in Tzon-kha-pa
see: Clements Markham, Narratives of Tibet, 1876: “. . . there have been two great incarnations of equal rank: the Dalai Lama at Potala . .  and the Teshu Lama at Teshu Lumbo, the incarnation of the Buddhisatwa Amitabha, and also of Tsong-khapa, who was himself the incarnation of Amitabha.” — p. xlvii

— 109 —

“the glorious counterparts in the mystic world . . .”
p/q: T. W. Rhys Davids, Buddhism, 1886: “. . . every earthly mortal Buddha has his pure and glorious counterpart in the mystic world, free from the debasing conditions of this material life: or rather that the Buddha under material conditions is only an appearance, the reflection, or emanation, or type of a Dhyāni Buddha . . . The number of Dhyāni Buddhas is accordingly, in theory, infinite, like the number of the Buddhas, but only the five are practically acknowledged.” — pp. 204-5
“Buddhas of Contemplation” . . . are all Anupadaka (parentless)
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “By the name of Dhyāni Buddha, ‘Buddha of contemplation,’ or by the term Anupadaka, ‘without parents,’ celestial beings are designated corresponding to the human Buddhas teaching upon earth, who are called ‘Mānushi Buddhas.’ ” — p. 51

— 110 —

Darkness generates light
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Whilst he (Brahmā) . . . was meditating on creation, there appeared a creation beginning with ignorance, and consisting of darkness. . . . Brahmā, beholding that it was defective {‘did not as yet possess that which is the purpose of man’}, designed another . . . Beholding this creation also imperfect, Brahmā again meditated; and a third creation appeared, abounding with the quality of goodness . . . and luminous within and without.” — 1:69-72 & fn. (i.5)
Brahmâ’s “Will” or desire to create
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . when Brahmā creates the world anew, they [created beings] are the progeny of his will . . .” — 1:79 (i.5)
the doctrine that Desire, πόθος, is the principle of creation
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “He [Sanchoniatho] supposes that the beginning of all things was . . . a breeze of thick air and a Chaos turbid and black as Erebus . . . But when this wind became enamoured of its own first principles (the Chaos), and an intimate union took place, that connexion was called Pothos: and it was the beginning of the creation of all things.” — p. 3 (Euseb. Præp. Evan.)
and this is the Universal Mind . . . the Demiurgos
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — III,” April 1887: “No impulse, no energy, no form in the cosmos can ever come into existence without having its original conception in the field of Chit, which constitutes the demiurgic mind of the Logos.” — p. 446 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
the One Supreme and eternal — manifesting itself as Avalôkitêshwara (or manifested Iswara)
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Now this Parabrahmam which exists before all things in the cosmos is the one essence from which starts into existence a centre of energy, which I shall for the present call the Logos.  This Logos may be called . . . Eswara . . . It is called Avalokiteswara by the Buddhists . . . Avalokiteswara in one sense is the Logos in general . . . a center of spiritual energy which is unborn and eternal . . .” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 111 —

the “Word made flesh”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us . . .” — p. 121 (John, 1:14)
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Notes sur l’Ésotérisme du Dogme Chrétien,” Dec. 1887: “Pour la religion ecclésiastique du Christianisme . . . qui a carnalisé le Logos, ou Verbe . . . notre Sat ne sera jamais ni comprehénsible, ni acceptable . . . La Divinité que nous reconnaissons . . . divinité omniprésente, de qui le seul Verbe qui puisse ‘se faire chair’ est l’Humanité! . . . Le Christos . . . c’est l’Ego spirituel [To the ecclesiatical religion of Christianity . . . which has carnalized the Logos, or Word . . . our Sat will never be either comprehensible or acceptable . . . The Divinity that we acknowledge . . . the omnipresent divinity, of which the only Word that can be ‘made flesh’ is Humanity! . . . The Christos . . . is the spiritual Ego] . . .” — p. 171 (Le Lotus, 1887, No. 9)

— Footnotes

In 1882 . . . Col. Olcott was taken to task for asserting . . . Electricity is matter
see: “Is Electricity Matter or Force?” Sept. 1882: “. . . Col. H. S. Olcott . . . has asserted that electricity is matter . . . ‘Electricity cannot . . . be seen, yet it is matter.  The universal ether of science no one ever saw, yet it is matter in a state of extreme tenuity.’ ” — p. 318 (The Theosophist, v. 3)
Maxwell . . . said, years ago, that Electricity was matter, not motion merely. . . .
see: Hermann von Helmholtz, “On the Modern Development of Faraday’s Conception of Electricity,” April 8, 1881: “. . . the mathematical interpretations of Faraday’s conceptions regarding the nature of electric and magnetic force has been given by Clerk Maxwell . . .”  “Now, the most startling result, perhaps, of Faraday’s law is this: If we accept the hypothesis that the elementary substances are composed of atoms we cannot avoid concluding that electricity also, positive as well as negative, is divided into definite elementary portions, which behave like atoms of electricity.” — pp. 157, 158 (Chemical News, 43:1115)
(See the Addendum to this Book.)
see: “The Masks of Science” (SD 1:506-23) and “Ancient Thought in Modern Dress” (SD 1:579-87).

— 112 —

Vishnu is not a high god in the Rig Veda
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “Section II — Subordinate position occupied by Vishṇu in the hymns of the Rig-veda as compared with other deities.” — 4:97-114
“a manifestation of Solar Energy” . . . striding through the Seven regions of the Universe . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “VISHṆU.  Root, vish, ‘to pervade.’ . . . In the Ṛig-veda Vishṇu is not in the first rank of the gods.  He is a manifestation of the solar energy, and is described as striding through the seven regions of the universe in three steps . . .” — p. 360
“the Vedic God having little in common with the Vishnu of later times”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “[Vishṇu] In the Veda he is occasionally associated with Indra.  He has very little in common with the Vishṇu of later times . . .” — p. 360
The “three strides of Vishnu” through the “seven regions of the Universe,” of the Rig Veda
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “. . . the place from which Vishṇu strode over the seven regions . . . Vishṇu strode over this (universe); in three places he planted his step . . .” — 4:63 (Rig-veda, i.22, 16)
explained by commentators as meaning “fire, lightning and the Sun”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “These three steps are explained by commentators as denoting the three manifestations of light — fire, lightning, and the sun . . .” — p. 360
the “three steps” . . . are explained by Aurnavâbha . . .
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “The second writer, Aurṇavābha . . . interprets Vishṇu’s three strides as the rising, culmination, and the setting of the sun.” — 4:97
the Elohim (Elhim) were called Echod, “one” . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July, 1885: “. . . from the first [Mosaic tradition], we have the great God-word Elohim. . . . ‘His name is Echod,’ or One. . . . the distinction between the names Elohim and Jehovah, in this, viz: that the first is a generalizing term, serving as a constant as entering into all created works and forms whatever, while the name Jehovah is a particular or discrete manifestation . . .” — p. 327 (Masonic Review, 63:6)
Then came the change, “Jehovah is Elohim” . . . “How is Jehovah Elohim?” . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — VI,” June, 1886: “In extracts from Sohar, the Rev. Dr. Cassel . . . says: ‘Jehovah is Elohim (Alhim).’ . . . ‘Es sind drie Stufen, deren jede für sich allein in Gott besteht, obgleich alle zusammen nur eine engverbundene, unzertrennbare Einheit bilden.’  That is — by three steps God, (Alhim) and Jehovah became the same, and though separated, each and together they are of the same One.” — pp. 266-7 (Masonic Review, 65:5)

— 113 —

The Zeroana Akerne is also the “Boundless Circle of the Unknown Time” . . .
see: E. C. Ravenshaw, “On the Winged Bulls, Lions, and Other Symbolical Figures from Nineveh,” 1856: “. . . ‘Time without bounds,’ — ‘Zarua Akerene,’ described in the Zend-avesta, as ‘the ever-soaring bird’ . . . the winged circle came to be considered the symbol of Ormazd, the active creator . . . and sometimes, perhaps, as the symbol of the sun . . .” — pp. 115-16 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, v. 16)

— Footnotes

the ratio 20612 / 6561 . . . gives the Great Pyramid measures
see: J. Ralson Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The relation of 6561 : 20612 is both in the pyramid structure and in the Bible . . .” — p. 6
      “. . . the great pyramid of Egypt was built to perpetuate a series of measures, astronomical and otherwise, and to contain a mathematical and geometrical system of calculation . . .” — p. 74
the triangle being a symbol of deity everywhere
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The equilateral triangle was adopted by all ancient nations as a symbol of Deity, and was regarded as the most perfect of figures.” — 2:743
(See . . . “Pythagorean Triangle,” Oliver)
see: Rev. G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “The Pythagoreans maintained the principle of three worlds . . . the inferior, the superior, and the supreme.  The inferior contains bodies and magnitudes, as the guardians of things generated and consequently corruptible.  Next above is the superior world, intended for superior powers, called by Pythagoras in his Golden Verses, the immortal gods, produced by the divine Mind.  The third world, called supreme, is the abode of the One Great Deity, who existed from eternity . . .” — pp. 79-80

— 114 —

“a curve of such a nature . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, A Criticism on the Legendre Mode of the Rectification of The Curve of the Circle, 1881: “The curve of a circle is of such a nature, that as to any, even the least part thereof, if such part be protracted either way, it will finally re-enter on itself and form the entire circumference of the circle.” — p. 13
as shown by the Kabalists . . . otz — “the Tree of the Garden of Eden”
see: J. Ralson Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The Hebrew values for 7 and 9 are characteristic of the letters ע and צ.  Put them together, and there results עצ, or ots, or the word for the tree in the garden.” — p. 200
      “. . . the Garden was the scene of the creation of and first recognition by the sexes of their difference of organism.” — p. 294

— 115 —

one account enumerates Seven worlds, exclusive of the nether worlds . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “In general the tri-loka or three worlds are heaven, earth and hell.  Another classification enumerates seven, exclusive of the infernal regions, also seven in number . . .” — p. 179

— Footnotes

‘My mouth speaks . . . I know not thy numbers’
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “My mouth shall tell of thy righteousness . . . I know not the numbers thereof.” — p. 760 (Psalms, 71:15)
the Hyksos, their (alleged) ancestors, as Josephus shows . . .
see: Flavius Josephus, Works, tr. William Whiston, 1835: “Now this Manetho, in the second book of his Egyptian history, writes . . . ‘there came, after a surprising manner, men of ignoble birth out of the eastern parts, and had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country, and with ease subdued it by force . . . This whole nation was styled Hycsos, that is, Shepherd-kings; for the first syllable, Hyc . . . denotes a king, as is Sos, a shepherd . . . These people, . . . and their descendents . . . kept possession of Egypt five hundred and eleven years.’ ” — p. 583 (Against Apion, i.14)
History knows nothing of the question . . . (See Isis Unveiled, vol. II. . . .)
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “To the present moment, with all the controversies and researches, History and Science remain as much as ever in the dark as to the origin of the Jews.  They may as well be the exiled Tchandalas, or Pariahs, of old India, the ‘bricklayers’ mentioned by Vina-Svati, Veda-Vyasa and Manu, as the Phoenicians of Herodotus, or the Hyk-sos of Josephus, or descendents of Pali shepherds, or a mixture of all these.” — 2:438-9
“Khamism . . . unity of the Aryan and Semitic races”
see: Christian C. J. Bunsen, Egypt’s Place in Universal History, 1848-67: “Khamism [the ancient Egyptian language] is the historical proof of the original unity of those two great languages of the world which took at a later period the form of Semitic and Arian . . . The peculiarity of the men of Western Asia or the Semites, which appears already in Egyptian, is here remarkable.” — 4:142

— 116 —

“Another enumeration calls the Seven worlds . . .”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Another enumeration calls the seven worlds earth, sky, heaven, middle region, place of birth, mansion of the blest, and abode of truth; placing the sons of Brahmā in the sixth division, and stating the fifth, or Jana-loka, to be that where animals destroyed in the general conflagration are born again.” — p. 179

— 117 —

“Deity becomes a whirldwind.”  They are also called Rotæ
see: The Hexaglot Bible, 1901: “. . . a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself . . . out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures . . .”  “. . . et aspectus earum et opera, quasi sit rota in medio rotæ.”  “. . . and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel.” — pp. 341, 342, 343 (Ezekiel, 1: 4, 5 [KJV], 16 [Vulgate], 16 [KJV])
the moving wheels of the celestial orbs participating in the world’s creation
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le Zohar nous montre les ophanim, ou roues mouvantes des orbes célestes, participant à la création de l’univers [the Zohar shows us the Ophanim, or moving wheels of the celestial orbs, participating in the creation of the universe].” — 2:339
in the Kabala, they are represented by the Ophanim . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “The name of the second Sephira is ChKMH, Chokmah, Wisdom . . . represented . . . among the angelic hosts by AVPNIM, Auphanim, the Wheels (Ezek. i).” — p. 24 (Introduction)
Hicetas, Heraclides, Ecphantus . . . taught the rotation of the earth
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “The part which the several cosmogonic systems and conceptions contributed to the modern theory . . . Rotation of the Earth.  Hicetas, Ecphantus, Heraclides . . .” — 619
Aryabhata . . . Aristarchus, Seleucus, and Archimedes calculated its revolution
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “ Revolution of the Earth.  Aristarchus, Seleucus, Archimedes, Aryabatta [of India], Copernicus.” — p. 619
the theory of the Elemental Vortices . . . by Sir W. Thomson
see: Sir William Thomson, “On Vortex Atoms,” March 6, 1867: “After noticing Helmholtz’s admirable discovery of the law of vortex motion in a perfect liquid . . . the author said that this discovery inevitably suggests the idea that Helmholtz’s rings are the only true atoms. . . . to explain the properties of matter, on the hypothesis that all bodies are composed of vortex atoms in a perfect homogeneous liquid.” — p. 197 (Proceedings of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow, v. 6)

— Footnotes

“The doctrine of the rotation of the earth about an axis . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The doctrine of the rotation of the earth about an axis was taught by the Pythagorean Hicetas, probably as early as 500 B.C.  It was also taught by his pupil Ecphantus, and by Heraclides, a pupil of Plato.  The immobility of the sun and the orbital rotation of the earth were shown by Aristarchus of Samos as early as 281 B.C., to be suppositions accordant with facts of observation.  The heliocentric theory was taught about 150 B.C., by Seleucus of Seleucia on the Tigris.” — p. 551
“It is said also that Archimedes, in a work entitled Psammites . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “It is said also that Archimedes, in a work entitled Psammites, inculcated the heliocentric theory.  The sphericity of the earth was distinctly taught by Aristotle, who appealed for proof to the figure of the earth’s shadow on the moon in eclipses {De Coelo, ii.14}.  The same idea was defended by Pliny {Natural History, ii.65}.  These views seem to have been lost from knowledge for more than a thousand years.” — pp. 551-2 & fns. (“Pre-Kantian Speculations”)

— 118 —

“Double Triangle” . . . Spirit and Matter . . . a sign of Vishnu . . .
see: Krishnashankar Lalshankar, “The Six-Pointed and Five-Pointed Stars,” Nov. 1881: “. . . the ‘double triangle’ which is known to the Western nations as ‘Solomon’s Seal’, and in India . . . as the ‘sign of Vishnu’ . . . represents symbolically the macrocosm . . . of the dual trinity of spirit, matter and space, and the creative, preservative, and destructive energies as understood by the Aryans.” — p. 30 (The Theosophist, v. 3)

— Footnotes

“The first Cause is the Infinite or Unlimited.  This gives existence . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The first cause is the infinite or unlimited.  This gives existence to the first finite or limited.  That which produces a limit is analogous to motion.  The limit produced is a point, the essence of which is motion; but being without parts, this essence is not actual motion but only a conatus [vital impulse] to it.  From this first proceed extension, space, figure and succession or time.  As in geometry a point generates a line, a line a surface, and a surface a solid, so here the conatus of a point tends towards lines, surfaces and solids.  In other words, the universe is contained in ovo in the first natural point.  The motion toward which the conatus tends is circular, since the circle is the most perfect of all figures . . . ‘The most perfect figure of the motion above described must be the perpetually circular; that is to say, it must proceed from the centre to the periphery and from the periphery to the centre.’ ” — p. 567 (Swedenborg, Principia Rerum Naturalium)

— 119 —

“Spiral lines” . . .  an evolution which takes place gradually
see: Addenda, §V, “Organic Evolution and Creative Centres”: “Universal Evolution, otherwise, the gradual development of species in all the kingdoms of nature, works by uniform laws.”  “. . . the ethereal forms of the first Men are first projected on seven zones by seven Dhyan-Chohanic centers of Force . . . they work in cycles and on a strictly geometrical and mathematical scale of progression . . . an eternal spiral progress into matter with a proportionate obscuration of spirit . . .” — SD 2:731-2

— 120 —

“. . . boundless and infinite expansion” . . . the name of Brahmâ
see: Monier Williams, Indian Wisdom, 1875: “The more common name . . . is Brahman, neut. (nom. Brahmā), derived from root bṛih, ‘to expand,’ and denoting the universally expanding essence or universally diffused substance of the universe.” — p. 12 fn.

— Footnotes

In the Rig Veda we find the names Brahmanaspati and Brihaspati alternating . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “In the Ṛig-veda the names Bṛihaspati and Brahmanaspati alternate, and are equivalent to each other. . . . He is called in one place ‘the father of the gods’ . . .” — p. 63

— 121 —

“Very familiar facts seem to stand in no need of explanation . . .”
p/q: Alexander Bain, Logic, 1870: “Very familiar facts seem to stand in no need of explanation themselves, and to be the means of explaining whatever can be assimilated to them.  Thus, the boiling and evaporation of a liquid is supposed to be a very simple phenomenon requiring no explanation, and a satisfactory medium of the explanation of rarer phenomena.  That water should dry up is, to the uninstructed mind, a thing wholly intelligible; whereas to the man acquainted with Physical science, the liquid state is anomalous and inexplicable.  The lighting of a fire, by contact with a flame, is a great scientific difficulty; yet few people think so.” — 2:125
“God is a living Fire”
see: Hymnal of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1881:
“O Jesus, Light of all below,
  Thou Fount of living fire . . .” — p. 259
the Pentecostal “Tongues of Fire”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And when the day of Pentecost [50 days after Passover] was fully come . . . there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind . . . And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.” — p. 156 (Acts, 2:1-3)
the “burning bush” of Moses
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.  And Moses said, I will now turn aside . . . God called unto him out of the midst of the bush . . .” — p. 73 (Exodus, 3:2-4)

— 122 —

(“the Lord thy God is a consuming fire”)
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant . . . For the Lord thy God is a consuming fire . . .” — p. 240 (Deuteronomy, 4:23-4)
the “four Maharajahs”
see: The Dīpavaṃsa, tr. Hermann Oldenberg, 1879: “The four (divine) Mahārājas of the four quarters . . .”  “The four (divine) Mahārājas, the glorious guardians of the world . . .” — pp. 193, 200 (xvi.13, xvii.60)
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Four spirits stand, four powers preside . . . at the four cardinal points or the four corners of the Mount in general myths of the world . . .” — 1:410

— 123 —

“The glory of God comes from the way of the East”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . and behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east . . .” — p. 1096 (Ezekiel, 43:2)
all the evil under the Sun comes from the North . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Out of the north an evil shall break forth upon all the inhabitants of the land.” — p. 946 (Jeremiah, 1:14)
it is precisely for that reason that “we curse the North-Wind . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Voilà pourquoi . . . nous maudissons l’aquilon et que dans le baptême nous commençons par nous tourner vers l’occident (sidéral), pour mieux renoncer à celui qui l’habite; après quoi, nous tournant vers l’orient’ {St. Ambroise, sur Amos, ch. vi.} [It is precisely for that reason . . . that we curse the North Wind, and that in the ceremony of baptism we begin by turning towards the (sidereal) West, the better to renounce the one who inhabits it; after which we, turning to the East {St. Ambrose, On Amos, ch. vi.}] . . .” — 3:397 & fn.
στοιχεῖα . . . incorporeal principles placed at each of the four great divisions of our Cosmical world
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Platon et Aristote ne cessent de nous le répéter, ils n’entendaient par στοιχεῖα que les principes incorporels préposés à chacune des quatre grandes divisions de notre monde cosmique [Plato and Aristotle were repeatedly telling us that στοιχεῖα was understood only as meaning the incorporeal principles placed at each of the four great divisions of our Cosmic world].” — 3:396

— Footnotes

“every visible thing in this world had an angelic virtue as an overseer . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Quoique saint Augustin . . . ait avancé quelque part qu’à chaque chose visible de ce monde était préposée une vertu angélique, il faut bien se garder d’entendre cela des individus, mais des espèces entières, dont chacune en effet a son ange particulier [Although St. Augustine . . . has said somewhere that every visible thing in this world has an angelic virtue, one has to be careful not to conceive this as individuals but as entire species, each in fact having its own particular angel].” — 3:396 (Vossius, Theologia Gentili, 1.VII)

— 123-4 —

For the Church there are two kinds of Sidereal beings . . . “the Rectors of Light” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . il y a donc aussi deux armées, deux cités; celle des recteurs de lumière . . . et celle des recteurs ténébreux (rectores tenebrarum harum) . . . cosmocrates primitifs ou usurpateurs, que l’Église interdit [so there are also two armies, two cities; that of the rectors of light . . . and that of the rectors of darkness . . . primitive cosmocratores or usurpers, whom the Church forbids] . . .” — 3:396

— 124 —

“every particle of the existing matter must be a register of all that has happened”
p/q: W. Stanley Jevons, The Principles of Science, 1874: “. . . Babbage has pointed out that if we had power to follow and detect the minutest effects of any disturbance, each particle of existing matter must be a register of all that has happened.” — 2:455

— Footnotes [124-5]

Moleschott . . . assures us that “Thought is the movement of matter”
p/q: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, 1864: “What we term mind, thought, conception, is the result of natural, though peculiarly combined, forces . . . combined in an infinitely complicated mode . . .”  “. . . inherent forces, which in themselves are nothing but various modes of material motions.”  “ ‘Thought is a motion of matter.’  Moleschott.” — pp. 49, 52-3, 135
every thought . . . aspect on the astral plane (See “The Occult World” . . .)
see: A. P. Sinnett, The Occult World, 1883: “ ‘. . . every thought of man upon being evolved passes into the inner world, and becomes an active entity by associating itself, coalescing we might term it, with an elemental — that is to say, with one of the semi-intelligent forces of the kingdoms.’ ” — pp. 89-90 (K.H., First Letter to Hume, Nov. 1, 1880)
the Single Substance Doctrine . . . Professor Bain, ably terms “guarded Materialism”
p/q: Alexander Bain, Mind and Body, 1875: “Let me first classify the different views that may be held as to the ultimate component elements of a human being.
      I. Two Substances.  1. Both Material . . . 2. An Immaterial and a Material . . .
      II. One Substance.  1. Mind and Matter the same . . . 2. Contrast of Mind and Matter saved.  Guarded or qualified Materialism . . .” — pp. 139-40
among its upholders such men as Lewis [Lewes]
see: George Henry Lewes, The History of Philosophy, 1880: “. . . the materialists have at least this important advantage, that they strive to get rid of all metaphysical entities, and seek an explanation of phenomena in the laws of phenomena.” — 2:743
such men as . . . Spencer, Ferrier, and others
see: Alexander Bain, Mind and Body, 1875: “. . . it has been computed (Herbert Spencer) that five times as much blood circulates in the grey or corpuscular substance as in the white or fibrous substance.  In these imperfectly understood changes of the nerve-tissue, we have the embodiment of what is called the nerve-force.”  “[The] popular expounder of these views is Büchner . . . This principle . . . [is] the essential and inherent activity of matter; all known force being in fact embodied in matter. . . . [These writers] ask with Priestley and Ferrier: ‘Why introduce a new entity, or rather a nonentity, until we see what these multifarious activities of matter are able to accomplish?’ ” — pp. 33, 195

— 125 —

In the Egyptian temples, according to Clemens Alexandrinus, an immense curtain . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . dans les temples égyptiens comme dans ceux des Hébreux, au rapport de saint Clément d’Alexandrie, un immense rideau, supporté par cinq colonnes, séparait le tabernacle, dans lequel les prêtres seuls avaient le droit d’entrer, des autres parties de l’édifice [according to Clement of Alexandria, in the Egyptian temples as in those of the Hebrews, an immense curtain, supported by five columns, separated the tabernacle, in which only the priests had the right to enter, from the other parts of the building].” — 3:397-8 (Clement, Stromata, 1.V.6)
see: Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, tr. William Wilson, 1869: “The covering, then, the barrier of popular unbelief, was stretched in front of the five pillars, keeping back those in the surrounding space. . . . For great is the crowd that keep to the things of sense, as if they were the only things in existence. . . . But the knowledge of God is a thing inaccessible to the ears and like organs of this kind of people.” — pp. 240-1 (Strom. V.6, Writings of Clement, v. 2)
symbolizing our five senses . . . while the four colours . . . the four terrestrial elements
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ce rideau représentait, par la distinction de ses quatre couleurs, les quatre éléments principaux, πρωτων, et signifiait la connaissance de Dieu que les cinq sens de l’homme peuvent lui procurer par l’entremise des quatre éléments [This curtain represented by the distinction of its four colors the principal elements, πρωτων, and meant knowledge of God which the five senses of man can procure for him through the agency of the four elements] . . .” — 3:398 (Clement, Stromata, 1.V.6)
the square tabernacle raised by Moses . . . “Thou shalt make an hanging . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . thou shalt make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet: with cherubims of cunning work . . . And thou shalt make the boards for the tabernacle, twenty boards on the south side . . . on the north side there shall be twenty boards . . . westward shalt thou make six boards . . . And thou shalt make an hanging for the door of the tent, of blue, and purple, and scarlet . . . And thou shalt make for the hanging five pillars of shittim wood . . .”  “And thou shalt make for it a grate of network of brass; and upon the net shalt thou make four brasen rings in the four corners thereof.” — pp. 106-7 (Exodus, 26:1, 18, 20, 22, 36-7; 27:4)

— Footnotes

[In Monism] thought, they say, is . . . only “the subjective side of nervous motion”
see: Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Psychology, 1883: “Though accumulated observations and experiments have led us by a very indirect series of inferences to the belief that mind and nervous action are the subjective and objective faces of the same thing, we remain utterly incapable of seeing, and even of imagining, how the two are related.” — 1:140 (vii.56)
“Natura Elementorum obtinet . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Strom., 1. V., §6. ‘Natura elementorum obtinet revelationem Dei’ [The nature of the elements contained the revelation of God].” — 3:398 fn.
Consult the Zends . . . as compared by Layard . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Voir, sur la même théorie, ‘les Zends,’ t. II., p. 228, et Plutarque, de Isid., rapprochés par M. Layard [Lajard], Acad. des inscr., 1854, t. XV [See, on the same theory, ‘the Zends,’ 2:228, and Plutarch, De Iside, as compared by Lajard, Academie des Inscriptions, 1854, v. 15].” — 3:398 fn.

— 125-6 —

Tabernacle pillars are the same as those raised at Tyre to the four elements . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ . . . ce que représentent les quatre faces des pyramides, des obélisques, des colonnes que Josèphe nous dit avoir été élevées dans le temple de Tyr aux quatre éléments, et placées sur des piédestaux dont les quatre angles regardaient les quatre points cardinaux [that represents the four sides of the pyramids, obelisks, of the columns which according to Josephus, have been erected to the four elements in the temple of Tyre, and have been placed on pedestals, the four corners of which faced the four cardinal points].” — 3:397

— 126 —

“the angles of the pedestals had equally the four figures of the Zodiac”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Josèphe ajoute que ‘ces angles de piédestaux portaient également les quatre figures du Zodiaque, qui représentent la même orientation’ [Josephus adds that ‘these corners of the pedestals also supported the four figures of the zodiac, which represent the same orientation’].” — 3:397 (Josephus, Antiquities, 1.viii.22)
see: Flavius Josephus, Works, tr. William Whiston, 1835:  “There stood round about it twelve oxen, that looked to the four winds of heaven, three to each wind . . . there were four small quadrangular pillars that stood one at each corner . . . upon which was engraven, in one place a lion, and in another place a bull and an eagle.” — p. 167 (Antiquities of the Jews, Bk 8, ch. 3, §§ 4-6)
Layard . . . finds the four cardinal points . . . in the religion of every country
see: Felix Lajard, Recherches sur le Culte du Cyprès Pyramidal chez les peuples civilisés de l’Antiquité [Researches on the Worship of the Pyramidal Cypress among the Civilized Peoples of Antiquity], 1847 — pp. 34-104 (Annales de l’Institut Archéologique, v. 4, new series, Report XIX)
“the Devas who preside each over one of the four continents . . .”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The four Maharajas, or ‘Great kings’ of the Devas, preside each over one of the four continents into which the Hindoos divide the world.  Visitors in Chinese temples will have noticed two warlike images on each side, just within the entering door. . . . Each leads an army of spiritual beings to protect mankind and Buddhism.” — p. 216
four living creatures “who have the likeness of a man” . . .
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself . . . Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures . . . they had the likeness of a man.  And every one had four faces, and every one had four wings.”  — p. 1035 (Ezekiel, 1:4-6 )
describing Mount Meru as: “the exalted mass of glory . . .”
p/q: “Story of the Churning of the Ocean” [Mahābhārata, 1.15], tr. Charles Wilkins, Oct. 1817: “There is a fair and stately mountain and its name is Meru, a most exalted mass of glory, reflecting the sunny rays from the splendid surface of its gilded horns.  It is clothed in gold and is the respected haunt of Devas and Gandharvas.  It is inconceivable, and not to be encompassed by sinful man; and it is guarded by dreadful serpents.” — 4:346 (Asiatic Journal, v. 4)

— 127 —

“The word signifies in Hebrew, fullness of knowledge . . .”
p/q: Alexander Cruden, Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “CHERUB.  This word in the Hebrew signifies fulness of knowledge; and angels are so called from their exquisite knowledge, and were therefore used for the punishment of man, who sinned by affecting divine knowledge, Gen. 3. 24.” — p. 72
the Cherub placed at the gate of the garden of Eden after the “Fall” . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . therefore the Lord God sent him [Adam] forth from the garden of Eden . . . and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden the Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” — p. 5 (Genesis, 3:23-24)
“I looked, and behold, a whirlwind . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And I looked, and behold, a whirldwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself . . . Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. . . . they had the likeness of a man.  And every one had four faces, and every one had four wings. . . . the face of a man and the face of a lion . . . the face of an ox . . . the face of an eagle.” — p. 1035 (Ezekiel, 1:4-6, 10)
Compare the “Ophite Spirits”
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Among the seven ophite spirits, the first, the lion, corresponded with Michael; the second, the bull, with Uriel; the third, the dragon, with Raphael; the fourth, the eagle, with Gabriel . . .” — 1:118
“Now as I beheld the living creatures . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . their appearance was like burning coals of fire . . . Now as I beheld the living creatures, behold one wheel upon the earth by the living creatures, with his four faces. . . . and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel.” — pp. 1035-6 (Ezekiel, 1:13, 15-16)
“for the support of the living creature was in the wheel”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.” — p. 1036 (Ezekiel, 1:20)

— 128 —

the guardian deities . . . Loka-Pâlas, “Supporters or guardians of the World”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “LOKA-PĀLAS.  Supporters or guardians of the world.  The guardian deities who preside over the eight points of the compass, i.e., the four cardinal and four intermediate points of the compass . . . Each of these guardian deities has an elephant who takes part in the defence and protection of the quarter . . .” — p. 180

— Footnotes

The Jews . . . having no names for East, West, South, and North, expressed . . .
see: Alexander Cruden, Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “The Hebrews express the east, west, north, and south, by words which signify, before, behind, left and right, according to the situation of a man, with his face turned towards the east.” — p. 155
out of the forty-seven translators . . . of England’s Bible “only three understood Hebrew . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “With respect to the latter translators — the forty-seven of King James I. of England and VI. of Scotland — be it remembered that only three understood Hebrew; and of these two died before the psalms were translated . . .” — 2:511

— 129 —

Achath, feminine, “One,” and Achod, “One” . . . masculine
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “The word Elohim is a plural formed from the feminine singular ALH, Eloh, by adding IM to the word. . . . it gives to the word Elohim the sense of a female potency united to a masculine idea . . . Now, this Mother is Elohim. . . . Achath (feminine, not Achad, masculine) Ruach Elohim Chiim: One is She the Spirit of the Elohim of Life.” — pp. 21-2 (Introduction)

— 130 —

Elohim is a plural noun . . . with the plural word Chiim [Chayim]
see: The Targums, tr. [& glossary] J. W. Etheridge, 1865: “The name Elohim is the plural form of El or Eloha . . . Elohim is used not only with plural pronouns . . . but with plural adjectives (Elohim . . . chayim, ‘living Gods’ . . .).” — pp. 3-4 (Glossary)

— Footnotes

“Achath-Ruach-Elohim-Chiim” denotes the Elohim as androgynous . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . we are usually told that the Holy Spirit is masculine.  But the word RVCh, Ruach, Spirit, is feminine, as appears from the following passage of the Sepher Yetzirah: ‘. . . Achath (feminine . . .) Ruach Elohim Chiim:  One is She the Spirit of the Elohim of Life.’ ” — p. 22 (Introduction)
“Mulaprakriti . . . acts as the one energy through the Logos . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Parabrahmam is an unconditioned and absolute reality, and Mulaprakriti is a sort of veil thrown over it . . . Parabrahmam, after having appeared on the one hand as the ego, and on the other as Mulaprakriti, acts as the one energy through the Logos.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“Now Parabrahmam, is the one essence . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Now this Parabrahmam which exists before all things in the cosmos is the one essence from which starts into existence a centre of energy, which I shall for the present call the Logos. . . . It is called the Verbum or the Word by the Christians, and it is the divine Christos who is eternally in the bosom of his father.  It is called Avalokiteswara by the Buddhists . . .” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“In almost every doctrine, they have formulated the existence of a centre . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “In almost every doctrine they have formulated the existence of a centre of spiritual energy which is unborn and eternal, and which exists in a latent condition in the bosom of Parabrahmam at the time of pralaya, and starts as a centre of conscious energy at the time of cosmic activity.” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
Parabraham . . . It is not Ego nor is it Non-ego . . .
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “[Parabrahmam] is not even atma. . . . It is not ego, it is not non-ego, nor is it consciousness . . .” — p. 302 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 131 —

the Devaloka worlds and firmaments
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “These heavens are peopled by Devas. . . . To become an inhabitant of these worlds is regarded as a reward for good actions, for those who have lived previously in lower states of existence.” — p. 225

— 132 —

Muktas or Jivatmas (Monads) who have attained Moksha . . . “may incarnate on Earth”
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Muktas (Jivatmas who have attained Moksha) are never again subject to the qualities of matter or to Karma.  But if they choose, for the sake of doing good to the world, they may incarnate on earth.” — §150
“The Jiva (Soul) goes with Sukshma Sarira . . .”
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, A Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “. . . the Jiva goes with sukshmasarira from the heart of the body, to the Brahmarandra in the crown of the head, traversing the Sushumna, a nerve connecting the heart with the Brahmarandra.  The Jiva breaks through the Brahmarandra and goes to the region of the sun (Suryamandala) through the solar rays.  Then it goes, through a dark spot in the sun, to Paramapada. . . . The Jiva is directed on its way to Paramapada by the Supreme Wisdom acquired by Yoga.  The Jiva thus proceeds to Paramapada by the aid of the Athivāhikas (bearers in transit) known by the names of Archi Ahas . . . Aditya . . . Prajapatis . . .  The archis, etc., here mentioned are certain pure souls and not the ordinary night, day, month, year, air, etc.” — §§ 156-7

— Footnotes

Sophia Achamoth is shown lost in the waters of Chaos (matter)
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “. . . the Spirit rests upon Chaos, or the waters of creation, which are Matter, Water, Darkness, the Abyss. . . . the imperfect [Sophia] Achamoth upon descending into Chaos, lost her way there . . . hopelessly entangled in Matter . . .” — p. 96
Christos delivering and helping her on the right Path
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “. . . Christos was designed for the guide of all who proceed from God . . . [and] was intended to assist and lead upwards his imperfect sister.” — p. 96
in the old Coptic MSS. . . . “Christos” . . . replaced by “Jesus”
see: Pistis-Sophia, tr. G. R. S. Meade (& notes by Meade & HPB), April 15, 1890: “ ‘This treatise, ascribed to Valentinus . . . was discovered by Schwartze in a Coptic MS. preserved in the British Museum’ {Experts say it is the oldest Coptic MS. in the Museum}.”  “It will greatly add to the clear understanding of the mystic narrative if the reader bears in mind that the term ‘Jesus’ stands for Christos . . .” — pp. 107 & fn., 108 [Introduction] (Lucifer, v. 6)

— 133 —

— Footnotes

“I confess I am much disposed to assert the existence of Immaterial natures in the world . . .”
p/q: Eduard von Hartmann, Spiritism, tr. & Preface by C. C. Massey, 1885: “ ‘I confess,’ said Kant (‘Träume eines Geistersehers,’ &c.), ‘that I am much disposed to assert the existence of immaterial natures in the world . . . the human soul stands even in this life in indissoluble association with all immaterial natures in the spirit-world . . .’ ” — p. xvi (Preface)
see: Immanuel Kant, Dreams of a Spirit-Seer [Träume eines Geistersehers], tr. E. F. Goerwitz, 1900: “I confess that I am very much inclined to assert the existence of immaterial natures in the world, and to put my soul itself into that class of beings.”  “. . . ‘it will be proved’ I don’t know where or when, that the human soul also in this life forms an indissoluble communion with all immaterial natures of the spirit-world, that, alternately, it acts upon and receives impressions from that world . . .” — pp. 52, 61

— 134 —

— Footnotes

“Le Livre des Morts,” by Paul Pierret; “Le Jour de ‘Viens a nous’ . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Le Jour de Viens à nous!  C’est le jour où Osiris a dit au Soleil:  Viens!  Je le vois rencontrant le Soleil dans l’Amenti [The day of Come-to-us!  It is the day when Osiris says to the Sun:  Come!  I see him meeting the Sun in Amenti (the afterworld)].” — p. 61 (xvii.41-2)
“it must not be supposed that the Logos is but a single centre of energy . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . such centres of energy are almost innumerable in the bosom of Parabrahmam.  It must not be supposed that this Logos is but a single centre of energy which is manifested by Parabrahmam.  There are innumerable others.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v.8)
See also . . . the day of “Come-To-Us,” The Funerary Ritual of the Egyptians . . .
see: Vicomte Emmanuel de Rougé, Études sur le Rituel Funéraire, 1860: “C’est Anubis qui a fixé leur place, dans ce jour de viens à nous! [It is Anubis (the guide of the dead) who fixed their place in this day of come-to-us].” — p. 54

— 135 —

the soul of every defunct person . . . became an Osiris, was Osirified
see: William Palmer, Egyptian Chronicles, 1861: “So each ancestor in turn went . . . to the original Osiris as patriarch of the dead, and to his intermediate ‘Osirified’ fathers, and was himself Osirified like them; all making one collective Osiris, waiting for that reunion and restoration which was to come . . .” — 1:3

— 136 —

Daiviprakriti, the Light manifested through Eswara
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . firstly, Parabrahmam; secondly Eswara; thirdly, the light manifested through Eswara, which is called Daiviprakriti in the Bhagavad Gita . . .” — p. 306 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
the Mother and also the Daughter of the Logos
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “The reason why it is called the mother of Christos is this.  When Christos manifests himself in man as his Saviour it is from the womb, as it were, of this divine light that he is born.  So it is only when the Logos is manifested in man that he becomes the child of this light of the Logos — this maya; — but in the course of cosmic manifestation this Daiviprakriti, instead of being the mother of the Logos, should, strictly be called the daughter of the Logos.” — p. 305 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 137 —

Kwan-Yin-Tien . . . the “melodious heaven of Sound”
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “. . . the paradise called Kwang-yin t‘ien, ‘The heaven of brightness and sound.’ ” — p. 340
Kwan-Yin, or the “Divine Voice” . . .
see: Samuel Beal, A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, 1871: “. . . Tara-Deva and Kwan-yin are to this day conjoined in the Chinese Pantheon — the one, in fact, denoting the Divinity of Speech . . . ‘Vachīshwara, i.e., the Voice-Deity.’ ” — p. 385
“Speech” . . . Thus may be traced the connection with . . . the Hebrew Bath-Kol . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — VI,” June, 1886: “The first (Alhim, Elohim) is like the Hebrew letters, which are the frame-work for sound or speech, but are dead without the use of the living vowels, or the Spirit, the Bath Col, or Daughter of the Voice.” — p. 259 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
Vâch, the goddess of Speech . . . “generated by the gods” . . . “who yields us nourishment . . .”
p/q: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “When Vāch (speech) . . . queen of the gods, sat down, melodious, she milked forth sustenance and waters towards the four quarters . . . The gods generated the divine Vāch . . . may this melodious cow Vāch . . . approach us, when we celebrate her praises.” — 3:253 (Rigveda viii, 89, 10)
see: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “. . . ‘the divine Vāch,’ ‘queen of the gods,’ . . . ‘who yields us nourishment and sustenance.’  The Brāhmaṇas associate her with Prajāpati in the work of creation.” — p. 329
Brahmâ . . . dividing his body into two parts, male and female . . . Vâch, Viraj
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Having divided his own body into two, he became a male by half, by half a female: on her [Vāch] that Lord begot Virāj.” — p. 6 (i.32)
explaining the reason why Eswara (or Brahmâ) is called Verbum or Logos . . .
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . I may however allude to one other point, which explains the reason why Eswara is called Verbum or Logos; why in fact it is called Sabda Brahmam [Logos of Brahman].” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— Footnotes

“Evolution is commenced by the intellectual energy of the Logos . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Now creation or evolution is commenced by the intellectual energy of the Logos.  The universe . . . does not spring into existence by mere chance, nor does it spring into existence merely on account of the potentialities locked up in Mulaprakriti. . . . This light of the Logos is the link, so to speak, between objective matter and the subjective thought of Eswara.  It is called in several Buddhist books fohat.  It is the one instrument with which the Logos works.” — p. 306 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 138 —

“The explanation I am going to give you . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “The explanation I am going to give you will appear thoroughly mystical.  But if mystical it has a tremendous significance when properly understood.  Our old writers said that Vach is of four kinds.  These are called para, pasyanti, madhyama, vaikhari.  This statement you will find in the Rig Veda itself and in several of the Upanishads.  Vaikhari Vach is what we utter.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“Every kind of vaikhari Vâch . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Every kind of vaikhari Vach exists in its madhyama, further in its pasyanti, and ultimately in its para form.  The reason why this Pranava is called Vach is this, that these four principles of the great cosmos correspond to these four forms of Vach.  Now the whole manifested solar system exists in its sukshma form in this light or energy of the Logos, because its image is caught up and transferred to cosmic matter, and again the whole cosmos must necessarily exist in the one source of energy from which this light emanates.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“The whole cosmos in its objective form is vaikhari Vâch . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “The whole cosmos in its objective form is vaikhari Vach, the light of the Logos is the madhyama form, and the Logos itself the pasyanti form, and Parabrahmam the para aspect of that Vach.  It is by the light of this explanation that we must try to understand certain statements made by various philosophers to the effect that the manifested cosmos is the Verbum manifested as cosmos.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 139 —

“The whole Kosmos must necessarily exist in the One Source . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . the whole cosmos must necessarily exist in the one source of energy from which this light emanates.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“Pragna, or the capacity of perception . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “A Personal and An Impersonal God,” Feb. 1883: “Just as a human being is composed of seven principles, differentiated matter in the solar system exists in seven different conditions. . . . Further, Pragna or the capacity of perception exists in seven different aspects corresponding to the seven conditions of matter.” — p. 105 (The Theosophist, v. 4)

— 140 —

what is termed the “Over-Soul” by Emerson
see: Ralph Waldo Emerson, Works, 1883: “. . . that Unity, that Over-soul, within which every man’s particular being is contained and made one with all other; that common heart . . . that overpowering reality . . . within man is the soul of the whole . . .” — p. 59 (“The Over-Soul”)
it is made the standing reproach of the Ancients that they “supposed their Elements simple . . .”
see: Agrippa Nelson Bell, Knowledge of Living Things, 1860: “. . . what the ancients deemed to be simple and undecomposable, has long since been resolved into simpler substances, again and again simplified . . .” — p. 7

— 141 —

— Footnotes

“Where are we to draw the line?” . . .
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Where then are we to draw the line?  The different groupings shade off so imperceptibly the one into the other . . . Is there no way out of this perplexity?  Must we either make the elementary examinations so stiff that only some 60 or 70 candidates can pass, or must we open the examination doors so wide that the number of admissions is limited only by the number of applicants?” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“Take the case of yttrium.  It has its definite atomic weight . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address of the President,” March 28, 1888: “Take the case of yttrium.  It has its definite atomic weight; it behaved in every respect as a simple body, an element, to which we might indeed add, but from which we cannot take away.  Yet this yttrium, this supposed homogeneous whole, on being submitted to a certain method of fractionation, is resolved into portions not absolutely identical among themselves, and exhibiting a gradation of properties.  Or take the case of didymium: here was a body betraying all the recognised characters of an element.  It had been separated with much difficulty from other bodies which approximated closely to it in their properties, and during this crucial process it had undergone very severe treatment and very close scrutiny.” — p. 217 (Chemical News, June 1, 1888)
“But then came another chemist . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address of the President,” March 28, 1888: “But then came another chemist who, treating this assumed homogeneous body by a peculiar process of fractionation, resolved it into the two bodies praseodymium and neodymium, between which certain distinctions are perceptible.  Further, we even now have no certainty that neodymium and praseodymium are simple bodies.  On the contrary, they likewise exhibit symptoms of splitting up.  Now, if one supposed element on proper treatment is thus found to comprise dissimilar molecules, we are surely warranted in asking whether similar results might not be obtained in other elements, perhaps in all elements, if treated in the right way?  We may even ask where the process of sorting-out is to stop? a process which of course presupposes variations between the individual molecules of each species.  And in these successive separations we naturally find bodies approaching more and more closely to each other.” — p. 217 (Chemical News, June 1, 1888)

— 142 —

the essence of Cometary matter . . . “is totally different . . .”
p/q: “Reply to an English F.T.S.,” 1885: “The essence of cometary matter must be — and the ‘Adepts’ say is — totally different from any of the chemical or physical characteristics with which the greatest chemists and physicists of the earth are familiar . . .” — pp. 241-2 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 143 —

— Footnotes

“that the elements are not absolutely homogeneous” . . .
p/q: Sir William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “We now come to the last objection pertinently put forth by Clerk-Maxwell to the hypothesis that the elements are not absolutely homogeneous.  He writes: ‘It is difficult to conceive of selection and elimination of intermediate varieties, for where can these eliminated molecules have gone to if, as we have reason to believe, the hydrogen, &c., of the fixed stars is composed of molecules identical in all respects with our own.’ ” — p. 499 (Journal of the Chemical Society, v. 53)
“In the first place we may call in question this absolute molecular identity . . .”
p/q: Sir William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “In the first place we may call in question this absolute molecular identity, since we have hitherto had no means for coming to a conclusion save the means furnished by the spectroscope, whilst it is admitted that for accurately comparing and discriminating the spectra of two bodies they should be examined under identical states of temperature, pressure, and all other physical conditions.  We have certainly seen, in the spectrum of the sun, rays which we have not been able to identify.” — p. 499 (Journal of the Chemical Society, v. 53)

— 144 —

— Footnotes

A period of 311,040,000,000,000 years
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then 4.320.000 years, or a divine age, x 1000 = 4.320.000.000 years, or a day or night of Brahmā.” — 1:51 fn.
see: Sūrya Siddhānta, tr. [& cm.] Ebenezer Burgess [& W. D. Whitney], 1860: “21. [Brahmā’s] extreme age is a hundred . . .{a hundred years [of Brahmā], each composed of three hundred and sixty days [360 x 4,320,000,000 yrs.] and nights [360 x 4,320,000,000 yrs.] . . . The length of Brahma’s life would be . . . 311,040,000,000,000 solar years} . . .” — pp. 154-5 & note (Journal of the American Oriental Society, v. 6)

— 145 —

sprung like Rudra from Brahmâ . . . a male and a female
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “[Brahmā] was filled with wrath capable of consuming the three worlds . . . Then from his forehead, darkened with angry frowns, sprang Rudra, radiant as the noon-tide sun, fierce, and of vast bulk, and of a figure which was half male, half female.” — 1:102-4 (i.7)
He has seven sons who are his brothers
see: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Rudra . . . obtained seven other names . . . These names are sometimes used for Rudra or Śiva himself, and at others for the seven manifestations of him, sometimes called his sons.” — p. 270

— 146 —

Substantialists who call every Force and Energy . . . an “Entity”
see: A. Wilford Hall, “Scientific Evidence of a Future Life, No. 2,” July 1886: “If the principles of Substantialism be true, then, as there shown, every force or form of energy known to science must be a substantial entity.” — p. 1 (Scientific Arena, v. 1, no. 2)

— 147 —

See “Gods, Monads, and Atoms,” Part III.
see: SD 1:610-34.
Vide infra, “A Few Theosophical Misconceptions, etc.”
see: “A Few Early Theosophical Misconceptions Concerning Planets, Rounds, and Man” (SD 1:152-70), and “Additional Facts and Explanations Concerning the Globes and the Monads” (SD 1:170-91).
Scientists . . . will dogmatise.  It is “a mode of motion”
see: Lyell Adams, “On the Value of Empirical Generalizations,” Oct. 1875: “Men still call themselves psychologists, physiologists, physicists, and so on, but the bent of them all is towards the interpretation of mind as an affection of matter, and of all affections of matter as modes of motion.” — pp. 609-10 (The New Englander, v. 34)
Universal Motion . . . explained in the first pages of this volume
see: Proem: “It is the one life . . . the one self-existing reality . . . Its one absolute attribute, which is itself, eternal, ceaseless Motion . . .” — SD 1:2

— 148 —

“Seven Neutral Centres”
see: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “. . . Keely claims to have demonstrated the subdivision of matter in seven distinct orders . . .” — p. 275
      “The evolution of what is called ‘matter’ from the different modes of vibration is through the action of the second law . . .  or ‘negative attraction’ . . . Where the vibrations under this mode meet, and are maintained in a state of mutual affinity or equilibrium, there is established what is called a ‘neutral centre’ . . .” — pp. 359-60
“Fair foundations (are) laid whereon to build . . .”
p/q: John Milton, Poetical Works, v. 3, 1809:
“. . . Knowledge forbidden? [to Adam & Eve]
              . . . Can it be sin to know?
              . . . And do they only stand
  By Ignorance?  Is that their happy state,
  The proof of their obedience and their faith?
  O fair foundation laid whereon to build
  Their ruin!  hence I will excite their minds
  With more desire to know . . .” — p. 123 (Paradise Lost, iv.515, 517-23)

— Footnotes

the inventor of the famous “Motor” . . . calls the “Etheric Centres”
see: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “[Mr. Keely writes:] ‘. . . I can only answer this question properly by entering into a progressive synthesis, starting on the rotating etheric centres that were fixed by the Creator with their attractive or accumulative power.’ ” — p. 200

— 149 —

scientific philosophy . . . defined by Kant as “the Science of the limits to our Knowledge”
p/q: Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, tr. John P. Mahaffy, 1872: “Reason . . . cannot be fully satisfied with any empirical use of the rules of understanding, as being always conditioned . . . and various complaints have been made concerning these limits to our knowledge.” — 3:122-4 (§§ 45, 46, Kant’s Critical Philosophy for English Readers)

— Footnotes

Uranus . . . whose satellites . . . from East to West
see: John Ogilvie, Imperial Dictionary, 1883: “There is still some uncertainty as to the number of satellites belonging to Uranus. . . . [There are] four which are seen by astronomers at the present time . . . The satellites of Uranus differ from the other planets . . . (with the exception of Neptune’s satellite), in the direction of their motion, which is from east to west . . .” — 4:528

— 150 —

— Footnotes

Laplace . . . calculating on the theory of probabilities, offered to bet . . .
see: P.-S. de Laplace, Exposition du Système du Monde, 1827: “Leur mouvement de rotation [et] leur movement de révolution . . . ne sont point dus à des causes irrégulières.  En soumettant au calcul leur probabilité on trouve qu’il y a plus de deux cent mille milliards à parier contre un, qu’ils ne sont point l’effet du hasard . . . Nous devons donc croire au moins avec la même confiance, qu’une cause primitive a dirigé les mouvemens planétaires [Their rotational movement and their orbital movement . . . are not due to irregular causes.  Calculating their probability, we find the odds are more than two hundred thousand milliards to one that they are not the result of chance . . . So we have to believe at least with the same confidence that one primary cause directed the planetary motions].” — pp. 518-19

— 150-1 —

key to Cosmic physics . . . “to be turned seven times” . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The said key must be turned seven times before the whole system is divulged.  We will give it but one turn, and thereby allow the profane one glimpse into the mystery.” — 2:461

— 151 —

these theories . . . contradict . . . statements made by other Theosophists
see: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism (1885), and “Two Chelas in The Theosophical Society [Mohini Chatterji & Laura Holloway],” Man: Fragments of Forgotten History (1885).

— 152 —

— Footnotes

See . . . the summary of the Stanzas in the Proem, page 22
see: Proem: “I pass on, therefore, to the subject matter of the Stanzas as given in this volume, adding a skeleton outline of them . . .” — SD 1:20

— 153 —

the diagram appended to the Comments on Verse 7 [6] of Stanza VI
see: Stanza VI, 6: “The following comparative diagram shows the identity between the two systems, the Kabalistic and the Eastern. . . .” — SD 1:199-200

— 154 —

Pliny, who called the Earth our kind nurse and mother . . .
see: Samuel Ward, Modern System of Natural History, v. 11, 1776: “This earth, says Pliny [Natural History, ii.63], like a kind mother, receives us at our birth, and sustains us when we are born.  It is the only element around us that is never found an enemy to man.” — p. 6
the Earth . . . the Footstool of God
see: Many Thoughts of Many Minds, comp. Henry Southgate, 1862:
“EARTH — the Footstool of God.
  Earth, thou great footstool of our God . . .
  Mighty stage of mortal scenes . . .
                    Watts.” — p. 176
For Earth is . . . the vestibule — “. . . to glorious mansions . . .”
p/q: Joanna Baillie, Dramatic and Poetical Works, 1851:
“That I believe this earth on which we stand,
  Is but the vestibule to glorious mansions,
  Through which a moving crowd for ever press . . .” — p. 525 (The Martyr, III.ii)

— Footnotes

“The astronomical conclusions are theories . . .”
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888:  “. . . the astronomical conclusions are theories based on data so uncertain, that while in some cases they give results incredibly short, like that of 15 millions of years for the whole past process of the formation of the solar system, in others they give results almost incredibly long, as in that which supposes the moon to have been thrown off when the earth was rotating in three hours, while the utmost retardation claimed from observation would require 600 millions of years to make it rotate in twenty-three hours instead of twenty-four.” — p. 48

— 155 —

Mr. Darwin’s theory
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Mr. G. H. Darwin has recently shown that the actual seat of most rapid cooling in the earth is probably about 100 miles below the surface, and that this point continues to descend as cooling progresses.” — p. 296

— Footnotes

For Darwin’s theory to hold good . . . more incongruous speculations had to be invented
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . the moon cooled nearly six times as rapidly as the earth . . . If the earth’s incrustation began fourteen million years ago . . . the moon reached the present terrestrial stage eleven and two-thirds millions of years since.” — p. 379

— 156 —

“there is not much mystery left now . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “. . . there is not much mystery left now in the riddle of the eighth sphere, nor as to the place in the sky where it may be sought.  The conditions of existence there, however, are topics on which the adepts are very reserved in their communications to uninitiated pupils . . .” — p. 113

— 157 —

septenary division in differnet indian systems . . .
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Septenary Division in Different Indian Systems,” 1885: “We give below in tabular form the classifications, adopted by Buddhist and by Vedantic teachers, of the principles in man . . .” — p. 185 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 158 —

“From the foregoing table it will be seen . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Septenary Division in Different Indian Systems,” 1885: “From the foregoing table it will be seen that the third principle in the Buddhist classification is not separately mentioned in the Vedantic division as it is merely the vehicle of prāna.  It will also be seen that the fourth principle is included in the third kosa (sheath), as the said principle is but the vehicle of will-power, which is but an energy of the mind.  It must also be noticed that the Vignanamayakosa is considered to be distinct from the Manomayakosa, as a division is made after death between the lower part of the mind, as it were, which has a closer affinity with the fourth principle than with the sixth and its higher part, which attaches itself to the latter, and which is, in fact, the basis for the higher spiritual individuality of man.” — pp. 185-6 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“We may also here point out . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Septenary Division in Different Indian Systems,” 1885: “We may also here point out to our readers that the classification mentioned in the last column is for all practical purposes connected with Raja Yoga, the best and simplest.  Though their [there] are seven principles in man, there are but three distinct Upadhis (bases), in each of which his Atma may work independently of the rest.  These three Upadhis can be separated by an adept without killing himself.  He cannot separate the seven principles from each other without destroying his constitution.” — p. 186 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 159 —

(See diagram No. 2 infra, “The Moon and the Earth.”)
see: SD 1:172.
(see diagram No. 1)
see: SD 1:153.

— 159-60 —

“Beginning so early as with the 2nd round . . .”
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Beginning with the second Round, already evolution proceeds on quite a different plan. . . . It is only the first Round that man becomes from a human being on Globe B. a mineral, a plant, an animal on Planet C.  The method changes entirely from the second Round; but — I have learned prudence with you; and will say nothing before the time for saying it has come.” — pp. 177-8 (K.H., Letter XXIII B, § 29, Oct. 1882)

— 160 —

“Man,” which came later . . .
see: Man: Fragments of Forgotten History, by “Two Chelas in the Theosophical Society,” 1885.

— 161 —

Gautama Buddha, it was held, was a Sixth-Rounder . . .
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Plato and Confucius were fifth round men and our Lord [Buddha] a sixth round man . . .” — p. 84 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
One Master taught . . . “Fifth-Rounders” even now on Earth . . .
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “The present mankind is at its fourth round . . . The Buddhas and Avatars form the exception as verily we have yet some Avatars left to us on earth.” — p. 77 (M., Letter XIII, Jan. 1882)
“A few drops of rain do not make a Monsoon . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “A few drops of rain do not make a monsoon though they presage it. . . . No, we are not in the fifth round, but fifth round men have been coming in for the last few thousand years.” — p. 84 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 2, 1882)

— 162 —

“It is impossible . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “Clearly it is impossible when the complicated facts of an entirely unfamiliar science are being presented to untrained minds for the first time, to put them forward with all their appropriate qualifications, compensations and abnormal developments visible from the beginning.  We must be content to take the broad rules first and deal with the exceptions afterwards . . . the traditional methods of teaching, generally followed, aim at impressing every fresh idea on the memory, by provoking the perplexity it at last relieves.” — p. 145

— 163 —

the erroneous statement that . . . “besides the Earth . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “Besides the earth . . . there are only two other worlds of our chain which are visible to physical eyes — the one behind and the one in advance of it.  These two worlds, as a matter of fact, are Mars and Mercury . . .” — p. 136
“What planets, of those known to ordinary science . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “What other planets of those known to ordinary science, besides Mercury, belong to our system of worlds?” — p. 148 (K.H., Letter XXIII A, Oct. 1882)
“Mars, etc., and four other planets . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Mars and four other planets of which astronomy knows yet nothing.  Neither A, B, nor Y, Z, are known; nor can they be seen through physical means however perfected.” — p. 176 (K.H., Letter XXIII B, Oct. 1882)

— 164 —

“there are other and innumerable Manvantaric chains . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “ ‘There are other and innumerable manvantaric chains of globes bearing intelligent beings — both in and out of our solar system . . .’ ” — p. 119 (K.H., Letter XVIII, June 1882)
“the traditional modes of teaching . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “. . . the traditional methods of teaching, generally followed, aim at impressing every fresh idea on the memory, by provoking the perplexity it at last relieves.” — p. 145

— Footnotes

“Try to understand that you are putting me questions . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “. . . try to understand that you are putting me questions pertaining to the highest initiations.  That I can give you a general view, but that I dare not nor will I enter upon details . . .” — p. 177 (K.H., Letter XXIII B, Oct. 1882)

— 165 —

there ‘must exist some defect in the mother idea of the theory’ as Faye justly observes
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “M. Faye, in the first of his important memoirs on nebular cosmogony {Comptes Rendus . . .}, has presented it as a difficulty in the theory of Laplace that the inner satellite of Mars revolves in about one-third the period of the planet’s rotation . . . ‘There must exist, therefore, some defect in the mother idea of the theory.’ ” — p. 168 & fn.
‘Gratification of curiosity is the end of knowledge for some men’ . . .
see: Francis Bacon, Works, v. 3, 1857: “. . . we would in general admonish all to consider the true ends of knowledge, and not to seek it for the gratification of their minds . . . but for its instrinsic merit and purposes of life.” — p. 337 (Preface, Novum Organum)
‘knowledge dwells / In heads replete with thoughts of other men . . .’
p/q: William Cowper, The Task, and Other Poems, 1831:
“Knowledge and wisdom, far from being one,
  Have oftimes no connexion.  Knowledge dwells
  In heads replete with thoughts of other men;
  Wisdom in minds attentive to their own.” — p. 126 (IV:89-92)

— 166 —

‘The minor Pralaya . . .’
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “There are three kinds of pralayas . . . 1. The universal or Maha pralaya . . . 2. The solar pralaya . . . 3. The minor pralaya . . . The minor pralayas of No. 3 concern but our little string of globes, whether man-bearing or not.  To such a string our Earth belongs.” — p. 93 (K.H., Letter XV, July 10, 1882)

— 167 —

‘Let us imagine,’ wrote the same Master . . .
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Let us imagine that our earth is one of a group of seven planets or man-bearing worlds . . . Now the life impulse reaches ‘A’ or rather that which is destined to become ‘A’ and which so far is but cosmic dust.” — p. 94 (K.H., Letter XV, July 10, 1882)

— 167-8 —

“I believe this will lead to a further confusion. . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “I believe this will lead to a further confusion.  A Round we are agreed to call the passage of a monad from globe ‘A’ to globe ‘Z’ (or ‘G’) . . .” — p. 80 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)

— 168 —

“The ‘World-Ring’ is correct. . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “The ‘world-ring’ is correct.  M. advised Mr. Sinnett strongly to agree upon a nomenclature before going any further.” — p. 80 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
“Not being permitted to give you the whole truth . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Not being permitted to give you the whole truth, or divulge the number of isolated fractions, I am unable to satisfy you by giving you the total number.” — p. 81 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
“Try to solve the problem of 777 incarnations . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Though I am obliged to withhold information about many points yet if you should work out any of the problems by yourself it will be my duty to tell you so.  Try to solve the problem of the 777 incarnations.” — p. 83 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
the revelation of the whole system . . . had not been contemplated . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Correspondence,” May 15, 1888: “. . . the revelations then broached were purposely designed to rather offer a bird’s-eye view of the doctrine than to render a detailed treatment . . . No regular systematic teaching was ever contemplated, nor could it be given to a layman . . .” — p. 256 (Editor’s Note, Lucifer, v. 2)

— 168-9 —

the four Vidyas . . . “Yajna-Vidya” . . . “Maha-Vidya” . . . “Guhya-Vidya” . . . “Atma-Vidya” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The four Vidyās or branches of knowledge are said to be: Yajna-vidyā, knowledge or performance of religious rites; Mahā-vidyā, great knowledge, the worship of the female principle, or Tāntrika worship; Guhya-vidyā, knowledge of mantras, mystical prayers, and incantations; and Ātma-vidyā, knowledge of soul, true wisdom.” — 1:148 fn.

— 169 —

“on pure metaphysics of that sort we are not now engaged”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “. . . an evolution from something behind it, as every imaginable manifestation of Nature must be, until in the vast series of manifestations, the mind travels back to the unmanifested beginning of all things.  On pure metaphysics of that sort we are not now engaged.” — p. 46
“Why this preaching of our doctrines . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “A quoi bon . . . this preaching of our doctrines, all this uphill work and swimming in adversum flumen?  Why should the West be so anxious then to learn anything from the East, since it is evidently unable to digest that which can never meet the requirements of the special tastes of its Esthetics. . . . I do not want to discourage you.  I would only draw your attention to the formidable difficulties encountered by us in every attempt we make to explain our metaphysics to Western minds, even among the most intelligent.” — p. 193  (K.H., Letter XXV, Feb. 2, 1883)

— 170 —

“the spiritual monads . . . do not fully complete their mineral existence on globe A . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “The spiritual monads . . . do not fully complete their mineral existence on globe A, then complete it on globe B, and so on.  They pass several times round the whole circle as minerals, and then again several times round as vegetables, and several times as animals.  We purposely refrain for the present from going into figures . . .” — p. 49
“For reasons which are not easy . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “For reasons which are not easy for the outsider to divine, the possessors of occult knowledge are especially reluctant to give out numerical facts relating to cosmogony, though it is hard for the uninitiated to understand why these should be withheld.” — p. 140

— 171 —

theological dogma of a newly-created soul for every baby born
see: Jonathan Edwards, Works, 1830: “God is the Creator of men in both soul and body; but their souls are in a special and more immediate manner his workmanship, wherein less use is made of second causes, instruments, or means, or any thing pre-existent.” — 7:180

— 172 —

that Globe . . . begins to die (to go into its planetary pralaya)
see: Max Müller, The Six Systems of Indian Philosophy, 1899: “. . . the very popular idea of Pralayas, i.e. destructions or absorptions of the whole world . . . At the end of this Pralaya, however, Brahman creates or lets out of himself a new world, matter becomes gross and visible once more, and souls become active and reimbodied . . .”  “. . . in the Bhagavad-gītā IX, 7, the idea of Pralayas, absorptions, and of Kalpas or ages, of their end and their beginning . . . are already quite familiar to the poets.” — pp. 144, 145

— 173 —

the Japanese Yamaboosis . . . the ascetic monks of Kioto
see: C. Pfoundes, Fu-so Mimi Bukuro, 1875: “The Yamabushi is a sect of wandering priests . . .”  “The chief temple of this sect is in Kiôto and is named Mio an ji, or temple of light and darkness.  That in Yedo is known as Ichi-getz-ji, or one-moon temple.” — pp. 114, 115
the mystics of the Lao-Tze sect . . . the Dzenodoo
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “A Bewitched Life,” Aug. 1885: “. . . the temple of Tzi-onene, a Buddhist monastery . . . None other is so venerated in Kioto.  Its monks belong to the sect of Dzeno-doo . . . They are connected, moreover, closely connected, and allied with the Yama-boosi, (the ascetics or ‘hermits’) who follow the doctrines of Lao-tze.” — p. 267 (The Theosophist, v. 6)

— 174 —

(the Lunar Gods or “Spirits,” called in India, the Pitris)
see: Institutes of Hindu Law, tr. Sir William Jones, 1796: “[Brahmā] first produced ten Lords of created beings . . . They . . . produced seven other Menus . . . and separate companies of Pitris, or progenitors of mankind.” — pp. 5-6 (i.34, 36-7)
see: Louis Jacolliot, Occult Science in India, 1884: “The Pourohita, or Brahmin . . . offers a sacrifice to the Pitris, or ancestral spirits . . . the lunar spirits that protect the family.” — p. 29

— 175 —

(See “Gods, Monads and Atoms.”)
see: SD 1:610-34.
the enormous period intervening between the mineral epoch . . .
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “. . . we may now treat the enormous period intervening between the mineral epoch on globe A and the man epoch . . .” — p. 48

— 175-6 —

“The full development of the mineral epoch on Globe A . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “The full development of the mineral epoch on globe A prepares the way for the vegetable development, and as soon as this begins, the mineral life impulse overflows into globe B.  Then when the vegetable development on globe A is complete and the animal development begins, the vegetable life impulse overflows to globe B, and the mineral impulse passes on to globe C.  Then, finally, comes the human life impulse on globe A.” — pp. 48-9

— 176 —

“. . . there are processes of evolution . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “. . . there are processes of evolution which precede the mineral evolution, and thus a wave of evolution, indeed several waves of evolution, precede the mineral wave in its progress round the spheres.” — p. 49
“There are seven kingdoms. . . .”
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “There are seven kingdoms.  The first group comprises three degrees of elementals, or nascent centres of forces — from the first stage of the differentiation of Mulaprakriti to its third degree — i.e., from full unconsciousness to semi-perception; the second or higher group embraces the kingdoms from vegetable to man; the mineral kingdom thus forming the central or turning-point in the degrees of the ‘Monadic Essence’ — considered as an Evoluting Energy.  Three stages in the elemental side; the mineral kingdom; three stages in the objective physical side — these are the seven links of the evolutionary chain.” — p. 276 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 176-7 —

“A descent of spirit into matter . . .”
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “A descent of spirit into matter, equivalent to an ascent in physical evolution; a re-ascent from the deepest depths of materiality (the mineral) towards its status quo ante, with a corresponding dissipation of concrete organisms up to Nirvana — the vanishing point of differentiated matter.” — p. 276 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 177 —

there are the three elemental Kingdoms, which precede the Mineral
see: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: [Diagram] “Lower Element group → : Spirit descends into matter . . . Gradual evolution of form.”
      “. . . the three successive stages passed by the spiritual impulse (through the elementals . . .) before they are imprisoned in the most concrete form of matter . . .” — p. 277 (Five Years of Theosophy)
And what relation does it bear to an Atom? . . . “None whatever . . .”
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “What relation does the monad bear to the atom?  None whatever to the atom or molecule as in the scientific conception at present.  It can neither be compared with the microscopic organism classed once among polygastric infusoria, and now regarded as vegetable and ranked among algae; nor is it quite the monas of the Peripatetics.  Physically or constitutionally the mineral monad differs, of course, from the human monad, which is neither physical nor can its constitution be rendered by chemical symbols and elements.” — pp. 273-4 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 177-8 —

In short, as the spiritiual Monad is One . . . so the Mineral Monad . . .
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “In short, the mineral Monad is one — the higher animal and human monads are countless.  Otherwise, how could one account for and explain mathematically the evolutionary and spiral progress of the four kingdoms?” — p. 274 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 178 —

The “Monad” is the combination of the last two “principles” in man . . .
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “The ‘monad’ is the combination of the last two Principles in man, the 6th and the 7th, and, properly speaking, the term ‘human monad’ applies only to the Spiritual Soul, not to its highest spiritual vivifying Principle.  But since divorced from the latter the Spiritual Soul could have no existence, no being, it has thus been called.” — p. 274 (Five Years of Theosophy)
Now the Monadic, or rather Cosmic, Essence . . . in the mineral, vegetable, and animal . . .
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “Now the Monadic Essence (if such a term be permitted) in the mineral, vegetable, and animal, though the same throughout the series of cycles from the lowest elemental up to the Deva kingdom, yet differs in the scale of progression.  It would be very misleading to imagine a monad as a separate entity trailing its slow way in a distinct path through the lower kingdoms, and after an incalculable series of transmigrations flowering into a human being; in short, that the monad of a Humboldt dates back to the monad of an atom of horneblende.  Instead of saying a mineral monad, the correcter phraseology in physical science which differentiates every atom, would of course have been to call it the Monad manifesting in that form of Prakriti called the mineral kingdom.” — pp. 274-5 (Five Years of Theosophy)
The atom, as represented in the ordinary scientific hypothesis . . .
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “Each atom or molecule of ordinary scientific hypothesis is not a particle of something, animated by a psychic something, destined to blossom as a man after aeons.  But it is a concrete manifestation of the Universal Energy which itself has not yet become individualized: a sequential manifestation of the one Universal Monas.  The ocean does not divide into its potential and constituent drops until the sweep of the life-impulse reaches the evolutionary stage of man-birth.  The tendency towards segregation into individual monads is gradual, and in the higher animals comes almost to the point.” — p. 275 (Five Years of Theosophy)
The Peripatetics applied the word Monas to the whole Kosmos . . .
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “The Peripatetics applied the word Monas to the whole Cosmos, in the pantheistic sense; and the Occultists while accepting this thought for convenience’ sake, distinguish the progressive stages of the evolution of the Concrete from the Abstract by terms of which the ‘Mineral Monad’ is one.  The term merely means that the tidal wave of spiritual evolution is passing through that arc of its circuit.” — p. 275 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 178-9 —

The ‘Monadic Essence’ begins to imperceptibly differentiate . . .
p/q: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “The ‘Monadic Essence’ begins to imperceptibly differentiate in the vegetable kingdom.  As the monads are uncompounded things, as correctly defined by Leibnitz, it is the spiritual essence which vivifies them in their degrees of differentiation which constitutes properly the monad — not the atomic aggregation which is only the vehicle and the substance through which thrill the lower and the higher degrees of intelligence.” — p. 275 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 180-1 —

the Manasa-Putras, those who endow the “senseless” shells . . . with “mind”
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — III,” April 1887: “In speaking of himself [as the Logos] Krishna says, (chapter x, verse 6): — ‘The seven great Rishis . . . partaking of my nature, were born from my mind . . .’  He speaks of the sapta rishis . . . as his manasaputras, or mind-born sons . . .” — p. 444 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The mind said . . . I am the eternal chief among the elements.  Without me, the senses never shine, like an empty dwelling, or like fire the flames of which are extinct.  Without me, all beings, like fuel half-dried and half moist, fail to apprehend qualities or objects, even with the senses exerting themselves.” — p. 268 (Anugītā, vii)

— 181 —

the Manasa-Dhyanis (the Solar Devas . . .) the “givers of intelligence and consciousness” to man
see: “On the Identity and Differences of the Incarnating Powers”: “The Endowers of man with his conscious, immortal ego, are the ‘Solar Angels’ . . .”  “All these are the Manasam . . . who incarnated in the Third Race, and in this and various other ways endowed mankind with Mind.” — SD 2:88, 89

— 182 —

the most retarded . . . ushered into a new chain after pralaya . . .
see: F. Max Müller, The Six Systems of Indian Philosophy, 1899: “According to the Vedānta, there occurs at the end of each Kalpa a Pralaya or dissolution of the universe, and Brahman is then reduced to its causal condition . . . At the end of this Pralaya, however, Brahman creates or lets out of himself a new world, matter becomes gross and visible once more, and souls become active and re-embodied, though with a higher enlightenment . . .” — p. 144

— 183 —

Every form on earth . . . to follow the model . . . in the ‘heavenly man’
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “. . . the first world, or the Archetypal Man, in whose image everything is formed . . .”  “ ‘The Heavenly Adam . . . who emanated from the highest primordial obscurity (i.e., the En Soph), created the Earthly Adam.’ . . . ‘He unites in himself all forms.’ ” — pp. 27, 29 (Sohar, iii, 48 a.)

— 184 —

The human fœtus follows in its transformation all the forms . . .
see: Ernst Haeckel, The Pedigree of Man, 1883: “In man also, as in his lower fellows, the manifold series of forms through which the organism passes during its individual development from the egg, presents us, approximately and in outline, with a picture of the series of forms through which its ancestors have passed in the course of measureless ages.” — p. 131

— 185 —

— Footnotes

the reader is referred “to the Brahmins . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Let any one inquire of an educated Brahman the reason for the respect shown to monkeys — the origin of which feeling is indicated in the story of the valorous feats of Hanoumā, the generalissimo and faithful ally of the hero of Ramayana, and he would soon be disabused of the erroneous idea that the Hindus accord deific honors to a monkey-god.  He would, perhaps, learn — were the Brahman to judge him worthy of an explanation — that the Hindu sees in the ape but what Manu desired he should: the transformation of species most directly connected with that of the human family — a bastard branch engrafted on their own stock before the final perfection of the latter.” — 2:278
“He might learn, further . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “He might learn, further, that in the eyes of the ‘heathen’ the spiritual or inner man is one thing, and his terrestrial, physical casket another.  That physical nature, the great combination of physical correlations of forces ever creeping on toward perfection, has to avail herself of the material at hand; she models and remodels as she proceeds, and finishing her crowning work in man, presents him alone as a fit tabernacle for the overshadowing of the Divine spirit.” — 2:278-9
a German scientific work is mentioned
see: Bibliotheca Sacra, v. 34, July 1877: “In the pamphlet entitled ‘The Dissolution of Species by Natural Selection’ [Ueber die Auflösung der Arten durch Natürliche Zuchtwahl], the anonymous author [J. W. Albert Wigand] aims to show that the necessary result of a development in accordance with the principle of natural selection will be the final reduction of all organic species to one single, universal organism, in which meet the respective characteristics of plant, animal, and man . . .” — p. 578 (“Notices on Recent Publications”)
a Hanoverian scientist had recently published a Book . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “A Hanoverian scientist has recently published a work entitled Ueber die Auflösung der Arten durch Natürliche Zucht Wahl, in which he shows, with great ingenuity, that Darwin was wholly mistaken in tracing man back to the ape.  On the contrary, he maintains that it is the ape which has evolved from man.  That, in the beginning, mankind were, morally and physically, the types and prototypes of our present race and of human dignity, by their beauty of form, regularity of feature, cranial development, nobility of sentiments, heroic impulses, and grandeur of ideal conceptions.” — 2:278 fn.
This is a purely Brahmanic, Buddhistic and Kabalistic philosophy. . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “This is a purely Brahmanic, Buddhistic, and kabalistic philosophy.  His book is copiously illustrated with diagrams, tables, etc.  He says that the gradual debasement and degradation of man, morally and physically, can be readily traced throughout the ethnological transformations down to our times.  And, as one portion has already degenerated into apes, so the civilized man of the present day will at last, under the action of the inevitable law of necessity, be also succeeded by like descendants.  If we may judge of the future by the actual present, it certainly does seem possible that so unspiritual and materialistic a body as our physical scientists should end as simia rather than as seraphs.” — 2:278-9 fn.

— 186 —

“the mineral kingdom will no more develop the vegetable . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “. . . the mineral kingdom will no more develope the vegetable kingdom . . . than the Earth was able to develope Man from the ape till it received an impulse from without.” — p. 48
“Man belongs to a kingdom distinctly separate . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “Man belongs to a kingdom distinctly separate from that of the animals . . .” — p. 57

— 187 —

“It is enough to show that we may . . . conceive a life-impulse giving birth . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “It is enough to show that we may as reasonably . . . conceive a life impulse giving birth to mineral forms, as of the same sort of impulse concerned to raise a race of apes into a race of rudimentary men.” — p. 46
the explanation of the Master (Mr. Sinnett’s “teacher”) . . .
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882, pp. 78-88.

— 188 —

having to pass through states . . . as “Inmetallization, Inherbation, Inzoonization . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “The monad performs not only ‘world rings’ or seven major inmetalliations, inherbations, zoonisations (?) and incarnations — but an infinitude of sub-rings or subordinate whirls all in a series of sevens.” — pp. 80-1 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
the necessity of failures . . . “Still, as these ‘failures’ are too far progressed . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “. . . there must be ‘failures’ in the ethereal races of the many classes of Dyan Chohans or Devas as well as among men.  But still as these failures are too far progressed and spiritualized to be thrown back forcibly from their Dyan Chohanship into the vortex of a new primordial evolution through the lower kingdoms . . .” — p. 87 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
When Karma has reached them . . .
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “Then Karma has reached them and they will have to accept to the last drop in the bitter cup of retribution.  Then they become an active Force, and commingle with the Elementals . . . to develop little by little the full type of humanity.” — p. 87 (K.H., Letter XIV, July 9, 1882)
“Man in the First Round and First Race on Globe D . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “1st Round. — An ethereal being — non-intelligent, but super-spiritual.  In each of the subsequent races and sub-races and minor races of evolution he grows more and more into an encased or incarnate being, but still preponderatingly etherial.  And like the animal and vegetable he develops monstrous bodies correspondential with his coarse surroundings.” — p. 87 (K.H., July 9, 1882, Letter XIV, “Supplementary Notes”)
“II. Round.  He (Man) is still gigantic and ethereal . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “2nd Round. — He is still gigantic and etherial, but growing firmer and more condensed in body — a more physical man, yet still less intelligent than spiritual; for mind is a slower and more difficult evolution than the physical frame and the mind would not develop as rapidly as the body.” — p. 87 (K.H., July 9, 1882, Letter XIV, “Supplementary Notes”)

— 188-9 —

“III. Round.  He has now a perfectly concrete or compacted body . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “3rd Round. — He has now a perfectly concrete or compacted body; at first the form of a giant ape, and more intelligent (or rather cunning) than spiritual.  For in the downward arc he has now reached the point where his primordial spirituality is eclipsed or over-shadowed by nascent mentality.  In the last half of this third round his gigantic stature decreases, his body improves in texture (perhaps the microscope might help to demonstrate this) and he becomes a more rational being — though still more an ape than a Deva man.” — pp. 87-8 (K.H., July 9, 1882, Letter XIV, “Supplementary Notes”)

— 189 —

“IV. Round.  Intellect has an enormous development . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “4th round. — Intellect has an enormous development in this round.  The dumb races will acquire our human speech, on our globe, on which from the 4th race language is perfected and knowledge in physical things increases.  At this half-way point of the fourth round, Humanity passes the axial point of the minor manwantaric circle.  (More-over, at the middle point of every major or root race evolution of each round, man passes the equator of his course on that planet, the same rule applying to the whole evolution or the seven rounds of the minor Manwantara — 7 rounds ÷ 2 = 3½ rounds).  At this point then the world teems with the results of intellectual activity and spiritual decrease.” — p. 88 (K.H., July 9, 1882, Letter XIV, “Supplementary Notes”)
‘. . . centred in our make such strange extremes! . . .’
p/q: Edward Young, The Complaint: or, Night Thoughts, 1851:
“How complicate, how wonderful, is man!
  How passing wonder HE, who made him such!
  Who centered in our make such strange extremes!
  From different natures marvelously mixt . . .” — p. 13 (Night I)

— 190 —

Hanuman is the son of Pavana . . .
see: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “HANUMĀN . . . a celebrated monkey chief.  He was the son of Pavana, ‘the wind,’ by Anjanā, wife of a monkey named Kesarī.” — p. 116
The reader . . . will find in Book II . . . the whole explanation of this ingenious allegory.
see: “Western Evolutionism: The Comparative Anatomy of Man and the Anthropoid in No Way a Confirmation of Darwinism,” SD 2:680-5.

— 191 —

“the counterfeit of a man . . .”
p/q: William Shakespeare, Henry IV, Part I: “. . . to die, is to be a counterfeit; for he is but the counterfeit of a man, who hath not the life of a man . . .” — Act V, Sc. IV, 116-118
The “Lemuro-Atlantean” . . . was higher than we are with all our sciences
see: “Are Giants Fiction?”: “[Lemuro-Atlanteans] were giants in knowledge and learning . . . Their Science was innate in them . . . Creuzer describes them well in saying that: — ‘Those children of Heaven and Earth were endowed with extraordinary faculties . . . They commanded the Elements, knew the secrets of heaven and the earth . . .’ ” — SD 2:285

— 192 —

“The holy youths (the gods) refused to multiply . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From Brahmā . . . were born mind-engendered progeny . . . But, as they did not multiply themselves, Brahmā created other mind-born sons . . . But they were without desire or passion . . . estranged from the universe, and undesirous of progeny.” — 1:100-2 (i.7)
6. The curse is pronounced
see: “Is Pleroma Satan’s Lair?”: “. . . the fall of all these Logoi and Demiurgi from their primitive exalted position, had in all cases one and the same esoteric signification in it; the curse — in its philosophical meaning — of being incarnated on this earth . . .” — SD 2:515

— 193 —

Jewish Kabalists arguing . . . Ruach (Spirit) was united to Nephesh (living Soul)
see: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “The living soul they designated Nephesh chaiah . . . produced by, the infusion of the spirit . . . into the quickening body of man . . .”  “. . . the Greek Anémos represents the Hebrew Ruach, the designation of that from which Nephesh chaiah . . . proceeded . . . Do not these relations, thus co-ordinated, suggest that the ancient doctrine in regard to the soul was that it proceeded from the union of spirit and body . . .?” — pp. 190, 192
“There were many wars” refers to . . . Powers — pure Essences — “that were told to create”
see: The Hymns of Orpheus [tr. Thomas Taylor], 1792: “. . . the following account of the battles of the Gods . . . ‘For some [gods] determine their essence about unity, on which they depend; and others . . . are mutually separated from each other . . . Some supply the power of generating to inferiors; and others exhibit a constant and undefiled purity.’ ” — pp. 157-8 fn. (Proclus, Commentary on Plato’s Republic)

— 194 —

“And there was war in Heaven . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and they prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.  And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world . . .” — p. 329 (Revelation, 12:7-9)
the same story is given in the Codex Nazareus . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “BAHAK ZIVO . . . said with a loud voice: I am father of the genii . . . This is the command, that I construct creatures . . . Ignorant of Orcus . . . nor having knowledge of consuming fire which is wanting in light, I shall not have this in my power . . . Thereupon he receives most kindly Fetahil [Ptahil] who has been called to his aid . . .” — p. 50 (Codex Nazaraeus, I.181)
This is a repetition of the failure of the “Fathers” . . . (Book II, Sloka 17)
see: Stanza IV: “Creation of the First Races”: “The breath (human Monad) needed a form; the Fathers gave it . . . The breath needs a mind to embrace the Universe; ‘We cannot give that,’ said the Fathers . . .” — SD 2:105
We will now quote from our earlier Volumes . . .
[SD passages on pages 194 through 197 are quoted from Isis Unveiled, 1:299-301.  Most of this text from Isis was quoted or paraphrased from S. F. Dunlap’s translation of the Codex Nazaraeus in Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861.]

— Footnotes

“According to the symbolical teaching . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “According to the symbolical teaching here, spirit, from being simply a functioning agent of God, became volitional in its developed and developing action, and, substituting its own will for the Divine desire in its regard, so fell.  Hence the kingdom of spirits and spiritual action, which flow from and are the product of spirit volition, are outside, and contrasted with and in contradiction to the kingdom of souls and divine action.” — p. 233
“When man was created, he was human in constitution . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “When man was created he was human in constitution, with human affections, human hopes and human aspirations . . . From this state he fell — into the brute and the savage . . . it was a fall from the natural into the supernatural and the animal . . .” — p. 235
On the authority of Irenæus, of Justin Martyr and the Codex . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “. . . SPIRITUS {The sacred prophets say that one and the same SPIRIT is divided into seven pneumata (spirits). — Justin, ad Graecos}.  The SPIRITUS even at one time conceived ‘Seven Figures’ . . . Namely, She bore the Seven Stellars (Planets) {Irenæus, I. xxxiv. p. 136, is closely allied to the Codex Nasaraeus}.” — p. 52 & fns.
Dunlap shows that the Nazarenes regarded “Spirit” as a female and Evil Power . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “The Nasarenes treat their ‘Spirit’ as an evil Power . . . Justin Martyr also compares the Spirit that moved on the face of the waters with Kora; making the Spirit feminine . . . Christ, the Kurios, and Kora would then be the Light-god and his feminine Spiritus: Christ and the Holy Ghost are the Gnostic Pair that produce Aeons. — Irenæus, I. pp. 11, 13, 15, ff..” — p. 52 fn.

— 194-5 —

“Then steps on the stage of creation the spirit . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Then steps on the stage of creation the ‘spirit’ (which properly ought to be translated ‘soul,’ for it is the anima mundi, and which with the Nazarenes and the Gnostics was feminine) . . .” — 1:299-300

— 195 —

Thus the spirit of the Earth perceiving that . . . the splendour was ‘changed’ . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “. . . the ‘Spirit’ strengthening herself . . . discovered that the Splendor was changed, and that for the Splendor existed ‘decrease and damage’ . . . and said to Karabtonos who was frantic and without sense and judgment:  Arise, see, the Splendor (light) of the Newest MAN (i.e. of Fetahil [Ptahil]) has failed, the decrease of this Splendor is visible.  Rise up, lie with thy MOTHER, and free thee from limits by which thou art held, and those more ample than the whole world.” — p. 51 (Codex Nazaraeus, i.181)
the Spiritus conceives “Seven Figures,” and the seven stellars (planets) . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “The SPIRITUS even at one time conceived ‘Seven Figures,’ which also giving birth to during seven days She bore witless. . . . She bore the Seven Stellars (Planets).” — p. 52 (Codex Nazaraeus, i.181)
Fetahil extends his hand towards the abyss of matter . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “Extending then his hand toward the abyss, Fetahil [Ptahil] said:  Let the earth exist, just as the abode of the Powers has existed.  And, his hand having been dipped in, even a certain thickening . . . took place.” — p. 52 (Codex Nazaraeus, i.181)
“Then the Codex proceeds to tell how Bahak-Zivo was separated . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “We will tell thee how BAHAK Zivo was separated from the Spiritus, how the cogitation of all the Genii (Angels) was separated from the rebel voice.” — pp. 52-3 (Codex Nazaraeus, ii.233)

— Footnotes

Fetahil . . . was, with the Nazarenes, the king of light, and the creator . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Fetahil [Ptahil] was with the Nazarenes the king of light, and the Creator; but in this instance he is the unlucky Prometheus, who fails to get hold of the Living Fire, necessary for the formation of the divine soul, as he is ignorant of the secret name (the ineffable or incommunicable name of the kabalists).” — 1:300 fn.
See Franck’s “Codex Nazaræus”
see: Ad. Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “. . . nous voulons parler de Code nazaréen, cette bible du gnosticisme purement oriental [we want to refer to the Codex Nazaræus, that bible of purely oriental gnosticism].” — p. 345
     “La gradation par laquelle la doctrine nazaréenne descend du souverain être aux dernières limites de la création est exactement la même que dans un passage du Zohar [The steps by which the Nazarene doctrine descends from the supreme being to the farthest limits of creation are exactly the same as in a passage of the Zohar] . . .” — p. 346
     “. . . ils sont l’expression mythologique de ce principe, d’ailleurs très nettement formulé dans le Code nazaréen, que les ténèbres et le mal ne sont que l’affaiblissement graduel de la lumière divine [these are mythological expressions of this principle, that darkness and evil are only the gradual weakening of the divine light, which is elsewhere very clearly formulated in the Nazarene codex].” — p. 349

— 195-6 —

Then Mano (the greatest), who dwells with the greatest ferho . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “The FIRST LIFE pours forth . . . to the greatest Mano, who dwells with the greatest FERHO. . . . who was named Kebar Zivo, and by another name, Nebat Iavar bar Iufin Ifafin . . . Helm and Vine of the food of Life, and, commiserating the Genii (Angels) on account of the magnitude of their ambition, said to him:  Genie, Lord of the Genii, see what the Genii (Angels) do, and about what they are consulting.” — p. 53 (Codex Nazaraeus, i.135)

— 196 —

They say, ‘Let us call for the world . . .’
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “They say:  Let us call forth . . . the world, and let us call the ‘Powers’ into existence.  The Genii are the Princes . . . Sons of Light, but Thou art the Messenger of Life.” — p. 53 (Codex Nazaraeus, i.135)
And in order to counteract the influence of the seven “badly disposed” principles . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “And in order to counteract the influence of the seven ‘badly disposed’ principles, the progeny of Spiritus, Cabar Zio, the mighty Lord of Splendor, procreates seven other lives (the cardinal virtues) who shine in their own form and light ‘from on high’ and thus reëstablishes the balance between good and evil, light and darkness.” — 1:301
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “Twelve Stellars (Signs) proceeded forth all badly disposed.” — p. 52 (Codex Nazaraeus, i.181)
      “. . . seven lives were procreated which are from CABAR ZIO (the Mighty Light of Life . . .) and are those Bright (ones) shining in their own form and splendor that comes from on high.” — p. 57 (Codex Nazaraeus, iii.61)

— Footnotes

See the Cosmogony of Pherecydes.
see: François Lenormant, The Beginnings of History, 1883: “fragments of pherecydes’ cosmogony. . . . Pherecydes says that the first principles are Zês, Chthonia and Cronos, Zês being the ether . . .”  “[Zês] brought into concord and true harmony the world composed of contrary elements . . .” — pp. 537, 538, 539

— 196-7 —

“The Astral Light or Anima mundi . . .”
p/q: H. B. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The Astral Light, or anima mundi, is dual and bisexual.  The male part of it is purely divine and spiritual; it is the Wisdom; while the female portion (the spiritus of the Nazarenes) is tainted, in one sense, with matter, and therefore is evil already.  It is the life-principle of every living creature, and furnishes the astral soul, the fluidic perisprit to men, animals, fowls of the air, and everything living.  Animals have only the germ of the highest immortal soul as a third principle.  It will develop but through a series of countless evolutions; the doctrine of which evolution is contained in the kabalistic axiom: ‘A stone becomes a plant; a plant a beast; a beast a man; a man a spirit; and the spirit a god.’ ” — 1:301 fn.

— 197 —

the three Kabalistic Faces
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “. . . the three Kabbalistic ‘Faces’ . . . We find among them the three highest attributes and seven lower; which are the Ten Sephiroth of the Kabbala.” — p. 57
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . the ten Sephiroth represent the archetypal man . . . In looking at the Sephiroth constituting the first triad, it is evident that they represent the intellect . . . The second triad corresponds to the moral world . . . The third represents power and stability, and is therefore called the material world. . . . These three aspects are called the faces, ANPIN.” — p. 28 (Introduction)
In . . . Isis . . . the primitive Jewish Christians, the Nazarenes and the Ebionites, are fully considered. . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The Gospel according to the Hebrews was but too well known to have been the only one accepted for four centuries by the Jewish Christians, the Nazarenes and the Ebionites.  And neither of them accepted the divinity of Christ. . . . But to return to our Sophia-Achamoth and the belief of the genuine, primitive Christians. . . . Ilda-Baoth, is thus the ‘son of darkness,’ the creator of our sinful world (the physical portion of it).” — 2:183

— Footnotes

the difference between nous, the higher divine wisdom, and psyche, the lower and terrestrial . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish . . . But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits . . .” — p. 301 (Epistle of James, 3:15, 17)
Vide “Demon est Deus inversus”
see: SD 1:411-24.

— 198 —

the seven planetary spheres . . . of which Earth is the lowest
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “As soon as Jesus was born, Christos, the perfect, uniting himself with Sophia (wisdom and spirituality), descended through the seven planetary regions, assuming in each an analogous form, and concealing his true nature from their genii . . .” — 2:186
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “The soul thus descending, as it passes through each sphere receives successive coatings, as it were, of a luminous body, and is furnished at the same time with several faculties it has to exercise during its probation upon Earth.” — p. 316
(See the Section On Satan . . .)
see: “On the Myth of the ‘Fallen Angel’ ” —  SD 2:475-505

— Footnotes

About the Nazarenes see Isis . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The oldest Nazarenes, who were descendants of the Scripture nazars, and whose last prominent leader was John the Baptist, although never very orthodox in the sight of the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem were, nevertheless, respected and left unmolested. . . . But the followers of Jesus . . . became a still more exasperating thorn in their side . . .” — 2:132

— 199 —

In the Kabala, worlds are compared to sparks . . .
see: Christian D. Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “ ‘There were old worlds . . . which perished as soon as they came into existence: were formless, and they were called sparks.  Thus the smith when hammering the iron, lets the sparks fly in all directions.  These sparks are the primordial worlds, which could not continue, because the Sacred Aged had not as yet assumed his form . . .’ ” — p. 21 (Idra Suta, Sohar, iii, 292 b.)

— 199-200 —

In Section the VIIth of this Book . . . the Commentary upon Saptaparna
see: Stanza VII, 3: “When the one becomes the two — the ‘three-fold’ appears.  The three are (linked into) one; and it is our thread, O Lanoo, the heart of the man-plant, called Saptaparna. . . .” — SD 1:231
      “. . . ‘the Man-Plant,’ Saptaparna, thus refers to the seven principles, and man is compared to the seven-leaved plant of this name so sacred among Buddhists.” — SD 1:236

— 200 —

See also the Section of that name in Part II.
see: “Saptaparna,” SD 2:590-8.
The Archetypal World . . . Creative World . . . Formative World . . . Material World
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “[Diagram] The Four Worlds: The World of Archetypal Form . . . the World of Creation . . . the World of Formation . . . the Material and Sensuous World” — Plate VI (facing page 35)

— 201 —

Something “caused the Universe to move with circular motion”
p/q: Proclus, The Commentaries of Proclus on the Timaeus of Plato, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1820: “The universe . . . is moved with a circular motion . . . ‘Hence by a circumduction . . . [the Demiurgus] caused it to be moved convolving in a circle.’ ” — 1:465-6

— Footnotes

Mrs. Elizabeth Denton . . . This is what she described in one of her experiments
see: William Denton, The Soul of Things, 1874: “. . . Where are all these things that the psychometer sees?  The following, unexpectedly seen by Mrs. Denton, may shed some light upon the question.” — 3:345
“What a difference between that which we recognize as matter here . . .”
p/q: William Denton, The Soul of Things, 1874: “ ‘What a difference between that which we recognize as matter here and that which seems like matter there!  In the one, the elements are so coarse and so angular, I wonder that we can endure it all, much more that we can desire to continue our present relations to it: in the other, all the elements are so refined, they are so free from those great, rough angularities which characterize the elements here, that I can but regard that as by so much more than this the real existence.’ ” — 3:346

— 202 —

Northern Mythology refers to it as the battle of the Flames, the sons of Muspel . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “The idea of the destructive power of fire was equally connected with the giant Muspel . . . His sons, the flames . . . finally mustered in great force for the Last Battle on the field of Wigrid.” — p. 56
Hence the incessant fight of Indra . . . with the Asuras . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “INDRA.  The god of the firmament . . . he is continually at war with Vṛitra or Ahi, the demon of drought and inclement weather . . .”  “He is frequently at war with the Asuras, of whom he lives in constant dread . . .” — pp. 123, 124, 125
Hence also the War in Heaven . . . when a third of the stars . . . was hurled down into Space
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And there appeared another wonder in heaven . . . a great red dragon . . . And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth . . . And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.” — p. 329 (Revelation, 12:3, 4, 7, 8)

— 202-3 —

“This is the basic and fundamental stone of the secret cycles. . . .”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “This basic and true fundamental stone [foundation stone] of the secret cycles, shows on its very face, that far from taking their revealed Vedas and Bible literally, the Brahman-pundits, and the Tanaïm — the scientists and the philosophers of the pre-Christian epochs — speculated on the creation and development of the world quite in a Darwinian way, both anticipating him and his school in the natural selection of species, gradual development, and transformation.” — 2:260

— 203 —

“There were old worlds that perished . . .”
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “This important fact that worlds were created and destroyed prior to the present creations is again and again reiterated in the Sohar. . . . ‘There were old worlds . . . which perished as soon as they came into existence . . .’ ”  “ ‘Because the Man, represented by the ten Sephiroth, was not as yet.’ ” — pp. 21, 22
the festival of the “Fires” . . . seven lighted sticks of incense
see: The Dabistan, v. 1, tr. Shea and Troyer, 1843: “. . . they erected the temples of seven planets . . . they burned before them the suitable incense at the appointed season.” — p. 35
      “In front of each temple was a large fire-temple . . . and in these they burnt the proper perfumes.” — p. 47
      “Thus, although there is a festival every day of the week in some idol-temple or other . . . on the day of the Sun . . . there was a solemn festival at which all the people assembled.” — p. 63

— 204 —

many perish, their mass disintegrating . . . within the insatiable stomachs of various Suns
see: Stanza IV, 5c: “Bal-ilu [the Sun] was not satisfied, though his house was the largest. . . . He breathed (drew in) into his stomach the vital airs of his brothers.  He sought to devour them.” — SD 1:100
The seven lokas are also called . . . the “Circles”
see: Monier-Williams, Buddhism, 1889: “Buddhist writers make it [the Universe] consist of an infinite number of . . . vast circular planes, which for convenience may be called spheres. . . . built up in successive tiers through infinite space, below, upon, and above Mount Meru . . . First comes Hell . . . Above the subdivisions of Hell come the other sensuous worlds . . . with concentric circles of seven seas.” — pp. 120-1
Mount Meru . . . is said to have seven gold and seven silver steps
see: Monier-Williams, Buddhism, 1889: “. . . when Buddha was about to return to earth from the god Indra’s heaven, the god reflected that . . . his descent ought to be celebrated ‘with special honours.’  He therefore caused a ladder of gold to extend from the Mountain Meru . . . The steps were alternately of gold, silver, coral, ruby, emerald and other gems. . . . When Buddha commenced his descent all the worlds were illuminated . . .” — p. 417

— 205 —

“Sound is the characteristic of Akâsa (Ether) . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Elementary Egotism {Ahaṃkāra}, then becoming productive, as the rudiment of sound, produced from it Ether {ākāśa}, of which sound is the characteristic . . . Ether {ākāśa}, becoming productive, engendered the rudiment of touch; whence originated strong wind . . . Then wind, becoming productive, produced the rudiment of form (colour); whence light (or fire) proceeded . . .” — 1:34-5 & fns. (i.2)
see Professor Trumholdt’s work on the Aurora Borealis
see: Alexander von Humboldt, Cosmos, 1848:  “Aurora Borealis” — 1:187-96

— 206 —

There are four grades of initiation mentioned in exoteric works . . .
see: Fah-Hian, Travels of Fah-Hian, tr. Samuel Beal, 1869: “The Arhat or Arhan is a saint who has arrived at the fourth gradation of mind in the Buddhist scale of excellence.  These successive steps are: — 1. Srôtâpanna; 2. Sakradâgâmin; 3. Anâgâmin; 4. Arhan.” — p. 19 fn.

— 207 —

This “Root-Base” has a name . . . “the ever-living-human-Banyan”
see: Bhagavad-Gītā, tr. J. Clockburn Thomson, 1855: “I am the soul, O Arjuna! which exists in the heart of all beings . . . Among luminous bodies, I am the beaming sun. . . . [I am] The sacred fig-tree {The Banyan} . . .” — pp. 70-1 & fn. (ch. 10)
      “. . . the eternal sacred fig-tree grows with its roots above and its branches downwards. . . . And their roots, which extend downwards, are the connecting bonds of action in the world of man. . . . And I allude to that primeval spirit only, from which the eternal stream (of life) emanates.” — pp. 97-9 (ch. 15)
the “Sons of Ad”
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926:  “Do you know that the Chaldees were at the apex of their Occult fame before what you term as the ‘bronze Age’?  That the ‘Sons of Ad’ or the children of the Fire Mist preceded by hundreds of centuries the Age of Iron . . .” — p. 153 (K.H., Letter XXIII B, Oct. 1882)

— 208 —

— Footnotes [208-9]

all the rules of proportion are those taught anciently at initiations . . .
see: Marcus Vitruvius Pollio, The Architecture, tr. Joseph Gwilt, 1826: “. . . symmetry and proportion . . . are as necessary to the beauty of a building as to that of a well formed human figure. . . . The navel is naturally placed in the centre of the human body, and, if in a man lying with his face upward, and his hands and feet extended, from his navel as the centre, a circle be described, it will touch his fingers and toes. . . . so the ancients have, with great propriety, determined that in all perfect works, each part should be some aliquot part of the whole; and since they direct, that this be observed in all works, it must be most strictly attended to in temples of the gods . . .” — pp. 78-9 (iii.1)
the Disciples of the Initiates . . . handed it over to their Cyclopes, the “Sons of Cycles” . . .
see: The Book of God: The Apocalypse of Adam-Oannes [by E. V. H. Kenealy], 1867: “. . . the French Institute in 1804, found that there were 127 towns, which had anciently been in part at least Cyclopean, that is, reared by the Gnostic priests, or Cyclopes, the sons of the Cycle . . . They possessed powers of machinery to which modern skill is unequal; though modern vanity has excused itself by saying that these were the works of ‘hundred-handed Giants.’  The Druidical circles, cromleachs, cairns, altars . . . are the work of these gigantic engineers.  They used neither mortar nor cement, nor steel, nor iron to cut the stones with; and yet they were so artificially wrought that in many places the joints are hardly seen, though many of the stones, as in Peru, are 38 feet long, 18 feet broad, and 6 feet thick, and in the wall of the fortress of Cusco, there are stones of a still greater size. (Acosta, vi. 14)” — p. 118
the walls [well] of Syene, built 5,400 years ago  . . .
see: The Book of God: The Apocalypse of Adam-Oannes [by E. V. H. Kenealy], 1867: “The well of Syene made 5400 years ago, when that spot was exactly under the tropic, which it has now ceased to be . . . was so constructed, that at noon, at the precise moment of the summer solstice, the entire disk of the sun was seen reflected on its surface — a work which the united skill of all the astronomers in Europe, would not now be able to effect.” — p. 118

— 209 —

what was said in Vol. I . . . concerning a certain Sacred Island in Central Asia . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “. . . long before the days of Ad-am . . . there was a vast inland sea, which extended over Middle Asia . . . An island, which for its unparalleled beauty had no rival in the world, was inhabited by the last remnant of the race which preceded ours.” — 1:589

— 210 —

Institutions of Manu in regard to the laws of Grihasta and married life
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Under the law of Manu, the life of a Brāhman was divided into four āśramas or stages:
      1. Brahmachārī. — The student . . .
      2. Grihastha. — The householder; the married man living with this wife as head of a family engaged in the ordinary duties of a Brāhman, reading and teaching the Vedas, sacrificing and assisting to sacrifice, bestowing alms and receiving alms.
      3. Vānaprastha. — The anchorite, or ‘dweller in the woods’ . . .
      4. Sannyāsī. — The religious mendicant . . . — pp. 59-60
“he whose seven forefathers have drunk the juice of the moon-plant (Soma)”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . one who understands the Vedas; one who practices the duties they enjoin {‘He of whom seven forefathers have drunk the juice of the moon-plant is a trisuparṇa’} . . .” — 3:174 & fn. (iii.15)
“The great antique heart”
p/q: Thomas Carlyle, Past and Present, 1845: “The great antique heart: how like a child’s in its simplicity, like a man’s in its earnest solemnity and depth!  Heaven lies over him wheresoever he goes or stands on Earth; making all the Earth a mystic Temple to him, the Earth’s business all a kind of worship.  Glimpses of bright creatures flash in the common sunlight; angels yet hover doing God’s messages among men . . . Wonder, miracle encompass the man; he lives in an element of miracle . . . A great Law of Duty, high as these two Infinitudes, dwarfing all else, annihilating all else . . . It was a Reality, and it is one.  The garment only of it is dead; the essence of it lives through all Time and Eternity!” — p. 157 (ii.15)

— 211 —

“A creature of a more exalted kind . . .”
p/q: Ovid, Metamorphoses, tr. John Dryden, 1828:
“A creature of a more exalted kind
  Was wanting yet, and then was man design’d:
  Conscious of thought, of more capacious breast,
  For empire form’d, and fit to rule the rest.” — p. 46 (Works of The British Poets, v. 32)
the Mundane Tree of the Norse Legend, which cannot wither and die . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “Then the ash Yggdrasil grew up, the tree of the universe, of time and of life.  The boughs stretched out into heaven . . . Its three roots reached down to dark Hel . . . the roots down below are gnawed by the dragon Nidhögg . . . still the ash could not wither until the Last Battle should be fought, where life, time and the world were all to pass away.” — p. 26

— 211-12 —

“The essense of our being, the mystery in us that calls itself ‘I’ . . .”
p/q: Thomas Carlyle, On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History, 1849: “The essence of our being, the mystery in us that calls itself ‘I,’ — ah, what words have we for such things? — is a breath of Heaven; the Highest being reveals himself in man.  This body, these faculties, this life of ours, is it not all as a vesture for that Unnamed?” — p. 9 (“The Hero as Divinity”)

— 212 —

“There is but one temple in the universe . . .”
p/q: Thomas Carlyle, On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History, 1849: “ ‘There is but one temple in the universe,’ says the devout Novalis, ‘and that is the Body of Man. . . .’  This sounds much like a mere flourish of rhetoric; but it is not so.  If well meditated, it will turn out to be a scientific fact . . . We are the miracle of miracles, — the great inscrutable mystery of God.” — p. 9 (“The Hero as Divinity”)

— 213 —

the “four bodies and the three faculties” of Brahmâ
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In this manner, Maitreya, Jyotsnā (dawn), Rātri (night), Ahan (day), and Sandhyā (evening), are the four bodies of Brahmā invested by the three qualities.” — 1:81 (i.5)
the Panchâsyam . . . or the five Dhyani-Buddhas
see: Edward Paske, “Buddhism in the British Provinces of Little Tibet,” May 28, 1878: “The self existent Adi Buddha by five spontaneous acts of divine wisdom (jugān), and by five exertions of mental reflection (dhyān), created the Puncha Dhyani Buddha[s].” — p. 201 (Journal of the Anthropological Institute, v. 8)
taught by both the Shinto and the Buddhist sects . . . Anthropogenesis precedes Cosmogenesis
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Anthropogenesis precedes cosmogenesis, and the purely evolutionary names of the divine personages (or impersonations) that are mentioned in this account of a creation, or evolution, are chiefly of a purely phonetic value . . .” — p. 147 (The Theosophist, v. 10)

— 214 —

When all was as yet Chaos (Kon-ton) three spiritual Beings appeared . . .
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Three spiritual divinities appear: the first mentioned is Ameno-mi-naka-nushi-no-kami, Divine Monarch of the central heaven, when all was as yet chaos (Kon-ton): the second is Taka-mi-musubi-no-kami, Exalted Imperial Divine offspring of heaven and earth . . . and the third is Kamu-mi-musubi no-kami, offspring of the gods . . .” — pp. 147-8 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
These were without form or substance . . .
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “These three were without form and invisible, and as yet neither the celestial nor terrestrial matter had collected together, nor had the essence of things been formed.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)

— 214-15 —

“Senior occultatus est et absconditus . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “ ‘Senior occultatus est et absconditus: Microprosopus manifestus est, et non manifestus’ [The Ancient One is hidden and concealed: Microprosopus is manifested, and not manifested].” — p. 32 fn. (The Sohar, Liber Mysterii, iv. 1; Rosenroth)

— 215 —

the “Six-pointed Star” . . . the symbol . . . of Vishnu in India (the Chakra, or wheel)
see: Krishnashankar Lalshankar, “The Six-Pointed and Five-Pointed Stars,” Nov. 1881: “. . . the ‘double triangle’ . . . the ‘sign of Vishnu’ in India — is made to represent the universal spirit and matter . . .”  “. . . the ‘double triangle’ which is known . . . in India as Shaktôn Chakram . . . represents symbolically the macrocosm . . .” — p. 30 (The Theosophist, v. 3)
the Tetragrammaton
see: Laurence Oliphant, Scientific Religion, 1888: “. . . the tetragrammaton consists of the four letters which compose the name of Jehovah, IHVH — or Yod (masculine), He (feminine), Vau (masculine), He (feminine). . . . They signify kabbalistically, Yod, the Father; He, the Mother; Vau, the Son; and He, the Bride . . . of the Son . . .” — p. 299
the “He of the four letters”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . that it may restore the spirit of Yod He [Father-Mother] . . . his mother [the first He] contributed . . . the brilliancy . . . He (the first He of the Tetragrammaton) . . .” — p. 107 (Book of Concealed Mystery, v.42)

— Footnotes [215-16]

Rabbi Simeon says . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “The Hebrew Sohar was written by or composed from the writings of Simeon ben Iochai who lived in the second century before Christ.” — p. 89
“Oh companions, companions, man as an emanation was both man and woman . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “ ‘O companions, companions (says the Rabbi), man, as (God’s) emanation, was both man and woman; as well on the side of the FATHER as on the side of the MOTHER.  And this is the sense of the words: And Elohim spoke, Let there be Light and it was Light!  That is, it becomes Light on the side of the FATHER, and it was Light on the side of the MOTHER.  And this is the ‘two-fold Man.’ ” — p. 72 (Auszüge aus dem Sohar)”

— 216-17 —

In the cosmogony of Japan . . . an egg-like nucleus appears . . .
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “From out of the chaotic mass an egg-like nucleus appeared . . . The male aetherial principle (Yo) ascended, and the female grosser principle (In) precipitated, and a separation occurred between the celestial and terrestrial . . .” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)

— 217 —

“From this the female, the mother, the first rudimentary objective being is born. . . .”
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “From the terrestrial sediment there germinated these two Divines . . . offspring of the heaven . . . The foregoing were invisible, and without sex.  Then between the celestial sphere and the terrestrial plain creation began, and the undermentioned seven divine spirits appeared.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
The “Invisible Celibate” . . . “The Spirit (or the God) of the rayless depths”
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Kuni-no-tako-tachi, to whom is attached the invisible celibate, Kuni-sa-tsuchi-no-mikoto, god of the rayless depths.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
“The Spirit of the Vegetable Kingdom,” of the “Abundant Vegetation”
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “To-yo-ku . . . the spirit of abundant vegetation.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
“The Spirit of the Earth” and “the Spirit of the Sands” . . .
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Uhi-chi-ni-no-kami, spirit of the ground, which like the foregoing were embodiments of the male principle; also included Sa-hi-chi-ni-no-kami, spirit of the sands, that contained the (In) female principle.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
These two were one; yet unconscious of being two . . .
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “The sexes were now to be divided, but as yet unconscious, Tsu-no-gai-no-kami being the male, dark complexioned and muscular, and Iku-gai-no-kami the female, fair and effeminate.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
(5th and 6th.) Spirits who were androgynous or dual-sexed
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “The 5th and 6th were dual of sex.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
The Seventh Spirit . . . appears as the first divine human form distinctly male and female.
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “The 7th then appeared in the first divinely human form of a male and a female.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
These . . . descended into the Universe by the celestial Bridge . . . perceiving far below a chaotic mass . . .
p/q: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Isanagi, the male, and Isamai, the female, then appeared together upon the celestial bridge (the milky way).  Isanagi perceiving far beneath a chaotic mass of cloud and water, thrust into the depths the jewel-spear he held poised.  Dry land appearing, the two divine beings descended thereon, separating to explore the newly created island world, called Ono-koro.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)

— 218 —

(Atomic Forms) . . . the “Imperishable Jivas”
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Before evolution set in, Nature (prakriti) was without form and unknowable.  It may however be said to have been atomic.  Its attributes were in a latent condition (Sukshumavasthā).”  “It is pure . . . atomic . . . immutable . . . Every particle of Prakriti contains Jiva . . . Parabrahm pervades every Jiva . . .”  “All gross bodies perish, the only real things are the sukshma particles which are uncreated and indestructible . . .” — §§ 91, 93, 114

— Footnotes [218-19]

the Asuras born in Brahmâ’s first body — which turned into “Night” . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the demons (the Asuras) were first born, issuing from his thigh.  Brahmā then abandoned that form which was composed of the rudiment of darkness, and which, being deserted by him, became night. . . . thence from his mouth proceeded the gods, endowed with the quality of goodness.  The form abandoned by him became day . . . He next adopted another person, in which the rudiment of goodness also prevailed; and, thinking of himself as the father of the world, the progenitors (the Pitṛis) were born from his side.” — 1:80-1 (i.5)

— 219 —

Sevekh “or seventh” . . . type of intelligence . . . a dragon . . .
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Seven Souls of Man, 1887: “The crocodile, whose Egyptian name is Sevekh, or seventh, was a type of intelligence, as the seventh soul . . .” — p. 25
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “Sevekh signifies the number seven . . . the crocodile type; he attained the dignity of the first god as Sevekh-Kronus, the dragon.  In the Kaffir dialects the crocodile and a soul are synonymous, as they were in Sevekh on account of his superior intelligence.” — 2:387 fn.
god with a crocodile’s head
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Le crocodile personnifie les feux redoutables du soleil . . . Lorsque le soleil se lève sur la terre, c’est l’arrivée parmi les hommes de l’âme qui anime les dieux [The crocodile personifies the awe-inspiring fires of the sun . . . When the sun rises over the earth, it is the arrival among men of the soul that animates the gods].” — p. 273 fn. (lxxxviii.1)
“I am the god (crocodile) . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis le crocodile présidant à crainte.  Je suis le dieu-crocodile à l’arrivée de son âme parmi les hommes.  Je suis le dieu-crocodile amené pour la destruction [I am the (god) crocodile presiding over fear.  I am the god-crocodile at the arrival of his Soul among men.  I am the god-crocodile brought along for destruction].” — p. 273 (lxxxviii.1)

— 220 —

“I am the fish . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882:  “Je suis le poisson du grand Horus de Kem-our.  Je suis enveloppé dans Sekhem [I am the fish of the great Horus in Kem-ur.  I am enveloped in Sekhem].” — p. 273 (lxxxviii.2)
entering into Sekhem with Horus-Thot and “emerging from it as pure spirit”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Horus fait que son œil éclaire la terre; mon nom est son nom.”  “J’entre dans Sekhem et j’en sors en pur esprit [Horus makes his eye bring light to the earth; my name is his name. . . . I enter into Sekhem and emerge from it as pure spirit].” — pp. 198, 200 (lxiv.22, 29)
“I see the forms of . . . men transforming eternally . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . je vois les formes des hommes éternellement.  Celui qui sait ce chapitre . . . prend toutes les formes des vivants [I see the forms of men eternally.  He who knows this chapter . . . takes all the forms of the living] . . .” — p. 200 (lxiv.30)
“Oh my heart, my ancestral heart . . .”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Mon cœur de ma mère!  Mon cœur nécessaire pour mes transformations!  Ne te dresse pas contre moi . . . et ne te sépare pas de moi devant le gardien de la balance [Oh my ‘mother-heart’ (my ‘ancestral heart’)!  My heart that is necessary for my transformations!  Do not rise against me . . . and do not part with me before the Keeper of the scales].” — p. 201 (lxiv.34-5)
“Thou art my personality within my breast . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Tu es ma personnalité dans ma poitrine, compagnon divin sauvegardant mes chairs [You are my personality within my breast, divine companion watching over my bodies of flesh].” — p. 201 (lxiv.35)
Massey shows that the crocodile was “the Seventh Soul . . . the Seer unseen.”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Seven Souls of Man and their Culmination in Christ, 1887: “Seven zootypes having been adopted . . . to express the seven elements or souls in man.  The Shrew mouse was an Egyptian type of the first formation . . . the hawk, of the second soul . . . the monkey . . . the jackal . . . the serpent . . . the frog (or beetle), of the transformation into an intellect; and the crocodile, Sevekh, which is the number seven, into the Seer unseen, the soul as supreme one of the seven souls.” — p. 23

— 220-1 —

Thus the defunct “Osirified”
see: William Palmer, Egyptian Chronicles, 1861: “So each ancestor in turn went . . . to the original Osiris as patriarch of the dead, and to his intermediate ‘Osirified’ fathers, and was himself Osirified like them; all making one collective Osiris, waiting for that reunion and restoration which was to come . . .” — 1:3

— 221 —

the defunct . . . became the god Khem, who “gleans the field of Aanroo”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Khem.  Le défunt moissone le champ Aanrou en qualité de dieux K. [Khem.  The deceased gleans the field of Aanroo as the god Khem] . . .” — p. 617 (“Index Analytique”)

— 222 —

the one, like a thread through many beads . . . a life-thread, Sutratma . . .
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — II,” March 1887: “Birth after birth a new physical body comes into existence, and perishes when earthly life is over. . . . But karana sarira . . . is capable of existing independently of the astral body.  Its plane of existence is called Sutratma, because, like so many beads strung on a thread, successive personalities are strung on this karana sarira . . .” — p. 361 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— Footnotes

Paracelsus calls them Flagae . . .
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘There is an incalculable number of such genii in the universe, and we may learn through them all the mysteries of the Chaos in consequence of their connection with the Mysterium magnum.  Such familiar spirits are called Flagae.’ ” — p. 96

— 223 —

— Footnotes

one infinitesimal cell . . . determining . . . the correct image of the future man
see: August Weismann, Studies in the Theory of Descent, tr. Raphael Meldola, 1882: “The power of organisms to transmit their properties to their offspring appears to me to be only conceivable in such a manner ‘that the germ of the organism by its chemico-physical composition together with its molecular structure, has communicated to it a fixed direction of development — the same direction of development as that originally possessed by the parental organism.’ ” — 2:667
it is to this cell that he traces the immortal portion of man
p/q: “The Morphological Causes of Heredity,” Scientific American Supplement, Feb. 26, 1887: “. . . what enables this cell to transmit through hundreds of generations of the vegetable and animal kingdom all the characteristic peculiarities of structure and form? . . . Professor Weismann calls this substance ‘germ-plasm’ (Keimplasma) . . . The germ-plasm thus constitutes the immortal part of our organism.” — p. 9295

— 224 —

“The Blessed Ones have nought to do with the purgations of matter.”
see: Pistis Sophia, tr. G. R. S. Mead, 1896: “Now the light-emanations have no need of any mystery, for they are pure; but the human race hath need of purification, for all men are purgations of matter.” — pp. 248-9 (ii.249)

— 225 —

The first Dhyanis . . . could only throw off their shadows
see: “Creation of the First Races”: “[The Creators] threw off their ‘shadows’ or astral bodies . . . the newly-created men, ‘were the shadows of the Shadows.’ ” — SD 2:86
the “Lord God breathed into his nostrils . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” — p. 3 (Genesis, 2:7)
living Soul — or Nephesch  . . . not the Divine Spirit
see: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “According to the Hebrew sacred Scriptures, the soul is the self, as opposed to and distinguished from the spirit . . . Hence the soul and the self are expressed in Hebrew by one and the same word — Nephesh.” — pp. 188-9

— 226 —

“The wind bloweth where it listeth,” instead of “the Spirit goeth where it willeth”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth . . .” — p. 123 (John, 3:8)
see: A Popular Commentary on The New Testament, ed. Philip Schaff, 1880: “. . . the word pneuma is used with much more latitude in the Greek Bible . . . many take the first part of the verse as having reference to the Spirit, not the wind: ‘The Spirit breatheth where He will, and thou hearest His voice, but knowest not whence He cometh and whither He goeth; so is every one that hath been born of the Spirit.’ ” — 2:33 (The Gospel of John and The Acts)

— Footnotes

Nephesh chaiah (living soul), according to the Hebrews . . .
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “The living soul they designated Nephesh chaiah.  This Nephesh chaiah . . . proceeded from, or was produced by, the infusion of the spirit, or breath of life, into the quickening body of man, and was to supersede and take the place of the spirit in the thus constituted self — so that the spirit passed into, was lost sight of and disappeared in, the living soul.” — p. 190
The human body ought to be viewed as a matrix . . .
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “. . . would not the human have been viewed as a matrix in which the creative work was still going on?  Would it not have been held that his life, rightly used, was the process by which the living soul is ultimately produced from the animated body of man?” — p. 192
the author identifies “Spirit” . . . simply with the “breath of life”
see: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “. . . the Hebrews had associated the spirit with the wind by giving both the same designation, Ruach, and even identified them as the breath of life . . .” — pp. 190-1
with the ancient Hebrews, Greeks and even Latins, Ruach, Pneuma and Spiritus . . .
see: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “. . . the Greeks severed this association, calling the spirit Pneuma and the wind Anémos; and this dissociation was continued by the Latins in their Spiritus and Ventus.” — p. 191

— 227 —

co-eval with, and disappearing with the solar boat
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “(Je suis) maître de renaître une seconde fois . . . à l’ouest du ciel, gouvernail de l’est {Allusion au dieu Af naviguant dans sa barque} . . . et ta sortie à l’Orient [I am able to be born a second time . . . in the western part of Heaven, the East-Rudder {an allusion to the god Af navigating in his (solar) boat} . . . and going out on the Eastern side].” — pp. 193-4 (lxiv.1, 2, 5) & p. 202 {note 2}
This “Soul” emerges from the Tiaou . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . voient par son rayonnement, seigneur de la résurrection sortant des ténèbres [see by his radiance, the Lord of the resurrection coming out of darkness].” — p. 193 (lxiv.2)
      “. . . les vingt-quatre heures passent ensemble en se présentant une à une, jusqu’à la sixième qui se produit dans le Tiaou, heure nocturne [the twenty-four hours pass together coming one by one, until the sixth which arrives in the Tuat, the nightly hour].” — p. 196 (lxiv.12)
The shadow, the astral form, is annihilated, “devoured by the Uraeus”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Cette demeure de l’heure dans Ro sta, flamme brûlante . . . ou ne se réunnissent pas les mânes, car il s’y trouve des uræus pour l’anéantissement de leurs âmes [This dwelling of the hour in Restau, the burning flame . . . in which the shades do not assemble, for there are Uraeus to annihilate their souls].” — p. 518 (cxlix.50-1)
the Soul-bird, “the divine Swallow . . .” will live in the eternity . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis l’hirondelle {Isis} . . . la flamme sort de l’horizon. . . . j’ai anéanti les impuretés que je gardais sur terre.  Gardiens des portes . . . je suis semblable à vous. . . . Je connais les chemins mystérieux conduisant aux portes du champ Aanru [I am the Swallow {Isis} . . . the flame bursts out of the horizon. . . I annihilated the impurities I was holding on to on earth.  Keepers of the Gates . . . I resemble you. . . . I know the mysterious ways leading to the gates of the Field of Aanru].” — pp. 267-8 (lxxxvi.1, 5-7) & p. 269 {note 1}

— Footnotes

Vide in Part II., Book II., “The Seven Souls of Man”
see: “The Seven Souls of the Egyptologists,” SD 2:632-3.
the divisions made respectively by Messrs. Gerald Massey and Franz Lambert
see: Gerald Massey, The Seven Souls of Man and their Culmination in Christ, 1887; and Franz Lambert, “Psychologie de l’Égypte Ancienne,” Le Lotus, v. 2: April, May, & June, 1888.
This “moon-god” “expressed the Seven nature-powers . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Seven Souls of Man and their Culmination in Christ, 1887: “The moon-god, Taht-Esmun . . . expressed the Seven nature-powers that were prior to himself, and were summed up in him as his seven souls, of which he was the manifestor as the Eighth One. . . . The seven rays of the Chaldean god Heptaktis, or Iao, on the Gnostic stones indicate the same septenary of souls.” — p. 2
“The first form of the mystical seven . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Seven Souls of Man and their Culmination in Christ, 1887: “. . . the first form of the mystical seven was seen to be figured in heaven by the seven large stars of the Great Bear, the constellation assigned by the Egyptians to the Mother of Time, and of the seven Elemental Powers.” — p. 2

— 228 —

Plutarch . . . shows the Egyptians celebrating . . . “The Ingress of Osiris into the moon”
p/q: Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, in Latin, Greek, and English, tr. Samuel Squire, 1744: “. . . they call the Apis the living image of Osiris, and suppose him begotten by a ray of generative light, flowing from the Moon . . . they celebrate a festival, which is expressly called by them the entrance of Osiris into the Moon.” — pp. 58-9 (§ 43)
In chapter xli [ii] life is promised after death
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je sors de tes multitudes (de vivants) circulantes.  Je me recommence parmi les mânes {je revis après la mort} [I leave your circulating multitudes of the living.  I begin a new life among the shades of the dead {I live again after death}].” — pp. 13 (ii.2) & p. 14 {note 2}
and the renovation of life is placed under the patronage of Osiris-Lunus . . .
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Ce chapitre . . . promet la vie après la mort et le renouvellement, est mis sous l’invocation d’Osiris-lunus parce que la lune est en relation avec les idées de renouvellement [This chapter . . . promises life after death, and the renewal of life is placed under the invocation of Osiris-Lunus, because of the moon’s relationship with ideas of renewal].” — p. 14 (ii, note 1)
In the Dankmoe . . . “Oh, Osiris-Lunus!  That renews . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . on lit dans les Denkmael (IV, 59): ‘O Osiris-lunus!  Thot te renouvelle le renouvellement’ [in the Denkmael it says: ‘Oh Osiris-Lunus!  Thoth gives to you again the renewal of life’].” — p. 14 (ii, note 1)
“Thou renewest thyself as the god Lunus when a babe.”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “ ‘Tu te renouvelles comme le dieu Lunus en enfant’ (Mariette, Abydos, pl. 51) [‘You renew yourself as the god Lunus when a babe’].” — p. 14 (ii, note 1)
“Couplings and conceptions abound when he . . . is seen in heaven on that day.”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “ ‘Les accouplements et les conceptions abondent lorsqu’il est vu au ciel en ce jour’ (P. Pierret, Etudes égypt.) [‘Couplings and conceptions abound when he is seen in heaven on that day’].” — p. 14 (ii, note 1)
“Oh, sole radiant beam of the moon . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “O unique rayonnant dans la lune! . . . Ouvre-moi le Tiaou, car, Osiris N, je sortirai le jour pour faire ce que je désire sur terre parmi les vivants [Oh, sole radiant beam of the moon!  Open the Tuat to me, for I, Osiris N, shall go forth by day to do what I wish on earth among the living].” — p. 13 (ii.2-3)

— Footnotes

(See “Holy of Holies.”)
see: “The ‘Holy of Holies.’ Its Degradation,” SD 2:459-74.

— 229 —

when the whole world was “of one lip and of one knowledge”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . one is apt to wish for a return of the day when all the world was of one lip and of one knowledge.” — p. 318
see: “Symbolism and Ideographs”: “Mr. Ralston Skinner . . . In his own words: — ‘The writer is quite certain that there was an ancient language which modernly and up to this time appears to have been lost, the vestiges of which, however, abundantly exist.’ ” — SD 1:308

— 230 —

“Elohim is a ‘general abstraction’ . . . ‘a constant co-efficient’ ”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Cabbalah — No. IX,” May 1887: “Under the expression, And God said Let there be Light, we have found the coordination of the abstract enunciation of pi of the schools, in the use of the name Alhim [Elohim] to show the ratio of 31415 to 1 (as technically called, the constant co-efficient) . . .” — p. 195 (Masonic Review, 67:4)
it makes Man emanate . . . from a Septenary group . . . just as in “Pymander . . .”
see: Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “Having all Power, he considered the Operations or Workmanships of the Seven . . . all the operations of the Seven Governors . . .”  “This is the Mystery that to this day is hidden and kept secret; for Nature being mingled with man, brought forth a Wonder most Wonderful; for he having the nature of the Harmony of the Seven . . . Nature continued not, but forthwith brought forth seven Men, all Males and Females . . . according to the Natures of the seven Governors.” — pp. 10, 11 (Bk 2, “Poemander,” §§ 20, 23, 29)

— 231 —

“Chaos ceases, through the effulgence of the Ray of Primordial light . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Chaos . . . a cessé par la rayonnement de la lumière du commencement sur les ténèbres totales, à l’aide de la grande force magique de la parole du dieu solaire, lxxx, 1, 2 [Chaos . . . has ceased through the radiance of the primordial light upon the total darkness, with the help of the great magic power of the Word of the Solar god].” — p. 599 (“Index Analytique”)
the “three-fold being issues as its First-born”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Chief principle then invests that Great principle, Intellect [Mahat]; and it becomes threefold . . .” — 1:29-30 (i.2)
      “Mahat is, therefore, the divine mind in creative operation . . . the first product of the mixture of spirit and matter, and the first rudiment of creation.” — 1:33 fn.
“Osiris-Ptah (or ra) creates his own limbs . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “C’est Ra, créateur de ses membres qui deviennent les dieux de la suite de Ra [This is Rā, the creator of his own limbs, which become the gods in the retinue of Rā].” — p. 54 (xvii.4)

— Footnotes

“They remain over the seventh heaven . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “They remain over the seventh heaven (or spiritual world), for it is they who, according to the kabalists, formed in succession the six material worlds, or rather, attempts at worlds, that preceded our own, which, they say, is the seventh.” — 2:420

— 232 —

“Evolution has reached its acme of physical development . . .”
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “The lowest or most material point, in the cycle thus becomes the inverted apex of physical intelligence . . . At the halfway point of the fourth round here, the polar point of the whole seven-world period is passed.  From this point outwards the spiritual Ego begins its real struggle with body and mind to manifest its transcendental powers.” — pp. 138-9
(See diagram in Stanza VI. Comm. 6)
See SD 1:200.

— Footnotes

“In the Egyptian notions . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “In the Egyptian notions, as well as those of all other faiths founded on philosophy, man was not merely, as with the Christians, a union of soul and body; he was a trinity when spirit was added to it.  Besides, that doctrine made him consist of kha — body; khaba — astral form, or shadow; ka — animal soul or life-principle; ba — the higher soul; and akh — terrestrial intelligence.  They also had a sixth principle named Sah . . . After due purification, during which the soul, separated from its body . . . it was finally absorbed into ‘the Soul of the world.’ ” — 2:367-8
in the Index, one finds . . . “Six principles of man” . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Six, principles of man II 367” — 2:709

— 233 —

every globe . . . under the supervision and guidance of . . . Dhyan-Chohans
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gītā — III,” April 1887: “. . . it was quite possible that it was the Logos that appeared in the shape of the first Dhyan Chohan, or Planetary Spirit, when the evolution of man was recommenced after the last period of inactivity on this planet . . . and after having set the evolutionary current in motion, retired to the spiritual plane . . . and has been watching since over the interests of humanity . . .” — p. 443 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 234 —

the “Ego-Sum,” necessitates self-consciousness
see: Tennemann & Morell, Manual of the History of Philosophy, 1870: “. . . Ego sum Ego [I am I].  This is the self-evident principle of Philosophy and Science in general . . . expressing the necessary form and substance of Self-consciousness.” — p. 424 (Fichte, § 401)

— Footnotes

“They held that, functionally, Spirit and Matter . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “They held that, functionally, spirit and matter of corresponding opacity and density tended to coalesce; and that the resultant created spirits, in the disembodied state, were constituted on a scale in which the differing opacities and transparencies of elemental or uncreated spirit were reproduced.  And that these spirits in the embodied state attracted, appropriated, digested and assimilated elemental spirit and elemental matter whose condition was conformed to their own.” — p. 343
“They therefore taught that there was a wide difference . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “They therefore taught that there was a wide difference in the condition of created spirits; and that in the intimate association between the spirit world and the world of matter, the more opaque spirits in the disembodied state were drawn towards the more dense parts of the material world, and therefore tended towards the centre of the earth, where they found the conditions most suited to their state; while the more transparent spirits passed into the surrounding aura of the planet, the most rarified finding their home in its satellite.” — p. 343

— 235 —

the Zoroastrians regarded their Amshaspends as dual entities . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ceci rentrerait dans la doctrine des férouers ou doublures spirituelles que le zoroastrisme appliquait à tous les êtres, y compris les anges [This would come back again in the doctrine of the ferouers or spiritual doubles, which the Zoroastrians applied to all beings, angels included].” — 2:353
“In these oracles the seven Cosmocratores of the world . . . are double . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Dans des oracles . . . les sept cosmocrateurs du monde . . . sont doubles: les uns appliqués au gouvernement du monde supérieur, les autres appliqués à celui de l’inférieur [In the Oracles . . . the seven cosmocratores of the world . . . are doubles; one (set of seven) applied to the government of the upper world; the other applied to that of the lower world] . . .’ ” — 2:353 (De Mysteriis, ii.3)
Cosmocratores of the world . . . mentioned likewise by St. Paul
see: The Hexaglot Bible, 1901: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers [κοσμοκράτορας] of the darkness of this world . . .” — 6:505 (Ephesians, 6:12)
      “. . . πρὸς τοὺς κοσμοκράτορας τοῦ σκότους τούτου [against the cosmocratores of this present darkness] . . .” — 6:504 (Ephesians, 6:12)
Such is also the opinion of Jamblichus . . .
see: Iamblichus, On The Mysteries, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1821: “. . . the appearances of the Gods and their perpetual attendants . . . accord with their essences, powers, and energies. . . . those of archangels approximate in a greater degree to divine causes; but those of archons, if these powers appear to you to be the cosmocrators, who govern the sublunary element, will be more various . . .” — pp. 85-6 (ii.3)

— Footnotes

(see Book ii. “On the primitive Manus of humanity”)
see: “The Primeval Manus of Humanity,” SD 2:307-15.

— 236 —

Panchasikha . . . is one of the seven Kumâras who go to Sveta-Dvipa . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . in Śweta-dwīpa, the Sanakādikas [Kumāras] went to see Bhagavat or Vishṇu.  Their names are Sanaka, Sananda, Sanātana, Sanatkumāra, Jāta, Vodhu, Panchaśikha, all children of Brahmā . . .” — 2:200 fn.
Sections on “Saptaparna,” “The Septenary in the Vedas,” etc.
see: “The Mysteries of the Hebdomad,” SD 2:590-641.

— Footnotes

The deceased is allotted a piece of land in the field of Aanroo . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Il est divisé en quatorze sections . . . du domaine céleste appelé le champ Aanrou [It is divided into 14 sections . . . of the Heavenly domain called the field of Aanru].” — p. 507 (cxlix, Vignette)
the deified shades of the dead, glean . . . the corn seven cubits high . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je connais ce champ Aanrou de Ra dont le blé a 7 coudées . . . que moissonnent des mânes [I know this Aanru Field of Ra, the corn of which is 7 cubits high . . . which is reaped by the shades of the dead] . . .” — p. 509 (cxlix.8-9)
This corn is the food on which they live . . . or that will kill them . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “O cette demeure des bras qui enlèvent les mânes pour la destruction . . .”  “J’ouvre la porte de la demeure de la Vérité.  Je m’y nourris des productions du champ Hotep.”  “O dieux de la demeure de l’heure!  Je suis avec vous.  Je vis avec vous [Oh this abode of the arms that take away the shades of the dead for their destruction . . . I open the gate of the abode of Truth.  There I nourish myself with the products from the Field of Hotep . . . Oh Gods of the abode of the hour!  I am with you.  I live with you].” — pp. 515-16, 518-19 (cxlix.38, 48, 52-3)
the deceased is either destroyed therein, or becomes pure spirit for the Eternity
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . je respire dans le domaine de mon père, le Grand.  Il m’a livré l’Amenti radieux où sont détruits les vivants [I breathe in the land of my father, the Great One.  He has taken me to the radiant Amenti, where the living are destroyed].” — p. 121 (xxxii.9)
      “. . . je ne suis pas mort dans l’Amenti, j’y suis pur esprit pour l’éternité [I am not dead in Amenti, there I am a pure spirit for eternity].” — p. 114 (xxx.4)

— 237 —

“I am the three-wicked Flame . . .”
see: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “L’âme est une lumière vêtue; cette lumière est triple [The Soul is a clothed light; this light is triple] . . .” — p. 388
“I enter into the domain of Sekhem . . . region of the Flames who have destroyed their adversaries.”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis avec Horus . . . à Sekhem; je sors et j’entre dans la demeure des flammes, détruisant les adversaires [I am with Horus . . . in Sekhem; I go forth and I enter the abode of the Flames, destroying the adversaries].” — p. 5 (i.7)
(See . . . “Book of the Dead,” and the “Mysteries of Ro-stan [Ro-stau].”)
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis avec Horus ce jour . . . de rendre mystérieux les mystères de Ro-stau [I am with Horus on this day . . . for making mysterious the mysteries of Ro-stau].” — p. 5 (i.6-7)

— 238 —

“Life, like a dome of many-coloured glass . . .”
p/q: Percy Bysshe Shelley, Adonais, 1821:
“The One remains, the many change and pass;
  Heaven’s light forever shines, Earth’s shadow’s fly;
  Life, like a dome of many-coloured glass,
  Stains the white radiance of Eternity,
  Until Death tramples it to fragments.” — p. 28 (lii)

— 239 —

“The Deity . . . manifests itself through the ten Sephiroth . . .”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . the infinite and limitless One, the Ain Soph, is the first Sephira . . . From this first Sephira the other nine emanations are produced.” — p. 44 note (Book of Concealed Mystery, i.4)
“The Deity is like the Sea from which outflows a stream called wisdom . . .”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . (The great sea is wisdom, the fountain of mercy and loving-kindness . . .)” — p. 53 (Book of Concealed Mystery, i. 28)
      “. . . that fountain riseth and floweth forth (that is, understanding emanating from wisdom) . . .” — p. 87 (Annotation 1)
“From the basin, like seven channels, issue the Seven Sephiroth . . .”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “Among them are set apart . . . seven channels . . . {the Sephiroth arranged in the three pillars, or tree of life} . . .” — pp. 103 & 104 note (Book of Concealed Mystery, v.30)
“In the beginning of Time . . .”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “In the beginning the Elohim created the substance of the heavens and the substance of the earth. (The sense is: Six members were created, which are the six numerations of Microprosopus . . .)” — p. 46 (“Siphra Dtzenioutha,” i.16)
“the seventh being Malkuth . . .”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “Therein are His two nostrils like mighty galleries, whence His spirit rushes forth over all.  (The Mantuan Codex adds that this is the seventh conformation, which refers to MLKVTh, Malkuth, or “the kingdom,” the tenth emanation or Sephira of the Deity.)” — p. 46 (Book of Concealed Mystery, i.15)

— 240 —

why Malkuth, called “the inferior Mother” . . . is shown as the Bride . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “It is called . . . Malkuth, the Kingdom, and also the Queen, Matrona, the inferior Mother, the Bride of Microprosopus . . .” — p. 26 (Introduction)
“When Matronitha, the Mother, is separated . . .”
p/q: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “When Matronitha, the mother, is separated, and conjoined with the King face to face in the excellence of the Sabbath, all things become one body.” — p. 337 (Lesser Holy Assembly [“Ha Idra Zuta Qadisha”], xxii.746)
what is said in Luke xviii. 12
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “I fast twice in the week . . .” — p. 107 (Luke, 18:12)
(See Greek text where the week is called Sabbath.  “I fast twice in the Sabbath.”)
p/q: The Hexaglot Bible, 1901: “Νηστεύω δὶς τοῦ σαββάτου [I fast twice in the Sabbath] . . .” — 5:464 (Λουκᾶν, 18:12)
“and their happiness will be eternal, for they . . . will enjoy an eternal Sabbath.”
p/q: Alexander Cruden, A Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “Sabbath is also taken for the eternal rest and felicity in heaven . . . for they will ever be with the Lord, and will enjoy an eternal Sabbath [σαββατισμὸς] Heb. 4.9.” — p. 500
see: The Hexaglot Bible, 1901: “. . . a promise being left us of entering into his rest . . . For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said . . . they shall enter into my rest. . . . There remaineth therefore a rest [σαββατισμὸς] to the people of God.” — 6:651, 653 (Hebrews, 4:1, 3, 5, 9) & 652 [4:9, Greek text]

— 241 —

upon the six depend all things which are in it . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . Bera Shith, ‘He created the six.’  Upon these depend all things which are below (principally the Queen, who is the lowest path, or the bride of Microprosopus . . .).” — pp. 46-7 (Book of Concealed Mystery, i.16)
The “smaller face” . . . “is formed of six Sephiroth”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . so is Microprosopus composed of six of the Sephiroth.” — p. 47 note (Book of Concealed Mystery, i.16)
“Seven kings come and die in the thrice destroyed world . . .”
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . the kingdom of the restored world was formed from the kingdom of the [thrice] destroyed world, wherein seven kings had died and their possessions had been broken up.” — p. 48 (Book of Concealed Mystery, i.19)
Captain C. Pfoundes . . . “The Shinto idea of creation”
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke [Captain C. Pfoundes], “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “. . . the Shin-to, or Divine Way, of old Japan. . . . The basis is the recognition of the divine origin of humanity . . .” — p. 146 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
“Out of chaos (Konton) the earth (in) was the sediment precipitated . . .”
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Three spiritual divinities appear: the first . . . when all was as yet chaos (Kon-ton) . . . From out of the chaotic mass an egg-like nucleus appeared . . . The male aetherial principle (Yo) ascended, and the female grosser principle (In) precipitated, and a separation occurred between the celestial and terrestrial.  From the terrestrial sediment there germinated these two Divines . . .” — pp. 147-8 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
“The first man was called Kuni-to ko tatchi-no-mikoto . . .”
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Then between the celestial sphere and the terrestrial plain creation began, and the undermentioned seven divine spirits appeared.  1st.— Kuni-no-soko-tatchi-no-mikoto (or kami).  2nd.— Kuni-no-tako-tatchi, to whom is attached the invisible celibate . . . god of the rayless depths.  3rd.— To-yo-ku  (or mu) no-kami, the spirit of abundant vegetation.  4th. — Uhi-chi-ni-no-kami, spirit of the ground, which like the foregoing were embodiments of the male principle; also included Sa-hi-chi-ni-no-kami, spirit of the sands, that contained the (In) female principle. . . . The 5th and 6th were dual of sex.  The 7th then appeared in the first divinely human form of a male and a female.” — p. 148 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
“Isanagi and Isanami begat Tenshoko . . . the first of the five gods of the Earth.”
see: Omoie Tetszunotszuke, “The Cultus of the Far East,” Dec. 1888: “Isanagi, the male, and Isanami, the female, then appeared together upon the celestial bridge (the milky way). . . . Isanami conceived, and the first born was a deformed male (though some accounts say that Tensho-ko, a female, was the first-born).”  “Isanagi wished to dispel the constant and thick fogs in which the land was frequently enveloped, so by the power of his lungs he created Shina-tobe-no-kami (the spirit of the sea shore).  Isanagi cut Kaku-isuchi into three portions . . . the upper portion becoming Ika-isuchi-no-kami (the thunder drummer); the center portion became Oyama-tsumi-no-kami, the god of abundance of spring water; and the lower portion became Taka-wo-kami, the spirit of the Tempests.” — pp. 148-9, 150 (The Theosophist, v. 10)
the number seven “the key to the Mosaic creation and the symbols of every religion”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Le septénaire est le grand nombre biblique.  Il est la clef de la création de Moïse et le symbole de toute la religion [The septenary is the great biblical number.  It is the key to the Mosaic creation and the symbol of every religion].” — p. 33
the diagram he gives in his “Clef des Grands Mystères” is septenary
see: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Supplément: ‘Une Prophétie et Diverses Pensées de Paracelse [Supplement: ‘A Prophecy and Various Thoughts of Paracelsus’].” — p. 389 (Diagram)

— 242 —

the diagram (Plate VII. In Mr. Mathers’ Kabala) . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “Plate Showing the Formation of the Soul, etc. (From “Clef des Mystéres” by Eliphas Lévi Zahed.)” — Plate VII (facing p. 37)

— 243 —

Kabalistic and Occult Pneumatics.  (See “Histoire de la Magie” [La Clef des Grands Mystères] . . .”)
see: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Résumé de La Pneumatique Kabbalistique” [Summary of Kabbalistic Pneumatics], and “Pneumatique Occulte” [Occult Pneumatics], pp. 388-9.
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887, Plate VII (facing p. 37).
1. The Soul (or ego) is a clothed light . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “L’âme est une lumière vêtue; cette lumière est triple [The soul is a clothed light; this light is triple] . . .” — p. 388
2. Neschamah — “pure Spirit.”  3. Ruach — the Soul or Spirit.  4. Nephesch — plastic mediator.
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Neschamah, — l’esprit pur [Neshamah — pure spirit]; Ruach, — l’âme ou l’esprit [Ruach — the soul or spirit]; Nephesch, — le médiateur plastique [Nephesh — the plastic mediator].” — p. 388
5. The garment of the Soul is the rind (body) of the image . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Le vêtement de l’âme, c’est l’écorce de l’image [The garment of the soul is the rind of the image].” — p. 389
6. The image is double, because it reflects the good as [well as] the bad
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “L’image est double parce qu’elle reflète le bon et le mauvais ange [The image is double, because it reflects the good as well as the bad angel].” — p. 389
7. Imago, body
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: [See “Image” in diagram] “Imago — Imago” — p. 389
1. Nephesh is immortal because it renews its life by the destruction of forms.
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Nephesch est immortelle en se renouvelant par la destruction des formes [Nephesh is immortal, renewing itself by the destruction of forms].” — p. 389

— 244 —

2. Ruach progresses by the evolution of ideas . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Ruach est progressif par l’évolution des idées [Ruach is progressive through the evolution of ideas] . . .” — p. 389
3. Neschamah is progressive without oblivion and destruction.
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Neschamah est progressif sans oubli et sans destruction [Neshamah is progressive without oblivion and without destruction].” — p. 389
4. The soul has three dwellings.
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Il y a trois séjours pour les âmes [There are three dwellings for the souls] . . .” — p. 389
5. . . . the plane of the mortals . . . the Superior Eden; and the Inferior Eden.
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Le foyer des vivants, L’Eden supérieur, Et l’Eden inférieur [The home of the living, the superior Eden, and the inferior Eden].” — p. 389
6. The image (man) is a sphinx that offers the riddle of birth.
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “L’image est un sphinx qui pose l’énigme de la naissance [The image is a sphinx that poses the riddle of birth].” — p. 389

— 244-5 —

7. The fatal image (the astral) endows Nephesch with its aptitudes . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “L’image fatale doue Nephesch de ses aptitudes; mais Ruach peut lui substituer l’image conquise d’après les inspirations de Neschamah [The fatal image endows Nephesh with its aptitudes; but Ruach is able to substitute this with the image acquired in accordance with the inspirations of Neshamah].” — p. 390

— 245 —

The body is the mould of Nephesch . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Le corps est le moule de Nephesch, Nephesch le moule de Ruach, Ruach le moule de vêtement de Neschamah [The body is the mould of Nephesh, Nephesh the mould of Ruach, Ruach the mould of the garments of Neshamah].” — p. 390
Light (the Soul) personifies . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “La lumière se personnifie en se revêtant, et la personalité n’est stable que quand le vêtement est parfait [Light personifies and clothes itself, and personality endures only when the garment is perfect].” — p. 390
The angels aspire to become men . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “Les anges aspirent à se faire hommes; un homme parfait, un homme-dieu, est au-dessus de tous les anges [The angels aspire to become men; a perfect man, a man-god is above all the angels].” — p. 390
Every 14,000 years the soul rejuvenates . . .
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Clef des Grands Mystères, 1861: “. . . tous les quatorze mille ans, l’âme se retrempe et se repose dans le sommeil jubilaire de l’oubi [every 14,000 years the soul rejuvenates and rests in the jubilean sleep of oblivion].” — p. 391

— 246 —

The Monad . . . shot down by the law of Evolution into the lowest form of matter . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Thus the monad was shot down into the first form of matter and became encased in stone; then, in course of time, through the combined efforts of living fire and living water, both of which shone their reflection upon the stone, the monad crept out of its prison to sunlight as a lichen.” — 1:302

— Footnotes

“There were old worlds, which perished as soon as they came into existence . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “ ‘There were old worlds, which perished as soon as they came into existence: were formless, as they were called sparks.  Thus the smith, when hammering the iron, lets the sparks fly in all directions.  These sparks are the primordial worlds which could not continue, because the Sacred Aged had not as yet assumed his form (of opposite sexes — the king and queen), and the Master was not yet at his work.’ ” — 2:408 (Idra Suta, Zohar, iii. 292b)
      [Also quoted in Isis Unveiled, 2:421]

— 247 —

In the Sankhya philosophy, Purusha (spirit) is . . . impotent
see: Monier Williams, Hinduism, 1880: “In the Sānkhya . . . we have a synthetical system starting from an . . . ‘eternally existing essence,’ called Prakṛiti [Primary Substance] . . .”  “. . . the Sānkhya counts up . . . [to] Purusha, the soul [spirit], which is wholly in its own nature destitute of Guṇas [qualities], though liable to be bound by the Guṇas of Prakṛiti.” — pp. 194, 195
unless he mounts on the shoulders of Prakriti . . .
see: Monier Williams, Hinduism, 1880: “But each separate soul is a witness of the act of a separate creation without participating in the act.  It is a looker on, uniting itself with unintelligent Prakṛiti, as a lame man mounted on a blind man’s shoulders . . .” — p. 197

— 248 —

Swayambhuva Manu . . . from whom descended the seven primitive Manus . . .
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “There are six other Manus in successive generations sprung from this Manu Svāyaṃbhuva (born of the self-existent); they . . . created their own several offspring. . . . The seven glorious Manus, of whom Svāyaṃbhuva is the first, having produced all this (world) of moving and stationary beings, ruled (it each) in his own period {— antara.  This makes a manvantara}.” — p. 9 & fn. (i.61, 63)
Karabtanos or Fetahil . . . begets on his Mother, “Spiritus,” seven figures . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “. . . Karabtonos who was frantic and without sense and judgment . . . lay with the SPIRITUS.  The SPIRITUS even at one time conceived ‘Seven Figures’ . . . Namely, She bore the Seven Stellars (Planets).  And just so many, even seven, his own appearances (species), went forth fashioned.” — pp. 51-2

— Footnotes

Read in Isis, vol. ii [i] . . . the doctrine of the Codex Nazaræus
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Bahak-Zivo, the ‘father of genii, is ordered to “construct creatures.” ’  But, as he is ‘ignorant of Orcus,’ he fails to do so and calls in Fetahil [Ptahil] a still purer spirit to his aid, who fails still worse.”  — 1:299

— 249 —

“The very Atoms,” says Tyndall, “seem instinct with a desire for life”
p/q: John Tyndall, Address Delivered Before the British Association, 1874: “Everywhere throughout our planet we notice this tendency of the ultimate particles of matter to run into symmetric forms.  The very molecules seem instinct with a desire for union and growth.” — p. 82

— Footnotes

Pasteur . . . would say that the Organic cells are endowed with a vital potency . . .
p/q: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “. . . je dirais que les cellules ont un potentiel de vie qui ne s’éteint pas avec la suppression du gaz oxygène ni avec la vie proprement dite due à l’influence de ce gaz [I would say that cells have a vital potential that does not stop with the cessation of the supply of oxygen gas, nor with life which is strictly speaking due to the influence of that gas] . . .” — p. 62 fn.
“I would add . . . that the evolution of the germ is accomplished . . .”
p/q: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “. . . je dirais que la puissance d’évolution du germe se poursuit dans le nouveau déterminisme des phénomènes et naturellement avec des résultats particuliers, au nombre desquels se rencontrent des actes de fermentation [I would say that the force of evolution of the germ continues causing new phenomena and of course with particular results, among which fermentation].” — p. 62 fn.
life, according to Claude Bernard and Pasteur, is . . . a process of fermentation
see: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “. . . pour Claude Bernard, la vie se compose de synthèses organiques et de destructions organiques, et que toutes les actions de décomposition organique se ramènent à des fermentations [for Claude Bernard, life consists of organic syntheses and organic destructions, and that all actions of organic decomposition can be reduced to fermentation].” — p. 47
lower lives, such as Vibriones . . . could exist without air
see: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “Ce vibrion vit, se nourrit, se multiplie, s’engendre en dehors de toute participation du gaz oxygène libre . . . Le contact de l’air le tue [This vibrion lives, feeds itself, multiplies, reproduces itself without any free oxygen gas . . . Contact with air kills it].” — p. 139
They derived the oxygen . . . from the various substances that surround them
see: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “Il existe une autre classe d’êtres pouvant vivre, se nourrir en dehors de toute participation du gaz oxygène libre, par conséquent en empruntant forcément tout l’oxygène de leurs principes immédiats à des combinaisons, notamment à la matière fermentescible qui est toujours oxygénée: dans ces conditions, ces êtres sont ferments [There exists another class of beings that is able to live, and to feed itself without any free oxygen gas; and that therefore necessarily takes all the oxygen from the chemicals directly present in their compounds, in particular in fermentable matter which is always oxygenated: under these conditions these beings are ferments].” — pp. 131-2
He calls them Ærobes . . . and Anærobes . . .
see: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “. . . en 1861 j’ai opposé, pour la première fois, l’existence et les propriétés de deux sortes d’êtres en les désignant par l’expression d’aérobies et d‘anaérobies . . . Il existe des êtres qui ne peuvent vivre, qui ne peuvent se nourrir sans assimiler de l’oxygène libre; ce sont les aérobies: ils ne sont pas ferments [in 1861 I contrasted for the first time the existence and the properties of two kinds of beings, by referring to them by the expression aerobes and anaerobes . . . There exist beings who cannot live, who cannot feed themselves without absorbing free oxygen; these are the aerobes: they are not ferments].” — p. 131
Certain germ cells, such as those of yeast, develop and multiply in air . . .
see: Louis Pasteur, Examen Critique . . . sur La Fermentation, 1879: “La vie de la levûre, quand elle est privée d’oxygène libre, est pénible, et lente est son action comme ferment.  Si l’oxygène est présent, même en faible quantité, les cellules s’entretiennent dans un état de jeunesse et d’activité remarquable [The life of yeast is difficult when it is lacking oxygen, and its action is sluggish like a ferment.  If oxygen is present, even in low quantity, the cells endure in a youthful condition and with remarkable activity] . . .” — p. 101

— 250 —

Nature is the “Ever-becoming”
see: George Henry Lewes, History of Philosophy, 1880: “. . . this restless, changing flux of things which never are, but are ever becoming; this Heraclitus proclaimed to be God, or the One.” — 1:72

— Footnotes

It is a Vedic teaching that “there are three Earths . . .”
see: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “According to the Vedas there are three earths corresponding to the three heavens, and our earth is called Bhūmi.” — p. 243

— 251 —

several great men of Science . . . use . . . “the fourth dimension of Space”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Occult or Exact Science?” May 1886: “. . . several eminent men of science who, becoming convinced of the actuality of ‘spiritual’ phenomena, so-called, have become spiritualists . . . like Professors Wallace, Hare, Zöllner, Wagner, Butlerof . . .”  “ ‘I would remind my colleagues,’ adds the Professor-Spiritualist [Butlerof], ‘that our inferences . . . must go a great deal further than our sensuous perceptions. . . . what is there to prevent us thinking of a space of higher dimensions . . . [for] phenomena that could only be explained on the supposition of a four-dimensional space.’ ” — pp. 484, 489-90 (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— Footnotes

Professor Zöllner’s theory
see: Collins & Row, “Light on the Path,” Feb. 1886: “And Professor Zollner in his work on Transcendental Psychics enunciates the theory of a fourth dimension of matter, or rather a fourth property of matter enabling it to pass through matter.” — p. 322 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
“The giving reality to abstractions . . .”
p/q: Alexander Bain, Logic, 1870: “The giving reality to Abstractions is the error of Realism and is not as yet fully conquered.  Space and Time are frequently viewed as separated from all the concrete experiences of the mind instead of being generalizations of these in certain aspects.” — 2:389

— 252 —

the “Elements” . . . Fire, Air, Water, Earth
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “Elementum.— The invisible element or basic principle of all substances that may be either in a solid (earthly), liquid (watery), gaseous (airy), or ethereal (fiery) state.  It does not refer to the so-called simple bodies or ‘elements’ in chemistry, but to the invisible basic substance out of which they are formed.” — p. 33
see: “On the Elements and Atoms”: “Plato speaking of the irrational, turbulent Elements ‘composed of fire, air, water, and earth,’ means Elementary Dæmons.” — SD 1:567 fn.

— Footnotes

Milton was right when he spoke of the “Powers of Fire, Air, Water, Earth”
see: John Milton, Poetical Works, 1720:
“And of those Dæmons that are found
  In fire, air, flood, or under ground,
  Whose power hath a true consent
  With Planet, or with Element.” — 2:222 (“Il Penseroso,” 93-6)

— 253 —

“the body of the Holy Ghost” . . . “Baphomet” . . . “Androgyne Goat of Mendes”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic: a Digest of the Writings of Éliphas Lévi, 1886: “The Gnostics made it the burning body of the Holy Ghost, and this it was which was adored in the secret rites of the Sabbath or the Temple under the symbolic figure of Baphomet, or of the Androgyne Goat of Mendes.” — p. 75 (§ IV, “The Great Magic Agent, or the Mysteries of the Astral Light”)

— Footnotes

There is a curious work by Blanchard, on the Origin of Life . . .
see: Émile Blanchard, “L’Origine des Êtres,” in La Vie des Êtres Animés, 1888.
“a force in Nature” . . . the “great Arcanum of transcendent Magic”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “There exists a force in Nature . . . by whose means a single man, who can master it and knows how to direct it, might throw the world into confusion and transform its face. . . . it consists of a universal agent whose supreme law is equilibrium, and whose direction depends immediately on the Great Arcanum of transcendent magic.” — pp. 74-5 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
“This ambient and all-penetrating fluid . . .”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “This ambient and all-penetrating fluid, this ray detached from the sun’s splendour, and fixed by the weight of the atmosphere and by the power of central attraction, this body of the Holy Ghost, which we call the Astral Light and the Universal Agent . . . is represented on ancient monuments by the girdle of Isis, which twines in a love-knot round two poles . . . and by the serpent devouring its own tail, emblem of prudence and of Saturn.” — p. 75 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
“It is the winged dragon of Medea . . .”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “It is the winged dragon of Medea, the double serpent of the caduceus, and the tempter of Genesis; but it is also the brazen snake of Moses, encircling the Tau . . . Lastly, it is the devil of exoteric dogmatism, and is really the blind force which souls must conquer, in order to detach themselves from the chains of earth; for if their will should not free them from its fatal attraction, they will be absorbed in the current by the same power which first produced them, and will return to the central and eternal fire.” — p. 75 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)

— 254 —

“In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth” is a mistranslation
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The Opening Sentence in Genesis . . . in the scroll-reading the letters are not separated, but run together, without point divisions, from which there are two readings to this sentence, as follows:
(1.) B’rāshith bara Elohim eth hāshamayim v’eth h’arets.
(2.) B’rāsh ithbara Elohim eth hāshamayim v’eth h’arets.
Suffering a closer analysis, this narrative form assumes a cosmical interpretation . . . So the sentence reads, ‘In (or out of) his own essence as a womb, God, in the manifestation of two opposites in force, created the two heavens, and the earth’ . . .” — pp. 179-80
not “Heaven and Earth,” but the duplex or dual Heaven . . .
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . not the heavens, as we laxly take it, but ‘the two, or duplex heavens’ . . . the upper, or light, and the lower, or dark . . .” — p. 180
God divided the light from the darkness . . .
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . and God divided the light from the darkness. . . . And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.  And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament . . .” — p. 1 (Genesis, 1:4, 6-7)
“God made the Earth and the Heavens . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth . . .” — p. 2 (Genesis, 2:4-5)
Eliphas Lévi calls it . . . the “Astral Light” . . . the “grand Agent Magique”
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “This ambient and all-penetrating fluid . . . which we call the Astral Light and the Universal Agent . . . is represented on ancient monuments by . . . the serpent devouring its own tail . . . The Great Magic Agent is revealed by four kinds of phenomena . . . caloric, light, electricity, magnetism.” — p. 75 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)

— 255 —

The “Astral Light” . . . “everything which exists has been evolved from it . . .”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “. . . this body of the Holy Ghost, which we call the Astral Light . . . Everything which exists has been evolved from it, and it preserves and reproduces all forms.” — pp. 75-6 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
“The great Magic agent is the fourth emanation . . .”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “The Great Magic Agent is the fourth emanation of the life-principle, of which the sun is the third form . . . for the day-star is only the reflection and material shadow of the sun of truth which illuminates the intellectual world, and which itself is but a gleam borrowed from the Absolute.” — p. 76 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
“it is not the immortal Spirit . . .”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “. . . but it is not the immortal spirit, as the Indian hierophants . . . have imagined.” — p. 77 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
those who . . . translated the term Akâsa by “Ether” (Wilson, for instance) . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘They (the elements) in successive order acquire the property of causality one to the other.’  The order is also the same; or, ether (Ākāśa), wind or air (Vāyu), fire or light (Tejas) . . . Ākāśa has the single property of sound . . .” — 1:35-6 fn. (Wilson)
[those who] have ignorantly imagined it to be “material” . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “A characterization of ākāśa will serve to show how inadequately it is represented by ‘ether’.  In dimension, it is, as has been said, infinite; it is not made up of parts . . . So far forth it corresponds exactly to time, space, Īśwara, and soul.  Its speciality, as compared therewith, consists in its being the material cause of sound.” — 1:34 fn. (Hall)

— 256 —

“In the beginning there was neither day nor night . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There was neither day nor night, nor sky nor earth, nor darkness nor light, nor any other thing, save only One, unapprehensible by intellect, or That which is Brahma and Puṃs (spirit) and Pradhāna . . .” — 1:23 (i.2)
The Commentator describes the Deity as: “One Pradhânika Brahma Spirit . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864: “ ‘One Prādhānika Brahma Spirit: That, was.’  The commentator explains Prādhānika, Pradhāna eva, the same word as Pradhāna; but it is a derivative word, which may be used attributively, implying ‘having, or conjoined with, Prahhāna.’  The commentator, however, interprets it as the substantive . . .” — 1:24 fn.
“Prakriti in its primary state is Akâsa”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Brahmanism on the Sevenfold Principle in Man,” 1885: “I stated that Prakriti in its primary state is Akasa.” — p. 169 (Five Years of Theosophy)
Mahat is the first product of Pradhâna . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then from that equilibrium of the qualities (Pradhāna) . . . proceeds the unequal development of those qualities (constituting the principle Mahat or Intellect) at the time of creation {The first product of Pradhāna . . . the principle called Mahat . . .}.” — 1:29 & fn. (i.2)
Mahat . . . “whose characteristic property is Buddhi”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This primary element is consciousness . . . and is, itself, swallowed up by Mahat, whose characteristic property is intelligence {Buddhi}.” — 5(I):198 & fn. (vi.4)
Mahat . . . is called “Eswara” . . . “Creator” . . . “the cause of all things”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Mahat is also called Īśwara, from its exercising supremacy over all things; Bhāva, from its elementary existence; Eka, or ‘the one,’ from its singleness . . . as the Vāyu adds . . . ‘Mahat, impelled by the desire to create, causes various creation.’ . . . Mahat is, therefore, the divine mind in creative operation, the νοῦς . . . of Anaxagoras; ‘an ordering and disposing mind, which was the cause of all things.’ ” — 1:32-3 fn.

— Footnotes

the seven Prakritis or “productive productions” are Mahat, Ahamkara, and the five tanmatras
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The seven, or productive productions, are, in pure Sānkhya philosophy, mahat, ahaṃkāra, and the five tanmātras.  See the Sānkhya-kārikā, III., and the commentaries.” — 5(I):199 fn. (vi.4)

— 257 —

“Mahat and matter are the inner and outer boundaries . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . earth and Mahat are the inner and outer boundaries of the universe.  In this manner, — as (in the creation,) were the seven forms of nature (Prakṛiti), reckoned from Mahat to earth, — so, at the (time of elemental) dissolution {Pratyāhāra}, these seven succesively re-enter into each other.  The egg of Brahmā is dissolved in the waters that surround it, with its seven zones {Dwīpa}, seven oceans, seven regions . . .” — 5(I):198-9 & fns. (vi.4)
“In my Father’s house are many mansions”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “In my Father’s house are many mansions . . . I go to prepare a place for you.” — pp. 143-4 (John, 14:2)

— Footnotes

the egg is said to be externally invested by seven envelopes . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “And this egg was externally invested by seven natural envelopes; or by water, air, fire, ether, and Ahaṃkāra . . .” — 1:40 (i.2)
“in this manner were the seven forms of nature (Prakriti) reckoned . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In this manner, — as (in the creation,) were the seven forms of nature (Prakṛiti) reckoned from Mahat to earth . . .” — 5(I):198 (vi.4)
. . . Hegel also.  For him Nature was a perpetual becoming.
p/q: John Steinfort Kedney, Hegel’s Æsthetics, 1885: “. . . everything is in movement, and only to be explained as a process, a perpetual becoming . . .” — p. 124
“God . . . objectivises himself as Nature . . .”
see: G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes, 1832: “Das Wesen schaut nur sich selbst in seinem Fürsichseyn an . . . es ist das Wort, das ausgesprochen den Aussprechenden entäußert und ausgeleert zurückläßt [The absolute Being beholds only itself in its Self existence (in its objective otherness) . . . it is the ‘Word’ (the Logos), which when spoken (by Spirit), empties the speaker of himself, externalizes him].” — p. 577

— 258 —

like must produce like
see: Heinrich Ritter, The History of Ancient Philosophy, v. 3, 1839: “According to Aristotle . . . in natural things it is clear that the power of like produces like . . . for the form must exist antecedently in the mind of the maker before he can realise it by his work.” — p. 145

— 259 —

Astral Light, which Eliphas Lévi calls “the imagination of Nature”
p/q: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “. . . there exists an agent which is natural and divine, material and spiritual, a universal plastic mediator, a common receptacle of the vibrations of motion and the images of forms, a fluid and a force, which may be called in some way the Imagination of Nature.” — pp. 64-5 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)

— Footnotes

“It is through this Force . . .”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, Histoire de la Magie, 1860: “Par cette force tous les appareils nerveux communiquent secrètement ensemble; de là naissent la sympathie et l'antipathie; de là viennent les rêves; par là se produisent les phénomènes de seconde vue et de vision extranaturelle [It is through this force that all the nerve centres secretly communicate with each other; from it sympathy and antipathy are born; from it come dreams; that through it the phenomena of second sight and supernatural vision take place].” — p. 19
“Astral Light, acting under the impulsion of powerful wills . . .”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, Histoire de la Magie, 1860: “La lumière astrale aimante, échauffe, éclaire, magnétise, attire, repousse, vivifie, détruit, coagule, sépare, brise, rassemble toutes choses sous l'impulsion des volontés puissantes [The Astral Light, acting under the impulsion of powerful wills, warms, enlightens, magnetizes, destroys, coagulates, separates, breaks and gathers all things].” — p. 19
“God created it on that day when he said: Fiat Lux . . .”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, Histoire de la Magie, 1860: “Dieu l'a créée au premier jour lorsqu'il a dit le fiat lux!  C’est une force . . . dirigée par les égrégores, c'est-à-dire par les chefs des âmes.  Les chefs des âmes sont les esprits d'énergie et d'action [God created it on the first day when he said fiat lux!  It is a force directed by the Egregores, that is, by the chiefs of the souls.  The chiefs of the souls are the spirits of energy and action].” — p. 19

— 260 —

Eugenius Philalethes . . . assured his readers . . . no one had yet seen the Earth
see: Thomas Vaughan (Eugenius Philalethes), The Magical Writings, 1888: “The foure elements are the objects and, implicitly, the subjects of man, but the earth is invisible. . . . But, on my Soule, it is so, and, which is more, the eye of man never saw the earth . . . not our Magicall Earth.” — p. 84 (Magia Adamica)

— 261 —

ptomaïne (the alkaloid poison generated by decaying matter . . .)
see: L. B. Anderson, “Ptomaines,” Sept. 1886: “Ptomaine . . . A term applied to certain peculiar substances (resembling alkaloids) which are produced during the process of putrefaction. . . . by the putrefaction of albuminous matters a soluble ferment is produced, which is poisonous.” — p. 234 (Gaillard’s Medical Journal, v. 43)

— 262 —

yields a smell as strong as and equal to . . . orange blossoms . . .
see: L. B. Anderson, “Ptomaines,” Sept. 1886: “The liquid under observation was . . . extracted by ether; acicular crystals were produced . . . The addition of acids to them usually changes them, with the production of pleasant odors, like orange flower . . . Allowed to oxidize by contact with the atmospheric air, they emit disagreeable cadaveric or urinous odors.” — p. 235 (Gaillard’s Medical Journal, v. 43)
essence of certain mushrooms . . . nearly identical with the venom of the cobra
see: Charles C. Beach, “Ptomaines,” Aug. 20, 1887: “. . . a large number of experiments made by Gautier . . . show that some of the ptomaines at least are poisonous in a high degree, and the cessation of muscular contractility . . . is vividly suggestive of the action of some of the poisonous mushrooms. . . . According to observations of this same author made upon the venom of serpents, the cobra poison resembles the last-described ptomaine.” — p. 207 (New York Medical Journal, v. 46)

— Footnotes

Arnaud, Gautier, and Villiers, have found . . . the same venomous alkaloid
see: T. Christy, New Commercial Plants and Drugs, 1885: “cuprea bark . . . contains . . . an alkaloid, which has been named Cinchonamine by its discoverer, M. Arnaud. . . . it possesses an action of a toxic nature . . . about six times as strong as that of quinine . . .” — pp. 41-2
see: L. Wolfe, “The Ptomaines,” Jan. 16, 1888: “A ptomaine of cholera was isolated in 1885 by Villiers; it was principally found in the intestines, and in traces in the kidneys . . . Armand Gautier is also one of the prominent investigators on this subject.” — p. 25 (Therapeutic Gazette, v. 12)
the same venomous alkaloid as in that of the toad, the salamander, the cobra
see: Dujardin-Beaumetz, “On Ptomaines and Leucomaines,” Nov. 15, 1888: “This it is that led Gautier to examine the saliva and the venom of serpents.  Already many years before, in 1852, Cloès had indicated the presence of alkaloids in the venom of the toad and the salamander. . . . Gautier then analyzed the venom of the cobra-de-capello, and found two new alkaloids . . . Then Gautier examined the saliva of man, and extracted therefrom certain alkaloids which are toxic to small animals . . .” — p. 726 (Therapeutic Gazette, v. 12)
and the trigonocephalus
see: L. B. Anderson, “Ptomaines,” Sept. 1886: “Snake poison differs from human saliva only in the intensity of its action.  Gautier has extracted from the poison of the trigonocephalus [viper] . . . two distinct alkaloids . . .” — p. 236 (Gaillard’s Medical Journal, v. 43)
alkaloid . . . generated by living men, animals, and plants
see: Dujardin-Beaumetz, “On Ptomaines and Leucomaines,” Nov. 15, 1888: “But Gautier did not stop here . . . Comparing the animal cell to the vegetable cell, he showed that both may produce alkaloids, and just as the vegetable cell of the cinchonas produces quinine and a series of other alkaloids, so our cells fabricate alkaloids . . .” — p. 726 (Therapeutic Gazette, v. 12)
an alkaloid in the fresh meat of an ox . . . Xanthocreatinine
see: Vaughan and Novy, Ptomaines and Leucomaines, 1888: “The finely divided fresh beef-meat . . . is treated with . . . oxalic acid . . .”  “The alcoholic solution . . . gives, on cooling, a deposit of lemon-yellow-colored crystals of xantho-creatinine . . .” — pp. 269, 270
tissues . . . venoms . . . carbonic acid and urea in the functions of life
see: Vaughan and Novy, Ptomaines and Leucomaines, 1888: “chemistry of the leucomaines. . . . Under this name [are] all those basic substances which are formed in animal tissues during normal life . . . Gautier is of the belief that they are being formed continuously and incessantly in the animal tissues, side by side with the formation of urea and carbonic acid . . .” — pp. 225-6
poisons . . . generated by the animal system of living beings . . .
see: Vaughan and Novy, Ptomaines and Leucomaines, 1888: “How do germs induce disease? . . . it was discoverd that they produce, by their growth, chemical poisons, ptomaines, that the absorption of these poisons is followed by the symptoms of the disease, and that each specific, pathogenic microörganism produces its own characteristic poison.  In infectious diseases the chemical poison is really formed within the body, but the active agent, the germ, causing the formation of the poison, is introduced from without.” — p. 13

— 263 —

“Fish, Sin and Moon”
see: George Smith, Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876: “In the first year there appeared . . . an animal endowed with reason, by name Oannes, whose whole body . . . was that of a fish . . . This being . . . gave them [men] an insight into letters and sciences, and arts of every kind. . . . Oannes wrote concerning the generation of mankind . . . ‘There was a time in which there existed nothing but darkness and an abyss of waters, wherein resided most hideous beings . . . The person who presided over them was a woman named Omoroca . . . in Greek Thalassa, the sea; but which might equally be interpreted the moon.’ ” — pp. 39-41
      “In the Babylonian system the moon [Sin] takes precedence of the sun . . .” — p. 59

— Footnotes

the cells of the organs . . . form ferments . . .
see: Louis Pasteur, “New Facts . . . of the Theory of Ferments,” Nov. 29, 1872: “. . . we see in these comparative experiments cells which, at the desire of the operator, become ferments or cease to be so. . . . In the first, the life of the plant on the surface of the liquid continues and is kept up by the atmospheric oxygen; while, in the other case, that life continues and is sustained beyond, and without the influence of oxygen . . .” — p. 255 (Chemical News, 26:679)

— 263-4 —

the mystery . . . underlies the Matsya (fish) Avatar of Vishnu, the Chaldean Oannes . . .
see: The Book of God: The Apocalypse of Adam-Oannes [by E. V. H. Kenealy], 1867: “In a fragment garbled from Berosus by the ecclesiastical historian Eusebius . . . we have some allusion to this Incarnation . . . an Immortal Living Creature . . . whose name was Oannes.  His body was like that of a fish . . . (. . . it really means a man-headed fish like Vishnu in the Matsyāvatāra) . . . he communicated the knowledge of letters, arts, and sciences: he taught men to dwell together in cities: to erect temples: to introduce laws . . . After him, there appeared several other Living Creatures (Messiahs) of the same form.” — pp. 292-3

— 264 —

Joshua “Son of the Fish (Nun)”
see: C. Staniland Wake, Serpent-Worship, 1888: “It is worthy of notice that ‘Nun,’ the name of the father of Joshua, is the Semitic word for fish . . .” — p. 52
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906:
      “And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses . . .” — p. 194 (Numbers, 11:28)
      “. . . Joshua the son of Nun, which standeth before thee . . .” — p. 235 (Deuteronomy, 1:38)
      “Now after the death of Moses . . . the Lord spake unto Joshua the son of Nun . . .” — p. 285 (Joshua, 1:1)
the Holy of Holies in the temple . . . the symbol of the womb
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . the number 10 is the perfect one, and a Jehovah value . . . and by Hebrew Kabbalah, the letter ה, or number 5, is the womb. . . . the total forming the male-female in one, 10, as here the womb of the Garden of Eden, or Paradise.” — p. 198
Holy of Holies . . . symbolized by the King’s chamber . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The holy of holies [in the Temple of Solomon], as a cube of 20 [20 x 20 x 20 cubits], was just 1/8 of the cube of the king’s chamber region in the pyramid, or the full cube of the length of the king’s chamber. . . . The primal one, or cube, was taken as containing all material and all life within itself.  It was male-female . . . they are to be used together . . . The king’s chamber region is the great cube of this union . . .” — p. 169
we refer the reader to Book II., “The Holy of Holies”
see: “The ‘Holy of Holies.’ Its Degradation,” SD 2:459-74.

— 265 —

“My Father . . . and I — are one”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “I and my Father are one.”  “. . . the Father is in me, and I in him.” — p.138 (John, 10:30, 38)
the day, “Be with us”
see: Stanza V, 6: “. . . the day ‘Be-With-Us’; that day when man, freeing himself from the trammels of ignorance, and recognizing fully the non-separateness of the Ego within his personality . . . from the Universal Ego . . . merges thereby into the One Essence . . .” — SD 1:130-1

— 266 —

the Manes (see Egyptian Dynasties enumerated by the priests to Solon)
see: George Rawlinson, “The Antiquity of Man Historically Considered,” April 1883: “Solon was informed that . . . Egyptian history could be traced back without a break for 345 generations . . .”
      “Manetho, an Egyptian priest . . . professed to carry back the origines of Egypt to a date more than 30,000 years anterior to Alexander the Great . . .
1. Reigns of the gods 13,000   Years
2. Reigns of heroes 1,255       "
3. Reigns of other kings 1,817       "
4. Reigns of 30 Memphites 1,790       "
5. Reigns of 10 Thinites 350       "
6. Reigns of Manes and heroes 5,813       "
7. Reigns of the 30 dynasties 5,000       "     ”
              — pp. 346, 347 (Journal of Christian Philosophy, v. 2)

— 267 —

(See Book II., “Divine Dynasties.”)
see: “Our Divine Instructors,” SD 2:365-78.

— Footnotes

The ancient hieratic alphabets of the Maya and the Egyptians are almost identical.
see: Augustus Le Plongeon, Sacred Mysteries among the Mayas and the Quiches, 1886: “In my work . . . I have shown how the legends accompanying the images of several of the Egyptian deities, when interpreted by means of the Maya language, point directly to Mayax as the birthplace of the Egyptian civilization.  How the ancient Maya hieratic alphabet . . . is as near alike to the ancient hieratic alphabet of the Egyptians as two alphabets can possibly be . . . There is every reason to believe that the cosmogonical conceptions, so widely spread, originated with the Mayas . . .” — p. 113

— 268 —

the weary “Road” . . . Winds up hill all the way . . .
p/q: Christina Rossetti, “Up-Hill,” July 14, 1866: “Does the road wind up-hill all the way? / Yes, to the very end.” — p. 442 (The Round Table, v. 3)
Like Visvakarman he has to sacrifice himself to himself . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “VISWA-KARMAN . . . a personification of the creative power.  In this character Viswa-karmā was the great architect of the universe . . . In these hymns also he is said to sacrifice himself or to himself . . . ‘Viswa-karmā . . . first of all offered up all worlds in a Sarva-medha (general sacrifice), and ended by sacrificing himself.’ ” — p. 363
“Kalki Avatar”
see: W. J. Wilkins, Hindu Mythology, 1882: “When Vishnu in the form of Krishna reascended to heaven, the Fourth or Kāli Yuga commenced . . . an age of impurity and dissension. . . . At its termination Vishnu is expected to come again, bearing the name Kalki, to put an end to wickedness, and establish a kingdom of righteousness . . .” — p. 205

— 269 —

“The History of Creation and of this world . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” The Theosophist, Nov. 1881: “The history of creation and of this world from its beginning up to the present time is composed of Seven chapters.  The Seventh chapter is not yet completed.” — p. 44 (The Theosophist, v. 3)
Upa-ni-shad . . . “the conquest of ignorance by the revelation of secret, spiritual knowledge”
see: The Upanishads, Part I, tr. F. Max Müller, 1879: “Most European scholars are agreed in deriving upa-ni-shad from the root sad, to sit down . . . pupils sitting down near their teacher to listen to his instruction. . . . Native philosophers . . . derive it . . . from the root sad, in the sense of destruction, supposing these ancient treatises to have received their name because they were intended to destroy passion and ignorance by means of divine revelation . . .” — pp. lxxix-lxxx (Introduction)

— 270 —

“The great Teachers of the higher Knowledge . . .”
p/q: Mountstuart Elphinstone, The History of India, ed. E. B. Cowell, 1866: “The great teachers of this highest knowledge are not Brahmans but Kshatriyas, and Brahmans are continually represented as going to the great Kshatriya kings (especially Janaka of Videha) to become their pupils.” — p. 282 (Appendix VII, by E. B. Cowell)
the Upanishads “breathe an entirely different spirit” . . .
p/q: Mountstuart Elphinstone, The History of India, ed. E. B. Cowell, 1866: “When we examine the older Upanishads . . . they breathe an entirely different spirit, a freedom of thought unknown in any earlier work except the Ṛig Veda hymns themselves.” — p. 282 (Appendix VII, by E. B. Cowell)

— Footnotes

“The Vedas have a distinct dual meaning . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Brahmanism on the Sevenfold Principle in Man,” 1885: “. . . the Vedas have a distinct dual meaning — one expressed by the literal sense of the words, the other indicated by the metre and the swara (intonation), which are, as it were, the life of the Vedas. . . . the mysterious connection between swara and light is one of its most profound secrets.” — p. 154 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 271 —

Sri Sankaracharya . . . his original treatises . . . preserved in his maths
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ŚANKARĀCHĀRYA . . . established several maths or monasteries for the teaching and preservation of his doctrines.” — p. 279
the Smârtava Brahmins . . . founded by Sankaracharya . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “. . . he was the founder of the great sect of Smārtava Brāhmans, who are very numerous and powerful in the south.” — p. 279

— Footnotes

Also called “the Sons of Wisdom” . . . and the “Brothers of the Sun”
see: T. Subba Row, “The Aryan-Arhat Esoteric Tenets on the Sevenfold Principle in Man,” The Theosophist, Jan. 1882: “. . . the country called ‘Si-dzang’ by the Chinese, and Tibet by Western geographers, is mentioned in the oldest books preserved in the province of Fo-kien . . . it was inhabited by the ‘Teachers of Light,’ the ‘Sons of Wisdom’ and the ‘Brothers of the Sun.’ . . .” — p. 98 (Editorial Appendix: Note I, by HPB)

— 272 —

in their mathams . . . in the “Sringa-giri” . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Some of these [maths or monasteries] still remain.  The chief one is at Sṛinga-giri or Sṛingiri, on the edge of the Western Ghauts in the Mysore, and it has the supreme control of the Smārtava sect.” — p. 279
The Secret Doctrine is the accumulated Wisdom of the Ages . . .
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “. . . this ancient science, which the moderns ignore, is perhaps as old as the world.  It was known to the ancient prophets, to the Arhats and Rishis of the East, to initiated Brahmins, Egyptians, and Greeks.  Its fundamental doctrines are found in the Vedas as well as in the Bible.  Upon these doctrines rest the fundaments of the religions of the world.” — p. xi
it is the uninterrupted record covering thousands of generations of Seers
see: Godfrey Higgins, Anacalypsis, 1836: “How can one consider these striking circumstances and not see that almost all ancient history and epic poetry are mythological, — the secret doctrines of the priests, disguised in parables, in a thousand forms? . . . In all nations, in all times, there has been a secret religion . . .” — 1:366

— 273 —

One homogeneous divine Substance-Principle, the one radical cause
see: William Enfield, History of Philosophy, 1837: “[Pythagoras] says, God is one; he is not, as some conjecture, exterior to the world, but in himself entire pervades the universal sphere . . . the first simple principle of all things . . .” — p. 228
      “Plato . . . taught, that there is an Intelligent Cause, which is the origin of all spiritual being . . . the Supreme Intelligence, incorporeal, without beginning, end, or change . . .” — pp. 130-1
      “The Gnostics . . . maintained, that all natures, both intelligible, intellectual, and material, are derived, by a succession of emanations, from the infinite fountain of Deity.” — p. 378
       “[Giordano Bruno’s] opinion, that all things have from eternity flowed from one immense and infinite fountain, an emanative principle, essential to the Divine nature. . . . out of infinite emanations from the eternal fountain, infinite and eternal worlds are produced; whilst, in truth, only one being exists, which is infinite, immutable, indivisible . . .” — p. 582
“Some few, whose lamps shone brighter . . .”
p/q: John Dryden, Religio Laici, 1682:
“Some few, whose Lamp shone brighter, have been led
  From Cause to Cause, to Nature’s secret head;
  And found that one first principle must be . . .” — p. 2 [lines 12-14]
(See in chapters on Symbolism . . .)
see: “Primordial Substance and Divine Thought,” SD 1:325-41.
“Parabrahmam and Mulaprakriti” are One
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita,” 1887: “This Avyaktam [Undifferentiated] is Mulaprakriti, or rather Parabrahmam manifested in Mulaprakriti as its upadhi [vehicle].” — p. 311 (The Theosophist, Feb. 1887)
      “Parabrahmam and Mulaprakriti. . . . Parabrahmam seems to be the one foundation for all physical phenomena, or for all phenomena that are generally referred to Mulaprakriti.” — p. 432 (The Theosophist, April 1887)
even in the conception of the One Logos, its first manifestation . . .
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Of course, this [Logos] is the first manifestation of Parabrahmam, the first ego that appears in the cosmos, the beginning of all creation . . .” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 273-4 —

It appears from the objective standpoint of the One Logos as Mulaprakriti . . .
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “From its objective standpoint, Parabrahmam appears to it as Mulaprakriti. . . . . Parabrahmam, after having appeared on the one hand as the ego, and on the other as Mulaprakriti, acts as the one energy through the Logos.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 274 —

[for] the mediæval Nominalists . . . Universals . . . existed only in name and human fancy
see: William Enfield, History of Philosophy, 1837: “. . . Rosceline . . . adopted the Stoic opinion, that universals have no real existence either before or in individuals, but are mere names and words . . . a tenet which was afterwards propagated by Abelard, and produced the sect of the Nominalists.” — p. 516

— 275 —

pure Spirits without any of the earthly alloy “which time is wont to prey upon”
see: Julius Charles Hare, Sermons, 1849: “. . . God is infinite and uncreated . . . immortal from the first, without any of the earthly alloy which Time is wont to prey upon . . .” — 2:469 (Sermon XXIV)
“personality” . . . “individuality existing in itself . . .”
p/q: Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Notes on English Divines, 1853: “. . . personality is individuality existing in itself, but with a nature as its ground.” — 1:43 (“Notes on Field on the Church”)

— 276 —

Young was right in saying that “Angels are men of a superior kind”
p/q: Edward Young, The Complaint: or, Night Thoughts, 1851:
              “. . . one spirit pour’d
From spirit’s awful fountain; pour’d Himself
Through all their souls; but not in equal stream . . .
Angels are men of a superior kind . . .” — p. 83 (“Night IV”)
neither “ministering” . . . nor are they “Harbingers of the Most High” . . .
p/q: Many Thoughts of Many Minds, comp. Henry Southgate, 1862:
“ANGELS [quotation categories]:
  Angels — Harbingers of the Most High
  Angels — Ministering
  Angels — Appeal to their Protection
  Angels — Messengers of Wrath . . .” — pp. 25-6
“Man can neither propitiate nor command the Devas”
see: Iamblichus, On the Mysteries, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1821: “This necessity [of the Gods] . . . is the friend of love . . . For it happens that a divine nature is incapable of being allured, is impassive and uncompelled . . .” — pp. 59-60 (ch. 14)
man can, even during his terrestrial life, become as “One of Us”
see: Samuel J. Baird, The Elohim Revealed, 1860: “. . . Elohim, being plural in its form, is a distinct intimation of the plurality which subsists in the unity of the divine essence. . . . ‘Let us make man, in our image, after our likeness’ [Gen. i.26];  ‘. . . the man is become as one of us.’ – Gen. iii.22.” — p. 52

— 277 —

There is but one indivisible and absolute . . . which people call Space
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . the indivisible, perfect, infinite unity, the Absolute Unknown Cause of All Causes, the Ain Soph, the Eternal All above All, a manifestation thereof . . . becomes the First Cause, the Cause of Causes.  In this the Unknown Absolute . . . manifested Itself through an emanation . . . It first withdrew Itself into Itself, to form an infinite Space, the Abyss; which It then filled with a modified and gradually diminishing Light or Vitalization, first appearing in the Abyss, as the centre of a mathematical point which gradually spread Its Life-giving energy or force throughout all Space.” — pp. 230-1

— 278 —

Three distinct representations of the Universe . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Qabbalah also asserts the existence of Three principal emanated or created regions . . . ‘The first World . . . is that Above, hidden from all . . .”  “The second World . . . is connected with that Above . . . ‘This is the gate of YHVH.’ ”  “The third World . . . is the lower World from the other, there is found in it separation . . .” — pp. 419-20
This was taught . . . in India and Chaldea, by the Chinese as by the Grecian Sages
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . the First World . . . is that of Adam Illa-ah, the Celestial Prototypic Adam or Man. . . . The idea of a first ideal or prototypic androgenic Man is of great antiquity in the metaphysical religion of the Orient, and we think, may be found in the oldest writings of the Akkadians, Babylonians, Chaldeans, Hindus, Chinese and Egyptians: even in the Greek philosophy . . .” — pp. 280-1
these three Universes were allegorized . . . by the three trinities . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “These first three Sephiroth are . . . the Intelligible or Intellectual World. . . . a triad above all other emanations . . .”  “The second triad of the Sephiroth . . . Soul of the World or Universal Soul . . .”  “The next, third, Triad of the Sephiroth is . . . the Material World . . .” — pp. 200-1

— 279 —

“Sciolists” . . . blindly accepting everything that emanates from “authorities”
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “. . . Professor Whitney very properly reproves [sciolist writers] . . . Haeckel is called a headlong Darwinian . . . Schleicher is infected with Darwinism . . . ‘His essays are unsound, illogical, untrue; but there are still incautious sciolists by whom every error that has a great name attached to it is liable to be received as pure truth . . .’ ” — 4:534
As Hermes says, “Knowledge differs much from sense . . .”
p/q: Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “But Knowledge differs much from Sense; for Sense is of things that surmount it, but Knowledge is the end of Sense.” — p. 23 (iv.33)

— 280 —

“the still small voice” of our spiritual consciousness
see: W. J. Colville, Discourses, 1886: “. . . the Eternal Being spoke to his creatures in a still small voice which addressed itself exclusively to their most interior spiritual consciousness. . . . in the days of Elijah we hear of a storm, an earthquake, and a fire . . . but the writer of the narrative distinctly declares that the Lord was neither in the storm, nor in the fire, nor in the earthquake . . . the presence of God not being made manifest to Elijah until he heard a still small voice [1 Kings, 19:11, 12].” — p. 6 (“The Living Test of Truth”)
(See Part II., “On the Hidden Deity.”)
see: “The Hidden Deity, Its Symbols and Glyphs,” SD 1:349-58.

— Footnotes

“When thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are . . . But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thine inner chamber, and having shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret . . .” — p. 7 (Matthew, vi.5-6)
Our Father is within us . . .
see: W. J. Colville, Discourses, 1886: “. . . picture the All-Good as the Eternal Life of the universe, which dwells within as well as acts upon every creature.  Practically, you deal with God when you deal with your own highest nature; that atma or seventh principle in man, which according to Asiatic Theosophy illuminates the mind and endows humanity with life immortal, is the very breath of God, the essence of divinity within us . . .” — p. 12 (“The Living Test of Truth”)

— 281 —

“Oh, my son, matter becomes . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “O my son, matter becomes; formerly it was, for matter is the vehicle of becoming.  Becoming is the mode of activity of the uncreate and foreseeing God.  Having been endowed with the germ of becoming, matter is brought into birth, for the creative force fashions it according to the ideal forms.  Matter not yet engendered, had no form; it becomes when it is put into operation.” — pp. 133-4 (Fragments, Part VI)
“Everything is the product of one universal creative effort . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘Everything is the product of one universal creative effort . . .’ (‘Philosophia ad Atheniensis.’) . . . There is nothing dead in Nature.  Everything is organic and living, and consequently the whole world appears to be a living organism.” — p. 44
“the innate, eternal, and self-existing Ideas” of Plato, now reflected by Von Hartmann
see: Eduard von Hartmann, Philosophy of The Unconscious, tr. William C. Coupland, 1884: “Of this unconscious clairvoyant intelligence we have come to perceive that in its infallible purposive activity, embracing out of time all ends and means in one . . . it infinitely transcends the halting, stilted gait of the discursive reflection of consciousness . . .” — 2:247

— Footnotes

“Dr. Ménard observes that in Greek . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “Dr. Ménard observes that in Greek, the same word signifies to be born and to become.  The idea here is that the material of the world is in its essence eternal, but that before creation or ‘becoming,’ it is in a passive and motionless condition.” — pp. 133-4 fn.
“Creation is thus the period of activity . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “Creation is thus the period of activity of God, who . . . has two modes — Activity, or existence, God evolved (Deus explicitus); and Passivity of Being — God involved (Deus implicitus). . . . The ‘Ideal Forms,’ mentioned in the above fragment, are the archetypal or formative ideas of the Neo-Platonists; the eternal and subjective concepts of things subsisting in the Divine Mind prior to ‘creation’ or ‘becoming.’ ” — p. 134 fn.

— 281-2 —

a “force behind phenomena” . . . from which all things proceed
see: Eduard von Hartmann, Philosophy of The Unconscious, tr. William C. Coupland, 1884: “The unity of the Unconscious may very well exist at the same time, of that namely, which never can come into consciousness, because it lies behind it . . .” — 2:227

— 282 —

Paracelsus mentions it . . . synthesized by Dr. F. Hartmann . . .
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “Iliaster. — The hidden power in Nature, by means of which all things grow and multiply . . .” — p. 34
“Perpetual motion of the great Breath”
see: Hugo Grotius, The Truth of the Christian Religion, tr. John Clarke, 1805: “. . . translated by Philo Biblius from Sanchuniathon’s Collection: ‘The Theology of the Phoenicians supposes the Foundation of the Universe to have been . . . the Breath of a dark Air, and a dismal Chaos, covered with thick Darkness; that these were infinite, and had no Bounds for many Ages.  But when this Spirit or Breath placed its Desire or Love on these first Principles . . . This was the Beginning of the Creation of all Things.’ ” — p. 27 (i.16)

— 283 —

Protyle, introduced by Mr. Crookes in chemistry
see: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “To form a conception of their genesis I must beg you to carry your thoughts back to the time when the visible universe was ‘without form and void,’ and to watch the development of matter in the states known to us from an antecedent something.  What existed anterior to our elements, before matter as we now have it, I propose to name protyle.” — p. 95 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
“When Evolution took place the Yliaster divided itself . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “When creation took place the Yliaster divided itself; it, so to say, melted and dissolved, and developed out of itself the Ideos or Chaos (Mysterium magnum, Iliados, Limbus major, or Primordial Matter).  This Primordial Essence is of a monistic nature, and manifests itself not only as vital activity, a spiritual force, an invisible, incomprehensible, and indescribable power; but also as vital matter, of which the substance of living beings consists.” — p. 41
In this Ideos of primordial matter . . .
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “In the Limbus or Ideos of primordial matter, invested with the original power of life, without form, and without any conceivable qualities — in this, the only matrix of all created things, the substance of all things is contained.” — pp. 41-2
It is the Chaos . . . by evolution and division in Mysteria Specialia
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “It is described by the ancients as the Chaos, and has been compared to a receptacle of germs, out of which the Macrocosmos, and afterwards by division and evolution in Mysteria specialia, each separate being came into existence.” — p. 42
“All things and all elementary substances . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “All things and all elementary substances were contained in it, in potentia, but not in actu . . .” — p. 42
“it seems that Paracelsus anticipated the modern discovery . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “It seems that Paracelsus anticipated the modern discovery of the ‘potency of matter’ three hundred years ago.” — p. 42 fn.
“the Magnus Limbus is the nursery . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “The Magnus Limbus is the nursery out of which all creatures have grown, in the same sense as a tree may grow out of a small seed; with the difference, however, that the great Limbus takes its origin from the Word of God, while the Limbus minor (the terrestrial seed or sperm) takes it from the earth.” — p. 42

— Footnotes

“Mysterium is everything . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘Mysterium’ is everything out of which something may be developed, which is only germinally contained in it.  A seed is the ‘mysterium’ of a plant, an egg the mysterium of a living bird, &c.” — p. 42 fn.

— 284 —

“The great Limbus is the seed . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “The great Limbus is the seed out of which all beings have come, and the little Limbus is each ultimate being that reproduces its form, and that has itself been produced by the great.  The little Limbus has all the qualifications of the great one, in the same sense as a son has an organization similar to that of his father.” — p. 42-3
(See Comment. Book II. Para. iii.)
see: Stanza III, “Attempts to Create Man,” SD 2:75-85.
“As Yliaster dissolved . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “As creation took place and the Yliaster dissolved, Ares, the dividing, differentiating, and individualizing power of the Supreme Cause, began to act.  All production took place in consequence of separation.  There were produced out of the Ideos the elements of Fire, Water, Air, and Earth, whose birth, however, did not take place in a material mode or by simple separation, but spiritually and dynamically, just as fire may come out of a pebble or a tree come out of a seed, although there is originally no fire in the pebble nor a tree in the seed.” — p. 43
“Spirit is living, and Life is Spirit . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘Spirit is living and Life is Spirit, and Life and Spirit produce all things, but they are essentially one and not two.’ ” — p. 43
“The elements too, have each one its own Yliaster . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “The elements, too, have each one its own Yliaster, because all the activity of matter in every form is only an effluvium of the same fountain.  But as from the seed grow the roots with their fibres, afterwards the stalk with its branches and leaves, and lastly the flowers and seeds; likewise all beings were born from the elements, and consist of elementary substances out of which other forms may come into existence, bearing the characteristics of their parents.” — p. 43
(“This doctrine, preached 300 years ago . . .”)
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “This doctrine, preached 300 years ago, is identical with the one that has revolutionized modern thought after having been put into a new shape and elaborated by Darwin; and is still more elaborated by the Indian Kapila, in the Sankhya philosophy.” — p. 43 fn.
“The elements as the mothers of all creatures . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “The elements, as the mothers of all creatures, are of an invisible spiritual nature, and have souls.  They all spring from the Mysterium magnum . . .” — p. 43
Compare this with the Vishnu Purâna.  “From Pradhâna . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then from that equilibrium of the qualities (Pradhāna), presided over by soul {Kshetrajna, ‘embodied spirit’}, proceeds the unequal development of those qualities . . .” — 1:29 & fn. (i.2)

— 284-5 —

“From the great Principle Mahat . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From the great principle (Mahat) Intellect . . . is produced; the origin of the (subtile) elements, and of the organs of sense . . .” — 1:32-4 (i.2)

— 285 —

“The creation of the visible world . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “The creation of the visible world by the ‘working gods,’ or Titans, as agents for the Supreme God, is a thoroughly Hermetic idea, recognizable in all religious systems, and in accord with modern scientific research, which shews us everywhere the Divine Power operating secretly through natural forces.” — p. 7 fn.
“That Universal Being, that contains all . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “That Universal Being which contains all and which is all, puts into motion the soul and the world, all that nature comprises.  In the manifold unity of universal life, the innumerable individualities distinguished by their variations, are, nevertheless, united in such a manner that the whole is one, and that everything proceeds from unity.” — pp. 47-8 (Asclepios, Part I)
“God is not a mind . . .”
p/q: Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “God is not a Mind, but the Cause that the Mind is; not a Spirit, but the Cause that the Spirit is; not Light, but the Cause that Light is.” — p. 58 (ix.64)

— 286 —

“I adjure thee, Heaven . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “I adjure thee, Heaven, holy work of the great God; I adjure thee, Voice of the Father, uttered in the beginning when the universal world was framed; I adjure thee by the Word, only Son of the Father Who upholds all things; be favorable, be favorable!” — p. 153 (Various Hermetic Fragments, VI)
“Thus the Ideal Light . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “Thus the Ideal Light was before the Ideal Light, and the luminous Intelligence of Intelligence was always, and its unity was nothing else than the Spirit enveloping the universe.  Out of Whom is neither God, nor Angels, nor any other essentials . . .” — p. 153 (Various Hermetic Fragments, VI)
“To speak of God is impossible. . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “. . . to speak of God, impossible.  For the corporeal cannot express the incorporeal . . . that which has not any body, nor appearance, nor form, nor matter, cannot be apprehended by sense.  I understand, O Tatios, I understand that which it is impossible to define — that is God {The above fragments are from the ‘Physical Eclogues’ and ‘Florilegium’ of Stobæus}.” — pp. 139-40 & fn. (Fragments, Hermes to His Son Tatios, VIII)

— 286-7 —

“Glory to the unchangeable . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Glory to the unchangeable, holy, eternal, supreme Vishṇu, of one universal nature, the mighty over all: to him who is Hiraṇyagarbha, Hari, and Śankara, the creator, the preserver, and destroyer of the world: to Vāsudeva, the liberator of his worshippers: to him whose essence is both single and manifold; who is both subtile and corporeal, indiscrete and discrete: to Vishṇu, the cause of final emancipation. . . . the cause of the creation, existence, and end of this world; who is the root of the world, and who consists of the world.” — 1:13-15 (i.2)

— 287 —

“Reality is not upon the earth . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “Reality is not upon the earth, my son, and it cannot be thereon . . . Nothing on earth is real, there are only appearances . . .”  “The real consists solely in itself, and remains what it is. . . . Man is transient, therefore he is not real; he is but appearance, and appearance is the supreme illusion.” — pp. 135, 136-7 (Fragments, Hermes to his Son Tatios, VII)
“Tatios:  Then the celestial bodies themselves are not real . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885:
“Tatios.  Then the celestial bodies themselves are not real, my father, since they also vary.
  Trismegistos.  That which is subject to birth and to change is not real . . . there is in them a certain falsity, seeing that they too are variable . . .
  Tatios.  And what, then, is the primordial Reality, O my father?
  Trismegistos.  He Who is One and alone, O Tatios; He Who is not made of matter, nor in any body, Who has neither colour nor form, Who changes not, nor is transmuted, but who always Is.” — pp. 137-8 (Fragments, Hermes to his Son Tatios, VII)

— 288 —

Hermetic Books, or rather Hermetic Fragments
see: Edward Maitland, “The Hermetic Books” [Preface to The Virgin of the World], 1885: “The Fragments comprised in this reprint . . . enjoyed a high repute as of undoubted genuineness, the [Church] Fathers invoking their testimony on behalf of the Christian mysteries . . . [There were] learned men of the Renaissance, who regarded them as the source of the Orphic initiations and of the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato. . . . And the conclusion come to by recent critics . . . [is] that amid the Alexandrian ideas, on which they are based, there are some traces of the religious doctrine of ancient Egypt.” — p. ii
in remarkable agreement with the Esoteric Eastern doctrine
see: Edward Maitland, “The Hermetic System” [Preface to The Virgin of the World], 1885: “To the philosophical student of humanity the most significant and important feature of the present remarkable epoch is, unquestionably, the revival of Occult Science and Mystical, or Esoteric, Philosophy. . . For the system designated the Hermetic Gnosis — the earliest formulation of which, for the western world, belongs to the pre-historic times of ancient Egypt — has constituted the core of all the religio-philosophical systems of both east and west, Buddhism and Christianity, among others, being alike intended as vehicles for and expressions of it . . .” — pp. ix-x
the “Definitions of Asclepios” . . .
see: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885, pp. 101-13 (Book 3, The Definitions of Asclepios).

— Footnotes

“those who dwell in the neighbourhood of the immortals . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “These dwell in the neighbourhood of the Immortals, and thence watch over human things.” — p. 104 (Definitions of Asclepios, Part I)
Chiti, “that by which the . . . consequences of actions . . . are selected for the use of the soul”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Chiti is that by which the consequences of acts and species of knowledge are selected for the use of soul.” — 1:32 fn.
With the Yogis, the Chiti is a synomym of Mahat . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The first product of Pradhāna . . . the principle of Mahat . . . We have in the same Purāṇa [the Vāyu], as well as in the Brahmānda and Linga, a number of synonyms for this term . . .”  “. . . prajnā, manas, brahma, chiti . . .” — 1:29-30 fn., 32 fn.
Chiti is a quality of Manas . . . with Buddhi
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Manas is that which considers the consequences of acts . . . Buddhi is that which communicates to soul the knowledge of good and evil . . . Chiti is that by which the consequences of acts . . . are selected . . .” — 1:31-2 fn.

— 289 —

“The Initial Existence . . . spreads as it issues from Laya . . .”
see: “The Masks of Science”: “. . . the newly published catechism of the Visishtadwaita Vedantins . . . teaches that before evolution began, Prakriti (Nature) was in a condition of laya or absolute homogeneity . . . ‘latent and undifferentiated’ . . .” — SD 1:522
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Matter exists in two conditions, the sukshma, or latent and undifferentiated; and in the sthula or differentiated condition.  In the sthula condition it produces a congeries of forms called Jagat (universe).” — § 95
one finger’s [breadth] (angula)
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Angula = Angulī . . . ‘finger-breadth’ . . .” — 5(II):11

— 290 —

the Sun . . . driven by seven horses . . . he has seven rays
see: Ṛig-Veda Sanhitā, Book I, tr. H. H. Wilson, 1850: “Divine and light-diffusing Sūrya, thy seven coursers {Sapta haritah . . . the seven rays} bear thee . . . The Sun has yoked the seven mares that safely draw his chariot.” — p. 133 & fn. (I.4, vi.8-9)
seven . . . equal to the metres of the Vedas
see: Ṛig-Veda Sanhitā, Book II, tr. H. H. Wilson, 1854: “Akshareṇa sapta vāṇīh, the seven generic metres of the Veda . . .” — p. 135 fn.

— Footnotes

“Vishnu . . . is at once, the sevenfold Sun and distinct from it . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Vishṇu, in the form of his active energy, never either rises or sets, and is, at once, the sevenfold sun and distinct from it.” — 2:296 (ii.11)
“In the same manner as a man approaches a mirror . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In the same manner as a man, approaching a mirror, placed upon a stand, beholds, in it, his own image, so the energy (or reflection) of Vishṇu is never disjoined (from the sun’s car, which is the stand of the mirror), but remains, month by month, in the sun, (as in the mirror), which is there stationed.” — 2:296-7 (ii.11)

— 291 —

One Life . . . manifests in seven states, which . . . are the Forty-nine Fires
see: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Agni is represented as having seven tongues . . . In the Vishṇu Purāṇa he is called Abhimānī, and the eldest son of Brahmā. . . . he had three sons . . . and these had forty-five sons; altogether forty-nine persons, identical with the forty-nine fires . . .” — p. 7

— Footnotes

[forty-nine fires] In “Vishnu” and other Purânas
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Agni named Abhīmānin, who is the eldest born of Brahmā, had, by Swāhā, three sons of surpassing brilliancy . . . They had forty-five sons, who, with the original son of Brahmā, and his three descendants, constitute the forty-nine fires {The Vāyu Purāṇa enters into a very long detail of the names and places of the whole forty-nine fires. . . . The Bhāgavata explains these different fires to be so many appellations of fire employed in the invocations with which the different oblations to fire are offered in the ritual of the Vedas}.” — 1:155-6 & fn. (i.10)
“Nature,” “Going down cyclically into matter . . .”
see: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “. . . the God smiled benignant, and commanded Nature to exist.  And, issuing with His voice, the Feminine came forth in her perfect beauty.”  “. . . And having differentiated created forms, He filled them with mysteries . . .”  “{Hence the creation of Nature and . . . descent into generation occurs . . . The human body, although last in manifestation, is really the first in the Divine intention . . .}” — pp. 4-5, & 8 fn.

— 292 —

“Kanyâ . . . means a Virgin . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Kanyā. — Means a virgin and represents Sakti or Mahāmayā.  The sign in question is the sixth Rāsi or division, and indicates that there are six primary forces in Nature. . . . they are called by the following names {Parāsakti: —  Literally the great or supreme force or power.  It means and includes the powers of light and heat}.” — p. 110 & fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“Jnanasakti . . . The power of intellect . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Gnānasakti . . . the power of intellect or the power of real wisdom or knowledge.  It has two aspects.” — p. 110 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“The following are some of its manifestations . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “The following are some of its manifestations when placed under the influence or control of material conditions.  (a) The power of the mind in interpreting our sensations.  (b) Its power in recalling past ideas (memory) and raising future expectation.  (c) Its power as exhibited in what are called by modern psychologists ‘the laws of association,’ which enables it to form persisting connections between various groups of sensations and possibilities of sensations, and thus generate the notion or idea of an external object.  (d) Its power in connecting our ideas together by the mysterious link of memory, and thus generating the notion of self or individuality.” — p. 110 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“some of its manifestations when liberated from the bonds of matter are . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “The following are some of its manifestations when liberated from the bonds of matter: — (a) Clairvoyance.  (b) Pyschometry.” — p. 110 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 292-3 —

“Itchasakti — the power of the Will . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Itchāsakti . . . the power of the will.  Its most ordinary manifestation is the generation of certain nerve currents which set in motion such muscles as are required for the accomplishment of the desired object.” — p. 110 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 293 —

“Kriyasakti. The mysterious power of thought . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Kriyāsakti: — The mysterious power of thought which enables it to produce external, perceptible, phenomenal results by its own inherent energy.  The ancients held that any idea will manifest itself externally if one’s attention is deeply concentrated upon it.  Similarly an intense volition will be followed by the desired result.  A Yogi generally performs his wonders by means of Itchāsakti and Kriyāsakti.” — p. 111 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“Kundalini Sakti. The power or Force which moves in a curved path. . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Kundalinisakti . . . the power or force which moves in a serpentine or curved path.  It is the universal life-principle which everywhere manifests itself in Nature.  This force includes in itself the two great forces of attraction and repulsion.  Electricity and magnetism are but manifestations of it.  This is the power or force which brings about that ‘continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations’ which is the essence of life according to Herbert Spencer, and that ‘continuous adjustment of external relations to internal relations’ which is the basis of transmigration of souls or punarjanmam (re-birth) according to the doctrines of the ancient Hindu philosophers.  A Yogi must thoroughly subjugate this power or force before he can attain moksham.” — p. 111 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations”
p/q: Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Biology, 1864: “. . . the broadest and most complete definition of Life will be — The continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations.” — 1:80
“Mantrika-sakti. The force or power of letters, speech or music . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Matrikāsakti . . . the force or power of letters or speech or music.  The whole of the ancient Mantra Shastra has this force or power in all its manifestations for its subject-matter. . . . The influence of its music is one of its ordinary manifestations.  The power of the mirific ineffable name is the crown of this Sakti.” — p. 111 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“Modern Science has but partly investigated the first . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Modern science has but partly investigated the first, second and fifth of the forces or powers above named, but it is altogether in the dark as regards the remaining powers.” — p. 111 fn. (Five Years of Theosophy)
“The six forces . . . represented by the “Daiviprakriti”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “The six forces are in their unity represented by the Astral Light.” — p. 111 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 294 —

“The creation of Life by the Sun . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “This creation of life by the sun is as continuous as his light; nothing arrests or limits it.  Around him, like an army of satellites, are innumerable choirs of Genii.  These dwell in the neighbourhood of the Immortals, and thence watch over human things.  They fulfil the will of the Gods by means of storms, tempests, transitions of fire, and earthquakes; likewise by famines and wars, for the punishment of impiety.” — p. 104 (Definitions of Asclepios, I)
“It is the sun who preserves . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “It is the sun who preserves and nourishes all creatures; and even as the Ideal World which environs the sensible world fills this last with the plenitude and universal variety of forms, so also the sun enfolding all in his light accomplishes everywhere the birth and development of creatures . . .”  — pp. 104-5 (Definitions of Asclepios, I)
“Under his orders is the choir of Genii . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “Under his orders is the choir of the Genii, or rather the choirs, for there are many and diverse, and their number corresponds to that of the stars.  Every star has its genii, good and evil by nature, or rather by their operation, for operation is the essence of the genii.” — p. 105 (Definitions of Asclepios, I)
“All these Genii preside over mundane affairs . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “All these Genii preside over mundane affairs, they shake and overthrow the constitution of States and of individuals; they imprint their likeness on our souls, they are present in our nerves, our marrow, our veins, our arteries, and our very brain-substance . . .” — p. 105 (Definitions of Asclepios, I)
“at the moment when each of us receives life and being . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “At the moment when each of us receives life and being, he is taken in charge by the genii who preside over births, and who are classed beneath the astral powers.  Perpetually they change, not always identical, but revolving in circles.  They permeate by the body two parts of the soul, that it may receive from each the impress of his own energy.” — p. 105 (Definitions of Asclepios, I)

— Footnotes

Comments on Stanza IV [and V] “the Lipika and the four Maharajas,” the agents of Karma
p/q: Stanza V, 5b: “ ‘Four winged wheels . . .’ are the ‘four Maharajas’ . . .”  “They are the protectors of mankind and also the Agents of Karma on Earth, whereas the Lipika are concerned with Humanity’s hereafter.” — SD 1:122, 126
see: Stanza IV, 6: “The Lipi-ka . . . these Divine Beings are connected with Karma . . .” — SD 1:103-4
“Animal man is the son of the animal elements . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘Animal man is the son of the animal elements out of which his soul was born, and animals are the mirrors of man.’ ” — p. 56 (“De Fundamento Sapientiae”)

— 294-5 —

“But the reasonable part of the Soul . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford & Maitland, 1885: “But the reasonable part of the soul is not subject to the genii; it is designed for the reception of God, who enlightens it with a sunny ray.  Those who are thus illumined are few in number, and from them the genii abstain; for neither genii nor gods have any power in the presence of a single ray of God.  But all other men, both soul and body, are directed by genii, to whom they cleave, and whose operations they affect.  But reason is not like desire, which deceives and misleads.  The genii, then, have the control of mundane things, and our bodies serve them as instruments.” — pp. 105-6 (Definitions of Asclepios, I)

— 296 —

for these Vital Force, Light, Sound . . . exist merely as . . . “affections of matter”
see: Lyell Adams, “On the Value of Empirical Generalizations,” Oct. 1875: “Men still call themselves psychologists, physiologists, physicists, and so on, but the bent of them all is towards the interpretation of mind as an affection of matter, and of all affections of matter as modes of motion.” — pp. 609-10 (The New Englander, v. 34)

— Footnotes

“A characteristic of Akâsa will serve to show . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘A characterization of ākāśa will serve to show how inadequatively it is represented by “ether.”  In dimension, it is, as has been said, infinite; it is not made up of parts; and colour, taste, smell, and tangibility do not appertain to it.  So far forth it corresponds exactly to time, space, Īśwara, and soul.  Its speciality, as compared therewith, consists in its being the material cause of sound.  Except for its being so, we might take it to be one with vacuity.’ ” — 1:34 fn.
see: Nehemiah Nīlakaṇṭha Śāstrī Gore, Rational Refutation, tr. Fitz-Edward Hall, 1862, p. 120 fn.

— 297 —

the “modes of motion” . . . of Moleschott
see: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, 1864: “What we term mind, thought, conception, is the result of natural, though peculiarly combined, forces . . . combined in an infinitely complicated mode . . .”  “. . . inherent forces, which in themselves are nothing but various modes of material motions.”  “ ‘Thought is a motion of matter.’  Moleschott.” — pp. 49, 52-3, 135
the Founder of the new Hylo-Idealistic Scheme . . .
see: Lucifer, v. 1, Dec. 15, 1887: “Under the extraordinary title of  ‘AUTO-CENTRICISM’ . . . Dr. Lewins publishes a series of letters on the subject of the philosophy of which he is the founder. . . . Dr. Lewins is among those who regard consciousness as a function of the nerve-tissue . . . Apart from the brain there is no Ego, no external world.  What, then, is the Brain itself . . . Hylo-Idealism does not say.” — p. 330 (“Literary Jottings”)
“Cerebration is generically the same as chylification” . . .
see: Constance Naden, What is Religion?, notes by Robert Lewins, 1883: “. . . heat produced by oxidation . . . in the glands it causes secretion, and in the brain thought.”  “. . . ‘the brain secretes thought as the liver secretes bile . . .’ ” — pp. 25, 57

— Footnotes

“So himself was indeed (his own) son”
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “ ‘As thou (O Agni) at the measured times . . . didst sacrifice to the gods, so sacrifice also to thyself’ {I might explain the word Tanūnapāt as meaning ‘his own son.’  Agni is his own son}.” — 4:9 & fn. (Rigveda, x. 7, 6)

— 298 —

“Owing to circumstances still unknown . . .”
p/q: Henry Thomas Buckle, History of Civilization in England, 1864: “Owing to circumstances still unknown, there appear, from time to time, great thinkers, who, devoting their lives to a single purpose, are able to anticipate the progress of mankind, and to produce a religion or a philosophy, by which important effects are eventually brought about.  But if we look into history, we shall clearly see that, although the origin of a new opinion may be thus due to a single man, the result which the new opinion produces will depend on the condition of the people among whom it is propagated.  If either a religion or a philosophy is too much in advance of a nation, it can do no present service, but must bide its time, until the minds of men are ripe for its reception.” — 1:186
“Every science, every creed has had its martys. . . .”
p/q: Henry Thomas Buckle, History of Civilization in England, 1864: “Every science and every creed has had its martyrs; men exposed to obloquy, or even to death, because they knew more than their contemporaries, and because society was not sufficiently advanced to receive the truths which they communicated.  According to the ordinary course of affairs, a few generations pass away, and then there comes a period, when these very truths are looked upon as commonplace facts; and a little later, there comes another period, in which they are declared to be necessary, and even the dullest intellects wonder how they could ever have been denied.” — 1:186

— 299 —

(Vide Addendum)
see: Addenda, “Science and the Secret Doctrine Contrasted,” SD 1:477-676.
“Close thy mouth, lest thou shouldst speak of this . . .”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Occult Science in India, tr. W. L. Felt, 1884: “Close your mouth that you may not speak of it, and your heart that you may not think of it, and if your heart forgets itself, bring it to its place again, for it is for this reason that they have been united together . . .” — p. 175 (Sepher Jeszirah)
“This is a secret which gives death: close thy mouth . . .”
see: Louis Jacolliot, Occult Science in India, tr. W. L. Felt, 1884: “This is a fatal secret; close thy mouth that no part of it may be revealed to the vulgar herd; compress thy brain in order that no part of it may be spread abroad.” — p. 175 (Agrouchada-Parikchai)

Part II — The Evolution of Symbolism

— 303 —

“A symbol is ever . . .”
p/q: Thomas Carlyle, Sartor Resartus, 1849: “For is not a Symbol ever, to him who has eyes for it, some dimmer or clearer revelation of the Godlike? . . . through all these there glimmers something of a Divine Idea . . . Nay the highest ensign that men ever met and embraced under, the Cross itself, had no meaning save an accidental extrinsic one.” — pp. 153-4 (iii.3)
“For thirty years past Professor Max Müller has been teaching . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “For thirty years past Professor Max Müller has been teaching in his books and lectures, in the Times, Saturday Review, and various magazines, from the platform of the Royal Institution, the pulpit of Westminster Abbey, and his chair at Oxford, that Mythology is a disease of language, and that the ancient symbolism was a result of something like a primitive mental aberration.” — p. 1

— 303-4 —

“ ‘We Know,’ says Renouf, echoing Max Müller . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “ ‘We know,’ says Renouf, echoing Max Müller, in his Hibbert Lectures, ‘We know that mythology is the disease which springs up at a peculiar stage of human culture.’  Such is the shallow explanation of the non-evolutionists, and such explanations are still accepted by the British public, that gets its thinking done for it by proxy.  Professor Max Müller, Cox, Gubernatis and other propounders of the Solar Mythos have portrayed the primitive myth-maker for us as a sort of Germanised-Hindu metaphysician, projecting his own shadow on a mental mist, and talking ingeniously concerning smoke, or, at least, cloud; the sky overhead becoming like the dome of dreamland, scribbled over with the imagery of aboriginal nightmares!” — p. 1

— 304 —

“They conceive the early man in their own likeness . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “They conceive the early man in their own likeness, and look upon him as perversely prone to self-mystification, or, as Fontenelle has it, ‘subject to beholding things that are not there!’  They have misrepresented primitive or archaic man as having been idiotically misled from the first by an active but untutored imagination into believing all sorts of fallacies, which were directly and constantly contradicted by his own daily experience; a fool of fancy in the midst of those grim realities that were grinding his experience into him, like the gri[n]ding icebergs making their imprints upon the rocks submerged beneath the sea.” — p. 1
“It remains to be said, and will one day be acknowledged . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “It remains to be said, and will one day be acknowledged, that these accepted teachers have been no nearer to the beginnings of mythology and language than Burns’ poet Willie had been near to Pegasus.  My reply is, ’Tis but a dream of the metaphysical theorist that mythology was a disease of language, or anything else except his own brain.  The origin and meaning of mythology have been missed altogether by these solarites and weather-mongers!  Mythology was a primitive mode of thinging the early thought [thinking by means of things].” — p. 1
“It was founded on natural facts . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “It was founded on natural facts, and is still verifiable in phenomena.  There is nothing insane, nothing irrational in it, when considered in the light of evolution, and when its mode of expression by sign-language is thoroughly understood.  The insanity lies in mistaking it for human history or Divine Revelation.  Mythology is the repository of man's most ancient science, and what concerns us chiefly is this — when truly interpreted once more it is destined to be the death of those false theologies to which it has unwittingly given birth!” — pp. 1-2
“In modern phraseology a statement is sometimes said to be mythical . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “In modern phraseology a statement is sometimes said to be mythical in proportion to its being untrue; but the ancient mythology was not a system or mode of falsifying in that sense.  Its fables were the means of conveying facts; they were neither forgeries nor fictions. . . . For example, when the Egyptians portrayed the moon as a Cat, they were not ignorant enough to suppose that the moon was a cat; nor did their wandering fancies see any likeness in the moon to a cat; nor was a cat-myth any mere expansion of verbal metaphor; nor had they any intention of making puzzles or riddles . . .” — p. 2
“They had observed the simple fact that the cat saw in the dark . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “They had observed the simple fact that the cat saw in the dark, and that her eyes became full-orbed and grew most luminous by night.  The moon was the seer by night in heaven, and the cat was its equivalent on the earth; and so the familiar cat was adopted as a representative, a natural sign, a living pictograph of the lunar orb!” — p. 2

— 304-5 —

“And so it followed that the sun . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “And so it followed that the sun which saw down in the under-world at night, could also be called the cat, as it was, because it also saw in the dark.  The name of the cat in Egyptian is mau, which denotes the seer, from mau, to see.  One writer on mythology asserts that the Egyptians ‘imagined a great cat behind the sun, which is the pupil of the cat’s eye.’  But this imagining is all modern.  It is the Müllerite stock in trade!  The moon as cat was the eye of the sun, because it reflected the solar light, and because the eye gives back the image in its mirror.  In the form of the Goddess Pasht the cat keeps watch for the sun, with her paw holding down and bruising the head of the serpent of darkness, called his eternal enemy!” — p. 2

— 305 —

(vide § VII. [IX.] Deus Lunus)
see: “§ IX. The Moon, Deus Lunus, Phoebe,” SD 1:386-403.
Kenneth Mackenzie, has shown . . . a great difference between emblem and symbol
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “An emblem very often comprises a larger series of thoughts than a symbol, which may be said to illustrate some single, special idea.” — 1:198

— 305-6 —

The latter is “a concrete visible picture . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Emblem:  A concrete visible picture or sign representing principles, or a series of principles recognisable by those who have received certain instructions.” — 1:198

— 306 —

“All esoteric societies . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “All esoteric societies have made use of emblems and symbols, such as the Pythagorean Society, the Eleusinia, the Hermetic Brethren of Egypt, the Rosicrucians and the Freemasons.  Many of these emblems it is not proper to divulge to the general eye, and a very minute difference may make the emblem or symbol differ widely in its meaning.  The magical sigilla, being founded on certain principles of numbers, partake of this character, and although monstrous or ridiculous in the eyes of the uninstructed, convey a whole body of doctrine to those who have been trained to recognize them.” — 1:198
“Masonic Secrets” . . . those of “Polichinelle!”
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “In America . . . things in Masonry are taken au grand sérieux [with great seriousness], and not, as in England, au secret de Polichinelle [an ‘open secret’ (fig., a ‘secret’ whispered by a stage puppet)] . . .” — 1:160

— 307 —

In the Chinese language . . . every word has its corresponding symbol . . .
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “In the Chinese language . . . every word has its symbol or sign, which was intended to convey its meaning in a pictorial form . . .” — 2:707
The language possesses many thousands of such symbol letters, or logograms . . .
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Thus in this language there are several thousands of so-called letters, or, more properly speaking, ‘logograms,’ as each represents an entire word.” — 2:707-8

— Footnotes

Thus, a Japanese who does not understand one word of Chinese . . .
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “C’est ainsi que les Japonais et les Chinois, qui ont les mêmes signes graphiques, se comprennent, quoique parlant une langue différente [Thus, the Japanese and the Chinese, who have the same pictograms, understand each other while speaking a different language].” — p. 432 fn.

— 308 —

“The writer is quite certain that there was an ancient language . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “Unpublished Manuscript” — See Blavatsky Collected Writings, 1887 [v. 8]: “. . . the writer is quite certain that there was an ancient language which modernly and up to this time appears to have been lost . . .” — p. 219 (note 6)

— 309 —

the “divine” instructors of a new mankind . . . (See Stanza VI [VII], Book I., Part I.)
see: Stanza VII, 7: “. . . the Dhyani-Buddhas of the two higher groups . . . furnished the many and various races with divine kings and leaders.  It is the latter who taught humanity their arts and sciences, and the former who revealed . . . the great spiritual truths of the transcendental worlds. . . . The next great Manvantara will witness the men of our own life-cycle becoming the instructors and guides of a mankind whose Monads may now yet be imprisoned — semi-conscious — in the most intellectual of the animal kingdom . . .” — SD 1:267

— 310 —

universal language — suspected by the Mason Ragon
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Francmaçonnerie . . . on sait, depuis longtemps, que ses secrets . . . composent d’une langue universellement parlée [Freemasonry . . . it has long been known that its secrets . . . consist of a universally spoken language] . . .” — pp. 2-3
several men of note who have tried . . . Delgarme, Wilkins, Leibnitz
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Delgarme, Wilkins, Leibnitz se sont occupés de cette langue universelle [Delgarme, Wilkins, Leibnitz have occupied themselves with this universal language] . . .” — p. 432 fn.
but Demaimieux, in his Pasigraphie, is the only one . . .
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . mais Demaimieux, dans sa Pasigraphie, a seul prouvé sa possibilité [but Demaimieux, in his Pasigraphie, is the only one who has proved its possibility].” — p. 432 fn.

— 311 —

“Every time I hear people talking of the religion of Egypt . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Chaque fois que j’entends parler de la religion égyptienne, je suis tenté de demander de quelle religion égyptienne il s’agit.  Est-ce de la religion égyptienne de la quatrième dynastie, ou de la religion égyptienne de l’époque ptolémaïque?  Est-ce de la religion populaire ou de la religion des gens instruits? de la religion telle qu’on l’enseignait à l’école d’Héliopolis, ou de la religion telle que la concevaient les membres du sacerdoce thébain? [Every time I hear people talking of the religion of Egypt, I am tempted to ask which Egyptian religion they are talking about?  Is it of the Egyptian religion of the 4th Dynasty, or of the Egyptian religion of the Ptolemaic period?  Is it of the religion of the masses, or of that of learned people?  Of that which was taught in the school of Heliopolis, or of that other which was in the minds and conceptions of the Theban priestly class?].” — p. 148
“For, between the first tomb of Memphis . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Entre le premier tombeau memphite portant le cartouche d’un roi de la IIIe dynastie, et les dernières pierres gravées à Esnèh sous César Philippe l’Arabe, il y a cinq mille ans d’intervalle.  Sans compter l’invasion des Pasteurs, la domination éthiopienne et assyrienne, la conquête persane, la colonisation grecque et les mille révolutions de sa vie politique, l’Égypte a passé, pendant ces cinq mille ans, par maintes vicissitudes de vie morale et intellectuelle [Between the first tomb of Memphis, which bears the cartouche of a king of the third dynasty, and the last stones engraved at Esneh under Caesar-Philippus, the Arabian, there is an interval of five thousand years.  Leaving aside the invasion of the Shepherds, the Ethiopian and Assyrian domination, the Persian conquest, Greek colonization, and the thousand revolutions of its political life, during those five thousand years Egypt has passed through many changes of moral and intellectual life].” — pp. 148-9
“Chapter XVII. of the Book of the Dead . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Le chapitre XVII du Livre des Morts, qui paraît contenir l’exposition du système du monde tel qu’on l’entendait à Héliopolis au temps des premières dynasties, nous est connu par plusieurs exemplaires de la XIe et de la XIIe dynasties.  Chacun des versets qui le composent était déjà interprété de trois ou quatre manières différentes, si différentes que, selon les écoles, le démiurge devenait le feu solaire Râ-Shou, ou bien l’eau primordiale; quinze siècles plus tard, le nombre des interprétations avait augmenté sensiblement [Chapter XVII of the Book of the Dead which seems to contain the exposition of the system of the world as it was understood at Heliopolis at the time of the first dynasties, is known to us only by a few copies from the eleventh and twelfth dynasties.  Each of its verses was even then interpreted in three or four different ways; so different, indeed, that according to this or another school, the demiurge became the solar fire — Rā-shu, or the primordial water; fifteen centuries later, the number of readings had increased considerably].” — p. 149

— 311-12 —

“Time had, in its course, modified the ideas about the universe . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Le temps, en s’écoulant, avait modifié l’idée qu’on se faisait de l’univers et des forces qui le régissent.  Depuis dix-huit siècles à peine que le christianisme existe, il a travaillé, développé, transformé la plupart de ses dogmes: combien de fois le sacerdoce égyptien ne dut-il pas altérer les siens, pendant les cinquante siècles qui séparent Théodose des rois constructeurs de pyramides? [Time had, in its course, modified the conception about the universe and the forces that ruled it.  During the barely 18 centuries that Christiantiy has existed, it has worked out, developed and transformed most of its dogmas; how many times, then, might not the Egyptian clergy have altered its dogmas during those fifty centuries that separate Theodosius from the king builders of the pyramids?].” — p. 149

— 312 —

Osiris saying he is Toum (the creative force . . . giving form to all Beings . . .)
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Dit l’Osiris N:  Je suis Toum {créateur du ciel et de êtres} [Says Osiris N:  I am Tum {creator of heaven and all beings}].” — p. 53 (xvii.1) & note (Toum, p. 655)
Toum . . . self-existent, issued from Noun, the celestial river
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis Toum, en Etre unique dans le Noun {Fleuve céleste} [I am Tum, as a unique Being in Nūt {the Celestial River}].” — p. 53 (xvii.1) & note (Noun, p. 629)
He has found Shoo (solar force) on the staircase in the City of the Eight . . .
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Shou {la force du soleil} a soulevé le Noun {l’eau céleste} étant sur l’escalier qui est dans la ville des Huit [Shoo {the solar force} has lifted up the Nūt {the celestial water}, standing on the staircase in the City of the Eight] . . .” — p. 54 (xvii.2-3) & notes 2 & 3 (p. 72)
he has annihilated the evil principles . . . the children of the Rebellion
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Il a anéanti les enfants de la rébellion {mauvais principes} [He has annihilated the children of the rebellion {evil principles}] . . .” — p. 54 (xvii.3) & note (Rébellion, p. 641)
He is the Fire . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Feu, Flammes: La demeure de fl. est celle où l’on détruit les rebelles [Fire, Flames: the abode of flames is where the rebels are destroyed] . . .” — p. 610 (note: Feu, Flammes)
and Water, i.e., Noun the primoridal parent
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis le dieu grand qui s’est donné la forme à lui-même, c’est-à-dire l’Eau, c’est à dire le Noun, père des dieux [I am the Great God who gave shape to himself, i.e. the Water, i.e. Nūt (the Celestial River), Father of the gods] . . .” — p. 54 (xvii.3-4)
he created the gods out of his limbs . . . seven dark and seven light gods
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “C’est Ra, créateur de ses membres qui deviennent les dieux de la suite de Ra {[ses phases] comme soleil nocturne et soleil diurne} . . . {Ra, le soleil, crée ses propres membres en créant les dieux destinés à personnifier ses phases} [That is Ra, creator of his own limbs, which become the gods in the retinue of Ra {(his phases) as the Night-Sun and the Day-Sun} . . . {Ra, the Sun, creates his own limbs, creating the gods that are destined to personify his phases}] . . .” — p. 54 (xvii.3-4) & notes (pp. 73, 74)
He is the Law of existence and Being (v. 10), the Bennoo . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis la loi de l’existence et des êtres. . . . Le Bennou {Le B. d’Héliopolis ou Phénix, emblème d’Osiris qui meurt pour ressusciter, symbolise l’éternité par la perpétuelle succession du jour à la nuit} [I am the Law of existence and of beings . . . the Benu {the Benu of Heliopolis or the Phoenix, emblem of Osiris, who dies only to rise from the dead, symbolizes eternity by the perpetual succession of day and night}] . . .” — p. 55 (xvii.10) & note (Bennou, p. 597)
“The wayfarer who crosses millions of years, in [is] the name of One . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Traverseur de millions d’années est le nom de l’un, Grande Verte {l’abîme liquide} est le nom de l’autre [The one who traverses millions of years is the name of the One, the Great Green {the Watery Abyss} is the name of the other] . . .” — p. 57 (xvii.17) & note (p. 74: “l’abîme liquide, la Grande Verte”)
the Seven Luminous ones who follow their Lord, who confers justice
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . les sept Lumineux qui suivent leur seigneur, le dieu faisant droit [the seven Luminous ones who follow their Lord, the god conferring justice] . . .” — p. 60 (xvii.33)

— 313 —

“the Mosaic Books were intended, by a mode of art speech . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Cabbalah — No. IX,” May 1887: “ ‘The Sepher Thora (books of Moses) it is true, was a public book, but in every respect, nevertheless, it was a sealed book, which the unskilled man, unless by aid of traditional direction, could neither read, much less interpret, for himself.’ ”  “ ‘Every science and art (seriatim, —  as each was located like a mosaic in the Thora) had, as a consequence, its own secret discipline, its own art speech . . . so deeply natural that the inner-spirit of a subject matter only wholly disclosed itself to that one, who devoted himself to it with a full undivided love . . .’ ” — pp. 193, 194 (Masonic Review, 67:4)
“The foundation of these measures was the Parker ratio”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “One of the most remarkable proofs of the existence of this knowledge (of the foundation of these mysteries on the Parker and Metius relations of circumference to diameter of a circle) . . .” — p. 310
This ratio is 6,561 for diameter and 20,612 for circumference.
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “One of the values thus used in the Bible was rediscovered in about A. D. 1585, by Peter Metius, as 113 for diameter to 355 for circumference . . . the other was rediscovered by the late John A. Parker . . . as 6561 for diameter to 20612 for circumference, which, in the Sacred Record, is the perfect value.” — p. 13
the inch, was likewise the base of one of the royal Egyptian cubits . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “It is seen that from the elements of quadrature of Mr. Parker is to be derived the ancient Egyptian cubit value, and that in terms of the British inch and foot values.” — p. 75
He also found . . . a modified form of the ratio, viz., 113-355 . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The relation of 6561 : 20612 is both in the pyramid structure and in the Bible coupled with the form 113 : 355 . . . connections between the two will be shown, but what the exact basic relations between them were, as anciently recognized, remains to be discovered.” — p. 6
The author discovered that a system of exact science, geometrical, numerical, and astronomical . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1894: “The containment by the Bible of this system is in no manner a disparagement to it in any possible point of view:  to the contrary, if this system of exact science (call it so) is natural and divine, then indeed the Bible at last can be found to contain those exactitudes of Divine workmanship . . . A language thus displayed . . . brings up the question was it (or is it) possible for men to so construct a language, that it should . . . blend in a fully developed, numerical, mathematical, geometrical, astronomical, and cosmical system of exact enunciation?  Truly it bewilders one.” — p. 60 (“Appendix” to the Supplement)

— Footnotes

As we said in Isis . . . “To the present moment . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “To the present moment, with all the controversies and researches, History and Science remain as much as ever in the dark as to the origin of the Jews.  They may as well be the exiled Tchandalas, or Pariahs, of old India, the ‘bricklayers’ mentioned by the Vina-Svati, Veda-Vyasa and Manu, as the Phoenicians of Herodotus, or the Hyk-sos of Josephus, or descendants of Pali shepherds, or a mixture of all these.  The Bible names the Tyrians as a kindred people, and claims dominion over them.” — 2:438-9
“Yet . . . they became a hybrid people . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Yet, if even so, it would only the more confirm our opinion that the Jews are a hybrid race, for the ‘Bible’ shows them freely intermarrying, not alone with the Canaanites, but with every other nation or race they come in contact with.” — 2:439 fn.

— 314 —

Mr. Proctor . . . Speaking of “the multitude of relations . . .”
p/q: C. Staniland Wake, The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, 1882: “. . . Mr. Proctor refers to ‘the multitude of relations, independent of the pyramid, which have turned up while Pyramidalists have been endeavouring to connect the pyramid with the solar system.’ ” — p. 8
“these coincidences,” he says, “are altogether more curious . . .”
p/q: C. Staniland Wake, The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, 1882: “ ‘These coincidences . . . are altogether more curious than any coincidence between the Pyramid and astronomical numbers: the former are as close and remarkable as they are real; the latter, which are only imaginary, have only been established by the process which schoolboys call “fudging,” and now new measures have left the work to be done all over again {See Mr. Petrie’s letter to The Academy, Dec. 17, 1881}.’ ” — p. 8 & fn.
“They must, however, have been more than mere coincidences . . .”
p/q: C. Staniland Wake, The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, 1882: “They must, however, have been more than mere coincidences if the builders of the pyramid had the astronomical knowledge displayed in its perfect orientation and in its other admitted astronomical features.” — p. 8 fn.
Solomon’s Temple . . . never had a real existence . . .
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Les légendaires . . . ont confondu Hiram avec Adonhiram; ni l’un ni l’autre n’ont été architectes.  Ce fut Salomon qui bâtit le temple en son palais, du moins la Bible ne nomme pas l’exécuteur de ses plans [The writers of legends . . . have confused Hiram with Adonhiram; neither the one nor the other were architects.  It was Solomon who built the temple and his palace, at least the Bible does not mention the one who carried out his plans].” — p. 105 fn.
as much a solar myth as is the still later Hiram Abif
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “De cette interprétation, on a conclu qu’Hiram . . . devenu le héros de la nouvelle légende, avec le titre d’architecte, est l’Osiris (le soleil) de l’initiation moderne [From this interpretation the conclusion is that Hiram . . . having become the hero of the new legend, with the title architect, is the Osiris (the Sun) of the modern initiation] . . .” — p. 103

— 315 —

“As to the results of the whole investigation . . .”
p/q: W. M. Flinders Petrie, The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh, 1883: “As to the results of the whole investigation, perhaps many theoriests will agree with an American, who was a warm believer in Pyramid theories when he came to Gizeh.  I had the pleasure of his company there for a couple of days, and at our last meal together he said to me in a saddened tone, — ‘Well, sir!  I feel as if I had been to a funeral.’  By all means let the old theories have a decent burial; though we should take care that in our haste none of the wounded ones are buried alive.” — p. xvi
“The circle is the natural basis . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The circle is the natural basis or beginning of all area, and the square being made so in mathematical science, is artificial and arbitrary.” — p. 14
“Because the circle is the primary shape in nature . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “Because the circle is the primary shape in nature . . . circumference and radius, and not the square of diameter, are the only natural and legitimate elements of area, by which all regular shapes are made equal to the square, and equal to the circle.” — p. 15

— 316 —

“The circle and the equilateral triangle . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The circle and the equilateral triangle are opposite to one another in all the elements of their construction, and hence the fractional diameter of one circle, which is equal to the diameter of one square, is in the opposite duplicate ratio to the diameter of an equilateral triangle whose area is one.” — p. 15
the God-names Elohim and Jehovah, and their adaptation to phallicism . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The god-name Elohim . . . has the radicals El, אל, as the stem masculine, with an h, or ה, giving a feminine quality attached . . .” — p. 68
      “. . . the differential is a one straight line (phallus) of the denomination of the perfect circle (yoni) . . . this value is Jehovah . . . or the perfect one . . .”  “. . . the two words of which Jehovah is composed, make up the original idea of male-female . . . So, it is seen that the perfect one, as originator of measures, takes also the form of birth origin, as hermaphrodite one; hence, the phallic form and use.” — p. 159

— 317-18 —

— Footnotes

his theory was, that the porphyry sarcophagus . . . “is the unit of measure . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Professor Smyth has given us by far the most accurate mathematical description of the great pyramid to be found in literature.  But . . . he so little appreciates ancient Egyptian thought that he actually maintains that the porphyry sarcophagus of the king’s chamber is the unit of measure for the two most enlightened nations on earth — ‘England and America.’ ” — 1:520
see: Piazzi Smyth, Our Inheritance in The Great Pyramid, 1874: “John Taylor . . . suggests that, ‘The coffer in the King’s Chamber of the Great Pyramid was intended to be a standard measure of capacity and weight fit for all nations; and certain nations did originally receive their weights and measures from thence . . . The quarter corn measures of the British farmer are fourth parts or quarters of the contents of the coffer in the King’s Chamber . . .’ This is a statement requiring full examination.” — pp. 97-8
we had said, that Herodotus . . . “might have added . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “But, Herodotus did not tell all . . . he might have added that, externally, it symbolized the creative principle of nature, and illustrated also the principles of geometry, mathematics, astrology, and astronomy.  Internally, it was a majestic fane, in whose sombre recesses were performed the Mysteries, and whose walls had often witnessed the initiation-scenes of members of the royal family.  The porphyry sarcophagus, which Professor Piazzi Smyth, Astronomer Royal of Scotland, degrades into a corn-bin, was the baptismal font, upon emerging from which, the neophyte was ‘born again,’ and became an adept.” — 1:519
Shaw . . . maintained that the Sarcophagus had been used . . . for the Mysteries of Osiris
see: C. Staniland Wake, The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, 1882: “An early English writer, Mr. Shaw . . . thought the coffer was intended for the celebration of the mystical worship of Osiris . . .” — p. 93
“The so-called King’s Chamber . . .”
p/q: C. Staniland Wake, The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, 1882: “The so-called King’s Chamber, of which an enthusiastic pyramidist says, ‘The polished walls, fine materials, grand proportions, and exalted place eloquently tell of glories yet to come,’ if not ‘the chamber of perfections’ of Cheops’s tomb, was probably the place to which the initiant was admitted after he had passed through the narrow upward passage and the grand gallery, with its lowly termination, which gradually prepared him for the final stage of the sacred mysteries.” — p. 93
the same “strait gate” which “leadeth unto life” . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Enter ye in at the strait gate . . . Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” — p. 9 (Matthew, 7:13-14)

— 319 —

Ezra, who remodelled the whole Pentateuch
see: Andrews Norton, The Pentateuch, 1870: “. . . Masius . . . the author of a commentary much esteemed by the learned on Joshua, avowed . . . that the Pentateuch in its present form was not the production of Moses, but of Ezra or some other later writer, who had modernized some of the ancient names.” — p. vi
the story told of Moses by Ezra had been learned by him while at Babylon
see: Andrews Norton, The Pentateuch, 1870: “. . . Le Clerc endeavoured to show that our actual Pentateuch was probably the work of the Israelitish priest, who, after the dissolution of the Northern kingdom, was sent by the King of Assyria from Babylon to instruct the new colonists in the worship of Jehovah . . .” — p. viii

— Footnotes

“In the palace of Sennacherib at Kouyunjik I found another fragment . . .”
p/q: George Smith, Assyrian Discoveries, 1875: “In the palace of Sennacherib at Kouyunjik I found another fragment of the curious history of Sargon, a translation of which I published in the ‘Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology,’ vol. i, part i. page 46.” — p. 224
The capital of Sargon . . . “was the great city of Agadi . . .”
p/q: George Smith, Assyrian Discoveries, 1875: “The capital of Sargon was the great city of Agadi, called by the Semitics Akkad, mentioned in Genesis as a capital of Nimrod (Gen. x. 10) . . . Akkad lay near the city of Sippara on the Euphrates and north of Babylon.” — p. 225
Sippara is the same as the name of the wife of Moses — Zipporah (Exodus ii.)
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Moses was content to dwell with the man: and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter.” — p. 73 (Exodus, 2:21)
1. Sargona, the powerful king, the king of Akkad am I. . . .
p/q: George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876:
“1. Sargina the powerful king the king of Akkad am I.
  2. My mother was a princess, my father I did not know, a brother of my father ruled over the country.
  3. In the city of Azupiranu which by the side of the river Euphrates is situated
  4. my mother the princess conceived me; in difficulty she brought me forth
  5. She placed me in an ark of rushes, with bitumen my exit she sealed up.
  6. She launched me on the river which did not drown me.
  7. The river carried me, to Akki the water carrier it brought me.
  8. Akki the water carrier in tenderness of bowels lifted me . . .” — pp. 299-300
“And when she (Moses’ mother) could not longer hide him . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And when she [Moses’ mother] could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch, and put the child therein; and she laid it in the flags by the river’s brink.” — p. 72 (Exodus, 2:3)

— 320 —

— Footnotes

“The story,” says Mr. G. Smith, “is supposed to have happened . . .”
p/q: George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876: “This story is supposed to have happened about b.c. 1600, rather earlier than the supposed age of Moses; and, as we know that the fame of Sargon reached Egypt, it is quite likely that this account had a connection with the events related in Exodus ii., for every action, when once performed, has a tendency to be repeated.” — p. 300
Sayce has had the courage to push back the dates . . . by two thousand years more
see: A. H. Sayce, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, 1887: “. . . the astronomical observations sent by Kallisthenes from Babylon to Aristotle in B.C. 331 reached back for 1903 years (i.e. to B.C. 2234).” — p.  23 fn.
Sargon must have preceded Moses by 2,000 years at the least
see: A. H. Sayce, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, 1887: “The work on astronomy . . . supplemented by numerous additions in its passage through the hands of generations of Babylonian astronomers . . . contained so many records of eclipses as to demonstrate the antiquity of Babylonian astronomy even in the remote age of Sargon himself.” — pp. 29-30

— 321 —

“The Cube unfolded is in display a cross of the tau . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “Cube unfolded is in display a cross of the tau form, or Egyptian form, or of the Christian cross form.  Circle attached to the first, gives the ansated cross of the Egyptians.  Numbers 3 and 4 counted on the cross, showing a form of the golden candlestick, and of the 3 + 4 = 7, and 6 + 1 = 7, days in the circle of the week, as 7 lights of the sun. . . . the symbol is completed by the attachment of a man to the cross.  This kind of measure was made to co-ordinate with the idea of the origin of human life and hence the phallic form.” — p. v (“Table of Contents,” §§ 20, 21)

— Footnotes

the Hindu Wittoba crucified in space
see: Godfrey Higgins, Anacalypsis, 1836: “Mr. Moore describes an Avatar called Wittoba, who has his foot pierced. . . . ‘The subject of plate 98 [in Moore’s Hindu Pantheon] is evidently the crucifixion . . .’  This incarnation of Vishnu or Cristna is called Wittoba or Ballaji. . . . he is represented exactly in the form of a Romish crucifix . . .” — 1:145
the significance of the “sacred sign,” the Swastica
see: “The Fall of the Cross into Matter” (SD 2:553-62), and “The Cross and the Pythagorean Decade” (SD 2:573-89).
Plato’s Decussated man in Space
see: Justin Martyr, The First Apology, tr. Dods, Reith & Pratten, 1867: “. . . concerning the Son of God in the Timaeus of Plato, where he says, ‘He placed him crosswise [decussated] in the universe’ . . . For he gives the second place to the Logos which is with God, who he said was placed crosswise in the universe . . .” — 2:58 (Apol. I, § 60, Writings of Justin Martyr)

— 321-2 —

“primordial vestiges of these symbols.”  “Under the general view . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “primordial vestiges of these symbols: Under the general view taken of the nature of the number forms of Mr. Parker, it becomes a matter of research of the utmost interest as to when and where their existence and their use first became known.  Has it been a matter of revelation in what we know as the historic age — a cycle exceedingly modern when the age of the human race is contemplated?  It seems, in fact, as to the date of its possession by man, to have been further removed, in the past, from the old Egyptians than are the old Egyptians from us.” — p. 54

— 322 —

“The Easter Isles in ‘mid Pacific’ . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The Easter Isles in ‘mid Pacific’ present the feature of the remaining peaks of the mountains of a submerged continent, for the reason that these peaks are thickly studded with cyclopean statues, remnants of the civilization of a dense and cultivated people, who must have of necessity occupied a widely extended area.  On the backs of these images is to be found the ‘ansated cross,’ and the same modified to the outlines of the human form. A full description, with plate showing the land, with the thickly planted statues, also with copies of the images, is to be found in the January number, 1870, of the ‘London Builder.’  The statues exhibiting the markings of the cross, it is thought, are in the British Museum.” — p. 54
“In the ‘Naturalist,’ published at Salem . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “In the ‘Naturalist,’ published at Salem, Massachusetts, in one of the early numbers (about 36), is to be found a description of some very ancient and curious carvings on the crest walls of the mountains of South America, older by far, it is averred, than the races now living.  The strangeness of these tracings is in that they exhibit the outlines of a man stretched out on a cross, by a series of drawings, by which from the form of a man that of a cross springs, but so done that the cross may be taken as the man, or the man as the cross; thus exhibiting a symbolic display of the interdependency of the forms set forth in the text.” — p. 54
“It is known that tradition among the Aztecs . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “It is known that tradition among the Aztecs has handed down a very perfect account of the deluge of Noah.  Baron Humboldt says that we are to look for the country of Aztalan, the original country of the Aztecs, as high up, at least, as the 42d parallel north; whence journeying, they at last arrived in the vale of Mexico.  In that vale the earthen mounds of the far north become the elegant stone pyramidal, and other structures, whose remains are now found.  The correspondence between the Aztec remains and those of the Egyptians is well known.” — pp. 57-8
“Attwater, from examination of hundreds of them . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . Atwater, from examination of hundreds of them, is convinced that their authors had a knowledge of astronomy.  As to one of the most perfect of the pyramidal structures among the Aztecs, Humboldt gives a description to the following effect: ‘The form of this pyramid (of Papantla), which has seven stories, is more tapering than any other monument of this kind yet discovered, but its height is not remarkable, being but 57 feet, its base but 25 feet on each side.  However, it is remarkable on one account: it is built entirely of hewn stones, of an extraordinary size, and very beautifully shaped.  Three staircases lead to the top, the steps of which were decorated with hieroglyphical sculptures and small niches, arranged with great symmetry.  The number of these niches seems to allude to the 318 simple and compound signs of the days of their civil calendar.’ ” — p. 58

— Footnotes

See farther on the description given of the early Aryan initiation
see: “The Symbolism of . . . the Cross and Circle”: “. . . Visvakarma, crucifying the ‘Sun-Initiate’ on the cruciform lathe. . . . ‘the attachment of a man to the cross . . . was made use of in this very form of display by the Hindus’; but, made ‘to co-ordinate’ with the idea of the new rebirth of man by spiritual, not physical regeneration.” — SD 2:543
Visvakarma crucifying the Sun, “Vikkârtana,” shorn of his beams — on a cruciform lath
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “. . . the sage Viswa-karma, placed the luminary [the Sun] on his lathe and cut away an eighth of his effulgence . . . The names and epithets of the sun are numberless.  He is . . . Vikarttana, ‘shorn of his beams’ (by Viswa-karma) . . .” — p. 311

— 322-3 —

“318 is the Gnostic value of Christ . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “318 is the Gnostic value of Christ, and the famous number of the trained or circumcised servants of Abram.  When it is considered that 318 is an abstract value, and universal as expressive of a diameter value to a circumference of unity, its use in the composition of a civil calendar becomes manifest.” — p. 58

— 323 —

scientific theories . . . are a thousand times nearer the truth than the vagaries of theology
see: Charles Lyell, Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man, 1863: “In our attempts to account for the origin of species, we find ourselves still sooner brought face to face with . . . a system of nature which had gone on for millions of years . . .” — p. 469
6000 years since Adam . . . Lyell’s “Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man”
see: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “No one can read Sir Charles Lyell’s ‘Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man’ without acknowledging that these evidences are very strong indeed; and that they point to an antiquity far beyond the six thousand years which have hitherto been regarded as our age.” — p. 197

— Footnotes

“the Scriptures carefully refrain . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall, published anonymously], 1871: “In this respect, then, the Scriptures may be said to stand on a level with other writings which are not inspired . . . for, while they carefully refrain from making any direct contribution to the scientific knowledge of mankind, they have never stumbled upon any statement which will not abide the light of advancing science.” — p. 14

— 323-4 —

They speak of “a white Adam and a black Adam, a red Adam and a yellow Adam.”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “There are . . . very learned ethnologists who assert that the existing varieties of the human race can only be accounted for by the creation of several Adams — a white Adam and a black Adam, a red Adam and a yellow Adam . . .” — p. 195

— 324 —

Hindus enumerating the rebirths of Vamadeva from the Linga Purâna
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the Linga P. [I, x] describes the repeated birth of Śiva, or Vāmadeva, as a Kumāra, or boy, from Brahmā, in each Kalpa, who again becomes four. . . . all of a white complexion: in the thirteenth [Kalpa], the Kumāra becomes Virajas, Vivāhu, Viśoka, Viśwabhāvana; all of a red colour: in the thirty-first, he becomes four youths of a yellow colour; and, in the thirty-second, the four Kumāras were black.” — 1:79 fn.
The unknown author of “Primeval Man”
see: Primeval Man Unveiled: or, the Anthropology of the Bible [by James Gall, published anonymously].  London: Hamilton, Adams, & Co., 1871.
“it would be unfortunate if the defenders of the Bible . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “It would be unfortunate if the defenders of the Bible should be driven into the position of either surrendering the inspiration of Scripture, or denying the conclusions of geologists . . .” — p. 55
“Adam was not the first man . . .”
see: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “. . . it is not so conclusively asserted that Adam was the first man, or that no previous race existed before his time . . .” — p. 198
The exhumed relics . . . “instead of shaking our confidence in Scripture . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “. . . the recent discovery of ancient human remains, supposing them to be ultimately proved to be pre-Adamic, instead of shaking our confidence in Scripture, supplies additional proof of its veracity.” — p. 194
“we” (the clergy) “are enabled to leave scientific men . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “The moment we make the distinction which we have indicated, we discover the mistake, and are enabled to leave scientific men to pursue their studies without attempting to coerce them by the fear of heresy.” — p. 55
“The Bible narrative does not commence with creation . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “The Bible narrative does not commence with creation, as is commonly supposed, but with the formation of Adam and Eve, millions of years after our planet had been created.  Its previous history, so far as Scripture is concerned, is yet unwritten.” — p. 55
“There may have been not one, but twenty different races . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “There may have been not one, but twenty different races upon the earth before the time of Adam, just as there may be twenty different races of men on other worlds.” — p. 55
“Satan (was) never in heaven, Angels and men (being) one species” . . . “Angels that sinned.”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “Contents. . . Angels and Men One Species [ch. 10] . . . The Angels that Sinned [ch. 13] . . . Satan Never in Heaven [ch. 15] . . .” — p. vii
Satan was “the first Prince of this world”
see: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “. . . we must mark the earth-bound habitat of Satan.  He is the ‘prince of this world . . .’ ” — p. 214
Satan . . . remained on earth as a disembodied Spirit, and tempted Adam and Eve.
see: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “If Satan and his angels were created in the image of God, and if, falling from their original righteousness, they died, and are now disembodied spirits, they must have lived and died before the time of Adam; because, even in the garden of Eden, Satan was a disembodied spirit, and had to use the organism of a serpent in order to communicate with Eve.” — p. 202

— Footnotes

author . . . of the “Stars and the Angels”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “The present work is a further development of views published in 1858 in a volume entitled ‘The Stars and the Angels.’ ” — p. iii (Preface)
ch. iv. of Genesis, v. 16 and 17, which shows Cain going to the land of Nod . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.  And Cain knew his wife . . .” — p. 5 (Genesis, 4:16, 17)

— 324-5 —

“The earlier ages of the Satanic race . . . may have been a period of patriarchal civilization . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “The earlier ages of the Satanic race, and more especially during the life-time of Satan, may have been a period of patriarchal civilization and comparative repose — a time of Tubal-cains and Jubals, when both sciences and arts attempted to strike their roots into the accursed ground . . . What a subject for an epic . . .” — pp. 206-7

— 325 —

“there are inevitable incidents which must have occurred. . . .”
p/q: Primeval Man Unveiled [by James Gall], 1871: “There are inevitable incidents which must have occurred.  We see before us . . . the gay primeval lover wooing his blushing bride at dewy eve under the Danish oaks that then grew where now no oaks will grow. . . . the gray primeval patriarch bending under his load of years with his primeval offspring innocently gamboling by his side. . . . A thousand such pictures rise before us . . .” — p. 207
“As it would seem irrational to affirm that we already know all existing causes . . .”
p/q: Alexander Bain, Logic, 1870: “As it would seem irrational to affirm that we already know all existing causes, permission must be given to assume, if need be, an entirely new agent. . . . Assuming what is not strictly accurate as yet, that the undulatory hypothesis accounts for all facts, we are called on to decide whether the existence of an undulating ether is thereby proved.” — 2:131

— 325-6 —

“We cannot positively affirm that no other supposition will explain the facts. . . .”
p/q: Alexander Bain, Logic, 1870: “We cannot positively affirm that no other supposition will explain the facts . . . Newton’s corpuscular hypothesis is admitted to have broken down on Interference; and there is at the present day, no rival.  Still, it is extremely desirable in all such hypotheses, to find some collateral confirmation, some evidence aliunde, of the supposed ether.” — 2:131

— 326 —

“Some Hypotheses consist of assumptions . . .”
p/q: Alexander Bain, Logic, 1870: “Some Hypotheses consist of assumptions as to the minute structure and operations of bodies.  From the nature of the case, these assumptions can never be proved by direct means.  Their only merit is their suitability to express the phenomena.  They are Representative Fictions.” — 2:132

— 327 —

that Deity was not “Jehovah” (see “The Holy of Holies”)
see: “The ‘Holy of Holies.’ Its Degradation”: “. . . behind the symbolic substitute — Jehovah — there was the unknown, incognizable Deity, the Kabalistic Ain-Soph . . . Jehovah was a substitute for purposes of an exoteric national faith, and had no importance or reality in the eyes of the erudite priests and philosophers . . .” — SD 2:472
the “Unknown” . . . “dwelleth not in temples made with hands” (Acts xviii [xvii], 23-4)
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, To the Unknown God.  Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.  God that made the world and all things therein . . . dwelleth not in temples made with hands . . . though he be not far from every one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being . . .” — pp. 182-3 (Acts, 17:23-25, 27-28)

— Footnotes

he terms the “First Cause” . . . a “power manifesting through phenomena” . . .
p/q: Herbert Spencer, First Principles, 1880: “. . . in our search for a cause, we discover no resting place until we arrive at the hypothesis of a First Cause; and we have no alternative but to regard this First Cause as Infinite and Absolute.” — p. 38 (§ 12)
      “Thus the consciousness of an Inscrutable Power manifested to us through all phenomena, has been growing ever clearer . . .” — p. 108 (§ 31)

— 328 —

— Footnotes

The term Protyle is due to Mr. Crookes . . .
see: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “What existed anterior to our elements, before matter as we now have it, I propose to name protyle.  But how can we suppose the protyle, or fire-mist, converted into the atomic condition? . . . that universal formative principle in nature which I suggest first made itself manifest in the condensation of protyle into atomic matter.” — p. 95 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)

— 329 —

“Matter” ought to be applied to the aggregate of objects of possible perception . . .
p/q: Immanuel Kant, Kritik der Urtheilskraft, 1884: “Aber der Boden, auf welchem ihr Gebiet errichtet . . . ist immer doch nur der Inbegriff der Gegenstände aller möglichen Erfahrung [But the subject matter to which its realm extends . . . is always only the aggregate of objects of all possible cognitive perception] . . .” — pp. 10-11 (Introduction, xvii)

— 330 —

(See “Chaos, Theos, Kosmos.”)
see: “Chaos – Theos – Kosmos,” SD 1:342-9.
“From Intelligence . . . associated with Ignorance . . . attended by its projective power . . .”
p/q: Manual of Hindu Pantheism: The Vedāntasāra, tr. G. A. Jacob, 1881: “From Intelligence associated with Ignorance attended by its projective power, in which the quality of insensibility (tamas) abounds, proceeds ether, — from ether, air, — from air, heat, — from heat, water, — and from water, earth. . . . ‘From this, from this same Self, was the ether produced’ (Taittirīya Upanishad, 2. 1).” — p. 57
“From Intelligence (called Mahat) . . . proceeds Ether . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From the great principle (Mahat) Intellect, threefold Egotism (Ahaṃkāra) . . . Elementary Egotism, then becoming productive . . . produced from it Ether . . .” — 1:32-4 (i.2)

— 331 —

the deific Entity . . . under the name of “Pater omnipotens Æther” . . .
see: Virgil, Works, 1865: “Tum pater omnipotens fecundis imbribus Aether / Coniugis in gremium laetae descendit [Then Ether the Almighty Father descends in fruitful showers into the lap of his joyous spouse] . . .” — 1:240 (Georgica, ii, 325-6)
see: Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, tr. H. A. J. Munro, 1866: “. . . poets and philosophers love to celebrate this union of ether and earth, ether as father descending in showers into the lap of mother earth.” — 2:137-8 (note 250)
the “Imponderable Substance,” once admitted as the “Ether of Space”
see: M. E. Edlund, “On the Nature of Electricity,” Aug. 1872: “It was formerly the received opinion that heat consisted of a subtile and imponderable substance emitted by the source of heat . . . it is now proved that these phenomena are oscillations, either of the minutest particles of matter or of the aether — that subtile and elastic material diffused through all nature . . .” — p. 81 (Philosophical Magazine, v. 44)
the Cosmocratores — or the “world bearers” . . . Mundi Tenentes — the “world holders” . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “cosmocratores, porteurs du monde, comme dit Bossuet; mundi tenentes, ou tenants du monde, comme dit Tertullien; mundi dominos, ou les dominations, comme disent la plupart des commentateurs [Cosmocratores, ‘World Bearers’ as Bossuet says, mundi tenentes, or the ‘world holders,’ as Tertullian says; mundi dominos, or the Dominations, as most of the commentators say] . . .” — 3:392
Zoroaster . . . said: “Consult it only when it is without form or figure”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Zoroastre disait: ‘Ne le consulte que lorsqu’il est sans figure et sans forme, absque forma et figura’ [Zoroaster said: ‘consult it only when it is without form or figure] . . .” — 3:416
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “When you behold a sacred fire without form / Shining flashingly through the depths of the whole world / Hear the voice of fire.” — p. 280 (Chaldean Oracles of Zoroaster, fragment 199)
“When it has a form — heed it not” . . . “but when it is formless, obey it, for it is then sacred fire . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Quand il a une forme, ne l’écoute pas, dit à son tour Psellus; quand il n’en a pas, écoute-le, car c’est alors le feu sacré, et tout ce qu’il te révélera sera très-vrai [When it has a form, heed it not, says Psellus in his turn; when it is formless, listen to it, for it is then sacred fire, and all it will reveal to you shall be true].” — 3:416
Virgil calls Jupiter, Pater omnipotens Æther
see: Virgil, Works, 1865: “Tum pater omnipotens . . . Aether [Then Aether the Almighty Father] {Some identify ‘Aether’ [All-Father] and ‘Tellus’ [Earth Mother] with Jupiter and Juno} . . .” — 1:240 & fn. (Georgica, ii, 325)

— Footnotes

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world . . .” — p. 258 (Ephesians, 6:12)
Further on St. Paul mentions the spiritual malices . . . spread in the air
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . l’apôtre saint Paul aux Éphésiens: ‘. . . c’est contre les recteurs ténébreux de ce monde . . . contre les malices spirituelles répandues dans les airs . . . spiritualia nequitiae in coelestibus’ [the apostle Saint Paul to the Ephesians: ‘. . . it is against the powers of darkness of this world . . . against the spiritual powers of wickedness scattered in heavenly places’].” — 3:392

— 331-2 —

the author of the Homoiomerian System of philosophy, Anaxagoras of Clazomenæ . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The author of the Homoiomerian system of philosophy, Anaxagoras of Clazomenè, firmly believed that the spiritual prototypes of all things, as well as their elements, were to be found in the boundless ether, where they were generated, whence they evolved, and whither they returned . . .” — 1:158
see: William Enfield, The History of Philosophy, 1837: “Anaxagoras, of Clazomene . . . said concerning himself that he was born to contemplate the heavens.”  “. . . he supposed bodies of every kind to be generated from similar particles, ὁμοιομερείαι [homoiomeriæ] . . .” — pp. 84, 85, 86

— 332 —

prototypes of all things . . . in the boundless Ether where they were generated
see: William Enfield, The History of Philosophy, 1837: “That Anaxagoras maintained an infinite mind to be the author of all motion and life, is attested by many ancient authorities.”   “. . . he taught that air, or subtle ether, is the first material principle in nature, but that it partakes of a divine intelligence, without which nothing could be produced. . . . he conceived the infinite ether to be animated by a divine mind, and all thngs to be formed from this compound principle.” — pp. 87, 88
the elements are Tamas, i.e., “unenlightened by intellect, which they obscure”
p/q: Vedanta-Sara, tr. J. R. Ballantyne, 1898: “That there is the prevalence of tamas in the cause of these (five elements . . .) from the excess of senselessness observed in them, (— the elements being unenlightened by Intellect which they quite obscure).” — p. 32 (V.)
“What is the primordial Chaos but Æther” . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “What is the primordial Chaos but Æther?  The modern Ether; not such as is recognized by our scientists, but such as it was known to the ancient philosophers, long before the time of Moses; Ether, with all its mysterious and occult properties, containing in itself the germs of universal creation; Ether, the celestial virgin, the spiritual mother of every existing form and being, from whose bosom as soon as ‘incubated’ by the Divine Spirit, are called into existence Matter and Life, Force and Action.” — 1:134
Electricity, magnetism, heat, light . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Electricity, magnetism, heat, light, and chemical action are so little understood even now that fresh facts are constantly widening the range of our knowledge.  Who knows where ends the power of this protean giant — Ether; or whence its mysterious origin? — Who, we mean, that denies the spirit that works in it and evolves out of it all visible forms?” — 1:134
It will be an easy task to show . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “It is an easy task to show that the cosmogonical legends all over the world are based on a knowledge by the ancients of those sciences which have allied themselves in our days to support the doctrine of evolution; and that further research may demonstrate that they were far better acquainted with the fact of evolution itself, embracing both its physical and spiritual aspects, than we are now.” — 1:134
“With the old philosophers, evolution was a universal theorem . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “With the old philosophers, evolution was a universal theorem, a doctrine embracing the whole, and an established principle; while our modern evolutionists are enabled to present us merely with speculative theoretics; with particular, if not wholly negative theorems.  It is idle for the representatives of our modern wisdom to close the debate and pretend that the question is settled, merely because the obscure phraseology of the Mosaic account clashes with the definite exegesis of ‘exact science.’ ” — 1:134

— 333 —

“Removing the darkness, the Self-existent Lord . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Then the self-existent Lord became manifest . . . removing the darkness. . . . Wishing to produce different beings from his own body, he having desired, first created water alone; in that he cast seed.  That became a golden egg . . .” — p. 2 (i.6, 8-9)
“Darkness, imperceptible, without definite qualities . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “This (All) was darkness, imperceptible, without definite qualities, undiscoverable, unknowable, as if wholly in sleep.” — pp. 1-2 (i.5)
Having dwelt in that Egg for a whole divine year, he . . . splits that egg in two
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “That Lord having dwelt in that egg for a year, spontaneously, by his own meditation, split that egg in two.  And with those two shares he formed the heaven and the earth, in the middle the sky and eight regions, and the perpetual place of the waters.” — p. 3 (i.12-13)
That which is the undiscrete . . . cause, eternal, which Is and Is not . . .
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “That which is the undiscrete Cause, eternal, which Is and Is not, from It issued that male who is called in the world Brahmā.” — p. 3 (i.11)

— Footnotes

vide . . . “Cross and Circle,” and the “Earliest Symbolics of the Cross”
see: “Cross and Circle,” SD 2:545-53; and “The Cross, a Christian After-Thought,” SD 2:587-9.

— 333-4 —

“(14.) From Self (âtmanah) he created mind . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “From himself {Or ‘from self,’ ātmanaḥ} he created mind, which is and is not; and from mind egoism {Self-consciousness}, the ruler, the lord.” — p. 3 (i.14) & fns. (2 & 4)

— 334 —

Medhâtithi, the commentator, justly observes here that it is the reverse . . .
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Self-consciousness (egoism) is produced from mind; Medh. [Medhātithi] says it means the converse of this, that the former is produced from the latter.” —  p. 3, fn. 4
For Manas is dual, and as shown and translated by Colebrooke . . .
see: H. T. Colebrooke, Essays on the Religion and Philosophy of the Hindus, 1858: “Eleven organs of sense and action, which are also productions of the conscious principle.  Ten are external: viz. five of sense and five of action.  The eleventh is internal, an organ of both sense and action, termed manas or mind. . . . Mind, serving both for sense and action, is an organ by affinity, being cognate with the rest.” — p. 153
Medhâtithi translates it as “the one conscious of the I,” or Ego, not “ruler”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “. . . and from mind egoism, the ruler {According to Medh., ‘the one conscious of the I’} . . .” — p. 3 (i.14) & fn. 5
“He also, having made the subtile parts of those six . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “He also, having made the subtile parts of those six, of unmeasured brightness, to enter into the elements of self, created all beings.” — p. 3 (i.16)
“He having pervaded the subtile parts of those six . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “ ‘Into the elements of self.’  K. [Kullūka Bhaṭṭa] has ātmamātrāsu, as translated above; Medh. would read mātrābhiḥ, ‘by elements;’ thus the whole verse would be: ‘He having pervaded the subtile parts of those six, of unmeasured brightness, by elements of self, created all beings.’ ” — p. 3, fn. 7
“The six appear rather to be the manas plus the five . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “The six appear rather to be the manas plus the five principles of ether, air, fire, water, earth; ‘having united fine portions of these six with the spiritual elements, he (thus) created all existent things’. . . ātmamātra is therefore the spiritual atom as opposed to the elementary, not reflexive ‘elements of himself.’ ” — pp. 3-4, fn. 7

— 334-5 —

“(17.) As the subtile elements of bodily forms of This One depend on these six . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “As the subtile elements {‘Elements’ means here portions} of bodily forms of This One depend on these six, so the wise call his form çarīra.” — p. 4 (i.17) & fn. 1

— 335 —

“This non-eternal (Universe) arises then from the Eternal, by means of . . .” (purusha)
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “This non-eternal (universe) arises then from the eternal, by means of the subtile elements of forms of those seven very glorious principles {‘Principles’ — puruṣa is here put for tattva, according to Medhātithi (The five elements plus mind and self-consciousness are probably meant; ‘subtile elements’ as before ‘fine portions of form.’)}.” — p. 4 (i.19) & fn. 5
they constitute the “seven purusha”
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Of these {These (elements, manas, and self-consciousness) seven puruṣa}, then, that which succeeds partakes of the quality of that which goes before . . .” — p. 4 (i.20) & fn. 6
“those which are called the atomic destructible portions” . . .
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “But of the five (elements), those which are called the atomic destructible {distinct from the atoms of the nyāya} elements, by these this All arises in successive order.” — p. 5 (i.27) & fn. 4
This creative Brahmâ, issuing from the mundane or golden egg, unites in himself . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the character of Brahmā {united in himself the nature of either sex . . . ‘this first-born of the world, whom they represented under two shapes and characters, and who sprang from the mundane egg . . .’}. ” — 1:40 & fn. (i.2)
“πρωτόγονον διφυῆ τρίγονον Βακχεῖον . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . this first-born . . . was the person from whom the mortals and immortals were derived.  He was the same as Dionysus, whom they styled, πρωτόγονον διφυῆ τρίγονον Βακχεῖον Ἄνακτα Ἄγριον ἀρρητὸν κρύφιον δικέρωτα δίμορφον [first-born, thrice begotten Bacchic king, living in the wild, ineffable, secretive, two-horned and two-formed] . . .” — 1:40 fn.
see: Thomas Taylor, The Mystical Hymns of Orpheus, 1824: “Bacchus I call . . . O firstborn, thrice begotten, Bacchic king. / Rural, ineffable, two-form’d, obscure, / Two-horn’d . . .” — p. 68 (Hymn 30, “To Bacchus”)
Seven Angels of the Presence
see: Calmet’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1830: “[In Revelation, viii.2- 3] St. John saw seven angels standing before the Lord.  In a very ancient book, ‘The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,’ they are called angels of the presence . . .” — 1:128
mahat, ahamkara and the five tanmâtras are called the seven Prakritis . . .
see: Sānkhya Kārikā and The Bhāshya, tr. Colebrooke & Wilson, 1837: “Mūla (the root) prakriti (nature) is . . . the root of the seven principles . . . Seven principles. — Mahat and the rest; from its being the great (mahat) element; this is Intellect (Buddhi). . . . The seven principles are, 1. Intellect [Mahā-Buddhi or Mahat]; 2. Egotism [Ahaṃkāra]; 3-7. The five subtle rudiments [tanmātras].” — p. 16 (III, Bhāshya)
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The seven prakritis, or productive productions, are, in the pure Sānkhya philosophy, mahat, ahaṃkāra, and the five tanmātras.” — 5(I):199 fn.
counted from Maha-Buddhi or Mahat down to Earth. . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In this manner, — as (in the creation,) were the seven forms of nature (Prakṛiti), reckoned from Mahat to earth . . .”  “See the Sānkhya-kārikā, III., and the commentaries . . . which counts the seven prakṛitis from mahā-buddhi — the same as mahat . . .” — 5(I):198, 199 fn. (vi.4)

— Footnotes

Ahamkara . . . this conception of “I” . . . is either sattwa, “pure quietude,” or appears as rajas . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Ahaṃkāra, ‘the conception of I,’ has a preponderance either of sattwa, ‘pure quietude’, or of rajas, ‘activity’, or of tamas, ‘stagnancy’. ” — 1:35 fn.

— 336 —

chapter i. of Genesis . . . “God” commands to another “god,” who does his bidding
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” — p. 1 (Genesis, 1:3)
“God” fashions the heaven and the Earth . . . the former is no Heaven in fact, but the “Deep” . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” — p. 1 (Genesis, 1:2)
“And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters” . . . this Spirit is Nara-yana
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This is the well-known verse of Manu, I., 10, rendered by Sir Wm. Jones: ‘The waters are called nārāh, because they were the production of Nara, or the spirit of god; and, since they were his first ayana, or place of motion, he thence is named Nārāyaṇa, or moving on the waters.’ . . . there can be little doubt that this tradition is, in substance, the same as that of Genesis [1:2] . . .” — 1:56 fn.

— Footnotes

See “The Holy of Holies”
see: “The ‘Holy of Holies.’ Its Degradation.” — SD 2:459-74
Oulam . . . a time when beginning or end is not known
see: John Wesley Hanson, Aiōn-Aiōnios, 1880: “Says a French author {LeClerc}: ‘It is certain that in Hebrew there is no word which, properly speaking, signifies eternity or a time which has no end.  Gnolam {Olam} signifies only a time, of which we know not the beginning or the end . . .’ ” — p. 11 & fn.
Oulam . . . does not mean “infinite duration” . . .
see: John Wesley Hanson, Aiōn-Aiōnios, 1880: “Of course the Greek word aiōn into which the Hebrew olam is almost always rendered, must, in the Old Testament, have the precise meaning of the word it represents . . . As from olam signifies from an indefinite past time, and to olam an unknown time in the future . . . instead of being rendered forever, or forever and ever, should in English, be represented by an age of ages, or ages of ages, or some other phrase indicating an indefinite period . . . Of their own intrinsic force the words cannot denote endless duration.” — p. 13
by Eternity and Immortality only “existence to the end of the Kalpa” is meant
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “By immortality is meant existence to the end of the Kalpa . . .” — 2:269 (ii.8)
See the remarkable work of James Darmesteter, Cosmogonies Aryennes . . .
see: James Darmesteter, Cosmogonies Aryennes, in Essais Orientaux, 1883, pp. 135-207.

— 337 —

“And God said, Let there be a firmament . . .” . . . and “God,” the second, obeyed . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘He said’ to Elohim: ‘Let light be!’  The Lord of the Building, He said it, and the builder did it at once. . . . He said: ‘Let be a firmament.’  ‘Let be lights.’  And all has been done at once.” — p. 360
“there was light” . . . does not mean light at all, but . . . the androgyne “Adam Kadmon”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . ‘And Elohim said; Let light be! and it was light.’ . . . And this is the double-face formed Adam {The first Adam [Adam Kadmon], the Man, was an androgene and is the Primordial Ideation Adam . . .}.” — p. 360 & fn.
the secondary angels, the first being the Elohim . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Nachmanides and R. Be’hai hold, the first word Elohim of the first verse of Genesis is really e’lohim and only meant, energies or angels, and not the Deity.  That B’resheeth meant Be-raisheeth, i.e., with Wisdom, one of the Sephiroth, and that through it was emanated, that, the essence of which is unknown . . .” — p. 348
whether we call these “Forces” . . . the Ophanim, as St. John [Ezekiel] does
see: Abbé L. Chiarini, “Chaldean Astronomy Discovered in Ezekiel,” 1831: “I shall consider a little more fully the symbolical meaning of the eyes, with which Ezekiel has filled the four circles of his sphere, and the four cherubim attached to them: ‘and their whole body . . . and the wheels [ophanim], were full of eyes round about . . . the wheels that they four had {the word ophanim must be translated ‘wheels’ or ‘circles’ the first time; and the second, ‘sides’ or ‘faces’ . . . ‘with his four faces’}.” — p. 305 & fn. (Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register, v. 4)
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . and round about the throne were four living creatures full of eyes before and behind.  [Creatures with four faces] . . . like a lion . . . like a calf, and the third creature had a face as of a man, and the fourth . . . a flying eagle.” — p. 323 (Revelation of St. John, 4:6-7)
In the Sepher Jezireh . . . “One is the Spirit of the living God . . .”
p/q: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “ ‘One is the spirit of the living God, blessed be His name, who liveth for ever! voice, spirit, and word, this is the Holy Ghost.’ (Chapter i, Mishna ix).” — p. 67
First from One emanated number Two, or Air . . . and then number Three, Water . . .
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “One is the spirit . . . The creative air, represented by number two, emanated from the Spirit . . . The water again, represented by the number three, proceeded from the air . . .” — p. 67
Ether or Fire completes the mystic four
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “. . . the ether or fire, represented by the number four, emanated from the water . . .” — p. 67
“When the Concealed of the Concealed wanted to reveal Himself, he first made a point . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . when Ain Soph desired to manifest Itself, It first made a point. . . . This idea of Kether as the representative of Existence, the Being or the Absolute manifested . . . constitutes a Perfect Form . . .” — p. 257
      “ ‘Verily, so also, the King of Kings, the Concealed of all the Hidden, and the Cause of all Causes, disguises Itself in a splendid garment (i.e., the entire universe) . . .’ ” — p. 293 (Tiqqoon 21)

— 338 —

“He maketh the wind His messengers, flaming Fire His servants,” says the Jezireh
p/q: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “He maketh the wind his messengers, flaming fire his servants.” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, Cap. i, Mishna ix, x)
Chaos . . . the Soul of the World after it had been impregnated by the Spirit . . .
see: George Stanley Faber, The Origin of Pagan Idolatry, 1816: “This great universal parent, the Panthea of antiquity, who . . . produces the mundane egg in Chaos, was certainly the . . . mundane ship floating (as it was supposed) in the waters of Chaos. . . . Thales and Anaxagoras agree in teaching, that water was the matrix of all things, and that the Universe remained in a state of chaotic confusion until Nous or Intellect came and arranged it in order.  This demiurgic Nous is evidently the same person as the Nous of the Platonists . . . [and] was deemed the Soul of the World.” — 1:256
the deity that pervades all Space and things. . . . “the living Fire”
see: Tennemann & Morell, Manual of the History of Philosophy, 1870: “God is a living fire, unlike however to common fire; he is named also πνεῦμα or spirit; he fashions, produces and permeates all things . . .” — p. 137 (Chrysippus)

— Footnotes

throughout the Acts [Epistles], Paul calls the invisible Kosmic Beings the “Elements”
see: The Interlinear Greek New Testament, 1894: “. . . when we were infants, under the elements [στοιχεῖα] of the world . . .”  “. . . having been known by God, how do ye turn again to the weak and beggarly elements [στοιχεῖα] . . .” — pp. 495-6 (Galatians, 4:3, 9)
      “. . . according to the elements [στοιχεῖα] of the world . . .”  “If then ye died with the Christ from the elements [στοιχείων] of the world . . .” — pp. 523-4 (Colossians, 2:8, 20)
      “. . . the elements [στοιχεῖα] of the beginning of the oracles of God . . .” — p. 566 (Hebrews, 5:12)
“The poor primordial elements have long been exiled . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The poor, honest primordial elements have long been exiled, and our ambitious men of science run races to determine who shall add one more to the fledgling brood of the sixty-three or more elementary substances.” — 1:190
they are not “primordial principles . . . out of which the universe was fashioned”
p/q: Josiah Cooke, The New Chemistry, 1874: “These substances are frequently called chemical elements, but our modern chemistry does not attach to this term the idea that these substances are primordial principles, or self-existing essences, out of which the universe has been fashioned.  Such ideas were associated with the word element in the old Greek philosophy . . .” — p. 111
see: Plato, Works, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1804: “. . . the first elements, as it were, from which we and other things are compounded cannot be rationally described.  For they say that each of these can alone be denominated by itself . . .” — 4:86 (Theaetetus)
as Professor Crookes [Cooke] says, “they are unfortunate terms”
p/q: Josiah Cooke, The New Chemistry, 1874: “. . . so far as the words element and elementary suggest such ideas, they are unfortunate terms.  Experimental science, which deals only with legitimate deductions from the facts of observation, has nothing to do with any kind of essences except those which it can see, smell, or taste.  It leaves all others to the metaphysicians.” — pp. 111-13
“The Chaos of the ancients, the Zoroastrian sacred fire . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The chaos of the ancients; the Zoroastrian sacred fire, or the Antus-byrum [Âtas-Behrâm] of the Parsees; the Hermes fire; the Elmes-fire of the ancient Germans; the lightning of Cybelè; the burning torch of Apollo; the flame on the altar of Pan; the inextinguishable fire in the temple on the Acropolis, and in that of the Vesta; the fire-flame of Pluto’s helm; the brilliant sparks on the hats of the Dioscuri, on the Gorgon head, the helm of Pallas, and the staff of Mercury . . . the Egyptian Phtha, or Ra; the Grecian Zeus Cataibates (the descending); the pentecostal fire-tongues; the burning bush of Moses; the pillar of fire of the Exodus, and the ‘burning lamp’ of Abram; the eternal fire of the ‘bottomless pit’; the Delphic oracular vapors; the Sidereal light of the Rosicrucians; the Akasa of the Hindu adepts; the Astral light of Eliphas Levi; the nerve aura and the fluid of the magnetists; the od of Reichenbach . . . the Psychod and ectenic force of Thury; the psychic force of Sergeant Cox and Mr. Crookes; the atmospheric magnetism of some naturalists; galvanism; and finally, electricity, are but various names for many different manifestations, or effects of the same mysterious, all-pervading cause — the Greek Archeus, or Ἀρχαῖος.” — 1:125

— 339 —

Magus and magnes are two branches growing from the same trunk
see: Éliphas Lévi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 1861: “[Paracelse] place la toute-puissance du mage dans le magnès intérieur et occulte [Paracelsus locates the omnipotence of the Magus in the interior and occult magnes].” — 1:302
“a fire that gives knowledge of the future.  Science and amiable speech” . . .
p/q: Joseph Ennemoser, The History of Magic, tr. William Howitt, 1854: “. . . in the Zendavesta it is said ‘that fire gives knowledge of the future, science, and amiable speech.’ ” — 2:35
see: The Zend-Avesta, Part II, tr. James Darmesteter, 1883: “Hail unto thee, O Fire [Atar], son of Ahura Mazda . . . Give me, O Ātar . . . Knowledge, sagacity; quickness of tongue . . . and then the understanding that goes on growing and the one that is not acquired through learning.” — pp. 358, 359 (Nyāyis, V. 4, 10)
The Zohar explains it as the “white hidden fire, in the Resha trivrah” . . .
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘. . . Resha hivrah, i.e., the White Head . . . appointed, prepared and produced, a spark (scintillation) from the splendour of intense Light (or, the Cardinal Lamp). . . . And the spark existed and remained (intact), and a pure air (azoth) came forth . . . And in that pure air . . . the spark (of vitality) was absorbed and taken up and included “in it” . . . it was hidden “in it” . . . And the subtile air (azoth) exists above it on this, and the subtile fire (the white hidden fire) on that, side.’ ” — pp. 133-4
(the White Head), whose Will causes the fiery fluid to flow in 370 currrents . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘. . . and Resha hivrah’s, i.e., the White Head’s, Will went on, and the spark (scintilla) was extended into 370 currents . . . on four sides (the four cardinal points of the compass.).’ ” — p. 133
the “Serpent that runs with 370 leaps” of the Siphrah Dzenioota
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘The Serpent which runs with 370 leaps. . . . When the Perfect One (or, the Arch-Angel Metatron?) is raised up, the serpent is changed into three spirits . . .’ ” — p. 234 (Siphrah D’Tznioothah, c. v, § 33)
(Vide Part II. in Vol. II . . . “The Many Meanings of the War in Heaven.”)
see: SD 2:492-505.
the guiding action of “higher intelligences” as a “necessary part of the great laws . . .”
p/q: Alfred Russel Wallace, Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection, 1870: “It therefore implies, that the great laws which govern the material universe were insufficient for his production, unless we consider . . . that the controlling action of such higher intelligences is a necessary part of those laws . . .” — p. 360
“Myths . . . are now proved to be fables, just in proportion as we misunderstand them . . .”
p/q: E. Pococke, India in Greece, 1852: “. . . under the name of ‘Myths.’  They are now proved to be fables, just in proportion as we misunderstand them; truths, in proportion as they were once understood.” — p. viii

— 340 —

“. . . this visible universe of spirit and matter . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “This visible universe of spirit and matter, they say, is but the concrete image of the ideal abstraction; it was built on the model of the first divine idea.  Thus our universe existed from eternity in a latent state.  The soul animating this purely spiritual universe is the central sun, the highest deity itself.  It was not himself who built the concrete form of his idea, but his first-begotten . . .” — 1:342
it was constructed on the geometrical figure of the dodecahedron
see: Plato, The Timaeus, ed. R. D. Archer-Hind, 1888: “And whereas a fifth figure [the dodecahedron] yet alone remained, God used it for the universe in embellishing it with signs {There is in existence yet a fifth regular solid, the dodecahedron. . . . God, says Plato, used it for a pattern in diversifying the universe with signs: that is it served as a model for the twelvefold division of the zodiac}.” — p. 197 (§ 20) & fn. 14
the first-begotten ‘was pleased to employ twelve thousand years in its creation’
p/q: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “That God, the demiurgus of all things . . . was pleased to employ twelve thousand years in their creation . . . In the first thousand years he created the heaven and the earth; in the second he made this apparent firmament . . . in the third, the sea and all the waters in the earth; in the fourth, the great lights, the sun and the moon, together with the stars; in the fifth, every soul of birds, and reptiles, and quadrupeds . . . in the sixth, man.” — p. 309 (“Cosmogony of the Tyrrhenians,” Suid. v. Tyrrhenia)
“This agrees with the Egyptian theory of 6,000 ‘years’ . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “This agrees with the Egyptian theory of 6,000 ‘years,’ and with the Hebrew computation.  Sanchoniathon, in his Cosmogony, declares that when the wind (spirit) became enamored of its own principles (the chaos), and intimate union took place, which connection was called pothos, and from this sprang the seed of all.” — 1:342
“And the chaos knew not its own production . . . with the wind was generated Môt, or the ilus (mud)”
p/q: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “And it (the Chaos) knew not its own production; but from its embrace with the wind was generated Môt; which some call Ilus (Mud) . . .” — p. 3 (Sanchoniatho, “The Cosmogony”)
“Zeus-Zen (aether), and Chthonia (the chaotic earth) and Metis (the water) . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The Greek Zeus-Zēn (aether), and Chthonia (the chaotic earth) and Metis (the water), his wives; Osiris and Isis-Latona — the former god representing also ether — the first emanation of the Supreme Deity, Amun, the primeval source of light; the goddess earth and water again . . .” — 1:156
“Mithras, the rock-born god, the symbol of the male mundane-fire . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Mithras, the rock-born god, the symbol of the male mundane-fire, or the personified primordial light, and Mithra, the fire-goddess, at once his mother and his wife; the pure element of fire (the active, or male principle) regarded as light and heat, in conjunction with earth and water, or matter (female or passive elements of cosmical generation).” — 1:156

— Footnotes

See the Greek translation by Philo Byblus
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “. . . in the remains of the Phoenician History of Sanchoniatho . . . his history was composed in the Phoenician language . . . It was translated into Greek by Philo Byblius, and for the preservation of these fragments we are indebted to the care of Eusebius.” — p. viii
Mithras was regarded among the Persians as the Theos ekpetros — god of the rock.
see: The History of the Apostles Creed [by Sir Peter King], 1702: “The symbol used by the more devout and secret Votaries of Mithras . . . was Θεὸς ἐκ πέτρας [Theos ek petras] God of a Rock . . .” — p. 18

— 341 —

Mithras is the son of Bordj, the Persian mundane mountain . . .
see: Rev. Joseph B. Gross, The Heathen Religion, 1856: “Mithras, as the symbol of the male-mundane fire, is said to be the son of the Persian world-mountain Bordj, from whose primeval rocks he went forth as a ray of fire, permeating and inflaming the earth.” — p. 282
“Brahmâ, the fire-god, and his prolific consort . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Brahma, the fire-god, and his prolific consort; and the Hindu Unghi [Agni], the refulgent deity, from whose body issue a thousand streams of glory and seven tongues of flame, and in whose honor the Sagniku Brahmans preserve to this day a perpetual fire; Siva, personated by the mundane mountain of the Hindus — the Meru (Himalaya).  This terrific fire-god, who is said in the legend to have descended from heaven, like the Jewish Jehovah, in a pillar of fire, and a dozen other archaic, double-sexed deities, all loudly proclaim their hidden meaning.” — 1:156
“And what can these dual myths mean . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “And what can these dual myths mean but the physico-chemical principle of primordial creation?  The first revelation of the Supreme Cause in its triple manifestation of spirit, force, and matter; the divine correlation, at its starting-point of evolution, allegorized as the marriage of fire and water, products of electrifying spirit, union of the male active principle with the female passive element, which become parents of their tellurian child, cosmic matter, the prima materia, whose spirit is ether, the Astral Light!” — 1:156

— Footnotes

Bordj . . . contains . . . the male, or active and the female, or passive, elements.
see: Rev. Joseph B. Gross, The Heathen Religion, 1856: “The Bordj, in its capacity of world-mountain, contains . . . the active and passive principles of creation. . . . Light and fire, etc., are the active or male principles of creation, and these being infused into the passive elements of earth, water, etc., the union results in the procreation of the world.” — p. 282 fn.

— 342 —

“Space, the all containing uncontained, is the primary embodiment of simple Unity . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Space, the all-containing uncontained, is the primary embodiment of simple unity. . . . But if space is boundless extension, the question necessarily arises, Boundless extension of what? . . . the unknown container of all.  Space, the unknown first Cause.” — pp. 3-4
SPACE . . . modern wiseacres have proclaimed “an abstract idea” and a void
see: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Space, the all-containing uncontained, is the primary embodiment of simple unity. . . . The abstract idea of space, as a limitless void, is comparatively modern.” — p. 3
the seven-headed Serpent of Space, called “the Great Sea”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘. . . the little ones (the perfect initiates) are those who understand the allusion to the work of the beginning, by the mystery of the serpent of the Great Sea.’ ” — p. 234 (Zohar ii, 34b)
      “The Akkadians and Chaldeans, believed the world to be encircled, by this great serpent of the sapphire crystalline heaven sea, with seven heads . . .” — p. 235
“In the beginning, the Alhim created the heavens and the earth . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘In the beginning the God(s) [Alhim or Elohim] created the heavens and the earth’ . . . the six (Sephiroth of Construction,) . . . It created six, (and) on these stand (exist) all Things.  And those depend upon the seven forms of the Cranium up to the Dignity of all Dignities.” — pp. 232-3 (Siphrah D’Tznioothah)

— 343 —

“The existence of spirit in the common mediator . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The existence of spirit in the common mediator, the ether, is denied by materialism; while theology makes of it a personal god, the kabalist holds that both are wrong, saying that in ether, the elements represent but matter — the blind cosmic forces of nature; and Spirit, the intelligence which directs them.  The Hermetic, Orphic, and Pythagorean cosmological doctrines, as well as those of Sanchoniathon and Berosus, are all based upon one irrefutable formula, viz.: that the ether and chaos, or, in the Platonic language, mind and matter, were the two primeval and eternal principles of the universe, utterly independent of anything else.  The former was the all-vivifying intellectual principle; the chaos, a shapeless, liquid principle, without ‘form or sense,’ from the union of which two, sprung into existence the universe, or rather, the universal world, the first androgynous deity — the chaotic matter becoming its body, and ether the soul.” — 1:341
“According to the phraseology of a Fragment of Hermias . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “According to the phraseology of a Fragment of Hermias, ‘chaos, from this union with spirit, obtaining sense, shone with pleasure, and thus was produced the Protogonos (the first-born) light.’  This is the universal trinity, based on the metaphysical conceptions of the ancients, who, reasoning by analogy, made of man, who is a compound of intellect and matter, the microcosm of the macrocosm, or great universe.” — 1:341
“Nature abhors Vacuum” said the Peripatetics
p/q: Blaise Pascal, Oeuvres de Blaise Pascal, 1819: “Que tous les disciples d’Aristote assemblent tout ce qu’il y a de fort dans les écrits de leur maître . . . que la nature abhorre le vide [Let all the disciples of Aristotle bring together all the bits of strong reasoning in the writings of their master . . . that nature abhors a vacuum] . . .” — 4:281
Democritus . . . taught that the first principles . . . were atoms and a vacuum.
see: Diogenes Laërtius, The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1853: “Such was the life of [Democritus].  Now his principle doctrines were these.  That atoms and the vacuum were the beginning of the universe; and that everything else existed only in opinion. . . . but atoms and the vacuum he believes exist by nature.” — pp. 394-5 (“Life of Democritus,” 11, 12)
That Chaos, however, became the “Soul of the World” . . .
see: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, ed. William Smith, 1850: “Aether . . . was, together with Night, Day, and Erebus, begotten by Chaos and Caligo (Darkness). . . . In the Orphic hymns . . . Aether appears as the soul of the world, from which all life emanates, an idea which was also adopted by some of the early philosophers of Greece.” — 1:49-50

— Footnotes

Damascius . . . calls it Dis, “the disposer of all things.”
p/q: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “. . . the theology now under discussion celebrates as Protogonus (First-born), and calls him Dis, as the disposer of all things . . .” — p. 314 (Damascius, “The Theogonies”)

— 344 —

its “first begotten” was born of Chaos and Primordial Light
see: Thomas Taylor, The Mystical Hymns of Orpheus, 1824: “Protogonus [First-begotten] {the first principle of all things is the one, or the good itself; and after this, conformably to the doctrine of Pythagoras, the two principles, ether [primordial light] and chaos, subsist}.” — p. 18 & fn. (Hymn VI, “To Protogonus”)
“These Chaldeans,” writes Philo . . . “were of the opinion . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “These (Chaldaeans) were of opinion that this kosmos, among the things that exist, is single, either being itself God (Theos), or that in it is God (Theos) comprehending the soul of all things. (Philo, Migration of Abraham, § 32)” — p. 385
Brahmâ is the Theos . . . personified by ayana . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Hear, then, how the deity Nārāyaṇa, in the person of Brahmā, the great parent of the world, created all existent things.”  “When the three worlds are but one mighty ocean, Brahmā, who is one with Nārāyaṇa, satiate with the demolition of the universe, sleeps upon his serpent-bed . . . for a night of equal duration with his day; at the close of which he creates anew.” — 1:45, 52-3 (i.3)
It is also Vishnu, sleeping on Ananta-Sacha . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “An entire Kalpa . . . or fourteen Manwantaras; and it is succeeded by a night of similar duration; during which . . . the lord of all, and creator of all . . . sleeps upon the serpent Śesha, amidst the ocean {it is as Vishnu or Nārāyaṇa that the deity sleeps in the intervals of dissolution}.” — 3:30 & fn. (iii.2)
“God of the three Aspects”
see: Monier-Williams, Brāhmanism and Hindūism, 1891: “For it must be borne in mind that Brahmā, Vishṇu and Śiva are all three held to be subordinate deities . . . and that all three are believed to be corporeal manifestations of the one sole self-existent, bodiless, impersonal Essence of the Universe, and destined to be reabsorbed into that Essence.” — p. 557
“four-faced Brahmâ”
see: Monier-Williams, Brāhmanism and Hindūism, 1891: “Moreover among the various idols and symbols scattered throughout India . . . Brahmā . . . Evolver of the Universe . . . with his four faces looking in all directions . . .” — pp. 557-8
“Of him who is and yet is not . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “That which is the undiscrete Cause, eternal, which Is and Is not, from It issued that male [Purusha] who is called in the world Brahmā.” — p. 3 (i.11)

— 344-5 —

“In the Egyptian mythology, Kneph, the Eternal Unrevealed God . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “In the Egyptian mythology, Kneph the Eternal unrevealed God is represented by a snake-emblem of eternity encircling a water-urn, with his head hovering over the waters, which it incubates with his breath.  In this case the serpent is the Agathodaimon, the good spirit; in its opposite aspect it is the Kakodaimon — the bad one.” — 1:133
“In the Scandinavian Eddas, the honey dew . . . falls during the hours of night . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “In the Scandinavian Eddas, the honey-dew [from the Yggdrasill] — the food of the gods and of the creative . . . bees — falls during the hours of night, when the atmosphere is impregnated with humidity; and in the Northern mythologies, as the passive principle of creation, it typifies the creation of the universe out of water . . .” — 1:133
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847: “ ‘An Ash know I standing, / Named Yggdrasill . . . Thence come the dewdrops / That fall in the dales . . .’  The dew that falls thence on the earth men call honey-dew, and it is the food of the bees.” — p. 413

— 345 —

“this dew is the astral light . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “. . . this dew is the astral light in one of its combinations and possesses creative as well as destructive properties.  In the Chaldean legend of Berosus, Oännes or Dagon, the man-fish, instructing the people, shows the infant world created out of water and all beings originating from this prima materia.  Moses teaches that only earth and water can bring a living soul; and we read in the Scriptures that herbs could not grow until the Eternal caused it to rain upon earth.  In the Mexican Popol-Vuh man is created out of mud or clay (terre glaise), taken from under the water.” — 1:133
“Brahmâ creates the great Muni (or first man) . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Brahma creates . . . the great Muni (or first man), seated on his lotus, only after having called into being, spirits, who thus enjoyed among mortals a priority of existence, and he creates him out of water, air, and earth.  Alchemists claim that primordial or pre-Adamic earth when reduced to its first substance is in its second stage of transformation like clear-water, the first being the alkahest proper.  This primordial substance is said to contain within itself the essence of all that goes to make up man; it has not only all the elements of his physical being, but even the ‘breath of life’ itself in a latent state, ready to be awakened.  This it derives from the ‘incubation’ of the Spirit of God upon the face of the waters — chaos; in fact, this substance is chaos itself.  From this it was that Paracelsus claimed to be able to make his ‘homunculi’; and this is why Thales, the great natural philosopher, maintained that water was the principle of all things in nature.” — 1:133-4
“Job says . . . that ‘dead things are formed from under the waters . . .’ ”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Job mentions, in chap, xxvi., 5, that ‘dead things are formed from under the waters, and inhabitants thereof.’  In the original text, instead of ‘dead things,’ it is written dead Rephaim (giants or mighty primitive men), from whom ‘Evolution’ may one day trace our present race.” — 1:133
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Dead things {Rephaim} are formed / from under the waters, and the inhabitants thereof.” — p. 688 & fn. (Job, 26:5)
      “For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants (the Rephaim) . . .” — pp. 237-8 (Deuteronomy, 3:11)
“In the primordial state of creation,” says Polier’s Mythologie des Indous . . .
p/q: Colonel [Antoine-Louis] de Polier, Mythologie des Indous, 1809: “Au commencement de celui, qui existe l’univers couvert d’eau reposait dans le sein de l’éternel [At the beginning of the One who exists, the universe covered with water, reposed in the bosom of the Eternal] . . .” — 1:163
“Brahmâ . . . poised on a lotus-leaf, floated (moved) upon the waters . . .”
p/q: Colonel [Antoine-Louis] de Polier, Mythologie des Indous, 1809: “. . . [Brahmā] couché sur une fleur de lotos . . . et flottant sur l’abîme liquide, n’apercevant . . . qu’une immensurable étendue d’eau et observant que le monde était englouti dans les ténèbres [Brahmā lying on a lotus flower and floating on the watery Abyss, only perceiving . . . an immeasurable extent of water and observing that the world was engulfed in darkness] . . .” — 1:163
“Who am I?  Whence came I? . . . Direct your thoughts to Bhagavat.”
p/q: Colonel [Antoine-Louis] de Polier, Mythologie des Indous, 1809: “D’oú viens-je?  Que suis-je? . . . adresse tes prières à Bhagavat [Where do I come from?  What am I? . . . direct your prayers to Bhagavat] . . .” — 1:163-4

— Footnotes

With the Greeks . . . the Ocean was the father of the Gods
see: Aristotle, Metaphysics, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1801: “For they made Ocean and Tethys the parents of generation {by Ocean the antient theologists signified the divine cause of all motion} . . .” — p. 8 & fn. (i.3)
they had anticipated in this connection the theories of Thales . . .
see: Aristotle, Metaphysics, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1801: “For Thales indeed, who was the leader of this philosophy, said that this [first] principle is water.” — p. 8

— 346 —

Egyptian cosmogony . . . shows in its opening sentences Athor, or Mother Night
see: W. R. Cooper, An Archaic Dictionary, 1876: “HAT-HOR.  An Egyptian goddess . . . Her name was often written Athor.” — p. 219
see: Hargrave Jennings, The Rosicrucians: Their Rites and Mysteries, 1887: “In early ages the Egyptians worshipped this highest being under the name Athor. . . . Among the Egyptians Athor also signified the night . . .” — 1:226
the primordial elements . . . form collectively the Voice of the Will
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Another passage teaches, of the voice which goes out of the Spirit and identifies itself with it in the Supreme Thought, that this Voice is, at the foundation, no other thing than the water, air and fire . . . and all the Energies of nature, but that all these elements and forces are blended in one sole thing, that is, in the Voice which goes out of the Spirit.” — pp. 136-7
the Will Memrab [Memrah], or the “Word,” the Logos
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “By this the Qabbalists intended to inforce the idea that the universe was created by the Will, Memrah, Logos or Word, Wisdom, of the Invisible Absolute Unknown Supreme Being.” — p. 137
Memrab, or the “Word” . . .
see: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “On reconnaîtra sans effort le Meïmra des traducteurs chaldéens . . . Enfin, ce qui achève de lui donner toute ressemblance avec le verbe kabbalistique, c’est qu’elle a un corps et une âme . . . qu’elle est à la fois esprit et parole [We will easily recognize the Memra of the Chaldean translators . . . What finally gives it full resemblance with the kabbalistic ‘Word,’ is that it is a body and a soul . . . that it is at the same time Spirit and Word].” — pp. 370-1
“By a series (yom) of foundations (hasoth) the Alhim caused . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “. . . in Genesis ii. 4: ‘By a succession (yom) of formations (hasoth) God caused earth and heavens to be.’ ” — p. 61
it is first Alhim, then Jahva-Alhim, and finally Jehovah
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “In reading the Pentateuch, it is noticeable that God is first called Elohim [Alhim], then Jehovah Elohim, and then Jehovah.” — p. 63
It is the “Movers,” the “Runners,” the theoi (from θέειν, “to run”)
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . mais appliqué à tous les dieux en général . . . le mot θεὸς, comme nous l’apprend Platon, vient du verbe θεῖν, courir, le cercle signifiait le mouvement ou la course de ce dieu [but applied to all the gods in general . . . the word θεὸς, as Plato teaches us, comes from the verb θεῖν, to run, the circle meant the motion or the course of that god] . . .” — 3:265
For it is not Brahmâ who creates in the Rig Veda, but the Prajâpati
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “PRAJĀ-PATI.  ‘Lord of creatures,’ a progenitor, creator. . . . and as the secondary creator of the ten Ṛishis, or ‘mind-born sons’ of Brahmā, from whom mankind is descended.  It is to these ten sages, as fathers of the human race, that the name Prajā-pati most commonly is given.” — p. 239
the word Rishi . . . being connected with the word to move
see: The Ṛiṣi [by M. M. Kunte], 1879: “Such was the Ṛiṣi mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda.  He was pre-eminently the leader or mover, (the word Ṛiṣi being derived from Ṛiṣ — to go) . . .” — p. 4 (Introduction)
as Patriarchs, they lead their hosts on the Seven Rivers
see: Tarucnath Dutt, The Vedic Age, 1860: “After leaving their original place of abode, the Aryas . . . spread themselves over, what they call, the country of the seven rivers. . . . the five rivers of the Punjaub, the Indus and the Saraswati. . . . These rishis resembled, in many respects, the patriarchs of the Jews and the Egyptians.  They were the chiefs of their respective families or tribes, and they united in themselves the offices of kings, priests and generals in war.” — p. 7

— 347 —

the term [God] varies . . . from the Persian Khoda
see: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “Baal-Gad was the Sun.  The tribe of Gad were probably sun-worshippers . . . the Persian Khoda (Choda) ‘God’ being the royal title of the ancient kings of Bokhara . . .” — pp. 69-70
to the Slavonian, from the Greek Bacchus (Bagh-bog)
see: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “The Sclavonians adored Bog, the rising Sun, the Old Persian Baga, the Romans Bacchus, the Hindus Bhaga . . .” — p. 59
(“See Section XIV . . .”)
see: “The Four Elements,” SD 1:460-70.

— Footnotes

The Cosmic Tabernacle of Moses . . . representing the four cardinal points . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le tabernacle cosmique élevé par Moïse dans le désert avait une forme carrée . . . elle représentait uniquement . . . les quatre faces des pyramides, des obelisques, des colonnes que Josèphe nous dit avoir été élevées dans le temple de Tyr aux quatre éléments, et placées sur des piédestaux dont les quatre angles regardaient les quatre points cardinaux [the cosmic tabernacle erected by Moses in the desert had a square form . . . this uniquely represented . . . the four sides of the pyramids, the obelisks, the pillars which Josephus tells us were erected in the temple of Tyre to the four elements, and placed on pedestals, the four corners of which faced the four cardinal points].” — 3:397
the Genii, or Angels have their abodes in four respective points
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . les génies de ces quatre éléments étaient supposés résider dans l’espace . . . dans ces quatre points cardinaux [the genii of these four elements were supposed to reside in (sidereal) Space . . . in these four cardinal points] . . .” — 3:397

— 347-8 —

“R. Yehudah began, it is written . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘R. Yehudah began, it is written: “Elohim said: Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters.” . . . Come, See!  At the time that the Holy, Blessed be He! created the world He created 7 heavens Above.  He created 7 earths Below, 7 seas, 7 days, 7 rivers, 7 weeks, 7 years, 7 times, and 7000 years that the world has been.  The Holy, Blessed be He! is in the seventh of all . . .’ ” — p. 415 (Zohar iii, 9b)

— 348 —

trigunas (Satwa, Rajas and Tamas, see Purânas)
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . imperishable Brahma; who is Īśwara {the deity in his active nature} . . . who, with the three qualities {Sattwa . . . goodness or purity, knowledge, quiescence; Rajas . . . foulness, passion, activity; and Tamas . . . darkness, ignorance, inertia}, is the cause of creation . . .” — 1:3-4 & fns. (i.1)
Amrita (immortality) . . . This allegory is found in the “Churning of the Ocean” . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “AMṚITA.  ‘Immortal.’ . . . the water of life produced at the churning of the ocean by the gods and demons [asuras] . . . The gods, feeling their weakness . . . repaired to Vishṇu, beseeching him for renewed vigour and the gift of immortality.  He directed them to . . .
              ‘. . . take Mandara,
The mountain, for a churning stick, and Vāsuki [Naga king],
The serpent, for a rope; together churn
The ocean to produce the beverage [Amrita] —
Source of all strength and immortality . . .’ ” — pp. 12-13
Thus the Kosmos is “the Son” with Plato . . .
see: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “According to Plato, ‘One is the Cause of all’ . . . From this is born . . . the ‘existing,’ ‘ensouled’ world.  It is the realized ‘Idea’ . . . Plato calls the ‘Kosmos’ ‘the Son’ of the Father and Mother (Thought and Matter).” — p. 189
see: Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, tr. Samuel Squire, 1744: “Now universal nature . . . [is] made up of these three things, of Intelligence, of Matter, and . . . Kosmos . . . the first of these [Intelligence] is the same with what Plato is wont to call the Idea . . . the Father; to the second of them [Matter] he has given the name of the Mother . . . and to the latter of them, that of the Off-spring [the Son] . . .” — pp. 77-8 (§ 56)
“The Egyptians . . . distinguish between an older and younger Horus . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “The Egyptians distinguished between an Older and Younger Horus, the former the brother of Osiris; the latter the Son of Osiris and Isis.  The first is the ‘Idea’ of the World remaining in the Demiurgic Mind, ‘born in darkness before the creation of the world.’  The second Horus is this ‘Idea’ going forth from the Logos, becoming clothed with Matter, and assuming an actual existence.” — pp. 189-90
“The Mundane God, eternal, boundless, young and old . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “The Mundane God, eternal, boundless, young and old, of winding form. — Chaldean Oracles {Cory, 240}.” — p. 190

— 349 —

Satis eloquentiae, sapientiae parvum
p/q: Sallust, De Catilinae Conjuratione [On the Conspiracy of Cataline], 1883: “Animus audax, subdolus, varius, cujus rei libet simulator ac dissimulator . . . satis loquentiae, sapientiae parum [His mind was daring, subtle, and versatile, capable of pretending or dissembling whatever he wanted. . . . He had eloquence enough, but too little wisdom].” — p. 12 (§ 5)
“He is only the ideal Cause of the Potencies . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “He is only the ideal cause of the potencies . . . and from him proceed the potencies to be created, after they have become the real cause.  Save that one ideal cause, there is no other to which the world can be referred. . . . through the potency of that cause — every created thing comes by its proper nature.” — 1:66 fn.
(Original Sanskrit Texts, Part iv . . .)
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “How can the agencies of creation, etc., be possible to Brahma, who is devoid of the (three) qualities . . .?”  “. . . these powers of creative agency [Potencies] . . . belong to the essence of Brahma . . .” — 4:36 fn. (Vishṇu Purāṇa, I. iii)
Fathers of the Church . . . complaining bitterly of the Gnostics . . .
see: Irenæus, Writings, v. 1, tr. Roberts & Rambaut, 1868: “They proceed to tell us that the Propator of their scheme was known only to Monogenes [the only begotten], who sprang from him; in other words, only to Nous . . . Nous alone took pleasure in contemplating the Father . . .” — p. 7 (Against Heresies, i.2)
Valentinus, “the profoundest doctor of the Gnosis”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . the names of the Æons . . . the following may be taken for their most authoritative roll-call, having been drawn up by Valentinus himself, the profoundest doctor of the Gnosis . . .” — p. 263
“there was a perfect aion who existed before[,] Bythos, or Buthon . . . called Propator”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “According to the Valentinians there was a perfect Aiōn who existed before, called Buthon [Bythos] and Propator.” — p. 32 fn.

— Footnotes

As Mulaprakriti is known only to Iswar, the Logos
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . Parabrahmam appears to it [the Logos] as Mulaprakriti. . . . It is seen by the Logos with a veil thrown over it. . . . Now we see the first manifestation of Parabrahmam is a Trinity . . . It consists of Mulaprakriti, Eswara or the Logos, and the conscious energy of the Logos . . .” — pp. 304-5 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 350 —

as the Basilidians taught, “there was a supreme god, Abraxax . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . Basilides the heretic . . . asserted that there was a Supreme God named Abraxas, by whom was created Mind whom the Greeks call Nous.  From Mind proceeded the Word, from the Word, Providence; from Providence, Virtue and Wisdom; from these two again, Virtues, Principalities and Powers were made; from these infinite productions and emissions of Angels.  By these Angels the 365 heavens were created.” — p. 259
“Amongst the lowest . . . the God of the Jews . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “Amongst the lowest Angels . . . he sets last of all the god of the Jews, whom he denies to be God, affirming that he is one of the Angels.” — p. 259
the Word or Logos, or Dabar (in Hebrew)
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “. . . the word Logos . . . St. John uses it as a translation of the Hebrew DBR . . .” — p. l fn. (“Introductory Dissertation”)
[the Word becomes] “Words” . . . a Host (of angels, or Sephiroth, “numbers”)
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . symbolizing the action of the Sephiroth in the creation . . . when it is said that the angels, &c., wait for the words [dĕbārīm] from their lips, it signifies symbolically the way in which the angels, &c., were created by the word of the Deity in his Sephirotic form.” — p. 172 fn. (Greater Holy Assembly, xxiv.503)
      “This Wisdom is the beginning of all things.  Thencefrom are expanded the thirty-two paths . . . And in them is the Law comprehended, in the twenty-two letters and in the ten utterances {The Sephiroth, or numbers}.” — p. 280 & fn. (Lesser Holy Assembly, vii.213)
collectively One, and on the ideal plane a nought — 0, a “No-thing”
see: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “Quand l’inconnu des inconnus voulut se manifester, il commença par produire un point . . . une concentration absolue de Dieu en sa propre substance . . . se distingue de tout ce qui est fini, limité et déterminé; par cela même qu’on ne peut pas encore dire ce qu’il est, on le désigne par un mot qui signifie nulle chose, ou le non être, אין [When the Unknown of the Unknown wished to manifest Himself, he first produced one point . . . an absolute concentration of God in His own substance . . . He is distinct from all that is finite, limited and determined; for the very reason that it cannot be told yet what he is, he is designated by a word which signifies No-Thing, Non-Being, ’Ayin].” — pp. 185-6
It is without form or being, “with no likeness with anything else.”
p/q: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “. . . qu’avant la création Dieu était sans forme, ne resemblant à rien [before the creation God was without form, with no likeness to anything] . . .” — p. 177
Philo calls the Creator, the Logos . . . “the Second God”
see: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “Both the ‘Word’ and the ‘Wisdom’ appear as a Being, the Second God {Philo, Quaest. et Solut.}.” — p. 233 & fn.
Deity . . . called Ain-Soph — “the word Ayin meaning nothing.”
p/q: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “Cette première Séphirah se nomme tantôt . . . le non-être, אין [This first Sephira is sometimes called the Infinite . . . and sometimes the Non-being, (’Ayin)] . . .” — p. 110 fn.
See also Section XII . . .
see: “The Theogony of the Creative Gods,” SD 1:424-45.

— 351 —

deity had to be viewed under the symbol of four syllables
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “He (the Supreme) spake the first word of his name . . . a syllable of four letters.  He then added the second syllable . . . Then the third . . . Finally the fourth . . . Thus the utterance of the whole name consists . . . of four syllables.” — p. 286
God is a quaternary, to wit: “the Ineffable, the Silence, the Father, and Truth”
p/q: William Heckford, A Succinct Account of All the Religions, 1791: “They [Marcosians] were a sect of Christian Heretics in the second century, so called from their leader Marcus, who represented the supreme God, as consisting not of a Trinity, but a Quaternity, viz. the Ineffable, Silence, the Father and Truth . . .” — p. 319
he makes of Deity, the number 30 in 4 syllables
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘. . . a syllable of four letters. . . . the second syllable, also of four letters.  Then the third, composed of ten letters.  Finally the fourth, made up of twelve letters. . . . the whole name consists of thirty letters, and of four syllables.’ ” — p. 286
Marcus narrates how the “Supreme Tetrad came down unto me . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘The supreme Tetrad came down unto me from that region which cannot be seen nor named, in a female form because the world would have been unable to bear their appearing in a male figure, and revealed to me the generation of the universe, untold before either to gods or men.’ ” — p. 286
“When first the Inconceivable, the Beingless and Sexless . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘When first the Father, the Inconceivable, Beingless, sexless, began to be in labour he desired that his Ineffable should be born, and his invisible should be clothed with form.  He therefore opened his mouth and uttered the Word like unto himself.  This word standing before him showed that he was manifesting himself as the form or type of the Invisible One.’ ” — p. 286
“The uttering of the (ineffable) name . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘Now the uttering of the Name came to pass in this wise.  He (the Supreme) spake the first word of his name, the which is a syllable of four letters.  He then added the second syllable, also of four letters.  Then the third, composed of ten letters.  Finally the fourth, made up of twelve letters.  Thus the utterance of the whole name consists of thirty letters, and of four syllables.  Each letter has a form-pronunciation and writing of its own, but neither understands nor beholds that of the whole Name; nay, not even the power of the letter standing next to itself.’ ” — p. 286

— Footnotes

Iswara, or the Logos, cannot see Parabrahmam, but only Mulaprakriti
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . Parabrahmam is an unconditioned and absolute reality, and Mulaprakriti is a sort of veil thrown over it.  Parabrahmam by itself cannot be seen as it is.  It is seen by the Logos with a veil thrown over it, and that veil is the mighty expanse of cosmic matter.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 351-2 —

“All these sounds when united . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘Now these sounds united make up the Beingless unbegotten Æon, and these are the Angels that always behold the face of the Father.’ ” — p. 286

— 352 —

(the Logos, the “second God” . . . “the Inconceivable,” according to Philo)
see: Philo Judæus, Works, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1854-5: “. . . no mortal thing could have been formed on the similitude of the supreme Father of the universe, but only after the pattern of the second deity, who is the Word [Logos] of the supreme Being . . . since in his first Word God is superior to the most rational possible nature.” — 4:391-2 (Questions . . . in Genesis, II. 62)
It is as Kabalistic . . . also four syllabled, twelve, forty-two, and even seventy-two . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “The substance of the revelation brought down to Marcus by Truth is to be found in the Kabbala, which makes the mystic names of God to consist of four, twelve, forty-two and seventy-two letters respectively.” — p. 287
The Tetrad shows to Marcus the truth . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘I [the supreme Tetrad] will shew unto thee Truth . . . that thou shouldest behold her naked, acknowledge her beauty . . . and be astonished at her wisdom.  Look up therefore at her head Α and Ω, at her neck Β and Ψ, at her shoulders with her hands Γ and Χ . . . at her feet Μ and Ν.’ ” — pp. 287-8
In this Sephira is easily recognized, the Crown . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “Similarly in the Kabbalistic diagram of the Sephiroth, the Crown is the head; Wisdom, the brain; Intelligence, the heart; Love, the right arm; Gentleness, the left arm; Beauty, the chest; Firmness, the right leg; Splendour, the left leg; . . . Kingdom, or Shekinah, the union of the whole body.” — p. 288 fn.
Braisheeth bara Elohim means that the six . . . Sephiroth, belong to the lower material class
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “Berashith Bera Elohim . . . The sense is: Six members were created, which are the six numerations of Microprosopus . . . Upon these depend all things which are below . . .” — pp. 46-7 (Book of Concealed Mystery, i.16)
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “B’raisheeth barah elohim ath hashshama’yem v’ath haa’retz, i. e., ‘In the beginning the God(s) created the heavens and the earth’: (the meaning of which is;) the six (Sephiroth of Construction,) over which B’raisheeth stands, all belong Below.” — pp. 232-3
“Seven . . . are applied to the Lower Creation . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The idea of the [ten] Sephiroth of the Qabbalah . . . Seven of which are applied to the Lower creation, and three to the Spiritual man, the Heavenly Prototypic or first Adam.” — p. 303

— Footnotes

The “Seven Angels of the Face,” with the Christians
see: Dictionary of Sects, ed. John Henry Blunt, 1874: “The opinions of the author . . . are stated clearly in the [Nazarene] Testament of Levi.  In sect. 3 the universe in the times of the Gospel is described as of seven spheres.  Three represent the outer world . . . The fifth is occupied by angels of the Face of God.” — p. 363

— 353 —

“Now Koros (Kurios) signifies the pure and unmixed nature of intellect . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Mysteries of Adoni, 1861: “. . . Kurios {‘Now Koros does not signify a boy, but the pure and unmixed nature of Intellect.’ — Plato, Cratylus, p. 79} . . .” — p. 23 & fn.
Kurios is Mercury, the Divine Wisdom, and “mercury is the Sol”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Mysteries of Adoni, 1861: “Kor, Kur, is the Sun . . . The Kurios is the Divine MIND, the Logos in the Sun.  Mar (Our Lord) Kurios  (Merkury) . . . Mercury (the Divine WISDOM) is Sol.” — p. 23 fn.
see: Arnobius, The Seven Books of Arnobius, 1871: “. . . how will you be able to distinguish between them, whether this is the Sun, or that Mercury . . . one may seem to be the other, nay, more, both may be considered both!” — p. 285 (Adversus Gentes, vi.12)
Æsculapius, called the “Saviour of all,” is identical . . . with Phta
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Mysteries of Adoni, 1861: “ ‘Æsculapius the Savior of the all’ . . . He is identical with Phtah (the Creative Intellect, the Divine WISDOM) . . . He is Apollo (Baal, Bol), Atys, Adonis, and Hercules.” — p. 93 fn.
in whose bosom they were received, hence the Limbus . . . or the Astral Light
see: Thomas Vaughan, The Magical Writings, tr. A. E. Waite, 1888: “It is Nature’s common place, her index, where you may finde all that ever she did, or intends to do. . . . ‘the bosom of the superiour Nature’ . . . the immediate receptacle of spirits after dissolution, whence they passe to a Superior Limbus {With this fourth essence . . . may be profitably compared the hypothesis of the Astral Light as elaborated by Lévi}.” — p. 18, & p. 156 (note 4)
Phta . . . his name signifying “he who opens” . . .
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Phtah . . . Son nom signifie celui qui ouvre, et fait peut-être allusion à l’une de ses fonctions, qui était d’ouvrir le cercueil et de dévoiler la face du mort pour lui rendre la vie [Ptah . . . His name means he who opens, and alludes perhaps to one of his functions, which was to open the coffin and to unveil the face of the dead to restore him to life].” — p. 165
Kneph . . . the snake-emblem of eternity encircling a water-urn . . .
see: L. N. Bescherelle, L’Instruction Popularisée par L’Illustration, 1851: “On voit même, sur une médaille du temps d’Adrien, l’urne-Canope environnée du serpent Agathodémon, symbole de Knef.  Kanob est donc Knef, et on peut, en conséquence, le regarder . . . comme le génie même des eaux primitives fécondées par le grand Knef [We even see on a medallion from the time of Hadrian, the urn of Canopus (the water deity) encircled by the serpent Agathodæmon, the symbol of Kneph.  Canopus is thus Kneph, and can therefore be regarded . . . as the same spirit of the primordial waters impregnated by the great Kneph].” — p. 28
the same idea of “Darkness,” its ray moving on the waters
see: J. Lempriere, Bibliotheca Classica, 1833: “Thick darkness was spread over the abyss; the waters covered it, and a subtle spirit, a pure intelligence, was residing . . . in the bosom of Chaos. . . . On a sudden, from the bosom of eternal night beamed forth a sacred ray . . . the primitive light, the Demiurgus, Kneph.” — 1:55
As “Logos-Soul,” this permutation is called Phta
see: J. Lempriere, Bibliotheca Classica, 1833: “Now Kneph, the creator . . . united with the divine word [Logos], and produced the second Demiurgus [Logos-Soul], the god of fire and of life, Phtha . . . He is also the breath of life, which all created things need . . .” — 1:55
as Logos-Creator, he becomes Imhot-pou, his son
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “La déesse Sokhit . . . compose avec Phtah et son fils Imhotpou la trinité [The goddess Sokhit makes up the Trinity, along with Ptah and his son Imhotep] . . .” — p. 8
Imhot-pou . . . “the god of the handsome face”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Imhotpou . . . Les traits de sa figure sont très fins, aussi l’appelle-t-on Phtah au beau visage [Imhotep . . . The features of his face are very fine, he is also called ‘Ptah with the handsome face’].” — p. 165
Noot, “space or Sky,” and Noo, “the primordial Waters,” the Androgyne Unity
see: Prince Rudolph, Travels in the East, 1884: “ ‘Call hither to me . . . the Sky-goddess Nut, and at the same time the father and mother who were united with me at such time as I found myself in the primordial waters, and likewise also him who bore my godhead in himself, the god of the primordial water, Nun.’ ” — p. 166 (Inscription from the Tomb of Seti I)
this Concealed Unity is . . . ἄπειρος, Endless, Boundless, non-Existent
see: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “This ‘Nothing’ (ayin) is the indivisible and infinite unity; hence it is called En-soph.  This is ‘boundless,’ and not limited by any thing.  Here we have Anaximander’s to apeiron [τό ἄπειρον] . . .” — p. 351

— 354 —

The Hebrews . . . substituted for it the “Duplex heavens”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “ ‘He created’. . . not the heavens, as we laxly take it, but ‘the two or duplex heavens’ . . .” — p. 180
“In and out of his own essence . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “ ‘In (or out of) his own essence as a womb, God . . . created the two heavens, and the earth,’ as to the heavens, the upper, or light, and the lower, or dark . . .” — p. 180
“Whosoever acquaints himself with . . . the Mercaba and the lahgash . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . only the sages, familiar with this profound and sublime science, can occupy themselves therewith. . . . and to what is below it of the Ma-a’seh Merkabah . . . It is not permitted to impart the Mysteries of the Thorah, except to . . . one who understands in la-’hash, i.e., silence or secret . . .” — p. 44
from within the eternal essence of Ain-Soph, comes forth Sephira . . . the Primordial Point
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “When the Hidden of all the Hidden, willed to manifest Itself, It first made a point (Kether, the first Sephirah . . .).” — pp. 280-1
In this emanation the triple triad is formed.
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . in the Sephiroth there is a triple Trinity, the upper, lower, and middle.” — p. 27 (Introduction)
From the invisible Dew . . . Sephira creates primeval waters
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . the dew from the White Head, which is ever filled therewith; and from that dew are the dead raised unto life {This subtle air, fire, and dew are analogous to the three ‘mother letters’ . . . the letter A symbolizing air, the medium between M the water, and Sh the fire}.” — p. 178 & fn. (Greater Holy Assembly, xxvii.546)
“It requires earth and water to make a living soul,” says Moses
see: Henry Cornelius Agrippa, Three Books of Occult Philosophy, 1898: “For Moses writes, that only Earth and Water bring forth a living soul.” — 1:45
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.  And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” — p. 3 (Genesis, 2:6-7)
It requires the image of an aquatic bird to connect it with water
see: Henry Cornelius Agrippa, Three Books of Occult Philosophy, 1898: “But he ascribes a twofold production of things to Water, viz., of things swimming in the Waters, and of things flying in the Air above the Earth [Gen. 1:20].” — 1:45

— Footnotes

Oulam meant only a time whose beginning or end is not known. . . .
see: John Wesley Hanson, Aiōn-Aiōnios, 1880: “Says a French author {LeClerc}: ‘It is certain that in Hebrew there is no word which, properly speaking, signifies eternity or a time which has no end.  Gnolam {Olam . . . the g being silent} signifies only a time, of which we know not the beginning or the end . . .’ ” — p. 11 & fn.

— 355 —

The frog in the moon
see: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “The frog is a natural transformer from the tadpole phase in the water to the four-legged stage on land!  The moon likewise transforms . . . so the frog as picture-object, natural type and living demonstrator for the moon, ultimately became the frog in the moon.” — p. 4
“The Indivisible Point, which has no limit and cannot be comprehended . . .”
p/q: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “Le point indivisible . . . n’ayant point de limites et ne pouvant pas être connu, à cause de sa force et de sa pureté, s’est répandu au dehors, et a formé un pavillon qui sert de voile à ce point indivisible [The Indivisible Point . . . which has no limit and cannot be known, because of its force and its purity, expanded outwards, and has formed a canopy that serves the Indivisible Point as a veil].” — p. 213
yet the latter also “could not be viewed in consequence of its immeasurable light . . .”
see: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “Ce pavillon, quoique d’une lumière moins pure que le point, était encore trop éclatant pour être regardé; il s’est à son tour répandu au dehors, et cette extension lui a servi de vêtement [This canopy, though of a light less pure than the Point, was still too bright to be viewed; it too expanded outwards, and this extension served as its garment] . . .” — p. 213
“Thus through a constant upheaving (motion) finally the world originated”
p/q: Adolphe Franck, La Kabbale, 1843: “. . . c’est ainsi que tout se fait par un mouvement qui descend toujours; c’est ainsi enfin que s’est formé l’univers [thus through a motion that continually descends; it was thus, finally, that the universe is made].” — p. 213
The Spiritual substance sent forth by the Infinite Light is the first Sephira . . .
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “At first En Soph . . . sent forth from his infinite light one spiritual substance, the first Sephira . . .” — 2:404
Sephira exoterically contains all the other nine Sephiroths in her.
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The first Sephira contained the other nine, and this brought them forth.” — 2:404
Chochmah or Wisdom, “a masculine, active potency whose divine name is Jah (יה)”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Chochma or Wisdom . . . a masculine active potency, represented among the divine names by (יה) Jah . . .” — 2:404
Binah, a feminine passive potency, Intelligence, represented by the divine name Jehovah
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . and from this potency proceeded a feminine passive potency denominated . . . Intelligence (Binah, בינה), represented by the divine name (יהוה) Jehovah. — 2:404
Father, Abba, and Mother Amona . . . the double-sexed logos . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . Ayin or No-Thing [Ain Soph].  Its first emanation is called, Abbah or the Father [Kether] . . . The first emanation from Kether, the Will or Father, is the Sephirah Binah . . . It is also termed by the Qabbalah Immah, the Mother . . . The second emanation from Kether, is . . . ’Hokhmah, Wisdom, the Word, also called the Son; the united complex of all forms.  It is the male principle and that which gives existence to Every-Thing . . .” — p. 199

— 356 —

“a ray issuing from Paramârthika . . . became manifested in Vyavahârika . . .”
see: T. Subba Row, “Brahmanism on the Sevenfold Principle in Man,” 1885: “. . . the Vedanta postulating three kinds of existence — (1) the pāramārthika, (the true, the only real one), (2), the vyavahārika (the practical), and (3) the pratibhāsika (the apparent or illusory life) — makes the first life or jiva, the only truly existent one.  Brahma or the one’s self is its only representative in the universe . . . while the other two are but its ‘phenomenal appearances’ . . . [Note IV by HPB]” — p. 182 (Five Years of Theosophy)
to descend into the Universal Mother, and to cause her to expand (swell, brih)
see: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “The one and chief attribute of the universal spiritual principle — the unconscious but ever active life-giver — is to expand and shed; that of the universal material principle to gather in and fecundate.  Unconscious and non-existing when separated, they become consciousness and life when brought together.  Hence again — Brahma, from the root ‘brih’ the Sanskrit for ‘to expand, grow or to frucify.’ ” — p. 71 (M., Letter XIII, Jan. 1882)
“The Infinite Unity, formless and without similitude . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . It was alone, without form, and without any similitude . . . But after the Deity had emanated the form of the Upper Man . . . It used the same, as a chariot (Merkabah), so as to descend (through it); It desired to be named after this form, which is the Sacred Name YHVH.” — p. 278
“In the beginning was the Will of the King . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “In the beginning, was the Will of the King, prior to any existence . . . It sketched and engraved the forms of all Things, that were to be manifested from concealment into view. . . . And there went forth, as a sealed secret, from the head of Ain Soph; a nebulous spark of matter without shape or form . . . Thus life is drawn from Below and from Above, thus the source renews itself, and the sea always full, spreads its water everywhere.” — pp. 194-5 (Zohar iii, 290b)
“The seventh palace, the fountain of life . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The seventh palace, the fountain of life, is the first in the order from above . . .” — p. 195 (Zohar ii, 261a)
“Wisdom hath builded her house . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Wisdom hath builded her house, She hath hewn out her seven pillars.” — p. 832 (Proverbs, 9:1)
Tsi-Tsai (the Self-Existent)
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The word Ishwara, rendered by tsï-tsai, ‘self-existent’ . . .” — p. 215
the root of Wuliang-sheu (Boundless Age), Amitabhe
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The life-time of this Buddha is without limit, lasting through countless kalpas, and therefore he is called ‘Amitabha’ (Wu-liang-sheu, ‘Boundless age’).” — pp. 233-4
The “great Extreme” of Confucius gives the same idea
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Confucius speaks of the Great Extreme as the commencement ‘of changes.  It produced the two figures.  These produced the four images, and these again the eight divining symbols.’ . . . If we understand the eight divining symbols to be eight departments of nature, as heaven, earth, fire, water, &c., then we may construct a cosmogony out of the formula above cited. . . . We find there, say the Chinese, heaven, earth, and man in miniature. . . . The commentator says that the phrase ‘Great Extreme’ here means ‘heaven, earth, and man, included but not yet separated.’ ” — pp. 320-1

— Footnotes

“Ah, companions, companions, man as an emanation was both man and woman . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “O companions, companions (says the Rabbi), man, as (God’s) emanation, was both man and woman; as well on the side of the FATHER as on the side of the MOTHER.  And this is the sense of the words: And Elohim spoke, Let there be Light and it was Light.  That is, it becomes Light on the side of the FATHER, and it was Light on the side of the MOTHER.  And this is the ‘two-fold Man.’ (Auszüge aus dem Sohar)” — p. 72

— 357 —

If we turn to Chaldea we find in it Anu, the concealed deity
see: George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876: “Anu represents abstract divinity, and he appears as an original priniciple, perhaps as the original principle of nature.” — p. 54
Anu, which means in Sanskrit “atom”
see: Monier Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1872: “Aṇu . . . an atom of matter . . .” — p. 11
aníyámsam anîyasâm (smallest of the small)
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Glory to the supreme Vishṇu . . . who is the root of the world, and who consists of the world . . . who is the smallest of the small {aṇīyāṃsam aṇīyasāṃ . . . ‘the most atomic of the atomic’} . . .” — 1:14-15 & fn. (i.2)
Parabrahm . . . smaller than the smallest atom, and greater than the greatest
p/q: A. E. Gough, “The Philosophy of the Upanishads,” Calcutta Review, v. 70, 1880: “ ‘Smaller than the smallest, greater than the greatest, the Self that is seated in the heart of living things. . . . undecaying, primeval, omnipresent, because it permeates all things . . . that withdraws them into itself in the end of things, in which are all things in the beginning . . .’ ” — p. 440 (Svetāśvatara Upanishad, iii.20-2, iv.1)
the Cuneiform Texts on the “Lateras Coctiles”
see: Sennacherib’s Campaign in Syria, Phœncia, and Palestine, tr. H. G. Kieme, 1875: “The last investigations have been made by that eminent and sagacious Assyrian scholar, George Smith . . . An immense number of baked clay tablets, of terra cotta cylinders, and burnt bricks, covered to a great extent with minute writings in a wedge-shaped manner, have been dug out . . .” — pp. viii-ix (Introduction)
see: Ernest A. Budge, “Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon,” 1885: “. . . inscriptions give [cuneiform text], ina kūpri u agurri, ‘with cement and burnt brick.’ . . . Agurri is . . . ‘lateres coctiles,’ or burnt brick.” — p. 146 (Transactions of the Victoria Institute, v. 18)
There also, we find Anu . . . Bel, the Creator . . . and Hea, the Universal Soul or wisdom
see: George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876: “. . . Anu, Hea, and Bel were considered the ‘great gods’ . . . These gods and their titles are given as:
1. Anu, king of angels and spirits . . .
2. Bel, lord of the world, father of the gods, creator . . .
3. Hea, maker of fate, lord of the deep, god of wisdom and knowledge . . .” — pp. 52-3
“1. When above, were not raised the heavens . . .”
p/q: George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, 1876:
“1. When above, were not raised the heavens:
  2. and below on the earth a plant had not grown up;
  3. the abyss also had not broken open their boundaries:
  4. The chaos (or water) Tiamat (the sea) was the producing-mother of the whole of them.
  5. Those waters at the beginning were ordained; but
  6. a tree had not grown, a flower had not unfolded.
  7. When the gods had not sprung up, any one of them;
  8. a plant had not grown, and order did not exist . . .” — pp. 62-3
the Dark Swan, which becomes white, when Light is created
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The starting-point in all the oldest mythologies is on the night-side of phenomena. . . . Out of this darkness issues the first shape, that of the Great Mother . . .”  “The swan that floats double in light and shadow presented another dual image of the goddess above and in the waters below.” — 2:6, 13
the Crusaders, led on by Peter the Hermit, were preceded . . . by the Holy Ghost
see: John William Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, 1874: “[Pope] Urban’s crusade failed . . . under Peter the Hermit . . . The van of the Crusade consisted of two hundred and seventy-five thousand men . . . preceded by a goat and a goose, into which some one had told them that the Holy Ghost had entered.” — p. 341

— 358 —

Pan . . . was generally figured in connection with aquatic birds
see: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “Pan appears . . . commonly standing near water, and accompanied by aquatic fowls . . . to whom geese were particularly sacred (Petronii Satyric, 136-7).” — p. 100
“Priapic doings and her enjoyment thereof”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “Hence the Swan of Leda, and his Priapic doings with the heroine, and her enjoyment thereof.” — p. 100
Swans . . . frequently found . . . with Apollo, as they are the emblems of water
see: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism, 1884: “Swans frequently occur as emblem of the waters upon coins; and sometimes with the head of Apollo on the reverse.” — p. 100
“From time immemorial . . . the origin of life.”
p/q: L. Maria Child, The Progress of Religious Ideas, 1855: “From time immemorial, an emblem has been worshipped in Hindostan as the type of creation, or the origin of life.  It is the most common symbol of Siva . . .” — 1:17
“Siva . . . pervades the Universe.  The maternal emblem . . . a religious type.”
p/q: L. Maria Child, The Progress of Religious Ideas, 1855: “. . . Siva was not merely the reproducer of human forms; he represented the Fructifying Principle, the Generating Power that pervades the universe . . . The maternal emblem is likewise a religious type . . .” — 1:17
“This reverence for the production of life, introduced . . . the sexual emblems.”
p/q: L. Maria Child, The Progress of Religious Ideas, 1855: “This reverence for the production of Life introduced into his [Osiris’] worship the sexual emblem so common in Hindostan.” — 1:151
“Is it strange that they regarded with reverence the great mystery of human birth? . . .”
p/q: L. Maria Child, The Progress of Religious Ideas, 1855: “. . . is it strange that they likewise regarded with reverence the great mystery of human Birth?  Were they impure thus to regard it?  Or are we impure that we do not so regard it?” — 1:16
“But no clean and thoughtful mind could so regard them.”
p/q: L. Maria Child, The Progress of Religious Ideas, 1855: “The sexual emblems everywhere conspicuous in the sculptures of their temples would seem impure in description, but no clean and thoughtful mind could so regard them . . .” — 1:157-8
“We have traveled far, and unclean have been the paths . . .”
p/q: L. Maria Child, The Progress of Religious Ideas, 1855: “We have traveled far, and unclean have been the paths, since those old anchorites first spoke of God and the soul in the solemn depths of their forest sanctuaries.  Let us not smile at their mode of tracing the Infinite and Incomprehensible Cause throughout all the mysteries of Nature, lest by so doing we cast the shadow of our own grossness on their patriarchal simplicity.” — 1:16-17

— 359 —

The “First Cause” had no name
see: W. J. Wilkins, Hindu Mythology, 1882: “He who is beyond the cognizance of the senses, subtile, undiscernible, eternal, who is the essence of all things . . . that First Cause, undiscernible, eternal, which is both existent and non-existent . . .” — pp. 84-5
Kalahansa . . . the “Swan of Eternity”
see: Monier Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1872: “Kala-haṇsa . . . a kind of duck or goose . . . [or] another bird . . . Brahma or the supreme spirit . . .” — p. 211
      “haṇsa . . . a goose, gander, swan . . . the supreme Soul or universal Spirit . . . [from] han in the sense of ‘to go,’ i.e. ‘who goes eternally’ . . .” — p. 1163
who lays . . . a “Golden Egg”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Brahmā (masculine). . . . His vehicle is a swan or goose, from which he is called Hansa-vāhana. . . . [Brahma (neuter)] the self-existent lord, created the waters and deposited in them a seed, which seed became a golden egg, in which he himself was born as Brahmā, the progenitor of all the worlds.” — pp. 56, 57
it was a symbol adopted among the Greeks, the Syrians, Persians, and Egyptians
see: Jacob Bryant, A New System, 1807: “. . . the dove, Oinas, was represented as hovering over the mundane egg . . . Hence in the Dionusiaca, and in other mysteries, one part of the nocturnal ceremony consisted in the consecration of an egg.  By this, as we are informed by Porphyry, was signified the world. . . . It was said by the Persians of Oromasdes, that he formed mankind, and inclosed them in an egg.  And the Syrians used to speak of their ancestors, the Gods, as proceeding from such an inclosure.” — 3:164-5
Seb . . . is spoken of as having laid an egg, or the Universe
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis . . . ce grand oeuf pondu par Seb sur la terre [I am . . . this great egg laid by Seb on earth].” — p. 173 (liv.1, 2)
“an egg conceived at the hour of the great one of the Dual Force”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . cet oeuf conçu à l’heure du grand de la double force [that egg conceived at the hour of the great one of the dual force] . . .” — p. 173 (liv.3)
Ra is shown . . . “resplendent in the Egg of the land of mysteries”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je resplendis dans l’oeuf dans le pays des mystères [I (Ra) shine brightly in the egg in the land of mysteries].” — p. 93 (xxii.1)
“the Egg to which is given life among the gods”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . oeuf auquel est donnée la vie parmi eux (les dieux) [the egg to which is given life among them (the gods)] . . .” — p. 147 (xlii.13)
“It is the Egg of the great clucking Hen . . . who issues from it like a hawk”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis cet oeuf du grand Glousseur [I am this egg of the great clucking Hen] . . .” — p. 173 (liv.1)
      “Je me lève en grand épervier sortant de son oeuf [I rise up as a great hawk going out of its egg] . . .” — p. 235 (lxxvii.1)
the Orphic Egg is described by Aristophanes
see: Aristophanes, The Birds, tr. John Hookham Frere, 1839:
“Before the creation of Æther and Light,
  Chaos and Night together were plight . . .
  Nor Ocean, or Air, or substance was there . . .
  By Night the primæval in secrecy laid;
  A Mystical Egg . . .” — p. 39

— 359-60 —

part of the Dionysiac and other mysteries . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the Orphic egg amongst the Greeks, and that described by Aristophanes . . . part of the ceremony in the Dionysiaca and other mysteries consisted of the consecration of an egg . . .” — 1:39 fn.

— 360 —

Ἐρμήνενει [Ἑρμήνεύει] δέ τὸ ὠὸν κόσμον
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the Orphic egg . . . by which, according to Porphyry, was signified the world: Ἑρμήνεύει δέ τὸ ὠὸν τὸν κόσμον [And the egg represents the cosmos].” — 1:39 fn.
Faber and Bryant . . . the egg typified the ark of Noah
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Whether this egg typified the ark, as Bryant and Faber suppose, is not material to the proof of the antiquity and wide diffusion of the belief, that the world, in the beginning, existed in such a figure.” — 1:39 fn.
And as Wilson has it: “A similar account of the first aggregation . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “A similar account of the first aggregation of the elements in the form of an egg is given in all the Purāṇas, with the usual epithet Haima or Hiraṇya, ‘golden,’ as it occurs in Manu., I, 9.” — 1:39 fn.
“Intellect . . . gross elements inclusive, formed an egg . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Intellect and the rest, to the gross elements inclusive, formed an egg . . . and there Vishṇu, the lord of the universe . . . abided in it, in the character of Brahmā. . . . In that egg, O Brahman, were the continents and seas and mountains, the planets and divisions of the universe, the gods, the demons, and mankind.” — 1:38-40 (i.2)
the first visible male being, who united in himself the nature of either sex . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Here is another analogy to the doctrines of antiquity relating to the mundane egg: and, as the first visible male being, who . . . united in himself the nature of either sex, abode in the egg, and issued from it; so, ‘this first-born of the world . . . was the person from whom the mortals and immortals were derived.’ ” — 1:40 fn. (i.2)
The “first born of the world” . . . who sprang from the mundane egg . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . ‘this first-born of the world . . . who sprang from the mundane egg, was the person from whom the mortals and immortals were derived.  He was the same as Dionysus . . .’ ” — 1:40 fn.
The god Ra is shown . . . beaming in his egg (the Sun)
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Ra dans son oeuf, qui rayonne dans son disque [Ra in his egg, beaming in his (solar) disk] . . .” — p. 63 (xvii.50)
he starts off as soon as the god Shoo . . . gives him the impulse
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . se lève à son horizon . . . qui circule dès que Shou l’a soulevé [he rises at his horizon . . . and starts his circuit as soon as Shu has lifted him up] . . .” — p. 63 (xvii.50-1)
“He is in the Solar egg . . . to which is given life among the gods”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . il est dans l’oeil solaire, oeuf auquel est donnée la vie parmi eux (les dieux) [he is in the solar eye, the egg to which is given life among them (the gods)] . . .” — p. 147 (xlii.13)
“I am the creative soul of the celestial abyss. . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis l’âme créatrice de l’abîme céleste . . . On ne voit pas mon nid, on ne perce pas mon oeuf.  Je suis le seigneur [I am the soul-creator of the celestial abyss . . . None sees my nest, none can break my egg.  I am the Lord].” — p. 265 (lxxxv.9)
it is strange to find a scholar saying . . . the ancient Aryans were ignorant of the decimal notation
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “. . . that the nine figures and the use of the cipher were known to the Buddhists of the third century b.c. is a doubtful point, particularly if we consider that the numbers contained in the Bactro-Pali inscriptions, in the first or second centrury b.c., show no trace, as yet, of that perfect system of ciphering.” — 2:294-5
Max Müller says that “the two words cipher and zero, which are but one . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “The two words cipher and zero, which are in reality but one, would almost in themselves be sufficient to prove that our figures are borrowed from the Arabs.” — 2:286

— Footnotes

See Max Müller’s “Our Figures”
see: Max Müller, Chips From a German Workshop, v. 2, 1867, pp. 286-96.

— 360-1 —

Cipher is the Arabic “cifron,” and means empty . . .
p/q: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “Cipher is the Arabic cifron, which means empty, a translation of the Sanskrit sūnya.” — 2:286

— 361 —

The Arabs had their figures from Hindustan . . .
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “The Arabs, however, far from claiming the discovery of the figures for themselves, unanimously ascribe it to the Indians, nor can there be any doubt that the Brahmans were the original inventors of those numerical symbols which are now used over the whole civilized world.” — 2:286-7
Boethius’s Geometry . . . among the Pythagorean numerals the 1 and the nought
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “The so-called ‘Pythagorean Numerals’ are shown [Plate N.5] in the MSS. of Boethius’s Geometry, composed in the sixth century.” — pp. 446-7
the Pythagorean Moderatus, says that the numerals of Pythagoras were “hieroglyphical symbols . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1864: “The Pythagorean Moderatus, quoted by Porphyry (Vit. Pythag.), states that the numerals of Pythagoras were hieroglyphical symbols, by means whereof he explained ideas concerning the nature of things.” — p. 228
Max Müller states . . . he has found but nine letters (the initials of the Sanscrit numerals)
p/q: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “We also beg to call attention to a list of ancient Sanskrit numerals . . . We find nine letters, the initials of the Sanskrit numerals, employed for 1 to 9 . . .” — 2:295
Pythagoras derived his knowledge from India . . .
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “. . . the Arabs, on arriving in Spain . . . adopted the figures which they there found in use . . . and which had travelled there from the Neo-Pythagorean schools of Egypt, and originally from India . . .” — 2:291
Neo-Pythagoreans . . . the first teachers of “ciphering” . . .
p/q: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “All that can be claimed for them [the Neo-Pythagoreans] is, that they were the first teachers of ciphering among the Greeks and Romans; that they, at Alexandria or in Syria, became acquainted with the Indian figures, and adapted them to the Pythagorean Abacus . . .” — 2:288
“some philosophers hold that ideas and numbers are of the same nature . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “And that the ‘Numbers’ of Pythagoras were Ten, appears from the remark of Aristotle (Met. vii. 8) ‘that some philosophers maintained that ideas and numbers were of the same nature, and amount to Ten in all.’ ” — p. 447

— 362 —

The ibis . . . sacred also to Mercury or Thoth . . . was held in the greatest veneration . . .
see: Herodotus, History, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “The story goes, that . . . winged snakes come flying from Arabia towards Egypt, but are met in this gorge by the birds called ibises, who forbid their entrance and destroy them all.  The Arabians assert, and the Egyptians also admit, that it is on account of the service thus rendered that the Egyptians hold the ibis in so much reverence {the ibis was sacred to Thoth, the Egyptian Hermes}.” — 2:106 & fn. (ii.75)
There were two kinds of ibises, Herodotus tells us . . .
see: Herodotus, History, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “The ibis is a bird of a deep-black colour . . . the black ibis which contends with the serpents.  The commoner sort, for there are two quite distinct species . . . its general plumage is white, but the head and neck are jet black . . .” — 2:106 (ii.76)
The other was sacred to the Moon
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Mercure emprunta la forme de cette seconde espèce . . . qui, par ses deux couleurs, a le même rapport avec la lune que le taureau Apis [Mercury took the form of this second species . . . who, through his two colors, has the same relationship with the Moon as the bull Apis] . . .” — p. 573
The bird is . . . helped by Isis, as the moon, her sidereal symbol.
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “À cause de ses rapports avec la lune, on donnait à Isis, qui est le symbole de cet astre, une tête d’ibis. [Because of its relationship with the moon, Isis, who is the symbol of that heavenly body, was given the head of an ibis].” — p. 573
Hermes . . . watched under the form of that bird over the Egyptians . . .
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Hermès, sous cette forme, veillait, dit Abenephius (De cultu égypt.), à la conservation des Egyptiens, et les instruisait dans toutes les sciences [Hermes watched in this form over the preservation of the Egyptians, says Abenephius (De cultu Egypt.), and he (Hermes) instructed them in all the sciences].” — pp. 573-4
In Egypt, he who killed an ibis, or the golden hawk . . . could hardly escape death.
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “En Egypte on ne pouvait tuer un ibis ou un épervier . . . sans perdre la vie [In Egypt you could not kill an ibis or a (golden) sparrow-hawk . . . without losing your life].” — p. 574 fn.

— 362-3 —

zoomancy, said by Suidas to have been imparted by Orpheus, who taught how to perceive . . .
see: A. Bouché-Leclercq, Histoire de la Divination dans l’Antiquité, 1880: “Suidas est seul à mentionner les ‘oracles d’Orphée . . . on inventa la méthode de divination inductive connue sous le nom d’ooscopie [Suidas is the only one to mention that in the ‘Oracles of Orpheus’ . . . the inductive method of divination known as oomancy (divining the future from the yolk and white of the egg) was invented] . . .” — 2:114

— 363 —

These four animals are . . . symbols of the four elements, and the four lower principles in man
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Les animaux évangéliques sont . . . emblèmes imaginés pour exprimer les quatre éléments ou les quatre principes des corps [The gospel animals are . . . invented symbols to express the four elements or the four principles of the body] . . .” — p. 574 fn.
they correspond . . . materially to the four constellations . . .
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . ils correspondent matériellement à quatre constellations, lesquelles forment le cortège du dieu-soleil, et occupent, au solstice d’hiver, les quatre points cardinaux de la sphere [they correspond materially to the four constellations that form the suite of the solar god, and occupy during the winter solstice, the four cardinal points of the (zodiacal) circle].” — p. 574 fn.
“the ancient Hierophants have combined . . . the dogmas and symbols . . .”
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Les hiérophantes combinèrent tellement les dogmes et les symboles de leur religion, que ces symboles pussent être assez exactement expliqués par trois systèmes différents (l’allégorique, l’historique et l’astronomique) [The hierophants combined the dogmas and symbols of their religion in such a manner, that these symbols could be perfectly explained by three different systems (allegorical, historical, astronomical)] . . .” — p. 574 fn.

— 363-4 —

In the temple of Philæ in Upper Egypt . . . a cerastes (the horned viper) was born
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “It was rapidly seen, with a due sense of awe, that the cerastus, which is oviparous in its generation, emerged from the same form of generative life, and hence the serpent . . . soon became a religious symbol, as we find it on the Temple of Philæ . . .” — 1:182

— 364 —

The creative God emerges from the egg that issues from the mouth of Kneph . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The egg is also seen issuing from the mouth of Kneph, and afterwards the creative god, emerging from the egg, appears as a winged serpent.” — 1:182
[the creative God] is glyphed by the “flying or fiery serpents” of the Wilderness
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? . . . And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:5-6)
Ophio-Christos, the Logos of the Gnostics
see: Hargrave Jennings, The Rosicrucians: Their Rites and Mysteries, 1887: “The Ophites are said to have maintained that the serpent of Genesis was the Λογος, and the ‘Saviour.’  The Logos was Divine Wisdom . . .” — 1:273
the allegory of the Brazen Serpent . . . the mystery of Christ and Crucifixion
see: F. A. Power, The Book of Texts of Ancient and Modern History, 1879: “Among the Jews the brazen serpent was considered a type of the resurrection: through it the dying lived . . . As the serpent was raised up [by Moses], so shall Christ be lifted up; as they who were stung by the fiery serpents were restored by looking up to the brazen serpent . . . These are all the analogies which we can legitimately trace between the lifting up of the brazen serpent and the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.” — p. 473
“brazen” being the feminine principle, and that of fiery, or “gold,” the male one
see: Hargrave Jennings, The Rosicrucians: Their Rites and Mysteries, 1887: “The three most celebrated emblems carried in the Greek mysteries were the Phallus, Ι; the Egg, Ο and the Serpent, Φ . . . The first, in each case, is the emblem of the sun, or of fire, as the male, or active, generative power.  The second denotes the passive nature, or feminine principle . . .” — 1:274-5
Ra, the mighty one, remains in his Egg
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Ra dans son œuf, qui rayonne dans son disque [Ra in his egg, who radiates in his disc] . . .” — p. 63 (xvii.50)
during the struggle between the “children of the rebellion” and Shoo
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . Shou a soulevé le Noun étant sur l’escalier . . . Il a anéanti les enfants de la rébellion [Shu has lifted up Nūt (the Heavens), standing on the stairs . . . He has annihilated the children of the rebellion].” — p. 54 (xvii.2-3)
Shoo (the Solar Energy and the Dragon of Darkness)
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Shou symbolise la force du soleil; il a triomphé du Chaos par sa victoire sur les mauvais principes . . . ‘les enfants de la rébellion.’ [Shu symbolizes the power of the Sun; he has triumphed over Chaos through his victory over the evil principles . . . ‘the children of the rebellion’].” — p. 72 (xvii, note 2)

— Footnotes

And this is only because the brazen serpent was lifted on a pole!
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:9)
Mico the Egyptian egg standing upright supported by the sacred Tau
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Still more curious is the symbol of the egg in Egypt, when we consider that the sacred anch or crux ansata was in Coptic called by the name of ‘Sustainer of Life,’ or Mici; mici, being an egg standing supported by the Sacred Tau . . .” — 1:182-3
both the Brazen and “fiery” Serpents were Saraphs, the “burning fiery” messengers
see: George Oliver, Signs and Symbols, 1826: “[Serpent worship] might have a further reference to the Seraphim or ministering Angels of that people [the Jews]; for Saraph signifies equally a fiery Serpent, and an Angel.  And the miraculous cures effected by the Brazen Serpent, would give an additional impulse to the practice . . .” — pp. 54-5
“Brass was a metal symbolizing the nether world . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “Brass was a metal symbolizing the nether world . . . that of the womb where life should be given to the new year.  The recurring year was symbolized by a serpent swallowing . . . the end of its tail; and thus was a female emblem as reproducing itself.  The word for serpent was, in Hebrew, Nakash.  But this is the same term for brass . . .” — p. 173
the Jews complained of the Wilderness where there was no water
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water . . .” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:5)
“the Lord sent fiery serpents” to bite them
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:6)
to oblige Moses, he gives him as a remedy the brazen serpent on a pole
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole . . .” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:8)
“any man when he beheld the serpent of brass . . . lived”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it [the brazen serpent], shall live.” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:8)
After that the “Lord” . . . gives them water, and grateful Israel sang . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And from thence they went to Beer: that is the well whereof the Lord spake unto Moses, Gather the people together, and I will give them water.  Then Israel sang this song, Spring up, O well . . .” — pp. 208-9 (Numbers, 21:16-17)
The Seraphim שרפים (fiery winged serpents) . . .
see: The Book of God: The Apocalypse of Adam-Oannes [by E. V. H. Kenealy], 1867: “Seraphim —  שרפים Fiery Winged Serpents; that is Archangels of the most transcendent glory; flame-like in splendour and majesty, which live in the presence of the Serpent of Eternity — God.” — p. 14
cherub also meant serpent . . . as it is formed of כר (kr) circle, and אוב “aub” . . .
p/q: The Book of God: The Apocalypse of Adam-Oannes [by E. V. H. Kenealy], 1867: “The word Cherub also meant Serpent.  It is a compound word, formed of כר kr, circle, and אוב aub, serpent — a Serpent in a Circle.” — p. 14
And this . . . justifies Hezekiah for breaking it.
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Now it came to pass . . . that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign. . . . He removed the high places, and brake the images . . . and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made . . .” — p. 516 (II Kings, 18:1, 4)

— 364-5 —

The deceased is resplendent in his Egg when he crosses to the land of mystery
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je resplendis dans l’oeuf dans le pays des mystères [I am resplendent in the Egg in the Land of Mysteries].” — p. 93 (xxii.1)

— 365 —

He is the Egg of Seb
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis . . . ce grand oeuf pondu par Seb sur la terre [I am . . . this great egg laid by Seb on earth].” — p. 173 (liv.1, 2)
The Mundane Egg was placed in Khnoom, the “Water of Space”
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The creative power was known as Noum [Khnoom], the moist power, water being looked upon as the cause of all things, and in this the egg floated.” — 1:182
Phtah, the “fiery god,” carries the Mundane egg in his hand
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The deity of fire, Phtha, who presided over heat and the generation of man, on many monuments bears the mythical egg in his hands . . .” — 1:182
In conjunction with the hawk . . . the symbol is dual . . . the mortal and the immortal
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “On Egyptian mummy cases we frequently find the egg in conjunction with the hawk, as symbols relatively of mortal and immortal life . . .” — 1:183
In Kircher’s Œdipus Egyptiacus . . . an egg floating above the mummy . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . in one papyrus preserved in Kircher (Œdipus Egyptiacus, vol. iii, p. 124), above the mummy the egg is floating as a symbol of the new life attending the Osirified person (the deceased), the purified soul, after his sojourn in the place of expiation . . .” — 1:183
the scarabeus, the Khopiroo (from the root Khoproo “to become,” “to be reborn”)
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Le scarabée s’appelait en égyptien Khopirrou, Khopri, de la racine khoprou, devenir: aussi est-il devenu de bonne heure en Égypte l’emblème de la vie humaine et des devenirs successifs de l’âme dans l’autre monde [In Egyptian the scarab was called Khopirrou, Khopri, from the root khoprou, ‘to become’:  in early Egypt it also became the emblem of human life and the successive reimbodiments of the soul in the other world].” — p. 225
In the Theogony of Mochus, we find Æther first, and then air . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “In the theogony of Mochus, ‘The Aether was the first and the Air: these are ‘the Two Principles;’ from them Ulom the ‘Intelligible god’ was born {Movers, 282}.” — p. 188 & fn.
see: F. C. Movers, Die Phönizier, v. 1, 1841, p. 282.
Eros-Phanes evolves from the divine Egg
see: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “The Orphic Eros-Phanes springs from the egg which the Aetherial winds impregnate {K. O. Müller, 236}.” — p. 188 & fn.
see: K. O. Müller, History of the Literature of Ancient Greece, 1840, 1:236.
the divine Egg, which the Æthereal Winds impregnate
see: K. O. Müller, History of the Literature of Ancient Greece, 1840: “The mundane egg, which included the matter of chaos, was impregnated by the winds, that is, by the aether in motion; and thence arose the golden-winged Eros.” — 1:236
wind being “the Spirit of the unknown Darkness”
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “First was Ether and Air, which are the Two first principles . . . after the two principles the summit may be the one Wind . . . The One principle of the Universe is celebrated as Unknown Darkness . . .” — pp. 319-20 (Damascius, Theogonies)
Purusha . . . original matter . . . “from whose union springs the great soul of the world”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “ ‘In the Kathakopanishad, the Spirit (Purusha) already stands before the Original Matter, from whose union springs the Great Soul of the world . . . the Spirit of life.’ (Weber, Akad. Vorles.)” — p. 189
the female creator who is first a germ . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . the goddess-creatrix Ixoretta was herself the universal germ.  Being first a drop of dew, next a pearl, at last she transformed herself into an egg.” — 1:184
the Egg . . . is covered with seven coverings . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . the egg contained five elements, and was covered by seven coverings . . . The seven coverings became the seven heavens, and the seven worlds of Brahmanical cosmogony.” — 1:184

— 365-6 —

Breaking in two . . . the white forming the terrestrial waters.
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “. . . the egg burst into two unequal parts.  From the shell, fire and air escaped, forming the superior region and heaven, and the yolk and white formed the earth and water.” — 1:184

— 366 —

it is Vishnu who emerges from within the egg . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “According to other versions of the legend, the mysterious egg contained Vishnu, who brought the lotus.” — 1:184
Vinata . . . brought forth an egg from which was born Garuda . . .
see: W. J. Wilkins, Hindu Mythology, 1882: “Garuda . . . half-man and half-eagle, the Vāhan of Vishnu. . . . When Daksha’s sons refused to people the world, he produced sixty daughters . . . of these . . . ‘Vinatā bore him [Kasyapa] two celebrated sons, Garuda and Aruna . . .’  The mother of Garuda is said to have laid an egg; hence her son assumed a bird-like form.” — p. 374
The egg was sacred to Isis . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The egg was also symbolically attributed to Isis, and is to be found in the hieroglyphic name of that goddess.  The priests of Egypt strictly abstained from eating eggs . . . lest they should anger the Deity by the destruction of the germs of a being thus destined to live.” — 1:182
Osiris was born from an Egg . . . Apollo and Latona . . . also Castor and Pollux
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Diodorus Siculus says (I. 29), that Osiris was born from an egg . . . From the Egg of Leda, Apollo and Latona were born; and Castor and Pollux — the Gemini of the Zodiac — had a similar origin.” — 1:182
The Chinese believe that their first man was born from an egg . . .
see: “Illustrations of Men and Things in China,” The American Eclectic, Jan. 1842: “The idea of chaos is expressed by bubbling, turbid water; heaven [T’ien] and earth [Ti] are the dual powers; before the chaos was separated, these two powers were mingled and pent up as a chick in ovo . . . the first man Pwankoo was hatched from the primeval chaos by the dual powers  . . .” — p. 50
as observed in “Chaos, Theos, Kosmos,” the older Horus was the Idea of the world . . .
p/q: “Chaos, Theos, Kosmos”: “The first [Horus] is the Idea of the world remaining in the Demiurgic Mind, ‘born in darkness before the creation of the world.’  The second Horus is this ‘Idea’ going forth from the Logos, becoming clothed with matter, and assuming an actual existence {Mover’s ‘Phoinizier,’ 268}.” — SD 1:348
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “The Egyptians distinguished between an Older and Younger Horus . . . The first is the ‘Idea’ of the World remaining in the Demiurgic Mind, ‘born in darkness before the creation of the world.’ ” — pp. 189-90
“born in Darkness before the creation of the world”
p/q: F. C. Movers, Die Phönizier, v. 1, 1841: “Sie unterschieden nach ihm einen ältern und jüngern Horus.  Der erstere war vor der Weltbildung in der Finsterniß geboren [They distinguished after him between an Older and a Younger Horus.  The first was born in Darkness before the creation of the World].” — p. 268
The second Horus was the same Idea going forth . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “The second Horus is this ‘Idea’ going forth from the Logos, becoming clothed with Matter and assuming an actual existence {Movers, 268}.” — p. 190 & fn.
Khnoum and Ammon; both are represented ram-headed, and both often confused
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Le dieu Khnoum à tête de bélier . . . il se confondit fréquemment avec Ammon-Thébain à tête de bélier [The ram-headed god Khnoom . . . he was often confused with the Theban ram-headed god Ammon].” — p. 167
Khnoum is “the modeller of men,” fashioning . . . the Mundane Egg on a potter’s wheel
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Khnoum signifie le modeleur, et on voit souvent le dieu modelant l’oeuf du monde sur un tour à potier [Khnoom means ‘the modeler,’ and we often see the god shaping the Mundane Egg on a potter’s wheel].” — p. 167

— Footnotes

Isis . . . holding a lotus in one hand and in the other a circle and the Cross (crux ansata)
see: G. C. Ceccaldi, “Patère et Rondache,” Sept. 1875: “La déesse obombre de ses ailes Horus enfant . . . Ils tiennent le lotus, fleur d’Isis, et la croix ansée, symbole de procreation [With her wings the goddess provides shade to the infant Horus . . . They hold the lotus, the flower of Isis, and the crux ansata, symbol of procreation] . . .” — pp. 28-9 (Revue Archéologique, v. 31)
Horus — the “older,” or Haroiri . . .
see: G. Maspero, “Les Hypogées Royaux de Thèbes,” 1888: “Le plus répandu de ces dieux était Hor, l’épervier, non pas celui qu’on appela plus tard Harsiisi, Hor fils d’Isis, mais Haroiri, Hor l’aîné, Hor l’ancien [The most common of these gods was Hor, the hawk, not the one later called Harsiisi, Hor the son of Isis, but Haroiri, the elder Hor, the ancient Hor].” — p. 256 (Revue de l’Histoire des Religions, v. 17)
The Egyptians very often represented the rising Sun under the form of Hor . . .
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Les Égyptiens représentaient le soleil levant sous la forme du dieu Hor, sortant d’un lotus épanoui.  Ici, Hor a la tête d’épervier, et le disque solaire surmonté des deux longues plumes [The Egyptians represented the rising Sun under the form of the god Hor, coming out of a lotus in full bloom.  Here Hor has the head of a hawk, and the solar disc (is) placed above two long feathers].” — p. 185

— 367 —

Emepht, the One, Supreme . . . principle, who blows the egg out of his mouth
see: Thomas Vaughan, The Magical Writings, 1888: “Emepht, whereby they expresse their supreme God . . . the true one, signifies properly an intelligence, or spirit converting all things into himself, and himself into all things. . . . Emepht produc’d an egg out of his mouth . . . In the production of this egg was manifested another Deitie, which they call Phtha, and out of some other natures and substances inclos’d in the egg, this Phtha formed all things.” — pp. 117-18 (Magia Adamica)
It is Phtah . . . “he who opens,” the opener of life and Death . . .
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Phtah était au début le dieu des morts . . . Son nom signifie celui qui ouvre, et fait peut-être allusion à l’une de ses fonctions, qui était d’ouvrir le cercueil et de dévoiler la face du mort pour lui rendre la vie [Ptah was originally the god of the dead . . . His name means he who opens and alludes perhaps to one of his functions, which was to open the coffin and to unveil the face of the dead to restore him to life].” — p. 165
the Chemis . . . which floats on the ethereal waves . . .
see: G. S. Faber, The Origin of Pagan Idolatry, 1816: “In the present legend, Python is obviously the Egyptian Typhon or the ocean, the infant Apollo is the infant Horus, the floating island Delos occupies the place of the floating island Chemmis . . . when the solar god Horus was obliged to take refuge in the floating island Chemmis . . . the Sun is thus set afloat by the old mythologists . . . he was born out of an egg, which had floated on the ocean, and which had been tossed about at the mercy of the elements: and he was thus produced . . . the primeval being from whom all were equally born, the personage who himself was specially the first-produced.” — 2:221-3
Scandinavian Cosmogony — placed by Professor Max Müller . . . “far anterior to the Vedas”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “In the history of ancient religions, Odin . . . was worshipped as the supreme deity during a period long anterior to the age of the Veda and of Homer.” — p. 318
the poem of Voluspa (the song of the prophetess) . . .
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847: “The Völu, or Völo-spá — a compound word, signifying The Song of the Prophetess — appears to be the oldest as it is the most interesting of the Eddaic poems.” — pp. 363-4
the phantom-germ of the Universe . . . lying in the Ginnungagap
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “In the beginning was a great abyss; neither day nor night existed; the abyss was Ginnungagap; the yawning gulf; without beginning without end.” — p. 22
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847:
“ ‘Twas time’s first dawn,
  When nought yet was . . .
  Earth was not there,
  Nor heaven above.
  Nought save a void
  And yawning gulf [Ginnungagap].” — p. 401
Nebelheim (the mist-place . . .)
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “Towards the north, in immeasurable space where dwell darkness and icy cold, arose Nifelheim (the Home of the Mists) . . .” — p. 22
Then the Invisible blew a scorching wind which dissolved the frozen waters . . .
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847: “ ‘. . . that part of Ginnungagap looking towards Muspellheim was filled with glowing radiancy . . . And when the heated blast met the gelid vapour it melted into drops . . .’ ” — pp. 402-3
the streams of Elivagar, distilling in vivifying drops . . . created the earth
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “The spring Hwergelmir (the seething cauldron) sprang into life in Nifelheim, and out of it flowed twelve and more infernal streams (Eliwagar) . . . when the great blocks of ice began to melt . . . and drops of water to form and run down their sides, then it was that life first showed itself . . .” — p. 22
vivifying drops . . . created the earth and the giant Ymir, who only had “the semblance of man”
p/q: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847: “ ‘. . . these drops quickened into life, and took a human semblance.  The being thus formed was named Ymir . . .’ ” — p. 403
and the cow, Audhumla . . . from whose udder flowed four streams of milk
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847: “ ‘Immediately after the gelid vapours had been resolved into drops . . . there was formed out of them the cow named Audhumla.  Four streams of milk ran from her teats, and thus fed she Ymir.’ ” — p. 403

— Footnotes

Phtah was originally the god of death . . . He is a solar god . . .
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Phtah était au début le dieu des morts: ce n’est que plus tard qu’on est arrivé à le faire rentrer . . . dans la catégorie des dieux solaires [Ptah was originally the god of the dead: it is only later that he was once more placed . . . in the category of the solar gods].” — p. 165
He was the national god of Memphis, the radiant and “fair-faced God.”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Il était le dieu national de Memphis . . . Les traits de sa figure sont très fins, aussi l’appelle-t-on Phtah au beau visage [He was the national god of Memphis . . . The features of his face are very fine; and so he was also called the fair-faced Ptah].” — p. 165 (Ep. saïte, Saqqarah)
The Brahmanda Purâna . . . like the Skanda, is “no longer procurable in a collective body” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa is usually considered to be in much the same predicament as the Skanda, no longer procurable in a collective body, but represented by a variety of Khaṇḍas and Māhātmyas, professing to be derived from it.” — 1:lxxxv (Preface)
“Brahmanda Purâna” . . . “that which is declared in 12,200 verses . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa.  ‘That which has declared, in twelve thousand two hundred verses, the magnificence of the egg of Brahmā, and in which an account of the future Kalpas is contained . . . and was revealed by Brahmā.’ ” — 1:lxxxiv-lxxxv

— 368 —

the anguinum, the “Egg” of the “pagan” Druid . . .
see: J. G. R. Forlong, Rivers of Life, 1883: “Pliny . . . tells us, in regard to the origin of the anguinum or serpent egg, that this is brought about by ‘a bed or knot of snakes’ . . . The egg or its priestly imitation . . . was once revered by Kelts as ‘an object of Druidical worship.’ . . . we might multiply to almost any extent tales showing fear and reverence in regard to these matters . . .” — 2:295-6
the Maha Kalpa is never a “day,” but a whole life or age of Brahmâ
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Properly, a great Kalpa is not a day, but a life, of Brahmā . . .” — 1:53 fn.
for it is said in the Brahmâ Vaivarta: “Chronologers compute a Kalpa . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . as in the Brahma Vaivarta . . . ‘Chronologers compute a Kalpa by the life of Brahmā.  Minor Kalpas, as Saṃvarta and the rest, are numerous.’ ” — 1:53 fn.
One Parardha . . . half of the existence of Brahmâ
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Brahmā is said to be born . . . a hundred of his years is said to constitute his life.  That period is also called Para, and the half of it, Parārdha.” — 1:46-7 (i.3)
the last Kalpa was the Padma . . . the present one being Vârâha
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The only Kalpas usually specified are . . . the last, or the Pādma, and the present or Vārāha.” — 1:53 fn.

— Footnotes [368-9]

Brahmâ assumed the form of that animal to raise the Earth out of the “Waters of Space”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Brahmā . . . concluding that within the waters lay the earth, and being desirous to raise it up, created another form for that purpose . . . he took the figure of a boar.” — 1:56-9 (i.4)
The Vârâha . . . “delighting to sport in water”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Varāha form was chosen, says the Vāyu P., because it is an animal delighting to sport in water.  But it is described, in many Purāṇas, as . . . an allegorical representation of the extrication of the world from a deluge of iniquity, by the rites of religion.  Geologists may, perhaps, suspect . . . an allusion to a geological fact, or the existence of lacustrine mammalia in the early periods of the earth.” — 1:59 fn.

— 369 —

Yudishthira — the first King of the Sacea, who opens the Kali Yuga era . . .
p/q: Sampson Arnold Mackey, Mythological Astronomy, 1822-3: “We are informed that ‘Yudhis’tir, was the first of the six Sacas; he was born on the Sabe-Sringa, or mountain with 100 peaks . . .’  And ‘that Yudis’tir or Judhis’tir, began his reign immediately after the Flood. . . . [i.e.] The beginning of the Cali-yuga reign of Yudhis’tir.’ ” —  pp. 38-9 (Key of Urania)
see: F. Wilford, “Of the Kings of Magad’ha; their Chronology,” 1809, p. 82 (Asiatic Researches, v. 9)
“an actual King and man who lived 3,102 years b.c.”
see: Alexander Cunningham, Book of Indian Eras, 1883: “. . . the period of the Great War [Mahābhārata], or the era of Yudhishthira, was also the beginning of the Kāli-Yuga.”  “The Kāli-Yuga, or fourth age of Hindu Chronology, dates from the year 3102 B.C.” — pp. 7, 31

— Footnotes

According to Colonel Wilford, the conclusion of the “Great War” was b.c. 1370 . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “According to Colonel Wilford’s computations . . . the conclusion of the Great War took place B.C. 1370. . . . Mr. Bentley brings the date of Yudhishṭhira, the chief of the Pāṇḍavas, to 575 B.C.” — 4:232 fn.

— 369-70 —

He is the “Yudishthira born on the mountain of the hundred peaks . . .”
p/q: Sampson Arnold Mackey, Mythological Astronomy, 1822-3: “We are informed that ‘Yudhis’tir . . . was born on the Sabe-Sringa, or mountain with 100 peaks, at the extremity of the world; beyond which nobody can go.’  And ‘that Yudhis’tir . . . began his ‘reign immediately after the Flood.’ and vol. 9 [Asiatic Researches], p. 364 we read, The beginning of the Cali-yuga in the reign of Yudhis’tir.” — pp. 38-9 (“Key of Urania”)

— 370 —

the Preliminary Sections which preface Anthropogenesis in Book II
see: “Preliminary Notes,” SD 2:1-12.
the pralaya before which fourteen Manvantaras elapse . . . Brahmâ’s dissolution
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “That period is, also, termed a Kalpa, during which fourteen Manus preside; and, at the end of it, occurs the incidental or Brahmā dissolution.” — 5(I):190 (vi.3)
it is said in Vishnu Purâna . . . “at the end of a thousand periods . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “At the end of a thousand periods of four ages, the earth is, for the most part, exhausted. . . . The eternal {Avyaya} Vishṇu then assumes the character of Rudra, the destroyer . . . drinks up all the waters . . . and sets the three worlds and Pātāla on fire. . . . Hari, in the form of Rudra, who is the flame of time {Kālāgni} . . . reduces Pātāla to ashes. . . . Janārdana, in the person of Rudra . . . breathes forth heavy clouds . . . and, all things, animate or inanimate, having perished, the clouds continue to pour down their waters for more than a hundred years.” — 5(I):190-4 & fns. (vi.3)
as Wilson shows: — The first is called Naimittika . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The first is called Naimittika, ‘occasional’ or ‘incidental’ . . . as occasioned by the intervals of Brahmā’s days; the destruction of creatures, though not of the substance of the world, occurring during his night.” — 5(I):186 fn.

— 371 —

Prakritika . . . occurs at the end of the Age or Life of Brahma . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The general resolution of the elements into their primitive source, or Prakṛiti, is the Prākṛitika destruction, and occurs at the end of Brahmā’s life.” — 5(I):186 fn.
Atyantika, does not concern the Worlds . . . but only the individualities of some people
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The third, the absolute or final, Ātyantika, is individual annihilation; Moksha, exemption for ever from future existence.” — 5(I):186 fn.
Maha Pralaya . . . lasting as it does 311,040,000,000,000 years
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa:, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The dissolution of existing beings . . . which takes place after two Parārdhas {two Parārdhas, as equal to one hundred years of Brahmā, are 311,040,000,000,000 years of mortals}.” — 5(I):186-7 & fn. (vi.3)
The Bhagavata . . . speaks of a fourth kind of pralaya, the Nitya . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Bhāgavata {XII, iv, 35} here notices the fourth kind . . . Nitya, or constant dissolution; — explaining it to be the imperceptible change that all things suffer in the various stages of growth and decay, life and death.” — 5(I):186 fns.
the inhabitants of Swar-loka . . . seek refuge “with the Pitris . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “A vast whirlpool of eddying flame then spreads to . . . the sphere of the gods {Swar-loka} . . . The inhabitants of the two (upper) spheres . . . remove to (the sphere above, or) Mahar-loka {Those . . . distinguished for piety, abide, at the time of dissolution, in Mahar-loka, with the Pitṛis, the Manus, the seven Ṛishis, the various orders of celestial spirits, and the gods}.” — 5(I):192-3 & fns. (vi.3)
the whole of the above . . . repair to Jana-loka in “their subtle forms . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “These, when the heat of the flames that destroy the world reaches to Mahar-loka, repair to Jana-loka, in their subtle forms, destined to become reembodied, in similar capacities as their former, when the world is renewed, at the beginning of the succeeding Kalpa.” — 5(I):193 fn. (Vāyu Purāṇa)
“These clouds, mighty in size . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Mighty in size, and loud in thunder, they fill all space {Nabhas-tala}.  Showering down torrents of water, these clouds quench the dreadful fires . . . and then they rain, uninterruptedly, for a hundred years, and deluge the whole world.  Pouring down, in drops as large as dice, these rains overspread the earth, and fill the middle region {Bhuvo-loka}, and inundate heaven.  The world is now enveloped in darkness; and all things animate or inanimate, having perished, the clouds continue to pour down their waters . . .” — 5(I):194 & fns. (vi.3)
When the waters have reached the region of the Seven Rishis . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “When the waters have reached the region of the seven Ṛishis, and the whole of the three worlds is one ocean, they stop.  The breath of Vishṇu becomes a (strong) wind, which blows for more than a hundred years, until all the clouds are dispersed.  The wind is then reabsorbed; and he of whom all things are made, the lord by whom all things exist, he who is inconceivable, without beginning, beginning of the universe, reposes, sleeping upon Śesha, in the midst of the deep.” — 5(I):195 (vi.4)

— 371-2 —

The Adikrit (Creator?) Hari, sleeps upon the ocean of Space . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The creator {Ādikṛit}, Hari, sleeps (upon the ocean), in the form of Brahmā — glorified by Sanaka and the saints {Siddha} who had gone to the Jana-loka, and contemplated by the holy inhabitants of Brahma-loka, anxious for final liberation, — involved in mystic slumber, the celestial personification of his own illusions . . .” — 5(I):195 & fns. (vi.4)

— 372 —

This is the Pratisanchara (dissolution?) termed incidental . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This . . . is the dissolution {Pratisanchara} termed incidental; because Hari, in the form of Brahmā, sleeps there, as its incidental cause.” — 5(I):196 & fn. (vi.4)
When the Universal Spirit wakes . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “When the universal spirit wakes, the world revives; when he closes his eyes, all things fall upon the bed of mystic slumber.  In like manner as a thousand great ages constitute a day of Brahmā {the original has Padmayoni, the same as Abjayoni}, so his night consists of the same period . . . Awaking at the end of his night, the unborn . . . creates the universe anew . . .” — 5(I):196 & fn. (vi.4)
“When by dearth and fire . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “When, by dearth and fire, all the worlds and Pātālas are withered up . . . the progress of elemental dissolution is begun.  Then, first, the waters swallow up the property of earth (which is the rudiment of smell); and earth, deprived of its property, proceeds to destruction. . . . the earth becomes one with water. . . . When the universe is, thus, pervaded by the waves of the watery element, its rudimentary flavour is licked up by the element of fire; and in consequence . . . the waters themselves are destroyed. . . . they become one with fire; and the universe is, therefore, entirely filled with flame, which . . . gradually overspreads the whole of the world.” — 5(I):196-7 (vi.4)
“While Space is one flame . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “While space is enveloped in flame, above, below, and all around, the element of wind seizes upon the rudimental property, or form, which is the cause of light; and, that being withdrawn {Pralīna}, all becomes of the nature of air.  The rudiment of form being destroyed, and fire {Vibhāvasu} deprived of its rudiment, air extinguishes fire, and spreads . . . over space, which is deprived of light, when fire merges into air.  Air, then, accompanied by sound, which is the source of ether, extends everywhere throughout the ten regions of space, until ether seizes upon contact {Sparśa}, its rudimental property, by the loss of which, air is destroyed, and ether {Kha} remains unmodified: devoid of form, flavour, touch {Sparśa}, and smell, it exists unembodied {I find no reading but mūrttimat, which means ‘embodied’} and vast, and pervades the whole of space.” — 5(I):197-8 & fns. (vi.4)

— 372-3 —

“Akâsa, whose characteristic property . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Ether {Ākāśa}, whose characteristic property and rudiment is sound, exists alone, occupying all the vacuity of space.  But then the radical element {Bhūtādi} . . . devours sound; and all the elements and faculties are, at once, merged into their original.” — 5(I):198 & fns. (vi.4)

— 373 —

“The primary Element, Consciousness, combined with tamasa . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This primary element is consciousness, combined with the property of darkness {tāmasa}, and is, itself, swallowed up by Mahat, whose characteristic property is intelligence {Buddhi}; and earth and Mahat are the inner and outer boundaries of the universe.  In this manner . . . were the seven forms of nature (Prakṛiti), reckoned from Mahat to earth — so, at the (time of elemental) dissolution, these seven successively re-enter into each other.” — 5(I):198-9 & fns. (vi.4)
“The Egg of Brahmâ (Sarva-mandala) is dissolved . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The egg of Brahmā {Sarva-maṇḍala} is dissolved in the waters that surround it, with its seven zones {Dwīpa}, seven oceans, seven regions, and their mountains.  The investure of water is drunk up by fire; the (stratum of) fire is absorbed by (that of) air; air blends itself with ether; the primary element {Bhūtādi} . . . devours the ether, and is (itself,) taken up by intellect {Mahat}, which along with all these, is seized upon by nature (Prakṛiti).” — 5(I):199 & fns. (vi.4)
“The Prakriti is essentially the same . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This Prakṛiti is, essentially, the same, whether discrete or indiscrete; only that which is discrete is, finally, lost or absorbed in the indiscrete.  Spirit {Puṃs}, also, which is one, pure, imperishable, eternal, all-pervading, is a portion of that supreme spirit which is all things.  That spirit {Sarveśa} which is other than (embodied) spirit, in which there are no attributes of name, species {Nāman and jāti} . . . which is one with (all) wisdom, and is to be understood as (sole) existence {Sattā} . . . Nature (Prakṛiti) . . . and spirit {Purusha} . . . both resolve into supreme spirit.” — 5(I):199-200 & fns. (vi.4)

— Footnotes

that which St. Paul calls Elements . . . Angels and Demons
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit . . . after the rudiments {elements} of the world . . .” — p. 265 & fn. (Colossians, 2:8)
see: John Parkhurst, Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament, 1798: “. . . in Col. ii.8 the elements, or rudiments of the world . . . must there be understood to include, at least, the dogmas of Pagan philosophy . . . his converts were partly Platonic and partly Pythagorean; the former teaching the worship of demons or angels, as mediators between man and God . . .” — p. 628

— 374 —

‘. . . sleepest thou, O Lord?’ . . . ‘I never sleep . . .’
p/q: Book of the Prophet Moses, tr. E. Cureton, 1855-6: “Then Moses said unto the Lord, Oh Lord, dost thou sleep or not?  The Lord said to Moses, I never sleep . . . if I were to withdraw my providence from the heavens and the earth for no longer than a space of time . . . they would at once have fallen to ruin and confusion . . .” — pp. 22-3 (Miscellanies of the Philebiblon Society, v. 2)
modes of interpretation . . . mystical; the allegorical; the moral; and the literal or Pashut
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The learned Franciscan, Nicolas de Lyra . . . adopts the four Jewish modes of interpretation . . . Sod, secret, mystical; D’rash, allegorical, Remez, spiritual or moral, and פשט Pashut literal.” — p. 105
“B’raisheeth barah elohim . . . ‘In the beginning the God(s) created . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “B’raisheeth barah elohim ath hashshama’yem v’ath haa’retz, i.e., ‘In the beginning the God(s) created the heavens and the earth’ . . . the six (Sephiroth of Construction,) over which B’raisheeth stands, all belong Below.  It created six, (and) on these stand (exist) all Things.  And those depend upon the seven forms of the Cranium up to the Dignity of all Dignities.  And the second ‘Earth’ does not come into calculation . . . ‘And from it, (that Earth) which underwent the curse; came it forth’ . . .” — pp. 232-3 (Siphrah D’Tznioothah)
‘It (the Earth) was without form and void . . .’
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “It (the Earth) was without form and void; and darkness was over the face of the Abyss, and the spirit of elohim . . . was breathing, (me’racha’pheth, i. e., hovering, brooding over, moving.’ . . .).” — p. 233 (Siphrah D’Tznioothah)

— 374-5 —

“Thirteen depend on thirteen (forms) . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Thirteen depend on thirteen (forms) of the most worthy Dignity.  Six thousand years hang (are referred to) in the first six words.  The seventh (thousand, the millennium,) above it (the cursed Earth), is that which is strong by Itself.  And it was rendered entirely desolate during twelve hours (one entire day . . . ) as is written . . .” — p. 233 (Siphrah D’Tznioothah)

— 375 —

“In the thirteenth, It (the Deity) shall restore all . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “In the Thirteenth, It (the Deity) shall restore them (as from the ‘beginning’) . . .” — p. 233 (Siphrah D’Tznioothah)
“Kings of Edom” who typify the worlds . . . as well as the primordial men . . .
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “. . . seven kings are seen in the land (Edom), and now after their vessels are broken, they are called shells . . .” — p. 102 (Book of Concealed Mystery, v.27)
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The doctrine of an imperfect creation preceding the more perfect one was continued by the Jewish Kabalists into the creation of worlds.  They assert that an abortive creation preceding the present order of things is indicated by the Kings of Edom, or the old kings who are said to have reigned before the monarchs of Israel {Gen. xxxvi. 31-41}.” — 2:40 & fn.
pre-Adamic . . . first Root-race.  As they were shadows, and senseless
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Pre-Adamite Kings. . . . ‘[The] Ancient of Ancients, before He prepared His Form, built kings and engraved kings, and sketched out kings, and they could not exist . . . Before He arranged Himself in His Form, had not been formed all those whom He desired to form, and all worlds have been destroyed . . .’ ” — p. 386 (Zohar iii, 135a)

— 375-6 —

they could not see the Parguphim, or “Face could not see Face” . . .
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Before the Balance existed, Face could not view Face {The Parzuphim, Intellectual, Moral and Material Worlds}, and the primordial kings died . . .” — p. 118 & fn. (Siphrah D’Tznioothah)

— 376 —

“the Seven Rishis, certain (secondary) divinities . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Seven Ṛishis, certain (secondary) divinities, Indra {Śakra}, Manu, and the kings his sons, are created and perish at one period . . .” — 1:50-1 & fn. (i.3)
For the seventh . . . represents . . . the “seventh period of creation”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The creation of the Arvāksrotas beings was the seventh, and was that of man.” — 1:75 (i.5)
“Long before his (Ibn Gebirol’s) time . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Long before his time, indeed we believe many centuries before the Christian era, there was in Central Asia, a ‘Wisdom Religion’; fragments of which subsequently existed among the learned men of the archaic Egyptians, the ancient Chinese, Hindus, Israelites and other Asiatic nations . . .” — p. 219
“The Qabbalah most likely originally came from Aryan sources . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Qabbalah most likely, originally came from Aryan sources, through Central Asia, Persia, India and Mesopotamia, for from Ur and Haran came Abraham and many others, into Palestine.” — p. 221
And such was the firm conviction of C. W. King . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . the Jews learnt the idea of a Hidden Wisdom, underlying the Mosaic Law, from their intercourse with the Eastern nations during the Babylonion captivity; and we may further be assured that the origin of this Secret Wisdom is Indian.” — p. 6
Vamadeva Modelyar (Modely) describes the coming “night”
see: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “Empruntons à Vamadèva-Modely la description de cette seconde période de l’existence divine [Let us borrow the description of this second period of divine existence from Vamadeva Modely].” — p. 229
“Strange noises are heard, proceeding from every point . . .”
[Quoted previously in Isis Unveiled, 2:273-4, from Jacolliot’s Les Fils de Dieu.]
“Strange noises are heard . . . the precursors of the Night of Brahmâ . . .”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “De toutes parts des bruits étranges se produisent, précurseurs de la nuit de Brahma, le crépuscule se lève, le soleil vient de passer au trentième degré du macara (monstre marin, signe du zodiaque), il n’arrivera point au signe des minas (poissons, signe du zodiaque), et les gourou des pagodes, préposés au rasi-tchacra (zodiaque) peuvent briser leur cercle devenu inutile [From all sides, strange noises are produced, precursors of the Night of Brahmā, dusk sets in, the sun has just passed the thirtieth degree of Macara (sea monster, sign of the zodiac), it will not reach the sign of the Minas (Pisces, the sign of the zodiac), and the gurus of the pagodas, appointed to watch the zodiac, may break their circle which has become useless].” — p. 229
“Gradually light pales . . . waters dry up . . . and plants die.”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “Peu à peu la lumière pâlit, la chaleur diminue, les lieux inhabitables se multiplient, l’air se raréfie de plus en plus; les sources tarissent, les grands fleuves voient leur eau s’épuiser peu à peu, l’Océan n’a plus que du sable, les plantes meurent [Gradually light pales, heat diminishes, uninhabitable spots multiply, the air becomes more and more rarified; the springs dry up, the great rivers gradually see their water exhausted, the Ocean has only sand, the plants die] . . .” — p. 229
“Men and animals decrease in size.  Life and motion lose their force . . .”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “. . . les hommes et les animaux diminuent tous les jours; le mouvement et la vie perdent leur force, les astres ne gravitent plus qu’avec peine dans l’espace, comme une lampe que la main du chocra n’entretient plus [men and animals decrease in size all the time; motion and life lose their force, the heavenly bodies can hardly gravitate in space, like a lamp which the hand of a servant no longer maintains] . . .” — pp. 229-30

— 376-7 —

“Sourya (the Sun) flickers and goes out . . . his task being accomplished, he falls asleep.”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “. . . Sourya (le soleil) vacille et s’éteint, la matière tombe dans le pralaya (dissolution), et Brahma devient Zeus . . . le dieu irrevélé . . . puisque son jour s’est accompli, il tombe dans le repos . . . et s’endort [The Sun flickers and goes out, matter falls into pralaya (dissolution), and Brahmā becomes Zeus . . . the Unrevealed God . . . since his workday is accomplished, he comes to rest and falls asleep].” — p. 230

— 377 —

“And now again he re-enters the golden egg of His Thought . . .”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “Et il renferme dans l’oeuf d’or de sa pensée, le germe de tout ce qui existe, ainsi que le dit le divin Manou. — Pendant son paisible sommeil, les êtres animés pourvus des principes de l’action quittent leurs fonctions et le sentiment (manas) tombe dans l’inertie [And he retires into the golden egg of his thought, the germ of all that exists, just as the divine Manu says. — During his peaceful sleep, the living beings, endowed with the principles of action, cease their functions, and perception (manas) becomes dormant].” — p. 230 (“L’Inde Brahmanique”)
“When they are all absorbed in the Supreme Soul . . . till the day when it resumes its form . . .”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, Les Fils de Dieu, 1875: “Lorqu’ils sont dissous en même temps dans l’Ame suprême, cette âme de tous les êtres dort tranquillement dans la plus parfaite quiétude.  Après s’être retiré dans l’obscurité primitive, elle y demeure longtemps sans accomplir ses fonctions, et dépouillée de sa forme qu’elle ne reprend qu’au réveil [When they are at the same time absorbed in the Supreme Soul, this soul of all beings sleeps tranquilly in the most complete quietude.  After being withdrawn into primitive darkness, it stays there a long time without performing its functions, and stripped of the form that it will resume only upon waking].” — p. 230 (“L’Inde Brahmanique”)
“barbarians” will be masters of the banks of the Indus . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . barbarians will be masters of the banks of the Indus, Dārvika, the Chandrabhāgā, and Kāśmīra.” — 4:222-3 (iv.24)
“There will be contemporary monarchs . . . intent upon the wives of others”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “These will, all, be contemporary monarchs, reigning over the earth; — kings of churlish spirit, violent temper, and ever addicted to falsehood and wickedness.  They will inflict death on women, children, and cows; they will seize upon the property of their subjects {‘intent upon the wives of others’} . . .” — 4:224-5 & fn. (iv.24)
“they will be of unlimited [limited] power . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . they will be of limited power; and will, for the most part, rapidly rise and fall: their lives will be short, their desires unsatiable; and they will display but little piety.” — 4:225 (iv.24)
“People of various countries intermingling with them . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The people of the various countries intermingling with them will follow their example; and, the barbarians being powerful in the patronage of the princes, whilst purer tribes are neglected, the people will perish {‘the Mlechchhas will be in the centre, and the Āryas, at the end’}.  Wealth and piety will decrease day by day, until the world will be wholly depraved.” — 4:225-6 & fn. (iv.24)
“Property alone will confer rank . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then property alone will confer rank; wealth will be the only source of devotion; passion will be the sole bond of union between the sexes; falsehood will be the only means of success in litigation; and women will be objects merely of sensual gratification.” — 4:226-7 (iv.24)
“External types will be the only distinction . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . external types . . . will be the only distinctions of the several orders of life {implying that a man, if rich, will be reputed pure}; dishonesty {Anyāya} will be the (universal) means of subsistence; weakness will be the cause of dependence; menace and presumption will be substituted for learning; liberality will be devotion . . . mutual assent will be marriage; fine clothes will be dignity . . .” — 4:227-8 & fns. (iv.24)

— 377-8 —

“He who is the strongest will reign . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Amidst all castes, he who is the strongest will reign over a principality . . . The people, unable to bear the heavy burthens {kara-bhāra, the load of taxes} . . . will take refuge amongst the valleys . . . Thus, in the Kali age, shall decay constantly proceed, until the human race approaches its annihilation.” — 4:228 & fn. (iv.24)

— 378 —

“When the close of the Kali age shall be nigh . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “When . . . the close of the Kali age shall be nigh, a portion of that divine being who exists, of his own spiritual nature . . . shall descend upon earth . . . as Kalki, endowed with eight superhuman faculties. . . . He will, then, reestablish righteousness upon earth; and the minds of those who live at the end of the Kali age shall be awakened, and shall be as pellucid as crystal.” — 4:228-9 (iv.24)
“The men who are thus changed . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The men who are, thus, changed . . . shall be as the seeds of human beings, and shall give birth to a race who shall follow the laws of the Kṛita age (or age of purity).  As it is said: ‘When the sun and moon, and (the lunar asterism) Tishya, and the planet Jupiter are in one mansion, the Kṛita age shall return.’ ” — 4:229 (iv.24)
“Two persons, Devapi . . . and Moru . . . continue alive throughout the four ages . . .”
p/q: Vishnu Purāna, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Two persons, — Devāpi . . . and Maru . . . continue alive throughout the whole four ages, residing at the village of Kalāpa.  They will return hither, in the beginning of the Kṛita age.” — 4:237 (iv.24)
“Moru the son of Sighru . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Śīghra; his son was Maru, who, through the power of devotion (Yoga), is still living . . . and, in a future age, will be the restorer of the Kshattriya race in the solar dynasty.” — 3:325 (iv.4)

— Footnotes

Morya, of the Morya dynasty, to which Chandragupta belonged
see: Max Müller, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, 1860: “Chandragupta was the founder of a new dynasty, the Mauryas at Pāṭaliputra.” — p. 280
the dynasty of ten Moryas . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “These are the ten Mauryas, who will reign over the earth for a hundred and thirty-seven years {the Matsya and Bhāgavata have ten Mauryas, and 137 years}.” — 4:190 & fn. (iv.24)
Colonel Tod believes the name Morya . . . a Rajpoot tribe
p/q: R. Ragoonath Row, “The Puranas on the Dynasty of the Moryas and on Koothoomi,” 1885: “Col. Tod considers Morya, or Maurya, a corruption of Mori, the name of a Rajput tribe.” — p. 482 (Five Years of Theosophy)
see: James Tod, Annals and Antiquities of Rajast’han, 1873: “Chandragoopta, the suppposed opponent of Alexander, was a Mori . . .”  “{Chandragoopta (Mori), degraded into the barber (maurya) tribe . . .}” — 1:84, & 207 fn.
princes have taken their name Maurya from their town called Mori
see: R. Ragoonath Row, “The Puranas on the Dynasty of the Moryas and on Koothoomi,” 1885: “The Commentary on the Mahavanso thinks that the princes of the town Mori were thence called Mauryas.” — pp. 482-3 (Five Years of Theosophy)
see: Max Müller, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, 1860: “[In the Mahāvanso we read] ‘The appelation of “Moriyan sovereigns” is derived from the auspicious circumstances under which their capital, which obtained the name of Moriya, was called into existence.’ ” — p. 285
as Professor Max Müller gives it, Morya-Nagara
see: Max Müller, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, 1860: “His [Chandragupta’s] mother, the queen consort of the monarch of Moriya-nagara, the city before mentioned . . . gave birth to a son . . . and deposited him at the door of a cattle pen.  A bull named Chando stationed himself by him, to protect him . . .” — p. 289
Vachaspattya, a Sanscrit Encyclopedia, places Katapa . . . in Tibet
p/q: R. Ragoonath Row, “The Puranas on the Dynasty of the Moryas and on Koothoomi,” 1885: “Vachaspattya, a Sanskrit Encyclopedia, places the village of Katapa on the northern side of the Himalayas — hence in Tibet.” — p. 483 (Five Years of Theosophy)
Moru will re-establish the Kshattriya . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Maru . . . will be the restorer of the Kshattriya race in the solar dynasty {The Vāyu-purāṇa seems to declare, that he will reestablish the Kshattras in the nineteenth coming yuga}.” — 3:325 & fn. (iv.4)

— 379 —

“I see Brahm the Creator enthroned in thee above the lotus!”
p/q: The Bhagvat-Geeta, tr. Charles Wilkins, 1785: “I see Brahmā, that Deity sitting on his lotus-throne . . . I see thyself, on all sides, of infinite shape . . . I can neither discover thy beginning, thy middle, nor again thy end . . .” — pp. 90-1 (Lecture XI, “Display of the Divine Nature in the Form of the Universe”)
the seeds of the lotus contain . . . perfected plants
see: William Jones, “On the Gods of Greece, Italy, and India,” 1792: “. . . bright yellow, the colour of the curious pericarpium in the centre of the water-lily, where Nature . . . in some degree discloses her secrets, each seed containing, before it germinates, a few perfect leaves . . .” — p. 60 (Dissertations Relating to Asia, v. 1)
The lotus, in India, is the symbol . . . of Mount Meru.
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1833: “Mount Meru is said . . . to be ‘like the Seed-Cup of the Lotus of Earth’ . . . For the mount is also described as a lotus rising up out of the waters . . .” — 2:29
the four quarters of Heaven (the Maharajahs, see Stanzas)
see: Stanza V, 5: “These are the ‘four Maharajas’ . . . the Devas who preside, each over one of the four cardinal points.  They are Regents or Angels who rule over the Cosmical Forces of North, South, East and West . . .” — SD 1:122-3
The lotus flower, represented as growing out of Vishnu’s navel . . .
see: Edward Moor, The Hindu Pantheon, 1810: “ ‘It is related, in the Scanda Purana, that, when the whole earth was covered with water, and Vishnu lay extended asleep . . . a lotos arose from his navel . . .’ {Plates 7. and 8. represent this scene, but Vishnu is there . . . on Sesha, the vast thousand-headed serpent, emblematic of Eternity}.” — p. 17 & fn.

— Footnotes

(the Holy Ghost being still typified by “tongues of fire”)
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906:  “And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire . . . And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost . . .” — p. 156 (Acts, 2:3-4)

— 379-80 —

Lakshmi . . . is also called Padma . . . floating at “Creation,” on a lotus flower
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “LAKSHMĪ. . . . Another legend represents her as floating on the flower of a lotus at the creation.  With reference to this origin, one of her names is . . . ‘daughter of the sea of milk.’  From her connection with the lotus she is called Padmā. . . . ‘she was produced from the sea at the churning of the ocean.’ ” — p. 176

— 380 —

like Venus from the froth
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “According to this legend she sprang, like Aphrodite, from the froth of the ocean, in full beauty with a lotus in her hand . . .” — p. 176
“. . . Then seated on a lotus . . .”
p/q: Monier Williams, Indian Wisdom, 1875:
              “. . . Then seated on a lotus
Beauty’s bright goddess, peerless Śrī, arose
Out of the waves . . .” — p. 499
In chapter lxxxi. of the Ritual . . . called “Transformation into the Lotus”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Chapitre de faire la transformation en lotus [Chapter about making the transformation into the lotus].”  — p. 255 (ch. lxxxi)
a head emerging from this flower . . . exclaims: “I am the pure lotus . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Tableau: Une tête sortant de la fleur d’un lotus [Vignette: A head emerging from a lotus flower].  Je suis un lotus pur, sortant d’entre les lumineux. . . . Je fais les messages que poursuit Horus.  Je suis un lotus pur issu du Champ du Soleil [I am a pure lotus, emerging from the Luminous Ones. . . . I carry the messages of Horus.  I am a pure lotus born from the Field of the Sun].” — p. 255 (lxxxi.1-2)
The lotus-idea may be traced even in . . . Genesis, as stated in Isis.
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “At this first stage of action, Brahma had not yet become the architect, the builder of the universe, for he had, like the architect, to first acquaint himself with the plan, and realize the ideal forms which were buried in the bosom of the Eternal One, as the future lotus-leaves are concealed within the seed of that plant.” — 1:92

— Footnotes

Lakshmi is Venus-Aphrodite . . . she sprang from the froth of the ocean . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Lakshmi or Śrī . . . The origin ascribed to her by the Rāmāyaṇa is the one commonly received.  According to this legend she sprang, like Aphrodite, from the froth of the ocean, in full beauty with a lotus in her hand, when it was churned by the gods . . .” — p. 176
Burnouf . . . saying that Brahmâ does not create . . . emanates all nature out of himself
see: Émile Burnouf, La Science des Religions, 1872: “Brahmā . . . le père, l’aïeul, le producteur.  On ne doit jamais traduire aucun de ses noms par le mot créateur . . . l’idée de créer n’existe pas dans la langue sanscrite.  C’est par voie d’émanation qu’il engendre l’univers [Brahmā . . . the father, the ancestor, the originator.  One must never translate any of his names with the word creator . . . the idea of creating does not exist in the Sanskrit language.  It is by means of emanation that he engenders the Universe] . . .” — p. 158

— 381 —

“And God said, Let the earth bring forth . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And God said, Let the earth bring forth . . . the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself.” — p. 1 (Genesis, 1:11)
the lotus . . . Its mode of growth . . . a symbol of the generative activities.
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The lotus . . . has two stalks, one of those being the bearer of the fruit.  The fruit, or seed, was the child who grew into the virile male . . . the mother being the opening One . . .” — 1:514-15
a child is sometimes represented as . . . issuing from the flower
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The infant Sun-God was pourtrayed as rising up out of the waters on a lotus . . . The lotus was the bark of the god and the womb of the genetrix in one . . .” — 1:462
(See § X [IX], “Deus Lunus.”)
see: § IX, “The Moon, Deus Lunus, Phœbe,” SD 1:386-403.
the use of this generative function as a basis for symbolical language . . .
see: Gerald Massey, Man in Search of His Soul, 1887: “It is here . . . that we should have to seek for the true origin of those Phallic symbols or sexual images which are found scattered the world over . . . Such emblems . . . were all erected with one meaning, and each according to the same primitive typology of a resurrection. . . . the Phallic Imagery was perpetuated for symbolic uses, and not for direct worship . . . the formation of the earliest tomb, together with the Monuments reared above, are all founded on the natural organs of the reproductive system, and, architecturally, the so-called Phallic faith resolves itself into an objective imitation of the parts of the human body which are devoted to re-birth . . .” — p. 4

— Footnotes

In Indian Purânas it is Vishnu, the first . . . logos
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The worshippers of Vishṇu recognise in him the supreme being from whom all things emanate. . . . in the Purāṇas he is the Prajāpati (creator) and supreme god.” — p. 360
Brahmâ, the second logos . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Brahmā . . . the supreme spirit manifested as the active creator of the universe.  He sprang from the mundane egg deposited by the supreme first cause . . .” — p. 56
Vishnu . . . Brahmâ . . . one as manifesting the lotus, the other as issuing from it
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Brahmā, the active creator . . . is represented as springing from a lotus which grew from Vishṇu’s navel while he was sleeping afloat upon the waters.” — p. 360

— 382 —

“The locality of the womb is to be taken as the most holy place, the sanctum sanctorum . . .”
see: “ ‘The Holy of Holies.’ Its Degradation”: “The Sanctum Sanctorum of the Ancients . . . The Gentiles . . . as Pantheists . . . regarded it — in its esoteric meaning — as the symbol of resurrection . . . The Jews . . . setting forth their Holy of Holies as the most solemn sign of their Monotheism — exoterically; while seeing in it but a universal phallic symbol — esoterically.” — SD 2:459

— Footnotes

“Know ye not ye are the Temple of God”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” — p. 221 (1 Corinthians, 3:16)
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you . . .” — p. 223 (1 Corinthians, 6:19)

— 383 —

“With the ancient wise, there was no name and no idea, and no symbol of a first cause.”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July 1885: “As the First Cause was utterly unknown and unnameable, such names as were adopted as most sacred . . . were not so sacred as commonly held . . .” — p. 324 (Masonic Review, 63:6)

— Footnotes

The Lord God tempts sorely Pharoah and “plagues him with great plagues”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman [his wife] that she was very fair. . . . and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. . . . And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife.” — p. 14 (Genesis, 12:14-15, 17)

— 384 —

the letter M . . . is made to symbolize water . . . a glyph for the waves
see: William Gesenius, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1836: “Mem, the thirteenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet . . . probably signifies water . . . the antique forms of the letter have a certain resemblance to waves.” — p. 537
makara — the tenth sign of the Zodiac . . . MA is equivalent to . . . number 5
p/q: T. Subba Row, “The Twelve Signs of the Zodiac,” 1885: “Makara. . . . The letter Ma is equivalent to number 5, and Kara means hand. . . . So, Makaram or Panchakaram means a Pentagon.” — p. 113 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 384-5 —

Mandala is in Sanskrit “a circle,” or an orb . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “MAṆḌALA.  ‘A circle, orb.’  A circuit or terrestrial division . . . the Sanhitā of the Ṛig-veda is divided into ten Maṇḍalas.” — p. 197

— 385 —

Pharaoh’s daughter “called his name Moses . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water.” — p. 72 (Exodus, 2:10)
see: Dictionary of the Bible, ed. William Smith, 1863: “Moses . . . Its Hebrew form is Mosheh, from Māshāh, ‘to draw out’ . . .” — 2:425
the “three Maries” at the crucifixion
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother [Mary], and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.” — p. 151 (John, 19:25)
the Messiah is always connected with Water, Baptism, the Fishes
see: W. J. Schröder, The Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Expounded, 1876: “The Israel completed in the Messiah, in Christ, the temple, draws water with joy from the wells of salvation (Isa. xii. 3).”  “In the Talmud the Messiah, too, is called ‘fish,’ and according to Abrabanel the constellation Pisces announces His birth.” — pp. 487, 489
Khnoom . . . sits on a throne enshrined in a lotus (Saitic epoch, Serapeum).
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Le dieu Khnoum à tête de bélier est assis sur un fauteuil qui, lui-même, repose sur une fleur de lotus [The ram-headed god Khnoom sits on a throne that itself rests on a lotus flower] . . .” — p. 170 (“Ep. Saïte. Sérapéum.”)
The god Bes stands on a lotus, ready to devour his progeny.  (Ibid, Abydos)
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Dieu Bes posé sur une fleur de lotus: il semble vouloir dévorer l’enfant [The god Bes standing on a lotus flower: it seems that he wants to devour the child] . . .” — p. 162 (“Ep. Saïte.  Abydos.”)
Thot . . . wearing the Solar disc as head gear, sits with a bull’s head . . .
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Sur une fleur de lotus épanouie, un dieu à corps humain, à tête de taureau, coiffée du disque solaire, est debout les bras levés . . . C’est une forme de Thot, taureau dans la ville de Mendès [On a full-blown lotus, a god with a human body, with a bull’s head, wearing the Solar disc as head gear, stands with raised arms . . . It is a form of Thot, the bull in the city of Mendes] . . .” — p. 163
the goddess Hiquet, under her shape of a frog, who rests on the lotus . . .
see: Thomas S. Millington, Signs and Wonders in the Land of Ham, 1873: “A frog sitting upon the sacred lotus was symbolical of the return of the Nile to its bed after the inundations. . . . there is also a frog-headed goddess named Heka . . . to whose favour the annual overflow of the Nile, with all the benefits which followed, was ascribed.” — p. 75
The “frog or toad goddess” was one of the chief cosmic deities
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “La grenouille est une déesse, Hiqit . . . l’une des principales parmi les divinités cosmiques [The frog is a goddess, Heqet . . . one of the chief cosmic deities] . . .” — p. 146

— Footnotes

the seven daughters of the Midian priest . . . had Moses water their flock . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew water . . . And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock.  And when they came to Reuel their father, he said . . . call him, that he may eat bread.  And Moses was content to dwell with the man: and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter.” — pp. 72-3 (Exodus, 2:16-18, 20-1)

— 385-6 —

She not only participated in the organization of the world . . .
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Non seulement elle était l’une des principales parmi les divinités cosmiques, et avait contribué avec Khnoum à l’organisation du monde, mais elle était liée au dogme de la resurrection [Not only was she one of the principal ones among the cosmic deities, and had together with Khnoom contributed to the organization of the world, but she was also connected with the doctrine of resurrection].” — p. 146

— 386 —

the early Egyptian Christians adopted it . . .
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Les chrétiens d’Égypte l’empruntèrent aux payens et fabriquèrent des lampes en forme de grenouille [The Christians of Egypt adopted it from the pagans and made lamps in the form of a frog] . . .” — p. 146
lamps, on which were engraved the words “I am the resurrection” . . .
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “. . . lampes en forme de grenouille, sur lesquelles ils écrivaient: Je suis la résurrection, Ἐγὼ εἶμι Ἀνάστασις [lamps in the form of a frog, on which they wrote: I am the resurrection].” — p. 146
Yet, the cold chaste moon . . . in the words of Shelley —
p/q: P. B. Shelley, Poetical Works, 1840:
“The cold chaste Moon . . .
  Who makes all beautiful on which she smiles,
  That wandering shrine of soft yet icy flame
  Which ever is transformed, yet still the same,
  And warms not but illumines.” — p. 283 (“Epipsychidion,” 329-33)

— Footnotes

such “frog-goddesses” may be seen at Bulaq, in the Cairo Museum
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “1420 – 1429 . . . La grenouille est une déesse, Hiqit . . . C’est pour cela qu’on la trouve sur les momies [(Artifacts) 1420 – 1429 . . . The frog is a goddess, Heqet . . . For that reason we find her on the mummies].” — p. 146

— 387 —

Diana-Hecate-Luna is the three in one. . . . Diva triformis
see: Description of Ancient Marbles in the British Museum, 1845: “Hecate Triformis. . . . This divinity is sometimes represented with three heads only . . . Horace invokes her by the appellation of Diva triformis . . .” — p. 100 (Plate XLI)
The cat, a lunar symbol . . . is often seen on the top of the Sistrum in the hand of the goddess
see: Apuleius, The Metamorphosis, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1822: “For her right hand, indeed, bore a brazen rattle {this rattle . . . of Isis, is the same with the celebrated sistrum of that Goddess . . . ‘on the summit of the concavity of the sistrum they carved a cat having a human face . . .’  But by the cat they indicated the moon} . . .” — pp. 261-2 & fn. (Bk XI)
This animal was held in great veneration in the city of Bubaste . . .
see: Herodotus, History, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “When [a cat dies], the Egyptians are in deep affliction. . . . The cats on their decease are taken to the city of Bubastis, where they are embalmed, after which they are buried in certain sacred repositories.” — 2:95-6 (ii.66-7)
no one has better described it than Mr. G. Massey . . .
see: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “. . . when the Egyptians portrayed the moon as a Cat . . . They had observed the simple fact that the cat saw in the dark, and that her eyes became full-orbed and grew most luminous by night. . . . and so the familiar cat was adopted as a representative, a natural sign, a living pictograph of the lunar orb!” — p. 2

— Footnotes

The goddess Τρίμορφος in the statuary of Alcamenes
see: Description of Ancient Marbles in the British Museum, 1845: “This divinity is sometimes represented with three heads only, but more frequently as in the present instance with three bodies.  Hence she is styled τρίμορφος . . . Alcamenes was the first artist who represented the triple figure of Hecate or Diana.” — p. 100 (Plate XLI)

— 387-8 —

the mythological allegory which shows Diana hiding under the shape of a cat . . .
see: Angelo de Gubernatis, Zoological Mythology, 1872: “In the fifth book of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, when the gods fled from the giants, Diana took the form of a cat.” — 2:58

— 388 —

Cynocephalus . . . was a glyph to symbolize the sun and moon . . .
see: J. G. Wilkinson, The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1883: “The Cynocephalus ape . . . was particularly sacred to Thoth [Mercury] . . . and in astronomical subjects two Cynocephali are frequently represented standing in a boat before the Sun in an attitude of prayer, as emblems of the Moon.” — 3:267

— 389 —

“the perception of time periods, marked on the vaulted arch of the heavens . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. VI,” June 1886: “One ancient usage was the observance of times, and this involved astronomy . . . and astrology . . . we find that Daniel, the most wonderful of all the prophets, told off God’s providence by set times . . . the sun and the moon and the planets were set in the expanse for signs and for seasons . . .” — p. 271 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
“in the description of the Flood, where correction of 150 days was made for a period of 600 years”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “Correction of the 600 Year Period . . . One of the commonest methods for the computation of time was by taking the number of degrees of the celestial circle, for the number of days in the year — viz., 360 degrees were made to stand for 360 days.” — p. 242
      “The number of years being 600, the period of confusion, or error, at ¼ of one day a year, would for this time amount to 150 days . . . Truly enough, this was just the length of duration of the flood over the compartments of the earth . . .” — pp. 243-4
“. . . ‘the period of viability’ is one of 210 days . . . The period of parturition . . . in 280 days . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Identification of the British Inch as the Unit of Measure of the Mound Builders,” Jan. 1886: “Of this 280 days is 40 weeks, or the period of parturition, while . . . 210 days is called the period of viability.” — p. 239 (Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, v. 9, “Appendix C”)

— Footnotes

Mercury was the messenger appointed to keep time . . .
see: J. G. Wilkinson, The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1883: “Plutarch states that ‘Mercury was supposed to accompany the moon round the world . . .’  Thoth, therefore, in one of his characters, answers to the moon, and in another to Mercury.” — 3:165
      “. . . Thoth, in one of his characters, corresponded to . . . the regulator and dispenser of time, who presided over the fate of man, and the events of his life.” — 3:168

— 390 —

“The basic idea . . . of the Hebrews was that God contained all things within himself”
see: Philo Judæus, Works, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1854-5: “About it being impossible to escape from God . . . He contains all things, while yet He is himself contained by nothing . . .” — 4:251 (Fragment P.752.A)
“the bull and the cow . . . Osiris was the Sun . . . Isis was . . . the Mother Earth”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Cabbalah — No. VII,” March 1887: “. . . the cow or (Egyptian) Isis . . . truly represented, in the first instance, the earth, or productive nature . . . In after times the ox or bull was added, representing the sun, or generative force in nature . . .” — p. 66 (Masonic Review, 67:2)
“These . . . periods . . . plainly set forth . . . in the Richardson and Gest tablets . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Identification of the British Inch as the Unit of Measure of the Mound Builders,” Jan. 1886: [Appendix C] “The Richardson Tablet,” “The Gest Tablet.” — pp. 234-9 (Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, v. 9)
“male and female, in the 27th verse of the 1st chapter of Genesis are . . . sacr and n’cabrah”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . after 6 days [of Creation] have elapsed, on the sixth day . . . the fructifying principles of sacr, membrum virile and nekabvah, yoni, (see Gen. 1., v. 27), are commanded to multiply.” — p. 184
see: Etymologicon Magnum [by Walter Whiter], Part 1, 1800: “. . . the Hebrew words for Male and Female — Zachar and Nekab (‘Male and Female created he them,’ Gen. c.1 v. 27.) . . .” — p. 348

— 391 —

(See Section “Holy of Holies” . . .)
see: Section XVII, “The ‘Holy of Holies.’ Its Degradation,” SD 2:459-74.
“With the ancient wise, there was no name, and no idea, and no symbol, of a First Cause.”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. VI,” June 1886: “. . . the wise men who enunciated the Cabbalah dealt first with the fact of a primal intelligence . . . This intelligence, they declared, could not be comprehended at all, — could not be located, — could not be named, though the cause of all.” — p. 257 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
its first comprehensible manifestation . . . a circle with a diameter line
see: “Proem”: “The first illustration being a plain disc . . . the second one in the Archaic symbol shows . . . a disc with a point in it — the first differentiation in the periodical manifestations of the ever-eternal nature . . . In its third stage the point is transformed into a diameter . . .” — SD 1:4
the one takes its birth from the nought or the Circle . . .
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — VI,” June 1886: “. . . the Ten Sephiroth, or the 10 Numbers, the picture of which is this: wherein the circle is the naught, its vertical diameter line is the first or primal One, — from which springs the 2, the 3, and so on to 9 . . .” — p. 266 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
“This idea of connecting the circle and its diameter line . . . number ten . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . the exactitude of the Jehovah diameter . . . ‘This number 10 is the mother of the soul . . . since the number one is born from the spirit . . .’  The primal one contained all the elements of generation, and therefore included the male idea and the female idea in itself.  Thus, 1 contained | as a male, and O (a circle) as a female . . .” — p. 157
“a double-womb, for in Hebrew the letter hé ה is . . . the number 5 and symbol of the womb . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “But these two, as separated parts of one, arranged together, were 10 . . . each of these parts was necessarily ½ . . . or .5, which was the letter ה [hé], or the womb letter . . .” — p. 157

— 392 —

the metrology of the Jews
see: J. Ralston Skinner, “Hebrew Metrology,” July 1885: “From these two ratios, viz: 6,561 to 20,612 [= 3.14159+] and 113 to 355 [= 3.14159+], the entire system of sacred metrology of the Hebrews took its rise . . .” — p. 322 (Masonic Review, 63:6)
“If 20,612 be multiplied by 4/3 . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “20612 x 4/3 . . . and this x 4/3 . . . the second term is numerically the value of the moon’s lunation [revolution around the earth], and the third is the base of the calculation of the solar year.” — p. 43
“hermaphrodite, that is phallus and yoni combined . . . the containment of Jehovah”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “. . . the necessity is a straight line one, of a denomination of 20612, or the perfect one, and Jehovah has been shown to be this. . . . the two words of which Jehovah is composed, make up the original idea of male-female, as the birth originator (for the י [Jod] was the membrum virile, and Hovah was Eve).  So, it is seen that the perfect one, as originator of measures, takes also the form of birth origin, as hermaphrodite one . . .” — p. 159
Binah, “the Upper mediating Mother, the Great Sea . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . Binah, the Upper Mediating Mother . . . the Great Sea or Holy Spirit.  Mary likely equals the Latin Mare, i.e., Sea.  According to a hymn of the Xth century sung at the Annunciation, she is: ‘Star of the Sea . . .’ ” — p. 336
Virgin Mary — the Magna Mater of the Syrians and the Greeks . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Mère Divine et Dame du Ciel’ (des Égyptiens) . . . la Grande Déesse, Magna Mater, des Syriens et des Grecs [‘Divine Mother and Lady of Heaven’ (of the Egyptians) . . . the Great Goddess, Magna Mater, of the Syrians and the Greeks].” — 3:111-12

— 393 —

“It is only natural that . . . Ammon-Ra should be his mother’s husband . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous comprenons donc qu’Amoun-râ soit l’époux de sa mere, puisque la Magna Mater des chrétiens est précisément l’epouse de ce fils qu’elle enfante [So we understand that Ammon-Ra should be his mother’s husband, since the Magna Mater of the Christians is precisely the spouse of that son that she conceives].” — 3:117
“We . . . understand now why Neithis throws radiance on the sun . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous comprenons dès lors que Neith illumine le soleil tout en restant la lune, puisque la Vierge, qui est reine du ciel comme elle, revêt le Christ-Soleil comme elle et en est revêtue, ‘tu vestis solem et te sol vestit [From now on we understand that Neith illumines the Sun, while totally remaining the Moon, since the Virgin, who is the Queen of Heaven, as Neith was, clothes the Christ-Sun as she is clothed, ‘you clothe the Sun and the Sun clothes you’]. ” — 3:117
“We . . . understand . . . that the famous inscription at Sais . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous comprenons que la fameuse inscription de Saïs ait pu dire: ‘Personne n’a jamais soulevé mon voile,’ attendu que cette phrase, plus littéralement traduite, est le résumé de ce que chante l’Église au jour de la Conception [We understand that the famous inscription at Sais could say: ‘No one has ever lifted my veil,’ considering that this phrase, translated more literally, is the summary of what is sung in the Church on the Day of the Conception].” — 3:117 (“Archeology of the Virgin Mother”)
“The man in the moon . . . is often charged with bad conduct . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “The Man in the moon is often charged with bad conduct towards his mother, sister, mother-in-law, or some other near female relation, on account of the natural origin in lunar phenomena.  In these the moon was one as the moon, which was two-fold in sex, and three-fold in character, as mother, child, and adult male.  Thus the child of the moon became the consort of his own mother!  It could not be helped if there was to be any reproduction.  He was compelled to be his own father!” — p. 23
“These relationships were repudiated by later sociology . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “These relationships were repudiated by later sociology, and the primitive man in the moon got tabooed.  Yet, in its latest, most inexplicable phase, this has become the central doctrine of the grossest superstition the world has ever seen, for these lunar phenomena and their humanly represented relationships, the incestuous included, are the very foundations of the Christian Trinity in Unity.  Through ignorance of the symbolism, the simple representation of early time has become the most profound religious mystery in modern Luniolatry.” — p. 23
“The Roman Church, without being in any wise ashamed of the proof . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “The Roman Church, without being in any wise ashamed of the proof, portrays the Virgin Mary arrayed with the Sun, and the horned moon at her feet, holding the lunar infant in her arms — as child and consort of the mother moon!  The mother, child, and adult male, are fundamental . . . In this way it can be proved that our Christology is mummified mythology, and legendary lore, which have been palmed off upon us in the Old Testament and the New, as divine revelation uttered by the very voice of God.” — p. 23
“In the introduction written by R’Hez’quee-yah . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “In the introduction written by R. ’Hiz’qee-yah, which is very old, and which forms part of the Brody edition of the Zohar (i, 5b sq.), is an account of a journey taken by R. El’azar, son of R. Shim-on b. Yo’haī, and R. Abbah . . .” — p. 335
They met a man with a heavy burden and asked his name . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . they meet with a man bearing a heavy burden . . . they asked him for his name; he replied: ‘Do not ask me who I am; but we will all proceed with the exploration of the Thorah.’ ” — p. 335

— 394 —

“They asked: ‘Who caused thee thus to walk . . .’ ”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “They asked, ‘Who caused thee thus to walk and carry such a heavy load?’  He answered: ‘The letter י (Yod, which = 10, and is the symbolical letter of Kether . . .).’ ” — p. 335
“They said to him: ‘If thou wilt tell us the name of thy father . . .’ ”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “They said to him: ‘If thou wilt tell us the name of thy father, we will kiss the dust of thy feet.’  He replied: ‘. . . as to my father, he had his dwelling in the Great Sea, and was a fish therein; which destroyed the Great Sea from one end to the other, and he was great and mighty and “Ancient of Days,” until he swallowed all the other fishes in the (Great) Sea . . .’ ” — pp. 335-6
“R. El’azar listened and said to him . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “R. El’azar listened to his words and said to him: ‘Thou art the son of the Holy Flame, thou art the son of Rab Ham-’nun-ah Sabah, (the Old,) {The fish in Aramaic or Chaldee is . . . nun, pron. noon} thou art the son of the Light of the Thorah . . .’ ” — p. 336 & fn.
the feminine Sephiroth, Binah, is termed by the Kabalist the great sea . . . Yah, and Elohim
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The feminine Sephirah, Binah, is sometimes termed by the Qabbalists, the Great Sea.  Among her divine Names are YaH and Elohim.” — p. 336
the Chaldean Tiamat . . the Thalatth of Berosus, who presides over the Chaos
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . there was a time when all was darkness and an abyss of waters, in this lived hideous strange beings . . . A woman named Omoroka, Chald. Thalatth . . . presided over them . . . In the Babylonian cosmogony as in the Hebrew, the watery abyss, termed by the former the Great Sea-serpent or dragon Tiamat, is the first source of all things.  The latter is also named Tiavat, and is the Thavatth of Bêrôssos, and the . . . ‘deep’ of Genesis.” — p. 243
translated by Chwolson from an old Chaldean MSS. translated into Arabic . . .
see: D. Chwolson, Über die Überreste der Altbabylonischen Literatur in Arabischen Übersetzungen [On the Fragments of Old Babylonian Literature in Arabic Translations], 1859.
see: A. Sayce, “Tammuz,” July 1865: “In the ‘Fragments of old Babylonian Literature,’ . . . recently discovered and edited by M. Chwolson, a different view is started.  These ‘Fragments’ claim to be translations by Ibn Wahshiya the Chaldean (a.d. 900) of certain ancient Chaldean works, of which the most considerable is the ‘Nabathean Agriculture’ by Kūthāmi the Kufian, whose age is assigned to the thirteenth century b.c.” — p. 441 (Journal of Sacred Literature, v. 7)
Qû-tâmy being instructed by the idol of the moon, is easily understood
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Thoughts on the Elementals,” May 15, 1890: “The word Pitri does mean, no doubt, the ancestor; but that which is invoked is the lunar wisdom esoterically, and not the ‘Lunar ancestor.’  It is the Wisdom that was invoked by Qu-ta-my, the Chaldean, in the ‘Nabathean Agriculture,’ who wrote down ‘the revelations of the Moon.’ ” — p. 187 (Lucifer, v. 6)
(vide Book III.)
[“Book III” refers to material that H. P. Blavatsky intended to use for Volume 3 of The Secret Doctrine.  This was never published, and a completed manuscript of it was never found.  Most of HPB’s leftover material is now published in volumes 12 and 14 of H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings.]
Seldenus tells us the secret . . . of the Teraphim
see: Joannis Seldenus, De Diis Syris [On the Syrian Gods], 1617: “De Teraphim Labanis . . . [Bk I, ch. 2].” — pp. 15-17
Seldenus tells us . . . as well as Maimonides (More Nevochim, Book III., ch. xxx)
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Seldenus, à son tour, nous dit, en parlant des téraphims et en copiant Maimonide (More Nevochim, livre III, chap. xxx) [Seldenus, in turn, tells us, when speaking about the teraphim and copying Maimonides (More Nevochim, Book III, ch. xxx) the following].” — 4:77
see: Maimonides, The Reasons of The Laws of Moses, tr. J. Townley, 1827: “Why the Ancient Idolaters united Agriculture with the Worship of the Stars. . . . they confessedly believed that the fruitfulness of the earth depended upon the worship of the planets and other heavenly bodies. . . . that Agriculture . . . depended upon the influence of the Sun, and the rest of the Stars, for its success . . .” — p. 169 (More Nevochim, III.xxx)
The worshippers . . . “carved images and claimed that the light of the principal stars . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Ils sculptèrent des images et prétendirent que la lumière des principales étoiles venant à les pénétrer, les vertus angéliques conversaient avec eux et leur annonçaient beaucoup de choses très-utiles’ [They carved images and claimed that as the light of the principal stars permeated these, the angelic forces conversed with them, and announced to them many very useful things].” — 4:77 (De Diis Syris)
Seldenus explains that the Teraphim were built . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Les téraphims, continue Seldenus, étaient composés d’après la position de certains astres, comme ceux que les Grecs appellent στοιχεῖα, et selon les figures que l’on plaçait dans les cieux et qu’on appelait ἀλεξητῆροὶ ou dieux tutélaires [The teraphim, continues Seldenus, were built according to the position of certain heavenly bodies, like those which the Greeks called στοιχεῖα, and according to the figures that were located in the heavens and called tutelary gods] . . .” — 4:77 (De Diis Syris)
Those who traced out the στοιχεῖα were called . . . the diviners by the στοιχεῖα.
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ceux qui traçaient les στοιχεῖα s’appelaient στοιχειωματικοὶ, ou devinant par les στοιχεῖα {De Diis Syriis, Teraph. II, Synt. p. 31} [those who traced out the στοιχεῖα were called στοιχειωματικοὶ, or those divining by the στοιχεῖα].” — 4:77 & fn.
vide infra, the Teraphim
see: “Adam-Adami”: “Even the mode of divination through ‘the idol of the moon’ is the same as practised by David, Saul, and the High Priests of the Jewish Tabernacle by means of the Teraphim.” — SD 2:455

— 395 —

men of science . . . proclaim the work . . . “either an apocypha or a fairy tale . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. F. de Rougemont . . . lui reproche . . . ‘[Chwolson a] prétendu refaire toute l’histoire profane et sacrée avec les écrits d’auteurs apocryphes’ [F. de Rougemont reproaches him . . . ‘(Chwolsohn has) pretended to rewrite the entire profane and sacred history with the writings of apocryphal authors’].” — 3:219
it described the worship of demons . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Si nous l’interrogeons sur ses sources et sur ses auteurs, il nous répond dès la première page de son livre que ‘toutes les doctrines en ont été révélées par Saturne (le dieu méchant) à la lune, puis par la lune à son idole’ [If we question him about his sources and his authors, he answers us from the first page of his book that ‘all doctrines were revealed by Saturn (the evil god) to the Moon, then by the Moon to its idol’] . . .” — 3:219
ancient divinations were . . . accomplished with the help of the Spirits of the Elements . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ammien Marcellin . . . nous avait avertis plus d’une fois que toutes les anciennes divinations se faisaient par les ‘esprits des éléments,’ spiritus elementorum . . . πνεῦματα τῶν στοιχειῶν {1.I, 21} [Ammianus Marcellinus . . . warned us more than once that all ancient divinations were accomplished by the ‘spirits of the elements’].” — 4:78 & fn.
see: Ammianus Marcellinus, Roman History, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1894: “The spirit which directs all the elements . . . can communicate to us the capacity of foreseeing the future by the sciences which we attain through various kinds of discipline.” — p. 244
the planets . . . and the Zodiac, were figured . . . by the twelve stones called “mysteries of the elements”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous voici donc encore une fois revenus aux anges des planètes et du zodiaque, qui . . . n’étaient pas figurés seulement à Héliopolis par les douze pierres appelées ‘mystères des éléments, elementorum arcana,’ mais bien aussi dans le temple de Salomon, dans plusieurs vieilles églises italiennes, et même à Notre-Dame de Paris [Here we have again come back to the angels of the planets and the zodiac, who . . . were represented not only in Heliopolis by the twelve stones called ‘mysteries of the elements, elementorum arcana,’ but also in Solomon’s temple and in several old Italian churches, and even at Notre Dame in Paris].” — 4:78
Diana-Luna, I’lythia, Lucina. . . . Anaïtis
see: Herodotus, History, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “She was the same Deity worshipped in many countries under various denominations . . . She was the ‘Queen of Heaven,’ the Moon . . . she answered to the Greek Eileithyiæ [Ilithyia] . . . as well as to Juno, Diana, and Lucina . . . The Phoenician Tanith or Tanat, who answered to Artemis (Diana) . . . Plutarch . . . says ‘Diana of Ecbatana is there called Anitis.’ ” — 2:445-6 (Appendix, “Essay I” by Wilkinson)
Luna-Artemis, to whom Pamphos was the first to give the surname of Καλλίστη
see: Pausanias, The Description of Greece, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1794: “. . . Pamphus, learning this name from the Arcadians, was the first poet that called Diana, Calliste [Καλλίστη].” — 2:337 (viii.35)
Καλλίστα πολὺ παρθενῶν
p/q: Euripides, The Hippolytus, ed. F. A. Paley, 1876: “. . . καλλίστα πολὺ παρθένων . . . καλλίστα τῶν κατ’ Ὄλυμπον παρθένων, Ἄρτεμι [fairest among all the virgins of the Pantheon . . . Artemis, fairer than all the maidens of Olympus].” — p. 13 (lines 66, 71-2)
This Artemis-Lochia . . . presided at conception and childbirth
see: J. C. Prichard, An Analysis of the Egyptian Mythology, 1819: “Lucina, or Diana [Artemis], the goddess of child-birth among the Greeks and Romans, bore also some near relation to the Moon . . . Plutarch affirms that the Moon was supposed, when full, to assist at child-birth . . . Hence, he says, ‘Diana is called Lochia . . .’ ” — pp. 136-7
The goddess Τρίμορφος was the personified symbol of . . . the moon in each of her phases
see: Cornutus, De Natura Deorum, ed. Friedrich Osann, 1844: “. . . ἡ Ἑκάτη τρίμορφος . . . τρια σχήματα γενικώτατα ἀποτελεῖν τὴν σελήνην [the three-formed Hecate . . . three forms that in the end belong to the Moon] . . .” — p. 208 (xxxiv, 220-8)
the Orpheans explained the epithet . . . by three kingdoms of nature over which she reigned
see: Thomas Taylor, The Mystical Hymns of Orpheus, 1824: “Einodian Hecate . . . Of earthly, wat’ry, and celestial frame . . .” — p. 7 (Hymn I, “To Hecate”)
revengeful and exacting, Hecate-Luna . . .
see: J. C. Prichard, An Analysis of the Egyptian Mythology, 1819: “It is well known that, among the Greeks, Diana [Luna] . . . was supposed to have changed her form on her descent to Hades, and to have become a goddess of stern and vindictive character.  Hecate . . . was the punisher of guilt, and the mistress of the Furies.” — p. 141

— 396 —

the lunar . . . goddesses, Nephtys or Neith, Proserpina, Melytta, Cybele, Isis . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Toutes ces déesses, Junon, Astarté, Mélytta, Cybèle, Isis, Athor, Neith, Vénus, Proserpine, Hécate [All these (lunar) goddesses, Juno, Astarte, Melytta, Cybele, Isis, Athor, Neith, Venus, Proserpine, Hecate] . . .” — 3:113
the gods were made to merge their functions . . . in the grand synthesis known as Maïa . . . a generic name
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Toutes ces déesses . . . venaient se fondre dans la grande synthèse des Maïa, leur nom générique [All these goddesses . . . were merged in the grand synthesis of Maïa, their generic name] . . .” — 3:113
Maïa . . . has come to mean . . . “mother,” from the root ma (nurse) . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Maïa . . . dont la racine est ma (nourrice), dont nous avons fait le mois de mai . . . que ce mois était consacré à Maïa [Maïa . . . whose root is ma (nurse), from which we have made the month of May . . . which was consecrated to Maïa] . . .” — 3:113
Its primitive meaning, however, was Maya, Durgâ . . . the personification of Illusion.
see: Selections from the Mahābhārata [with notes by H. H. Wilson], 1842: “Māyā is any illusory female form of celestial origin . . . but Māyā Devī, or Mahāmāyā, is usually applied to a form of Durgā, as a personification of the unreality of worldly things . . .” — p. 62 fn.
Artemis Soteira (. . . whose attribute is the lyre . . .)
see: Maxime Collignon, Mythologie Figurée de la Grèce, 1883: “L’Artémis secourable ou Soteira a pour attributs le carquois fermé, et parfois même la lyre [Artemis the redeemer, or Soteira, has as attributes the closed quiver, and sometimes even the lyre] . . .” — p. 107
Deus Lunus, and especially Osiris-lunus and Thot-lunus, were the occult potencies of the moon.
see: J. G. Wilkinson, The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1883: “The Egyptians represented their moon as a male deity, like . . . the Lunus of the Latins . . . Thoth is usually represented as a human figure with the head of an ibis . . . and in his character of Lunus he has sometimes a man’s face with the crescent of the moon upon his head . . . [Plutarch] supposes ‘Osiris to be the power and influence of the moon . . .’ ” — 3:165-6

— Footnotes

consecrating the month of May to the Virgin . . . “May is sacred to Maïa . . . or Vesta”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Maïa . . . dont nous avons fait le mois de mai, comme nous l’apprend le bon Plutarque . . . ‘ce mois était consacré à Maïa (Μαῖα), c’est-à-dire à Vesta’ {Voyez . . . Aulu-Gelle, au mot Maïa.}[ Maïa . . . of which we have made the month of May, as the good Plutarch teaches us . . . ‘that month was dedicated to Maïa (Μαῖα), that is, to Vesta’ {See . . . Aulus-Gellius, on the word Maïa}].” — 3:113 & fn.

— 397 —

the Mahabhâratan War . . . the Suryavansas and the Indovansas. . . .
see: John Kennedy, The Natural History of Man, 1851: “. . . the Mahabharata, or Great War, which was carried on between . . . two branches of the Lunar race of Indian sovereigns.  Nearly about the same time Rama is supposed to have lived.  The exploits of this Rama, the most illustrious of the Solar line of Indian Kings, or Suryavansas, as they are called by native writers, who also designate the Lunar line Indu-vansas, or Soma-vansas, are detailed in the ‘Ramayana.’ ” — 1:84
the sun was for a very long time feminine . . . The moon was called “The Lord of the sun,” Bel-Shemesh
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “In the Oriental system, the sun is feminine, and the moon masculine.  [The Hebrew] Bel Shemesh would mean ‘lord of the sun.’ ” — 2:669

— Footnotes

Dayanisi . . . “the Ruler of Men,” the “Judge,” or the Sun
see: Thomas Inman, Ancient Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names, 1868: “Dionysus . . . is of Assyrian origin, the formula for it being Dian-nisi, or Dayan-nisi, words signifying ‘Judge of men,’ the Dian or Dayan, being equivalent to the Hebrew Dan . . . ‘Shemesh dayan rabu shamie u irtsit,’ i.e., ‘The Sun, the Great Judge of heaven and earth.’ ” — 1:455
God is a “consuming fire,” “appears in, and is encompassed by fire”
p/q: Alexander Cruden, A Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “God hath often appeared in fire, and encompassed with fire . . .” — p. 203
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906:
“For the Lord thy God is a consuming fire . . .” — p. 240 (Deuteronomy, 4:24)
“I beheld . . . the Ancient of days . . . his throne was like the fiery flame . . .” — p. 1118 (Daniel, 7:9)
Ezekiel (viii, 16) saw the Jews “worshipping the sun.”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . at the door of the temple of the Lord . . . were about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple . . . and they worshipped the sun toward the east.” — p. 1043 (Ezekiel, 8:16)
The Baal of the Israelites (the Shemesh of the Moabites and the Moloch of the Ammonites) . . .
see: The Queen’s Printers Aids to the Student of the Holy Bible, 1882: “The Phœnicians shared the same religious beliefs as the Canaanites, Moabites, Edomites, Ammonites, and Philistines . . . The Sun-god, called by the general name of Baal (lord), or Moloch . . . (king), was worshipped under a great variety of forms and attributes . . . as the sun with long hair or rays, Baal-Shemesh.”  “. . . the Israelites, like their Phœnician kindred, were inclined towards sun-worship . . . In thus representing their national God, the Israelites identified Him with the Baal or Sun-god of the other Semitic tribes . . .” — pp. 106, 107
The “Sun of Righteousness”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings.” — p. 1186 (Malachi, 4:2)

— 398 —

Soma embodies the triple power of the Trimurti
see: Francis Wilford, “On the Chronology of the Hindus,” 1799: “Atri . . . had three sons; or, as it is declared in the Purānas, the Trimurti, or Hindu Triad, was incarnated in his house.  The eldest, called Soma, or the moon . . . was a portion or form of Brahma.” — p. 261 (Asiatic Researches, v. 5)
Soma, the moon, produced by the churning of the Ocean . . . in another Manvantara
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “So Soma, in the Swāyaṃbhuva Manwantara, was born as the son of Atri; in the Chākshusha, he was produced by the churning of the ocean.” — 2:11 fn.
“the Rishis milking the earth, whose calf was Soma, the moon”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the Ṛishis milked the earth through Bṛihaspati; their calf was Soma . . .” — 1:188 fn.
“the disease which springs up at a peculiar stage in human culture”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “ ‘We know,’ says Renouf . . . in his Hibbert lectures, ‘We know that mythology is the disease which springs up at a peculiar stage of human culture.’  Such is the shallow explanation . . . accepted by the British public, that gets its thinking done for it by proxy.” — p. 1
de Rougé . . . translates . . . “Thou art my Son, I have begotten thee”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Aprés avoir cité et traduit un texte dans lequel Ammon-râ dit au roi Aménophis III (Memnon): ‘Tu es mon fils, je t’ai engendré . . .’ [After having quoted and translated a text in which Ammon-ra says to King Amenophes III (Memnon): ‘You are my son, I have begotten you’] . . . ” — 3:108

— Footnotes

The earth flees for her life in the allegory . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Pṛithu took up his divine bow . . . and, in great wrath, marched forth to assail the Earth.  Earth, assuming the figure of a cow, fled hastily from him, and traversed . . . the regions of Brahmā and the heavenly spheres.” — 1:186 (i.13)
Again, in every Purâna, the calf changes name . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . he, therefore, having made Swāyaṃbhuva Manu the calf, milked the Earth {according to the Matsya . . . Indra was the calf . . . The Yakshas made Vaiśravaṇa their calf . . . On behalf of the mountains, Meru was the milker; Himavat, the calf}.” — 1:187, 188 fn. (i.13)

— 398-9 —

de Rougé . . . finds the same idea . . . under various forms
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. de Rougé ajoute: ‘Cette idée est exprimée sous une multitude d’autres formes plus ou moins énergiques’ [De Rougé adds: ‘This idea has been expressed under a multitude of other more of less effective forms’] . . .” — 3:108

— 399 —

“for this idea to have entered the mind of a hierogrammatist . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. de Rougé ajoute . . . pour que cette idée pût venir dans l’esprit des hiérogrammates, il fallait donc qu’il y eût dans la religion égyptienne un fonds de doctrine plus ou moins précis, indiquant comme un fait possible et à venir une incarnation divine, sous la forme humaine [De Rougé adds . . . so that this idea could enter the mind of the hierogrammatists, there must have been then a more or less defined doctrine in the Egyptian religion, indicating as a possible fact that might come to pass, a divine incarnation in a human form].” — 3:108
see: Emmanuel de Rougé, “Mémoire sur la Statuette Naophore” (Introductory Letter), April 26, 1851, Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 42, p. 346.
“to realize clearer” what “the Divine Father and Son” were with the Egyptians . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Si je [De Rougé] puis comprendre ce qu’étaient aux yeux des Égyptiens le Père et le Fils divins, j’éprouve bien plus de difficulté à me rendre compte des fonctions que l’on attribuait au principe féminin dans cette génération primordiale’ [Even if I (De Rougé) can understand what the divine Father and Son were in the eyes of the Egyptians, I find more difficulty accounting for the functions that were attributed to the feminine principle in this primordial generation].” — 3:108
see: Emmanuel de Rougé, “Mémoire sur la Statuette Naophore” (Introductory Letter), April 26, 1851, Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 42, p. 371.
de Rougé . . . quotes the sentence of the Commander to Cambyses . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . cette phrase . . . du commandant des pylônes, adressée au roi Cambyse en l’introduisant dans le temple de Saïs [this sentence . . . of the commander of the entrance towers, addressed to King Cambyses when introducing him into the temple of Saïs].” — 3:109
“I made known to his Majesty the dignity of Saïs . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Je fis connaître ensuite à sa majesté la dignité de Saïs, qui est la demeure de Neith, la génératrice du soleil, lequel est un premier-né, et qui n’est pas engendré, mais seulement enfanté’ [I then made known to His Majesty the dignity of Saïs, which is the abode of Neith, the female originator of the Sun, who is a first-born, and who is not begotten, but only brought forth].” — 3:109
see: Emmanuel de Rougé, “Mémoire sur la Statuette Naophore” (Introductory Letter), April 26, 1851, Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 42, pp. 353-4.
With the Christians, “the first-born” (primogenitus) is indeed generated . . . “genitum, non factum”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Le premier-né (primogenitus) est effectivement engendré (genitum, non factum), mais ici il est positivement enfanté (la Vierge enfantera, Virgo pariet . . .) [The first-born is in fact generated (not made), but here it is positively conceived (the Virgin will bring forth)].” — 3:109-10
“a demiurgical goddess, at once visible and invisible . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Neith était une certaine déesse démiurgique tout à la fois visible et invisible, ayant sa place dans le ciel et émettant néanmoins la génération aux espèces [Neith was a certain demiurgical goddess, at once visible and invisible, having her place in heaven and yet bringing forth the generation of species].” — 3:110

— Footnotes

the Egyptians prophesied Jehovah (!) and his incarnated Redeemer . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Il nous semble que le savant chrétien [De Rougé] . . . trouvant tout à la fois ici et son propre Jéhovah, et son rédempteur incarné (le bon serpent), et son martyre causé par la colère de Typhon (le mauvais serpent) [It seems to us that the Christian scholar (De Rougé) . . . finding here all at the same time his own Jehovah, his incarnated Redeemer (the good serpent), and his martyr caused by the anger of Typhon (the wicked serpent)] . . .” — 3:109

— 400 —

Behold in the Egyptian Hall of the British Museum, Hathor . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . qu’est-ce donc que cette déesse Hathor . . . allaite comme Isis?  Nous pouvons la voir ainsi dans le Musée britannique égyptien, implorée par le pharaon Thoutmés, qui lui donne la main pendant qu’il tend l’autre à Month-râ, seigneur du ciel [so who is this goddess Hathor . . . who breastfeeds as Isis?  We can also see her in the Egyptian Hall of the British Museum, implored by the Pharaoh Thutmose, who gives him a hand while he holds out the other to Month-rā, Lord of Heaven].” — 3:111
. . . “The Divine Mother and Lady, or Queen of Heaven”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ce monolithe est tiré des ruines de Karnak.  On voit encore au même musée la même déesse assise sur un trône, au bas duquel on lit: ‘MÈRE DIVINE ET DAME DU CIEL’ [This monolith has been taken from the ruins of Karnak.  Again at the same museum we see the same goddess seated on a throne, beneath which we read: ‘Divine Mother and Lady of Heaven’].” — 3:111
also “the Morning Star,” and the “Light of the Sea” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Tout se concilie dans le paganisme . . . même faire appeler cette Anaitis . . . ‘ÉTOILE DU MATIN et LUMIÈRE DE LA MER,’ stella matutina et lux maris [Everything is reconciled in paganism . . . even in calling this Anaitis . . . ‘Morning Star and Light of the Sea’].” — 3:111
Pallas, or Cybele, Minerva . . . holding her child-son on the lap . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Chez ceux-ci . . . Minerve, Pallas ou Cybèle, nous la verrons tenant un enfant sur ses genoux, invoquée dans ses fêtes sous le vocable de Μονογενὴς Θεοῦ, seule Mère de Dieu, et représentée quelquefois entourée de douze personnages, et assise au milieu d’eux sur un lion {Raoul Rochette}[In these . . . Minerva, Pallas or Cybele, we will see her holding a child on her lap, invoked in her festivals by the name of ‘the One Mother of God,’ and sometimes represented by an entourage of a dozen personages, and sitting among them on a lion].” — 3:112 & fn.
Semele, the wife of Jupiter and mother of Bacchus, the Sun . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Sémélé . . . épouse de Jupiter et mère de Bacchus (soleil) . . . Nonnus nous dit . . . ‘transportée, après sa mort, au ciel, où elle devient commensale de Mars et de Vénus sous le nom de πανβασιλεία, reine du monde’ [Semele . . . the wife of Jupiter and mother of Bacchus (Sun) . . . is, according to Nonnus, after her death, ‘taken to heaven, where she becomes the companion of Mars and Venus, under the name of the Queen of the World’].” — 3:112
“at the names of which . . . tremble all the demons”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ‘reine du monde, au nom de laquelle tremblent tous les démons’ [‘Queen of the World,’ at whose name all the demons tremble] . . .” — 3:112-13
“Σεμελῆν τρέμουσι δαίμονες.”  This Greek inscription . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Σεμελῆν τρέμοῦσιν δαίμονες’ {Inscription grecque d’un petit temple représenté sur une pierre trouvée par Beger et reproduite par Montfaucon} [‘Semele made the dæmons tremble’ {Greek inscription on a small temple, depicted on a stone found by Beger and reproduced by Montfaucon}].” — 3:113 & fn. (“Archéologie de la Vièrge-Mère”)

— 400-1 —

To Maury’s remark that “the Virgin took possession of all the Sanctuaries . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. Maury a donc bien raison de poser en principe que ‘la Vierge prit possession de tous les sanctuaires de Cérès et de Vénus, et que les rites païens proclamés et pratiqués en l’honneur de ces déesses furent en partie transférés à la mère de Christ’ [Maury was therefore quite right to posit in principle that ‘the Virgin took possession of all the sanctuaries of Ceres and Venus, and that the pagan rites, proclaimed and practiced in honor of these goddesses, were partly transferrred to the Mother of Christ’].” — 3:118

— 401 —

“. . . As the dogma, the liturgy, and the rites professed by the Roman Apostolic Church . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le dogme, la liturgie et les rites professés par l’Église apostolique et romaine en 1862, se retrouvant gravés sur des monuments, inscrits sur des papyrus ou des cylindres de bien peu postérieurs au déluge, il paraît impossible de nier l’existence d’un premier catholicisme anté-historique, dont le nôtre n’est que la continuation fidèle [as the dogma, liturgy, and the rites professed by the Roman Apostolic Church in 1862, found engraved on monuments, written on papyrus rolls or cylinders, are not much more recent than the Deluge, it seems impossible to deny the existence of a first prehistoric Catholicism, of which our own is but the faithful continuation] . . .” — 3:118
“. . . the summum of the impudence of demons and Goetic necromancy . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ce summum d’impudence et de necromancie goétique [that summum of impudence and goetic necromancy] . . .” — 3:119 fn.
“If in our (Christian) Revelation (l’Apolcalypse) . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . dans l’Apocalypse, Marie, revêtue du soleil, et ayant la lune sous ses pieds . . . n’a plus rien de commun avec l’humble servante de Nazareth, car elle est devenue la plus grande des puissances théologiques et cosmologiques de notre univers [in Revelation, Mary, clothed with the Sun and having the Moon under her feet . . . has nothing in common with the humble servant from Nazareth, because she has become the greatest theological and cosmological power in our universe].” — 3:116 (§ 11, “Archéologie de la Vierge-Mère”)
“who sits at the right hand of her Father . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Pindare chante l’assomption en ces termes: ‘La fille du ciel s’est élevée au ciel, elle est assise à la droite de son père pour lui transmettre nos prières; avocate . . . plus puissante que les anges . . . elle leur commande à tous’ [Pindar sings of the Assumption as follows: ‘The daughter of heaven has risen to heaven, she sits at the right hand of her father to convey our prayers to him; advocate (of mankind), more powerful than the angels . . . she has command over them all’].” — 3:112 (Pindare, Hymnes à Minerve)
“The Sun-Christ lives in thee and thou livest in him”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Cornélius à Lapide . . . C’est le même docteur qui, après avoir cité ce mot de saint Bernard à la sainte Vierge . . . ajoute: ‘Le Soleil Christ demeure en toi et tu demeures en lui’ [Cornelius à Lapide . . . This is the same scholar who after having quoted this word of St. Bernard to the holy Virgin . . . adds: ‘The Sun-Christ lives in you and you live in him’].” — 3:116 fn.
Again the Virgin is admitted to be the moon . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ajoute: ‘De même, la Vierge, mère de Dieu, est la Lune’ [He adds: ‘Again, the Virgin, Mother of God, is the Moon’].” — 3:116 fn.
the verse of Virgil — “Casta fove Lucina . . .” is applied to her
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . on peut lui appliquer ce vers de Virgile: Casta fave Lucina, tuus jam regnat Apollo [This verse of Virgil is applied to her: Pure Lucina, be gracious, thine own Apollo now is king].” — 3:116 fn. (Virgil, Eclogues 4.10)
“Like the moon, the Virgin is the Queen of Heaven”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Comme la lune . . . elle est reine du ciel [Like the moon . . . she is the Queen of Heaven].” — 3:116 fn. (Cornelius à Lapide, Apoc., xii)
they . . . reject even the ‘Nabathean Agriculture’ as a romance . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Appendice L,” § 4, “M. Chwolson et les livres des Nabathéens [Chwolson and the books of the Nabatheans].” — 3:218-21
A noble Marquis wrote twenty years ago six huge volumes
see: J.-E. de Mirville [Marquis de Mirville], Pneumatologie: Des Esprits, et de leurs Manifestations Diverses (vols. 1-5), 1863-4; Des Esprits de l’Esprit-Saint et Du Miracle (vol. 6), 1868.

— 402 —

“neither Hebrews nor Greeks borrowed any of their ideas from Egypt”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Luniolatry; Ancient and Modern, 1887: “When we are told by the Roman Catholic Egyptologist, Renouf, that ‘Neither Hebrews nor Greeks borrowed any of their ideas from Egypt,’ we can only think of such a dictum as an intentional blind, or as a result of putting up the glass to an eye that cannot see.” — pp. 7-8
Odin got his wisdom, power, and knowledge, by sitting at the feet of Mimir . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “Odin’s power and wisdom and knowledge are described in the Edda . . . He went to Mimir, the wise Jotun, who sat by the fountain of primeval wisdom, drank daily of the water and increased his knowledge thereby.” — p. 86
Mimir “drew the highest knowledge from the fountain . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “Mimir drew the highest knowledge from the fountain, because the world was born of water; hence, primeval wisdom was to be found in that mysterious element.” — p. 86
“the Sun, which enlightens and penetrates all things . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “The eye of the god of heaven is the sun, which enlightens and penetrates all things; his other eye is the moon, whose reflection gazes out of the deep, and which at last, when setting, sinks into the ocean.” — p. 86
Loki, the fire-god, is said to have hidden in the water . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “It is very curious that Loki, the fire-god, should have hidden in the water; but the belief that fire takes refuge in water is to be found amongst other nations . . .” — p. 295
Christians, who symbolized the Holy Ghost under . . . “cloven tongues like as fire”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.  And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost . . .” — p. 156 (Acts, 2:3-4)

— 403 —

“To make the transformation into the god giving light to the path of Darkness”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Chapitre de faire la transformation en dieu donnant la lumière sur la route des ténèbres [Chapter on making the transformation into a god, giving light on the path of darkness].” — p. 251 (§ lxxx)
“Woman-light of the Shadow” serves Thot in his retreat in the moon
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis la femme, lumière de ténèbres, j’arrive, j’éclaire les ténèbres . . . Je munis Thot dans la retraite de la Lune [I am the Woman-Light of the Shadows, I arrive, I illuminate the darkness . . . I serve Thot in the retreat of the Moon] . . .” — p. 252 (lxxx.5-6)
“All such symbols figured their own facts from the first . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “All such symbols figured their own facts from the first, and did not prefigure others of a totally different order.  The Iconography had survived in Rome from a period remotely pre-Christian.  There was neither forgery nor interpolation of types; nothing but a continuity of imagery with a perversion of its meaning.” — 1:445
“Object of horror or adoration . . .”
p/q: François-Auguste Chateaubriand, Génie du Christianisme, 1802: “Objet d’horreur ou d’adoration, les hommes ont pour lui une haine implacable, ou tombent devant son génie.  Le mensonge l’appelle, la prudence le réclame, l’envie le porte dans son coeur, et l’éloquence a son caducée; aux enfers il arme les fouets des furies, au ciel l’éternité en fait son symbole [Object of horror or of adoration, men have an implacable hatred for it (the serpent), or prostate themselves before its genius.  Falsehood calls it, prudence claims it, envy carries it in its heart, and eloquence on its caduceus.  In hell it arms the whips of the furies; in heaven eternity makes of it its symbol] . . .” — 1:118

— 404 —

Philostratus narrates that the natives . . . fed on the heart and liver of serpents . . .
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Philostratus in his life of Apollonius of Tyana asserts that the natives of Hindustan and Arabia ate the heart and liver of serpents for the purpose of acquiring a knowledge of the language and thoughts of animals {De Vita Apollonii}.” — 1:361 & fn.
When the Scandinavian Sigurd is fabled to have roasted the heart of Fafnir, the Dragon . . .
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “. . . Sigurd . . . accidentally tasted the blood of the Dragon.  Whereupon his eyes and ears were opened and he understood what the birds sang . . . ‘There thou sittest, Sigurd, roasting Fafnir’s heart; eat it thyself and become the wisest of men.’ ” — 1:361
Sigurd had become learned in the runes and magical charms . . .
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Then Sigurd ate the heart and became a god in power, the most famous of men, learned in all runes, the master of magical arts.” — 1:361
Gnostic Ophites . . . had a reason for honouring the Serpent . . . he taught the primeval men the Mysteries
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The Gnostic Ophites knew the reason why they honoured the serpent.  It was because the primal pair derived from it a knowledge of the mysteries {Epiphanius, Adv. Hæres, 37}.” — 1:338
see: Epiphanius, Panaria, ed. F. Oehler, 1859: “Sed iis persuasit serpens, ac scientiam importavit, totamque adeo divinorum mysteriorum cognitionem cum viro ac muliere communicavit [The Serpent convinced them and brought them knowledge, and communicated to man and woman the whole knowledge of the divine Mysteries].” — p. 503 (Adv. Haeres. 37)

— 405 —

“the great mystery in the mysteries” . . . symbol of “reclothing and rebirth . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The serpent was the great emblem of Mystery in the Mysteries . . . It was adopted as a type of feminine pubescence on account of its sloughing and self-renewal, and the symbol of re-clothing and rebirth in the Mysteries was its final phase.” — 1:340
The revelations and interpretations in “The Rivers of Life” . . .
see: J. G. R. Forlong, Rivers of Life, or Sources and Streams of the Faiths of Man in All Lands, 1883: Chapter 2, “Tree Worship” (1:31-92); & Chapter 3, “Serpent and Phalik Worship” (1:93-322).
“The notion of Payne Knight and Inman . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The notion of Payne Knight and Inman, that the cross or Tau is simply a copy of the male organs in a triadic form is radically false.” — 1:424

— 406 —

Thus, the Asvattha . . . is said in the Bhagavadgita to grow with its roots above . . .
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “They say the inexhaustible Aśvattha has (its) roots above, (its) branches below {Aśvattha stands here for the course of worldly life.  Its roots are above, viz. the supreme being}.” — p. 111 & fn. (Bhagavadgītā, xv)
Krishna . . . is “greater than Brahman, and First Cause . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . he again spoke to Kṛishṇa . . . And why, O high-souled one! should they not bow down to you (who are) greater than Brahman, and first cause?. . . O you pervading the universe! you are the indestructible, that which is, that which is not, and what is beyond them.” — p. 96 (Bhagavadgītā, xi)
Its boughs are Hiranyagharba . . . The vedas are its leaves.
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . its boughs are Hiraṇyagarbha and others of the higher beings.  The Vedas are its leaves . . .” — p. 111 fn. (Bhagavadgītā, xv)
(Brahmâ or Brahman in his highest manifestations . . .)
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The highest manifestations of Brahman, viz. the Hiraṇyagarbha, &c., say Śrīdhara and Madhusūdana.” — p. 108 fn. (Bhagavadgītā, ch. 14)
He only who goes beyond the roots shall never return
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “And downwards to this human world are continued its roots which lead on to action.  Its form is not thus known here, nor (its) end, nor beginning . . . then should one seek for that seat from which those that go there never return . . .” — p. 111 (Bhagavadgītā, xv)

— 407 —

Nidhögg — he who devours the corpses of the evil-doers in the “Hall of Misery”
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “[Hel] the goddess of the Under-world. . . . Her hall was called Misery, her dish Hunger, her knife Greed . . . Still more horrible than this was Hwergelmir, the roaring cauldron, where the dragon Nidhögg devoured the corpses of the evil-doers.” — p. 225
Nidhögg . . . gnawed the World-tree.
see: P. H. Mallet, Northern Antiquities, tr. Bishop Percy, 1847: “That ash . . . is the greatest and best of all trees.  Its branches spread over the whole world, and ever reach above heaven.  It has three roots . . . the third stands over Niflheim, and under this root, which is constantly gnawed by Nidhögg, is Hvergelmir.” — p. 411
the Midgard-snake coiled at the bottom of the Seas, encircles the Earth . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “. . . the Midgard-Snake [Jörmungander] . . . lying at the bottom of the sea, encircles the earth . . .” — p. 5
      “. . . Jörmungander reared her head in the air, till she resembled a twisted column, gnashed her jaws and emitted a venemous foam, before which the very gods shrank back.” — p. 54
Ananta, the Serpent of Eternity which carries Vishnu through the Manvantara . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Vishṇu, proceeding from the quality of darkness, which is called Śesha . . . This being is called Ananta . . . He has a thousand heads {He is the great serpent on which Vishṇu sleeps during the intervals of creation} . . .” — 2:211 & fn. (ii.5)
the world was completed “according to the perfect nature of number 6”
p/q: Philo Judæus, Works, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1854-5: “. . . the whole world had been completed according to the perfect nature of the number six . . .” — 1:26 (“On the Creation of the World,” § 30)
“when that reason (nous) which is holy in accordance with the number seven . . .”
p/q: Philo Judæus, Works, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1854-5: “When that reason which is holy in accordance with the number seven has entered into the soul the number six is then arrested, and all the mortal things which this number appears to make.” — 1:56 (“The Allegories of the Sacred Laws,” i.6)
“Number 7 is the festival day of all the earth . . .”
see: Philo Judæus, Works, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1854-5: “. . . the Father hallowed the day following, the seventh, praising it, and calling it holy.  For that day is the festival, not of one city or one country, but of all the earth; a day which alone it is right to call the day of festival for all people, and the birthday of the world.  And I know not if any one would be able to celebrate the nature of the number seven in adequate terms, since it is superior to every form of expression.” — 1:26 (“On the Creation of the World,” § 30)
“the Septenary of Stars seen in the great bear . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “. . . the septenary of stars seen in the Great Bear and seven-headed Dragon furnished a visible origin for the symbolic seven of time above.” — 2:312

— 407-8 —

“The goddess of the seven stars,” he adds — “Was the mother of time, as Kep . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The goddess of the seven stars was the mother of time as Kep; whence Kepti and Sebti for the two times and number 7.” — 2:312

— 408 —

“So this is the star of the Seven by name . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Sothis is the star of Seven by name.  Sevekh (Kronus), the son of the goddess, has the name of the seven or seventh.  So has Sefekh-Abu who builds the house on high, as Wisdom (Sophia) built hers with seven pillars.” — 2:312-13
“The primary Kronotypes were seven . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The primary kronotypes were seven, and thus the beginning of time in heaven is based on the number and the name of seven on account of the starry demonstrators.  The seven stars as they turned round annually kept pointing as it were with the forefinger of the right hand, and describing a circle in the upper and lower heaven.  The number 7 naturally suggested a measure by seven, that led to what may be termed Sevening, and to the marking and mapping out of the circle in seven corresponding divisions which were assigned to the seven great constellations; and thus was formed the celestial heptanomis of Egypt in the heavens.” — 2:313
“When the stellar heptanomis was broken up and divided . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “When the stellar heptanomis was broken up and divided into four quarters, it was multiplied by four, and twenty-eight signs took the place of the primary seven constellations; the lunar zodiac of twenty-eight signs being the registered result of reckoning twenty-eight days to the moon, or a lunar month.” — 2:313
“In the Chinese arrangement the four sevens are given to four genii . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “In the Chinese arrangement, the four sevens are given to four Genii that preside over the four cardinal points; or rather the seven northern constellations make up the Black Warrior; the seven eastern (Chinese autumn) constitute the White Tiger; the seven southern are the Vermilion Bird; and the seven western (called Vernal) are the Azure Dragon.  Each of these four spirits presides over its heptanomis during one lunar week.  The genitrix of the first heptanomis (Typhon of the seven stars), now took a lunar character, or was succeeded by a lunar representative of time.” — 2:313
“in this phase we find the goddess Sefekh . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “In this phase we find the goddess Sefekh, whose name signifies number 7, is the feminine word or logos in place of the mother of time, who was the earlier Word, as goddess of the seven stars.” — 2:313 (“Typology of Time”)
The author shows that it was the goddess of the Great Bear and mother of Time . . .
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Following the genitrix, who was designated the ‘Living Word’ as the goddess of the Great Bear and mother of time, Sevekh-Kronus, whose type was the crocodile=dragon, the pre-planetary form of Saturn, was called her son and consort; he was her word=Logos.” — 2:344

— 409 —

“the Assyrians have not only preserved the records . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘The Assyrians,’offers Jamblichus, ‘have not only preserved the memorials of seven-and-twenty myriads of years, as Hipparchus says they have, but likewise of the whole apocatastases and periods of the Seven Rulers of the World.’ ” — 2:321
see: Proclus, Commentaries on the Timaeus of Plato, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1820, 1:84 (Bk I)
The crocodile . . . made sacred . . . to Osiris and Isis
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Le crocodile, comme animal amphibie, était un hiéroglyphe naturel de la matière philosophique composée d’eau et de terre; aussi accompagne-t-il souvent les figures d’Osiris et d’Isis [The crocodile as an amphibian animal, was a natural hieroglyph of the philosophical matter composed of water and earth; he also often accompanies the figures of Osiris and Isis].” — pp. 569-70
this ship . . . carried along by a crocodile “to show the motion of the Sun . . .”
see: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “Les Egyptiens représentaient le soleil dans un navire comme pilote, et ce navire était porté par un crocodile, ‘pour signifier, dit Eusèbe (Prépàr évang., l. 3, c. 3), le mouvement du soleil dans l’humide’ [The Egyptians represented the sun in a boat as a pilot, and this ship was carried along by a crocodile, ‘to show the movement of the sun in the moist (principle), says Eusebius (Prepar. evang., 1.3, c. 3)’].” — p. 570
see: Eusebius, La Préparation Évangélique, tr. Séquier de Saint-Brisson, 1846: “Ils figurent le soleil par un homme monté tantôt sur un bateau, tantôt sur un crocodile; le bateau marque le mouvement [du soleil] sur la matière liquide [They represent the Sun by a man, sometimes embarked on a boat, sometimes on a crocodile; the boat denotes the motion (of the Sun) on the watery substance (Moyst Principle: the ‘Waters of Space’)] . . .” — 1:120 (iii.11)
hermetic matter is the principle, or basis, of gold, or again the philosophical sun
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . la matière hermétique est le principe ou la base de l’or ou soleil philosophique [hermetic matter is the principle or the basis of gold, or the philosophical sun] . . .” — p. 570
the water, within which the crocodile is swimming, is that water or matter made liquid
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . l’eau où nage le crocodile est ce mercure ou cette matière réduite en eau [the water in which the crocodile swims is that mercury (mercurial element), or matter made liquid] . . .” — p. 570
the ship . . . representing the vessel of nature . . .
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . le navire représente le vase de la nature, dans lequel le soleil ou principe igné et sulfureux est comme pilote [the ship represents the vessel of nature, in which the Sun or the fire and sulfur principle acts as a pilot] . . .” — p. 570

— 409-10 —

because it is the sun which conducts the work by his action upon the moist or mercury
p/q: J.-M. Ragon, Orthodoxie Maçonnique . . . Maçonnerie Occulte, 1853: “. . . parce que c’est lui qui conduit l’œuvre par son action sur l’humide ou le mercure [because it is he (the Sun) who carries out the work by his action upon the ‘moist’ or ‘mercury’ (mercurial element)].” — p. 570

— 410 —

On the marble sarcophagus of a tomb, discovered in 1852 near the Porta Pia . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “In the year 1852 . . . near Porta Pia, a marble sarcophagus was brought to light, ornamented with a bas-relief representing . . . the Adoration of the Magi, or else the prototype of that scene, the ‘Birth of the New Sun.’  The floor of the tomb was paved with a mosaic equally ambiguous in subject, whether a Madonna and Child, or . . . more probable, Isis suckling the infant Harpocrates.  Several minor sarcophagi in terra-cotta surrounded the larger one; and in these were found many leaden plates, rolled up into scrolls . . . [Jacques] Matter publishes facsimiles of three of the best preserved . . .” — p. 366
“On the first is seen Anubis . . . holding out a scroll . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “On the first is seen Anubis . . . holding out a scroll; at his feet are two female busts: below all are two serpents entwined about . . . a corpse swathed up like a mummy.  In the second scroll these busts are set on each side of the Anubis, a large figure much mutilated . . . holding out a cross, the ‘Sign of Life.’  Under his feet lies the corpse, encircled in the numerous folds of a huge serpent, the Agathodæmon, guardian of the deceased.” — p. 366
“In the third scroll, Anubis bears on his arm . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “In the third scroll . . . the same Anubis bears on his arm an oblong object, perhaps the Roman scutum, held so as to convert the outline of the figure into a complete Latin cross. . . . at the god’s foot is a rhomboid, the Egyptian ‘Egg of the World,’ towards which crawls a serpent coiled into a circle. . . . Under the pairs of busts in the other scrolls is the letter ω, repeated seven times in a line: reminding one of the ‘Names,’ the interpretation whereof has been already given from the Pistis-Sophia . . .” — p. 367
“Very remarkable also is a line of characters . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “Very remarkable also is a line of characters, apparently Palmyrene, upon the legs of the first Anubis.  As for the figure of the serpent, supposing these talismans to emanate not from the Isiac but the newer Ophite creed, it may well stand for that ‘True and perfect Serpent’ who ‘leads forth the souls of all that put their trust in him out of the Egypt of the body, and through the Red Sea of Death into the Land of Promise, saving them on their way from the serpents of the Wilderness, that is, from the Rulers of the stars.’ ” — pp. 367-8
the seven-lettered God who is now credited with being Jehovah
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “A fragment of the Pistis-Sophia supplied . . . the names of the Mysteries. . . . Lines 7, 8, are made up of vowels, variously combined, and shrouding from profane eyes the Ineffable Name ΙΑΩ which . . . was the name of the God of the Jews; meaning thereby their mode of writing ‘Jehovah’ in Greek characters. . . . the Egyptians expressed the name of the Supreme God by the seven vowels thus arranged — ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ {This is in fact a very correct representation . . . of the Hebrew pronunciation of the word Jehovah}.” — pp. 199-200 & fn.

— 410-11 —

“The . . . Seven Thunders uttered these seven vowels”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “The Greek language has but one word for vowel and voice; when therefore, ‘the seven thunders uttered their voices,’ the seven vowels, it is meant, echoed through the vault of heaven, and composed that mystic utterance which the sainted seer was forbidden to reveal unto mortals.” — p. 200

— 411 —

“Seal up those things . . . and write them not,” says Revelation.
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.” — p. 328 (Revelation, 10:4)
“Do ye seek after these mysteries? . . . No mystery is more excellent . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘Do you seek after these mysteries?  No mystery is more excellent than they; which shall bring your souls unto the Light of Lights, unto the place of Truth . . . Nothing therefore is more excellent than the mysteries which ye seek after, saving only the mystery of the Seven Vowels and their forty and nine Powers, and the numbers thereof.’ ” — pp. 200-1 (Pistis Sophia, 378)
demon est deus inversus
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, La Science des Esprits, 1865: “[les dogmes kabbalistiques] Dæmon est Deus inversus.”  “Duo erunt unum.  Quod intra est fiet extra et nox sicut dies illuminabitur [(kabbalistic tenets) The Devil is God inverted. . . . Two shall be one.  That which is within shall produce itself outwardly, and the night shall be enlightened like the day].” — p. 156 (“Extracted from the Kabbalist Collection of Pistorius”)

— 412 —

the B’ni Alhim . . . “present themselves before the Lord”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Again there was a day when the sons of God [Bĕnēi ’Elohīm] came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord.” — p. 663 (Book of Job, 2:1)
“The Sons of God” become the “Fallen Angels” only after perceiving that the daughters of men were fair
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives of all which they chose.” — p. 7 (Genesis, 6:1-2)
logical Pantheism . . . Natura naturans
see: General Sketch of the History of Pantheism [by Constance Plumptre], 1879: “. . . [the Pantheism] of Spinoza appears to us to be singularly clear and logical. . . . Spinoza thus conceives God as the Immanent Cause and Essence of all things . . . As Immanent and Omnipresent Cause therefore, God is designated Natura naturans; as manifested in what we call creation, he is  — Natura naturata.” — 2:321-2
the “comely mother but stone cold”
p/q: T. Westwood, The Quest of the Sancgreall, 1868:
“A comely face hath Nature, but no heart. . . .
  In your chameleon moods she hath no part. . . .
  She is a comely mother, but stone-cold.” — p. 198
“Nature has perfections . . . to show that she is the image of God . . .”
p/q: Blaise Pascal, The Thoughts of Blaise Pascal, tr. C. Kegan Paul, 1885: “Nature has her perfections to show that she is the image of God, and her defects to show that she is no more than his image.” — p. 192 (“Of Original Sin”)

— 413 —

The first “Adversary” . . . in old Purânic literature . . . Nârada, surnamed the “Strife-maker.”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Nārada . . . one of the seven great Rishis. . . . He also went down to the infernal regions (Pātāla), and was delighted with what he saw there. . . . Nārada has the appellations, Kali-kāraka, ‘strife-maker’ . . .” — pp. 218-19
In the Syro-Chaldean magic both Ophis and Ophiomorphos are joined in the Zodiac . . .
p/q: P. Davidson, “The Signs of the Zodiac,” Nov. 15, 1878: “. . . before the carnal fall the snake Ophis, the Divine Wisdom . . . in the material aspect the ‘Old Serpent’ represents matter, the Ophiomorphos . . . and in the magic of the ancient Syro-Chaldeans both are joined in the zodiacal sign of the dual Virgo-Scorpio . . .” — p. 724 (The Medium and Daybreak, v. 9)

— 414 —

“Lead us not into Temptation” is addressed daily to “our Father, which art in Heaven”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. . . . And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil . . .” — p. 7 (Matthew, 6:9, 13)
James, “the brother of the Lord”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter . . . But other of the apostles I saw none, save James the Lord’s brother.” — p. 247 (Galatians, 1:18-19)
“Let no man say when he is tempted . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man . . .” — p. 299 (Epistle of James, 1:13)
(1) “Those afflictions and troubles whereby God tries his people;” (2) Those means and enticements . . .
p/q: Alexander Cruden, A Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “Temptation . . . [1] Those means and enticements which the devil makes use of to ensnare and allure mankind, Mat. 6.13 / 26.41.  [2] Those afflictions and troubles, whereby God tries his people, Jam. 1.2, 12.” — p. 607
“the Devil is a liar and the father of it”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Ye are of your father the devil . . . When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” — p. 134 (John, 8:44)
we . . . are told in the same breath that Satan . . . was a son of God
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.” — p. 662 (Book of Job, 1:6)
Jehovah tempts the King of Israel to number the people
see: Old Testament Commentary, ed. C. J. Ellicott, 1883: “II Samuel 24:1: ‘And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah’ {It would appear that prosperity and power . . . affected even David’s humble dependence upon God, and led him to wish to organise his kingdom more perfectly as a worldly power}.” — 2:594 & fn.
Satan tempts him to do the same in another place.
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.” — p. 556 (1 Chronicles, 21:1)
Jehovah informs the brazen serpent that heals them.
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole . . . And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole; and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.” — p. 208 (Numbers, 21:8-9)

— 415 —

Pulâstya, a “Son of God” . . . is made the progenitor of Demons, the Râkshasas
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then arrived Pulastya, the son of Brahmā {Pulastya is considered as the ancestor of the Rākshasas} . . .” — 1:9-10 & fn. (i.1)
Râkshasas, the tempters and Devourers of men
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The children of Surasā were a thousand mighty many-headed serpents, traversing the sky {the Bhāgavata says Rākshasas were her offspring}. . . . all, sharp-toothed monsters, whether on the earth, amongst the birds, or in the waters, that were devourers of flesh.” — 2:73-4 & fn. (i.21)
Pisâcha (female Demon) is a daughter of Daksha . . . and the mother of all the Pisâchas
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “KRODHA-VAŚĀ.  One of the many daughters of Daksha . . . She was the mother ‘of all sharp-toothed monsters . . . that were devourers of flesh.’ ” — p. 169
      “PIŚĀCHAS . . . are represented as the offspring of Kaśyapa by his wife Krodhavaśā, or Piśāchā . . .” — pp. 234-5
the Pisâchas (Padma Purâna)
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Padma Purāṇa . . . makes Krodhā the mother of the Bhūtas; and Piśāchā, of the Piśāchas.” — 2:75 fn.
Abbé Gorresio, who “etymologises” Pulâstya’s name as meaning the “rejected,” hence Cain
see: Ch. de Paravey, “Des Traces de la Bible Retrouvées dans Les Livres Indous,” 1851: “Poulastya vient après lui; on traduit son nom, suivant le docte abbé Gorresio, par . . . qui est rejeté, et ce nom s’applique parfaitement à Cain [Pulastya comes after him, his name is translated according to the learned Abbot Gorresio by . . . one who is rejected, and this name applies perfectly to Cain] . . .” — p. 439 (Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 42)
Pulâstya dwells in Kedara . . . which means a “dug-up place” . . .
see: Ch. de Paravey, “Des Traces de la Bible Retrouvées dans Les Livres Indous,” 1851: “Suivant le Dictionnaire de M. Langlois, il habite à Kedara, lieu dont le nom signifie celui qui ouvre ou qui creuse la terra, sens qui nous rappelle que Caïn fut essentiellement laboureur, et se réfugia peut être dans les antres des montagnes [According to Langlois’ Dictionary, he (Pulastya) dwells in Kedara, the name of this place meaning he who breaks open or digs up the earth, which reminds us that Cain was essentially a laborer, and perhaps took shelter in mountain caves].” — p. 440 (Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 42)
Cain is shown . . . as the first worker in metals and a miner thereof
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron . . .” — p. 6 (Genesis, 4:22)
see: J. W. De Forest, “The Great Deluge,” Oct. 1872: “Cain, a fierce predatory clan . . . supported itself by tillage, and builded a city. . . . Another Cainite community, known as Tubal Cain (men living under earth?), was famous for its mining and its workmanship in metals.”  — p. 442 (Old and New, v. 6)
When Parâsara, whose father was devoured by a Râkshasa . . . “Let thy wrath be appeased . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Parāśara replied . . . I had heard that my father had been devoured by a Rākshasa . . . Violent anger seized me; and I commenced a sacrifice for the destruction of the Rākshasas. . . . when, as they were about to be entirely extirpated, my grandfather Vasishṭha thus spake to me: Enough, my child; let thy wrath be appeased: the Rākshasas are not culpable: thy father’s death was the work of destiny.  Anger is the passion of fools; it becometh not a wise man.  By whom, it may be asked, is any one killed?  Every man reaps the consequences of his own acts.” — 1:7-8 (i.1)

— 415-16 —

“Anger, my son, is the destruction of all that man obtains . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Anger, my son, is the destruction of all that man obtains . . . and prevents the attainment of heaven or of emancipation.  The chief sages always shun wrath: be not thou, my child, subject to its influence.  Let no more of these unoffending spirits of darkness be consumed {‘let this thy sacrifice cease’}.  Mercy is the might of the righteous.” — 1:8 & fn. (i.1)

— 416 —

See also several sections in Book II, Part II
see: “The Origin of the Satanic Myth” —  SD 2:378-90
“On the Myth of the ‘Fallen Angel,’ in its Various Aspects” —  SD 2:475-505
“Is Pleroma Satan’s Lair?” — SD 2:506-18
“the sliding down of Æons” in their double qualification of Angelic Beings and Periods
see: J. L. Mosheim, An Ecclesiastical History, tr. A. Maclaine, 1821: “ ‘. . . in process of time, a celestial family was formed in the pleroma.  This divine progeny . . . was called, by the philosophers, aeon,’ a term which signifies, in the Greek language, an eternal nature {Αιων, or aeon, among the ancients, was used to signify . . . the duration of spiritual and invisible beings. . . . it was by a metonomy, employed to signify the beings themselves}.” — 1:80 & fn.
      “These angels formed a heaven for their habitation, and brought forth other angelic beings, of a nature somewhat inferior to their own. . . . These angelic beings . . . fell, by degrees, from their original purity . . .” — 1:179-80

— 417 —

the seven rectors breaking through the seven circles of fire
see: The Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “Having all Power, he [God] considered the Operations or Workmanships of the Seven . . . and every one made him partaker of his own order.  And he learning diligently, and understanding their Essence, and partaking their Nature, resolved to pierce and break through the Circumference of the Circles, and to understand the power of him that sits upon the Fire. . . . and breaking through the strength of the Circles, so shewed and made manifest the downward-born Nature . . .” — pp. 10-11 (ii.20-22)
the “Marriage of Heaven with Earth”
see: The Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “And seeing . . . a Shape like unto himself, in himself he loved it, and would cohabit with it . . .” — p. 11 (ii.24)
the love of nature for Divine form and the “Heavenly man”
see: The Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “Nature presently laying hold of what it so much loved, did wholly wrap herself about it, and they were mingled . . . And from this cause Man . . . is double: Mortal, because of his body, and Immortal, because of the substantial Man.” — p. 11 (ii.25-26)
Samael, the chief of the Demons in the Talmud
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ce nom de Schemal rappelle tout à fait celui de Samaël, le chef des démons du Talmud [This name Shemal quite recalls that of Samael, the chief of the demons in the Talmud] . . .” — 2:349
“That great serpent with twelve wings . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ce grand serpent à douze ailes, identique à Satan, et qui entraîne dans sa chute tout le système solaire, c’est-à-dire les Titans [that great serpent with twelve wings, identical with Satan, and who, in his fall, sweeps along the whole solar system, that is, the Titans].” — 2:349
both Schemal and Samael represented . . . “the Spirit of the Earth”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Chez les Sabéens, le chef de ces esprits des planètes s’appelait Schemal, et M. Chwolsohn le regarde comme une divinité particulière qui gouvernait la terre {Agriculture des Nabathéens, t. II, p. 217} [Among the Sabeans, the Chief of the Planetary Spirits was called Shemal, and Chwolsohn regards it as a particular deity who ruled the earth {Nabathean Agriculture, v. 2, p. 217}].” — 2:349 & fn.
see: D. Chwolsohn, Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus, 1856: “Die Worte: ‘Des Oberhauptes der Genien’ beziehen sich unbedingt auf den Gott Schemāl . . . ‘welcher der höchste Gott ist’ [The words, ‘Of the Chief of the Genii’ certainly refers to the God Shemāl . . . ‘which is the highest God’] . . .” — 2:217
a symbolical form of Saturn, Chronos
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “La fable . . . nous montre d’abord Chronos [Kronos] mutilant Uranus, et plus tard . . . Jupiter révolté contre son père [The fable . . . shows us first Chronos (Kronos) mutilating Uranus, and later . . . Jupiter revolted against his father (Saturn)] . . .” — 2:349
a difference exists . . . between the Uranian Titans . . . and those post-diluvian giants . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . il faut bien se garder de confondre ces premiers Titans uranides ou célestes, soit avec les seconds Titans ou géants antediluviens, soit avec les troisièmes géants postdiluviens, qui paraissent devoir se rapporter aux descendants chamites [we must be careful not to confuse the first, Uranian or Celestial Titans, either with the second Titans or the antediluvian giants, or with the third postdiluvian giants, who seem to correspond with the Hamitic descendants] . . .” — 2:349

— 418 —

Michäel, “the generalissimus of the fighting Celestial Host . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Mikaël, le chef, l’archistrategus des armées du Seigneur [Michael, the commander in chief of the armies of the Lord] . . .” — 2:352
Kronos stands for endless . . . Duration, without beginning, without an end
see: George Smith, The Gentile Nations, 1854: “The Zendavesta recognizes as a fundamental principle Zerwan . . . time in its widest range, without beginning and without end.  This will be perceived to be identical with the first personality in the Chaldæan triad, which was stated to be Cronos, or ‘Time.’ ” — p. 292
Kronos is represented as mutilating Uranus, his father
see: J. S. Blackie, Homer and the Iliad, 1866: “Hesiod . . . introduces them [the Furies] as among the earliest born of divine powers, having been generated from the bloody drops which fell upon the earth when Kronos mutilated his father Uranus (Theog. 185).” — 4:251
The Titans of Hesiod’s Theogony were copied . . . from the Suras and Asuras of India.
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Les Suras et les Asuras du Mahabharatā des Hindous jouent exactement le même rôle que ces Titans de la Théogonie d’Hésiode [The Suras and the Asuras of the Mahābhārata of the Hindus play exactly the same role as the Titans of Hesiod’s Theogony].” — 2:349
These Hesiodic Titans . . . discovered to be seven — the seventh being called Phoreg
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Hésiode et la plupart des mythographes ne comptant que six Titans . . . mais le même explication revient toujours: six ou sept, suivant que vous comprenez ou ne comprenez pas . . . Phtha parmi les sept cabires.  D’ailleurs, nous lisons dans l’Encyclopédie des gens du monde . . . ‘qu’un autre fragment mythique en mentionne un septième, et que ce septième s’appelle Phoreg’ [Hesiod and most mythographers counting only six Titans . . . but the same explanation always returns: six or seven, depending on whether or not you include . . . Ptah among the seven Kabiri.  Moreover, we read in the Encyclopédie des gens du monde . . . that ‘another mythical fragment mentions a seventh, and that this seventh is called Phoreg’].” — 2:349-50
Taramaya
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “[Soma] carried off Tārā, the wife of Bṛihaspati . . . Then there ensued a fierce contest, which, being on account of Tārakā (or Tārā), was termed the Tārakāmaya or Tārakā war.” — 4:2-3 (iv.6)

— 419 —

The first war . . . lasted . . . one “divine year.” . . . the deities were defeated by the Daityas . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There was, formerly, a battle between the gods and demons {Asura}, for the period of a divine year, in which the gods were defeated by the demons {Daitya} under the command of Hrāda.” — 3:201 & fns. (iii.17)
After that, owing to a device of Vishnu, to whom the conquered gods applied for help . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Do thou . . . instruct us in some device by which we may be able to exterminate the enemies of the gods {Asura}.’  When the mighty Vishṇu heard their request, he emitted from his body an illusory form.”  “And so the Daityas were seduced from their proper duties by the repeated lessons of their illusory preceptor . . .” — 3:206, 208 (iii.17, 18)
Daityas and Asuras were engaged in the duties of their respective orders . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Have compassion upon us, O lord, and protect us, who have come to thee for succour from the Daityas! . . . Engaged in the duties of their respective orders {Varṇa}, and following the paths prescribed by holy writ, practising, also, religious penance, it is impossible for us to destroy them.’ ” — 3:205-6 & fn. (iii.17)
Having, after their defeat, “fled to the Northern shore of the Milky Ocean . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The discomfited deities fled to the northern shore of the milky ocean, where, engaging in religious penance, they thus prayed to Vishṇu.” — 3:201 (iii.17)

— Footnotes

the illusive form assumed by Vishnu Mayamoha
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “When the mighty Vishṇu heard their request, he emitted from his body an illusory form {Māyāmoha, ‘the deluder by illusion’} . . .” — 3:206 & fn. (iii.17)
[Wilson] fancied he found an allusion to Buddhism in Bhagavadgita . . .
see: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Professor Wilson, indeed, thought that there was an allusion to Buddhism in the Gītā.  But his idea was based on a confusion between the Buddhists and the Cārvākas or materialists.” — p. 24 (“Introduction”)
Book iii., ch. xviii., where the revered Orientalist arbitrarily introduces Buddha . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Chapter XVIII.  Buddha goes to earth, and teaches the Daityas to contemn the Vedas.” — 3:207 (iii.18)
“I affirm . . . that the Purânas do not contain what Professor Wilson has stated . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “I affirm that the Purāṇas do not contain what Professor Wilson has stated is contained in them . . . it remains with him to produce such passages . . . Until, however, such passages are produced, I may be allowed to repeat my former conclusions, that Professor Wilson’s opinion, that the Purāṇas, as now extant, are compilations made between the eighth and seventeenth centuries, rests solely on gratuitous assumptions and unfounded assertions, and that his reasoning, in support of it, is either futile, fallacious, contradictory, or improbable.” — 5(I):373 (Appendix: “Colonel Kennedy’s Rejoinder,” July, 1841)

— 419-20 —

supplications “to the first of beings, the divine Vishnu”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘May the first of beings, the divine Vishṇu, be pleased with the words that we are about to address to him . . .’ ” — 3:201-2 (iii.17)

— 420 —

“Glory to thee, who art one with the Saints . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Glory to thee, who art one with the saints, whose perfect nature is ever blessed, and traverses, unobstructed, all permeable elements!’ ” — 3:203 (iii.17)
“Glory to thee, who art one with the Serpent-race . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Glory to thee, who art one with the serpent-race, double-tongued, impetuous, cruel, insatiate of enjoyment, and abounding with wealth!’ ” — 3:203 (iii.17)
“O Lord, who hast neither colour nor extension . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘We bow to thee, O lord, who hast neither colour, nor extension, nor bulk {Ghana}, nor any predicable qualities; and whose essence {Rūpa}, purest of the pure, is appreciable only by holy sages {Paramarshi}.  We bow to thee, in the nature of Brahma, uncreated, undecaying {Avyaya}; who art in our bodies, and in all other bodies, and in all living creatures; and besides whom there is nothing else.’ ” — 3:205 & fns. (iii.17)
“We glorify that Vasudeva, the lord of all . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘We glorify that Vāsudeva, the (sovereign) lord (of all), who is without soil, the seed of all things, exempt from dissolution, unborn, eternal; being, in essence, the supreme condition of spirit {Paramapadātmavat}, and, in substance {Rūpa}, the whole of this (universe).’ ” — 3:205 & fns. (iii.17)
“The Purânas constantly teach incompatible doctrines! . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘[Vishṇu] pervades all the regions of the universe, and by his omnipresence, influences the conduct of all beings {The Purāṇas teach, constantly, incompatible doctrines.  According to this passage, the supreme being is not the inert cause of creation only, but exercises the functions of an active providence.  The commentator quotes a text of the Veda in support of this view: . . . ‘Universal soul, entering into men, governs their conduct.’  Incongruities, however, are as frequent in the Vedas as in the Purāṇas} . . .’ ” — 2:36-7 & fn. (i.17)

— Footnotes

the story of Prahlada . . . into whose heart Vishnu entered
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Hear, sire . . . the substance of all I have learned. . . . I have learned to adore him who is without beginning, middle, or end . . . Not into my heart alone,’ said Prahlāda, ‘has Vishṇu entered, but he pervades all the regions of the universe . . .’ ” — 2:35-6 (i.17)

— 421 —

Vishnu in his two aspects . . . “essentially prakriti and Spirit”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the two aspects of Vishṇu which are other than his supreme essential aspect are prakṛiti and spirit . . .” — 1:25 fn. (i.2)
the Universal Soul, that which E. Lévi calls Astral Light
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “This ambient and all-penetrating fluid . . . which we call the Astral Light and the Universal Agent . . .”  “The Great Magic Agent is the fourth emanation of the life-principle . . .”  “The Astral Light, being the instrument of life, naturally settles at living centres . . . it identifies itself with the individual life of the existence which it animates.” — pp. 75, 76 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
“at the conclusion of their prayers . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Upon the conclusion of their prayers {Stotra}, the gods beheld the sovereign deity Hari, armed with the shell, the discus, and the mace, riding on Garuda.” — 3:205 (iii.17)
one of the many . . . Gods, or Elohim . . . a “God above all Gods”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Solomon determined to build a house for the name of the Lord . . . And the house which I build is great: for great is our God above all gods.” — p. 570 (II Chronicles, 2:1, 5)

— Footnotes

the praise of the Yogins to Brahmâ, “the upholder of the earth”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then the great sages [Yogins] . . . were inspired with delight; and, bowing lowly, they praised the stern-eyed upholder of the earth. . . . ‘Thou art, O god: there is no other supreme condition but thou.’ ” — 1:63 (i.4)
“Those who have not practised devotion . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Those who have not practised devotion conceive erroneously of the nature of the world.  The ignorant, who do not perceive that this universe is of the nature of wisdom, and judge of it as an object of perception only, are lost in the ocean of spiritual ignorance.  But they who know true wisdom, and whose minds are pure, behold this whole world as one with divine knowledge, as one with thee, O god.  Be favourable, O universal spirit . . .” — 1:64 (i.4)

— 422 —

Jehovah . . . sends Satan with a special mission to tempt Job
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job . . . a perfect and upright man . . . And Satan answered . . . But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.  And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand . . . So went Satan forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown.” — p. 663 (Book of Job, 2:3-7)
Jehovah . . . harasses and wearies Pharaoh with Saraï, Abraham’s wife
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “The princes also of Pharaoh saw her [Saraï], and commended her before Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. . . . And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife.” — p. 14 (Genesis, 12:15, 17)
and “hardens” his heart against Moses
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.” — p. 75 (Exodus, 4:21)
plaguing his victims “with great plagues”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife.” — p. 14 (Genesis, 12:17)
see: Exodus, chapters 7 – 11 [on the “Ten Plagues of Egypt”: Nile water turned to blood, frogs, gnats, stinging flies, cattle pestilence, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, and the death of all the firstborn].
“Have compassion upon us, O Lord . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Have compassion upon us, O lord, and protect us, who have come to thee for succour from the Daityas!  They have seized upon the three worlds, and appropriated the offerings which are our portion, taking care not to transgress the precepts of the Veda.  Although we, as well as they, are parts of thee, of whom all beings consist, yet we behold the world impressed by the ignorance of unity, with the belief of its separate existence.’ ” — 3:205-6 (iii.17)
“engaged as they are in the paths prescribed by holy writ . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Engaged in the duties of their respective orders, and following the paths prescribed by holy writ . . . it is impossible for us to destroy them.  Do thou, whose wisdom is immeasurable {Ameyātman}, instruct us in some device by which we may be able to exterminate the enemies of the gods.’ ” — 3:206 & fn. (iii.17)
“When the mighty Vishnu heard their request . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “When the mighty Vishṇu heard their request, he emitted from his body an illusory form {Māyāmoha, ‘the deluder by illusion’}, which he gave to the gods, and thus spake: ‘This deceptive vision {Māyāmoha} shall wholly beguile the Daityas; so that, being led astray from the path of the Vedas, they may be put to death . . . Go, then, and fear not.  Let this delusive vision precede you: it shall, this day, be of great service unto you, O gods!’ ” — 3:206 & fns. (iii.17)
“After this, the great Delusion, Mâyâmoha, descending to earth . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “After this, the great delusion {Māyāmoha}, having proceeded (to earth), beheld the Daityas, engaged in ascetic penances . . . and, approaching them, in the semblance of a naked mendicant {Digambara}, with his head shaven . . . he thus addressed them, in gentle accents: ‘Ho, lords of the Daitya race, wherefore is it that you practise these acts of penance?’ ” — 3:207 & fns. (iii.18)
As Dr. Muir translates the passage: — “The great Deceiver, practising illusion . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘The great Deceiver, practising illusion, next beguiled other Daityas by means of many other sorts of heresy.  In a very short time these Asuras (=Daityas), deluded by the Deceiver, abandoned the entire system founded on the ordinances of the triple Veda.  Some reviled the Vedas; others the gods; others, the ceremonial of sacrifice; and others, the Brāhmans.  This (they exclaimed,) is a doctrine which will not bear discussion: the slaughter (of animals, in sacrifice,) is not conducive to religious merit.  (To say, that) oblations of butter consumed in the fire produce any future reward, is the assertion of a child.’ ” — 3:214 fn.
see: J. Muir, “Verses from the Sarva-Darśana-Sangraha,” Dec. 14, 1861, p. 302 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, v. 19)
“If it be a fact that a beast slain in sacrifice . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘If it be a fact, that a beast slain in sacrifice is exalted to heaven, why does not the worshipper slaughter his own father? . . . Infallible utterances do not, great Asuras, fall from the skies: it is only assertions founded on reasoning that are accepted by me, and by other (intelligent) persons like yourselves.  Thus, by numerous methods, the Daityas were unsettled by the great Deceiver.’ ” — 3:214-15 fn.
see: J. Muir, “Verses from the Sarva-Darśana-Sangraha,” Dec. 14, 1861, p. 302 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, v. 19)

— 422-3 —

“When they had entered on the path of error . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘When the Daityas had entered on this path of error, the deities mustered all their energies, and approached to battle.  Then followed a combat between the gods and the Asuras; and the latter, who had abandoned the right road, were smitten by the former.  In previous times, they had been defended by the armour of righteousness which they bore; but, when that had been destroyed, they, also, perished.’ ” — 3:215 fn.
see: J. Muir, “Verses from the Sarva-Darśana-Sangraha,” Dec. 14, 1861, p. 302 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, v. 19)

— 423 —

— Footnotes

Wilson’s opinion that the “Vishnu Purâna” is a production of our era . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Professor Wilson had taken a most erroneous view . . . which had, alone, led him to ascribe a modern origin to the Purāṇas . . . Professor Wilson’s opinion, that the Purāṇas, as now extant, are compilations made between the eighth and seventeenth centuries, rests solely on gratuitous assumptions and unfounded assertions . . . his reasoning, in support of it, is either futile, fallacious, contradictory, or improbable.” — 5(I):372-3 (Appendix: “Colonel Kennedy’s Rejoinder,” July, 1841)

— 424 —

the “Magic Head” in the Zohar, the double Face on the double Pyramid . . .
see: Éliphas Lévi, Histoire de la Magie, 1860: “La Tête Magique du Sohar [The Magic Head in the Zohar]” — p. 41 (Plate 2)
the Introduction to “Asgard and the Gods . . .” by W. S. W. Anson
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “Introduction,” pp. 1-21, by the editor, W. S. W. Anson.
“Although in Central Asia, or on the banks of the Indus . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “Although in Central Asia, on the banks of the Indus, in the Land of the Pyramids, in the Greek and Italian peninsulas, and even in the North, whither Kelts, Teutons and Slavs wandered, the religious conceptions of the people have taken different forms, yet their common origin is still perceptible.  We point out this connection between the stories of the gods, and the deep thought contained in them, and their importance, in order that the reader may see that it is not a magic world of erratic fancy which is opened out before him, but that, according to Germanic intuition, Life and Nature formed the basis of the existence and action of these divinities.” — p. 3 (“Introduction”)

— 424-5 —

“the religious conceptions of the most famous nations of antiquity . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “The religious conceptions of the most famous nations of antiquity are connected with the beginnings of civilization amongst the Germanic races.” — p. 2 (“Introduction”)

— 425 —

“These fairy tales are not senseless stories . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “These fairy tales are not senseless stories written for the amusement of the idle; they embody the profound religion of our forefathers . . .” — p. 21 (“Introduction”)
As Thomas Taylor . . . shows, no nation has ever conceived the One principle as the immediate creator . . .
see: Thomas Taylor, “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” April 1797: “. . . according to all the ancient theologists . . . the immediate artificer of the universe, is not the highest god.” — p. 259 (Monthly Magazine, v. 3)
Damascius . . . referred to it as “the Unknown Darkness.”
p/q: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “The One principle of the Universe is celebrated as Unknown Darkness . . .” — p. 320 (Damascius, Theogonies)
“To that god,” says Porphyry . . . “who is above all things . . .”
p/q: Thomas Taylor, “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” April 1797: “To that god (says Porphyry) who is above all things, neither external speech ought to be addressed, nor yet that which is inward . . .” — p. 259 (Monthly Magazine, v. 3)
Hesiod begins his theogony with: “Chaos of all things was the first produced”
p/q: Plato, The Cratylus, Phaedo, Parmenides and Timaeus, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1793: “This silence is indeed remarkably obvious in Hesiod, when in his Theogony he says . . . ‘Chaos was the first thing which was generated’ — and consequently there must be some cause prior to Chaos, through which it was produced; for there can be no effect without a cause.” — pp. 259-60 (“Introduction” to Parmenides)
Homer in his poems ascends no higher than Night  . . .
p/q: Thomas Taylor, “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” April 1797: “Homer, in his poems, ascends no higher than Night, whom he represents Jupiter as reverencing . . .” — p. 259 (Monthly Magazine, v. 3)

— Footnotes

ᾜτοι μεν πρώτιστα χάος γένετ . . . “was generated” . . .
p/q: Plato, The Cratylus, Phaedo, Parmenides and Timaeus, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1793: “This . . . is . . . obvious in Hesiod, when in his Theogony he says: ητοι μεν πρωτιστα Χαος γενετ . . . That is, ‘Chaos was the first thing which was generated’ . . . in the opinion of all antiquity, γενετο was considered as meaning was generated, and not was simply.” — pp. 259-60 (“Introduction” to Parmenides)

— 425-6 —

According to all the ancient theologists . . .
p/q: Thomas Taylor, “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” April 1797: “. . . according to all the ancient theologists, and the doctrine of Pythagoras and Plato, Jupiter, or the immediate artificer of the universe, is not the highest god.” — p. 259 (Monthly Magazine, v. 3)

— 426 —

Homer, therefore, is not only silent with respect to the first principle . . .
p/q: Thomas Taylor, “On the First Principle,” Feb. 1887: “Homer, therefore, is not only silent with respect to the first principle, but likewise with respect to those two principles immediately posterior to the first, the aether and chaos of Orpheus and Hesiod, and the bound and infinity of Pythagoras and Plato.” — p. 104 (The Platonist, v. 3)
Proclus says . . . “the Unity of Unities, and beyond the first adyte . . .”
p/q: Plato, The Cratylus, Phaedo, Parmenides and Timaeus, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1793: “With great beauty therefore does Proclus . . . assert of this incomprehensible cause, ‘that he is the god of all gods, the unity of unities, and above the first adyta; that he is more ineffable than all silence, and more unknown than all essence; that he is holy among the holies, and is concealed among the intelligible gods.’ ” — p. 262 (“Introduction” to Parmenides)
written by Thomas Taylor in 1797 . . . the “Jews appear to have ascended no higher . . .”
p/q: Thomas Taylor, “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” April 1797: “. . . the Jews appear to have ascended no higher in their theology, than the immediate artificer of the universe . . .” — p. 260 (Monthly Magazine, v. 3)
“Moses introduces a darkness on the face of the deep . . .”
p/q: Thomas Taylor, “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” April 1797: “Moses introduces a darkness on the face of the deep, without even insinuating, that there was any cause of its existence.” — p. 260 (Monthly Magazine, v. 3)
in the Rig Veda, wherein Brahmâ is not even named . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The name Brahmā is not found in the Vedas and Brāhmaṇas, in which the active creator is known as Hiraṇya-garbha, Prajāpati, etc. . . .” — p. 57
The Monad . . . is the original . . . from which follows the entire numeral system
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “. . . the Monad represented the throne of the Omnipotent Deity, placed in the centre of the empyrean . . . This disposition was symbolised by the hierogram of a Point within a circle or equilateral triangle . . . because the Monad or Point is the original and cause of the entire numeral system . . .” — p. 36
the same relation as the point . . . to the circumference of the Circle . . .
see: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “The universal symbol by which this great Being was designated, viz., the point within a circle . . . Hermes Trismegistus . . . describes the Maker of the universe as ‘an intelligible sphere whose centre is everywhere, and whose circumference cannot be defined,’ because the universe is boundless . . .” — p. 37
the Monad and the Duad of Pythagoras are identical with Plato’s infinite and finite
p/q: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “Thus, according to Porphyrius . . . the Monad and Dyad of Pythagoras seem to have been the same with Plato’s . . . ‘finite’ and ‘infinite’ in his Philebus . . .” — 2:7
see: Plato, Works, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1804: “God, we said, has exhibited the infinite, and also the bound of beings {Plato here . . . establishes two principles after the one. . . . the nature of beings is connected from things bounded and things infinite}.” — 4:494 & fn. (Philebus)
or what Plato calls the ἂπειρον and πέρας
see: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “. . . Plato’s πέρας and ἄπειρον, his ‘finite’ and ‘infinite’ . . .” — 2:7
the former being the “cause of all unity and measure of all things”
p/q: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “. . . that first most simple being, the cause of all unity, and the measure of all things {Porphyry, Vita Pythagorae, p. 47}.” — 2:7 & fn.

— Footnotes

It is the “bound” confused with the “Infinite” . . .
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “. . . the Yogins . . . maintained that in an ecstatic state man possesses the power of seeing God face to face . . . You have not proved the existence of your Lord, [Kapila] says, and therefore I see no reason why I should alter my definition of sensuous perception in order to accomodate your ecstatic visions. . . . he taunted his adversaries . . . The supreme lord of the Mystics, Kapila argued, is either absolute and unconditioned (mukta), or he is bound and conditioned (baddha).  If he is absolute and unconditioned, he cannot enter into the condition of a Creator . . . If, on the contrary, he is represented as active, and entering on the work of creation, he would no longer be the absolute and unchangeable Being which we are asked to believe in.” — 1:228-9
See T. Taylor’s article . . . quoted in the Platonist
see: Thomas Taylor, “On the First Principle,” Feb. 1887, The Platonist, v. 3 [“On the First Principle” was originally titled “Opinions of Ancient Theologists,” in The Monthly Magazine, v. 3, April 1797].

— 427 —

“In the beginning was a great abyss . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “In the beginning was a great abyss; neither day nor night existed; the abyss was Ginnungagap, the yawning gulf, without beginning, without end.” — p. 22
“All Father, the Uncreated, the Unseen, dwelt in the depth of the ‘Abyss’ . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “Allfather, the Uncreated, the Unseen, dwelt in the depth of the abyss and willed, and what he willed came into being.” — p. 22
evolution . . . divided into two acts: called in India the Prakriti and Padma Creations
see: H. H. Wilson, “Essays on the Purānas II,” April 20, 1839: “The Pādma Purāna . . . treats of the appearance of Virāt or Brahmā, and primary creation. . . . Creation, however, is the will and act of the uncreated supreme Brahma, who takes the form of Purusha, and in that character infuses into Prakriti the germ of activity.” — pp. 280-1 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, v. 5)
Before the warm rays pouring from the “Home of Brightness” awake life . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “. . . from the Home of Brightness rays of beneficent heat poured forth over Ginnungagap, and when the great blocks of ice began to melt . . . then it was that life first showed itself, and there arose a monster, the Giant Ymir, or Örgelmir (seething clay) . . . From him are descended the Hrimthurses or Frost-giants.” — pp. 22-3
Then comes the cow Audumla, the nourisher, from whom is born Buri . . .
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “The cow Audumla, the nourisher, came into being; from her flowed four streams of milk which fed the dreadful Ymir and his children . . . But she had nothing to graze on except the salt of the ice-rocks, which she licked.  On the first day . . . a head of hair was visible; on the second day, the whole head; and on the third, the rest of the body . . . This was now Buri (the Producer), who had a son named Bör (born), and Bör married Bestla, daughter of the Hrimthurses, by whom he had three sons, Odin (spirit), Wili (will) and We (holy).” — p. 23
(Compare the Genesis of the Primordial Races, in this work.)
see: “Creation of the First Races,” SD 2:86-108.
when Darkness still reigned throughout Space, when the Ases . . . were not yet evolved
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “The new rulers, who called themselves Ases, i.e., pillars and supports of the world, did not like this state of things at all. . . . the gods formed Midgard (Middle-garden), the dwelling-place of the children of men, who as yet unborn slept in the lap of time.  Darkness reigned throughout space . . .” — pp. 23-4
“Darkness,” wherein All-Father, the cause of all, dwells
see: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “Allfather, the Uncreated, the Unseen, dwelt in the depth of the abyss and willed, and what he willed came into being.” — p. 22
All-Father, the original cause of all, “he is scarcely more than mentioned . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “We have also the idea of Allfather, the unquestionable original cause of all things, though he is scarcely more than mentioned in the poems.” — p. 26
the idea “could not rise to distinct conceptions of the Eternal”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, ed. W. S. W. Anson, 1880: “. . . the preaching of the Gospel soon afterwards did away with the old faith.  Whilst struggling against the horrors of a northern climate and sending out armies into distant land, the Teutons fixed their eyes on certain aspects of nature, and could not rise to distinct conceptions of the Eternal.” — p. 29
Zeus is born in, and out of Kronos — Time.
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “Ζεύς was called by the Greeks the son of time. . . . Κρονίων or Κρονίδης was used in the sense of ‘connected with time, representing time, existing through all time.’ . . . It was a name fully applicable to the supreme God, the God of time, the eternal God. . . . in the current word for time the κ had become aspirated (κρόνος [kronos] had become χρόνος [chronos]) . . .” — 2:152
So is Brahmâ the production and emanation of Kala, “eternity and time”
see: Vans Kennedy, Researches into the Nature and Affinity of Ancient and Hindu Mythology, 1831: “ ‘. . . naught remained but one boundless ocean . . . and all was involved in impenetrable darkness.  One being alone, Maha Kala [Great Time], self-subsisting, then pervaded all space; who, becoming desirous of creation, churned his . . . fore finger, when issued a bubble, which . . . became an egg resembling gold. . . . and in the centre of it appeared Brahma . . .’ ” — p. 276
the androgyne of Plato
see: Plato, Works, v. 3, tr. George Burges, 1850: “But you must first learn the nature of man, and what sufferings it has undergone.  For our nature of old was not the same as it is now. . . . It was then man-woman . . . the male kind was the produce originally of the sun, the female of the earth . . .” — pp. 508-9 (The Banquet, § 16)

— Footnotes

Vâch — the “melodious cow, who milks sustenance and water” . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “VĀCH . . . In the Ṛig-veda, Vāch appears to be the personification of speech by whom knowledge was communicated to man. . . . she is described as ‘the melodious cow who milked forth sustenance and water,’ ‘who yields us nourishment and sustenance.’ ” — p. 329

— 428 —

Parabrahmam . . . “Is not Ego, it is not non-ego . . . it is not even Atma”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Again it is not even atma. . . . But Parabrahmam . . . is not ego, it is not non-ego, nor is it consciousness . . .” — p. 302 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“but though not itself an object of knowledge . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . the foundation of all phenomena is Parabrahmam, which, though not itself an object of knowledge, is yet capable of supporting and giving rise to every kind of object and every kind of existence which becomes an object of knowledge.  Now this Parabrahmam . . . is the one essence from which starts into existence a centre of energy, which I shall for the present call the Logos.” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
This Logos is the Sabda Brahmam of the Hindus . . .
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “This Logos may be called in the language of old writers either Eswara or Pratyagatma or Sabda Brahmam.” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
which he will not even call Eswara . . . lest the term should create confusion
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . but as this word is likely to mislead, I shall not call it Eswara, but by another name, also sanctioned by usage — Sutratma.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
But it is the Avalokiteswara of the Hindus [Buddhists], the Verbum of the Christians
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It is called the Verbum or the Word by the Christians . . . It is called Avalokiteswara by the Buddhists . . .” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“It is . . . the Gnatha or the Ego in the Kosmos . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It is the first gñatha or the ego in the cosmos, and every other ego . . . is but its reflection or manifestation.” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“It exists in a latent condition in the bosom of Parabrahmam . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It exists in a latent condition in the bosom of Parabrahmam, at the time of pralaya . . .” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“it has a consciousness and an individuality of its own . . . such centres of energy are . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It has consciousness and an individuality of its own. . . . such centres of energy are almost innumerable in the bosom of Parabrahmam.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“It must not be supposed, that even the logos is the Creator . . .”
p/q: See T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It must not be supposed that this Logos is but a single centre of energy . . . There are innumerable others. . . . Parabrahmam can manifest itself as a Logos not only in one particular, definite form, but in various forms.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“This Ego . . . is the first that appears in Kosmos . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . this is the first manifestation of Parabrahmam, the first ego that appears in the cosmos, the beginning of all creation and the end of all evolution. . . . When once this ego starts into existence as a conscious being having objective consciousness of its own . . . Parabrahmam appears to it as Mulaprakriti.  Please bear this in mind . . . for here is the root of the whole difficulty about Purusha and Prakriti felt by various writers on Vedantic philosophy.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“This Mulaprakriti is material to it . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Of course this Mulaprakriti is material to it, as any material object is material to us.  This Mulaprakriti is no more Parabrahmam than the bundle of attributes of this pillar is the pillar itself; Parabrahmam is an unconditioned and absolute reality, and Mulaprakriti is a sort of veil thrown over it.  Parabrahmam by itself cannot be seen as it is.  It is seen by the Logos with a veil thrown over it, and that veil is the mighty expanse of cosmic matter.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“Parabrahmam, after having appeared on the one hand as the Ego . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Again, Parabrahmam, after having appeared on the one hand as the ego, and on the other as Mulaprakriti, acts as the one energy through the Logos.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
He compares the Logos to the sun . . .
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . the sun may be compared with the Logos; light and heat radiate from it; but its heat and energy exist in some unknown condition in space, and are diffused throughout space as visible light and heat . . . In the same manner Parabrahmam radiates from the Logos, and manifests itself as the light and energy of the Logos.” — pp. 304-5 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
This is the first triadic hypostasis . . .
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Now we see the first manifestation of Parabrahmam is a Trinity . . .”
      “And now the question is, what is it that completes this trinity and makes it a quaternary?  Of course this light of the Logos.  As I have already said, it is a sort of light that permeates every kind of organism, and so in this trinity it is manifested in every one of the upadhis as the real jiva or the ego of man.” — pp. 305, 309 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 429 —

Ain-Soph . . . could not be comprehended, nor named, though the causeless cause of all
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. VI,” June 1886: “. . . the wise men who enunciated the Cabbalah dealt first with the fact of a primal intelligence . . . This intelligence, they declared, could not be comprehended at all, — could not be located, — could not be named, though the cause of all.” — p. 257 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
Hence its name — Ain-Soph — is a term of negation, “the inscrutable, the incognizable . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. VI,” June 1886: “They, therefore, designated it by a term of negation, and called it the Ain Soph, — the inscrutable, the unknowable, the unnameable.” — p. 257 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
“Close your eyes, and from your own consciousness of perception . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. VI,” June 1886: “Close your eyes, and from your own consciousness of perception try and think outward to the extremest limits, in every direction.  You will find that equal lines or rays of perception extend out evenly in all directions; so that the utmost effort of perception will terminate in the vault of a sphere.  The limitation of this sphere will, of necessity, be a great circle, and the direct rays of thought in any and every direction must be right line radii of the circle.” — p. 257 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
“This, then, must be, humanly speaking, the extremest all-embracing conception . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. VI,” June 1886: “This, then, must be, humanly speaking, the extremest all-embracing conception of the Ain Soph manifest; — which formulates itself as a geometrical figure, viz.: of a circle, with its elements, of curved circumference and right line diameter divided into radii.  Hence, a geometrical shape is the first recognizable mean of connection between the Ain Soph and the intelligence of man.” — pp. 257-8 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
the Avalôkitêswara, the Logos or Verbum of which Mr. Subba Row speaks
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “This Logos may be called . . . the Verbum or the Word . . . It is called Avalokiteswara by the Buddhists . . .” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
This Logos which sleeps in the bosom of Parabrahmam . . . as our “Ego is latent . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It exists in a latent condition in the bosom of Parabrahmam, at the time of pralaya just . . . as the sense of ego is latent at the time of sushupti or sleep.” — p. 303 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
Mulaprakriti . . . a cosmic veil which is “the mighty expanse of cosmic matter”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “It is seen by the Logos with a veil thrown over it, and that veil is the mighty expanse of cosmic matter.” — p. 304 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 429-30 —

“the highest trinity that we are capable of understanding” . . .
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Now we see the first manifestation of Parabrahmam is a Trinity, the highest Trinity that we are capable of understanding.  It consists of Mulaprakriti, Eswara or the Logos, and the conscious energy of the Logos, which is its power and light . . .” — p. 305 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 430 —

“matter, force and the Ego, or the one root of self . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “First, we have matter, secondly, we have force — at any rate, the foundation of all the forces in the cosmos; and thirdly, we have the ego or the one root of self, of which every other kind of self is but a manifestation or a reflection.” — p. 305 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
the “Seven sons of the divine Sophia”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “. . . the genitrix produced her progeny of seven elementary powers . . . These seven created man in their own image, — as the sons of Sophia or the Elohim of Genesis . . .” — 2:153
Isis is the daughter and the mother of Osiris, who is Horus
see: John Hunt, An Essay on Pantheism, 1866: “Isis, Osiris, and Horus combined, can be shown to comprise in themselves the whole system of Egyptian Mythology . . . Isis is the sister, wife, daughter, and mother of Osiris . . .” — p. 43 fn.
Sephira is the . . . mother of the “Heavenly man,” Adam Kadmon
see: John Hunt, An Essay on Pantheism, 1866: “This Word [Sephira] was the first ray, the original, in which the principles of conception and production were united; the father and mother principle of the actual universe . . . through which it proceeds as a divine ray in all degrees of light, life, and spirit.  At the head of this gradation is the celestial man, Adam Kadmon . . .” — pp. 89-90
In the Rig-Veda, Vâch is “mystic speech” . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “VĀCH.  ‘Speech.’  In the Ṛig-veda, Vāch appears to be the personification of speech by whom knowledge was communicated to man.  Thus she is said to have ‘entered into the Ṛishis’ . . . She was ‘generated by the gods,’ and is called ‘the divine Vāch,’ ‘queen of the gods’ . . .” — p. 329
she is associated . . . with the Prajâpati . . . called “the mother of the Vedas”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The Brāhmaṇas associate her with Prajāpati in the work of creation.  In the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa she is called ‘the mother of the Vedas’ . . .” — p. 329
“through her . . . Brahmâ . . . produced the universe”
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “In the Bṛihad Āraṇyaka Upanishad . . . Prajāpati . . . is said to have produced Vāch (speech), and through her, together with soul, to have created all things, including the Vedas. . . . ‘Vāch (speech) is an imperishable thing, and the first-born of the ceremonial, the mother of the Vedas . . .’ ” — 3:9, 10 (Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa)
Vâch . . . the daughter of Daksha, “the god who lives in all the Kalpas”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Daksha is a son of Brahmā; he is one of the Prajāpatis, and is sometimes regarded as their chief. . . . ‘in every age Daksha and the rest are born . . .’ ” — p. 76
      “According to the Padma Purāṇa, Vāch was daughter of Daksha . . .” — p. 330

— Footnotes

Called, in the Bhagavat-Gita, Daiviprakriti
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “This light from the Logos is called Daiviprakriti in the Bhagavad Gita . . .” — p. 305 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“In the course of cosmic manifestation, this Daiviprakriti . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “. . . in the course of cosmic manifestation this Daiviprakriti, instead of being the mother of the Logos, should, strictly speaking, be called the daughter of the Logos.” — p. 305 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 431 —

“Connecting himself through his mind with Vâch . . .”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “. . . Prajāpati, who, ‘being desirous of creating, connected himself with various spouses,’ and among them, ‘through his mind, with Vāch,’ from whom ‘he created the waters . . .’ ” — pp. 329-30
In the Kathaka Upanishad . . . “Prajapati was this universe . . .”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “In the Kathaka Upanishad this idea is more distinctly formulated: ‘Prajāpati was this universe.  Vāch was a second to him.  He associated sexually with her; she became pregnant; she departed from him; she produced these creatures; she again entered into Prajāpati.’ ” — p. 330
Brahmâ . . . performed the work of creation . . . with his own daughter . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Brahmā . . . performs the work of procreation by incestuous intercourse with his own daughter, variously named Vāch or Saraswatī (speech), Sandhyā (twilight), Sata-rūpā (the hundred-formed) . . .” — p. 57
Lot is shown guilty of the same crime . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Lot . . . dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters.  And the firstborn said unto the younger . . . come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him . . .”  “Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.” — p. 22 (Genesis, 19:30-32, 36)
Prajapati . . . under the form of a buck with his daughter, who had that of a hind (rohit)
see: Aitareya Brahmanam, tr. Martin Haug, 1863: “Prajāpati thought of cohabiting with his own daughter . . . He transformed himself into a buck . . . whilst his daughter assumed the shape of a female deer (rohit) . . .” — 2:217 (§ 33)
the esoteric reading of Genesis (ch. iii.) shows the same
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord God said unto the serpent . . . I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” — p. 4 (Genesis, 3:14-15)
see: “The ‘Curse’ from a Philosophical Point of View”: “When understood, the third chapter of Genesis will be found to refer to the Adam and Eve of the closing Third and the commencing Fourth Races.  In the beginning, conception was as easy for woman as it was for all animal creation. . . . Since that period, however, during the evolution of the Fourth Race, there came enmity between its seed, and the ‘Serpent’s’ seed, the seed or product of Karma and divine wisdom.  For the seed of woman or lust, bruised the head of the seed of the fruit of wisdom and knowledge, by turning the holy mystery of procreation into animal gratification . . .” — SD 2:410-11

— Footnotes

Bath Kol, the filia Vocis, the daughter of the divine voice . . . responding from the mercy seat
see: John Lightfoot, The Harmony of the Four Evangelists, 1822: “Both the Talmudic and the latter Rabbins make frequent mention of ‘Bath Kol,’ ‘Filia vocis’ . . . it is called, ‘the daughter of a voice,’ in relation to the oracle of Urim and Thummin . . . a voice was given from off the mercy-seat . . .” — p. 320

— 432 —

“Our old writers said that Vâch is of four kinds . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Our old writers said that Vach is of four kinds.  These are called para, pasyanti, madhyama, vaikhari.  This statement you will find in the Rig Veda itself and in several of the Upanishads.  Vaikhari Vach is what we utter.  Every kind of vaikhari Vach exists in its madhyama, further in its pasyanti, and ultimately in its para form.  The reason why this Pranava is called Vach is this, that these four principles of the great cosmos correspond to these four forms of Vach.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“The whole Kosmos in its objective form is Vaikhari Vâch . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “The whole cosmos in its objective form is vaikhari Vach, the light of the Logos is the madhyama form, and the Logos itself the pasyanti form, and Parabrahmam the para aspect of that Vach.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
“There are three kinds of light . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — VI,” June 1886: “There are three kinds of light: — (1) clear and penetrating, that of Jehovah, — (2) reflected light, — and (3) light in the abstract.” — p. 266 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
The ten Sephiroth . . . the 10 words, d-brim . . . the numbers and Emanations of the heavenly light
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — VI,” June 1886: “By this Cabbalah these Sephiroth were the numbers or emanations of the heavenly Light . . . they were the 10 Words, DBRIM . . . the light of which they were the flux was the Heavenly man, the Adam-KDM . . .” — p. 266 (Masonic Review, 65:5)

— Footnotes

Pranava . . . is a mystic term pronounced by the Yogis during meditation . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The daily prayers of the Brahman commence with the formula, Oṃ bhūr bhuvaḥ swar: ‘Om, earth, sky, heaven.’  These are the three mystical terms called Vyāhṛitis, and are scarcely of less sanctity than the Praṇava [Om] itself.  Their efficacy . . . fully detailed in Manu, II, 76-81.  In the Mitāksharā they are directed to be twice repeated mentally, with Om prefixed to each . . . the breath being suppressed by closing the lips and nostrils.” — 3:38 fn.

— 433 —

“When the Heavenly man . . . first assumed the form of the Crown . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — VI,” June 1886: “When He first assumed the form (of the crown, or the first Sephira,) He caused 9 splendid lights to emanate from it . . .” — p. 267 (Masonic Review, 65:5)
Pythagoras esteemed the Deity . . . to be the centre of unity and “Source of Harmony.”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “As the sole cause and first principle of all that exists, Pythagoras esteemed the Deity to be the centre of unity and source of harmony.” — p. 48
Pythagoras taught that unity being indivisible is no number.
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “. . . unity being indivisible, has no composition, nor is it a number, but the fountain and mother of all numbers.” — p. 45
the candidate . . . should have already studied . . . Arithmetic, Astronomy, Geometry and Music
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “. . . when Justin Martyr applied to a learned Pythagorean to be admitted as a candidate for the mysterious dogmata of his philosophy, he was asked whether, as a preliminary step, he had already studied the sciences of Arithmetic, Music, Astronomy, and Geometry, which were esteemed the four divisions of the mathematics . . .” — p. 14
the doctrine of Numbers . . . had been revealed to man by the celestial deities
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “Above all other sciences . . . the followers of Pythagoras esteemed the doctrine of Numbers, which they believed to have been revealed to man by the celestial deities.” — p. 14
the world had been . . . constructed according to the principles of musical proportion
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “They considered numbers . . . to be the cause of the essence of all other things; and therefore esteemed the creation of the world as nothing more than the harmonious effect of a pure arrangement of number. . . . that it was fashioned according to the principles of musical proportion . . .” — pp. 14-15
the seven planets . . . have a harmonious motion “and intervals corresponding to musical diastemes . . .”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “. . . as we are informed by Censorinus . . . the seven planets which govern the nativity of mortals have a harmonious motion, and intervals corresponding to musical diastemes, and render various sounds according to their several distances, so perfectly consonant that they make the sweetest melody, but ‘inaudible to us by reason of the greatness of the noise, which the narrow passage of our ears is incapable of receiving.’ ” — p. 15

— Footnotes

the “three steps of Vishnu”
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “. . . Vishṇu, who traversed the mundane regions, who established the upper sphere, striding thrice . . . he within (the range of) whose three vast paces all the worlds abide.” — 4:69 (Rig Veda, 1, 154)
Justin Martyr . . . he was rejected . . . as a candidate . . .
see: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “. . . when Justin Martyr applied . . . to be admitted as a candidate . . . he was asked . . . [about] the four divisions of the mathematics . . . And because the candidate acknowledged his ignorance of them he was refused admission into the society.” — p. 14
see: Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, tr. Dods, Reith & Pratten, 1867: “I came to a Pythagorean, very celebrated . . . he said, ‘What then?  Are you acquainted with music, astronomy, and geometry?’ . . . he dismissed me when I confessed to him my ignorance.” — p. 88 (Tryph. ch. 2, Writings of Justin Martyr)

— 433-4 —

“The monad . . . is the principle of all things. . . .”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “The Pythagoreans say, ‘The Monad is the principle of all things. . . . from the Monad and indeterminate duad, [came] Numbers; from numbers, Points; points, Lines; from lines, Superfices; from superfices, Solids; from these solid Bodies, whose elements are four, Fire, Water, Air, Earth; of all which, transmutated, and totally changed, the World consists.’ ” — p. 45 (Diogenes Laertius, Vit. Pyth.)

— 434 —

“the melodious cow who milked forth sustenance and water” . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “. . . ‘the divine Vāch,’ ‘queen of the gods’ . . . is described as ‘the melodious cow who milked forth sustenance and water,’ ‘who yields us nourishment and sustenance.’ ” — p. 329
as goddess of Speech . . . Aditi . . . the “Mother of the gods”
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “. . . the word Aditi is given a synonym (1) of pṛithivī, the earth; (2) of vāch, voice . . . she is defined as the mighty mother of the gods.” — 5:35
the “Great Green One” of the “Book of the Dead”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “L’Osiris N se purifie le jour de sa renaissance dans le grand nid du Grand . . . Grand Verte [Osiris N purifies himself on the day of his rebirth in the great nest of the Great One . . . the Great Green One] . . .” — p. 57 (xvii.16-17)

— 435 —

“when . . . (the then Pole-star) was at his lowest culmination . . .”
see: C. Staniland Wake, Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, 1882: “Assuming that the long narrow downward passage leading from the entrance was directed towards the pole star of the pyramid builders, astronomers have shown that in the year 2,170 b.c. the passage pointed to Alpha Draconis, the then pole star, at its lower culmination, at the same time that the Pleiades, particularly Alcyone, the centre of the group, were on the same meridian above.” — p. 6
Bunsen was right in admitting for Egypt an antiquity of over 21,000 years
see: Christian C. J. Bunsen, Egypt’s Place in Universal History, 1848-67: “. . . the period of 21,000 years, which has been adopted by all the greatest astonomers of the day for the deviations in the earth’s axis, brings us to two resting-places. . . . In other words: the history of progressive civilisation with which we are acquainted is comprised within one hemisphere, and under climatic accidents the most favourable to its advancement.” — 4:53
“The stories told by Egyptian priests . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The stories told by Egyptian priests and others of time-keeping in Egypt are now beginning to look less like lies in the sight of all who have escaped from their biblical bondage.  Inscriptions have lately been found at Sakkarah making mention of two Sothiac cycles which had been observed and registered at that time, now some six thousand years ago.  Thus when Herodotus was in Egypt the Egyptians had — as now known — observed at least five different Sothiac cycles of 1,461 years . . . The priests informed the Greek inquirer that time had been reckoned by them for so long that the sun had twice risen where it then set, and twice set where it then arose.  This . . . can only be realized as a fact in nature by means of two cycles of Precession [2 x 25,868 years], or a period of 51,736 years.” — 2:318
But see in our Book II., “Chronology of the Brahmins”
see: “The Chronology of the Brahmins,” SD 2:66-74.
Mor Isaac . . . shows the ancient Syrians defining their world of the “Rulers” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Les Syriens définissaient à peu près de la même manière leurs dix mondes séphirothiques {Mor Isaac, cité par le père Kircher, Œdipus, t. II, p. 425} [The Syrians defined, in almost the same way, their ten sephirothal worlds {Mor Isaac, cited by Father Kircher, Œdipus, v. 2, p. 425}] . . .” — 4:10, 11 fn.
The lowest world was the Sublunary . . . watched by the “Angels” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le premier (celui de la lune) était assigné aux simples anges du premier chœur; le second (celui de Mercure) appartenait aux archanges; le troisième (celui de Vénus), aux principautés [the first (that of the moon) was assigned to the simple angels of the first order; the second (that of Mercury), belonged to the Archangels; the third (that of Venus), to the Principalities] . . .” — 4:10
the fourth was that of the Sun . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le quatrième (celui du Soleil), aux grandes puissances; le cinquième (celui de Mars), aux vertus; le sixième (celui de Jupiter ou Bel), aux dominations; le septième (celui de Saturne), aux trônes [the fourth (that of the Sun), was assigned to the great Powers; the fifth (that of Mars), to the Virtues; the sixth (that of Jupiter or Bel), to the Dominions; the seventh (that of Saturn), to the Thrones] . . .” — 4:10
The eighth . . . is the domain of the Cherubs; the ninth, belonging to the . . . numberless stars . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le huitième (composé de onze cent vingt-deux étoiles), aux chérubins; le neuvième (étoiles marchantes, mais innombrables, en raison de leur hauteur), aux séraphins [the eighth (made up of 1,122 stars), to the cherubs; the ninth (the moving stars, which are numberless, on account of their distance), to the Seraphs] . . .” — 4:10

— Footnotes

Kabarim . . . means the measures of Heaven . . .
see: Sampson Arnold Mackey, Mythological Astronomy, 1822-3: “The name of Cabirim, is the measure of the heavens . . . compounded of Cab, a measure; and Irim or Urim the heavens; thus Cabirim is the measure of the heavens.” — p. 38 (“Notes”)

— 435-6 —

as to the tenth . . . it is composed “of invisible stars . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . quant au dixième, composé d’étoiles invisibles que l’on prendrait . . . pour des nuages, tant elles sont rapprochées et tenues dans cette zone que nous appelons Via straminis our Voie lactée [as to the tenth, it is composed of invisible stars that could be taken . . . for clouds, so packed together are they and held in that zone that we call Via Straminis or the Milky Way] . . .” — 4:10-11

— 436 —

“these are the stars of Lucifer . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ‘ce sont là . . . les étoiles de Lucifer, qui furent entraînées avec lui dans son terrible naufrage [these are . . . the stars of Lucifer, dragged along with him in his terrible shipwreck].’ ” — 4:11
That which comes after and beyond the tenth world . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ce qu’il y a au delà de ces dix sphères, on l’ignore [That which is beyond these ten spheres, we do not know].” — 4:11
“All they knew was that it is there that begins the . . . ocean of the infinite . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Tout ce que l’on sait, c’est que là commence ce vaste et incompréhensible océan de l’infini, véritable séjour de la Divinité, sans terme et sans fin [All we know is that it is there that begins the vast and incomprehensible ocean of the infinite, the true abode of Divinity, without boundary and without end].” — 4:11
Champollion shows the same belief among the Egyptians.
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Il en était de même de la cosmologie égyptienne [It was the same in Egyptian cosmology].” — 4:11 (Champollion-Figeac, Égypte moderne)
Hermes . . . says: Seven Agents (mediums) were also formed . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Hermès, après avoir parlé du Père qui crée le monde avec son Verbe et avec le Saint-Esprit . . . ajoute: ‘Il a aussi formé sept agents, qui contiennent dans les cercles le monde matériel, et dont l’action se nomme le destin’ [Hermes, after having spoken of the Father who creates the world with his Logos and the Holy Spirit, adds: ‘He has also formed seven agents, who contain within the circles the material world, and whose action is called destiny’] . . .” — 4:11 (Champollion-Figeac, Égypte moderne)
the “Rig Vidhana” . . . “belonging probably only to the time of the Purânas”
p/q: Albrecht Weber, The History of Indian Literature, tr. Mann & Zachariae, 1882: “. . . we have to mention the writings called Ṛigvidhāna, &c., which . . . probably belong only to the time of the Purāṇas.  They treat of the mystic and magic efficacy of the recitation of the hymns of the Ṛik . . .” — p. 62
the “mind-born sons” . . . are referred to in the Satapatha Brâhmana . . . in the Mahabhârata . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ ‘The seven Rishis’ (saptarshi) . . . ‘the mind-born sons’ of Brahmā, are often referred to.  In the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa their names are given as Gotama, Bharadwāja, Viswāmitra, Jamad-agni, Vasishṭha, Kaśyapa, and Atri.  The Mahā-bhārata gives them as Marīchi, Atri, Angiras, Pulaha, Kratu, Pulastya, and Vasishṭha.” — p. 268
the Vayu Purâna makes even nine . . . adding the names of Bhrigu and Daksha
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Bhṛigu, Pulastya, Pulaha, Kratu, Angiras, Marīchi, Daksha, Atri, and Vasishṭha.  These are the nine Brahmās (or Brahmarshis) . . .” — 1:100
“the materials . . . to study the history of the religious evolution in Egypt . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “. . . les matériaux que nous avons pour étudier l’histoire de cette évolution ne sont ni complets, ni souvent même intelligibles [the available material to study the history of this evolution is neither complete nor very often intelligible].” — p. 149

— 437 —

“Salutations to thee, Osiris, elder son of Sib . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “ ‘Salut à toi, Osiris, fils aîné de Sib, le plus grand des six dieux issus de la déesse Nout, le grand favori de son père Rā, le père des pères . . . roi du temps, maître de l’éternité . . . dès qu’il sortit du sein de sa mère, il réunit le[s] couronnes, il attacha l’uræus sur sa tête; multiforme, dieu dont le nom est inconnu, et qui a beaucoup de noms dans les villes et dans les provinces’ [‘Salutations to you, Osiris, elder son of Sib, the greatest of the six gods emanated from the goddess Nūt, the great favorite of his father Rā, father of fathers . . . king of duration, master of eternity . . . as soon as he issued from his mother’s bosom, he reunited the crowns, he fastened the uræus to his head; multiform, god whose name is unknown, and who has many names in the towns and provinces’] . . .” — pp. 49-50 (Abydos)
the archangel “whose name was secret”
see: The Book of Enoch, tr. R. Laurence, 1883: “. . . the principal part of the oath which the Most High, dwelling in glory, revealed to the holy ones. . . . He spoke to holy Michael to discover to them the sacred name, that they might understand that secret name, and thus remember the oath . . . And he established this oath of Akae by the instrumentality of the holy Michael.” — p. 86 (lxviii.19-22)
This Archangel was the representative on earth of the Hidden Jewish God
see: Paul Carus, “Yin Chih Wen,” May 1906: “Michael means literally ‘who is like God,’ and seems to designate that divine presence (viz. the ineffable name) which is believed to be equal to God . . . Michael, according to the angel lore of the Hebrews, is the representative of God, and so he is identified with God’s cause.  He is the guardian angel of Israel . . .” — p. 263 (Open Court, v. 20)
it is his “Face” that is said to have gone before the Jews like a “Pillar of Fire”
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light . . .” — p. 89 (Exodus, 13:21)
      “And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them: and . . . it gave light by night . . .” — p. 90 (Exodus, 14:19-20)
“The seven Amshaspends . . . personifications of the divine Virtues.”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Les sept amschaspands qui certes sont bien nos archanges désignent aussi cependant les personnifications des vertus divines’ [‘The seven Amshaspends, who are most certainly our Archangels, yet also designate the personifications of the divine Virtues’].” — 2:333 (Burnouf, Comment. sur le Yacua, p. 174)

— Footnotes

Brahmâ and Siva and Vishnu . . . connected with Nagas — a sign of their cyclic and cosmic character
see: Marie, Countess of Caithness, The Mystery of the Ages, 1887: “The serpent is known to renew itself eternally by casting its old skin when decayed, and growing a new one; and this annual renewal made it emblematical of . . . the Cycle, Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer, on the heavenly or spiritual plane. . . . the great Builder of the Universe, the Magus . . . being also the emblem of the Destroyer . . .” — pp. 384-5

— 438 —

“Virtues of God” . . . names of the seven Archangels
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Star-Angel-Worship,” July 15, 1888: “These names are their ‘mystery’ titles. . . . The usual names accepted are Mikael . . . ‘like unto God’; Gabriel, the ‘strength (or power) of God’; Raphael, or ‘divine virtue’; Uriel, ‘God’s light and fire’; Scaltiel, the ‘speech of God’; Jehudiel, the ‘praise of God’ and Barachiel, the ‘blessing of God.’ ”  “They are . . . the Seven . . . Virtues of the Kabalists . . .” — pp. 357, 358 (Lucifer, v. 2)
In the Book of Druschim
see: A. E. Waite, Doctrine and Literature of the Kabalah, 1902: “Isaac de Loria . . . his doctrines [were] collected by his disciple, R. Chaïm Vital . . . [The collection] seems never to have been printed, except in so far as it is given in the Kabbala Denudata, where the excerpts, embodying whole treatises, fill some three hundred quarto pages of close print.  They include:
      1. The first tract, so called, of the Liber Drushim, i.e., Book of Dissertations . . .” — pp. 292-3
In the Book of Druschim . . . in the Talmud, a distinction is given . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous trouvons dans le Thalmud une distinction que l’on fait remonter jusqu’aux plus antiques traditions {Traité I, du livre Druschim, p. 59} [We find in the Talmud a distinction that one can trace back to the oldest traditions].” — 2:333 & fn.
“There are three groups . . . the divine attributes” . . . The physical or sidereal Sephiroth . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Il y aurait trois ordres de séphiroth: 1. les séphiroth attributs divins; 2. les séphiroth physiques (ou sidérales), au nombre de sept ou de dix [There should be three orders of Sephiroth: 1. the Divine Attribute Sephiroth; 2. the physical (or sidereal) Sephiroth, seven or ten in number] . . .” — 2:333
“3rd.  The metaphysical Sephiroth, or periphrasis of Jehovah . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “3. les séphiroth métaphysiques, ou périphrase de Jéhovah, qui occupent les trois premières, tandis que les sept autres sont les esprits de la présence [the metaphysical Sephiroth, or periphrasis of Jehovah, who are the first three, while the seven others are the spirits of the Presence].” — 2:333
secret and unpronounceable name
see: Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopædia of Freemasonry, 1874: “Jehovah . . . In Hebrew it consists of four letters יהוה, and hence is called the Tetragrammaton, or four-lettered name; and because it was forbidden to a Jew, as it is to a Mason, to pronounce it, it is also called the Ineffable or Unpronounceable name.” — p. 376

— Footnotes

“The letter of Kether is י (Yod) . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The letter of Kether is י (Yod), of Binah ה (Heh), together YaH, the feminine Name. . . . the third letter, that of  ’Hokhmah, is ו (Vav), making together, יהו YHV of יהוה YHVH, the Tetragrammaton, and really the complete symbols of its efficaciousness.  The last ה (Heh) of this Ineffable Name being always applied to the Six Lower and the last, together with the seven remaining Sephiroth . . .” — p. 263

— 439 —

— Footnotes

Atlantis . . . (the gradual first sinking having begun during the Eocene age)
p/q: A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism, 1885: “ ‘In the Eocene age . . . the great continent, the father of nearly all the present continents, showed the first symptoms of sinking . . .’ ” — p. 64
From the superb religious poem by the Kabalist Rabbi Solomon Ben Gabirol . . .
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “The following definitions of deity are taken from a Kabbalistic poem by the Rabbi Solomon Ben Gabirol, in the Kether-Malchut, extracted from the prayers of Kippūr . . .” — 1:261
“Thou art one, the beginning of all numbers . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Thou art One, the beginning of all numbers, and the foundation of all edifices; Thou art One, and in the secret of Thy Unity, the wisest of men are lost, because they know it not.  Thou art One, and thy Unity is never diminished, never extended, and cannot be changed.  Thou art One, but not as an element of numeration; for Thy Unity admits not of multiplication, change, or form.” — 1:261
“Thou art existent . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Thou art Existent; but the understanding and vision of mortals cannot attain to Thy existence, nor determine for Thee the Where, the How, and the Why.  Thou art Existent, but in Thyself alone, there being none other that can exist with Thee.  Thou art Existent, before all Time and without Place.  Thou art Existent, and Thy Existence is so secret and profound that none can penetrate or discover Thy secrecy.  Thou art Living, but within no time which can be known and fixed; Thou art Living, but not by a spirit or a soul, for Thou art Thyself, the Soul of all souls.” — 1:261

— 440 —

The Latin Church . . . adopts a whole Kyriel of names . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . tous, élohim comme leur Dieu, les anges, par une sainte usurpation, ‘assument jusqu’au nom divin de Jéhovah, toutes les fois qu’ils le représentent’ [all of them, the Elohim like their God, the angels, by a holy usurpation, ‘adopt the divine name of Jehovah, every time they represent him’].” — 2:294
the said Forces . . . Elohim . . . “divine workmen” and Energies (Ἐνεργεία) . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ainsi, forces (élohim), énergies divines (ἐνεργειαι) . . . pierres enflammées des cieux (lapides igniti cælorum), soutiens de l’univers (κοσμοκρατορες), recteurs du monde (rectores mundi), anges des sphères célestes (ophanim ou rotae), flammes et forces du Très-Haut (chérubins et séraphins) . . . enfants de Dieu (bnè aleim), conseillers vigilants (egregores) [Thus, forces (Elohim), divine energies (Ἐνεργεία) . . . incandescent celestial stones (lapides igniti cælorum), supporters of the universe (κοσμοκρατορες), rulers of the world (rectores mundi), angels of the celestial spheres (ophanim ou rotae), flames and powers of the Most High (cherubs and seraphs) . . . children of God (b’ne Alhim), vigilant counselors (egregores)] . . .” — 2:294
“It was unknown to Confucius . . .”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “But why follow out these ideas [on cosmogony]?  They were unknown to Confucius.  They extended the cosmogony without introducing the idea of a personal Creator.” — p. 323
The Yi-King, “the very essence of ancient thought . . .”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “As we read the Yi-king, the very essence of ancient thought, and the combined work of the most venerated sages, we fail to recognize a distinct cosmogony.” — p. 320
The “great Extreme” as the commencement “of changes” . . . produces “two figures” . . .
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Confucius speaks of the Great Extreme as the commencement ‘of changes.  It produced the two figures.  These produced the four images, and these again the eight divining symbols.’ ” — p. 320
though the Confucianists see in them “Heaven, Earth and man in miniature” . . .
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “We find there, say the Chinese, heaven, earth, and man in miniature.  So, say I, we may find there anything we like.” — p. 321

— 440-1 —

Pythagoras . . . in his Triad, Tetractis and Decade emerging from the one and solitary Monad
see: Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopædia of Freemasonry, 1874: “Tetractys . . . has been peculiarly applied to a symbol of the Pythagoreans, which is composed of ten dots arranged in a triangular form of four rows. . . . Thus the one point was a symbol of the active principle or creator, the two points of the passive principle or matter, the three of the world proceeding from their union, and the four of the liberal arts and sciences . . .”  “ ‘The first of these, representing unity, is called a monad . . .’ ” — p. 810

— 441 —

Confucius is laughed at . . . for “talking of divination” before and after this passage
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Is there much in it besides twice one is two, twice two is four, twice four is eight?  Confucius, before and after this passage, is talking of divination.” — p. 320
“The eight symbols determine good and ill fortune . . .”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “ ‘The eight symbols determine good and ill fortune, and these lead to great deeds.  There are no imitable images greater than heaven and earth.  There are no changes greater than the four seasons.  There are no suspended images brighter than the sun and moon.  In preparing things for use, there is none greater than the sage.  In determining good and ill luck, there is nothing greater than the divining straws and the tortoise.’ ” — p. 320
the “symbolic sets of lines” . . . “three and six”
p/q: See Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “One of the kwa, or ‘symbolic sets of lines,’ is made up of three or six.” — p. 321
Confucius . . . believed in ancient magic . . . “he praised it to the skies in Yi-kin”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “When Confucius lived, the ancient magic was still in existence, and, if we take for granted the statements of the Kia-yü, he practised it himself.  However this may be, he praised it to the skies in the Yi-king.” — p. 325

— 441-2 —

The Ox, the Eagle, the Lion . . . are “the sacred animals” . . . grouped round the Evangelists
see: James Morison, Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew, 1870: “Chrysostom . . . compares the four Gospels to a chariot and four. . . . God rides upon the cherubim; and the cherubim, as represented in Ezekiel (i, 6-10), had four faces . . . hence in the common artistic representations of the four evangelists . . . Matthew . . . a man; Mark . . . a lion; Luke . . . an ox; and John . . . an eagle.” — p. liv

— Footnotes

the goat for one, the Azaz-el, or God of Victory
see: Nott and Gliddon, Types of Mankind, 1855: “ĀZAZ . . . has its radical monosyllable in āZ, ‘to conquer’ and ‘to be victorious;’ wherefore, ĀZAZ-EL signifies the ‘God of victory’ . . .” — p. 600
“If thou art capable of comprehending the mystery of Azazel . . .”
p/q: Nott and Gliddon, Types of Mankind, 1855: “Aben Esra . . . enunciates in the style of an oracle: ‘If thou art capable of comprehending the mystery of Azāzēl, thou wilt learn also the mystery of his name; for it has similar associates in Scripture; I will tell thee by allusion one portion of the mystery; when thou shalt have thirty-three years, thou wilt comprehend us.’ ” — p. 600
“Indeed all of them are Elohim like their God . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “En effet, tous, élohim comme leur Dieu, les anges, par une sainte usurpation, ‘assument jusqu’au nom divin de Jéhovah, toutes les fois qu’ils le représentent’ {Bible de Vence, t. XIX. 318.} [Indeed, all of them, Elohim like their God, the angels, by a holy usurpation, ‘adopt the divine name of Jehovah, every time they represent him’]. ” — 2:294 & fn.

— 442 —

the fourth (the human face) is a Seraph, i.e., a fiery serpent . . .
see: G. S. Faber, A Dissertation on the Mysteries of The Cabiri, 1803: “I strongly suspect, that both Seraph, to burn, and Seraph, a fiery serpent, are ultimately deducible from the compound radical Sar-Oph, the solar serpent.” — 1:164 fn.
the Demiurge . . . gives the first impulse to the rotary motion of our planetary system . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le Démiurge ou Logos divin, dont l’action imprime à la terre le mouvement qui la fait tourner sur elle-même et dirige toute la cour céleste [the Demiurge or divine Logos, whose action impresses the earth with the motion that makes it turn on its axis, and directs the whole celestial assembly] . . .” — 4:10
the Brahmandica . . . are credited with the authorship of the . . . Hymns of the Rig Veda
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “C’est à ces mêmes brahmandicas (anges) que sont attribués . . . les hymnes de Védas [It is to these same brahmāṇḍikas (angels) that are ascribed . . . the hymns of the Vedas].” — 4:10
They are sometimes seven, sometimes ten, when they become prajâpati . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Tantôt au nombre de sept . . . tantôt au nombre de dix . . . ils se nomment encore les pradjapatis ou seigneurs des créatures [Sometimes seven in number . . . sometimes ten in number . . . they still call themselves the Prajāpatis or the Lords of beings].” — 4:10
then they rebecome the seven and the fourteen Manus . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Incarnés ensuite dans les sept manous, qui représentent les sept Eons ou cycles de la création, ils reparaissent plus tard encore dans les sept rischis ou patriarches, incorporés à leur tour dans le ciel planétaire [Then incarnated in the seven Manus, who represent the seven Æons or cycles of creation, they reappear still later in the seven Rishis or patriarchs, and are in turn incorporated in celestial bodies].” — 4:10

— Footnotes

the eagle . . . Jesus refers to it as a carrion eater
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets . . . Wheresoever the carcase [carrion] is, there will the eagles be gathered together.” — p. 35 (Matthew, 24:24, 28)
and in the Old Testament it is called unclean
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Of all clean birds ye shall eat.  But these are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray . . . And all winged creeping things are unclean unto you.” — p. 254 (Deuteronomy, 14:11-12, 19)
the Lion is made a point of comparison with Satan
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour . . .” — p. 307 (I Peter, 5:8)
and the oxen are driven out of the Temple
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “After this he [Jesus] went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples . . . And he found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep . . . he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen . . .” — pp. 122-3 (John, 2:12, 14, 15)

— 443 —

the seventh tongue of Agni . . . “Kali,” “the black”
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “ ‘The seven flickering tongues [of the fire] are — Kālī (the black one), Karālī (the terrific one), Manojavā (swift as the mind), Sulohitā (the very red one), Sudhūmravarṇa (of purple colour), Sphulinginī (emitting sparks), and the Viśvarūpī (all-shaped) goddess.’ . . . ‘The first two of these names were at a later period personified . . . from that of the “dark, terrific, tongue of fire” to that of a goddess Kālī, Karālā . . .’ ” — 4:429
Two black doves flew from Egypt . . . settling on the oaks of Dodona
see: Herodotus, History, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “Two black doves flew away from Egyptian Thebes, and while one directed its flight to Libya, the other came to them [at Dodōna].  She alighted on an oak, and sitting there began to speak with a human voice, and told them that on the spot where she was, there should thenceforth be an oracle of Jove.” — 2:83 (ii.55)
Noah lets out a black raven after the deluge
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah . . . sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.” — p. 9 (Genesis, 8:6-7)
Odin’s black ravens fluttered around the Goddess Saga and “whispered to her . . .”
p/q: W. Wägner, Asgard and the Gods, 1880: “. . . the great goddess Saga . . . dwelt in a house of crystal . . . Odin’s ravens fluttered around her, and whispered to her of the past and of the future.” — p. 1
“The term Raven is used but once . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The term Raven is used but once, and taken as eth-h’ orebv . . . while the Dove is mentioned five times.  Its value is 71, and 71 x 5 = 355.  Six diameters, or the raven, crossing, would divide the circumference of a circle of 355 into 12 parts or compartments; and 355 subdivided for each unit by 6, would equal 213-0, or the head in the first verse of Genesis.” — p. 249

— 443-4 —

“This divided or subdivided . . . by 2 . . .”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “This divided, or subdivided, after the same fashion, by 2, or the 355 by 12, would give 213-2, or the word B’rāsh, ב־ראש, or the first word of Genesis . . . signifying the same concreted general form, astronomically, with the one here intended.” — p. 249

— 444 —

“In Rash (B’rash) or head, developed gods, the Heavens and the Earth”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, “The Cabbalah — No. I,” September, 1885: “ ‘B’rash ithbārā Elohim,’ etc.  ‘In the head (source or beginning) created itself (or developed) Gods, the heavens and the earth’ . . .” — p. 68 (Masonic Review, v. 64)
the ark, the womb . . . of terrestrial nature . . .
see: Jacob Bryant, A New System, 1807: “The Ark was certainly looked upon as the womb of nature; and the descent from it as the birth of the world.  Noah and all of the animal creation with him, had been for a long time inclosed in a state of obscurity.” — 3:218
Numerically Jehovah, Adam, Noah, are one in the Kabala
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “Now, the values, as applied to Noah, would give us his name as הח . . . Showing the Noah glyph to be a Jehovah one . . . Then, Jehovah and Noah are equal, or one equals one . . .”  “. . . the Adam or hermaphrodite cube, as a primal one, is, in separating into male and female, each a perfect one . . .” — pp. 160, 273
“the basic idea . . . was that God contained all things . . . man, including woman . . .”
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The primal one contained all the elements of generation, and therefore included the male idea and the female idea in itself. . . .” — p. 157

— Footnotes

Bryant is right in saying “. . . [Noah] was congratulated by Neptune . . .”
see: Jacob Bryant, A New System of Antient Mythology, 1807: “The history of the Patriarch was recorded by the antients through their whole theology . . . all the chief circumstances in the life of Noah correspond with the history of Janus.” — 3:75-6
      “He made also a door in the Ark . . . The entrance through it they esteemed a passage to death and darkness: but the egress from it was represented as return to life . . .”  “. . . the first month of the year was named Januarius, from Janus, as being an opening to a new era, and in some degree a renewal of time.”  “The Patriarch was also commemorated by the name of Poseidon [Neptune].” — 3:81, 83, 95
Druid Bardesin says of Noah . . . after a stay therein of a year and a day . . .
see: Aneurin Vardd, “Bardism,” 1876: “Bardism [of the Druidic Period] directs us toward her Neptune, landing on the Armenian Mount after being a year and a day in his ship . . . greeting him in the words of the Christian Bard, Davydd Jonawr, with a Happy New Year and also a New world.” — p. 164 (International Review, v. 3)

— 445 —

the absence of Brahmâ from the Rig Veda
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The name Brahmā is not found in the Vedas and Brāhmaṇas, in which the active creator is known as Hiraṇya-garbha . . .” — p. 57
But even they, “Creators” as the three may be, are not the direct creators
see: Vans Kennedy, Researches into the Nature and Affinity of Ancient and Hindu Mythology, 1831: “. . . the formation and economy of this universe depend not on the three divine hypostases . . .” — p. 214
      “The peculiar epithet, however, of creator, by which Brahma is distinguished, is obviously misapplied, because no act of creation is ever ascribed to him . . .” — p. 270
The latter . . . occupying a lower scale . . . are called Prajâpatis
see: Theodore Goldstücker, Literary Remains, 1879: “PRAJĀPATI . . . a name of those divine personages who, produced by Brahmā, created all existing beings . . . the world did not immediately proceed from Brahmā, the highest god, but through the intermediate agency of beings which thus stand between him and creation.” — 1:135
the “One Infinite God”
see: Vans Kennedy, Researches into the Nature and Affinity of Ancient and Hindu Mythology, 1831: “. . . their philosophy is founded on the contemplation of one infinite Being . . . one simple, unextended, indivisible Being, who is destitute of all qualities and attributes . . .” — p. 195
“There was neither day nor night, nor sky nor earth . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There was neither day nor night, nor sky nor earth, nor darkness nor light, nor any other thing, save only One, unapprehensible by intellect, or That which is Brahma and Puṃs (spirit) and Pradhāna (matter).” — 1:23-4 & fns. (i.2)
“One Prâdhânika Brahma Spirit: that was.”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘One Prādhānika Brahma Spirit: That, was.’ ” — 1:24 fn.
“I have thus explained to you, excellent Muni, six creations . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “I have thus explained to you, excellent Muni, six creations. . . . The creation of the Arvāksrotas beings was the seventh, and was that of man.” — 1:73-5 (i.5)
two additional and very mysterious creations
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There is an eighth creation, termed Anugraha, which possesses both the qualities of goodness and darkness. . . . But there is a ninth, the Kaumāra creation, which is both primary and secondary.” — 1:75-7 (i.5)

— 445-6 —

Celsus . . . “desiring to exhibit his learning,” speaks of a ladder of creation with seven gates . . .
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘. . . Celsus, desiring to exhibit his learning in his treatise against us, quotes also certain Persian mysteries . . . “There is a ladder with (seven) lofty gates, and on top of it an eighth gate.” ’ ” — 2:84
see: Origen, Contra Celsum, tr. F. Crombie, 1872, 2:360 (Contr. Cels. vi.22, Writings of Origen)

— 446 —

The mysteries of the Persian Mithras are explained . . .
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘. . . in the mysteries of Mithras . . . there is a representation of the two heavenly revolutions . . . of the fixed stars, and of that which takes place among the planets, and of the passage of the soul through these.’ ” — 2:84
see: Origen, Contra Celsum, tr. F. Crombie, 1872, 2:360 (Contr. Cels. vi.22, Writings of Origen)
“musical reasons, moreover, are added” . . .
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘He next proceeds . . . in this order . . . Musical reasons, moreover, are added and quoted by the Persian theology; and to these, again, he strives to add a second explanation connected also with musical considerations.’ ” — 2:85
see: Origen, Contra Celsum, tr. F. Crombie, 1872, 2:360 (Contr. Cels. vi.22, Writings of Origen)
Valentinus expatiates upon the power of the great Seven . . .
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Valentinus maintained that the power of the seven who gave life to this world after the likeness of the first hebdomad was represented by Arrhetos, whose name is composed of seven letters (with one duplicate) to indicate the Sevenfold nature of the one.” — 2:85
“The goddess Rhea . . . is a Monad, Duad, and Heptad” . . . all the Titanidæ
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “Proclus also says: ‘The Goddess Rhea is a Monad, Duad, and Heptad, comprehending in herself all the Titannidæ’ { Proclus in Timæus, b. iii}.” — 2:85 & fn.
p/q: Proclus, Commentaries on the Timaeus of Plato, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1820: “. . . the number of seven circles is adapted to the soul, which is produced by the vivific Goddess (Rhea), who is a monad, duad, and heptad, comprehending in herself all the Titannidæ . . .” — 2:137 (Bk III, S)
The Seven Creations . . . are all preceded by what Wilson translates — “the indiscrete Principle”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the Prākṛita creations, the developments of indiscrete nature, preceded by the indiscrete principle.” — 1:74 (i.5)
Mahattattwa . . . Bhûtasarga . . . Aindriyaka . . . “These three were the Prâkrita creations . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The first creation was that of Mahat {mahattattwa} or Intellect, which is also called the creation of Brahmā.  The second was that of the rudimental principles . . . termed the elemental creation (Bhūtasarga).  The third was . . . termed the organic creation, or the creation of the senses (Aindriyaka).  These three were the Prākṛita creations, the developments of indiscrete nature, preceded by the indiscrete principle.” — 1:74 & fn. (i.5)
Mukhya . . . Tairyagyonya . . . Urdhwasrotas . . . Arvaksrotas . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The fourth or fundamental creation (of perceptible things) was that of inanimate bodies.  The fifth, the Tairyagyonya creation, was that of animals.  The sixth was the Ūrdhwasrotas creation, or that of the divinities.  The creation of the Arvāksrotas beings was the seventh, and was that of man.” — 1: 74-5 (i.5)

— Footnotes

“And the fourth creation is here the primary . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “And the fourth creation is here the primary; for things immovable are emphatically known as primary.” — 1:75 fn.
Man is called a sacrificial animal . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Brahmā, having created, in the commencement of the Kalpa, various {‘sacrificial animals’} . . . employed them in sacrifices, in the beginning of the Tretā age {in the nara-medha, or human sacrifice, man is accounted a sacrificial animal}.” — 1:84 & fns. (i.5)

— 447 —

a “Day of Brahmâ,” a period of 4,320,000,000 years
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The most simple, and, probably, the original, calculation of a Kalpa is its being 1000 great ages . . . 4.320.000 years, or a divine age, x 1000 = 4.320.000.000 years, or a day or night of Brahmā.” — 1:51 fn.
In the Satapatha Brâhmana “Brahma” . . . radiates the gods.
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “In the beginning Brahma was this (universe). . . . Having created gods, he placed them in these worlds, viz., in this world Agni, in the atmosphere Vāyu, and in the sky Sūrya . . . and in the worlds which were yet higher he placed the gods who are still higher. . . . He then pervaded them . . .” — 5:388 (Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, xi.2, 3, 1-3)
“At the expiration of each night . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “At the end of His day and night, He, being asleep, awakes, and awaking creates mind, which is and is not.” — p. 10 (i.74)
“One is the Spirit of the living God . . . Voice, Spirit, and Word . . .”
p/q: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “ ‘One is the spirit of the living God, blessed be His name, who liveth for ever! voice, spirit, and word, this is the Holy Ghost.’ (Chapter i, Mishna ix).” — p. 67
First from one emanated number two, or Air, the creative element . . .
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “The creative air, represented by number two, emanated from the Spirit . . . The water again, represented by the number three, proceeded from the air . . . Whilst the ether or fire, represented by the number four, emanated from the water . . .” — p. 67 (Sepher Jetzira, I, ix, x)
In the Vishnu Purâna . . . the seven forms of matter (or principles) are shown.
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From the great principle (Mahat) Intellect, threefold Egotism (Ahaṃkāra) . . . the origin of the (subtile) elements {ether (Ākāśa), wind or air (Vāyu), fire or light (Tejas), water and earth} . . .” — 1: 32-4 & 36 fn. (i.2)
“R. Yehudah began, it is written: ‘Elohim said . . .’ ”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “R. Yehudah began, it is written: ‘Elohim said: Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters.’ . . . At the time that the Holy . . . created the world He created 7 heavens Above.  He created 7 earths Below, 7 seas, 7 days, 7 rivers, 7 weeks, 7 years, 7 times, and 7000 years that the world has been. . . . the seventh of all (the millenium).” — p. 415
“So here are seven earths Below . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘. . . so here, are 7 earths Below, they are all inhabited except those which are above and those which are below. . . . and between each earth, a heaven (firmament) is spread out between each other. . . . and there is in them creatures who look different one from the other like the Above . . .’ ” — p. 416

— 447-8 —

“. . . but if you object and say that all the children of the world came out from Adam . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “ ‘. . . but if you object and say that all the children of the world came out from Adam, it is not so . . . And the Lower earths where do they come from?  They are from the chain of the earth and from the Heaven Above.’ ” — p. 416

— 448 —

“They maintain that first of all the four elements . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘They maintain  that first of all the four elements, fire, water, earth, and air were produced after the image of the primary tetrad above, and that then if we add their operations, namely, heat, cold, dryness, and humidity, an exact likeness of the ogdoad is presented.’ ” — 2:85
p/q: Irenæus, Against Heresies, tr. Roberts and Rambaut, 1868, 1:73 (Adv. Hær. i.17, Writings of Irenæus)
the eighth, termed Anûgraha, “possesses both the qualities of goodness and darkness”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There is an eighth creation, termed Anugraha, which possesses both the qualities of goodness and darkness.” — 1:75-6 (i.5)
“they . . . had a like eighth creation . . . divine and human”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The Gnostics . . . they had an eighth creation both divine and human {Ibid, b. i. ch. xviii. 2}.” — 2:86
“They affirm that man was formed on the eighth day . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “Irenaeus says, ‘They affirm that man was formed on the eighth day.  Sometimes they assert that he was made on the sixth day, and at others on the eighth; unless perchance they mean that his earthly part was formed on the sixth day and his fleshly part on the eighth day; these two being distinguished by them.’ ” — 2:86
“The Gnostics had a superior Hebdomad, and an inferior one . . .”
see: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “The Gnostics also had the ‘Superior Hebdomad’ identified as the Seven Planetary Gods of the Seven Heavens of the god Iao . . .”  “The Gnostics held that there were seven mundane dæmons which they term the inferior hebdomad . . . [and] identify the Typhonian seven that were cast out from heaven to become devils on earth . . .” — 2:85-6, 114
Iao, the mystery god and the Regent of the Moon, as given in Origen’s chart
see: Origen, Contra Celsum, tr. F. Crombie, 1872: “. . . if any one would wish to become acquainted with the artifices of those sorcerers [Gnostics] . . . let him listen to the instruction which they receive after passing through . . . [seven] gates which are subjected to the world of ruling spirits. . . . ‘Thou, O second Iao, who shinest by night, who art the ruler of the secret mysteries of son and father . . .’ ” — 2:369-70 (Contr. Cels. vi.31, Writings of Origen)
“They affirm that these seven heavens are intelligent . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘They affirm, moreover, that these seven heavens are intelligent, and speak of them as being angels . . .’ ” — 2:86
see: Irenæus, Against Heresies, tr. Roberts and Rambaut, 1868, 1:21-2 (Adv. Hær. i.2, Writings of Irenæus)
they termed Iao Hebdomas . . . his mother . . . “Ogdoas” . . . “she preserved the number . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “. . . the god Iao . . . ‘on this account they termed Hebdomas, and his mother ‘Ogdoas,’ because she ‘preserved the number of the first begotten and primary Ogdoad of the Pleroma’ {Irenæus, b. i. ch. v. 2}.” — 2:86
Mârttanda — the eighth son of Aditi, whom she rejects . . .
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “Of the eight sons of Aditi who were born from her body, she approached the gods with seven, and cast out Mārttāṇḍa (the eighth).” — 5:49 (Rig-veda x. 72, 8)
born of the Seven-rayed one, Agni, the Sun
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “AGNI. . . . He appears in three phases — in heaven as the sun, in mid-air as lightning, on earth as ordinary fire. . . . Agni is represented as having seven tongues, each with a distinct name . . .” — pp. 6-7

— 449 —

Ildabaoth (from Ilda, “child,” and Baoth “the egg”), the son of Sophia Achamoth
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “After having produced Ilda-Baoth, Ilda from ילד, a child, and Baoth from ביצה, the egg . . . Sophia Achamoth suffered so much from the contact with matter . . .” — 2:183
He produces from himself these six stellar spirits . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “First of all he generated an Angel in his own likeness; this Angel a second; and so on up to the number of six. . . . Their names are Iao, Sabaoth, Adonai, Eloi, Ouraios, Astaphaios.  They became the Genii of the seven worlds, or planetary spheres.” — p. 97
“Oh, best of twice-born men!  Know that I (Manu) am he . . .”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “But, O best of twice-born men! know that I am he, the creator of all this world, whom that male Virāj . . . spontaneously produced.” — p. 6 (i.33)
He first creates the ten lords of Being, the Prajapatis, who . . . “produce seven other Manus.”
p/q: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Now I, desirous of creating beings . . . first created the ten lords of beings . . . They, very glorious, produced seven other Manus . . .” — p. 6 (i.34, 36)
“I am Father and God, and there is no one above me” . . . “Do not lie, Ildabaoth . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, Natural Genesis, 1883: “Ildabaoth . . . became puffed up and boasted ‘I am Father and God, and there is no one above me.’  His mother, hearing him speak thus, cried out to him, ‘Do not lie, Ialdabaoth, for the Father of all, the first Anthropos (Man), is above thee, and so is Anthropos, the Son of Anthropos’ { Ibid, b. i. ch. xxx. 6}.” — 2:86 & fn.
In Pistis-Sophia . . . Ieov is in each case accompanied by the epithet of “the Primal, or First man”
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . the Pistis-Sophia perpetually brings in IEOY invariably accompanied with the epithet of ‘the Primal Man’ . . . ” — p. 200
Marcus . . . speaks of a revelation to him of the seven heavens . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . the semi-Pythagorean, Marcus, had it revealed unto him that the seven heavens in their revelation sounded each one vowel which, all combined together, formed a single doxology, ‘the sound whereof being carried down to earth becomes the creator and parent of all things that be on earth.’ ” — p. 200

— 450 —

“The creators (Elohim) outline in the second ‘hour’ the shape of man”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 1861: “seconde heure.  Dieu ébauche la forme du corps . . . et c’est ainsi que les Eloim ont fait toutes choses [second hour — God designs the form of the body . . . and in that way the Elohim made all things].” — 2:404 (Le Nuctéméron Suivant Les Hebreux)
“There are twelve hours in the day . . .”
p/q: Éliphas Lévi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 1861: “Or, il y a douze heures dans la journée où s’accomplit la création de l’homme [Now, there are twelve hours in the day in which the creation of man was accomplished].” — 2:404
disguised into 12 “Hours.”  The Nuctameron of Apollonius of Tyana is the same thing.
see: Éliphas Lévi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 1861: “Nuctéméron veut dire le jour de la nuit ou la nuit éclairée par le jour.  C’est un titre analogue à celui de la lumière sortant des ténèbres [Nuctameron signifies the day of the night; or the (12 hours of) the night illumined by day.  It is a designation analogous to the Light issuing from the Darkness] . . .” — 2:385 (Le Nuctéméron d’Apollonius de Thyane)
“The dodecahedron lies concealed in the perfect Cube”
see: Albert G. Mackey, A Lexicon of Freemasonry, 1858: “The cube was the symbol of the mind of man after it had been purified . . . and thus prepared for mingling with the celestial gods.  The point within a circle, and the dodecahedron or figure of twelve sides, were symbols of the universe.” — p. 389
the twelve great transformations of Spirit into matter
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Qabbalah therefore calls the six sides of the entire universe, the six days of building. . . . and the six-sided cube symbolizes them {‘This (our) universe consists of six dimensions: Above, Below, and the four sides . . . As the Upper Mother has brought forth six . . . so the Lower Mother, brought forth six vessels of both}.” — pp. 268-9 & fn.
the Creation of Light (Spirit) . . . Darkness (matter) . . . Both are found in Genesis
see: The Hexaglot Bible, v. 1, 1901: “And the earth was without form and void; and Darkness was upon the face of the deep.  And the spirit of God [אלהים, Elohim] moved upon the face of the waters.  And God [אלהים, Elohim] said, Let there be light! and there was light.” — p. 3 [Hebrew text, p. 2] (Genesis, 1:2-3)
“Oh, companions, companions, man as an emanation was both man and woman . . .”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “O companions, companions (says the Rabbi), man, as (God’s) emanation, was both man and woman; as well on the side of the FATHER as on the side of the MOTHER.  And this is the sense of the words: And Elohim spoke, Let there be Light and it was Light! . . . And this is the ‘two-fold Man!’ (Auszüge aus dem Zohar) ” — p. 72
Mahat-tattwa creation
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The first creation was that of Mahat {mahattattwa} . . .” — 1:74 & fn.
“Worthiest of ascetics . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Worthiest of ascetics, through its potency — i.e., through the potency of that cause — every created thing comes by its proper nature.’ ” — 1:66 fn.

— 450-1 —

“Seeing that the potencies of all beings are understood only through the knowledge of That . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Seeing that the potencies of all existences are understood only through the knowledge of that — i.e., Brahma — which is beyond reasoning, creation and the like, such potencies of existences, are referrible to Brahma.’ ” — 1:44 fn.

— 451 —

“The first was Mahat,” says the Linga Purâna
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The reading is also established by the text of the Linga Purāṇa . . . ‘The first creation was that of Mahat; Intellect being the first in manifestation.’ ” — 1:75 fn.
as the Commentator says . . . Brahmâ was then created
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This creation being the work of the supreme spirit . . . according to the commentator: or it might have been understood to mean, that Brahmā was then created, being, as we have seen, identified with Mahat, ‘active intelligence,’ or the operating will of the Supreme.” — 1:74 fn.
Mahat (or Maha-Buddhi) is . . . divine mind in active operation
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Purāṇas generally employ the same expression, attributing to Mahat or Intelligence the act of creating.  Mahat is, therefore, the divine mind in creative operation . . .” — 1:33 fn.
“an ordering and disposing mind, which was the cause of all things,” — Νοῦς . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Mahat is, therefore, the divine mind in creative operation, the νοῦς ὁ διακόσμων τε καὶ πάντων αἴτιος of Anaxagoras; ‘an ordering and disposing mind, which was the cause of all things.’ ” —  1:33 fn.
see: Plato, Dialogues, tr. B. Jowett, 1874: “. . . I heard some one who had a book of Anaxagoras . . . he read that mind was the disposer and cause of all . . .” — 1:426 (Phædo, § 97)
the suggestive connection between Mahat and the Phœnician Mot . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The word itself suggests some relationship to the Phœnician Mot, which, like Mahat, was the first product of the mixture of spirit and matter, and the first rudiment of creation . . .” — 1:33 fn.
“Ex connexione autem ejus spiritus prodidit Mot . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘Ex connexione autem ejus spiritus prodiit Mot. . . . Hinc * * seminium omnis creaturæ et omnium rerum creatio’ Brücker, I., 240 [‘Out of the union with that spirit has proceeded Mot. . . . Hence arose the seeding of all creatures and the creation of all things’].” — 1:33 fn.
see: Jacob Brücker, Historia Critica Philosophiae, 1742-4, 1:240
“The Supreme Soul, the all permeant (Sarvaga) . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the supreme soul, the substance of the world {‘all-permeant’ sarvaga} . . . having entered into matter and spirit, agitated the mutable and immutable principles, the season of creation being arrived.” — 1:27 & fn. (i.2)

— Footnotes

“Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The expressions . . . ‘having entered into’ and . . . ‘agitated’, recall the mode in which divine intelligence, mens, νοῦς, was conceived, by the ancients, to operate upon matter . . .
Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus,
Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet . . .” — 1:27 fn.
see: Virgil, Works, tr. Christopher Pitt, 1778: “. . . a spirit with an active flame . . . animates this mighty frame . . .
Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus
Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet.” — 3:213-14 (Æneid, vi.726-7)

— 452 —

“The second Creation . . . was of the rudimental principles (Tanmâtras) . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The second was that of the rudimental principles (Tanmātras), thence termed the elemental creation (Bhūta-sarga).” — 1:74 (i.5)
Bhûtâdi means literally “the origin of the elements”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From the great principle (Mahat) . . . Egotism . . . and Bhūtādi, ‘rudimental’ {in strict literality, ‘origin of the elements’} . . .” — 1:32-3 & fn. (i.2)
the triple aspect of Ahankâra, translated Egotism . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From the great principle (Mahat) Intellect, threefold Egotism {Ahaṃkāra . . . It means the principle of individual existence, that which appropriates perceptions, and on which depend the notions, I think, I feel, I am} . . .” — 1:32-3 & fn. (i.2)
Ahankâra becomes “passionate” and finally “rudimental”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “From the great principle (Mahat) . . . threefold Egotism (Ahaṃkāra), denominated Vaikārika, ‘pure’; Taijasa, ‘passionate’; and Bhūtādi, ‘rudimental’ . . .” — 1:32-3 (i.2)

— Footnotes

“as presently explained, the mixture . . . is not mechanical . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . it more closely approximates to the Phoenician cosmogony, in which a spirit, mixing with its own principles, gives rise to creation. . . . As presently explained, the mixture is not mechanical; it is an influence or effect exerted upon intermediate agents which produce effects . . .” — 1:27 fn.
“As fragrance affects the mind . . . As perfumes do not delight the mind by actual contact . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In the same manner as fragrance affects the mind from its proximity merely, and not from any immediate operation upon mind itself, so the Supreme influenced the elements of creation {as perfumes do not delight the mind by actual contact, but by the impression they make upon the sense of smelling, which communicates it to the mind}.” — 1:27-8 & fn. (i.2)
“The entrance of the Supreme into spirit . . . He who is called the male (spirit) of Prakriti . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The entrance of the supreme Vishṇu into spirit, as well as matter, is less intelligible than the view elsewhere taken of it, as the infusion of spirit, identified with the Supreme, into Prakṛiti or matter alone.  Thus, in the Padma Purāṇa: ‘He who is called the male (spirit) of Prakṛiti is here named Achyuta; and that same divine Vishṇu entered into Prakṛiti.” — 1:28 fn.
Vishnu is both Bhûtesa, “Lord of the Elements, and all things,” and Viswarûpa . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Vishṇu is both Bhūteśa, ‘lord of the elements,’ or of created things, and Viśwarūpa, ‘universal substance.’ ” — 1:42 fn.

— 453 —

the Chitrasikhandina (bright-crested) or the Riksha . . . the seven stars (of the Great Bear)
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The seven Ṛishis are represented in the sky by the seven stars of the Great Bear, and as such are called Ṛiksha and Chitra-sikhaṇḍinas, ‘having bright crests.’ ” — p. 268
The third (the Indriya) was the modified form of Ahankâra . . . termed the organic Creation . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The third was the modified form of egotism {vaikārika}, termed the organic creation, or creation of the senses (Aindriyaka).” — 1:74 & fn. (i.5)
Ahankâra, the conception of “I” (from “Aham,” “I”)
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Ahaṃkāra being derived from Ahaṃ, ‘I’ . . .”  “Ahaṃkāra, ‘the conception of I’ . . .” — 1:34 fn., 35 fn.
“These three were the Prâkrita . . . developments of indiscrete nature . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “These three were the Prākṛita creations, the developments of indiscrete nature, preceded by the indiscrete principle {‘creation preceded by, or beginning with, Buddhi’}.” — 1:74 & fn. (i.5)
third Creation . . . Urhvasrotas . . . “the sixth creation . . . that of divinities”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . a third creation appeared, abounding with the quality of goodness, termed Ūrdhwasrotas. . . .”  “The sixth was the Ūrdhwasrotas creation, or that of the divinities.” — 1:72, 75 (i.5)

— Footnotes

“Concerning the seven secondaries, or Spiritual Intelligences . . .”
see: Éliphas Lévi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 1861: “Le monde, à ce que croyaient les anciens, est gouverné par sept causes secondes, comme les appelle Trithème, secundæi, et ce sont les forces universelles désignées par Moïse sous le nom pluriel d’Eloïm, les dieux.  Ces forces . . . règlent le mouvement des sphères [According to the ancients, the world is governed by seven secondary causes, called by Trithemius secundæi, and these are the universal forces designated by Moses under the plural name of Elohim, the gods.  These forces . . . regulate the movement of the spheres].” — 2:113
see: Johannes Trithemius, De septem secunda Deis id est intelligentiis sive spiritibus moventibus orbes [“Concerning the seven secondaries, that is, the Intelligences, or Spirits, who move the heavenly bodies”], 1522.
“Had Professor Wilson enjoyed the advantages . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . had Professor Wilson enjoyed the advantages which are now at the command of the student of Indian philosophy, unquestionably he would here have expressed himself differently.” — 1:21 fn. (i.2)
Thomas Taylor . . . understood Plato far better
see: Thomas Taylor, The Eleusinian and Bacchic Mysteries, 1875: “Mr. Taylor’s peculiar style has been the subject of repeated criticism; and his translations are not accepted by classical scholars.  Yet they have met with favor at the hands of men capable of profound and recondite thinking; and it must be conceded that he was endowed with . . . an intuitive perception of the interior meaning of the subjects which he considered.  Others may have known more Greek, but he knew more Plato.” — pp. xviii-xix (“Introduction” by Alexander Wilder)

— 454 —

This “creation” of the immortals, the “Deva-Sarga” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This, termed the creation of immortals {Deva-sarga}, was the third performance of Brahmā . . .” — 1:72-3 & fn. (i.5)
“at the close of the past (Padma) Kalpa . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “At the close of the past (or Pādma) Kalpa, the divine Brahmā . . . awoke from his night of sleep, and beheld the universe void.” — 1:55 (i.4)
Then Brahmâ is shown . . . in the secondary stage of evolution . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This creation is of the secondary order . . . water, and even the earth, being in existence, and, consequently, having been preceded by the creation of Mahat and the elements [Primary Creation].” — 1:55 fn. (i.4)
The Mukhya, the Primary . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Since immovable things were first created, this is called the first creation {immovable things are technically styled ‘primary,’ mukhya}.” — 1:70 & fn. (i.5)
“All the Hindu systems consider vegetable bodies . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘All the Hindu systems consider vegetable bodies as endowed with life.’  So, and correctly, remarks Professor Wilson, in his collected Works . . .” — 5(I):385 (“Corrigenda” by Hall)
Charâchara, or the synonymous sthâvara and jangama . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Charāchara, or the synonymous sthāvara and jangama, is, therefore, inaccurately rendered . . . ‘animate and inanimate,’ ‘sentient beings’ and ‘unconscious,’ ‘conscious and unconscious beings,’ etc., etc.  ‘Locomotive and fixed’ would be better, since trees are considered to possess souls.” — 5(I):385-6 (“Corrigenda” by Hall)
“The first creation was that of Mahat (Intellect) . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The first creation was that of Mahat or Intellect . . . The second was that of the rudimental principles (Tanmātras) . . . The third was the . . . creation of the senses (Aindriyaka).” — 1:74 (i.5)

— Footnotes

“The three Creations beginning with Intelligence are elemental . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘The three creations beginning with Intelligence are elemental; but the six creations which proceed from the series of which Intellect is the first are the work of Brahmā.’ ” — 1:77 fn. (Vāyu Purāṇa)
we read in the Linga Purâna that “the first Creation was that of Mahat . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The reading is also established by the text of the Linga Purāṇa . . . ‘The first creation was that of Mahat; Intellect being the first in manifestation.’ ” — 1:75 fn.

— 454-5 —

the third order of Elementals . . . are succeeded by the objective kingdom of minerals
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The fourth or fundamental creation . . . was that of inanimate bodies.” — 1:74-5 (i.5)

— 455 —

The Tiryaksrotas (or Tairyagyonya) creation, that of the “(sacred) animals”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the animal creation was manifested, to the products of which the term Tiryaksrotas is applied . . .”  “. . . the Tairyagyonya creation, was that of the animals.” — 1:71, 75 (i.5)
the germ of awakening consciousness or of apperception . . . in some sensitive plants
see: “About the Mineral Monad,” 1885: “. . . as shown by those plants that are known as sensitives, there are a few among them that may be regarded as possessing that conscious perception which is called by Leibnitz apperception . . .” — p. 276 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— Footnotes

This “creation” . . . is both primary (Prâkrita) and secondary (Vaikrita) . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “This creation, says the text, is both primary (Prākṛita) and secondary (Vaikṛita).  It is the latter . . . as regards the origin of these saints from Brahmā; it is the former, as affects Rudra, who, though proceeding from Brahmā, in a certain form was in essence equally an immediate production of the first principle.” — 1:78 fn. (i.5)

— 456 —

“The fifth . . . was that of animals . . . The Urdhvasrotas creation, or that of divinities”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The fifth, the Tairyagyonya creation, was that of animals.  The sixth was the Ūrdhwasrotas creation, or that of divinities.” — 1:75 (i.5)
The evolution of the “Arvaksrotas beings . . . was that of man”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The creation of the Arvāksrotas beings was the seventh, and was that of man.” — 1:75 (i.5)
Anûgraha (the Pratyayasarga or the intellectual creation of the Sankhyas . . .) . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There is an eighth creation, termed Anugraha, which possesses both the qualities of goodness and darkness {This is the Pratyayasarga or intellectual creation of the Sānkhyas (S. Kārikā, v. 46, p. 146); the creation of which we have a notion, or to which we give assent (Anugraha), in contradistinction to organic creation, or that existence of which we have a sensible perception}.” — 1:75-6 & fn. (i.5)
“There is a ninth, the Kumâra Creation . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . there is a ninth, the Kaumāra creation, which is both primary and secondary.” — 1:76-7 (i.5)

— Footnotes

“Created beings . . . although they are destroyed . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Created beings, although they are destroyed (in their individual forms) at the periods of dissolution, yet, being affected by the good or evil acts of former existence, they are never exempted from their consequences; and, when Brahmā creates the world anew, they are the progeny of his will, in the fourfold condition of gods, men, animals, or inanimate things.  Brahmā then, being desirous of creating the four orders of beings, termed gods, demons, progenitors, and men, collected his mind into itself.” — 1:79-80 (i.5)
The progenitors are the Pitris . . . born of Brahmâ’s side
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Brahmā . . . thinking of himself as the father of the world, the progenitors (the Pitris) were born from his side.” — 1:80-1 (i.5)
“These notions,” remarks Dr. Wilson, “the birth of Rudra and the saints . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “These notions, the birth of Rudra and the saints, seem to have been borrowed from the Śaivas, and to have been awkwardly engrafted upon the Vaishṇava system.” — 1:78 fn. (i.5)
Parâsara, the Vedic Rishi, who received the Vishnu Purâna from Pulastya . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “PARĀŚARA.  A Vedic Ṛishi . . . and he received the Vishṇu Purāṇa from Pulastya and taught it to Maitreya. . . . Speculations as to his era differ widely, from 575 b.c. to 1391 b.c., and cannot be trusted.” — p. 229

— 457 —

“the Dhyanis, derived immediately from the supreme Principle . . .”
see: T. Subba Row, “The Philosophy of Spirit,” May, 1882: “. . . these celestial ‘Dhyan-Buddhas’ came into existence (according to Vyasa) before the last work of creation or evolution commenced . . . as they are the direct emanations of Parabrahmam.” — p. 193 (The Theosophist, v. 3)
“these sages live as long as Brahmâ . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “These sages, however, live as long as Brahmā; and they are only created by him in the first Kalpa, although their generation is very commonly, but inconsistently, introduced in the Vārāha or Pādma Kalpa.” — 1:78 fn. (i.5)
the Kumaras are . . . “the creation of Rudra or Nilalohita . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Kaumāra creation is the creation of Rudra or Nīlalohita, a form of Śiva, by Brahmā . . . and of certain other mind-born sons of Brahmā . . .” — 1:77 fn. (i.5)
they are the progenitors of the true spiritual self
see: Stanza X, “The History of the Fourth Race”: “. . . Wisdom, in the shape of the incarnating Spirits of Mahat, descended from on high to animate and call the Third Race to real conscious life . . . that principle of our inner nature which develops in us into the Spiritual Ego — the Higher Self . . .” — SD 2:230
the Pitris, or lower Prajâpati, are no more than the fathers of the model . . .
see: Stanza X, “The History of the Fourth Race”: “When the pure, celestial Being (Dhyan Chohan) and the great Pitris of various classes were commissioned — the one to evolve their images (Chhaya), and make of them physical man, the others to inform him and thus endow him with divine intelligence . . .” — SD 2:233 fn.
made “in their image.” . . . (Compare what is said of “The Fallen Angels” in Book II.)
see: Stanza X, “The History of the Fourth Race”: “. . . ‘the Angels were commanded to create.’  After the Earth had been made ready by the lower and more material powers . . . the higher powers, the Archangels or Dhyanis, were compelled by the evolutionary Law to descend on Earth, in order to construct the crown of its evolution — man.” — SD 2:242
The Exoteric four are: Sanât-Kumara, Sananda, Sanaka, and Sanatana
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “KUMĀRAS.  Mind-born sons of Brahmā . . . There were four of them, Sanat-kumāra, Sananda, Sanaka, and Sanātana . . .” — p. 170
and the esoteric three are: Sana, Kapila, and Sanatsujâta
see: Vijnāna Bhikshu, Sānkhya-Sāra, ed. Fitz-Edward Hall, 1862: “ ‘These seven sons of Brahmā were called great Ṛishis.’  The more ordinary mānasa, or mind-born, sons of Brahmā vary, as specified in different Purāṇas . . . In the Mahābhārata, XII., 13078-9, they are said to be Sana, Sanatsujāta, Sanaka, Sanadana, Sanatkumāra, Kapila, and Sanātana.” — pp. 13-14 fn.
(See the four Orders of Angelic Beings; Comment on Stanza VII)
see: Stanza VII, 1: “The highest group is composed of the divine Flames . . .”  “The second Order of Celestial Beings, those of Fire and Æther . . .”  “The Third order corresponds to the Atma-Buddhi-Manas . . . The Fourth are substantial Entities {substantial and invisible Beings called Angels, Elementals, etc.} . . .” — SD 1:213, 216, 218 & fn.
“We must have recourse, here, to other Purânas . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “We must have recourse, here also, to other Purāṇas, for the elucidation of this term.” — 1:77 fn.

— 457-8 —

these (divinities) declining to create progeny . . . remained . . . ever boys, Kumâras
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “They are elsewhere termed Sanatkumāra, Sananda, Sanaka, and Sanātana, with sometimes a fifth, Ṛibhu, added.  These, declining to create progeny, remained, as the name of the first implies, ever boys, Kumāras; that is, ever pure and innocent . . .” — 1:77 fn.

— Footnotes

“The four Kumâras . . . Some specify seven”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The four Kumāras or mind-born sons of Brahmā.  Some specify seven.” — p. 277
Iswara Krishna’s “Sânkhya Kârika” with the Commentary . . .
see: The Sānkhya Kārikā by Īswara Krishna, tr. Henry Thomas Colebrooke; “also The Bhāshya or Commentary of Gaurapāda,” tr. Horace Hayman Wilson (1837).
“the seven sons of Brahmâ” . . . Sanaka, Sanadana, Sanatana, Kapila . . .
p/q: The Sānkhya Kārikā and The Bhāshya, tr. Colebrooke & Wilson, 1837: “ ‘Sanaka, Sanandana, and Sanātana the third; Āsuri, Kapila, Borhu, and Panchasikha: these seven sons of Brahmā were termed great sages.’ ” — p. 1
“The seven Prajâpati, Rudra, Skanda (his son) and Sanat-Kumâra . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The French translation ascribes a share in creation to Sanatkumāra: ‘Les sept Pradjāpatis, Roudra, Scanda (son fils), et Sanatcoumāra se mirent à produire les êtres [The seven Prajāpati, Rudra, Skanda (his son), and Sanatkumāra proceeded to create beings] . . .’ ” — 1:78 fn. (i.5)
the original is: “These seven . . . created progeny . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The correct rendering is: ‘These seven (Prajāpatis) created progeny; and so did Rudra: but Skanda and Sanatkumāra, restraining their power, abstained (from creation).’ ” — 1:78 fn. (i.5)
The “four orders of beings” are . . . “Ambhamsi” . . . “literally Waters” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The term Ambhāṃsi, lit., ‘waters,’ for the four orders of beings, gods, demons, men, and Pitṛis, is, also, a peculiar, and, probably, mystic, term.” — 1:80 fn. (i.5)
Narâyana . . . reclining on that which is its progeny (See Manu)
see: The Ordinances of Manu, tr. Burnell, ed. Hopkins, 1884: “Waters are called nārāḥ, for they are the offspring of Nara {Brahmā}; and since they were his first abode (ayana), he thence is called Nārāyaṇa.” — p. 2 & fn. (i.10)
“Water is the body of Nara . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Linga, Vāyu, and Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇas . . . have a somewhat different reading . . . {‘Water is the body of Nara: thus we have heard the name of water explained.  Since Brahmā rests on the water, therefore he is termed Nārāyaṇa’}. ” — 1:57 fns. (i.4)
“. . . Pure, Purusha created the waters pure . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Burnouf translates: ‘Purucha, ayant divisé en deux parties l’œuf (de Brahmā) . . . réfléchit à se faire un lieu où il pût se mouvoir; et pur, il créa les eaux pures [Purusha, having divided the Egg (of Brahmā) into two parts . . . considered making for himself a place where he could move; and pure, he created pure waters].’ ” — 1:58 fn. (i.4)
the term Ambhamsi . . . (in the Vedas it is a synonym of gods)
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The term Ambhāṃsi, lit., ‘waters’ . . . occurs in the Vedas, as a synonym of gods . . .” — 1:80 fn.

— 458 —

“Being ever as he was born, he is here called a youth . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “And the Linga has: ‘Being ever as he was born, he is here called a youth; and hence his name is well known as Sanatkumāra.’ ” — 1:77 fn.
In the Saiva Purâna, the Kumâras are always described as Yogins.
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Sanatkumāra and his brethren are always described, in the Śaiva Purāṇas, as Yogins . . .” — 1:78 fn.
“These five, O Brahmans, were Yogins . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘These five, O Brahmans, were Yogins, who acquired entire exemption from passion’ . . .” — 1:79 fn. (Kūrma Purāṇa)
(See Book II., “The Sacred Dragons and their Slayers.”)
see: “Edens, Serpents, and Dragons” (SD 2:202-19); “Serpents and Dragons under Different Symbolisms” (SD 2:354-6); and “The Origin of the Satanic Myth” (SD 2:378-90).

— 459 —

the howling and terrific destroyer . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Rudra . . . He is the howling terrible god. . . As applied to the god Śiva, the name of Rudra generally designates him in his destructive character.” — p. 269
Siva, the Mahâyogi . . .
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “[Śiva] is the Mahā-yogi, the great ascetic, in whom is centred the highest perfection of austere penance and abstract meditation . . .” — p. 298
a direct connection with . . . Archangel Michael . . . the Dragon Apophis . . .
see: Frederic T. Hall, The Pedigree of the Devil, 1883: “In later times the legend passed into that of Bel and the Dragon, and from time to time reappears in such records as that of Michael the Archangel and Satan, and Saint George and the Dragon. . . . Horus, an Egyptian Bel, fights and overcomes Apophis, a monstrous reptile.” — pp. 199-200
the Angel who, as shown by the Gnostics, refused to create
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “This is the command, that I [Bahak Zivo] construct creatures: but which will not be in my power. . . . Thereupon he  . . . brought [Fetahil] before the Apostle Gabriel. . . . Arise Fetahil, go, descend into the place that is without habitations and creatures . . . frame for thee a world and provide genii in it.  But this Gabriel, august father of the genii . . . did not instruct and teach him in the knowledge of it. . . . (‘The Son of the Man,’ i.e. of Fetahil) has failed . . .” — pp. 50-1 (Codex Nazareus, i.181)
the same essence with his father (Saturn), and called the “Son of Time,” Kronos
see: E. C. Ravenshaw, “On the Winged Bulls, Lions, and Other Symbolical Figures from Nineveh,” 1856: “It is very remarkable that Osiris was also called the son of Time, called ‘Seb,’ ‘the father of the Gods.’  In like manner the Greeks considered Jupiter to be the son of Kronos (Time) . . .” — p. 116 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, v. 16)
Sanaischara is Saturn, the planet (Sani and Sarra)
see: John Dowson, A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “ŚANI.  The planet Saturn. . . . Śani was a son of the sun and Chhāyā . . . He is also known . . . by the patronymic Śaura. . . . He is also . . . Sanaiś-chara, ‘slow-moving’ . . .” — p. 278
Saturn, who is the same as Bel . . . and Jehovah Sabbaoth
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “ ‘The Chaldeans call the God IAO, and SABAoth he is often called . . . the FATHER of the Intelligible World, Bel-Saturn . . .’ ” — p. 3
Mikael (מיכַאֶל “who is as God”)
see: Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopædia of Freemasonry, 1874: “Michael.  מיכאל.  Who is like unto God.  The chief of the seven archangels.  He is the leader of the celestial host . . . and the especial protector of Israel.” — p. 500
the guardian Angel of the Jews, as Daniel tells us . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people. . . at that time thy people shall be delivered . . .” — p. 1127 (Daniel, 12:1)
the Greek Ophites . . . identified Michael with their Ophiomorphos
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . ‘Satan Serpent-formed,’ Ophiomorphos . . . He is the combination of all that is most base in matter . . . Out of their normal hatred for Judaism, the Ophites gave this being the name of Michael, the guardian angel of the Jewish nation according to Daniel . . .” — p. 98
In the Talmud, Mikael (Michael) is “Prince of Water” . . .
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . the Government of the Creation is set forth in the Talmud . . . According to it, the government of all things is entrusted to the Angels, of whom there are seventy Princes, watching over each element, nation, and language.  Thus, Jehuel is the Prince of Fire, and has under him seven subordinates . . . Again, Michael is Prince of Water, and similarly attended by seven inferior spirits.” — pp. 38-9

— Footnotes

“To live is to die and to die is to live”
p/q: Porphyry, Select Works, “On the Cave of the Nymphs,” tr. Thomas Taylor, 1823: “ ‘Euripides (in Phryxo) says, that to live is to die, and to die to live.  For the soul coming hither, as she imparts life to the body, so she partakes (through this) of a certain privation of life . . . When separated, therefore, from the body, she lives in reality . . .’ ” — p. 195 fn. (Olympiodorus, “Commentary of the Gorgias”)

— 459-60 ―

Sanat-Sujâta, — the chief of the Kumâras
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The four Kumâras . . . [are] mind-born sons of Brahmā.  Some specify seven.  Sanat-Kumāra (or Sanat-sujāta) was the most prominent of them.” — p. 277

— 460 —

called Ambhamsi, “Waters”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The term Ambhāṃsi . . . ‘waters’ . . . is, also, a peculiar, and, probably, mystic term.  The commentator says it occurs in the Vedas, as a synonym for gods, &c. . . .” ― 1:80 fn.
the “Waters of the flood” are also called “the Great Dragon”
see: L. Vernon Harcourt, The Doctrine of the Deluge, 1838: “. . . the Egyptians, who deified the waters of the Deluge . . . the great Dragon that lieth in the midst of the rivers . . .” — 2:519
or Ophis, Ophio-Morphos
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “. . . the Spirit rests upon Chaos, or the waters of Creation, which are Matter, Water, Darkness, the Abyss.”  “. . . the Genius Ophis whom Ildabaoth had seized, and punished . . . by casting him down into the Abyss; and who, contaminated by his immersion in Matter, became converted into the exact image of his fellow-prisoner, Ophiomorphos.” — pp. 96, 99
(Vide Addenda, §§ XI. and XII., quotations from Mr. Crookes’ Lectures.)
see: “The Solar Theory,” SD 1:546-54; and “Ancient Thought in Modern Dress,” SD 1:579-87.
that “which composes and decomposes the compound bodies.”
see: Plato, Dialogues, tr. B. Jowett, 1874: “. . . the mother and receptacle of all created and visible and in any way sensible things, is not to be termed earth, or air, or fire, or water, or any of their compounds . . . but is an invisible and formless being which receives all things and attains in an extraordianry way a portion of the intelligible, and is most incomprehensible.” — 2:543 (Timaeus, § 51)
      “Now the compound or composite may be supposed to be naturally capable of being dissolved in like manner as of being compounded; but that which is uncompounded, and that only, must be, if anything is, indissoluble.” — 1:406 (Phaedo, § 78)

— 461—

In the Theogony of Moschus [Mochus], we find Æther first, and then air . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “In the theogony of Mochus, ‘The Aether was the first and the Air: these are ‘the Two Principles;’ from them Ulom the ‘Intelligible god’ was born {Movers, 282}.” — p. 188
Eros-Phanes evolves from the Spiritual Egg
  p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit History of Man, 1858: “The Orphic Eros-Phanes springs from the egg which the Aetherial winds impregnate {K. O. Müller, 236}.” — p. 188 & fn.
In the Hindu Katakopanisâd, Purusha . . . stands before the original matter . . .
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858: “ ‘In the Kathakopanishad, the Spirit (Purusha) already stands before the Original Matter, from whose union springs the Great Soul of the world (Mahan Atma, Brahma) the Spirit of life’ {Weber, Akad. Vorles.}.” — p. 189 & fn.
Creuzer defines those primitive beliefs . . . as a species of magism . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Écoutons bien Creuzer: ‘Ces croyances primitives . . . nous sommes portés à les considérer comme une espèce de magisme, comme un paganisme psychique, c’est-à-dire comme une déification des puissances, spiritualisation qui mettait les païens dans une étroite communauté avec ces puissances’ {IX.850} [Let’s listen to Creuzer: ‘These primitive beliefs . . . we tend to regard them as a species of magism, as a psychic paganism, i.e. as a deification of potencies, a spiritualization which brought the pagans into a close community with these potencies’].” — 3:400 & fn.

— 462 —

The tent which contained the Holy of Holies “was a Cosmic Symbol . . . the four cardinal points . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le tabernacle cosmique élevé par Moïse dans le désert avait une forme carrée [the Cosmic Tabernacle erected by Moses in the desert had the form of a square] . . .” — 3:397
see: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The entrance was toward the rising sun, or the vernal equinox.  The holy of holies was in the west of the structure, toward the place of the setting sun, the autumnal equinox.  The great quadrangular was oriented and faced to the four winds, or N., E., S., and W.” — p. 172
Josephus shows it built in white, the colour of Ether.
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “The holy of holies was a cube of 20 x 20 x 20 cubits . . . It was, according to Josephus, built in white, or the color of the ether.” — p. 165
a gigantic curtain, supported by five pillars, separated the sanctum sanctorum . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous comprenons aussi pourquoi, dans les temples égyptiens comme dans ceux des Hébreux, au rapport de saint Clément d’Alexandrie, un immense rideau, supporté par cinq colonnes, séparait le tabernacle, dans lequel les prêtres seuls avaient le droit d’entrer, des autres parties de l’édifice [We also understand why in the Egyptian temples as in those of the Hebrews, according to Clement of Alexandria, an enormous curtain supported by five pillars, separated the tabernacle, in which only the priests had the right to enter, from the other parts of the building].” — 3:397-8
see: Clement of Alexandria, Writings, v. 2, Stromata, tr. William Wilson, 1869, pp. 240-1.
By its four colours the curtain symbolized the four principal Elements . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ce rideau représentait, par la distinction de ses quatre couleurs, les quatre éléments principaux . . . et signifiait la connaissance de Dieu que les cinq sens de l’homme peuvent lui procurer par l’entremise des quatre éléments{Strom., l, V, §6.} [This curtain represented, by distinguishing its four colors, the four principal elements . . . and signified the knowledge of God which the five senses of man can procure for him with the help of the four elements] . . .” — 3:398 & fn.
see: Clement of Alexandria, Writings, v. 2, Stromata, tr. William Wilson, 1869, p. 240.
one of the “Chaldean Oracles” expresses ideas about the elements and Ether
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “The oracles assert, that the impression of characters, and of other divine visions, appear in the ether.”  “In this the things without figure are figured.”  “The ineffable and effable impressions of the world.”  “He makes the whole world of fire, and water, and earth, and all-nourishing ether.” — pp. 263-4 (Chaldean Oracles, 113, 114, 115, 117)
like that of the Unseen Universe . . .
see: The Unseen Universe [by Balfour Stewart & P. G. Tait], 1875: “In fine, what we generally call ether may be not a mere medium, but a medium plus the invisible order of things, so that when the motions of the visible universe are transferred into ether, part of them are conveyed as by a bridge into the invisible universe, and are there made use of or stored up.” — p. 147
It states that “from ether have come all things . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “It states that from æther have come all things, and to it all will return; that the images of all things are indelibly impressed upon it; and that it is the store-house of the germs or of the remains of all visible forms, and even ideas.  It appears as if this case strangely corroborates our assertion that whatever discoveries may be made in our days will be found to have been anticipated by many thousand years by our ‘simple-minded ancestors.’ ” — 1:189

— 463 —

Dodonean Jupiter, who included in himself the four elements . . . Jupiter Mundus
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Le Jupiter dodonéen comprenait donc, à lui seul, ce qu’on appelait les quatre principaux éléments et toutes les parties du monde physique, ce qui lui valut à Rome le titre panthéistique de Jupiter Mundus [The Dodonean Jupiter thus included in himself what were called the four principal elements and all the components of the physical world, which in Rome gave him the pantheistic title of Jupiter Mundus] . . .” — 3:377
As gods of Fire, Air, Water, they were celestial . . . as gods of the lower region, they were infernal
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Jupiter . . . Dieu collectif . . . nous l’avons vu se diviser en Jupiter aérien, fulgural, infernal, et marin; ou plutôt, dominer en maître sur ces quatre éléments de l’air, du feu, de la terre et des eaux [Jupiter . . . a collective god. . . we have seen him divide himself into Jupiter of the air, of lightning, the lower region, and the sea; or rather, as a master having dominion over those four elements of air, fire, earth, and waters.” — 3:393
If it is argued that the Dodonean Jupiter was identified with Aidoneus . . .
see: Friedrich Creuzer, Symbolik und Mythologie, 1842: “Dieser Juppiter war auch mit Aidoneus oder mit dem König der Unterwelt ein und derselbe [This Jupiter was also one and the same with Aidoneus or the King of the Underworld].” — 3:85
and Dis . . . Dionysius Chthonios, the subterranean, wherein . . . oracles were rendered
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . avec le Dis ou le Pluton des Romains, et surtout avec le Dionysius Chthoneus ou souterrain rendant des oracles [with Dis or the Roman Pluto, and above all with Dionysus Chthonios, or the subterranean Dionysus, who rendered oracles].” — 3:377
Aidoneus and Dionysius are the bases of Adonaï
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and their Remains, 1887: “ ‘Adonai,’ is converted by the Greek into Adoneus, a synonym for Pluto, and Orpheus . . . points out the identity of Bacchus [Dionysus], Pluto, and Sol.” — p. 296
Adonaï, or “Jurbo Adonaï,” as Jehovah is called in the Codex Nazaræus
see: Nimrod [by Algernon Herbert], 1829: “ ‘The Sun, the proudest of the Septem-stellars, having the names of Adonai, El-el, Jurbo, and Kadosch, will call Moses out of Mount Sinai . . .’ ” — 4:58 (Codex Nazaræus, 1:57)
“Thou shalt not worship the Sun, who is named Adonaï . . . Kadush and El-El”
p/q: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Mysteries of Adoni, 1861: “ ‘Worship not the Sun whose name is Adunai, whose name is Kadusch, whose name is El El . . .’ ” — p. 36 fn. (Codex Nazaræus, 1:47)
see also Psalm . . . [on the Solar Deity]
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Zoroastrianism,” July 1883: “ ‘In the Psalms, as well as in other parts of the Bible, the creation and government of the world are attributed to the Solar Deity . . . The Helio Deity of the Bible is continually called “God of Hosts,” “Lord of Hosts,” “Lord God of Hosts,” &c. . . . Wherever the God of Hosts is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, there can be no room for doubt that the writer meant the Sun (the Lord of the Host of Stars) . . . such as — “O Lord God of Hosts cause thy face to shine” (Psalms lxxx).’ ” — p. 243 (The Theosophist, v. 4)
and also “Lord Bacchus”
see: Godfrey Higgins, Anacalypsis, 1836: “ ‘. . . Jupiter, Pluto, the Sun, and Bacchus, are the same. . . . Iao is the Jehovah of Scripture, or the true God.  This is no other than the sun.  Iao . . . has been changed by the Greeks into Ιηιος (Ieios).’ ”  “ ‘Athenæus IX. gives Bacchus the name Ιηιος.  I doubt not but it is the great name of Jehovah . . . Jehovah Sabaoth, Lord of Hosts, in the Scripture; whence Bacchus was called Sabazius likewise.’ ” — 1:324-5
Baal-Adonis . . . became the Adonaï by the Massorah
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Mysteries of Adoni, 1861: “It is true that the Rabbins and the modern clergy call the Hebrew God’s name Adonai; but before the Rabbins added their points to the text the Old Hebrew letters were Adni (Adoni).”  “It is clear that Judaism turned its back upon the Baal or Adonis (Bacchus) worship . . . But the Mysteries lie at the foundation of the Mosaic Religion . . .” — pp. iv, xii-xiii
primitive religion was something better . . .
see: Ernest Renan, “Discussion sur la Notion de l’Unité de Dieu,” April 8, 1859: “. . . c’est Schelling, qui s’est arrêté à cette pensée que la religion primitive de notre race était autre chose que la préoccupation de phénoménes physiques [it is Schelling, who dwelled on the thought that the primitive religion of our race was something other than the preoccupation with physical phenomena] . . .” — p. 203 (Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 20)

— Footnotes

Gehenna . . . Jews immolated their children to Moloch
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “N’oublions pas encore que la vallée des Géants, près de Jérusalem, s’appelait Gehennum (géhenne, même étymologie que géant) que c’était à eux, et dans leur tophet, qu’on immolait les enfants à Moloch [And let us not forget that the valley of the Giants, near Jerusalem, was called Gehennum (gehenna, the same etymology as giant), that it was to them, and in their Tophet, that the children were sacrificed (immolated) to Moloch].” — 3:50
The Scandinavian Hel or Hela was a frigid region . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Hades was quite a different place from our region of eternal damnation, and might be termed rather an intermediate state of purification.  Neither does the Scandinavian Hel or Hela, imply either a state or a place of punishment . . . The Norse kingdom of the dead is moreover situated in the higher latitudes of the Polar regions; it is a cold and cheerless abode . . . The only designation of something approaching hell in the Bible is Gehenna or Hinnom . . .” — 2:11

— 463-4 —

and principles, more elevated than we . . . know of, “were hidden under the transparent veil . . .”
p/q: Ernest Renan, “Discussion sur la Notion de l’Unité de Dieu,” April 8, 1859: “. . . et qu’une religion plus grande, des principes plus élevés se cachaient sous le voile, transparent pour lui, de ces apparences de divinités naturelles, telles que le tonnerre, les vents et les pluies [and that a much greater religion, with much higher principles was hiding under the veil — which to it was transparent — of the appearances of these gods of nature, such as thunder, wind and rain].” — p. 203 (Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 20)

— 464 —

The four-fold Jupiter . . . the aerial, the fulgurant, the terrestrial, and the marine god . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Dieu collectif avant tout, nous l’avons vu se diviser en Jupiter aérien, fulgural, infernal et marin; ou plutôt, dominer en maître sur ces quatre éléments de l’air, du feu, de la terre et des eaux [Collective God before all, we have seen him divide himself into Jupiter of the air, the lightning, the lower region and the sea (the marine god); or rather, as a master having dominion over these four elements of air, fire, earth and waters].” — 3:393
While passing power over the fire to Hephaistos-Vulcan . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Nous l’avons vu, tout en se réservant l’air, déléguer sa puissance sur le feu à Héphaistos-Vulcain; sur la mer, à Poseidon-Neptune; et, pour la terre infernale, à Pluton-Aidoneus ou Dionysius Chthonius [While reserving the air entirely to himself, we have seen him delegate his power over the fire to Hephaistos-Vulcan; over the sea, to Poseidon-Neptune; and over the infernal earth, to Pluto-Aidoneus or Dionysus Chthonios].” — 3:393-4
Tradition points to a grotto, a vast cave in the deserts of Central Asia . . .
see: Robert Ker Porter, Travels in Georgia, Persia, Armenia, Ancient Babylonia, &c., 1822: “These subterraneous sanctuaries are found in . . . the native country of Zerdusht or Zoroaster . . . he retired to deserts, and into caves, where he abode many years . . .” — 2:496
whereinto light pours . . . crossways at the four cardinal points . . .
see: George Oliver, The History of Initiation, 1841: “. . . he [Zoroaster] retired to a circular cave or grotto . . . which he ornamented with a profusion of symbolical and astronomical decorations . . . the planets were displayed in order round him, in studs of gold glittering on a ground of azure . . . The four ages of the world were represented by so many globes of gold, silver, brass, and iron. . . . which reflected a thousand different colours and shades of colour . . .” — pp. 94-5
The magic of the ancient priests consisted . . . in addressing their gods in their own language. . . .
see: Iamblichos, Theurgia, tr. Alexander Wilder, 1911: “a language of priests . . . ‘Why are terms preferred that are unintelligible?’  They are not ‘unintelligible,’ however, as thou hast thought. . . . they, certainly, are all of them significant to the gods in a manner not divulged.  Nor can they be significant . . . through imaginings, but either spiritually by the mind which is at once divine and human, or in silence . . .”  “Hence, we believe that we ought to address our communications in speech native to the gods . . .” — pp. 243-4, 245
Paganism preached a dual . . . “creation” — “spiritualem ac mundanum”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Double création simultanée (spiritualem et mundanam) [A simultaneous dual creation (spiritual and worldy)].” — 2:308

— 465 —

“. . . gods of the gods of whom I am the maker . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Platon ne l’entendait pas autrement . . . ‘Les dieux des dieux, dont moi je suis le créateur (opifex), comme je suis le père de toutes leurs œuvres (operumque parens) [Plato did not understand it otherwise . . . ‘The gods of gods, of whom I am the maker (opifex), as I am the father of all their works (operumque parens)’].” — 2:322
see: Plato, The Timaeus, ed. R. D. Archer-Hind, 1888: “Now when all the gods had come to birth . . . he who begat this universe spake to them these words:  Gods of gods, whose creator am I and father of works . . .” — p. 137 (§ xiii)
“For though there be that are called gods . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth; as there be gods many, and lords many . . .” — p. 225 (1 Corinthians, 8:5)
“The ancients when they witnessed a natural phenomenon . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “The ancients, when they witnessed a natural phenomenon, removed from ordinary analogies, and unexplained by any mechanical action known to them, referred it to a soul, a spiritual or preternatural power . . . Air and gases were also at first deemed spiritual, but subsequently they became invested with a more material character; and the same words, πνεῦμα, spirit, &c., were used to signify the soul or a gas; the very word gas, from geist, a ghost or spirit, affords us an instance of the gradual transmutation of a spiritual into a physical conception . . .” — p. 89
“Cause and effect,” he explains, “are therefore . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Cause and effect, therefore, in their abstract relation to these forces, are words solely of convenience.  We are totally unacquainted with the ultimate generating power of each and all of them, and probably shall ever remain so; we can only ascertain the normæ of their action: we must humbly refer their causation to one omnipresent influence, and content ourselves with studying their effects and developing, by experiment, their mutual relations.” — p. xiv (“Preface to the Fifth Edition”)

— Footnotes

For a proof see the Commentaries on St. Paul’s Epistles, by St. John Chrysostom
see: John Chrysostom, The Homilies of S. John Chrysostom, “On the First Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians,” 1839.
St. Chrysostom says . . . “And, though there are (in fact) they who are called gods . . .”
p/q: John Chrysostom, Homilies on the First Epistle of St. Paul, 1839: “For though there are that be called gods, as indeed there are . . . be it in heaven or be it in earth: — in heaven, meaning the sun, and the moon, and the remainder of the choir of stars; for these too the Greeks worshipped . . .” — p. 265
“there are really several gods . . . [without] the God-principle . . . ceasing to remain essentially one . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Il semble, et l’on dit avec réalité, qu’il y a plusieurs dieux, sans que toutefois le Dieu principe et supérieur cesse de rester essentiellement seul et indivisé [It seems, and it is said in a real sense, that there are many gods, however without the God-principle and the Superior God ceasing to remain essentially one and undivided].’ ” — 2:322 (Dionysius, On The Divine Names)
see: Dionysius the Areopagite, Works, Pt. I, tr. John Parker, 1897: “. . . by the Divine likeness of many who become gods, according to their several capacity, there seems . . . a distinction and multiplication of the One God, but He is none the less the Supreme God . . . superessentially One God, — undivided in things divided . . .” — p. 26 (The Divine Names, § XI)

— 466 —

Hesiod believed . . . “the winds were the sons of the giant Typhœus”
see: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, ed. William Smith, 1850: “The master and ruler of all the winds is Aeolus . . . According to Hesiod . . . the destructive ones, as Typhon, are said to be the sons of Typhoeus.” — 3:1237
The Hesiodic Æolus, Boreas . . . were named Kadim, Tzaphon, Daren, and Ruach Hajan
see: Joshua Spalding, The Divine Theory, 1808: “. . . the four distinct movements we have described, are thought to be meant by the four winds, named in Hebrew kadim, tzaphon, darom, and rouach-hajam, which, in the scripture, are represented to be principal agents throughout the world, both in the work of creation and providence.” — 1:187
their Lord God, “with smoke coming out of his nostrils and fire out of his mouth . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “There went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth . . . And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly; and he was seen upon the wings of the wind.” — p. 438 (2 Samuel, 22:9, 11)
that oracle advised them to “sacrifice to the Winds”
p/q: Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, tr. William Wilson, 1869: “And at Delphi, on the expedition of Xerxes against Greece, the Pythian priestess having made answer: — ‘O Delphians, pray the winds . . .’ — they having erected an altar and performed sacrifice to the winds, had them as their helpers.” — p. 320 (Strom. vi.3, Writings of Clement of Alexandria, v. 2)
“God is a consuming fire” . . . “encompassed by fire”
p/q: Alexander Cruden, A Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “God hath often appeared in fire, and encompassed with fire . . .” — p. 203
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “For the Lord thy God is a consuming fire . . .” — p. 240 (Deuteronomy, 4:24)
did not Elijah seek for him . . . in the “great strong wind, and in the earthquake”?
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains . . . but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake.” — p. 480 (1 Kings, 19:11)

— 467 —

in Hebrew lightning is a synonym for fury, and is always handled by an evil Spirit
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Le chevalier Drack nous dit qu’en hébreu la foudre est toujours synonyme de fureur, et toujours maniée par l’esprit mauvais [The Chevalier Drack tells us that in Hebrew lightning is always a synonym for fury, and always handled by an evil spirit].” — 3:415 fn.
Jupiter Fulgur or Fulgurans is also called by the Christians œlicius
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Jupiter n’en est pas moins l’âme de la foudre, et s’appelle, à cause de cela, Jupiter Fulgur, ou Fulgurans, ou encore Œlicius [Jupiter is no less the soul of lightning, and because of that is called Jupiter Fulgur (‘the Thunderbolt’), or Fulgurans (‘the Source of Lightning’), or even Elicius (‘the God who calls forth lightning’)].” — 3:415 (Appendix P, “Cosmolatrie”)
“the Lord thundered from heaven . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906:
“The Lord thundered from heaven,
  And the most High uttered his voice.
  And he sent out arrows, and scattered them;
  Lightning, and discomfited them.” — p. 438 (2 Samuel, 22:14, 15)
The Athenians . . . sacrificed to Boreas . . . and wrecked 400 ships
see:  Herodotus, History of Herodotus, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “It is said that the Athenians . . . offered sacrifice both to Boreas and likewise to Orithyia . . . to destroy the ships of the barbarians . . . Such as put the loss of the Persian fleet in this storm at the lowest, say that four hundred of their ships were destroyed . . . The storm lasted three days.  At length the Magians, by offering victims to the Winds . . . while at the same time they sacrificed to Thetis and the Nereids, succeeded in laying the storm four days after it first began . . .” — 4:130-1 (“Polymnia,” 189-91)

— 468 —

“And he (Jesus) arose and rebuked the Wind . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, master, we perish.  Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was calm.” — p. 89 (Luke, 8:24)
“Oh, Virgin of the Sea . . . stay thy waves . . .”
see: Hubert Lebon, Ave Maria, 1849: “ ‘O powerful Virgin, protectress of the poor seaman . . . cast your eyes upon the waves . . . stay the boisterous winds.’ ” — pp. 71-2 (“The Ave Maria of the Mariner”)
copied . . . from that of the Phœnician mariners to the Virgin-goddess Astarte
see: Herodotus, History of Herodotus, tr. George Rawlinson, 1862: “. . . the introduction of the worship of Venus into Italy, where, as in Greece, she rose from the sea; and Astarte, the Phœnician Venus, was one of the Deities of Etruria.”
      “The Great Goddess of the East, Astarte, is found in all the colonies of the Phœnicians . . . she also occurs among the deities of the Etruscans. . . . she is frequently seen standing on the prow of a boat, being the protectress of mariners . . .” — 2:447, 451 (Appendix, “Essay I” by Wilkinson)

— 469 —

sentencing to death the philosopher Sopatrus for unchaining [enchaining] the winds
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . du philosophe Sopater {Condamné à tort ou à raison, sous Constantin, pour avoir enchaîné les vents et causé la famine en empêchant aussi l’arrivée des navires chargés de blé} [of the philosopher Sopater {Sentenced rightly or wrongly, under Constantine, for enchaining the winds and causing famine by also preventing the arrival of ships laden with wheat}].” — 3:453 & fn.
“men who by simple prayers and incantations . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Pausanias . . ‘ j’affirme avoir vu moi-même des hommes qui par de simples prières et enchantements détournèrent la grêle’ (Corinth.) [Pausanias . . . I maintain that I myself have seen men who by simple prayers and incantations averted a hailstorm].” — 3:454 fn.
see: Pausanias, The Description of Greece, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1794: “Indeed, I myself saw men who averted tempests by sacrifices and incantations.” — 1:236 (Corinthiacs, xxxiv)
Hoppo and Stadlein . . . sentenced to death for throwing charms on fruit . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . la peine portée contre les enchanteurs de fruits . . . et les transporteurs de moissons par charmes . . . le double exemple de Hoppo et de Stadelein . . . si l’on en croit le célèbre Sprenger [the punishment imposed on the charmers of fruit . . . and the transporters of harvest by magic spells . . . the double example of Hoppo and Stadlein . . . if one believes the famous Sprenger].” — 3:453-4 fn.
transferring a harvest by magic arts from one field to another . . . “Qui fruges excantassent . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . magiciens punis par la loi des Douze Tables {qui fruges excantassent . . . segetem pellicens incantando} [magicians punished by the law of the Twelve Tables {those who draw away the crops of another  . . . transporting them to their own by magic spells}].” — 3:453-4 & fn.
see: John Wordsworth, Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin, 1874: “(7) qui fruges excantassit . . . fruges excantare seems to mean ‘to charm away crops from a neighbour’s field,’ and segetem pellicere, ‘to attract them to one’s own’ . . .” — p. 527 (“The Law of the Twelve Tables,” Table VIII, § 7)
electricity . . . the “ultimate generating power” . . . the “one omnipresent influence”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Light, Heat, Electricity . . . are all convertible material affections; assuming either as the cause, one of the others will be the effect . . . We are totally unacquainted with the ultimate generating power of each and all of them . . . we must humbly refer their causation to one omnipresent influence . . .” — p. xiv
“Ethereal fire is the emanation of the Kabir . . .”
see: Stanza IV, 17: “Now what is that ‘Spiritual Fire’? . . . it is the emanation or the Ray which proceeds from its noumenon, the ‘Dhyan of the first Element.’ ”  “There is not the smallest doubt that the Kabeiri . . . are identical with the Kumāras and Rudras . . . and these Hindu dieties were, like the Kabeiri, the personified sacred Fires of the most occult powers of Nature.”  “. . . the Elements — especially fire, water, and air . . . are directly connected (in an occult way) with them.” — SD 2:105-6

— 470 —

the “Word” who was “in the beginning” . . . with the One Absolute
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God . . .” — p. 120 (John, 1:1)
It was the “Maker” . . . of all things; “without him was not anything made . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” — p. 120 (John, 1:3)
“in whom was life, and the life was the light of men”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “In him was life; and the life was the light of men.” — p. 120 (John, 1:4)
see: “I am the light of the world: he that followeth me . . . shall have the light of life.” — p. 133  (John, 8:12)
The great Dragon of Wisdom is born of Fire and Water . . . (Fa-Hwa-King).
see: Saddharma-Puṇḍarīka or The Lotus of the True Law [Fa-hua-ching], tr. H. Kern, 1884: “It is . . . as if a cloud rising above the horizon shrouds all space (in darkness) and covers the earth.  That great rain-cloud, big with water, is wreathed with flashes of lightning and rouses with its thundering call all creatures. . . . the Buddha comes into the world like a rain-cloud . . . ‘I recreate the whole world like a cloud shedding its water without distinction.’ ” — pp. 122-5 (ch. V)
see: E. M. Clerke, “Dragon Myths of the East,” July, 1887: “. . . in Buddhist cosmogony, water is the active agent in the destruction and restoration of the universe through vast alternate cycles . . . Its mysterious symbol — the Dragon of the Great Deep . . . personifying the beneficent rain-cloud . . .” — pp. 100-1 (Asiatic Quarterly Review, v. 4)
this Bodhisatva is said “to assume any form he pleases”
p/q: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “This fabulous Bodhisattwa has in China been usually represented with female attributes.  In the Fa-hwa-king, Kwan-yin is described as being able to assume any form at pleasure . . .” — p. 208
his special birthday is celebrated . . . in the second month on the nineteenth day
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “This observance rests for its authority on the Kin-kwang-ming-king, “The Bright Sutra of Golden Light.”  “Birthday of ‘Kwan-shï-yin p‘u-sa” (Avalôkitêshwara), 2d month, 19th day.” — pp. 206, 208
and that of “Maitreya Buddha” in the first month on the first day
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Birthday of Mi-li Fo (Maitreya Buddha), 1st month, 1st day.” — p. 208

— 470-1 —

The Kali yug is “l’Age d’Or” (!) only in . . . writings of some French pseudo-Occultists
see: Saint-Yves d’Alveydre, Mission des Juifs, 1884: “. . . le dernier âge, l’âge d’or . . . est le Kali-Youg, saison des grandes moissons spirituelles [the last age, the golden age . . . is the Kali-Yuga, the season of great spiritual harvests] . . .” — pp. 60-1

— 471 —

The Mantras . . . from special books kept secret . . . work a magical effect
see: Samuel Beal, Buddhism in China, 1884: “Then, after ten invocations to Kwan-yin . . . the officiating priest continues with a second reading from the books, recording the vow of Kwan-yin to deliver all living things.  Now follows the repetition of the ‘sacred words’ . . . not understood by the priests or people, but supposed to have a magical effect and bring deliverance by their inherent virtue.” — p. 153
Crowned with seven dragons, above his statue . . . “the universal Saviour of all living beings.”
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “Behind the Thibetan image is a monstrous male Kwan-yin . . . Over his head is a large circle, on which nine dragons twine themselves. . . . Above, on a tablet, is a sentence given by K‘ang-hi, P‘u-tsi-k‘iün-ling, ‘The universal saviour of all living beings.’ ” — p. 261
In a temple of Pu’to . . . Kwan-Shi-Yin is represented . . .
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “ . . . Kwan-shi-yin.  The chief seat of his worship in China is the locality in Shan-si . . . where he is regarded like . . . Kwan-yin at P‘u-to the Buddhist sacred island . . .” — p. 128
      “In a small temple . . . is an interesting representation of the eighteen Arhans crossing the sea.  They are seated on various sea animals. . . . Kwan-yin sits on some other sea animal.  He is pouring the elixir of life from a gourd.  As it flows out it becomes the genius of a star.” — pp. 263-4 (“Monasteries at P‘u-to”)
Kwan-Shi-Yin . . . on a black acquatic bird . . .
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “In a small temple . . . is an interesting representation of the eighteen Arhans crossing the sea.  They are seated on various sea animals. . . . Kwan-yin sits on some other sea animal.  He is pouring the elixir of life from a gourd.  As it flows out it becomes the genius of a star.” — pp. 263-4 (“Monasteries at P‘u-to”)
the Dalai-Lama is believed to be an incarnation of Kwan-Shi-Yin
see: Joseph Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, 1880: “The name ‘P‘u-to’ (P‘u-ta) is the same as that known in Indian ancient geography as ‘Potala’ . . . Kwan-shï-yin is said in the Hwa-yen-king to have taught the Buddhist doctrines on that island.”  “The Dalai Lama is a living incarnation of Kwan-yin, and therefore his palace-temple was called Potala.” — pp. 139, 266
the Teshu Lama is an incarnation of Amitabha
see: C. R. Markham, Narratives of Tibet and Lhasa, 1876: “This was Navang Lobsang. . . . in 1650 he visited the Emperor of China, and accepted the designation of Dalai (or ocean) Lama. . . . and since his time there have been two great incarnations of equal rank: the Dalai Lama at Potala, who is an incarnation of the Buddhisatwa Avalokiteswara; and the Teshu Lama at Teshu Lumbo, the incarnation of the Buddhisatwa Amitabha . . .” — p. xlvii
a writer must indeed have a diseased imagination to discover phallic worship everywhere . . .
see: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “General Forlong points out, too, that Khem, an Egyptian phallic deity, is also furnished with a whip . . . Quoting from Mr. McClatchey’s China Revealed . . .” — p. 273
see: J. G. R. Forlong, Rivers of Life, 1883: “. . . a missionary, the Rev. T. M’Clatchey [McClatchie], wrote that . . . ‘The old phallic God,’ as well as his God, he indignantly complains, is still ‘represented under (the same) two indecent symbols, viz., the Khëen or Yang . . . and the Khwān or Yin . . .” — 2:531 (T. McClatchie, “The Symbols of the Yin-king,” China Review, Nov. & Dec. 1872)
“the old phallic gods, represented under two evident symbols . . .”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “. . .‘the old phallic gods, represented under two evident symbols, the Kheen or Yang, which is the membrum virile, and the Khw-an or Yin, the pudendum muliebre, or Yoni’ . . .” — p. 273
“The name Avalokiteshwara . . . means ‘the Lord who looks down from on high.’ ”
p/q: T. W. Rhys Davids, Buddhism, 1886: “The name Avalokitesvara, which means ‘The Lord who looks down from on high,’ is a purely metaphysical invention.” — pp. 202-3
Nor is Kwan-Shi-Yin [Avalokiteśvara] “the Spirit of the Buddhas present in the Church”
p/q: T. W. Rhys Davids, Buddhism, 1886: “. . . Avalokitesvara, as we shall presently see, is the Spirit of the Buddhas present in the church.” — p. 203
it means “the Lord that is seen . . . the divine self perceived by Self”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “. . . Avalokita Isvar literally interpreted means ‘the Lord that is seen.’ . . . It is, when correctly interpreted, in one sense ‘the divine Self perceived or seen by Self,’ the Atman or seventh principle . . . becomes the object of perception for, and by the individuality centered in Buddhi, the sixth principle . . .” — p. 343 (K.H., Letter LIX, about July, 1883)

— 471-2 —

In a still higher sense, Avalokiteshwara . . . is the Logos perceived by the Universal Buddhi . . .
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “In the other sense Avalokitesvara implies the seventh Universal Principle, as the object perceived by the Universal Buddhi ‘Mind’ or Intelligence which is the synthetic aggregation of all the Dhyan Chohans . . .” — pp. 343-4 (K.H., Letter LIX, about July, 1883)

— 472 —

“Yogini,” which, we are told by . . . Jennings, “is . . . pronounced Yogi [Jogi] or Zogee (!) . . .”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “The female, thus worshipped, is ever after denominated Yogini, i.e. attached.  This Sanscrit word is, in the dialects, pronounced Jogi or Zogee . . . The word, from custom, has become equivalent with sena, and thus is exactly the same as Duti or Dutica (doo-ty-car).” — p. 60
“The books of morality,” in India, “direct a faithful wife to shun the society of Yogini . . .”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “The books of morality direct a faithful wife to shun the society of Yogini, or females who have been adored as Sacti. . . . amongst the votaries of a most licentious description.” — pp. 60-1
another preposterous absurdity quoted about “Budh . . . the source of generation . . .”
p/q: Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism: Celestial and Terrestrial, 1884: “The names Fiadh-Nemeadh, or Fidh-Nemead, given to them in early Irish annals, he [O’Brien] translates as Consecrated Lingams, Fidh being the plural of Budh, which signifies not only the sun as the source of generation, but also the male organ.” — p. 246 (Henry O’Brien, The Round Towers of Ireland)
“the most celebrated Chinese scholar of his time, Abel Rémusat . . .”
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “The most celebrated Chinese scholar of his time, Abel Rémusat . . . maintained that the three syllables, I Hi Wei, were meant for Je-ho-vah.” — p. 332
Father Amyot, who “feels certain that the three persons of the Trinity could be recognised” . . .
p/q: Max Müller, Introduction to the Science of Religion, 1873: “There is a passage at the beginning of the fourteenth chapter of the Tao-te-king in which Father Amyot felt certain that the three persons of the Trinity could be recognised.” — p. 331
Kwan-shi-yin, then, is “the Son identical with his Father” mystically, or the Logos — the word.
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, and the Substance of His Teachings, 1887: “In Chinese, Kwan-shai-gin is the universally manifested Word [‘the Logos’], coming from the unmanifested Absolute [‘the Father’] . . . and being identical with the former.” — p. 201 fn.
He is called the “Dragon of Wisdom” in Stanza III
see: Stanza III, 7: “He is called the ‘Blazing Dragon of Wisdom’ . . . because in Esoteric philosophy this first manifestation, being the synthesis or the aggregate of Universal Wisdom . . . contains in himself the Seven Creative Hosts . . .” — SD 1:71-2
In old Egypt, the God Nahbkoon, “he who unites the doubles” . . . was represented as a serpent
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Cette étrange divinité avait nom Nahbkôou, celui qui unit les doubles . . . Souvent c’est un serpent, debout sur deux jambes d’homme, avec ou sans les bras [This strange divinity had the name Nehebkau, he who unites the doubles . . . Often it is a serpent, standing upright on two human legs, with or without arms].” — p. 157
the serpent being an emblem of Christ with the Templars . . .
see: Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopædia of Freemasonry, 1874: “In the Templar and in the Philosophic degrees, — such as the Knight of the Brazen Serpent, where the serpent is combined with the cross, — it is evidently a symbol of Christ . . .” — p. 707
Knouph . . . “is represented among other forms under that of a huge serpent . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Le symbole de Cnouphis ou l’âme du monde . . . est donné, entre autres, sous la forme d’un énorme serpent monté sur des jambes humaines [The symbol of Knouphis or the soul of the world . . . is represented among other forms under that of a huge serpent on human legs] . . .’ ” — 3:333 (Champollion, Pantheon, 3)
“this reptile, being the emblem of the good genius and the veritable Agathodæmon, is sometimes bearded.”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘. . . ce reptile, emblème de bon génie, le véritable Agathodæmon, est souvent barbu [this reptile, emblem of the good genius, the real Agathodæmon, is often bearded] . . .’ ” — 3:333 (Pantheon, 3)
The sacred animal . . . is figured on . . . Gnostic or Basilidean gems.
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Cet animal sacré, identique à celui des Ophites, est figuré ainsi sur un très-grand nombre de pierres gravées, dites gnostiques ou basilidiennes [This sacred animal, identical with that of the Ophites, is also figured on a great number of engraved stones, called Gnostic or Basilidean].’ ” — 3:333 (Pantheon, 3)

— 472-3 —

This serpent appears with various heads . . . inscribed with the name ΧΝΟΥΒΙΣ (Chnoubis).
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Ce serpent y porte des têtes très-variées, mais il y est constamment accompagné des lettres ΧΝΟΥΒΙΣ, Chnoubis [On these (stones) this serpent bears a great variety of heads, but it is always accompanied with the letters ΧΝΟΥΒΙΣ, Chnoubis].’ ” — 3:333 (Pantheon, 3)

— 473 —

This symbol is identical with one . . . called “the first of the celestial gods” . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . c’est encore celui qui, d’après Jamblique et Champollion, ‘s’appellait Εικτῶν {Panthéon, texte 45} ou le premier des dieux célestes (le grand Hermès), auquel l’Hermès Trismégiste attribue l’invention de la magie’ [it is also he, who, according to Iamblichus and Champollion, ‘was called Εικτῶν {Panthéon, text 45} or the first of the celestial gods (the great Hermes), to whom Hermes Trismegistos attributes the invention of magic’].” — 3:333 & fn.

Part III — Addenda
Science and the Secret Doctrine Contrasted

— 475 —

“The knowledge of this nether world . . .”
p/q: Richard Francis Burton, “Zanzibar; and Two Months in East Africa,” Feb. 1858: “Said bin Salim is a Bayazi of the Kharijite schism . . . I have heard him crooning for long hours [the proverb]
‘The knowledge of this nether world,
      Say, friend, what is it? — false or true?
  The false what mortal cares to know? —
      The truth what mortal ever knew?’ ” — p. 211 (Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, v. 83)

— 477 —

So far as Science remains . . . “organized common sense”
p/q: T. H. Huxley, “On the Educational Value of the Natural History Sciences,” July 22, 1854: “Science is, I believe, nothing but trained and organized common sense . . .” — p. 77 (Lay Sermons, Addresses, and Reviews)

— 478 —

Devas and Genii . . . now termed by Science, Force, or “modes of motion”
see: Lyell Adams, “On the Value of Empirical Generalizations,” Oct. 1875: “Men still call themselves psychologists, physiologists, physicists, and so on, but the bent of them all is towards the interpretation of mind as an affection of matter, and of all affections of matter as modes of motion.” — pp. 609-10 (The New Englander, v. 34)
(Vide infra, “Gods, Monads, and Atoms”)
see: “Gods, Monads, and Atoms,” SD 1:610-34.

— 479 —

Newton’s “agent, material or immaterial” . . . which causes gravity
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘Gravity must be caused by an agent acting constantly according to certain laws; but whether this agent be material or immaterial, I have left to the consideration of my readers.’ ” — p. 54  
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Four Letters to Doctor Bentley, 1756, 26 (Letter III, Feb. 25, 1693)
one finds just as much . . . as in Kepler’s angelus rector
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The Newtonian theory of planetary motion is much more intricate than that of Kepler, according to which every planet is conducted along its path by an angelus rector [ruling angel] . . .” — p. 109
and the species immateriata by which the celestial bodies were carried along in their courses
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the well-known dreams of Kepler, who imagined that the planets were borne and carried along in their courses by an ‘immateriate species’ (species immateriata) capable of overcoming the inertia of bodies.” — p. 165
those Suns, which according to Richter — “. . . are Sun-flowers of a higher light”
p/q: Jean Paul’s Sämmtliche Werke [by J. P. F. Richter], 1828: “Sonnen sind Sonnenblumen höhern Lichts [Suns are Sunflowers of a higher light].” — p. 133 (v. 53, § V)
“Churchianity” — as Lawrence Oliphant calls it
see: Laurence Oliphant, Piccadilly, 1870: “ ‘. . . the Churchianity of the present day bears as little resemblance to the Christianity of eighteen hundred years ago, as the latter did to the worship it came to supersede . . .’ ” — p. 43
superstition . . . “renders a man a fool” . . .
p/q: Select Proverbs of all Nations, ed. Thomas Fielding, 1824: “Superstition renders a man a fool, and scepticism makes him mad.” — p. 69

— 480 —

the “Seven Governors” . . . the Spirits which guide the operations of nature
see: Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “But whence, quoth I, or whereof are the Elements of Nature made? . . . seven other Governors, which in their circles contain the Sensible World . . .” — p. 9 (ii.12, 13)
Sir Humphry Davy . . . loathed materialism.  “I heard with disgust,” he says . . .
p/q: Sir Humphry Davy, “Materialism,” June 23, 1838: “The doctrine of the materialists was always, even in my youth, a cold, heavy, dull, and insupportable doctrine to me . . . I heard with disgust, in the dissecting rooms, the plan of the physiologist, of the gradual secretion of matter, and its becoming endued with irritability, ripening into sensibility, and acquiring such organs as were necessary, by its own inherent forces, and at last rising into intellectual existence . . .” — p. 238 (The Saturday Magazine, v. 12)

— 481 —

Milton’s “Light / Ethereal, first of things, quintessence pure”
p/q: John Milton, Poetical Works, 1809:
“Let there be Light, said God; and forthwith Light
  Ethereal, first of things, quintessence pure,
  Sprung from the deep . . . for yet the sun
  Was not . . .” — 3:370 (Paradise Lost, VII.243-8)
“. . . Prime cheerer, light, / Of all material beings, first and best.”
p/q: James Thomson, The Seasons, 1818: “But yonder comes the powerful King of Day / . . . Prime cheerer, Light! / Of all material beings first, and best!” — pp. 50-1 (“Summer”)
“the first Creation of God was the light of the sense . . .”
p/q: Francis Bacon, Works, 1854-7: “The first creature of God, in the works of the days, was the light of the sense: the last was the light of the reason; and his Sabbath work ever since, is the illumination of his Spirit.” — 1:11 (Essays, “Of Truth”)
Milton, who hails the holy Light, which is the — “. . . Offspring of Heaven, first-born . . .”
p/q: John Milton, Poetical Works, 1809:
“Hail holy Light, offspring of Heaven first-born
  Or of the Eternal Coeternal beam
  . . . since God is light,
  And never but in unapproached light
  Dwelt from eternity, dwelt then in thee,
  Bright effluence of bright essence increate.” — 3:3-4 (Paradise Lost, III.1-6)

— 482 —

“working hypothesis” in a secondary sense, as Stallo puts it
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “It is true that in certain cases hypotheses which have proved to be untenable, may continue to be serviceable as ‘working hypotheses,’ in a secondary sense, as mere devices for holding together facts which have been collected by means of or with reference to them.” — p. xi (“Introduction”)
being radically inconsistent with each other . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Now, when two hypotheses are radically inconsistent with each other, one or both of them must eventually be discarded.” — p. xi
“It must not be forgotten that the several departments of Science are simply arbitrary . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “It must not be forgotten that the several departments of science are simply arbitrary divisions of science at large, and that their extent and limits are representative of nothing more than the necessities and conveniences of the division of labor.  In these several departments the same physical object may be considered under different aspects.  The physicist may study its molecular relations, while the chemist determines its atomic constitution.  But when they both deal with the same element or agent, it can not have one set of properties in physics, and another set contradictory of them in chemistry.” — p. xi
“If the physicist and chemist alike assume the existence of ultimate atoms . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “If the physicist and chemist alike assume the existence of ultimate atoms absolutely invariable in bulk and weight, the atom can not be a cube or oblate spheroid for physical, and a sphere for chemical purposes.  And a group of constant atoms can not be an aggregate of extended and absolutely inert and impenetrable masses in a crucible or retort, and a system of mere centers of force as part of a magnet or of a Clamond battery.  The universal æther can not be soft and mobile to please the chemist, and rigid-elastic to satisfy the physicist; it can not be continuous at the command of Sir William Thomson, and discontinuous on the suggestion of Cauchy or Fresnel.” — pp. xi-xii
G. A. Hirn . . . in the 43rd Volume of the Memoires de l’Academie . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . I have met with an admirable passage relating to the same subject in an article contributed by the eminent physicist, G. A. Hirn, to the forty-third volume of the Mémoires de l’Académie Royal de Belgique . . .” — p. xii fn. (Introduction)
“When one sees the assurance with which are to-day affirmed . . .”
p/q:  J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘Lorsqu’on voit l’assurance avec laquelle s’affirment aujourd’hui les doctrines qui rapportent aux seuls mouvements de l’atome l’ensemble, l’universalité des phénomènes, on est en droit de s’attendre à ce qu’il y ait unanimité aussi sur les qualités qu’on assigne à cet être unique, fondement de toute existence.  Or dès le premier examen des systèmes particuliers proposés, on éprouve la plus étrange déception; on s’aperçoit que l’atome du chimiste, celui du physicien, celui du métaphysicien, celui du mathématicien . . . n’ont absolument de commun que le nom! [When one sees the assurance with which today the doctrines are affirmed, which attribute the collectivity, the universality of phenomena to the motions alone of the atom, one has the right to expect a similar unanimity concerning the qualities ascribed to this unique being, the foundation of all that exists.  Now, from the first examination of the particular systems proposed, one feels the strangest deception; one perceives that the atom of the chemist, the atom of the physicist, that of the metaphysician, and that of the mathematician . . . have absolutely nothing in common but their name].’ ” — p. xii fn.
see: G.-A. Hirn, “Recherches expérimentales sur . . . la résistance de l’air et sa température,” July 2, 1881,  p. 68 (Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Belgique, v. 43)

— 482-3 —

“The inevitable result is the existing subdivision of our sciences . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘Résultat inévitable du morcellement actuel de nos sciences, chacun, dans son casier, se fabrique un atome qui satisfait aux exigences des phénomènes particuliers qu’il étudie, sans s’inquiéter le moins du monde des exigences propres aux phénomènes du casier voisin.  Le métaphysicien bannit les principes de l’attraction, de la répulsion, comme des rêves: le mathématicien, qui analyse les lois de l’élasticité, celles de la propagation de la lumière, les admet implicitement, sans même les nommer [As the inevitable result of the subdivision of our sciences, each one, in its own pigeon-hole, constructs an atom which satisfies the requirements of the particular phenomena it studies, without troubling itself in the least about the requirements appropriate to the phenomena of the neighboring pidgeon-hole.  The metaphysician banishes the principles of attraction and repulsion as dreams; the mathematician, who analyzes the laws of elasticity and those of the propagation of light, admits them implicitly, without even mentioning them] . . .’ ” — p. xii fn.
see: G.-A. Hirn, “Recherches expérimentales sur . . . la résistance de l’air et sa température,” July 2, 1881,  p. 68 (Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Belgique, v. 43)

— 483 —

“The chemist cannot explain the grouping of the atoms . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘Le chimiste ne peut expliquer le groupement des atomes dans ses molécules souvent si compliquées, sans attribuer à ses atomes des qualités spécifiques qui les distinguent: pour le physicien et le métaphysicien, partisans des doctrines modernes, l’atome est, au contraire, toujours et partout le même.  Que dis-je! on n’est pas plus d’accord dans une seule et même science sur les qualités de l’atome.  Chacun le construit à sa guise pour l’explication de tel phénomène restreint dont il s’occupe en particulier [The chemist cannot explain the grouping of the atoms in his often complicated molecules, without attributing to his atoms specific distinguishing qualities; for the physicist and the metaphysician, partisans of the modern doctrines, the atom is, on the contrary, always and everywhere the same.  What am I saying?  There is no agreement even within one and the same science as to the properties of the atom.  Each constructs it in his own way, in order to explain some limited phenomenon with which he is particularly concerned].’ ” — p. xii fn.
see: G.-A. Hirn, “Recherches expérimentales sur . . . la résistance de l’air et sa température,” July 2, 1881, p. 68 (Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Belgique, v. 43)
The “pre-requisite of that incessant play of the ‘scientific imagination’ ”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “It is the indispensable prerequisite of that incessant play of the ‘scientific imagination,’ upon which Professor Tyndall discourses with so much eloquence.” — p. xv
if physical theories are confessedly “mere formal, explanatory, didactic devices” . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Indeed, I am wholly at a loss to see what justification there is . . . for the charge of the reviewer in the New York ‘Nation,’ that I fail to comprehend that physical theories are ‘mere formal, explanatory, didactic devices’; that ‘atomism is a symbolical, and later a graphic, system . . .’ ” — p. xvi
“AN LUMEN SIT CORPUS, NEC NON?”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . en vain Newton avait-il émis plus d’un doute sur la corporéité de ces agents que nous nommons fluides impondérables {‘An lumen sit corpus, necnon?’} [didn’t Newton in vain express more than once his doubt about the corporeality of these agents we call imponderable fluids {‘Light is a body, is it not?’}] . . .” — 3:383 & fn.
It was he who was the first in a lecture at the London Institution, in 1842
see: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Twenty-five years having elapsed since I promulgated the views contained in this Essay, which were first advanced in a lecture at the London Institution, in January 1842 . . .” — p. vii (Preface)

— 484 —

“light, heat . . . are affections of matter itself, and not a distinct, ethereal  . . . fluid . . .”
see: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “It appears to me that heat and light may be considered as affections; or . . . vibrations of matter itself, and not of a distinct ethereal fluid permeating it.” — p. xiii
not a distinct ethereal, ‘imponderable,’ fluid
see: W. R. Grove, Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “If, instead of being regarded as a fluid or imponderable matter sui generis, electricity be regarded as the motion of an ether, equal difficulties are encountered.” ― p. 88
as for Oersted . . . Force and Forces were tacitly “Spirit . . . in Nature”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . comme pour Œrsted, le dernier mot de la science c’est ‘l’Esprit dans la nature,’ plus de fluides [i]mpondérables [as for Œrsted, the last word of science is ‘Spirit in nature,’ more (so) than imponderable fluids] . . .” — 4:146
see: Jean-Baptiste Élie de Beaumont, “Memoir of Oersted,” Dec. 29, 1862: “Oersted published, about 1850, two volumes under the title of Aanden i Naturen . . . the author introduces us, in a manner at once philosophic and popular, to the study of nature, by revealing to us the eternal spirit which determines all its phenomena . . . Vol. I. (1) Of Spirit manifested in matter.” — p. 180 fn. (Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution, 1869)
Newton would . . . lead Science back . . . Celestial bodies were propelled and guided by Intelligences
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Croiriez-vous, par example, que Newton nous ramène à Pythagore, et qu’il sera bientôt reconnu que les  corps célestes sont mus par des intelligences ? [Would you believe, for example, that Newton brings us back to Pythagoras, and that it will soon be recognized that the heavenly bodies are moved by intelligences?].’ ” — 4:153
see: Comte Joseph de Maistre, Les Soirées de Saint-Pétersbourg, v. 2, 1821, — p. 227

— Footnotes

“The question of the temperature of the sun . . .”
p/q: Robert Ward, “On Heat and Light,” Nov. 1880: “The question of the temperature of the sun has been the subject of investigation by many scientists.  Newton, one of the first investigators of the 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°; Zöllner, 102,200°; Secchi, 5,344,840°; Ericsson, 2,726,700°; Fizeau, 7,500°; Waterston, 9,000,000°; Spoerer, 27,000°; H. Saint-Claire Deville, 9,500°; Soret, 5,801,846°; Vicaire, 1,398°; Violle, 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.” — p. 685 (Journal of Science, v. 2)
(From the Theosophist.)
see: “The Imperfections of Science,” Feb. 1881, The Theosophist, v. 2, p. 115.
According to . . . Dr. Lewins . . . he [Newton] effectively disposed of Spirit
see: Robert Lewins, “Matter and Mind An Autopsy,” Aug. 1885: “Newton . . . first placed the Automatism of Matter, and its corollary the nullity of ‘Spirit’ as an inexpugnable verity . . . The average general intellect ought, since 1687, to see that since Matter does its own work no other substance is necessary . . .” — p. 493 (“Correspondence,” Journal of Science, v. 7)

— 485 —

— Footnotes

“The professed antagonism of Science to metaphysics . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the professed antagonism of science to metaphysical speculation 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 excluded middle, and resent, with the utmost vehemence, every application of the rule of consistency to their hypotheses and theories.” — pp. xviii-xix
“. . . and they regard an examination (of these) . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . and they regard an examination of their hypotheses and theories, in the light of these laws, as an impertinent intrusion of ‘a 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 . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The blindness of eminent physicists to some of the most obvious consequences of their own theories is marvelous.”  — p. xxxiii fn.
“When Prof. Tait, in conjunction with Prof. Stewart . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “When Professor Tait, in conjunction with Professor Stewart, announces that ‘matter is simply passive’ {The Unseen Universe, § 104}, and then, in connection with Sir William Thomson, declares that ‘matter has an innate power of resisting external influences’ {Treatise on Natural Philosophy, vol. i, § 216}, it is hardly impertinent to inquire how these statements are to be reconciled.” — pp. xlii-xliii & fns.
“When Prof. Du Bois Reymond . . . insists upon the necessity . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “When Professor Du Bois-Reymond, in a passage heretofore quoted, 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.” — p. xliii & fn.

— 486 —

a modification and refinement of the idea of Lucretius
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the atomic theory, since its first promulgation by the old Greek philosophers, and its elaborate statement by Lucretius, has been modified and refined.” — p. 84
Ether is accepted by . . . astronomy, in ordinary physics, and in chemistry
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . æther . . . has played a part more or less conspicuous in physical astronomy, in ordinary physics, and in chemistry.” ― p. ix (Introduction)
Astronomers, who first began by regarding it as a fluid . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “By the astronomers, this æther was originally regarded as a fluid of extreme tenuity and mobility, offering no sensible resistance to the movements of celestial bodies; and the question of its continuity or discontinuity was not seriously mooted.” — pp. ix-x
“Its main function in modern astronomy . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Its main function in modern astronomy has been to serve as a basis for hydrodynamical theories of gravitation.  In physics, this fluid for some time appeared in several rôles in connection with the ‘imponderables,’ some physicists going so far as to identify it with one or more of them.” — p. x
Kinetic theories; and . . . in optics as a substratum for luminous undulations
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884:  “. . . since the promulgation of the kinetic theories of these imponderables, and especially of the dynamical theories of heat, it [æther] has been in requisition chiefly in optics as a substratum for luminar undulations.  And here, to account for the dispersion of light, physicists came to insist upon its atomic or molecular structure . . .” — p. x (Introduction)
physicists . . . endowed the Ether with . . . an enormous elasticity, “so that its resistance . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . they had to endow it with an enormous elasticity, so that its resistance to deformation far exceeded that of the most rigid-elastic bodies.” — p. x
This necessitated the theory of the essential discontinuity of matter . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The second fundamental proposition of the modern atomic theory avouches the essential discontinuity of matter.  The advocates of the theory affirm that there is a series of physical phenomena which are inexplicable, unless we assume that the constituent particles of matter are separated by void interspaces.  The most notable among these phenomena are the dispersion and polarization of light.” — p. 92
Cauchy’s “scientific imagination” saw in atoms “material points without extension” . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . Cauchy . . . after defining atoms as ‘material points without extension,’ uses this language: ‘Thus, this property of matter which we call impenetrability is explained, when we consider the atoms as material points exerting on each other attractions and repulsions which vary with the distances that separate them . . .’ ” — p. 91
he proposed . . . that the ethereal medium . . . should consist of particles separated by sensible distances
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “This theoretical impossibility of dispersion has always been recognized as one of the most formidable difficulties of the undulatory theory.  In order to obviate it, Cauchy . . . assumed that the æthereal medium of propagation, instead of being continuous, consists of particles separated by sensible distances.” — pp. 93-4
Fresnel rendered the same service to the phenomena of polarization
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Fresnel has sought to remove the difficulties presented by the phenomena of polarization.” — p. 94
E. B. Hunt upset the theories of both . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “It is very questionable whether the assumption of ‘finite intervals’ between the particles of the luminiferous æther is competent to relieve the undulatory theory of light from its embarrassments.  This subject, in one of its aspects, has been thoroughly discussed by E. B. Hunt, in an article on the dispersion of light {Silliman’s Journal, 2d series, vol. vii, p. 364 seq.} . . .” — pp. 94-5 & fn.
There are now men of Science who proclaim them “materially fallacious”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the argument in question is not only formally, but also materially, fallacious.” — p. 94
The supposition of an atomic or molecular constitution of ether is upset
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The negative evidence here adduced against the supposition of an atomic or molecular constitution of the light-bearing medium is reënforced by positive evidence derived from a branch of the atomic theory itself — the modern science of thermo-dynamics.” — p. 97
Maxwell showed that such a medium would be simply gas.
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Maxwell has remarked, with obvious truth, that such a medium . . . would be nothing more nor less than a gas, though a gas of great tenuity . . .” — pp. 97-8
The hypothesis of “finite intervals” is thus proven to no avail . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The hypothesis of ‘finite intervals’ is unavailable as a supplement to the undulatory theory . . .” — p. 97
eclipses fail to reveal any such variation of colour as supposed by Cauchy
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Unfortunately for Cauchy’s hypothesis, the most careful observation of the eclipses in question has failed to reveal any such variations of colour . . .” — p. 96

— Footnotes

See Clerk Maxwell’s “Treatise on Electricity . . .”
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “An electro-magnetic theory of light . . . was broached by Clerk Maxwell in 1865, and has recently been set forth at some length in his ‘Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism,’ vol. ii, pp. 383 seq.” — p. 97 fn.
and compare with Cauchy’s “Memoire sur la Dispersion de la lumière”
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Since the publication of Cauchy’s ‘Mémoire sur la dispersion de la lumière’ . . . the most prominent physicists . . . now look for an explanation of the phenomena of the dispersion to the action of ponderable matter, or to the interaction between it and the æther.” — p. 97 fn.

— 487 —

the atomo-molecular constitution of the ether . . . is found quite subversive . . . of well-ascertained facts
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “But presently, in other departments of physics, the admission of the molecular or atomic constitution of the æther led to consequences subversive of a number of well-ascertained facts . . .” — p. x (Introduction)
Hirn’s charges being thus justified (vide supra)
see: “Modern Physicists are Playing at Blind Man’s Buff”: “. . . Hirn, may likewise be quoted . . . ‘the atom of the chemist, the atom of the physicist, that of the metaphysician, and that of the mathematician . . . have absolutely nothing in common but the name!  . . . Each constructs an atom to suit his own fancy, in order to explain some special phenomenon with which he is particularly concerned.’ ” — SD 1:482-3
Chemistry deemed it impossible to concede enormous elasticity to the ether . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “And in chemistry, too, it was found impossible to concede the enormous elasticity of the æther without depriving it of those properties upon which its serviceableness in the construction of chemical theories mainly depended.” — p. x (Introduction)
The exigencies of the atomo-mechanical theory . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the exigencies of the atomo-mechanical theory have led distinguished mathematicians and physicists to attempt a substitution, for the ordinary atoms of matter, of peculiar forms of vortical motion in a universal, homogeneous, incompressible, and continuous material medium, which . . . must, of course, be identical with the all-pervading æther.” — p. x (Introduction)

— 487-8 —

there is no physical action, “which, on close examination, does not resolve itself into actio in distans”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “In discussing this, I will not stop to inquire whether it be true or not that distant action is not a familiar fact; or, indeed, whether we have any experience of physical action which, on close examination, does not resolve itself into actio in distans.” — p. xxiii

— 488 —

metaphysical arguments . . . are “unconscious appeals to experience.”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘Metaphysical arguments, in so far as they have any weight or validity whatever, are unconscious appeals to experience . . .’ ” — p. xxii
see: Oliver Lodge, “The Ether and Its Functions,” Jan. 25, 1883,  p. 304 (Nature, v. 27).
if such an experience is not conceivable, then it does not exist
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘. . . if it is not conceivable, he has some prima facie ground for asserting that it probably does not exist.’ ” — p. xxiii
see: Oliver Lodge, “The Ether and Its Functions,” Jan. 25, 1883,  p. 304 (Nature, v. 27).
“If a highly developed mind or set of minds, find a doctrine . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884 : “ ‘If a highly-developed mind, or set of minds, find a doctrine about some comparatively simple and fundamental matter absolutely unthinkable, it is an evidence, and it is accepted as good evidence, that the unthinkable state of things is one that has no existence . . .’ ” — p. xxiii
see: Oliver Lodge, “The Ether and Its Functions,” Jan. 25, 1883, p. 304 (Nature, v. 27)
the explanation of cohesion, as well as of gravity, “is to be looked for in the vortex-atom theory . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . toward the end of his lecture, Professor Lodge indicates that the explanation of cohesion, as well as of gravity, is to be looked for in the vortex-atom theory of Sir William Thomson.” — p. xxiii
the dropping down on earth of the first life-germ by a passing meteor or comet
see: Sir William Thomson, “Inaugural Address of the President of British Association,” Aug. 4, 1871: “. . . we must regard it as probable in the highest degree that there are countless seed bearing meteoric stones moving about through space . . . The hypothesis that life originated on this earth through moss-grown fragments from the ruins of another world . . . is not unscientific.” — p. 56 (Chemical News, 24:610)
the author asks “whether . . . the elements of the vortex-theory are . . . facts of experience? . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “I will content myself with inquiring whether or not the elements of the vortex-atom theory are familiar, or even possible, facts of experience.  For, if they are not, clearly that theory is obnoxious to the same criticism which is said to invalidate the assumption of actio in distans.” — pp. xxiii-xxiv
“The medium in which the vortex-movements arise . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The medium in which the vortex-movements arise is, according to Professor Lodge’s own express statement {‘Nature,’ vol. xxvii, p. 305}, ‘a perfectly homogeneous, incompressible, continuous body, incapable of being resolved into simple elements or atoms; it is, in fact, continuous, not molecular.’  And, after making this statement, Professor Lodge adds, ‘There is no other body of which we can say this, and hence the properties of the æther must be somewhat different from those of ordinary matter.’  It appears, then, that the whole vortex-atom theory, which is offered to us as a substitute for the ‘metaphysical theory’ of actio in distans, rests upon the hypothesis of the existence of a material medium which is utterly unknown to experience, and which has properties somewhat different from those of ordinary matter.” — p. xxiv

— 488-9 —

“Hence this theory, instead of being, as is claimed . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Hence this theory, instead of being, as is claimed, a reduction of an unfamiliar fact of experience to a familiar fact, is, on the contrary, a reduction of a fact which is perfectly familiar, to a fact which is not only unfamiliar, but wholly unknown, unobserved, and unobservable.  Furthermore, the alleged vortical motion of, or rather in, the assumed æthereal medium is . . . impossible, because ‘motion in a perfectly homogeneous, incompressible, and therefore continuous fluid, is not sensible motion.’ ” — pp. xxiv-xxv

— Footnotes

“Somewhat different!” exlaims Stallo.  “The real import of this ‘somewhat’ is . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Somewhat different!  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 aether here defined is not only destitute of differences, but incapable of difference and change.” — p. xxiv fn.

— 489 —

“It is manifest, therefore, that wherever the vortex-atom theory may lead us . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “It is manifest, therefore . . . that, wherever the vortex-atom theory may land us, it certainly does not land us anywhere in the region of physics, or in the domain of verœ causœ.  And I may add that, inasmuch as the hypothetical undifferentiated and undifferentiable medium is clearly an involuntary reification of the old ontological concept pure being, the theory under discussion has all the attributes of an inapprehensible metaphysical phantom.” — p. xxvi
Cauchy’s “material points without extension”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “There are physicists holding this view who are of opinion that the atomic constitution of matter is consistent with its penetrability — among them M. Cauchy . . . defining atoms as ‘material points without extension.’ ” — p. 91
regarding the atoms as “material points exerting on each other attractions and repulsions . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “[Cauchy] uses this language: ‘Thus, this property of matter which we call impenetrability is explained, when we consider the atoms as material points exerting on each other attractions and repulsions which vary with the distances that separate them.’ ” — p. 91
“From this it follows that, if it pleased the author of nature . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘From this it follows that, if it pleased the author of Nature simply to modify the laws according to which the atoms attract or repel each other, we might instantly see the hardest bodies penetrating each other, the smallest particles of matter occupying immense spaces, or the largest masses reducing themselves to the smallest volumes, the entire universe concentrating itself, as it were, in a single point.’{Sept Leçons de Physique Générale, ed. Moigno, p. 38 seq.}” — pp. 91-2 & fn.

— 490 —

Has not Newton himself expressed grave doubts about the Nature of Force . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . en vain Newton avait-il émis plus d’un doute sur la corporéité de ces agents que nous nommons fluides impondérables [has not Newton in vain expressed more than one doubt about the corporeality of those agents that we call imponderable fluids].” — 3:383
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Four Letters to Doctor Bentley, 1756: “You sometimes speak of Gravity as essential and inherent to Matter.  Pray do not ascribe that Notion to me; for the cause of Gravity is what I do not pretend to know . . .” — p. 20 (Letter II, Jan. 17, 1693)
“it is not so sure whether those agents were not Spiritual Powers . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “En vain notre grand Cuvier avait-il répété, du haut de sa grande autorité, ‘on n’a pas encore décidé si ces agents sont ou ne sont pas spirituels’ {Révolutions du globe} [Didn’t our great Cuvier, at the height of his authority, repeat in vain that ‘it has not yet been decided whether these agents are spiritual or not’].” — 3:383
Sir Isaac Newton . . . did not use the word “attraction” . . . in a physical sense
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “At the very outset of his Principia he carefully guarded against the imputation that he looked upon gravity as an essential and inherent attribute of matter . . . The force which urges bodies in their central approach was to him, as he expressly says, a purely mathematical concept involving no consideration of real and primary physical causes {Princ., Def. viii}.” — p. 53 & fn.
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Principia, tr. Andrew Motte, 1848: “I likewise . . . use the words attraction, impulse or propensity of any sort towards a centre, promiscuously, and indifferently, one for another; considering those forces not physically, but mathematically: wherefore, the reader is not to imagine . . . that I attribute forces, in a true and physical sense, to certain centres (which are only mathematical points) . . .” — p. 77 (Definition VIII)
“there is some subtile spirit by the force and action of which all movements . . . are determined”
p/q: W. F. Wilkinson, Modern Materialism, 1888: “In the end of his great work he [Newton] seems inclined to the opinion that there is some subtle spirit by the force and action of which all movements of matter are determined.” — p. 9 (Present Day Tracts)

— 490-1 —

“It is inconceivable that inanimate brute matter . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘It is inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should, without the mediation of something else which is not material, operate upon and affect other matter, without mutual contact, as it must do if gravitation, in the sense of Epicurus, be essential and inherent in it.’ ” — p. 53
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Four Letters to Doctor Bentley, 1756, p. 25 (Letter III, Feb. 25, 1693).

— 491 —

“That gravity should be innate, inherent and essential to matter . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘That gravity should be innate, inherent and essential to matter, so that one body may act upon another at a distance, through a vacuum, without the mediation of anything else by and through which their action may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.  Gravity must be caused by an agent acting constantly according to certain laws; but, whether this agent be material or immaterial, I have left to the consideration of my readers.’ ” — pp. 53-54
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Four Letters to Doctor Bentley, 1756, pp. 25-6 (Letter III, Feb. 25, 1693)
Newton’s contemporaries got frightened — at the apparent return of occult causes . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . Newton’s contemporaries took alarm at the apparent return of occult causes into the domain of physics. . . . Leibnitz called it ‘an incorporeal and inexplicable power’ . . .” — p. 55
supposition of an attractive faculty and a perfect void . . . “revolting”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “John Bernouilli . . . denounced ‘the two suppositions of an attractive faculty and a perfect void’ as ‘revolting to minds accustomed to receiving no principle in physics save those which are incontestable and evident.’ ” — p. 55            
Euler . . . thought the action of gravity was due to either a Spirit or some subtle medium.
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Euler observed that the action of gravity must be due either to the intervention of a spirit or to that of some subtle material medium escaping the perception of our senses . . .” — p. 55
And yet Newton knew of . . . the Ether of the Ancients.
see: Isaac Newton, “An Hypothesis explaining the Properties of Light discoursed in my several Papers,” Dec. 7, 1675:  “Perhaps the whole frame of nature may be nothing but various contextures of some certain aethereal spirits . . . Thus perhaps may all things be originated from aether.” — p. 250 (“Letter to Henry Oldenburg,” History of the Royal Society, v. 3, 1757)
“No matter without force, no force without matter . . .”
p/q: W. F. Wilkinson, Modern Materialism, 1888: “No matter without force, and no force without matter; matter and force are inseparable, eternal and indestructible; there can be no independent force, since all force is an inherent and necessary property of matter; consequently there can be no immaterial creating power.” — p. 15 (Present Day Tracts)
see: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, 1864: “. . . we decidedly deny the existence of an independent force dominating the physical and chemical forces . . .”  “No force without matter — no matter without force!” — pp. lii, 2

— 492 —

Grove . . . sees “no reason to divest universally diffused matter . . .”
p/q: Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “Professor W. R. Grove, in a lecture at the London Institution . . . added: ‘With regard to the planetary spaces, the diminishing periods of comets is a strong argument for the existence of a universally diffused matter; this has the function of resistance, and there appears to be no reason to divest it of the functions common to all matter’ {Grove: Correlation of the Physical Forces, Youmans’ ed., Preface, 6 and 7}.” — p. 52 & fn.
uses the term Forces where his critics, “who do not attach to the word any idea of a specific action” . . .
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Again, the use of the term forces in the plural might be objected to by those who do not attach to the term force the notion of a specific agency . . .” — p. 168
Newton . . . having given the death-blow to the Elemental Vortices . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “En faisant rentrer dans la gravitation universelle toutes les lois qui président à la marche des cieux, Newton portait un coup mortel aux tourbillons de Descartes [In reintroducing into universal gravity all the laws that govern the course of the heavenly bodies, Newton gave a deathblow to the vortices of Descartes] . . .” — 4:144
when his disciple Forbes [Cotes] wrote in the Preface . . .
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, 2nd ed. [with a Preface by Roger Cotes], 1713.
“attraction was the cause of the System”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Forbes [Cotes] . . . s’avisa de publier, dans la préface qu’il joignait à l’œuvre capitale de son maître, que ‘ l’attraction était la cause du système.’  A ce mot, Newton se souleva tout indigné et s’inscrivit solennellement en faux contre le disciple qu’il aimait [Forbes (Cotes) . . . was so bold as to publish, in the preface that he added to the main work of his teacher, that ‘attraction was the cause of the system.’  Newton protested indignantly and solemnly contradicted the student he loved].” — 4:144

— Footnotes

“Attraction . . . has now become . . . a simple word, an idea”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Suivant le très-savant M. Le Couturier, ‘l’attraction ne serait plus pour tout le monde que ce qu’elle était pour Newton lui-même, un simple mot, une idée’ [According to the very learned Lecouturier, ‘for all the world attraction would not be more than it was for Newton himself, a simple word, an idea’].” — 4:145
see: C. H. Lecouturier, Panorama des Mondes, 1858: “Parmi les conséquences de la théorie du vide établie par Newton, il ne reste plus debout que le mot attraction [Of the consequences of the theory of empty space established by Newton, nothing remains but the word attraction].” — p. 53
“the existence of causes that act for us under a veil . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Mais il fallait bien permettre à J.-F.-W. Herschell de dire: ‘En étudiant les phénomènes de l’attraction, nous nous pénetrons, à chaque instant, de l’existence de causes qui n’agissent que sous un voile qui nous dérobe leur action directe’ {Musée des sciences, août 1856} [But we had to allow J. F. W. Herschel to say: ‘In studying the phenomena of attraction, every moment we are impressed with the idea of the existence of the causes that act only under a veil, which for us conceals their direct action’].” — 4:145 & fn.
“Thou shalt not revile the gods”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Thou shalt not revile the gods . . .” — p. 101 (Exodus, 22:28)
“He that sacrificeth to any God . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.” — p. 101 (Exodus, 22:20)

— 492-3 —

For Pythagoras the Forces were Spiritual Entities, Gods independent of planets and Matter . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Pour Pythagore, il s’agissait bien de recteurs spirituels indépendants et chargés de la conduite des astres qui leur étaient confiés {Vossius, 2:528} [For Pythagoras, they were the independent spiritual Rectors and those charged with guiding the stars with which they were entrusted].” — 4:141 & fn.

— 493 —

the planets . . . moved by an intrinsic Rector . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Pour Platon . . . les astres étaient mus par un recteur intrinsèque, représentant pour lui ‘le batelier dans son bateau’ [As Plato saw it . . . the heavenly bodies were moved by an intrinsic rector, representing to him ‘the boatman in his boat’].” — 4:141
see: Ernest Hello, “L’Homme,” 1877: “Pour Platon l’âme est accidentellement dans le corps: si elle est unie à lui, c’est . . . de la même façon que le batelier est uni au bateau [For Plato the soul just happens to be in the body: if it is united to it, it is in the same way that the boatman is one with the boat].” — p. 522 (Revue du Monde Catholique, v. 49)
Aristotle . . . called those rulers “immaterial substances”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Pour Aristote . . . les astres étaient mus par des moteurs éternels, qu’il appelait substances immatérielles [As Aristotle saw it . . . the heavenly bodies were moved by eternal moving powers, which he called immaterial substances] . . .” — 4:141
see: Aristotle, Metaphysics, tr. John H. McMahon, 1857: “Again, which of the four causes is Ontology principally concerned with? . . . it deals with immaterial substances . . .” — p. lxii (Analysis, Book X)
he rejected the gods as Entities (See Vossius . . .)
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Ce qui rend encore plus étonnant, dit Vossius, qu’il n’ait pu s’élever jusqu’à l’angélologie’ {Vossius, 2:528} [What is even more surprising, says Vossius, that he is unable to rise to the level of the angelology (doctrine of divine entities)].” — 4:141 & fn.
the stars and planets “were not inanimate masses but acting and living bodies . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Il n’en reconnaissait pas moins que les astres n’étaient pas des corps inanimés, mais bien des corps agissants et vivants . . . {De Cœlo, I. 9.} [He (Aristotle) realized none the less that the heavenly bodies were not inanimate bodies, but acting and living bodies indeed].” — 4:141
As if “sidereal spirits were the divine portion of their phenomena, τά θειότερα τῶν φανερῶν”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . comme si des esprits sidéraux étaient la partie divine des phénomènes, τὰ θειoτερα τῶν φανερῶν {De Cælo, I.9} [as if sidereal spirits were the divine part of the phenomena].” — 4:141 & fn.
see: Alexander von Humboldt, Cosmos, tr. E. C. Otté, 1851: “. . . in these theories the Godhead is attended by a number of astral spirits, who . . . maintain the planets in their eternal orbits {The stars are not inanimate bodies, but must be regarded as active and living beings (De Cælo, ii.12). . . . They are the most divine of created things; τὰ θειότερα τῶν φανερῶν (Aristot. De Cælo, I.9).}” — 3:15-16 & fn.
we find Tycho Brahè recognising in the stars a triple force, divine, spiritual and vital
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Riccioli . . . analyse ensuite les trois opinions différentes:  1. les forces physiques; 2. l’action de Dieu; 3. l’action des anges.  Il y ajoute celle de Ticho, leur reconnaissant une triple force, divine, spirituelle et vitale [Riccioli . . . then analyzes the three different opinions:  1. the physical forces; 2. the action of God; 3. the action of the angels.  He adds to these the opinion of Tycho, recognizing them as a triple force, divine, spiritual and vital] . . .” — 4:143
Kepler, putting together . . . “The Sun, guardian of Jupiter,” and . . . “He placed his throne in the Sun”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Képler, en effet, après avoir médité longtemps sur ce mot de Pythagore: ‘Le soleil gardien de Jupiter’; sur le verset de David: ‘Il a placé son siége [siège] dans le soleil’ [Kepler, in fact, after having thought a long time on the words of Pythagoras: ‘The Sun, guardian of Jupiter’; on the verse of David: ‘He has placed his throne in the Sun’] . . .” — 4:143
all the globes disseminated through Space were rational intelligences . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . nous ne pouvons plus nous étonner si quelqu’un, d’après certaines considérations pythagoriciennes, se met à imaginer que tous les globes disséminés dans l’espace sont autant d’âmes raisonnables (facultates ratiocinativas) circulant autour du soleil, dans lequel réside un pur esprit de feu . . . roi, ou, pour le moins, reine et source de l’harmonie générale {De Motibus planetarum harmonicis, p. 248}[we can no longer be surprised if someone, after certain Pythagorean considerations, begins to imagine that all the globes spread out through space are just as much rational souls (facultates ratiocinativas) circling around the sun, in which lives a pure spirit of fire . . . king, or at least queen and source of general harmony].” — 4:143 & fn.

— Footnotes

“the Lord God said: Behold the Man has become as one of us”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil . . .” — p. 4 (Genesis, 3:22)
To liken the “immateriate species to wooden iron,” and laugh at Spiller referring to them . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Kepler’s ‘immateriate species’ is the same wooden iron which Spiller exhibits under the name ‘incorporeal matter’ . . .” — p. 165

— 494 —

The Athenæum of Jan. 26, 1867, has some curious information upon this subject.
see: Augustus De Morgan, A Budget of Paradoxes, “Reprinted, with the Author’s Additions, from The ‘Athenæum,’ ” 1872.
“positive evidence can be adduced that Newton derived . . .”
p/q: Augustus De Morgan, A Budget of Paradoxes, 1872: “. . . positive evidence can be adduced that Newton derived all his knowledge of gravitation and its laws from Behmen, with whom gravitation or attraction is . . . the first of the seven properties of Nature.” — p. 462
“his (Bœhme’s) system, shows us the inside of things . . .”
p/q: Augustus De Morgan, A Budget of Paradoxes, 1872: “Behmen’s system, in fact, shows us the inside of things, while modern physical science is content with looking at the outside.”  “Thus, the science of electricity, which was not yet in existence when he wrote, is there anticipated; and not only does Behmen describe all the now known phenomena of that force, but he even gives us the origin, generation and birth of electricity itself.” — p. 462
“every new scientific discovery goes to prove . . .”
p/q: Augustus De Morgan, A Budget of Paradoxes, 1872: “Every new scientific discovery goes to prove his profound and intuitive insight into the most secret workings of nature . . .” — p. 462
he was “persuaded that the power of attraction could not be exerted by matter . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Newton, as his well known letter to Bentley proves, was persuaded that the power of attraction could not be exerted by matter across a vacuum.” — p. 50
“These passages . . . show what were his views . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “These passages show what were his views respecting the nature of the interplanetary medium of communication.” — p. 50

— Footnotes

“Il n’est plus possible aujourd’hui, de soutenir, comme Newton . . .”
p/q: C. H. Lecouturier, Panorama des Mondes, 1858: “Il n’est plus possible aujourd’hui, de soutenir comme Newton, que les corps célestes se meuvent au milieu du vide immense des espaces [Today it is no longer possible to maintain, as Newton did, that the heavenly bodies move in the immense emptiness of space].” — p. 47
“Parmi les conséquences de la théorie du vide . . .”
p/q: C. H. Lecouturier, Panorama des Mondes, 1858: “Parmi les conséquences de la théorie du vide établie par Newton, il ne reste plus debout que le mot attraction. . . . Nous voyons venir le jour où le mot attraction disparaîtra du vocabulaire scientifique [Of the consequences of the theory of empty space established by Newton, nothing remains but the word attraction. . . . We will see the day when the word attraction will disappear from the vocabulary of science] . . .” — p. 53

— 494-5 —

“Though declaring that the heavens ‘are void of sensible matter’ . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Though declaring that ‘the heavens are void of all sensible matter,’ he elsewhere excepted ‘perhaps some very thin vapors, steams and effluvia, arising from the atmosphere of the earth, planets and comets, and from such an exceedingly rare ethereal medium as we have elsewhere described {Newton: Optics, Bk. III, Query 28, 1704}.” — p. 50 & fn.

— 495 —

Dr. T. S. Hunt “called attention to some long-neglected passages . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Dr. T. S. Hunt has called attention to some long-neglected passages in Newton’s works, from which it appears that a belief in such universal, intercosmical medium gradually took root in his mind {Hunt: Celestial Chemistry from the Time of Newton . . . Nov. 28, 1881}.” — pp. 49-50 & fn.
“the idea was universal, even among men of Science, that Newton had . . . preached a void”
see: William Jones, Theological, Philosophical and Miscellaneous Works, 1801: “. . . it was generally believed by learned men, that a Vacuum had actually been demonstrated by our great Newton . . .” — p. 4 (Vol. 9, Introduction)
The old sages had maintained that “Nature abhorred vacuum”
p/q: Blaise Pascal, Oeuvres de Blaise Pascal, 1819: “Que tous les disciples d’Aristote assemblent tout ce qu’il y a de fort dans les écrits de leur maître . . . que la nature abhorre le vide [Let all the disciples of Aristotle bring together all the bits of strong reasoning in the writings of their master . . . that nature abhors a vacuum] . . .” — 4:281
see: Plato, Works, v. 2, tr. Henry Davis, 1849: “. . . owing to the imitation of Divine harmony that exists in mortal motions. . . . no real attraction takes place at all; but as a vacuum can nowhere be found, the particles are mutually impelled by each other . . .” — p. 394 (Timæus, § 60)
Recede ut procedes must become the motto of exact Science
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . nous devons nous appuyer sur notre ancienne maxime, ‘recede ut procedas, reculer pour avancer,’ et demander aux plus anciennes traditions une vérité que sans elles nous ne saurions plus comprendre [we must rely on our old maxim, ‘go back in order to proceed,’ and request from the oldest traditions a truth which, without them, we would no longer understand].” — 2:380

— 496 —

As Faye says: “Il manque quelque chose aux géologues . . .”
p/q: Winchell, World-Life, 1883:  “ ‘Il manque quelque chose aux géologues pour faire la géologie de la Lune, c'est d'être astronomes. A la vérité, il manque aussi quelque chose aux astronomes pour aborder avec fruit cette étude, c'est d'être géologues.’ [‘The geologists are lacking something to study the geology of the moon: they are not astronomers.  Truly, the astronomers are also lacking something for a fruitful pursuit of this study:  they are not geologists.’] — M. Faye.”  — p. 379
see: H. Faye, “Comparaison de la Terre et de la Lune au point de vue géologique,” Feb. 10, 1881, p. 61 (Journal d’Hygiène, v. 6)
“Much harm has already been done . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Much harm has already been done by attempting hypothetically to dissect matter and to discuss the shapes, sizes, and numbers of atoms, and their atmospheres of heat, ether, or electricity.” — p. 170
“Whether the regarding electricity, light, magnetism . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Whether the regarding electricity, light, magnetism, &c., as simply motions of ordinary matter be or be not admissible, certain it is, that all past theories have resolved, and all existing theories do resolve, the actions of these forces into motion.” — p. 170

— Footnotes

he must have hesitated between gravitation and attraction, impulse and some other unknown cause
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Opticks, 1718: “. . . Bodies act one upon another by the Attractions of Gravity, Magnetism, and Electricity . . . What I call Attraction may be perform’d by impulse, or by some other means unknown to me.” — pp. 350-1

— 496-7 —

“Whether it be that, on account of our familiarity with motion . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Whether it be that, on account of our familiarity with motion, we refer other affections to it, as to a language which is most easily construed and most capable of explaining them, or whether it be that it is in reality the only mode in which our minds, as contradistinguished from our senses, are able to conceive material agencies, certain it is that since the period at which the mystic notions of spiritual or preternatural powers were applied to account for physical phenomena, all hypotheses framed to explain them have resolved them into motion.” — p. 170

— 497 —

“The term perpetual motion . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “The term perpetual motion, which I have not unfrequently employed in these pages, is itself equivocal.  If the doctrines here advanced be well founded, all motion is, in one sense, perpetual.  In masses whose motion is stopped by mutual concussion, heat or motion of the particles is generated; and thus the motion continues, so that if we could venture to extend such thoughts to the universe, we should assume the same amount of motion affecting the same amount of matter for ever.” — p. 173
the theory of attraction and repulsion . . . was known from the days of Empedocles . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The conception of attraction and repulsion had come down from the epoch of Empedocles, by whom they were designated ‘love’ and ‘hate’ . . .” — p. 553
Kepler gave a pretty fair description of cosmic magnetism.
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “When, therefore, Kepler projected a theory employing attraction and repulsion, he attributed these actions to cosmical magnetism.” — p. 553

— Footnotes

“where force is made to oppose force . . .”
p/q: W. R. Grove, The Correlation of Physical Forces, 1874: “Where force is made to oppose force, and produce static equilibrium, the balance of pre-existing equilibrium is affected, and fresh motion is started equivalent to that which is withdrawn into a state of abeyance.” — p. 173
“Trans-solar space,” writes the great Humboldt . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘L’espace transsolaire . . . ne montre jusqu’à present aucun phénomène analogue à notre système solaire.  C’est une particularité du nôtre, que la matière s’y soit condensée en anneaux nébuleux, dont le noyau se durcit en terres et en lunes [Trans-solar space . . . does not hitherto show any phenomenon analogous to our solar system.  It is a peculiarity of our system that matter would be condensed within it in nebulous rings, of which the nucleus hardened into earths and moons].’ ”   — 4:138
see: A. Nefftzer, “Lettres et Conversations d’Alexandre de Humboldt,” 1860, pp. 727-8 (Revue Germanique, v. 12)
“. . . heretofore, nothing of the kind has ever been observed beyond our planetary system”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8:   “ ‘. . . on n’a jusqu’à présent rien observé de semblable en dehors de notre système solaire.’ (Voir, dans la Revue germanique du 31 décembre 1860, l'article intitulé Lettres et conversations d’Alexandre de Humboldt.) [‘. . . heretofore, nothing of the kind has ever been observed beyond our solar system.’ (See, in the Revue germanique of December 31, 1860, an article titled Lettres et conversations d’Alexandre de Humboldt)].” — 4:138

— 497-8 —

there are many phenomena in our Solar system, which he confessed his inability to explain
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Some of the phenomena of our system Newton confessed his inability to refer to the principles of gravitation.” — p. 607

— 498 —

“Such were the uniformity in the directions of the planetary movements . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Such were the uniformity in the directions of planetary movements, the nearly circular form of the orbits, and their remarkable conformity to one plane.” — p. 607
“These adjustments . . . ‘the work of an intelligent and all-powerful Being.’ ”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “These adjustments Newton, in his general scholium, pronounces to be ‘the work of an intelligent and all-powerful Being.’ ” — p. 607
“Might not those arrangements be an effect of the laws of motion?”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “ ‘But,’ asks Laplace, ‘might not these arrangements be an effect of the laws of motion; and might not the supreme intelligence which Newton invoked have caused them to depend on a more general phenomenon?’ ” — pp. 607-8
“Dieu est devenu une hypothèse inutile”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . deux siècles après ce grand homme [Newton], ce fît au nom de l’attraction que le marquis de Laplace prononçât son terrible mot déjà cité: ‘Dieu lui-même est devenu une hypothèse inutile’ [two centuries after that great man, it was in the name of attraction that the Marquis de Laplace uttered his terrible remark, already quoted: ‘God himself has become a useless hypothesis’].” — 4:145
Kepler is again criticised for his “curious hypothesis which made use of a vortical movement . . .”
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The celebrated Kepler, about 1595, devised a curious hypothesis which made use of a vortical movement within the solar system.” — p. 553
for his favouring Empedocles’ idea of attraction and repulsion, and “Solar magnetism”
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The conception of attraction and repulsion had come down from the epoch of Empedocles . . . When . . . Kepler projected a theory employing attraction and repulsion, he attributed these actions to cosmical magnetism.  The sun was regarded by him as a great magnet . . . The whole surface of the sun was regarded as attractive, while the centre was repulsive.  These two forces were everywhere in equilibrium . . .” — pp. 553-4
“to the time of Kepler no interaction between masses of matter . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . to the time of Kepler, no interaction between masses of matter had been distinctly recognized which was generically different from magnetism.” — p. 553

— 499 —

The Sun is a great Magnet. . . . The Solar substance is immaterial.
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The sun was regarded by him [Kepler] as a great magnet revolving on an axis whose position had been determined by the Divine Being {See . . . Delambre: Astronomie du Moyen Age}.  The solar substance was immaterial, and sent forth radially an emanation of the same substance.” — pp. 553-4 & fn. (“Speculations of Kepler”)
(See “Isis Unveiled,” Vol. I, pp. 270 to 271.)
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “. . . that which causes the numberless cosmic forces to manifest themselves in eternal correlation is but a divine electricity . . . the sun is but one of the myriad magnets disseminated through space . . .” — 1:270-1
the constant motion and restoration of the Sun’s energy . . . the perpetual care of a spirit
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Kepler, perceiving that the motion of the central sun must in time be diminished and exhausted, provided for its constant restoration by the perpetual care of the Creator, or by the assistance of a spirit designated for that employment.” — p. 554
“a hypothesis more fanciful . . . has not been offered in ancient or modern times”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “A hypothesis more fanciful, and less in accord with the requirements of physical principles has not been offered in ancient or modern times.” — p. 554
“it is impossible to explain the physical origin of the rotary motion of the solar system”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . dit l’Encyclopédie, on est assez d’accord qu’il est impossible d’expliquer l’origine physique de ce mouvement giratoire [says the Encyclopedia, there is sufficient agreement that it is impossible to explain the physical origin of this rotary motion] . . .” — 4:146
If the question is asked, “what causes rotation?” we are answered: “It is the centrifugal Force.” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Si nous demandons: Qui le cause? — C’est la force centrifuge, nous dit-on. — Et celle-ci, qui la produit? — La force de rotation . . .{Godefroy, Cosmogonie de la révélation} [If we ask: What causes it? — It is the centrifugal force, we are told. — And this, what produces it?  The force of rotation . . .].” — 4:146

— 500 —

Rotation has originated either — (a) By the collision of nebular masses . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The moment, however, that we recognize the probability of the collision of nebular masses, the idea of rotation necessarily arises.  A nebular mass comparatively minute, impinging upon a mass of any dimensions, would inevitably generate a rotation . . .” — p. 94
or by attraction, “in cases where no actual impact takes place”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “It is quite conceivable that nebular rotation might be generated by attraction, in cases where no actual impact takes place.” — pp. 97-8
“By the tangential action of currents of nebulous matter . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “[Ennis] has maintained that an amorphous nebula would be made to rotate by the tangential action of currents of nebulous matter descending from higher to lower levels simply by the action of the central gravity of the mass . . .” — pp. 98-9 fn.
see: Jacob Ennis, The Origin of the Stars, 1878: “§ XVII. The Necessity of Rotation in a Contracting Nebulous Mass.” — pp. 220-3
“It is a fundamental principle in physics that no rotation could be generated . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “It is, however, a fundamental principle in physics that no rotation could be generated in such a mass by the action of its own parts.  As well attempt to change the course of a steamer by pulling at the deck railing.” — p. 99 fn.
“The Comets are strangers to our planetary system” (La Place)
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Laplace says: ‘In our hypothesis the comets are strangers to the planetary system.’ ” — p. 182
“The Comets are undeniably generated in our Solar system” (Faye)
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “M. Faye also records the opinion that the comets belong to our system . . .” — p. 182 fn.
The “fixed stars are motionless” says one authority.
see: Emmanuel Kant, Du Ciel, tr. C. Wolf, 1886: “Le nom d’étoiles fixes . . . paraît justifié et mis hors de conteste par l’observation de tous les siècles [The name fixed stars . . . seems justified and accepted without contest based on the observation of all the ages].” — p. 137
“All the stars are actually in motion” . . .
see: Emmanuel Kant, Du Ciel, tr. C. Wolf, 1886: “En réalité, ce n’est qu’une lenteur excessive de mouvement, due à l’immense éloignement du centre commun autour duquel elles tournent [Actually, it is only an extreme slowness of movement, due to the immense distance from the common center around which everything revolves] . . .” — p. 137
“For over 350,000,000 years . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Un mouvement toujours le même depuis des millions de siècles {Selon M. Le Couturier, trois cent cinquante millions d’incandescence} [A movement that has been always the same for millions of centuries {According to Le Couturier, 350 million years of incandescence}] . . .” — 4:149 & fn.

— 501 —

“the sun having Alcyone in the Pleiades for the centre of its orbit . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . Maedler believes that he has rendered it probable that our sun has Alcyone in the Pleiades for the centre of its orbit, and consumes 180 millions of years in completing a single revolution.” — p. 140
“the Sun . . . will emit heat for no longer than 10,000,000 years more”
see: Sir William Thomson, “On the Sun’s Heat,” Jan. 21, 1887: “The same considerations led Newcomb to the conclusion ‘That it is hardly likely that the sun can continue to give sufficient heat to support life on the earth . . . for ten million years from the present time.’ ” — 1:387-8 (Popular Lectures and Addresses, 1889)
the time required for the earth to cool . . . could not exceed 80,000,000 years
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The time required for the earth to cool from incipient incrustation to its present state . . . Sir William Thomson concludes that this time cannot exceed 80,000,000 years {Thomson and Tait: Nat. Phil.}.” — p. 356 & fn.
that “a body in motion tends constantly to inertia . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Que tout corps en mouvement tend sans cesse au repos, s’il n’est constamment sollicité par une force active supérieure’ [‘That every body in motion tends incessantly toward inertia, if it is not constantly propelled by a superior active force’].” — 4:149
an original impulse . . . within a resisting ether . . . incompatible with that motion
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Une impulsion primitive inaltérable au milieu d’un éther résistant, que Newton déclarait incompatible avec elle [An original impulse that is unalterable, within a resisting ether, which Newton declared incompatible with it]!” — 4:149
Universal gravity . . . always tends to a centre in rectilinear descent
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Une circulation générale expliquée par une gravitation qui entraîne toujours . . . la chute rectiligne [A general rotation explained by a gravity which always entails . . . its rectilinear descent]!” — 4:149
the said revolution due to a magnetic force, which acts . . . in a straight line
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Une circulation due à un aimant qui agit toujours en ligne droite comme la gravitation [Revolution due to a magnet which, like gravity, always acts in a straight line]!” — 4:149

— Footnotes

Bischof . . . calculates that 350 million years would be required . . .
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . Bischof calculates that 350 million years would be required for the earth to cool from a temperature of 2000° to 200° centigrade.” — pp. 179-80

— 501-2 —

The whole acting under invariable and changeless laws . . . often shown variable . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Un mouvement inaltérable de sa nature . . . et non moins constamment tenu variable dans le fait {Pendant le rapprochement et l’éloignement du soleil} [A motion invariable in its nature . . . and nonetheless constantly kept variable in fact {In the course of approaching and receding from the sun}]!” — 4:149 & fn.

— 502 —

A Motor Force always proportionate to the mass it is acting upon . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Une force motrice, toujours proportionnelle à la masse, mais toujours indépendante de la nature spéciale de cette masse [A motor force, always proportional to the mass, but always independent of the particular nature of that mass] . . .” — 4:149
“without that Force independent from and of quite another nature . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘. . . sans cette force indépendante et d’une tout autre nature que cette masse, celle-ci, qu’elle fût grosse comme Saturne ou minime comme Cérès, tomberait toujours avec la même vitesse’ {Le Couturier, Musée des sciences, 15 août 1857} [‘without that force independent from and of quite another nature than that mass, the latter, were it as huge as Saturn, or as tiny as Ceres, would always fall with the same speed’]!” — 4:149& fn.
Laplace’s perceptions . . . Le Couturier’s electricity . . . Foucault’s heat
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. Le Couturier a beau nous dire que c’est l’électricité qui a mis les astres dans ce mouvement, M. Foucault que c’est la chaleur . . . Autant valaient les vieilles rêveries du marquis de Laplace attribuant la rotation des planètes au fluide atmosphérique du soleil [Lecouturier may very well say that it is electricity that set the heavenly bodies in motion. Foucault that it is heat . . . Of equal value were the old daydreams of the Marquis de Laplace, who ascribed the rotation of the planets to the atmospheric fluid of the sun] . . .” — 4:148
“but since it is recognised that weight decreases in proportion to the distance . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8:  “ ‘. . . mais comme il est reconnu que la pesanteur décroît au fur et à mesure qu’on s’élève ou s’éloigne du centre, il est évident qu’à une certaine distance, cette pesanteur est forcément réduite à zero. S’il y avait attraction, il y aurait forcément équilibre [but as it is recognized that the weight of an object decreases in proportion to its elevation or distance from the center, it is obvious that at a certain distance, this weight is necessarily reduced to zero.  If there was any attraction, there would necessarily be equilibrium].’ ” — 4:146
see: J. Tardy, Cosmographie de Ptolémée, 1857, p. 14
“And since the modern school recognizes neither a beneath nor an above . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Du moment . . . où l’école moderne reconnaît qu’il n’y a ni haut ni bas dans l’univers, nous ne voyons plus ce qui peut solliciter la terre et la faire tomber [From the moment . . . the modern school recognizes that there is neither an above nor a below in the universe, we no longer see what can cause the earth to fall] . . .’ ” —4:146
see: J. Tardy, Cosmographie de Ptolémée, 1857, p. 14.

— Footnotes

“In the bosom of that aggregate . . . are developed all the forces immanent to matter . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ecoutons M. Littré: ‘Dans le sein de cet agrégat qu’on nomme planète, se déploient toutes les forces qui sont immanentes à la matière . . . à savoir que la matière possède en soi-même, et . . . par soi-même, les forces qui lui sont propres’ [Listening to Littré: ‘In the bosom of that aggregate which is called planet, are developing all the forces that are immanent to matter. . . . i.e., matter possesses in itself and . . . through itself the forces that are proper to it’] . . .” — 3:383 
see:  É. Littré, “Cosmos, essai d’une description physique du monde,” 1858,  pp. 235-6 (Revue Germanique, v. 2) 
“Such forces are the property of weight . . . electricity . . . magnetism, the property of life.”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8:  “ ‘Ces forces sont la propriété de la pesanteur, la propriété d’électricité, la propriété du magnétisme terrestre . . . la propriété de la vie [These forces are the property of weight, the property of electricity, the property of terrestrial magnetism . . . the property of life] . . .’ ” — 3:383
see: É. Littré, “Cosmos, essai d’une description physique du monde,” 1858, p. 236 (Revue Germanique, v. 2) 
 “Every planet can develop life . . . as earth, for instance, which had not always mankind on it . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Sur chaque planète  se développe . . . la vie . . . témoin la terre qui n’a pas toujours porté des habitants, et qui maintenant en produit [On every planet  life develops . . . witness the earth which has not always borne inhabitants, and which now bears them].’ ”  — 3:383
see: É. Littré, “Cosmos, essai d’une description physique du monde,” 1858, p. 236 (Revue Germanique, v. 2)

— 502-3 —

“The planets rotate because they are made to rotate . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Soirées, t. II. Et il [Count de Maistre] ajoutait en note . . . les astres tournent parce qu’on les fait tourner. . . . En un mot le système physique est physiquement impossible [And he (Count De Maistre) added in a note . . . the heavenly bodies rotate because they are made to rotate. . . . In a word the physical system is physically impossible].” — 4:153 fn.

— 503 —

there is a will needed to impart a circular motion . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Il faut toujours une volonté pour imprimer la force circulaire et une autre volonté pour la retenir’ {Herschell, Discours} [There always has to be a will to impart circular motion and another will to restrain it].” — 4:154 & fn.
Science sometimes succeeds . . . in explaining some of such stoppages, retrograde motions . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . nous savons que la science parvient à expliquer ces temps d’arrêt de certaines planètes, ces mouvements de recul, ces angles en dehors des orbites, etc., par des apparences résultant de l’inégalité de leur vitesse et de la nôtre dans le parcours de nos orbes réciproques [we know that science succeeds in explaining these instances of the stationary points of certain planets, these retrograde motions, these angles outside the orbits, etc., by appearances resulting from the inequality of their speed and ours in the course of our orbits relative to each other] . . .” — 4:155
we still know that there are others, and “very real and considerable deviations”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . nous savons qu’il y a d’autres déviations ‘très-réelles et même assez considérables, dit Herschell, qui ne peuvent s’expliquer que par l’action mutuelle et irrégulière de ces planètes et par l’influence perturbatrice du soleil’ {Herschell, Discours, 165} [we know that there are other deviations, ‘very real and even quite considerable deviations, says Herschel, which can only be explained by the mutual and irregular action of those planets and by the perturbing influence of the sun’].” — 4:155 & fn.
From Newton, who found that this world needed repairing very often
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . dit Newton, ce monde paraît avoir besoin d’être retouché assez souvent [Newton says that this world seems to be in need of repair fairly often].” —  2:xxiii
“The orbits described by the planets as being very far from immutable . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. Reynaud n’est pas moins explicite sur toutes ces variations: ‘Les orbites parcourues par les planètes sont loin d’être immuables, et sont au contraire soumises à une mutation perpétuelle dans leur position et dans leur forme’ [Reynaud is no less explicit on all these variations: ‘The orbits described by the planets are far from being immutable . . . and are on the contrary subject to perpetual mutation of position and form] . . .” — 4:155
“they (the orbits) are alternately widening and narrowing . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ces orbites s’élargissent ou se rétrécissent alternativement, leur grand axe s’allonge ou diminue, ou oscille en même temps de droite et de gauche autour du soleil, et le plan même dans lequel elles sont situées s’élève ou s’abaisse périodiquement, tout en pivotant sur lui-même avec une sorte de tremblement {Terre et ciel, p. 28} [These orbits are alternately widening and narrowing, their great axis lengthens and shortens, or oscillates at the same time right and left around the sun, and the plane itself on which they are situated, rises or lowers itself periodically, while pivoting around itself with a kind of tremor].” — 4:155 & fn.
“Voilá certes, a voyage which has little in it of mechanical rigour . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Voilà certes un voyage qui n’a rien de la rigueur mécanique; tout au plus pourrait-il ressembler à celui du steamer ballotté, retardé, accéléré . . . tous ces écarts retarderaient indéfiniment l’arrivée du steamer, sans l’intelligence d’un pilote et d’un chauffeur qui savent tout réparer [That is certainly a voyage which has no mechanical rigour at all; at the most, one could compare it to that of a steamer that is tossed about, slowed down, accelerated . . . all these deviations would indefinitely delay the arrival of the steamer, without the intelligence of a pilot and an engineer who know how to totally compensate].” — 4:155-6

— Footnotes

Deuxième mémoire, “Manifestations Historiques” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, Tome Quatrième [Volume Four]: Deuxième Mémoire [Second Memoir], “Manifestations Historiques dans l’Antiquité Profane et Sacrée” [Historical Manifestations in Secular and Sacred Antiquity].

— 504 —

and though presenting . . . “phenomena not yet fully understood,” comets and meteors . . .
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “. . . suns, stars, and nebulæ are composed of the same matter as the earth and its inhabitants.  In like manner comets and meteors, though presenting in other respects phenomena not yet fully understood, are proved to obey the same laws and to consist of the same matter.” — pp. 15-16
“The comet of 1811 had a tail 120 millions of miles in length . . .”
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “. . . the comet of 1811 had a tail 120 millions of miles in length and 15 millions of miles in diameter at the widest part, while the diameter of the nucleus was about 127,000 miles, or more than ten times that of the earth.  In order that bodies of this magnitude, passing near the earth, should not affect its motion or change the length of the year by even a single second, their actual substance must be inconceivably rare.” — p. 16
“The extreme tenuity of a comet’s mass is also proved . . .”
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “The extreme tenuity of a comet's mass is also proved by the phenomenon of the tail, which, as the comet approaches the sun, is thrown out sometimes to a length of 90 millions of miles in a few hours.  And what is remarkable, this tail is thrown out against the force of gravity by some repulsive force, probably electrical, so that it always points away from the sun.” — p. 16
“And yet, thin as the matter of comets must be . . .”
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “And yet, thin as the matter of comets must be, it obeys the common law of gravity, and whether the comet revolves in an orbit within that of the outer planets, or shoots off into the abysses of space and returns only after hundreds of years, its path is, at each instant, regulated by the same force as that which causes an apple to fall to the ground . . .” — p. 17

— 505 —

incipient rotation may be provoked with equal ease in a mass in igneous fusion . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “La rotation primitive par la fusion ignée s’expliquant tout aussi bien par l’opacité glacée [The incipient rotation caused by igneous fusion can just as well be explained by glacial opacity].” — 4:149
“this intervention of heat is itself a pure hypothesis”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “M. Faye’s proposed modification. —  . . . ‘This corresponds, to a certain point, with what we see.  But this intervention of heat is itself a pure hypothesis.’ ” — pp. 198, 199
“the nebular theory does not profess to discover the origin of things . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “what the nebular theory does not imply . . . It does not profess to discover the origin of things, but only a stadium in material history.” — p. 196

— 506 —

The Zohar mades a distinction . . . between “the hajaschar . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le Zohar distingue toujours ‘les lumières-forces (hajaschar) des lumières réfléchies (or hachoser), ou simple extérioration phénoménale de leurs types spirituels {Kabbala denudata, II, 67} [The Zohar always makes a distinction between the light-forces (hajaschar), the reflected lights (’ōr hachoser), or the simple phenomenal exteriorization of their spiritual types].” — 4:154 & fn.
“A cause is that which is essentially acting in the genealogy of phenomena . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “M. le professeur Jaumes, membre de l’Académie de médecine de Montpellier . . . Une cause, dit-il, est ce qu’il y a d’essentiellement agissant dans une généalogie de phénomènes, dans toute production, dans toute modification. J’ai dit que cette activité était invisible [Professor Jaumes, member of the Academy of Medicine at Montpelier . . . He says, a cause is that which is essentially acting in the genealogy of phenomena, in every production, in every modification.  I have said that this activity was invisible] . . .” — 3:389
“To suppose it corporeal and residing in the properties of matter would be a gratuitous hypothesis.”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Si on la supposait corporelle (cette cause) ou résidant dans les propriétés de la matière, ce serait une hypothèse gratuite [If we suppose that it (that cause) is corporeal or that it resides in the properties of matter, then that would be a gratuitous hypothesis].” — 3:389
“To reduce all the causes to God . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Réduire toutes les causes à une seule, à Dieu . . . c’est s’embarrasser d’une hypothèse hostile à bien des vérités. Mais la pluralité des forces tenant leur existence de Dieu et la possédant en propre . . . n’est pas déraisonnable, . . . et il ne me répugne pas d’admettre entre Dieu et les phénomènes des agents intermédiaires appelés forces ou causes secondes [To reduce all the causes to just one, to God . . . that is getting caught up in a hypothesis hostile to many verities.  But the plurality of forces owing their existence to God and possessing that (existence) of their own, is not unreasonable . . . and I am not averse to admitting intermediary agents called secondary forces or causes between God and phenomena] . . .” — 3:389
“The distinction of Forces is the principle of the division of Sciences . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “La distinction des forces est le principe de la division des sciences: autant de forces réelles et séparées, autant de sciences mères [The distinction of forces is the principle of the division of sciences; so many real and separate forces, just as many mother-sciences].” — 3:389
“Forces are not suppositions and abstractions, but realities . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Non, les forces ne sont pas des suppositions, des abstractions, mais des réalités, et les seules réalités agissantes dont les attributs peuvent être déterminés à l’aide de l’observation directe et de l’induction [No, forces are not assumptions, abstractions, but realities, and the only acting realities whose attributes can be determined with the help of direct observation and induction].” — 3:389
(“Sur la distinction des Forces” . . .)
see: F.-A. Jaumes, “Étude sur la Distinction des Forces,” Mémoires, Académie des Sciences et Lettres de Montpellier, v. 2, 1854 [passages quoted & paraphrased by De Mirville, Des Esprits, 3:389].

— Footnotes

L’Univers expliqué par la Révélation
see: L.-A. Chaubard, L’Univers expliqué par la Révélation, ou Essai de Philosophie-Positive, 1841.
Cosmogonie de la Révélation
see: M.-M.-P. Godefroy, La Cosmogonie de la Révélation, 1841.
But see De Mirville’s Deuxiême Mémoire [“Second Memoir”].
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8.  [Originally presented as 3 “Mémoires” addressed to the French Academies, the “Second Memoir” was divided into four parts and published in volumes 2, 3, 4 and 5.]

— 507 —

if we believe Mr. Tyndall, even Faraday was an Aristotelian . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Faraday's opinion is concisely stated by Tyndall {“Faraday as a Discoverer,” . . . p. 123}: ‘What do we know of the atom apart from its force . . . what notion can we form of the nucleus independent of its powers? . . . When Faraday reasoned thus he was probably unaware that he but reproduced old reflections of Aristotle which have since found frequent expression in the writings of modern thinkers . . .” — p. 160 & fn.
Faraday . . . and all others . . . who see, in the atoms and molecules, “centres of force” . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . Boscovich, Faraday, and all those who define atoms or molecules as ‘centers of force,’ seek to realize the corresponding element, force, as an entity by itself.” — p. 162
“delusion that the conceptual elements of matter can be grasped . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The radical fallacy of the corpuscular as well as of the dynamical theory consists in the delusion that the conceptual elements of matter can be grasped as separate and real entities.” — p. 162
“no material constituent of a body, no atom, is in itself originally endowed with force . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Thus, Professor Philip Spiller . . . published a cosmological treatise {Der Weltaether als kosmische Kraft . . . 1873} . . . on the express proposition that ‘no material constituent of a body, no atom, is in itself originally endowed with force, but that every such atom is absolutely dead, and without any inherent power to act at a distance.’ ” — p. 164 & fn.

— 508 —

He asserts the independent substantiality of force . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “He is driven, therefore, to the assertion of the independent substantiality of force; and, accordingly, he assumes force to be an all-pervading quasi-material presence — as he terms it, an incorporeal matter (unkoerperlicher Stoff).” — p. 164
He is accused of “utter disregard of the fundamental correlation of force and matter”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “In utter disregard of the fundamental correlation of force and mass, Spiller indentifies his force-substance with the omniferous æther, so that this hypostasized half-concept, which, in the view of all other physicists, is not only imponderable, but destitute of cohesive, chemical, thermal, electric, and magnetic forces.” — pp. 164-5
Dr. Richardson . . . the theorist on the “nerve force,” or Nervous Ether
see: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” Popular Science Review, v. 10, 1871 (pp. 379-87).
also on “Sun Force and Earth Force”
see: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” Popular Science Review, v. 5, 1866 (pp. 327-36).
“marvelous as it may appear, light . . . can actually be stored up for use”
p/q: James Comper Gray, The Biblical Museum, 1879: “Marvellous as it may appear, light can actually be bottled up for use {Prof. Grove}.” — p. 251 & note

— 508-9 —

“Take an engraving which has been kept for some days in the dark . . .”
p/q: James Comper Gray, The Biblical Museum, 1879: “Take an engraving which has been kept for some days in the dark; expose it to full sunshine — that is, insulate it — for fifteen minutes; lay it on sensitive paper in a dark place, and at the end of twenty-four hours it will have left an impression of itself on the sensitive paper, the whites coming out as blacks. . . . there seems to be no limit to the reproduction of engravings {Prof. Grove}.” — p. 251 & note

— 509 —

Force is defined as “that which changes or tends to change any physical relation . . .”
p/q: J. P. Nichol, Cyclopædia of the Physical Sciences, 1868: “. . . force . . . is used to denote any action between a pair of bodies which changes, or tends to change, any physical relation between them, whether mechanical, thermal, chemical, electrical, magnetic, or any other kind.” — p. 380
“Science should have neither desires nor prejudices . . .”
p/q: Ludwig Büchner, Force and Matter, 1884: “ ‘Science,’ says Grove, ‘should have neither desires nor prejudices; truth should be her sole aim.’ ” — p. 72

— 510 —

There was a time . . . when he believed he knew something . . .
p/q: F. C. Bakewell, Electric Science, 1853: “There was a time when I thought I knew something about the matter; but the longer I live, and the more carefully I study the subject, the more convinced I am of my total ignorance of the nature of electricity.” — p. 99 fn.
“matter can no more be realized or conceived as mere spacial presence . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Matter can no more be realized or conceived as mere passive, spatial presence, than as a concretion of forces.  Force is nothing without mass, and mass is nothing without force.” — p. 161
“It is a mere delusion of the phantasy . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘It is a mere delusion of the phantasy that something, we know not what, remains after we have denuded an object of all the predicates belonging to it.’ {Schelling, Ideen, etc., p. 18}.” — pp. 160 & 161 fn.
pure force is nothing in the world of physics
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Mass, inertia, or matter per se, is indistinguishable from absolute nothingness; for mass reveals its presence or evinces its reality only by its action . . . And, on the other hand, pure force is equally nothing . . .” — p. 161

— Footnotes

“What do we know of the atom apart from its force? . . .”
p/q: John Tyndall, Faraday as a Discoverer, 1870: “What do we know, he asks, of the atom apart from its force?  You imagine a nucleus which may be called a, and surround it by forces which may be called m; ‘to my mind the a or nucleus vanishes, and the substance consists in the powers of m.  And indeed what notion can we form of the nucleus independent of its powers?  What thought remains on which to hang the imagination of an a independent of the acknowledged forces?’ ” — p. 151

— 510-11 —

“If we reduce the mass upon which a given force . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “And, on the other hand, pure force is equally nothing; for if we reduce the mass upon which a given force, however small, acts, to its limit zero — or, mathematically expressed, until it becomes infinitely small — the consequence is that the velocity of the resulting motion is infinitely great, and that the ‘thing’ . . . is at any given moment neither here nor there, but everywhere — that there is no real presence.  It is impossible, therefore, to construct matter by a synthesis of forces.” — p. 161

— 511 —

Inertia, so called, “is force” according to Newton
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Newton expressly speaks of inertia as of a force.  ‘There is inherent,’ he says {Princ., Def. iii}, ‘in matter a force, a power of resistance . . .’ ” — p. 162 & fn.
the views advocated by Faraday . . . that gravity — “. . . is a force pervading Space external to bodies . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘The fact that gravity increases inversely as the square of the distance may be regarded as evidence of the truth of the views advanced by Faraday, Waterston, and others, that it is a force pervading space external to bodies, and that on the mutual approach of the bodies the force is not increased, as is generally supposed, but the bodies merely pass into a place where the force exists with greater intensity.’{Croll, On the Transformation of Gravity, Phil. Mag. [V], vol. ii, p. 252}. ” — p. xxxii & fn.
G. A. Hirn declares the same in his Théorie Mécanique de l’Univers. . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Force, it is said, resides not in the atoms, but in the space between them.  The most distinguised representative of this school is G. A. Hirn, the well-known author of the Théorie Mécanique de la Chaleur . . .” — p. xxxi
the atom of the chemists is not an entity of pure convention . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘. . . I have demonstrated . . . that the atom of the chemists is not an entity of pure convention, and simply an explicative device, but that it exists really, that its volume is absolutely unalterable, and that, consequently, it is not elastic.  Force, therefore, is not in the atom; it is in the space which separates the atoms from each other.’ ” — pp. xxxi-xxxii

— 512 —

there are two distinct schools of physicists . . .
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . this inert element, matter, obviously requires to be supplemented by another element; and this element, according to the adherents of the atomo-mechanical theory, is motion, whereas, in the view of its opponents, it is force.” — p. xxxi
“the force is assumed to be an independent substantial entity . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “This force is assumed to be an independent, substantial entity, which is not a property of matter, nor essentially related to matter, otherwise than by its power to act upon it.” — p. xxxi
“While the absolute equality of the primordial units . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . while the absolute equality of the primordial units of mass is thus an essential part of the very foundations of the mechanical theory, the whole modern science of chemistry is based upon a principle directly subversive of it — a principle of which it has recently been said that ‘it holds the same place in chemistry that the law of gravitation does in astronomy {J. P. Cooke, The New Chemistry, p. 13}.’  This principle is known as the law of Avogadro or Ampère.” — pp. 33-4 & fn.

— Footnotes

“It imports that equal volumes of all substances . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “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 molecules are different also; and, inasmuch as the molecules of certain elementary substances are monatomic (i.e., 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.” — p. 34
this cardinal principle of modern theoretical chemistry . . .
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “That this cardinal principle of modern theoretical chemistry is in utter and irreconcilable conflict with the first proposition of the atomo-mechanical theory is apparent at a glance.” — p. 34

— 512-13 —

with “unfailing experimental verification”
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “The law of Avogadro . . . has served as the basis of innumerable deductions respecting the formation and transformation of chemical compounds which have thus far met with unfailing experimental verification.” — p. 34

— 513 —

“the differences of weight are only differences of density . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “According to the mechanical conception, which underlies the whole atomic hypothesis, differences of weight are differences of density; and differences of density are differences of distance between the particles contained in a given space.  But, in the atom there is no multiplicity of particles and no void space; hence differences of density or weight are impossible in the case of atoms.” — p. 101 fn.
“Physical atomism derives all the qualitative properties . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . says Professor Wundt . . . ‘the whole tendency of physical atomism is to derive all the qualitative properties of matter from the forms of atomic motion.  Thus the atoms themselves remain as elements utterly devoid of quality’ {‘Die Theorie der Materie,’ p. 381}.” — p. 31 & fn.
“Chemistry in its ultimate form must be atomic mechanics.”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “Naumann declares . . . that ‘chemistry in its ultimate form must be atomic mechanics’ {Thermochemie, p. 150}.” — pp. 304-5 & fn.
“Gases consist of atoms which behave like . . . elastic spheres.”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘Gases,’ says Kroenig, ‘consist of atoms which behave like solid, perfectly elastic spheres . . .’  This statement is adopted by Clausius and emphasized by Maxwell . . . {Phil. Mag, 4th ser., vol. xix, p. 19}.” — p. 42 & fn.

— 513-14 —

“We are forbidden by the modern theory . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘We are forbidden,’ says Sir William Thomson {Phil. Mag. 45:321}, ‘by the modern theory of the conservation of energy to assume inelasticity or anything short of perfect elasticity of the ultimate molecules, whether of ultra-mundane or mundane matter.” — p. 42 & fn.

— 514 —

Mr. Clerk Maxwell has stated that the pressure of strong sunlight . . .
p/q: “Notes and News: Pressure of Radiation,” Jan. 3, 1874: “It had, however, been recently shown by Maxwell, that the propagation of waves through the ether produces a pressure in the direction of the ray . . . Thus the pressure of strong sunlight is about three pounds and a quarter per square mile.” — p. 15 (The Academy, v. 5)

— Footnotes

“How could you make yourself understood . . .”
p/q: The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “How could you make yourself understood — command in fact, those semi-intelligent Forces, whose means of communicating with us are not through spoken words but through sounds and colours, in correlations between the vibrations of the two?” — pp. 30-1 (K.H., Letter VIII, about Feb. 20, 1881)

— 515 —

— Footnotes

The names of the Seven Rays — which are Sushumna, Harikesa, Viswakarman . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Here the seven chief rays are: Sushumṇa, Harikeśa, Viśwakarman, Viśwatryarchas, Sannaddha, Sarvāvasu, and Swarāj.” — 2:297 fn.
The Sushumna . . . is only to light up the moon
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘According to the Nirukta, II., 6, it is one ray of the sun (that named Sushumṇa) which lights up the moon . . .’ ” — 2:297 fn.
“There is no fundamental difference between light and heat . . .”
p/q: H. T. Buckle, History of Civilization in England, 1864: “[Leslie] firmly seized the great truth, that there is no fundamental difference between light and heat.  As he puts it, each is merely a metamorphosis of the other.  Heat is light in complete repose.  Light is heat in rapid motion.  Directly light is combined with a body, it becomes heat; but when it is thrown off from that body, it again becomes light {Leslie on Heat}.  Whether this is true or false, we cannot tell; and many years, perhaps many generations, will have to elapse, before we shall be able to tell.” — 2:400 & fn.

— 516 —

heat was some imponderable substance. . . . heat became a “mode of motion”
see: Grove, Helmholtz, Mayer, Faraday, Liebig and Carpenter, The Correlation and Conservation of Forces, 1873: “. . . heat, light, electricity, magnetism . . . have been formerly regarded as . . . ‘imponderable elements’ . . . Heat, light, electricity, and magnetism are now no longer regarded as substantive and independent existences . . . but simply as modes of motion . . .” — pp. xii-xiii (Introduction)
the Sushumna . . . “the ray cherished by the initiated Yogi . . .”
see: “Notes on Hata Yoga” [conversation with T. Subba Row], Dec. 1886: “The Sushumna . . . runs through the centre of the spine.  It is a sort of vein of magnetic electricity, and the energy passing through the Sushumna is a stream of vital electricity.” . . . “The reason why Sushumna is reckoned to be the chief of the Nadis [vessels] is, because it is only through it that the Monad goes out in the case of a Yogi . . .” — p. 138 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
Why is the moon held as the deity of the mind, by those Yogis?
see: “Notes on Hata Yoga” [conversation with T. Subba Row], Dec. 1886: “The seven Chakrams are connected with the seven planets in the following order . . . Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Moon, Sun.  The moon is connected with the mind of man, because it is so changeable and vacillating.” — p. 139 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 517 —

Let us see what an eminent Academician, Butlerof, the chemist, had to say . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “War in Olympus,” November 1879: “After several years of diligent research, and investigation of the phenomena, Messrs. Wagner and Butlerof, both distinguished savants and professors in St. Petersburg University, became thoroughly convinced of the reality of the weird manifestations.  As a result, both wrote numerous and strong articles in the leading periodicals . . .” — p. 40 (The Theosophist, v. 1)
see: A. M. Butlerof, “Статьи по медіумизму” [Articles on Mediumism], St. Petersburg, 1889 [A collection of “Scientific Letters” sent to Russian newspapers].
 “What is Force? . . . by the law of conservation of energy?”
see: A. Butlerow, “Prof. Butlerow’s Letter,” April 1882: “. . . we know that one form of energy can be transmuted into another (with the maintenance of equivalence according to the law of the preservation of power).  This other form may be a just perceptible one for us, whilst the former was not so, and apparently matter will look as if a power had originated from nothing.” — p. 182 (The Homœopathic Physician, v. 2)
“Let us admit . . . an absolutely homogeneous state of the Universe . . .”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “The Origin of Evil,” Oct. 15, 1887: “This is what we read in the ‘Scientific Letters’ by [Butlerof] . . . ‘In the evolution of isolated individuals, in the evolution of the organic world, in that of the Universe . . . wherever any of the processes of progressive complexity take place, there we find, apart from the transition from unity to plurality, and homogeneity to heterogeneity a converse transformation — the transition from plurality to unity, from the heterogeneous to the homogeneous.’ ” — p. 117 (Lucifer, v. 1)

— 518 —

“Therefore . . . the force . . . is in sober reality only an effect . . .”
see: A. Butlerow, “Prof. Butlerow’s Letter,” April 1882: “We know that there may exist vibrations of air imperceptible to our organ of hearing . . . we also know that there are waves of light, making no direct impression upon our eye . . . Such forms of energy may remain unknown to us just as well as if they did not exist at all, and this may last until the circumstances appear under which they are perceptible.” — p. 182 (The Homœopathic Physician, v. 2)
“Matter thus must be laid aside . . .”
see: A. Butlerow, “Prof. Butlerow’s Letter,” April 1882: “. . . the question arises whether we are justified in attributing a reality to matter itself, if we would abstract the conception of it from that of power?  Now since we perceive only the effects of power, and only according to these judge about the presence and the qualilties of that which we call matter, matter really disappears, and there remains but power or energy.” — p. 181 (The Homœopathic Physician, v. 2)

— 519 —

“to accept infinite divisibility is absurd . . .”
p/q: F. A. Lange, History of Materialism, tr. E. C. Thomas, 1880: “Büchner, in his work ‘Ueber Natur und Geist’ . . . — ‘You trouble yourself with difficulties which are more speculative than practical. . . . To suppose an infinite divisibility is absurd; it means to assume nothing, and to throw doubt upon the existence of matter at all . . .” — 2:370
“what a curious contradiction . . . The atom is indivisible, and . . . elastic. . . .”
see: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “ ‘The concept “elastic atom” . . . is a contradiction in terms, because elasticity presupposes [divisible] parts the distances between which can be increased and diminished.’ ”  “And the highest scientific authorities are equally explicit in declaring that the hypothesis of the atomic or molecular constitution of matter is in conflict with the doctrine of the conservation of energy, unless the atoms or molecules are assumed to be perfectly elastic.” —  pp. 40, 42

— Footnotes

“Scientific Letters,” Butlerof
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Occult or Exact Science?” May 1886: “[Butlerof’s] Scientific Letters — published in the [Russian newspaper] Novoye Vremya, St. Petersburg.” — p. 492 fn. (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— 520 —

Professor Butlerof . . . was defending the phenomena of the Spiritualists
see: “Science and Spiritualism,” Boston Journal of Chemistry (14:4), April 1880: “. . . scientific men have investigated it, and published the results of their labors. . . . Crookes devoted four years to the labor . . . and Wallace ten, and they state in the most decided manner that the alleged phenomena are actual and real. . . . In Russia, Wagner and Butleroff, professors in the University of St. Petersburg, after years of patient investigation, have reached similar conclusions.” — p. 37
as Professors Zöllner, and Hare did
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “The Evidence of Science,” July 1881: “From Professor Hare, the great American chemist . . . down to Professor Zöllner, the Leipsig astronomer in 1878, each and all of the men of Science who, undertaking to expose the so-called Spiritual phenomena in the name of Science . . . found themselves baffled and finally completely beaten by facts.” — p. 220 (The Theosophist, v. 2)
allegories about the sacredness of the three types of fire
see: Original Sanskrit Texts, tr. J. Muir, 1868-73: “Three (gods) create the fecundating principle in (all) existences; (there exist) three excellent productions of which light is the first: three fires attend upon the dawn . . .” — 3:247 (Rig Veda, vii.33, 7)
and the forty-nine original fires
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “In the Vishṇu Purāṇa he [Agni] is called Abhimānī, and the eldest son of Brahmā. . . . he had three sons, Pāvaka, Paramāna, and Śuchi, and these had forty-five sons; altogether forty-nine persons, identical with the forty-nine fires . . .” — p. 7

— 521 —

personified by the Sons of Daksha’s daughters and the Rishis
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Swāyaṃbhuva, the son of the self-born or uncreated, and his wife Śatarupā, the hundred-formed or multiform, are, themselves, allegories; and their female descendants, who become the wives of the Ṛishis . . . In another creation, the chief source of creatures is the patriarch Daksha (ability), whose daughters . . . are the mothers of all existing things.” — 1:xcv-xcvi (Preface)
“who with the first son of Brahmâ and his three descendants . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Agni named Abhīmānin, who is the eldest born of Brahmā, had, by Swāhā, three sons of surpassing brilliancy . . . They had forty-five sons, who, with the original son of Brahmā, and his three descendants, constitute the forty-nine fires.” — 1:155-6 (i.10)
Pavaka is electric, or Vaidyuta, fire . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Pāvaka is electric or Vaidyuta fire; Pavamāna is that produced by friction, or Nirmathya; and Śuchi is solar (Saura) fire.” — 1:156 fn.
Pavaka, moreover, is made parent to Kavyavâhana, the fire of the Pitris
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Pāvaka . . . is called parent of Kavyavāhana.” — 5(I):387 [Hall’s correction to Wilson’s footnote on 1:156]
Kavyavâhana, the fire of the Pitris: Suchi to Havyavâhana — the fire of the gods; and Pavamâna . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . Kavyavāhana, the fire of the Pitṛis; Śuchi [parent], of Havyavāhana, the fire of the gods; and Pavamāna, of Saharaksha, the fire of the Asuras.” — 1:156 fn.
“Then Ether, air, light, water, and earth, severally united . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Then ether, air, light, water, and earth, severally united with the properties of sound and the rest, existed as distinguishable according to their qualities, as soothing, terrific, or stupefying; but, possessing various energies and being unconnected, they could not, without combination, create living beings, not having blended with each other.  Having combined, therefore, with one another, they assumed, through their mutual association, the character of one mass of entire unity . . .” — 1:38 (i.2)
the writers were perfectly acquainted with . . . the origin of Kosmos from the “undiscrete Principle” . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . and from the direction of spirit, with the acquiescence of the indiscrete Principle, Intellect and the rest, to the gross elements inclusive, formed an egg . . .” — 1:38-9 (i.2)

— Footnotes

Called the “drinker of waters,” solar heat causing water to evaporate
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Agni named Abhīmānin . . . [had] three sons of surpassing brilliancy: Pāvaka, Pavamāna, and Śuchi, who drinks up water {Śuchi is solar (Saura) fire}.” — 1:155-6 & fn. (i.10)

— 521-2 —

the origin of Kosmos from the “undiscrete Principle” — Avyaktânugraheńa, as applied to Parabrahmam . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . with the acquiescence of the indiscrete Principle {Avyaktānugraheṇa} . . .” — 1:38 & fn.
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes of the Bhagavad Gita,” Feb. 1887: “This Avyaktam is Mulaprakriti, or rather Parabramam manifested in Mulaprakriti as its upadhi.” — p. 311 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 522 —

and not to “Avyakta, either First Cause, or matter,” as Wilson gives it
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Avyaktānugraheṇa . . . The expression is something equivocal; as Avyakta may here apply either to the First Cause or to matter.” — 1:38-9 fn.
the protyle, as Mr. Crookes has suggestively named matter
see: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “To form a conception of their genesis I must beg you to carry your thoughts back to the time when the visible universe was ‘without form and void,’ and to watch the development of matter in the states known to us from an antecedent something.  What existed anterior to our elements, before matter as we now have it, I propose to name protyle.” — p. 95 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
the newly-published catechism of the Visishtadwaita Vedantins
see: N. Bhashyacharya, A Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja Acharya, “compiled from the original Shastras,” 1887.
before evolution began, Prakriti (Nature) was in a condition of laya
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Before evolution set in, Nature (prakriti) was without form and unknowable. . . . Its attributes were in a latent condition (Sukshumavasthā).” — § 91
“matter exists in two conditions . . .”
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Matter exists in two conditions, the sukshma, or latent and undifferentiated; and in the sthula or differentiated condition.” — § 95
Then it became anu, atomic.
see: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “It is Jivatma and is not material. . . . It is pure, blissful (anandamaya) atomic (anu) . . .” — § 93
Sudda-satwa — “a substance not subject to the qualities of matter . . .”
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “What is Suddasatwa? . . . It is a substance not subject to the qualities of matter from which it is different.” — § 92
out of that substance the bodies of the inhabitants of Vaikuntaloka . . . are formed
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Out of this Suddasatwa are formed the Vaikuntaloka (the heaven of Vishnu) and the bodies of Iswara and of Muktas when, of their own free will, they take bodies upon themselves.” — § 92
That every particle or atom of Prakriti contains Jiva . . .
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Every particle of Prakriti contains Jiva and is the sarira (body) of that Jiva which it contains.  Every Jiva has the Supreme Spirit as Sariri (antaryami).” — § 93
“Parabrahm pervades every Jiva . . .”
p/q: N. Bhashyacharya, Catechism of the Visishtadwaita Philosophy, 1887: “Parabrahm pervades every Jiva as well as every particle of matter.” — § 93

— 523 —

the allegory of Purûravas and the celestial Gandharva . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the Gandharvas brought to Purūravas a vessel with fire, and said to him: ‘Take this fire, and . . . divide it into three fires; then, fixing your mind upon the idea of living with Urvaśī, offer oblations . . .”  “Then he began to reflect, that he had committed a great folly, in bringing away the vessel of fire, instead of his bride; and, leaving the vessel in the wood, he went (disconsolate,) to his palace.  In the middle of the night he awoke, and considered . . . that it was absurd in him to have left it . . . he rose, and went to the place where he had deposited the vessel; but it was gone.  In its stead, he saw a young Aśwattha tree . . .” — 4:9-10 (iv.6)
The primeval mode of obtaining fire by friction . . . is pregnant with meaning
see: Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, 1867-75: “ ‘Early the next morn, the Gandharvas gave him his choice: but when he said “let me be one of you,” they said: “That kind of sacred fire is not yet known among men . . .”  They then initiated Purūravas in the mysteries of a certain sacrifice, and when he had performed it, he became himself one of the Gandharvas.’  This is the simple story, told . . . in order to show the importance of a peculiar rite, the rite of kindling the fire by friction, which is represented as the one by which Purūravas obtained immortality.” — 2:103-4
The Tretagni (sacred triad of fires)
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Having thence elicited fire, he made it threefold . . . {forming the Tretāgni, or triad of sacred fires}.” — 4:10, 11 fn. (iv.6)
obtained by the attrition of sticks . . . “as many finger-breaths long . . .”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . he took the plants to his city, and prepared their wood for attrition, with pieces of as many inches {Angula, ‘finger-breadths’} long as there are syllables in the Gāyatrī.” — 4:10 & fn. (iv.6)
“the fire, that was primevally one, was made threefold (treta) . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Thus, fire, that was, at first, but one, was made threefold, in the present Manwantara, by the son of Ilā {The Bhāgavata says, that, before his time, there was but . . . one fire, and one god, Nārāyanā; and that, in the beginning of the Tretā age, Purūravas made them, all, ‘three’}.” — 4:11 & fn. (iv.6)

—  Footnotes

The Gandharva of the Veda is the deity who knows and reveals the secrets of heaven . . .
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The ‘heavenly Gandharva’ of the Veda was a deity who knew and revealed the secrets of heaven and divine truths in general.  He is thought by Goldstücker to have been a personification of the fire of the sun.” — p. 105
the intelligence residing in the Sushumna, Solar ray . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “. . . the seven solar rays dilate to seven suns {The seven rays are . . . said to be Sushumṇa, Harikeśa, Viśwakarman, Viśwavyarchas (?), Varchas, Vasu, Saṃpadvasu (?)} . . .” — 5(I):191 & fn. (vi.3)
the occult force in the Soma (the moon, or lunar plant) . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Cherished by the Sushumṇa ray of the sun, the moon is fed (to the full, in the fortnight of its growth); and, in the fortnight of its wane, the ambrosia of its substance is perpetually drunk by the immortals . . .” — 2:297-8 (ii.11)
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Soma.  The juice of a milky climbing plant . . . extracted and fermented, forming a beverage offered in libations to the deities, and drunk by the Brāhmans. . . . As a personification, Soma was the god who represented and animated the soma juice, an Indian Dionysus or Bacchus. . . . the name was appropriated to the moon, and some of the qualities of the soma juice have been transferred to the luminary . . .” — pp. 301-2
the noumenal causes of Sound and the “Voice of Nature”
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “. . . Vāch appears to be the personification of speech by whom knowledge was communicated to man.”  “The Mahā-bhārata also calls her ‘the mother of the Vedas,’ and says, ‘A voice derived from Brahmā entered into the ears of them all . . .’ ” — pp. 329, 330
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The Gandharvas were next born, imbibing melody.  Drinking of the goddess of speech, they were born . . .” — 1:83 (i.5)
the 6,333 “heavenly Singers” and musicians of Indra’s loka
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The Atharva-veda speaks of ‘the 6,333 Gandharvas.’ . . . Those of Indra’s heaven are generally intended by the term, and they are singers and musicians who attend the banquets of the gods.” — pp. 105-6
they are said to have mystic power over women, and to be fond of them
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “The Gandharvas . . . had a great partiality for women, and had a mystic power over them.” — p. 105
the Sons of God, who saw that the daughters of men were fair
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” — p. 7 (Genesis, 6:1-2)

— 524 —

“At this moment, when the theory of mere motion . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “At this moment, when the theory of mere motion as the origin of all varieties of force is again becoming the prevailing thought, it were almost heresy to re-open a debate, which for a period appears, by general consent, to be virtually closed; but I accept the risk, and shall state, therefore, what were the precise views of the immortal heretic, whose name I have whispered to the reader, respecting sun force.  Starting with the argument on which nearly all physicists are agreed, that there exists in nature two agencies, matter which is ponderable, visible, and tangible, and a something which is imponderable, invisible, and appreciable only by its influence on matter, Metcalfe maintains that the imponderable and active agency, which he calls ‘caloric,’ is not a mere form of motion, not a vibration amongst the particles of ponderable matter, but itself a material substance flowing from the sun through space, filling the voids between the particles of solid bodies and conveying by sensation the property called heat.” — pp. 329-30 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“The nature of caloric, or Sun-Force, is contended for by him on the following grounds . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “The material nature of caloric, or sun force, is contended for by him on the following grounds:
      1. That it may be added to, and abstracted from, other bodies, and measured with mathematical precision.
      2. That it augments the volume of bodies which are again reduced in size by its abstraction.
      3. That it modifies the forms, properties, and conditions of all other bodies.
      4. That it passes by radiation through the most perfect vacuum that can be formed, in which it produces the same effects on the thermometer as in the atmosphere.
      5. That it exerts mechanical and chemical forces which nothing can restrain, as in volcanos, the explosion of gunpowder and other fulminating compounds.
      6. That it operates in a sensible manner on the nervous system, producing intense pain; and, when in excess, disorganization of the tissues.” — p. 330 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“As against the vibratory theory, Metcalfe further argues . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “As against the vibratory theory, Metcalfe further argues that, if caloric were a mere property or quality, it could not augment the volume of other bodies; for this purpose it must itself have volume, it must occupy space; and it must, therefore, be a material agent.  If caloric were only the effect of vibratory motion amongst the particles of ponderable matter, it could not radiate from hot bodies without the simultaneous transition of the vibrating particles . . .” — p. 330 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)

— 524-5 —

“but the fact stands out that heat can radiate from material ponderable substance . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “. . . but the fact stands out that heat can radiate from material ponderable substance without loss of weight of such substance.” — p. 330 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)

— 525 —

“With this view as to the material nature of caloric . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “With this view as to the material nature of caloric, or sun force; with the impression firmly fixed on his mind that ‘everything in nature is composed of two descriptions of matter, the one essentially active and ethereal, the other passive and motionless,’ Metcalfe based the hypothesis that the sun force, or caloric, is a self-active principle.  For its own particles, he holds, it has repulsion; for the particles of all ponderable matter it has affinity; it attracts the particles of ponderable matter with forces which vary inversely as the squares of the distance.  It thus acts through ponderable matter.” — p. 330-1 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“If universal space were filled with caloric . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “If universal space were filled with caloric, sun force, alone (without ponderable matter), caloric would also be inactive, and would constitute a boundless ocean of powerless or quiescent ether, because it would then have nothing on which to act; while ponderable matter, however inactive of itself, ‘has certain properties by which it modifies and controls the actions of caloric, both of which are governed by immutable laws that have their origin in the mutual relations and specific properties of each.’ ” — p. 331 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“And he lays down a law . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “And he lays down a law which he believes is absolute, and which is thus expressed: — ‘By the attraction of caloric for ponderable matter it unites and holds together all things; by its self-repulsive agency it separates and expands all things.’ ” —­ p. 331 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“As I have already said, the tendency of modern teaching . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “As I have already said, the tendency of modern teaching is to rest upon the hypothesis . . . that heat is motion, or, as it would perhaps be better stated, a specific force or form of motion.
      But this hypothesis, popular as it is, is not one that ought to be accepted to the exclusion of the simpler view of the material nature of sun force and of its influence in modifying the condition of matter.  We do not yet know sufficient to be dogmatic . . .” — p. 331 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)

— 525-6 —

“The hypothesis of Metcalfe . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “. . . the hypothesis of Metcalfe respecting sun force and earth force is not only very simple, but most fascinating. . . Here are two elements in this universe: the one is ponderable matter . . . The second element is the all-pervading ether, solar fire.  It is without weight, substance, form, or colour; it is matter infinitely divisible and its particles repel each other; its rarity is such that we have no word except ether by which to express it.  It pervades and fills space, but alone it too is quiescent — dead.” — pp. 331-2 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)

— 526 —

“We bring together the two elements . . .”
see: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “We bring together the two elements, the inert matter, the self-repulsive ether, and thereupon the dead ponderable matter is vivified: through the particles of the ponderable substance the ether penetrates, and so penetrating, it combines with the ponderable particles and holds them in mass, holds them together in one bond of union; they are dissolved in the ether.” — p. 332 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“This distribution of solid ponderable matter . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “This distribution of solid ponderable matter through ether extends, according to the theory before us, to everything that exists at this moment.  The ether is all-pervading.  The human body itself is charged with the ether; its minute particles are held together by it: the plant is in the same condition; the most solid earth, rock, adamant, crystal, metal, all the same.
      But there are differences in the capacities of different kinds of ponderable matter to receive sun force, and upon this depends the various changing conditions of matter; the solid, the liquid, the gaseous condition.  Solid bodies have attracted caloric in excess over fluid bodies and hence their firmer cohesion: when a portion of molten zinc is poured upon a plate of solid zinc, the molten zinc becomes solid, because there is a rush of caloric from the liquid to the solid, and in the equalization the particles previously loose or liquid are more closely brought together . . .” — p. 332 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“Metcalfe himself, dwelling on the above-named phenomena . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “Metcalfe himself, dwelling on the above-named phenomena and accounting for them by the unity of principle of action which has already been explained, sums up his argument in very clear terms, in a comment on the densities of various bodies.
‘Hardness and softness, solidity and liquidity, are not essential conditions of bodies, but depend on the relative proportions of ethereal and ponderable matter of which they are composed.  The most elastic gas may be reduced to the liquid form by the abstraction of caloric, and again converted into a firm solid, the particles of which would cling together with a force proportional to their augmented affinity for caloric.  On the other hand, by adding a sufficient quantity of the same principle to the densest metals, their attraction for it is diminished when they are expanded into the gaseous state, and their cohesion is destroyed.’ ” — p. 333 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)

— Footnotes

it would be quiescent . . . or as Mr. Crookes has it, “locked in protyle”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Before the birth of atoms all those forms of energy which become evident when matter acts upon matter, could not have existed, — they were locked up in the protyle as latent potentialities only.” — p. 124 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— 527 —

“I shall not dwell at great length on this unity . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “I shall not dwell at greater length on the unity of sun force and earth, which this theory implies.  But I may add that out of it or out of the hypothesis of mere motion as force and of virtue without substance, we may gather as the nearest possible approach to the truth, on this, the most complex and profound of all subjects, the following inferences: — (a) Space inter-stellary, inter-planetary, inter-material, inter-organic, is not a vacuum, but is filled with a subtle fluid or gas, which for want of a better term we may call still, as the ancients did, Aith-Ur — Solar fire, ÆTHER.  This fluid, unchangeable in composition, indestructible, invisible, pervades everything, and all matter; the pebble in the running brook, the tree over-hanging, the man looking on, is charged with this ether in various degree: the pebble less than the tree, the tree less than the man.  All the planet in like manner is so charged!  A world built up in ethereal fluid and moving through a sea of it.” — p. 333 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
“The Ether, whatever its nature is . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “(b) The ether, whatever its nature, is from the sun and from the suns; the suns are the generators of it, the store-houses of it, the diffusers of it.  (c) Without the ether there could be no motion; without it particles of ponderable matter could not glide over each other; without it there could be no impulse to excite those particles into action.  (d) Ether determines the constitution of bodies.  Were there no ether, there could be no change of constitution of substance: water, for example, could only exist as a substance, compact and insoluble beyond any conception we could form of it.  It could never even be ice, never fluid, never vapour, except for ether.  (e)  Ether connects sun with planet, planet with planet, man with planet, man with man.  Without ether there could be no communication in the universe: no light, no heat, no phenomenon of motion.” — pp. 333-4 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)

— Footnotes

Aditi . . . “Mother of the gods.”
p/q: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “Aditi is called Deva-matri, ‘mother of the gods.’ ” — p. 3

— 528 —

the late achievements of Bunsen and Kirchoff
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The spectroscope, invented by Bunsen and Kirchoff in recent times . . . seizes the slender ray admitted to a darkened room through a narrow slit . . . It compels the ray to write out the names of the substances which enter into the constitution of the luminous body from which it proceeds.” — p. 37
the seven colours, the “primary” of a ray . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Every one understands that a ray of light passed through an angle of a prism is decomposed into seven colors commonly called ‘primary,’ which range themselves in a fixed order on a screen.” — p. 37
“varying from about seven hundred and sixty millionths of a millimètre . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The length of a luminous wave varies from about seven hundred and sixty millionths of a millimeter at the red end of the spectrum to about three hundred and ninety-three millionths of a millimeter at the violet end.” — pp. 37-8
the force . . . is believed to produce “inconceivably minute undulations”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “That is, the force which is the cause of the sensation of light produces inconceivably minute undulations in some medium — generally regarded the same as the ethereal medium . . .” — p. 38

— Footnotes

See Five Years of Theosophy — Articles . . .
see: “Do the Adepts Deny the Nebular Theory?” (pp. 245-51), and “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” (pp. 251-62), in Five Years of Theosophy, 1885.

— 529 —

Attraction by itself is not sufficient to explain merely planetary motion
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8:  “ ‘L’attraction ne suffit à l’explication des mouvements planétaires qu’en admettant pour chaque corps, une impulsion spéciale [Attraction is not sufficient to explain planetary motion, unless a special impulse is supposed for every body] . . .’ ”  — 4:145
see: L.-B. Francœur, Uranographie, ou Traité Élémentaire d’Astronomie, 1853, p. 370
and the rotation of every planet . . . due to some one cause combined with attraction
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘. . . et si les mouvements de toutes les planètes et de leurs satellites sont dus à une cause unique, combinée avec l’attraction [and if the movements of all the planets and their satellites are due to one unique cause, combined with attraction] . . .’ ” — 4:145
see: L.-B. Francœur, Uranographie, ou Traité Élémentaire d’Astronomie, 1853, p. 370
And even then, says an astronomer . . . Science would have to name that cause.
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Francœur . . . a écrit: ‘. . . il resterait encore à assigner quelle est cette cause’ {Philosophie naturelle, art. 142} [Francœur wrote: ‘. . . one would still have to determine what that cause is’] . . .” — 4:145 & fn.
“When we have learned the cause, unique et speciale . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘. . . quand nous connaîtrons la véritable cause unique et spéciale qui pousse, nous pourrons la combiner avec celle qui attire’ {Francœur, Astronomie, p. 342}[when we recognize the true cause, unique and special, that pushes, we will be able to combine it with the one that attracts].” — 4:145 & fn.
“Attraction between the celestial bodies is only repulsion . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘L’attraction entre les corps célestes n’est que répulsion, c’est le soleil qui les fouette sans relâche, sans quoi ils s’arrêteraient [Attraction between the celestial bodies is only repulsion, it is the sun that drives them incessantly onward, without which they would stop].’ ” — 4:145
that other far bolder one of Herschell — about certain organisms in the Sun
see: Richard A. Proctor, The Sun, 1871: “From the luminous atmosphere of the Sun, Herschel proceeds to the opaque body . . . ‘Its similarity to the other globes of the solar system with regard to its solidity, its atmosphere, and its diversified surface . . . lead us on to suppose that it is most probably also inhabited, like the rest of the planets, by beings whose organs are adapted to the peculiar circumstances of that vast globe.’ ” — p. 185
“he pursues them, turning slowly around himself . . .”
p/q: Stanza IV, 5c: “He pursues them, turning slowly around himself, they turning swiftly from him, and he following from afar the direction in which his brothers move on the path that encircles their houses {‘The Sun rotates on his axis always in the same direction in which the planets revolve in their respective orbits’}.” — SD 1:100 & fn.

— 530 —

“Arago proposed that this envelope should be called the Photosphere . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “Arago proposed that this envelope should be called the Photosphere, a name now generally adopted.  By the elder Herschel, the surface of this photosphere was compared to mother-of-pearl. . . . it resembles the ocean on a tranquil summer day, when its surface is slightly crisped by a gentle breeze . . .” — p. 148 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)
“Mr. Nasmyth has discovered a more remarkable condition . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “Mr. Nasmyth has discovered a more remarkable condition than any that had previously been suspected. . . . this astronomer has discovered objects which are peculiarly lens-shaped.  He himself describes them as more like ‘willow leaves’ . . . These leaved forms are different in size; they are not arranged in any order; they lie crossing each other in all directions; and they have an irregular motion amongst themselves. . . . They are seen approaching to and receding from each other, and sometimes assuming new angular positions, so that the appearance . . . has been compared to a dense shoal of fish, which, indeed they resemble in shape.” — p. 149 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)
“The size of these objects gives a grand idea of the gigantic scale . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “The size of those objects gives a grand idea of the gigantic scale upon which physical operations are carried out in the sun.  They cannot be less than a thousand miles in length, and from two to three hundred miles in breadth.  The most probable conjecture which has been offered respecting those leaf or lens-like objects, is that the photosphere is an immense ocean of gaseous matter in a state of intense incandescence, and that they are perspective projections of the sheets of flame.” — p. 149 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)
“Whatever they may be . . . it is evident they are the immediate sources of solar heat and light. . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “Whatever they may be, it is evident they are the immediate sources of solar heat and light.  Here we have a surrounding envelope of photogenic matter, which pendulates with mighty energies, and by communicating its motion to the ethereal medium, in stellar space, produces heat and light in far distant worlds.” — p.149 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)
“We have said that those forms have been compared to certain organisms . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “We have said that those forms have been compared to certain organisms; and Herschel says, ‘Though it would be too daring to speak of such organizations as partaking of the nature of life, yet we do not know that vital action is competent to develop heat, light, and electricity.’  Can it be that there is truth in this fine thought?” — p. 149 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)

— Footnotes

See “Five Years of Theosophy,” p. 258 — answer to this speculation of Herschell’s
see: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” 1885: “These ‘wonderful objects’ are not, as a modern astronomer interprets Sir J. Herschel’s words, ‘solar inhabitants, whose fiery constitution enables them to illuminate, warm and electricize the whole solar system,’ but simply the reservoirs of solar vital energy, the vital electricity that feeds the whole system in which it lives, and breathes, and has its being.” — p. 258 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 530-1 —

“May the pulsing of vital matter in the central Sun of our System . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “May the pulsing of the vital matter in the central Sun of our system be the source of all that life which crowds the Earth, and without doubt overspreads the other planets, to which the Sun is the mighty minister?” — p. 149 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)

— 531 —

“But regarding Life — Vital Force — as a power . . .”
p/q: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865: “But regarding Life — vital force — as a power far more exalted than either light, heat, or electricity, and, indeed, capable of exerting a controlling power over them all, we are certainly disposed to view with satisfaction that speculation which supposes the photosphere to be the primary seat of vital power, and to regard with a poetic pleasure that hypothesis which refers the Solar energies to life!” — p. 156 (Popular Science Review, v. 4)
“The idea attempted to be conveyed . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “The idea attempted to be conveyed by the theory is that between the molecules of the matter, solid or fluid, of which the nervous organisms and indeed of which all the organic parts of the body are composed, there exists a refined subtle medium, vaporous or gaseous, which holds the molecules in a condition for motion upon each other, and for arrangement and rearrangement of form; a medium by and through which all motion is conveyed; by and through which the one organ or part of the body is held in communion with the other parts and by and through which the outer living world communicates with the living man: a medium which, being present, enables the phenomena of life to be demonstrated, and which, being universally absent, leaves the body actually dead . . .” — p. 380 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“I use the word Ether in its general sense . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “I use the word ether in its general sense, as meaning a very light vaporous or gaseous matter: I use it, in short, as the astronomer uses it when he speaks of the ether of space, by which he means a subtle but material medium, the chemical composition of which he has not yet discovered.  Again, when I speak of a nervous ether, I do not convey that the ether is existent in nervous structure only: I believe, truly, that it is a special part of the nervous organisation; but as nerves pass into all structures that have capacities for movement and sensibilities, so the nervous ether passes into all such parts; and as the nervous ether is, according to my view, a direct product from blood, so we may look upon it as a part of the atmosphere of the blood.” — pp. 380-1 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)

— 532 —

“The evidence in favour of the existence of an elastic medium . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “The evidence in favour of the existence of an elastic medium pervading the nervous matter and capable of being influenced by simple pressure is all-convincing. . . . In nervous structure there is, unquestionably, a true nervous fluid, as our predecessors taught.  The precise chemical composition of this fluid is not yet well known, the physical characters of it have been little studied.  Whether it moves in current we do not know; whether it circulates we do not know; whether it is formed in the centres and passes from them through the nerves, or whether it is formed everywhere where blood enters nerve we do not know.  The exact uses of the fluid we do not, consequently, know.” — pp. 382-3 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“It occurs to my mind, however . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “It occurs to my mind, however, that the veritable fluid of nervous matter is not of itself sufficient to act as the subtle medium that connects the outer with the inner universe of man and animal.  I think — and this is the modification I suggest of the older theory — there must be another form of matter present during life; a matter which exists in the condition of vapour or gas, which pervades the whole nervous organism, surrounds, as an enveloping atmosphere, each molecule of nervous structure, and is the medium of all motion communicated to or from the nervous centres.” — p. 383 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“When it is once fairly presented to the mind . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “When it is once fairly presented to the mind that during life there is in the animal body a finely diffused form of matter, a vapour filling every part — and even stored in some parts; a matter constantly renewed by the vital chemistry; a matter as easily disposed of as the breath, after it has served its purpose — a new flood of light breaks on the intelligence.” — p. 383 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“The whole of the Microcosm is potentially contained . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘The whole of the Microcosm is potentially contained in the Liquor Vitae, a nerve-fluid comparable to the fluidic brain-substance, and in which is contained the nature, quality, character, and essence of beings . . .’ ” — p. 63 (Paracelsus, De Generatio Hominis)
“The Archæus . . . is an essence that is equally distributed in all parts of the human body . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘The Archaeus is an essence that is equally distributed in all parts of the human body . . . The Spiritus Vitae takes its origin from the Spiritus Mundi.  Being an emanation of the latter, it contains the elements of all cosmic influences, and is therefore the cause by which the action of the stars (cosmic forces) upon the invisible body of man may be explained.’ ” — p. 133 (Paracelsus, De Viribus Membrorum)

— Footnotes

“This vital force . . . radiates around man . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘The vital force is not enclosed in man, but radiates around him like a luminous sphere, and it may be made to act at a distance.’ ” — p. 133 (Paracelsus, Paragranum)

— 533 —

“It may be urged that in this line of thought . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “It may be urged that in this line of thought is included no more than the theory of the existence of the ether that is supposed to pervade space, the undulating ether of light.  It may be said that this universal ether pervades all the organism of the animal body as from without, and as part of every organisation.  This view would be Pantheism physically discovered, if it were true.  It fails to be true because it would destroy the individuality of every individual being: it fails to be true because it would destroy the individuality of every individual sense.” — p. 384 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“If we did not individually produce the medium . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “If we did not individually produce the medium of communication between ourselves and the outer world, if it were produced from without and adapted to one kind of vibration alone, then were fewer senses required than we possess; for, taking two illustrations only — ether of light is not adapted for sound, and yet we hear as well as see; while air, the medium of motion of sound, is not the medium of light, and yet we see and hear.” — p. 384 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)

— 534 —

“The indestructible and the destructible . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The indestructible and the destructible, such is the double manifestation of the self.  Of these the indestrucible is the existent {‘the true nature of the Sat, the self’ . . . Perhaps ‘underlying principle’ might be a nearer approach}, the manifestation as an individual (entity) is called the destructible.” — p. 292 & fn. (Anugītā, xiii)
“Every one who is twice-born . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Action should be understood to be . . . sacrifice, gift at a sacrifice, and sacred study, for (every one) who is born {‘twice-born}.  Such is the teaching of the ancients. . . . Space is the first entity.” — pp. 339-40 & fn. (Anugītā, xxvii)
“Now Space . . . has one quality . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Now space has one quality, and that is stated to be sound only.  I will speak at length of the numerous qualities of sound.  Shaḍja, Ṛishabha, together with Gāndhāra, Madhyama, and likewise Pañcama, and beyond these should be understood to be Nishāda and Dhaivata likewise {This is the Hindu Gamut} . . .” — pp. 384-5 & fn. (Anugītā, xxxv)

— 534-5 —

“State this wonderful mystery . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . state this wonderful mystery. . . . Hear also the assignment of causes exhaustively.  The nose, and the tongue, and the eye, and the skin, and the ear as the fifth, mind and understanding, these seven should be understood to be the causes of (the knowledge of) qualities.” — p. 277-8 (Anugītā, x)

— 535 —

“Smell, and taste, and colour . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Smell, and taste, and colour, sound, and touch as the fifth, the object of the mental operation and the object of the understanding, these seven are causes of action.  He who smells, he who eats, he who sees, he who speaks, and he who hears as the fifth, he who thinks, and he who understands, these seven should be understood to be the causes of the agents.  These {action, agent, and instrument}, being possessed of qualities, enjoy their own qualities, agreeable and disagreeable.” — p. 278 & fn. (Anugītā, x)
“Only some know me truly. . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “. . . even of those who have reached perfection, and who are assiduous, only some know me truly.  Earth, water, fire, air, space, mind, understanding, and egoism, thus is my nature divided eightfold.  But this is a lower (form of my) nature.  Know (that there is) another (form of my) nature, and higher than this, which is animate, O you of mighty arms! and by which this universe is upheld. . . . all this is woven upon me, like numbers of pearls upon a thread {Muṇḍakopanishad, p. 298}.”  — pp. 73-4 & fn. (Bhagavadgītā, vii)

— Footnotes

The modern commentators . . . take this sentence . . . to mean “that the powers of smelling . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “This seems to mean, that the powers of smelling, &c., when attributed to the self, make him appear as an agent, as an active principle.” — p. 278 fn. (Anugītā, x)
“the objects are causes, as their enjoyment causes an impression”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Nīlakaṇṭha says, ‘seed = cause; product = effect.  The unperceived is an effect . . . The objects are causes, as their enjoyment causes an impression.’ ” — p. 383 fn. (Anugītā, xxxv)
“Thus . . . these seven (senses) are the causes of emancipation” . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Thus these seven are the causes of emancipation.  And among the learned who understand (everything), the qualities which are in the position of the deities, each in its own place, always enjoy the offering according to prescribed rules.” — pp. 278-9 (Anugītā, x)
not at all “the senses” . . . For the “learned do not suppose . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “I presume, the senses. . . . The learned do not suppose their self to have aught to do with them.” — p. 279 fn. (Translator’s comment, Anugītā, x)

— 535-6 —

“I am the taste in the water . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “I am the taste in water, O son of Kuntī!  I am the light of the sun and moon.  I am . . . sound {the Occult essence which underlies all these and the other qualities of the various things mentioned} in space . . . I am the fragrant smell in the earth, refulgence in the fire; I am life in all beings . . .” — p. 74 (Bhagavadgītā, vii)

— 536 —

“Who knows the truth about the qualities of nature . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The preceptor said . . . He who knows the truth about the qualities of nature, who understands the creation of all entities, who is devoid of (the thought that this or that is) mine, and who is devoid of egoism, is emancipated . . .” — pp. 312-13 (Anugītā, xx)
“Accurately understanding the great tree . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Accurately understanding the great (tree) of which the unperceived is the sprout from the seed, which consists of the understanding as its trunk, the branches of which are the great egoism, in the holes of which are the sprouts, namely, the senses, of which the great elements are the flower-bunches, the gross elements the smaller boughs, which is always possessed of leaves, always possessed of flowers . . . on which all entities subsist, which is eternal, and the seed of which is the Brahman; and cutting it with that excellent sword — knowledge — one attains immortality, and casts off birth and death.” — p. 313 (Anugītā, xx)

— Footnotes

The elements are the five tanmâtras . . .
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The great elements are the five tanmātras of earth, water, fire, air, and space, which afterwards produce what we have called the gross elements . . .” — p. 313 fn. (Anugītā, xx)

— 537 —

“The theory, I offer, is that the nervous Ether is an animal product. . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “In the theory therefore I offer the nervous ether is an animal product.  In different classes of animals it may differ in physical quality so as to be adapted to the special wants of the animal, but essentially it plays one part in all animals, and is produced, in all, in the same way.” — p. 384 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“The nervous ether is not, according to my idea of it . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “The nervous ether is not, according to my ideal of it, in itself active or an excitant of animal motion in the sense of a force; but it is essential as supplying the conditions by which the motion is rendered possible.” — p. 385 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)

— 537-8 —

“It is the conductor of all vibrations of heat . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “It is the conductor, I presume, of all vibrations of heat, of light, of sound, of electrical action, of mechanical friction.  It holds the nervous system throughout in perfect tension during perfect states of life.  By exercise it is disposed of, and when the demand for it is greater than the supply, its deficiency is indicated by nervous collapse or exhaustion.  It accumulates in the nervous centres during sleep, bringing them, if I may so speak, to their due tone, and therewith rousing the muscles to awakening or renewed life.” — p. 385 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)

— 538 —

“The body fully renewed by it . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “The body, fully renewed by it, presents capacity for motion, fulness of form, life.  The body, bereft of it, presents inertia, the configuration of ‘shrunk death’ the evidence of having lost something physical that was in it when it lived.” ­— p. 385 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“The nervous Ether may be poisoned . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “Lastly, the nervous ether may be poisoned; it may, I mean, have diffused through it, by simple gaseous diffusion, other gases or vapours derived from without; it may derive from within products of substances swallowed and ingested, or gases of decomposition produced, during disease, in the body itself.” — p. 387 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
“The Archæus is of a magnetic nature . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘The Archæus is of a magnetic nature, and attracts or repulses other sympathetic or antipathetic forces belonging to the same plane.  The less power of resistance for astral influences a person possesses, the more will he be subject to such influences.  The vital force is not enclosed in man, but radiates around him like a luminous sphere, and it may be made to act at a distance.’ ” — p. 133 (Paracelsus, Paragranum)

— Footnotes

the Sun-Force, as Metcalfe and Professor Hunt explain it
see: B. W. Richardson, “Sun Force and Earth Force,” 1866: “But the philosopher who first boldly asserted the unity of the two forces was . . . Samuel Metcalfe.  This man, tracing all motion, all force to solar fire — Aith, the sun; Ur, fire, ÆTHER — spent the whole of his life . . . to prove that there was no necessity to conceive two forces in nature . . .” — p. 329 (Popular Science Review, v. 5)
see: Robert Hunt, “The Source of Heat in the Sun,” Jan. 1865, Popular Science Review, v. 4.

— 538-9 —

“It may poison the essence of life . . .”
p/q: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “ ‘It may poison the essence of life and cause diseases, or it may purify it after it has been made impure, and restore the health.’ ” — p. 133 (Paracelsus, Paragranum)

— 539 —

the tension of it generally may be too high or too low . . . “owing to local changes . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “The tension of the nervous ether generally may be too high or too low; it may be so locally, owing to local changes in the nervous matter it invests and charges.  Under undue tension of the brain or cord, both closed firmly in by bony walls, the ether, under sharp excitation, may vibrate as if in a storm, and plunge every muscle under cerebral or spinal control into uncontrolled motion — unconscious convulsion.” — p. 387 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)

— Footnotes

our pseudo-Orientalist devotes himself to criticizing the “Seven Principles” . . .
see: Arthur Lillie, Buddhism in Christendom, 1887: “Madame Blavatsky gives seven stages of spiritual progress which mortals after thousands and thousands of re-births will successively reach.  1. The body (Rupa).  2. Vitality (Jiva).  3. Astral body (Linga śarira).  4. Animal soul (Kāma rupa).  5. Human soul (Manas).  6. Spiritual soul (Buddhi).  7. Spirit (Atma). . . . These stages . . . are pure nonsense.” — p. 404
he speaks enthusiastically of the Vidyadharas, “the seven great legions . . .”
p/q: Arthur Lillie, Buddhism in Christendom, 1887: “The Vidyadharas round thee stand / Celestial courtiers, / The seven great legions of dead men made wise.” — p. 405
The “Hymn to the Sun” . . . endows Buddhism with a personal god
see: Arthur Lillie, Buddhism in Christendom, 1887: “Hymn to the Sun.  Eye of the World art thou! . . . All turn to thee.” — p. 405
Mr. Rhys Davids . . . said that the theories . . . “were not Buddhism, and were not Esoteric.”
p/q: T. W. Rhys Davids, “Theosophy and Buddhism,” July 24, 1886: “It also calls its doctrines Esoteric Buddhism.  But, however interesting, two things may be said of them without fear of mistake, and these are that they are not esoteric, and that they are not Buddhism.” — p. 989 (The Spectator, v. 59)

— 540 —

the Vitalist “fallacy” . . . still countenanced . . .
see: A. de Quatrefages, The Human Species, 1879: “We have already seen the essential phenomena by which they [living beings] are distinguised. . . . It seems to me, therefore, necessary to attribute them to a special cause, ― to Life.  I know that in the present day any one making use of this word is readily accused . . . of introducing into science a vague and almost mysterious expression.”  “If the anti-vitalists would only seriously reflect upon the matter, they would acknowledge that, considered from this point of view, there is nothing more mysterious in living beings than in some of the commonest phenomena presented by inanimate bodies.” — pp. 10, 11
“It is very true we do not know what life is . . .”
p/q: A. de Quatrefages, The Human Species, 1879: “It is very true that we do not know what Life is; but no more do we know what the force is that set the stars in motion and retains them in their orbits.” — p. 10
“Living beings are heavy . . .”
p/q: A. de Quatrefages, The Human Species, 1879: “Living beings are heavy, and therefore subject to gravitation; they are the seat of numerous and various physico-chemical phenomena which are indispensable to their existence and which must be referred to the action of etherodynamy.  But these phenomena are here manifested under the influence of another force. . . . Life is not antagonistic to the inanimate forces, but it governs and rules their action by its laws.” — p. 11
Dr. Gull’s attack on the theory of vitality
see: Lionel S. Beale, The Mystery of Life, 1871: “. . . Dr. Gull simply accepts, supports, and advocates the views of those who hold that ‘life’ is a form or mode of ordinary force, and attacks the position that life is a power distinct and apart from the forces of the non-living world . . .” — p. 2
“There is a mystery in life . . .”
p/q: Lionel S. Beale, The Mystery of Life, 1871: “There is a mystery in life.  A mystery which has never been fathomed, and which appears greater the more deeply the phenomena of life are studied and contemplated.  In living centres, far more central than the centre as seen by the highest magnifying powers — in centres of living matter where the eye cannot penetrate, but towards which the understanding may tend, — proceed changes of the nature of which the most advanced physicists and chemists fail to afford us the faintest conception.  Nor is there the slightest reason to think that the nature of these changes will ever be ascertained by physical investigation, inasmuch as they are certainly of an order or nature totally distinct from that to which any other phenomena known to us can be relegated.” — pp. 54-5

— 541 —

Occult philosophy denies that the sun is a globe in combustion . . .
see: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” Sept. 1883: “The ‘Adepts’ . . . deny most emphatically (a) that the Sun is in combustion, in any ordinary sense of the word; or (b) that he is incandescent or even burning though he is glowing . . .” — p. 299 (The Theosophist, v. 4)
the real Sun being hidden behind . . .  its shell
see: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” Sept. 1883: “The ‘Adepts’ affirm as a fact that the true Sun, — an invisible orb of which the known one is the shell, mask, or clothing — has in him the spirit of every element that exists in the solar system . . .” — p. 299 (The Theosophist, v. 4)
The Nasmyth willow leaves, mistaken by Sir J. Herschell for “Solar inhabitants”
see: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?,” Sept. 1883: “When saying in the course of his speculations upon the Nasmyth willow-leaf theory . . . ‘looked at in this point of view, we cannot refuse to regard them as organisms . . .’ ”  “. . . as a modern astronomer interprets Sir J. Herschel’s words, ‘solar inhabitants’ . . .” — p. 300 (The Theosophist, v. 4)
the reservoirs of solar vital energy, “the vital electricity that feeds the whole system . . .”
p/q: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?,” Sept. 1883: “These ‘wonderful objects’ are not . . . ‘solar inhabitants . . .’ but simply the reservoirs of solar vital energy, the vital electricity that feeds the whole system in which it lives, and breathes, and has its being.” — pp. 300-1 (The Theosophist, v. 4)
The Sun in abscondito being thus the storehouse of our little Kosmos . . .
p/q: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?,” Sept. 1883: “It is, as we say, the store-house of our little cosmos, self-generating its vital fluid, and ever receiving as much as it gives out.” — p. 301 (The Theosophist, v. 4)
The dark region is not due “to the absorption exerted by the vapours . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Father Secchi [says] . . . ‘The dark region is due to the absorption exerted by the vapors issuing from the bosom of the sun and interposed between the observer and the photosphere’ {Le Soleil, ii, 184}.” — p. 520
nor are the spots formed “by the matter . . . upon the solar disc”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “ ‘The spot is formed by the matter itself which the eruption projects upon the solar disc.’ ” — p. 520

— Footnotes

(see the theories of Secchi, of Faye, and of Young)
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . I present a condensed statement [pp. 522-30] of the characteristics of the four or five classes of stars pointed out by Father Secchi in his beautiful work on the sun {Le Soleil . . . 1867}.” — p. 522 & fn.
see: H. Faye, “Sur l’Origine du Système Solaire,” Les Mondes, 1880; and C. A. Young, The Sun and the Phenomena of its Atmosphere, 1872.
Professor Jevons attributes all the great periodical commercial crises to the influence of the Sun spots . . .
see: W. Stanley Jevons, Investigations in Currency and Finance, 1884: “. . . I am perfectly convinced that these decennial crises do depend upon meteorological variations of like period, which again depend, in all probability, upon cosmical variations of which we have evidence in the frequency of sun-spots, auroras, and magnetic perturbations.” — pp. 235-6

— 542 —

it is the dream of Science that “all the recognized chemical elements will one day be found . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . it is a dream of physical philosophy that all the recognized chemical elements will one day be found but modifications of a single material element.” — p. 48
the Hæckelian monera, is now viewed as the archeobiosis of terrestrial existence . . .
see: Ernst Haeckel, The Pedigree of Man, 1883: “. . . the first appearance of living beings, can only be decided empirically by proof of the so-called Archeobiosis . . . the spontaneous production of organisms of the simplest conceivable kind.  Such are the Monera . . . exceedingly simple microscopic masses of protoplasm without structure or organisation . . . Such a Moneron as that primordial organism discovered by the renowned English zoologist Huxley and named Bathybius Haeckelii . . .” — p. 33
“Brahmâ has essentially the aspect of prakriti . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “ ‘That Brahma, in its totality, has, essentially, the aspect of prakṛiti, both evolved and unevolved, and also the aspect of spirit, and the aspect of time.  Spirit, O twice-born, is the leading aspect of the supreme Brahma.  The next is a twofold aspect, viz., prakṛiti, both evolved and unevolved; and time is the last.’ ” — 1:18 fn.
Anu . . . means “atom”: Aníyâmsam ańíyasám, “the most atomic of the atomic” . . .
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “Having glorified him who is the support of all things; who is the smallest of the small {Aṇīyāṃsam aṇīyasāṃ . . . ‘the most atomic of the atomic’}; who is in all created things; the unchanged, imperishable {Achyuta} Purushottama.” — 1:15-16 & fns. (i.2)

— Footnotes

the “archeobiosis of terrestrial existence” has turned . . . into a simple precipitate
see: “Ballad of Bathybius,” Punch, Jan. 28, 1888: “ ‘Bathybius, a name given by Professor Huxley to a gelatinous substance found at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, and at first supposed to be a formless mass of living protoplasm, but now regarded as an inorganic precipitate.’ ” — p. 47
sulphate of lime . . . not even an organic substance!!!
see: “Ballad of Bathybius,” Punch, Jan. 28, 1888:
“Huxleius in a pallid light awoke . . .
  It was the voice of his Bathybius . . .
  ‘Sulphate of lime I am . . .
  You need not look for germ of life in me . . .
  I’m not organic . . .’ ” — p. 47
Sic transit gloria mundi [“Thus passes the glory of the world”]
see: Alexander Cargill, “Sic Transit Gloria Mundi,” 1883:
“There is no greatness, howsoe’er sublime,
  But hath its clouds attendant: to the West
  All glory must, ev’n as the sun, decline . . .” — p. 27 (Scraps From a Pedlar’s Wallet)

— 543 —

“the curds of the cold radiant mother” and “the fire-seed of the hot Father”
see: Stanza III, 4, 6: “The radiant essence becomes seven . . . The luminous egg . . . curdles and spreads in milk-white curds throughout the depths of mother . . . and the ocean was radiant light, which was fire, and heat, and motion.  Darkness vanished and was no more; it disappeared in its own essence, the body of fire and water, or father and mother.” — SD 1:29
resolvable nebulæ are not a class of proper nebulæ
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . all nebulæ giving bright-line spectra remain completely irresolvable; and all nebulæ which are resolvable give continuous spectra.  The ‘resolvable nebulæ,’ therefore, do not constitute a class of proper nebulæ.  More than half of those forms once regarded as nebulæ must be set down as starry clusters {Prof. Newcomb, Popular Astronomy, p. 444}.” — pp. 47-8 & fn.
Manasaputras — “mind-born men”
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — III,” April 1887: “In speaking of himself Krishna says, (chapter x, verse 6): — ‘The seven great Rishis, the four preceding Manus, partaking of my nature, were born from my mind: from them sprang . . . the human race and the world.’  He speaks of the sapta rishis and of the Manus as his manasaputras, or mind-born sons . . .” — p. 444 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
a Universe, with its numberless forms . . . built out of a “single substance”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . it is a dream of physical philosophy that all the recognized chemical elements will one day be found but modifications of a single material element.  When the dream is realized, we shall behold the amazing phenomenon of a universe with its numberless forms, conditions and aspects built out of a single substance.” — pp. 48-9

— Footnotes

“It is generally admitted that at excessively high temperatures . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “It is generally admitted that at excessively high temperatures, matter exists in a state of dissociation — that is, no chemical combination can exist.” — p. 48 fn.
homogeneity will show a bright line
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Now, if the so-called elements are really compounded, a state of dissociation would resolve them into ultimate atoms or molecules, all of one kind.  The spectrum of such a substance should be a bright line.” — p. 48 fn.
in the case of several molecular arrangements . . . “the spectrum should consist of two or three bright lines!”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “If the temperature is such that two or three different molecular arrangements may exist, the spectrum should consist of two or three bright lines.” — p. 48 fn.
Dumas . . . suggests “the composite nature of the ‘elements’ on . . . atomic weights”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Dumas, in 1857, based the suggestion of the composite nature of the ‘elements’ on certain relations of atomic weights . . .” — p. 48 fn.

— Footnotes [543-4]

Mr. Crookes’s . . . experiments may seem “to be best understood . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . the late remarkable experiments of Dr. Crooks on so-called ‘radiant matter’ . . . would seem to be best understood on the hypothesis of the homogeneity of the elements of matter, and the continuity of the states of matter.” — p. 49 fn.

— 544 —

the nebular theory . . . what it does not imply.  (Vide Supra)
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “What the Nebular Theory does Not Imply . . . It is not a theory of the evolution of the Universe. . . . It does not regard the comets as involved in that particular evolution . . . It does not deny an antecedant history of the luminous fire-mist. . . . It does not profess to discover the origin of things . . . It does not deny the existence of plan and purpose in the system of cosmic evolution.” — pp. 196-7
“the general principles of the atomo-mechanical theory . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the general principles of the atomo-mechanical theory, which is said to be the basis of modern physics, are substantially identical with the cardinal doctrines of ontological metaphysics . . .” — p. vi
“the fundamental errors of ontology become apparent . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the fundamental errors of ontology become apparent in proportion to the advance of physical science . . .” — p. vi

— Footnotes

“when bodies, deemed to be simple, combine with one another . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . H. Ste. Claire Deville affirms that ‘when bodies deemed to be simple combine with one another, they vanish, they are individually annihilated.’ ” — p. 48 fn.

— 545 —

“That which is the unevolved cause . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “That which is the unevolved cause is emphatically called, by the most eminent sages, pradhāna, original base, which is subtile prakṛiti, viz., that which is eternal, and which at once is and is not, or is mere process.” — 1:20 fn.
“There was neither day nor night . . .”
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “There was neither day nor night, neither heaven nor earth, neither darkness nor light.  And there was not aught else comprehensible by the senses or by the mental faculties.  There was then, however, one Brahma, essentially prakṛiti and spirit.  For the two aspects of Vishṇu which are other than his supreme essential aspect are prakṛiti and spirit, O Brāhman.  When these two other aspects of his no longer subsist, but are dissolved, then that aspect whence form and the rest, i.e., creation, proceed anew is denominated time, O twice-born.” — 1:25 fn.
(Vide in Part II., “Primordial Substance and Divine Thought”)
see: “Primordial Sustance and Divine Thought,” SD 1:325-41.

— Footnotes

Vide preceding Section IX [pp. 534-5] . . . quotation from Anugitâ
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “The nose, and the tongue, and the eye, and the skin, and the ear as the fifth, mind and understanding, these seven should be understood to be the causes of (the knowledge of) qualities.” — p. 278 (Anugītā, x)

— 546 —

his lecture on the “Genesis of the Elements”
see: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Lecture delivered at the Royal Institution, Feb. 18, 1887; published in The Chemical News, v. 55: Feb. 25, 1887 (pp. 83-8); and March 4, 1887 (pp. 95-9).
“Permit me, gentlemen, now to draw your attention . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Permit me, gentlemen, now to draw your attention for a short time to a subject which concerns the fundamental principles of chemistry, a subject which may lead us to admit the possible existence of bodies which, though neither compounds nor mixtures, are not elements in the strictest sense of the word; — bodies which I venture to call ‘meta-elements.’ ” — p. 206 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“To explain my meaning it is necessary . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “To explain my meaning it is necessary for me to revert to our conception of an element.  What is the criterion of an element?  Where are we to draw the line between distinct existence and identity?  No one doubts that oxygen, sodium, chlorine, sulphur, are separate elements; and when we come to such groups as chlorine, bromine, iodine, &c., we still feel no doubt, although were degrees of ‘elementicity’ admissible — and to that we may ultimately have to come — it might be allowed that chlorine approximates much more closely to bromine than to oxygen, sodium, or sulphur.  Again, nickel and cobalt are near to each other, very near, though no one questions their claim to rank as distinct elements.” — p. 206 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“Still I cannot help asking what would have been the prevalent opinion . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Still I cannot help asking what would have been the prevalent opinion among chemists had the respective solutions of these bodies and their compounds presented identical colours, instead of colours which, approximately speaking are mutually complementary?  Would their distinct nature have even now been recognised?” — p. 206 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“When we pass further . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “When we pass further and come to the so-called rare earths the ground is less secure under our feet.  Perhaps we may admit scandium, ytterbium, and others of the like sort to elemental rank; but what are we to say in the case of praseo- and neo-dymium, between which there may be said to exist no well-marked chemical difference, their chief claim to separate individuality being slight differences in basicity and crystallising powers, though their physical distinctions as shown by spectrum observations are very strongly marked?  Even here we may imagine the disposition of the majority of chemists would incline towards the side of leniency, so that they would admit these two bodies within the charmed circle.  Whether in so doing they would be able to appeal to any broad principle is an open question.” — pp. 206-7 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)

— 546-7 —

“If we admit these candidates how in justice are we to exclude the series of elemental bodies . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “If we admit these candidates, how in justice are we to exclude the series of elemental bodies or meta-elements made known to us by Krüss and Nilson?  Here the spectral differences are well marked, whilst my own researches on didymium show also a slight difference in basicity between some at least of these doubtful bodies.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)

— 547 —

“In the same category must be included the numerous separate bodies . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “In the same category must be included the numerous separate bodies into which it is probable that yttrium, erbium, samarium, and other ‘elements’ — commonly so-called — have been and are being split up.  Where then are we to draw the line?  The different groupings shade off so imperceptibly the one into the other that it is impossible to erect a definite boundary between any two adjacent bodies and to say that the body on this side of the line is an element, whilst the one on the other side is non-elementary, or merely something which simulates or approximates to an element.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“Wherever an apparently reasonable line might be drawn . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Wherever an apparently reasonable line might be drawn it would no doubt be easy at once to assign most bodies to their proper side, as in all cases of classification the real difficulty comes in when the border-line is approached.  Slight chemical differences of course are admitted, and, up to a certain point, so are well-marked physical differences.  What are we to say, however, when the only chemical difference is an almost imperceptible tendency for the one body — of a couple or of a group — to precipitate before the other?  Again, there are cases where the chemical differences reach the vanishing point, although well-marked physical differences still remain.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“Here we stumble on a new difficulty . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Here we stumble on a new difficulty: in such obscurities what is chemical and what is physical?  Are we not entitled to call a slight tendency of a nascent amorphous precipitate to fall down in advance of another a ‘physical difference?’  And may we not call coloured reactions depending on the amount of some particular acid present, and varying according to the concentration of the solution and to the solvent employed, ‘chemical differences?’  I do not see how we can deny elementary character to a body which differs from another by well-marked colour or spectrum-reactions whilst we accord it to another body whose only claim is a very minute difference in basic powers.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“Having once opened the door wide enough . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Having once opened the door wide enough to admit some spectrum differences, we have now to enquire how minute a difference qualifies the candidate to pass?  I will give instances from my own experience of some of these doubtful candidates.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“periodic theory” stands in the way of an unlimited multiplication of elements
see: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “The real difficulty we encounter by unlimited multiplication of elements arises from the Periodic theory.  That theory has received such abundant verification that we cannot lightly accept any interpretation of phenomena which fails to be in accordance with it.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, v. 57)

— 547-8 —

“That theory has received such abundant verification . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “That theory has received such abundant verification that we cannot lightly accept any interpretation of phenomena which fails to be in accordance with it.  But if we suppose the elements reinforced by a vast number of bodies slightly differing from each other in their properties, and forming, if I may use the expression, aggregations of nebulæ where we formerly saw, or believed we saw, separate stars, the periodic arrangement can no longer be definitely grasped.  No longer, that is, if we retain our usual conception of an element.  Let us then modify this conception.  For ‘element’ read ‘elementary group,’ such elementary groups taking the place of the old elements in the periodic scheme, — and the difficulty falls away.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)

— 548 —

“In defining an element . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “In defining an element, let us take not an external boundary, but an internal type.  Let us say, e.g., the smallest ponderable quanitity of yttrium is an assemblage of ultimate atoms almost infinitely more like each other than they are to the atoms of any other approximating element.  It does not necessarily follow that the atoms shall all be absolutely alike among themselves.  The atomic weight which we ascribe to yttrium, therefore, merely represents a mean value around which the actual weights of the individual atoms of the ‘element’ range within certain limits.  But if my conjecture is tenable, could we separate atom from atom, we should find them varying within narrow limits on each side of the mean.  The very process of fractionation implies the existence of such differences in certain bodies.” — p. 207 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
“Until lately such bodies passed muster as elements. . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Until lately such bodies passed muster as elements.  They had definite properties, chemical and physical; they had recognised atomic weights.  If we take a pure dilute solution of such a body, yttrium for instance, and if we add to it an excess of strong ammonia, we obtain a precipitate which appears perfectly homogeneous.  But if instead we add very dilute ammonia in quantity sufficient only to precipitate one half of the base present, we obtain no immediate precipitate.  If we stir up the whole thoroughly so as to ensure a uniform mixture of the solution and the ammonia, and set the vessel aside for an hour, carefully excluding dust, we may still find the liquid clear and bright without any vestige of turbidity.  After three or four hours, however, an opalescence will declare itself, and the next morning a precipitate will have appeared.” — pp. 207-8 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)

— 548-9 —

“Now let us ask ourselves, What can be the meaning . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Now, let us ask ourselves what can be the meaning of this phenomenon?  The quantity of precipitant added was insufficient to throw down more than half the yttria present, therefore a process akin to selection has been going on for several hours.  The precipitation has evidently not been effected at random, those molecules of the base being decomposed which happened to come in contact with a corresponding molecule of ammonia, for we have taken care that the liquids should be uniformly mixed, so that one molecule of the original salt would not be more exposed to decomposition than any other.” — p. 208 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)

— 549 —

“If, further, we consider the time which elapses . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “If, further, we consider the time which elapses before the appearance of a precipitate, we cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that the action which has been going on for the first few hours is of a selective character.  The problem is not why a precipitate is produced, but what determines or directs some atoms to fall down and others to remain in solution.  Out of the multitude of atoms present, what power is it that directs each atom to choose the proper path?  We may picture to ourselves some directive force passing the atoms one by one in review, selecting one for precipitation and another for solution, till all have been adjusted.” — p. 208 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)
Occultism . . . refers the reader to a subsequent section, “Gods, Monads, and Atoms”
see: Section XV, “Gods, Monads, and Atoms,” SD 1:610-34.
“In order that such a selection can be effected . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “In order that such a selection can be effected there evidently must be some slight differences between which it is possible to select, and this difference almost certainly must be one of basicity, so slight as to be imperceptible by any test at present known, but susceptible of being nursed and encouraged to a point when the difference can be appreciated by ordinary tests.” — p. 208 (Chemical News, May 25, 1888)

— 550 —

“In the Birmingham address already referred to . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “In the Birmingham address already referred to, I asked my audience to picture the action of two forces on the original protyle, one being time, accompanied by a lowering of temperature; the other, swinging to and fro like a mighty pendulum, having periodic cycles of ebb and swell, rest and activity, being intimately connected with the imponderable matter, essence, or source of energy we call electricity.  Now, a simile like this effects its object if it fixes in the mind the particular fact it is intended to emphasize, but it must not be expected necessarily to run parallel with all the facts.  Besides the ebb and flow of temperature with the periodic ebb and flow of electricity, positive or negative, requisite to confer on the newly born elements their particular atomicity, it is evident that a third factor must be taken into account.  Nature does not act on a flat plane; she demands space for her cosmogenic operations, and if we introduce space as the third factor all appears clear.” — p. 227 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“Instead of a pendulum . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Instead of a pendulum, which though to a certain extent a good illustration is impossible as a fact, let us seek some more satisfactory way of representing what I conceive may have taken place.  Let us suppose the zigzag diagram not drawn upon a plane, but projected in space of three dimensions.  What figure can we best select to meet all the conditions involved?” — p. 227 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“Many of the facts can be well explained . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Many of the facts can be well explained by supposing the projection in space of Professor Emerson Reynolds’s zigzag curve to be a spiral.  This figure is, however, inadmissible, inasmuch as the curve has to pass through a point neutral as to electricity and chemical energy twice in each cycle.  We must therefore adopt some other figure.  A figure of eight or lemniscate will foreshorten into a zigzag just as well as a spiral, and it fulfils every condition of the problem.” — p. 227 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)

— 551 —

“Such a figure will result . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Such a figure will result from three very simple simultaneous motions.  First, a simple oscillation backwards and forwards (suppose east and west); secondly, a simple oscillation at right angles to the former (suppose north and south) of half the periodic time, i.e., twice as fast; and thirdly, a motion at right angles to these two (suppose downwards), which, in its simplest form, would be with unvarying velocity.” — p. 227 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“If we project this figure in space . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “If we project this figure in space we find on examination that the points of the curves where chlorine, bromine, and iodine are formed come close under each other; so also will sulphur, selenium, and tellurium; again, phosphorus, arsenic, and antimony, and in like manner other series of analogous bodies.” — p. 227 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“It may be asked whether this scheme explains . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “It may be asked whether this scheme explains how and why the elements appear in this order?  Let us imagine a cyclical translation in space, each evolution witnessing the genesis of the group of elements which I previously represented as produced during one complete vibration of the pendulum.  Let us suppose that one cycle has thus been completed, the centre of the unknown creative force in its mighty journey through space having scattered along its track the primitive atoms, the seeds, if I may use the expression, which presently are to coalesce and develop into the groupings now known as lithium, beryllium, boron, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, sodium, magnesium, aluminium, silicon, phosphorus, sulphur, and chlorine.” — p. 227 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“What is most probably the form . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “What is most probably the form of track now pursued?  Were it strictly confined to the same plane of temperature and time, the next elementary groupings to appear would again have been those of lithium, and the original cycle would have been eternally repeated, producing again and again the same fourteen elements.  The conditions, however, are not quite the same.  Space and electricity are as at first; but temperature has altered, and thus, instead of the atoms of lithium being supplemented with atoms in all respects analogous with themselves, the atomic groupings which come into being when the second cycle commences form not lithium but its lineal descendant, potassium.” — pp. 227-8 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“Suppose, therefore, the vis generatrix . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Suppose, therefore, the vis generatrix [generative force] travelling to and fro in cycles along a lemniscate path as above suggested, while simultaneously temperature is declining and time is flowing on (variations which I have endeavoured to represent by the downward sink) each coil of the lemniscate track crosses the same vertical line at lower and lower points.  Projected in space, the curve shows a central line neutral as far as electricity is concerned, and neutral in chemical properties — positive electricity on the north, negative on the south.  Dominant atomicities are governed by the distance east and west from the neutral centre line, monatomic elements being one remove from it, diatomic two removes, and so on.  In every successive coil the same law holds good.” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)

— 552 —

“We have now traced the formation . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “We have now traced the formation of the chemical elements from knots and voids in a primitive, formless fluid.  We have shown the possibility, nay, the probability, that the atoms are not eternal in existence, but share with all other created beings the attributes of decay and death.” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“We have shown, from arguments . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “We have shown, from arguments drawn from the chemical laboratory, that in matter which has responded to every test of an element, there are minute shades of difference which may admit of selection.  We have seen that the time-honoured distinction between elements and compounds no longer keeps pace with the developments of chemical science, but must be modified to include a vast array of intermediate bodies — ‘meta-elements.’  We have shown how the objections of Clerk-Maxwell, weighty as they are, may be met; and finally, we have adduced reasons for believing that primitive matter was formed by the act of a generative force, throwing off at intervals of time atoms endowed with varying quantities of primitive forms of energy.” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“If we may hazard any conjectures . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “If we may hazard any conjectures as to the source of energy embodied in a chemical atom, we may, I think, premise that the heat radiations propagated outwards through the ether from the ponderable matter of the universe, by some process of nature not yet known to us, are transformed at the confines of the universe into the primary — the essential — motions of chemical atoms, which, the instant they are formed, gravitate inwards, and thus restore to the universe the energy which otherwise would be lost to it through radiant heat.  If this conjecture be well founded, Sir William Thomson’s startling prediction of the final decrepitude of the universe through the dissipation of its energy falls to the ground.” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)

— 552-3 —

“In this fashion, gentlemen, it seems to me . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “In this fashion, gentlemen, it seems to me that the great question of the elements may be provisionally treated.  Our slender knowledge of these first mysteries is extending steadily, surely, though slowly.” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)

— 553 —

“As the mighty focus of creative energy goes round . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “As the mighty focus of creative energy goes round we see it in successive cycles sowing in one tract of space seeds of lithium, potassium, rubidium, and caesium; in another tract, chlorine, bromine, and iodine; in a third, sodium, copper, silver, and gold; in a fourth, sulphur, selenium, and tellurium; in a fifth, beryllium, calcium, strontium, and barium; in a sixth, magnesium, zinc, cadmium, and mercury; in a seventh, phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, and bismuth; in other tracts, aluminium, gallium, indium, and thallium; silicon, germanium, and tin; carbon, titanium, and zirconium . . .” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“While a natural position near the neutral axis . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “. . . whilst a natural position near the neutral axis is found for the three groups of elements relegated by Professor Mendeleeff to a sort of hospital for incurables — his 8th family.” — p. 228 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)
“those intermediate links . . . named ‘meta-elements or elementoids . . .’ ”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “Thus we approach nearer and nearer either to a regular gradation in the molecules or to the recognition of those intermediate links, which I have named ‘meta-elements’ or elementoids.” — p. 217 (Chemical News, June 1, 1888)
“this deviation from absolute homogeneity . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Elements and Meta-Elements,” March 28, 1888: “That this deviation from absolute homogeneity should mark the constitution of these molecules or aggregations of matter which we designate elements will perhaps be clearer if we return in imagination to the earliest dawn of our material universe, and face to face with the great secret, try to consider the processes of elemental evolution.” — p. 208 (Chemical News, June 8, 1888)

— 554 —

that Stanza which treats of Fohat and his “Seven brothers or Sons” . . .
see: Stanza III, 7 (b): “All the Kabalists and Occultists, Eastern and Western, recognise (a) the identity of ‘Father-Mother’ with primordial Æther or Akāsa, (Astral Light); and (b) its homogeneity before the evolution of the ‘Son,’ cosmically Fohat, for it is Cosmic Electricity.  ‘Fohat hardens and scatters the seven brothers’ (Book III. Dzyan); which means that the primordial Electric Entity . . . electrifies into life, and separates primordial stuff or pregenetic matter into atoms . . .” — SD 1:75-6
Sound . . . is a sensation . . . Light is the sensation caused by . . . vibrations of ether on the retina of the eye
see: Atkinson and Ganot, Elementary Treatise on Physics, 1883: “. . . it is held that light is due to the undulations of the ether, just as sound is due to the undulations propagated through the air.  In the latter case the undulations cause the drum of the ear to vibrate and produce the sensation of sound.  In the former case, the undulations cause points of the retina to vibrate and produce the sensation of light.” — p. 570

— 555 —

the etheric Force, discovered by . . . John Worrel Keely
see: Clara Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “The discoverer of etheric force is able to give . . . the explanations of . . . all that he asserts.  Newton at first thought that he had discovered in electricity the ether which he asserted pervades all nature . . . Other philosophers have speculated upon magnetism in the same way . . . Mr. Keely’s experiments show that the two are . . . but modifications of the one force in nature.” — p. 48

— 556 —

“In the conception of any machine . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “ ‘In the conception of any machine heretofore constructed, the medium for inducing a neutral centre has never been found.  If it had, the difficulties of perpetual-motion seekers would have ended, and this problem would have become an established and operating fact.  It would only require an introductory impulse of a few pounds, on such a device, to cause it to run for centuries.  In the conception of my vibratory engine, I did not seek to attain perpetual motion; but a circuit is formed that actually has a neutral centre, which is in a condition to be vivified by my vibratory ether, and while under operation, by said substance, is really a machine that is virtually independent of the mass (or globe), and it is the wonderful velocity of the vibratory circuit which makes it so.  Still, with all its perfection, it requires to be fed with the vibratory ether to make it an independent motor . . .’ ” — p. 201
“All structures require a foundation . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “ ‘It is well known that all structures require a foundation in strength according to the weight of the mass they have to carry, but the foundations of the universe rest on a vacuous point far more minute than a molecule; in fact, to express this truth properly, on an inter-etheric point, which requires an infinite mind to understand.  To look down into the depths of an etheric centre is precisely the same as it would be to search into the broad space of heaven’s ether to find the end; with this difference, that one is the positive field, while the other is the negative field . . .’ ” — p. 201

— Footnotes

idealism . . . based upon “the old ontological assumptions . . .”
p/q: J. B. Stallo, Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics, 1884: “. . . the true basis of the post-Kantean species of idealism . . . is founded on the old ontological assumption that things or entities exist independently of each other . . . this is not true of objectively real things . . . and it is equally untrue of the relation between the cognizing subject and its object.” — p. 235

— 557 —

“As regards planetary volume . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “ ‘As regards planetary volume, we would ask in a scientific point of view — How can the immense difference of volume in the planets exist without disorganizing the harmonious action that has always characterised them?  I can only answer this question properly by entering into a progressive synthesis, starting on the rotating etheric centres that were fixed by the Creator with their attractive or accumulative power.  If you ask what power it is that gives to each etheric atom its inconceivable velocity of rotation, or introductory impulse, I must answer that no finite mind will ever be able to conceive what it is.  The philosophy of accumulation . . . is the only proof that such a power has been given.’ ” — pp. 199-200
“The area, if we can so speak, of such an atom . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “ ‘The area, if we can so speak of such an atom, presents to the attractive or magnetic, the elective or propulsive, all the receptive force and all the antagonistic force that characterizes a planet of the largest magnitude; consequently, as the accumulation goes on, the perfect equation remains the same.  When this minute centre has once been fixed, the power to rend it from its position would necessarily have to be so great as to displace the most immense planet that exists.  When this atomic neutral centre is displaced, the planet must go with it.  The neutral centre carries the full load of any accumulation from the start, and remains the same, for ever balanced in the eternal space.’ ” — p. 200
“We will imagine that . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “ ‘We will imagine that, after an accumulation of a planet of any diameter — say, 20,000 miles more or less, for the size has nothing to do with the problem — there should be a displacement of all the material, with the exception of a crust 5,000 miles thick, leaving an intervening void between this crust and a centre of the size of an ordinary billiard ball, it would then require a force as great to move this small central mass as it would to move the shell of 5000 miles thickness.  Moreover, this small central mass would carry the load of this crust for ever, keeping it equi-distant; and there could be no opposing power, however great, that could bring them together.  The imagination staggers in contemplating the immense load which bears upon this point of centre, where weight ceases.  This is what we understand by a neutral centre.’ ” — p. 200

— 558 —

— Footnotes

“What Mr. Keely does admit . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “What 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 of experiment.” — p. 85

— 559 —

(see paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 in the Commentary to Stanza VII.)
see: Stanza VII, SD 1:213-64.
“to demolish with the hammer of Science the idols of Science”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “They predict that he will, with the hammer of science, demolish the idols of science . . .” — p. 66
Mrs. Bloomfield-Moore . . . states that Mr. Keely, as a philosopher, “is great enough in soul . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “Those who know the most of Mr. Keely’s philosophy, and of his inventions to apply this new force to mechanics, are the most sanguine as to his ultimate success.  They say he is great enough in soul, wise enough in mind, and sublime enough in courage to overcome all difficulties, and to stand at last before the world as the greatest discoverer and inventor in the world . . .” — pp. 65-6
“Should Keely . . . lead scientists from the dreary realms where they are groping . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “ ‘He has passed the dreary realm where scientists are groping.  His researches are made in the open field of elemental force, where gravity, inertia, cohesion, momentum are disturbed in their haunts and diverted to use; where, from the unity of origin, emanates infinite energy in its diversified forms’ . . .” — p. 14
“Should he demonstrate . . . that the universe is animated by a mysterious principle . . .”
see: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “The pure Philosophy which science seems about to reveal discloses not a universe of dead matter, but a universe alive from its core to its outermost extremity, and animated by mind and means, to which matter, perfectly organized, is absolutely subservient.  It illuminates mysteries of nature which have only been partially revealed to us, and lifts the veil which has hitherto shrouded in darkness still greater mysteries . . .” — p. 15

— 559-60 —

“Should he be able to substitute, in the treatment of disease, the finer forces of nature . . .”
see: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “This is a terrible excuse for the use of those agences which . . . have sent more human beings to their graves than war, pestilence and famine combined.  Keely holds the opinion that Nature works under the one law of Compensation and Equilibrium — the law of Harmony; and that when disease indicates the disturbance of this law Nature at once seeks to banish the disease by restoring equilibrium, He seeks to render assistance on the same plan; replacing grossly material agences by the finer forces of nature . . .” — p. 92

— 560 —

“The author of No. 5 of the pamphlets issued . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “The author of No. 5 of the pamphlets issued by the Theosophical Publication Society, ‘What is Matter and What is Force,’ says therein, ‘The men of science have just found out “a fourth state of matter,” whereas the occultists have penetrated years ago beyond the sixth, and therefore do not infer, but know of, the existence of the seventh, the last.’  This knowledge comprises one of the secrets of Keely’s so-called ‘compound secret.’  It is already known to many that his secret includes ‘the augmentation of energy,’ the insulation of the ether, and the adaptation of dynaspheric force to machinery.” — p. 13 (T. P. S. 9)
“Step by step, with a patient perseverance . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “Step by step, with a patient perseverance which some day the world will honour, this man of genius has made his researches, overcoming the colossal difficulties which again and again raised up in his path what seemed to be (to all but himself) insurmountable barriers to further progress: but never has the world’s index finger so pointed to an hour when all is making ready for the advent of the new form of force that mankind is waiting for.  Nature, always reluctant to yield her secrets, is listening to the demands made upon her by her master, necessity.” — p. 16 (T. P. S. 9)
“The coal mines of the world cannot long afford . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “The coal mines of the world cannot long afford the increasing drain made upon them.  Steam has reached its utmost limits of power, and does not fulfil the requirements of the age.  It knows that its days are numbered.  Electricity holds back, with bated breath, dependent upon the approach of her sister colleague.  Air ships are riding at anchor, as it were, waiting for the force which is to make aerial navigation something more than a dream.  As easily as men communicate with their offices from their homes by means of the telephone, so will the inhabitants of separate continents talk across the ocean.  Imagination is palsied when seeking to foresee the grand results of this marvellous discovery when once it is applied to art and mechanics.  In taking the throne which it will force steam to abdicate dynaspheric force will rule the world with a power so mighty in the interests of civilization, that no finite mind can conjecture the results.” — pp. 16-17 (T. P. S. 9)

— 560-1 —

“Laurence Oliphant, in his preface to ‘Scientific Religion’ . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “Laurence Oliphant, in his preface to ‘Scientific Religion,’ says: ‘A new moral future is dawning upon the human race — one, certainly, of which it stands much in need.’  In no way could this new moral future be so widely, so universally, commenced as by the utilizing of dynaspheric force to beneficial purposes in life . . .” — p. 17 (T. P. S. 9)

— 561 —

“In considering the operation of my engine . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “ ‘In considering the operation of my engine, the visitor, in order to have even an approximate conception of its modus operandi, must discard all thought of engines that are operated upon the principle of pressure and exhaustion, by the expansion of steam or other analogous gas which impinges upon an abutment, such as the piston of a steam-engine.  My engine has neither piston nor eccentrics, nor is there one grain of pressure exerted in the engine, whatever may be the size or capacity of it.’ ” — p. 18 (T. P. S. 9)
“My system, in every part and detail . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “ ‘My system, in every part and detail, both in the developing of my power and in every branch of its utilization, is based and founded on sympathetic vibration.  In no other way would it be possible to awaken or develop my force, and equally impossible would it be to operate my engine upon any other principle. . . . . . . This, however, is the true system; and henceforth all my operations will be conducted in this manner — that is to say, my power will be generated, my engines run, my cannon operated, through a wire.’ ” — p. 18 (T. P. S. 9)
“It has been only after years of incessant labour . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “ ‘It has been only after years of incessant labour, and the making of almost innumerable experiments, involving not only the construction of a great many most peculiar mechanical structures, and the closest investigation and study of the phenomenal properties of the substance ‘ether,’ per se, produced, that I have been able to dispense with complicated mechanism, and to obtain, as I claim, mastery over the subtle and strange force with which I am dealing.’ ” — p. 18 (T. P. S. 9)
The “wire” is already a step below . . . the pure etheric plane
see: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “The force is now transmitted along a wire (of platinum and silver), and when the lever is lowered there is no exhaustion . . . of any up-lifting vapour, as was always the case when the ether was used in this experiment.” — p. 19 (T. P. S. 9)
From a “generator” six feet long . . . to one “no longer than an olf-fashioned silver watch”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “From 1882 to 1884 the ‘Generator’ was a structure six feet long and correspondingly wide and high . . . Continuing his labour of evolution . . . as to combine the production . . . in a machine no larger than a dinner plate . . . This instrument was completed in 1886, up to which time his experiments had been conducted upon a principle of sympathetic vibration . . . His later experiments have been confined to another modification of vibratory sympathy; and the size of the instrument used still for the same purposes is now no larger than an old-fashioned silver watch . . .” — p. 19 (T. P. S. 9)
“the two forms of force which he has been experimenting with . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “The two forms of force which he has been experimenting with, and the phenomena attending them, are the very antithesis of each other.” — p. 19 (T. P. S. 9)

— 562 —

Mr. Keely defines electricity “as a certain form of atomic vibration.”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “[Keely] attributes all ‘forces’ to various modes of vibration, as to the number of vibrations in a second.  Electricity Mr. Keely defines as a certain form of atomic vibration.” — p. 35 (T. P. S. 9)
He estimates  — Molecular vibrations at 100,000,000 per second . . .
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely’s Secrets, July 10, 1888: “He estimates
Molecular vibrations at 100,000,000   per second  
Inter-molecular "    " 300,000,000      "       "  
Atomic "    " 900,000,000   "       "  
Inter-atomic "    " 2,700,000,000   "       "  
Ætheric "    " 8,100,000,000   "       "  
Inter-Ætheric" "    "  24,300,000,000   "       "  ” — p. 35 (T. P. S. 9)

— 563 —

the terrible sidereal Force, known to . . . the Aryan Rishis in their Ashtar Vidya
see: The Mahabharata, “Adi Parva,” [tr. K. M. Ganguli], 1884: “Thus Drona continued giving lessons to the princes in the science of weapons [Astravidyā].” — p. 392
      “ ‘O Gandharva . . . I fight with thee with celestial weapons . . . This fiery weapon (that I shall hurl at thee) . . . Drona — gave it unto me.’ . . . Saying these words, the Pandava in wrath hurled at the Gandharva, that blazing weapon made of fire.  And it burnt the Gandharva’s chariot in a trice.” — p. 488
It is the vril of Bulwer Lytton’s “Coming Race”
see: Edward Lord Lytton, The Coming Race, 1886: “These people consider that in vril they have arrived at the unity in natural energetic agencies, which has been conjectured by many philosophers . . . These subterranean philosophers assert that, by one operation of vril, which Faraday would perhaps call ‘atomospheric magnetism,’ they can influence the variations of temperature — in plain words, the weather; that by other operations . . . they can exercise influence over minds, and bodies . . .” — pp. 53-4
It is this vibratory Force, which . . . reduced to ashes 100,000 men and elephants
see: The Mahabharata, “Adi Parva,” [tr. K. M. Ganguli], 1884: “. . . Arjuna, like unto the terrible fire that consumeth at the end of the Yuga, began to prostrate on the ground horses and cars and elephants by thousands.” — p. 410
In the fable about the sage Kapila whose glance made a mountain of ashes of King Sagara’s 60,000 sons
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The sixty thousand sons of Sagara . . . saw the Ṛishi Kapila sitting, with his head declined in meditation, and illuminating the surrounding space with radiance as bright as the splendours of the autumnal sun shining in an unclouded sky.  Exclaiming ‘This is the villain who has maliciously interrupted our sacrifice, and stolen the horse: kill him! kill him!’ they ran towards him, with uplifted weapons.  The Muni slowly raised his eyes, and, for an instant, looked upon them; and they were reduced to ashes by the (sacred) flame that darted from his person.” — 3:298-300 (iv.4)
there is enough work before him . . . to “humble the pride of those scientists . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “They predict . . . that the demonstration of the truth of his system will humble the pride of those scientists who are materialists, by revealing some of the mysteries which lie behind the world of matter . . .” — p. 66

— 564 —

“It is as platina to hydrogen gas. . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893:  “It is as platina to hydrogen gas.  Molecular separation of air brings us to the first subdivision only; inter-molecular, to the second; atomic, to the third; inter-atomic, to the fourth; etheric, to the fifth; and inter-etheric, to the sixth sub-division, or positive association with luminiferous ether.  In my introductory argument I have contended that this is the vibratory envelope of all atoms.  In my definition of atom I do not confine myself to the sixth subdivision, where this luminiferous ether is developed in its crude form, as far as my researches prove.  I think this idea will be pronounced, by the physicists of the present day, a wild freak of the imagination.  Possibly, in time, a light may fall upon this theory that will bring its simplicity forward for scientific research.  At present I can only compare it to some planet in a dark space, where the light of the sun of science has not yet reached it.” — p. 202
“I assume that sound, like odour, is a real substance . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “I assume that sound, like odour, is a real substance of unknown and wonderful tenuity, emanating from a body where it has been induced by percussion and throwing out absolute corpuscles of matter — inter-atomic particles — with a velocity of 1120 feet per second, in vacuo 20,000.  The substance which is thus disseminated is a part and parcel of the mass agitated, and if kept under this agitation continuously would, in the course of a certain cycle of time, become thoroughly absorbed by the atmosphere; or, more truly, would pass through the atmosphere to an elevated point of tenuity corresponding to the condition of subdivision that governs its liberation from its parent body.” — pp. 202-3
“The sounds from vibratory forks . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “The sounds from vibratory forks, set so as to produce etheric chords, while disseminating their compound tones permeate most thoroughly all substances that come under the range of their atomic bombardment.  The clapping of a bell in vacuo liberates these atoms with the same velocity and volume as one in the open air . . .” — p. 203

— 564-5 —

“. . . and were the agitation of the bell kept up continuously . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “. . . and were the agitation of the bell kept up continuously for a few millions of centuries, it would thoroughly return to its primitive element.  If the chamber were hermetically sealed, and strong enough, the vacuous volume surrounding the bell would be brought to a pressure of many thousands of pounds to the square inch, by the tenuous substance evolved.” — p. 203

— 565 —

“In my estimation, sound truly defined is the disturbance of atomic equilibrium . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “In my estimation, sound truly defined is the disturbance of atomic equilibrium, rupturing actual atomic corpuscles; and the substance thus liberated must certainly be a certain order of etheric flow.  Under these conditions is it unreasonable to suppose that, if this flow were kept up, and the body thus robbed of its element, it would in time disappear entirely?  All bodies are formed primitively from this highly tenuous ether, animal, vegetable and mineral, and they only return to their high gaseous condition when brought under a state of differential equilibrium.” — p. 203
“As regards odour, we can only get some definite idea . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “As regards odour . . . we can only get some definite idea of its extreme and wondrous tenuity by taking into consideration that a large area of atmosphere can be impregnated for a long series of years from a single grain of musk; which, if weighed after that long interval, will be found to be not appreciably diminished.  The great paradox attending the flow of odorous particles is that they can be held under confinement in a glass vessel!  Here is a substance of much higher tenuity than the glass that holds it, and yet it cannot escape.  It is as a sieve with its meshes large enough to pass marbles, and yet holding fine sand which cannot pass through; in fact, a molecular vessel holding an atomic substance.  This is a problem that would confound those who stop to recognize it.” — pp. 203-4
“But infinitely tenuous as odour is . . .”
p/q: Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, Keely and His Discoveries, 1893: “But infinitely tenuous as odour is, it holds a very crude relation to the substance of subdivision that governs a magnetic flow (a flow of sympathy, if you please to call it so).  This subdivision comes next to sound, but is above sound.  The action of the flow of a magnet coincides somewhat to the receiving and distributing portion of the human brain, giving off at all times a depreciating ratio of the amount received.  It is a grand illustration of the control of mind over matter, which gradually depreciates the physical till dissolution takes place.  The magnet on the same ratio gradually loses its power and becomes inert.  If the relations that exist between mind and matter could be equated, and so held, we would live on in our physical state eternally, as there would be no physical depreciation.  But this physical depreciation leads, at its terminus, to the source of a much higher development — viz., the liberation of the pure ether from the crude molecular; which in my estimation is to be much desired.” — p. 204

— 566 —

“incorporeal corporealities” — such as “appear in the mirror,” and “abstract forms” . . .
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford and Maitland, 1885: “If thou reflectest, O King, thou wilt perceive that there are incorporeal corporealities. . . . Corporealities which appear in mirrors; are they not incorporeal? . . . There are yet other incorporealities; for instance, abstract forms . . . they are manifest in animated and inanimated corporealities. . . . In other words, the Sensible World and the Ideal World reflect each other.” — p. 107 (Definitions of Asclepios, II)

— Footnotes

In this case the American “Substantialists” are not wrong . . .
see: A. Wilford Hall, “The Substantial Philosophy – I,” April 1884: “Substantialism teaches . . . that we have only entered the hitherto unexplored . . . domain of the absolute physical, vital, mental, and spiritual entities which, though immaterial, underlie, manipulate, and control all material bodies, and from which domain, as their source, all material worlds have their origin, and from whose delegated power all visible and sensible manifestations are now observed in sensuous phenomena.” — p. 280 (Wilford’s Microcosm, v. 3)
“there must be positive entitative properties in objects which have a constitutional relation . . .”
p/q: Mrs. M. S. Organ, “What is the True Philosophy of Color?” July 1886: “There must be positive, entitative properties inherent in objects which have a constitutional relation to the nerves of animal sensation or there can be no perception. No impression of any kind can be made upon nerve, brain, or mind — no stimulus to action — unless there is an actual and direct communication of a substantial force.” — p. 24 (The Scientific Arena, I:2)
“That force may be the most refined and sublimated immaterial Entity . . .”
p/q: Mrs. M. S. Organ, “What is the True Philosophy of Color?” July 1886: “That force may be the most refined and sublimated immaterial entity, yet it must exist: for no sense, element, or faculty of the human being can have a perception, or be stimulated into action, without some substantial force coming in direct contact with it. This is the fundamental law pervading the whole inorganic, organic and mental world. In a true philosophical sense there is no such thing as independent action: for every force or substance is correlated to some other force or substance.” — p. 24 (The Scientific Arena, I:2)
“We can with just as much truth and reason assert that no substance possesses . . .”
p/q: Mrs. M. S. Organ, “What is the True Philosophy of Color?” July 1886: “We can, with just as much truth and reason, assert that no substance possesses any inherent gustatory property, or any olfactory property — that taste and odor are simply sensations caused by vibrations; and hence mere illusions of animal perception.” — p. 24 (The Scientific Arena, I:2)

— 567 —

— Footnotes

“it is at present, and perhaps always will be, impossible to reduce . . . geological time into years . . .”
p/q: W. Pengelly, “On the Devonian Age of the World,” Aug. 1861: “In the existing state of our knowledge it is impossible to convert geological into astronomical time: it is at present, and perhaps always will be, beyond our power to determine . . . how many revolutions round the sun the earth made between any two recognized and well-marked events in its geological history.” — p. 332 (The Geologist)
irrational, turbulent Elements “composed of fire, air, water, and earth”
see: Plato, Works, v. 2, tr. Henry Davis, 1849: “. . . after living well for the time appointed to him, each one [each soul] should once more return to the habitation of his associate star . . . but failing in these points . . . the soul should be changed into the nature of some brute corresponding thereto, and when changed never cease from labour, until . . . having overcome by reason its turbulent and irrational part . . . composed of fire, water, air, and earth, it should at length return to the first and best disposition of its nature.” — pp. 346-7 (Timæus, xvii)
Elementary Dæmons
see: Proclus, Commentaries on the Timæus of Plato, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1820: “It is not, therefore, the dæmoniacal genus which ascends or descends . . . nor are dæmons subject to death, but partial souls . . .” — 1:45

— 568 —

Anaxagoras . . . believed more or less in animated atoms
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “According to Anaxagoras . . . the primitive condition of things was a heterogeneous commixture of substances which continued motionless and unorganized . . . ‘Then Mind began to work upon it, communicating to it motion and order.  The Mind first effected a revolving motion to a single point; but ever-increasing masses were gradually brought within the sphere of this motion, which is still incessantly extending farther and farther in the infinite realm of matter.’ ” — p. 552
down to Epicurus, the Roman Lucretius, and finally even to Galileo . . . animated atoms
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “The views of Leucippus, and of Democritus . . . maintained that space was eternally filled with atoms actuated by an eternal motion. . . . These views were extended by Epicurus and the Roman Lucretius {similar theories were long afterward entertained by Torricelli and Galileo}, though by them the lateral motion of the atoms was ascribed to choice — a conception of the animated nature . . .” — p. 553 & fn.
“Light . . . consolidates into fiery particles; which . . . become cold, hard particles . . .”
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “The Kabbalists compare the spirit to a substance which remains fluidic in the divine environment, and under the influence of the essential light, but whose exterior hardens, like a cortex exposed to the air, in the colder regions of the rational or of visible forms.  These cortices [outer shells] . . . belong to the heaviness or hardness of their animal nature.” — pp. 106-7 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
see: Kabbala Denudata [tr. Christian Knorr von Rosenroth], v. 2, 1684: “. . . omnes animæ delapsæ in profunda corticum, cum exinde prodeunt, ut veniant in hunc mundum, & intrent in aliquod corpus [all the souls that have fallen deeply into the ‘cortex’-state, then proceed forward, that they may come into this world and enter into a body] . . .” — p. 326 (Tractatus de Revolutionibus Animarum, xx.15)
“And this is called Soul, imprisoned in its robe of matter”
see: A. E. Waite, The Mysteries of Magic, 1886: “. . . an interior body . . . becomes their prison and their torment after death, until the moment when they succeed in dissolving it in the heat of the divine light . . .” — p. 107 (“Writings of Éliphas Lévi”)
The “whirling Souls,” Gilgoolem
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Certain of the learned Jews have believed, for many centuries, in the doctrine of Gilgul . . . a process, called by them the ‘Whirling of the Soul’ . . . The learned may consult further authorities on this curious subject in the Kabbala Denudata . . .” — 1:250-1
The passage of the Soul-Atom “through the Seven Planetary Chambers”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “According to the Arabian descriptions, each of the seven chambers of the Pyramids — those grandest of all cosmic symbols — was known by the name of a planet. . . . Each mummy, from the moment that it was embalmed, lost its physical individuality in one sense; it symbolized the human race.  Placed in such a way as was best calculated to aid the exit of the ‘soul,’ the latter had to pass through the seven planetary chambers before it made its exit through the symbolical apex.  Each chamber typified, at the same time, one of the seven spheres, and one of the seven higher types of physico-spiritual humanity alleged to be above our own.  Every 3,000 years, the soul, representative of its race, had to return to its primal point of departure before it underwent another evolution into a more perfected spiritual and physical transformation.” — 1:296-7
It had the latter when it was said to dissolve into Ether.
see: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “The individualization of man after death depended on the spirit . . . in the case of criminals beyond redemption . . . the shining thread which links the spirit to the soul, from the moment of the birth of a child, is violently snapped, and the disembodied entity is left to share the fate of the lower animals, to gradually dissolve into ether, and have its individuality annihilated . . .” — 1:315

— Footnotes

Plato used the words “secretions” of turbulent Elements
see: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “But this is plainly declared by Proclus upon the Timæus, after he had spoken of . . . ‘irrational’ or ‘brutish demons,’ or ‘demoniac aërial’ brutes; of which he sometimes speaks doubtfully . . .”  “. . . [these] corruptions being nothing but accidental mutations, concretions, and secretions . . .” — 3:443, 445
Esoteric Treatise on the Doctrine of Gilgul
see: Tractatus de Revolutionibus Animarum [Treatise on the Revolutions of Souls], in Kabbala Denudata, v. 2.
see: Christian Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, 1865: “Knorr Baron von Rosenroth, therefore put himself under the tuition of R. Meier Stern, a learned Jew, and with his assistance was enabled to publish the celebrated work entitled the Unveiled Kabbalah (Kabbala Denudata), in two large volumes, the first of which was printed at Sulzbach, 1677-78, and the second at Frankfort-on-the-Maine, 1684, giving a Latin translation of . . . the Doctrine of Metempsychosis (הגלגולים) [ha-Gilgulim] . . .” — p. 140
Surely no educated Jew ever believed . . . “the bodies of Jews deposited in foreign lands . . .”
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Certain of the learned Jews have believed . . . the bodies of Jews deposited in foreign tombs contain within them a principle of soul, which cannot rest until, by a process called by them the ‘Whirling of the Soul,’ the immortal particle reaches once more the sacred soil of the Promised Land.” — 1:250-1
metempsychosis, the psychic spark being conveyed through bird, beast . . .
p/q: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “This whirling of souls was supposed to be accomplished by a process somewhat similar to that of the metempsychosis of the Hindus, the psychical spark being conveyed through bird, beast, or fish, and sometimes the most minute insect.” — 1:251
“All the Souls go into the gilgoolah”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Of the Gil’gool-em, or Revolution of Souls.  ‘All the souls go up into the gil-gool-ah . . .’ {Zohar ii, 99b}” — p. 413 & fn.

— 569 —

Soul . . . formed from the smoothest, roundest, and finest atoms
p/q: Diogenes Laërtius, The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, tr. C. D. Yonge, 1853: “(Epicurus . . . adds that the soul is composed of atoms of the most perfect lightness and roundness . . .)” — p. 448 (“Epicurus to Herodotus”)

— 569-70 —

the sublime teachings on the subject of Soul and Spirit, of Sankarâchârya . . .
see: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, “Being a Translation of Sankaracharya’s Viveka-Chudamani,” tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, in The Theosophist, v. 7: Oct. 1885 (pp. 65-8); Jan. 1886 (pp. 253-8); March 1886 (pp. 385-90); July 1886 (pp. 661-5); Aug. 1886 (pp. 724-32).

— 570 —

The monad — a truly “indivisible thing,” as defined by Good
see: John Mason Good, The Book of Nature, 1828: “. . . matter has its ultimate atoms, or monads, as they were denominated by Leibnitz, from the language of Pythagoras, beyond which it is altogether indivisible . . .” — p. 32
“having attained that primeval consciousness . . .”
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(294.) Having attained that primeval consciousness, absolute bliss, of which the nature is truth, which is without form and action, abandon this illusive body that has been assumed by the atma just as an actor (abandons) the dress (put on).” — p. 732 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
Buddhi (the Anandamaya sheath) is but a mirror which reflects absolute bliss . . .
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(209.) Anandamaya sheath is the reflection of the absolute bliss, yet not free from ignorance.” — p. 725 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
and is not the Supreme Spirit, being subject to conditons . . .
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(211.) Nor is this Anandamaya the supreme spirit, because it is subject to conditions.  It is a modification of Prakriti, an effect, and the sum of all the consequences of good acts.” — p. 725 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
Atma alone is the one real and eternal substratum of all
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — III,” April, 1887: “ ‘Look at my condition when manifested as Eswara (Logos) . . . My Atma (however) is the foundation and origin of manifested beings . . .’ ” — p. 432 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
the essence and absolute knowledge — the Kshetragna
see: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — IV,” July 1887: “ ‘. . . this body is called Kshetra (Upadhi or vehicle).  That which knows this (Kshetra) the wise call Kshetragna (the real self or Ego). . . . the knowledge of Kshetra and Kshetragna I consider to be real knowledge.” — p. 635 (The Theosophist, v. 8)
It is called in Esoteric philosophy “the One Witness”
see: Vans Kennedy, Researches into the Nature and Affinity of Ancient and Hindu Mythology, 1831: “From the Brahma Puran . . . ‘The god whom I worship is that universal Spirit which pervades all things . . . within me, within thee, and within others he resides, the witness of every thing . . .’ ” — p. 347

— Footnotes [570-1]

“It is the Spirit that beareth witness . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.  For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” — p. 315 (1 John, 5:6-7)
“there are three who bear witness: the Spirit and the Water and the Blood”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And there are three who bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood . . .” — p. 315 (1 John, 5:8)
atma (spirit) alone is what remains after the subtraction of the sheaths . . .
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(212.) According to the Vedas the atma is what remains after the subtraction of the five sheaths.  It is the witness, it is absolute knowledge.” — p. 725 (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— 571 —

“the Three Witnesses to Karma”
see: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(213.) This atma . . . is the witness of the three states (waking, dreaming and dreamless sleep) . . .”  “(219.) The manifestation of this atma is identical in the states of waking, dreaming and dreamless slumber; it is the one inward manifestation of self-consciousness in all egos; and is the witness of all forms and changes . . .” — pp. 725-6 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
Adi Buddha (Chogi dangpoi sangye) . . . without beginning or end
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . Ādi Buddha, in Tibetan Chogi dangpoi sangye, who is without beginning or end . . .” — p. 50
Vajradhara, the Supreme Buddha (also called Dorjechang)
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The first of the Buddhas is called in the Tantras Vajradhara (in Tibetan Dorjechang . . .).  As Vajradhara he is epitheted ‘the supreme Buddha . . .’ ” — p. 50
the “diamond heart,” Vajrasattva (Dorjesempa)
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . Vajrasattva (in Tibetan Dorjesempa) . . . . ‘the being who has the soul of a diamond (Vajrasattva).’ ” — p. 50
Dhyani Buddhas, called the Anupadaka, “the parentless”
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “By the name of Dhyāni Buddha, ‘Buddha of contemplation,’ or by the term Anupadaka, ‘without parents,’ celestial beings are designated . . .” — p. 51
see: Ernest Eitel, Hand-book of Chinese Buddhism, 1888: “anupapāduka or aupapāduka (Pāli. Opapātika. Singh. Aupapātika . . .) lit. birth by transformation. . . . supernatural birth . . . in full maturity, such as is ascribed to Buddhas and Bodhisattvas . . .” — p. 14
These Dhyani Buddhas . . . create from themselves . . . the super-human Bodhisattvas.
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The Dhyāni Buddhas have the faculty of creating from themselves by virtue of Dhyāna, or abstract meditation, an equally celestial son, a Dhyāni Bōdhisattva . . .” — p. 52
they may re-appear as Manushi (human) Buddhas
see: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “. . . a Dhyāni Bōdhisattva, who after the death of a Mānushi Buddha is charged with the continuance of the work undertaken by the departed Buddha . . .” — p. 52
“Whatever entities there are in this world . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “Whatever entities (there are) in this world, movable or immovable, they are the very first to be dissolved; and next the developments produced from the elements; and (after) these developments, all the elements.  Such is the upward gradation among entities.  Gods, men, Gandharvas, Piṣākas, Asuras, Rākshasas, all have been created by nature {svabhāva}, not by actions, nor by a cause.” — p. 387 & fn. (Anugītā, xxxvi)

— 571-2 —

“These Brâhmanas . . . the creators of the world, are born here . . .”
p/q: The Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā, tr. K. T. Telang, 1882: “These Brāhmaṇas, the creators of the world, are born here again and again.  And whatever is produced from them is dissolved in due time in those very five great elements, like billows in the ocean.  The great elements are in every way (beyond) the elements that make up the world {the gross elements}.  And he who is released, even from those five elements, goes to the highest goal.  The Lord Prajāpati created all this by the mind only.” — pp. 387-8 & fn. (Anugītā, xxxvi)

— 572 —

every Buddha . . . manifests himself simultaneously in three worlds . . .
p/q: Emil Schlagintweit, Buddhism in Tibet, 1863: “The Buddhists believe that each Buddha when preaching the law to men, manifests himself at the same time in the three worlds which their cosmographical system acknowledges.  In the world of desire, the lowest of the three to which the earth belongs, he appears in human shape.  In the world of forms he manifests himself in a more sublime form as Dhyāni Buddha.  In the highest world, the one of the incorporeal beings . . .” — pp. 51-2
This descends “like a flame spreading from the eternal Fire, immoveable . . .”
see: Iamblichus, On the Mysteries, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1821: “Prior to truly existing beings and total principles . . . there is one God . . . immoveable, and abiding in the solitude of his own unity. . . . But from this one deity, the God who is sufficient to himself, unfolds himself into light.” — p. 301 (viii.2)
and becomes universal life on the Mundane Plane
see: Iamblichus, On the Mysteries, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1821: “. . . the fire of the Gods, indeed, shines forth with an indivisible and ineffable light, and fills all the profundities of the world, in an empyrean {above the material worlds}, but not in a mundane, manner.  But the fire of archangels . . . is seen to possess about itself an abundant multitude . . .” — p. 92 & fn. (ii.4)
the Brahmanical mystic phrase: “Thou art ‘that’ — Brahm”
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(254.) . . . what is evolved out of atma is always atma, and every thing is atma, and there is nothing existing apart from it; therefore thou art ‘that’ — absolute peace, without stain, great, — Brahm . . .” — p. 728 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
The “Seven Sons of Light” are also called “Stars.”
see: H. T. Colebrooke, Miscellaneous Essays, 1873: “I have purposely reserved for separate consideration the seven Ṛishis, who give name to seven stars in Ursa major . . . because the authors, who give their positions, ascribe to them a particular motion . . . different from other stars, and apparently unconnected with the precession of the equinoxes.”  “. . . the seven Ṛishis are invisible deities, who perform the stated revolution in the period specified.” — 2:355, 360

— Footnotes

The Tanmâtras are literally the type or rudiment of an element devoid of qualities
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “In each several element resides its peculiar rudiment; thence the property of tanmātratā (type or rudiment) is ascribed to these elements.  Rudimental elements are not endowed with qualities . . .” — 1:35-7 (i.2)

— 573 —

Zanoni face to face with his Augoeides
see: Edward Bulwer Lytton, Zanoni, 1853: “— Soul of mine, the luminous, the Augoeides, why descendest thou from thy sphere — why from the eternal, starlike, and passionless Serene, shrinkest thou back to the mists of the dark sarcophagus?” — p. 57 (ii.4)
see: Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1818: “In the etherial vehicle of the soul, which when the soul energizes intellectually is spherical . . . This vehicle also is αὐγοειδής [augoeides], or luciform, throughout diaphanous, and of a star-like nature.  Hence Marcus Antoninus beautifully observes . . . ‘The sphere of the soul is then luciform . . . illuminated with a light by which she sees the truth of all things, and the truth that is in herself.’ ” — p. 225 fn.
Iswara, say the Vedantins, is the highest consciousness in nature.
see: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “The highest consciousness that is in nature (the atma being absolute) is Iswara or the seventh principle of the macrocosm.” — p. 729 fn. (The Theosophist, v. 7)
“This highest consciousness,” answer the Occultists, “is only a synthetic unit . . . on the plane of illusion . . .”
see: Theoptes, The Panidèa, 1846: “. . . The Logos or perfect Reason, is not only the original synthesis of all form, but it also contains all form within itself, by reason of its omnipresence. . . . Take away space . . . and all forms are resolved into a synthetic unit, and subsist in the bosom of the Logos as a mere idea.” — pp. 58-9
“Oh, wise man, remove the conception that not-Spirit is Spirit”
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “(287.) O wise man . . . remove the conception that not-spirit is spirit.” — p. 731 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
There are seven chief groups of such Dhyan Chohans . . . the primeval seven Rays.
see: Solar Sphinx [T. Subba Row], “The Idyll of the White Lotus,” Aug. 1886: “. . . as seven distinct rays radiate from the ‘Central Spiritual Sun,’ all adepts and Dhyan Chohans are divisible into seven classes . . .” ­— p. 706 (The Theosophist, v. 7)
The monad . . . as a triad, it is the direct radiant progeny of the said compound unit
see: Iamblichus, On the Mysteries, tr. Thomas Taylor, 1821: “. . . a triad is the immediate progeny of a monad. . . . And hence it is said in one of the Chaldean oracles, ‘In every world a triad shines forth, of which a monad is the ruling principle.’ ” — p. ix fn.
not the breath (and special creation out of nihil) of “God”
see: Stephen Charnock, Discourses Upon the Existence and Attributes of God, 1874: “From this rude matter . . . he kneaded the body of man . . . fit to entertain a soul of a heavenly extraction, formed by the breath of God (Gen. ii. 7). . . . God first forms matter out of nothing . . .” — 2:40
though Iswara is “God” “unchanged in the profoundest depths of pralayas . . .”
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “Iswara . . . is God, unchanged in the profoundest depths of pralaya and the intensest activity of the manvantara.” — p. 729 fn. (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— Footnotes

the seven chief planets, the spheres of the indwelling seven spirits . . .
see: Solar Sphinx [T. Subba Row], “The Idyll of the White Lotus,” Aug. 1886: “. . . all adepts and Dhyan Chohans are divisible into seven classes, each of which is guided, controlled and overshadowed by one of seven forms or manifestations of divine wisdom.” — p. 706 (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— 573-4 —

“beyond (him) is ‘Atma’ . . .”
p/q: Sankaracharya, The Crest Jewel of Wisdom, tr. Mohini M. Chatterji, Aug. 1886: “Beyond is ‘atma,’ round whose pavilion is the darkness of eternal Maya.” — p. 729 fn. (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— 574 —

“I and my Father are one”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “I and my Father are one. . . . the Father is in me, and I in him.” — p. 138 (John, 10:30, 38)
“I ascend to my Father and your Father”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father . . .” — p. 153 (John, 20:17)
“Every Buddha meets at his last initiation all the great adepts . . .”
p/q: Solar Sphinx [T. Subba Row], “The Idyll of the White Lotus,” Aug. 1886: “Every Buddha meets at his last initiation all the great adepts who reached Buddhaship during the preceding ages: and similarly every class of adepts has its own bond of spiritual communion which knits them together . . . The only possible and effectual way of entering into any such brotherhood . . . is by bringing oneself within the influence of the spiritual light which radiates from one’s own Logos.  I may further point out here . . . that such communion is only possible between persons whose souls derive their life and sustenance from the same divine ray, and that, as seven distinct rays radiate from the ‘Central Spiritual Sun,’ all adepts and Dhyan Chohans are divisible into seven classes, each of which is guided, controlled and overshadowed by one of the seven forms or mainifestations of the divine wisdom.” — p. 706 (The Theosophist, v. 7)

— Footnotes

The . . . error of attributing to the ancients the knowledge of only seven planets . . .
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “Star-Angel Worship in the Roman Catholic Church,” July 15, 1888: “ ‘We shall examine . . . this opinion hitherto so accredited, to-day discredited, and which attributes rightly to our seven principal spirits the rulership, not of the seven known planets, with which we are reproached, but of the seven principal planets . . . [Des Esprits, 2:359-60]’  Every planet according to the esoteric doctrine is in its composition a Septenary like man, in its principles.  That is to say, the visible planet is the physical body of the sidereal being, the Atma or Spirit of which is the Angel, or Rishi, or Dhyan-Chohan . . .” — p. 364 (Lucifer, v. 2)
“My Father is greater than I”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . I go away, and come again unto you. . . . I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.” — p. 145 (John, 14:28)
“Glorify your Father who is in Heaven”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” — p. 5 (Matthew, 5:16)
“The righteous will shine in the kingdom of their Father”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” — p. 19 (Matthew, 13:43)
“Know ye not ye are a temple of God . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit of God dwelleth in you?” — p. 221 (1 Corinthians, 3:16)

— 575 —

“Seven Sons of Light” — called after their planets . . .
see: Theological and Philosophical Works of Hermes Trismegistus, tr. J. D. Chambers, 1882: “And the Heaven appeared in Seven Circles, and Gods in their stellar forms . . . were severally enumerated . . . bourne onward in a circular course by Divine Spirit {‘Sun and Moon, and five others denominated Planet Stars’}.” — pp. 26-7 & 28 fn. (Poemandres, iii.3)
the heavenly bodies in direct . . . communication with the Earth, its Guides
see: Theological and Philosophical Works of Hermes Trismegistus, tr. J. D. Chambers, 1882: “. . . the constellations . . . with the Gods in them . . . sowed . . . the generations of the men, for the knowledge of Divine works . . . for the dominion of all things that are under heaven . . . and for signs of good things, for knowledge of Divine power . . .” — pp. 27-9 (Poemandres, iii.3)
and Watchers — morally and physically; the visible orbs . . .
see: Moses Stuart, Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 1850: “The Bun-Dehesh, a commentary on the Zend-Avesta, contains an extract from it which shows clearly the name and object of the watchers . . . those secondary deities, who were commisioned by superior ones to watch and to oversee.  The names of these . . . are the names respectively of four of the planets . . . They ranked next to the sun and moon . . .” — p. 103
Neptune receives 900 times less light than our Earth
see: Collyns Simon, A Treatise on the Solar Illumination of the Solar System, 1879: “. . . by a division of Neptune’s distance into 30 parts, we find him, by this law, to have only 900 times less of this light than in various other parts of the system round the sun . . .” — p. 144
and Uranus 390 times less
see: Camille Flammarion, Pluralité des Mondes Habités, 1869: “La planète Uranus . . . la lumière et la chaleur qu’elle reçoit du Soleil sont 390 fois moindres qu’à la surface terrestre [the planet Uranus . . . the light and the heat that it receives from the sun are 390 times less than at the surface of the earth].” — p. 73
their satellites show a peculiarity of inverse rotation . . .
see: Camille Flammarion, Pluralité des Mondes Habités, 1869: “Ces satellites présentent une singularité dont il n’y a pas d’autre exemple dans le système solaire . . . Cette singularité a fait penser que la planète elle-même doit avoir un mouvement de rotation rétrograde [These satellites show a peculiarity of which there is no other example in the solar system . . . This peculiarity has made us think that the planet itself rotates with a retrograde movement] . . .” — p. 73

— Footnotes

The Sun was . . . the great Father of all the Seven “Fathers” . . .
see: George Stanley Faber, The Origin of Pagan Idolatry, 1816: “. . . in the Chaldèan oracles, the great father is said to have constituted a septenary of living erratic animals, which are the seven Worlds or seven Planets. . . . and, as the Sun was the brightest of these bodies, it was naturally thought the peculiar residence of the parent and chief of those hero-gods.” — 2:226

— 576 —

Roman Catholic theology speaks of “seventy planets . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Il ne serait pas difficile . . . d’ajuster le nombre sept, comme aussi celui de soixante-dix, que nous retrouvons également dans la subdivision des divinités du Zodiaque, sur les soixante-dix princes que le Zohar . . . fait présider aux destinées des peuples [It would not be difficult . . . to apply the number seven, as also the number seventy, which we also find in the subdivision of the divinities of the Zodiac, to the seventy princes that the Zohar . . . has presiding over the destinies of nations].” — 3:150 fn.
The seventy planets are connected with the seventy elders of the people of Israel
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And the Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel . . . and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee . . .” — p. 193 (Numbers, 11:16-17)
Jehovah . . . Sabaoth or Saturn
see: George Oliver, Signs and Symbols, 1826: “ ‘The name of Jupiter Sabazius, as Selden justly remarks, is clearly derived from Jehovah Sabaoth, a term perpetually applied to the Most High . . .’ ” — p. 30
see: Alexander Cruden, A Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, 1830: “Jehovah Sabaoth. . . . Whose host all creatures are, whether the host of heaven . . . or the stars and planets . . .” — p. 500
“When the most high . . . divided to the nations their inheritance . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance . . . He set the bounds of the people / According to the number of the children of Israel.” — p. 279 (Deuternomy, 32:8)
in the Septuagint the text reads “according to the number of Angels”
p/q: Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, tr. L. C. L. Brenton, 1844: “When the Most High divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God.” — 1:226 (Deuteronomy, 32:8)
“the Lord’s . . . portion is his people . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “When the Most High . . . separated the sons of Adam . . . the Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.” — p. 279 (Deuteronomy, 32:8-9)

— Footnotes

Herschell . . . saw pass in one quarter of an hour, 16,000 stars . . .
see: J. Henri Fabre, Le Ciel, 1878: “Herschel essaya de les compter.  Il estima que, en un quart d’heure, 116 000 étoiles défilaient sous ses yeux!  Il estima que le recensement total s’élèverait au moins à 18 millions [Herschel tried to count them.  He estimated that in a quarter of an hour 116,000 stars passed before his eyes.  He estimated that the total count would reach at least 18 million]!” — p. 315
one wonders no longer that Laplace . . . called God a hypothesis
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ce fût au nom de l’attraction que le marquis de Laplace prononçât son terrible mot déjà cité: ‘Dieu lui-même est devenu une hypothèse inutile’ [it was in the name of attraction that the Marquis de Laplace uttered his terrible remark, already quoted: ‘God himself has become a useless hypothesis’].” — 4:145

— 577 —

The Planetary origin of the Monad (Soul) . . . was taught by the Gnostics
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “This learned Father [Origen] had . . . a parchment chart on which were depicted the successive stages of the soul’s heavenward journey, with the several Powers it must encounter in its flight . . .”  “Of the theory therein embodied, much was evidently derived from the same source as the Neo-Platonic doctrine concerning the planetary origin of the soul’s faculties . . .” — pp. 343, 344
each soul born in, and from, the “Boundless Light” . . .
see: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “The chart itself was founded on that essential doctrine of Gnosticism, that the soul, released from the body, mounted upwards, eager for absorption into the Infinite Godhead, or ‘Boundless Light’ . . .” — p. 344
the Seven Devs, the ministers of Ahriman, “each chained to his planet”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “These genii were of a nature somewhat material, and therefore malignant, and in this respect corresponding to the Seven Devs, Ahriman’s ministers, who according to Zoroaster are chained each to his own planet.” — p. 344
(see Origen’s Copy of the Chart)
see: Origen, Contra Celsum, tr. F. Crombie, 1872: “[Celsus] returns to the subject of the Seven ruling Demons . . . We found, indeed, that in the Diagram, which on their account we procured a sight of, the same order was laid down as that which Celsus has given.” — 2:368 (Contr. Cels. vi.30, Writings of Origen)
given by Origen as Adonai, genius of the Sun . . .
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “Their names were put down therein, as Adonai, genius of the Sun, Iao of the Moon, Eloi of Jupiter, Sabao of Mars, Orai of Venus, Astaphai of Mercury, and Ildabaoth of Saturn.” — p. 344
the Pistis-Sophia . . . “that precious monument of Gnosticism”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “To the above-quoted theories explaining the nature of the soul, and its final destination, the recent discovery of that precious monument of Gnosticism, the Pistis-Sophia enables us to add a third, infinitely more complete in all its details.” — p. 348
Rulers of the Spheres . . . create the monads . . . out of the tears of their eyes . . .
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “This last revelation improves upon the Neo-Platonic doctrine by making the astral genii ‘the Rulers of the Sphere’ (Zodiac) create the soul from their own substance ‘out of the tears of their eyes and the sweat of their torment,’ animated with a spark of that Divine Light which has not yet been totally extracted from their fuller nature.” — pp. 348-9
(Vide Part II., “On the Seven Souls,” . . .)
see: “The Seven Souls of the Egyptologists,” SD 2:630-41; and “Gods, Monads, and Atoms,” SD 1:610-34.
The nations born under Saturn . . . in the book of Jasher — were eternally fighting . . .
see: The Book of Jasher, tr. M. M. Noah, 1840: “And Terah had twelve gods of large size, made of wood and stone, after the twelve months of the year, and he served each one monthly . . .”  “And Abram came to his father’s house and saw twelve gods standing there in their temples . . .”  “And he called out and said, wo unto my father and this wicked generation . . . who serve these idols of wood and stone . . .” — pp. 22, 28, 29 (ix.8, x.16, 32)

— Footnotes

“that summum bonum of Oriental aspiration, the Buddhist Nirvana” . . .
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “. . . ‘Boundless Light,’ that summum bonum of Oriental aspiration (the Buddist Nirwana ‘perfect Repose, the Epicurean Indolentia’) . . .” — p. 344

— 577-8 —

Jesus the initiate (or Jehoshua) . . . from whom the “historical” Jesus was copied
see: Gerald Massey, The Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ, 1887: “According to the Babylonian Gemara . . . this Jehoshua, the son of Pandira and Stada, was stoned to death as a wizard . . . and afterwards crucified by being hanged on a tree, on the eve of the Passover.  This is the manner of death assigned to Jesus in the Book of Acts.” — p. 2

— 578 —

not of pure Jewish blood
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Jehoshua, 1889: “. . . one of the stalwart Roman warriors, whose name was Pandira, fell in love with one of the dark-eyed daughters of Nazareth . . . the fruit of their ‘illegitimate’ union was a son, whom they called Jehoshua . . .” — p. 40
his own “Father” . . . with whom he communed . . . “spirit to Spirit and Soul to Soul”
see: H. U. Onderdonk, “Charity,” Jan. 1833: “Love; universal love . . . marks the entire subjection of the spirit of self . . . Love is the pervading light which animates with one impulse all holy creatures . . . reflected from spirit to spirit, and from soul to soul, and returning, in rays almost infinitely intermingled, to its divine source.” — p. 14 (The Protestant Episcopal Pulpit, v. 3)
“I know ye are Abraham’s seed . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Jesus answered them . . . I know that ye are Abraham’s seed . . . I speak the things which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. . . . Ye do the deeds of your father. . . . Ye are of your father the devil . . . He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” — p. 134 (John, 8:34, 37-8, 41, 44)
one who threatened with hell-fire anyone who simply says raca (fool) to his brother
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” — p. 6 (Matthew, 5:22)
“Each of these stars is a religious house.”
p/q: Edward Young, The Complaint: or, Night Thoughts, 1851:
“For, what a thunder of Omnipotence
                              . . . is seen in all!
  In man! in earth! in more amazing skies! . . .
  And is there cause for higher wonder still . . .
  Yes; and for deeper adoration too. . . .
  Each of these stars is a religious house . . .” — pp. 306-7 (“Night IX”)

— Footnotes

Abraham and Saturn are identical in astro-symbology
see: Robert Taylor, “Melchisedec: A Discourse,” May 5, 1833: “Thus the name which the Chaldean astronomers had given to the planet Saturn . . . as the most remote, most elevated, and most devious, of course, of all the then known planetary bodies, Father of Deviation: Ab-ram . . .” — p. 230 (The Comet, v. 2)

— 579 —

homogeneous matter, or Chaos, renamed . . . “Nebular condition of the world-stuff”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . fundamental conceptions of nebular cosmogony have been in existence ever since the dawn of Greek philosophy.  These are . . . The conception of widely extended, unorganized, homogeneous matter, which the Greeks called Chaos, and most late writers have identified with the nebular condition of matter . . .” — p. 618
What Anaxagoras called “Chaos” in his Homoiomeria
see: Tennemann & Morell, Manual of the History of Philosophy, 1870: “[Anaxagoras] admitted the existence of a chaotic matter, the constituent elements of which, always united and identical . . . are incapable of being decomposed {Exercitationes de Homoiomeriâ Anaxagoræ} . . .” — p. 79 & fn.
now called “primitive fluid” by Sir. W. Thomson
see: Conflict in Nature and Life [by John Stahl Patterson], 1883: “But according to Thomson . . . the primitive fluid is ‘the only true matter,’ yet that which we call matter is not the primitive fluid itself, but a mode of motion in that primitive fluid.” — p. 65
the “Vortical Atoms” of Sir W. Thomson
see: Sir William Thomson, “On Vortex Atoms,” March 6, 1867: “After noticing Helmholtz’s admirable discovery of the law of vortex motion in a perfect liquid . . . the author said that this discovery inevitably suggests the idea that Helmholtz’s rings are the only true atoms. . . . to explain the properties of matter, on the hypothesis that all bodies are composed of vortex atoms in a perfect homogeneous liquid.” — p. 197 (Proceedings of the Philosphical Society of Glasgow, v. 6)
“Light is the first begotten, and the first emanation . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Light is the first begotten, and the first emanation of the Supreme, and Light is Life, says the evangelist.  Both are electricity — the life-principle, the anima mundi, pervading the universe, the electric vivifier of all things.  Light is the great Protean magician, and under the Divine Will of the architect, its multifarious, omnipotent waves gave birth to every form as well as to every living being.  From its swelling, electric bosom, springs matter and spirit.  Within its beams lie the beginnings of all physical and chemical action, and of all cosmic and spiritual phenomena; it vitalizes and disorganizes; it gives life and produces death, and from its primordial point gradually emerged into existence the myriads of worlds, visible and invisible celestial bodies.” — 1:258

— Footnotes

the “Architect” is the generic name for the Sephiroth, the Builders of the Universe
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “As he appeared in the Intellectual World, the architect . . . said to the Master-builder, ‘Let us make a man in our image . . .’ ”  “The idea of the Sephiroth is that of a builder who desires to build a great Palace.  1. He grasps in his mind the plan of the whole building.  This is Kether, ’Hokhmah, Binah.  2. Then he considers the way . . . the work shall be done, that it shall correspond to the plan.  This is ’Hesed, Tiph’e-reth and Ge’boor-ah.  3. He considers the means of carrying this out, this is Ne-tza’h, Ye’sod and Hod.  The entire building is the Divine government of the whole world represented by Malkuth.” — pp. 360, 380

— 579-80 —

“It was at the ray of this First mother, one in three . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “It was at the ray of this First mother, one in three, that God, according to Plato, ‘lighted a fire, which we now call the sun,’ and, which is not the cause of either light or heat, but merely the focus, or, as we might say, the lens, by which the rays of the primordial light become materialized, are concentrated upon our solar system, and produce all the correlations of forces.” — 1:258

— 580 —

“the undulatory theory does not account for the results . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Mr. Hunt finds that the undulatory theory does not account for the results of his experiments.” — 1:137
see: Robert Hunt, Researches on Light, 1844: “If we admit the necessity of referring chemical changes to the theory of undulations . . . it does not appear to me, that it assists us in the least in the elucidation of the very remarkable class of phenomena we have been considering.” — p. 258
“the colors of vegetable life arise . . . from a specific attraction . . .”
p/q: Sir David Brewster, A Treatise on Optics, 1853: “The colours of vegetable life and those of various kinds of solids arise . . . from a specific attraction which the particles of these bodies exercise over the differently coloured rays of light.  It is by the light of the sun that the coloured juices of plants are elaborated, that the colours of bodies are changed . . . It is not easy to allow that such effects can be produced by the mere vibration of an ethereal medium; and we are forced, by this class of facts, to reason as if light was material.” — p. 402
“Josiah P. Cooke . . . says that he ‘cannot agree . . .’ ”
p/q: Josiah Cooke, The New Chemistry, 1874: “I cannot agree with those who regard the wave-theory of light as an established principle of science.” — p. 22
“Herschell's doctrine, that the intensity of light . . . ‘is inversely as the square of the distance . . .’ ”
p/q: M. J. Williamson, Modern Diabolism; Commonly called Modern Spiritualism, 1873: “But what appears to me the greatest, and indeed an unanswerable objection to the undulatory theory . . . It is to be found in the fact that the intensity of light is inversely as the square of the distance from the luminous body.  This has been definitely ascertained by experiments with photometers.” — p. 207
“Herschell’s doctrine . . . if correct, damages a good deal . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “. . . if correct, [Herschel’s doctrine] damages a good deal if it does not kill the undulatory theory.  That he is right, was proved repeatedly by experiments with photometers; and, though it begins to be much doubted, the undulatory theory is still alive.” — 1:137.
Helmholtz says that electricity must be . . .
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “Helmholtz says that electricity is probably as atomic as matter.” — p. 99 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
“If we accept the hypothesis that the elementary substances are composed of atoms . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “ ‘If we accept the hypothesis that the elementary substances are composed of atoms, we cannot avoid concluding that electricity also, positive as well as negative, is divided into definite elementary portions, which behave like atoms of electricity.’  Helmholtz, Faraday Lecture, 1881.” — p. 125 fn. (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— 581 —

in the hitherto fruitless chase after the element of negative atomic weight
see: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section,” Sept. 2, 1886: “. . . is electricity one of the negative elements? and the luminiferous ether another? . . . a substance of negative weight is not inconceivable . . .” — p. 125 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“We are on the track and are not daunted . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “We are on the track and are not daunted, and fain would we enter the mysterious region which ignorance tickets ‘Unknown.’ ” — p. 117 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“he who grasps the Key will be permitted . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “I must now call attention to a method of illustrating the periodic law [fig. 1] . . .”  “The more I study the arrangement of this zigzag curve the more I am convinced that he who grasps the key will be permitted to unlock some of the deepest mysteries of creation.” — pp. 119, 121 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“. . . a word analogous to protoplasm, to express the idea of the original primal matter . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “We require a word, analogous to protoplasm, to express the idea of the original primal matter existing before the evolution of the chemical elements.  The word I have ventured to use for this purpose is compounded of προ (earlier than) and ὑλη (the stuff of which things are made).  The word is scarcely a new coinage, for 600 years ago Roger Bacon wrote in his De Arte Chymiæ, ‘The elements are made out of ὑλη, and every element is converted into the nature of another element.’ ” — p. 122 fn. (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— Footnotes [581-2]

Mr. Crookes’ “Presidential Address” at Birmingham
see: William Crookes, President of the Section, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” delivered Thursday, September 2nd, 1886 at the “Birmingham Meeting,” published in The Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886, pp. 115-26.
“the ultimate substratum of Spirit”
see: Epes Sargent, The Proof Palpable of Immortality, 1876: “. . . the authors of the Veda at last arrived at the conception of a unity of forces, of a Divine Power as the ultimate substratum of things.  They regarded the beings of the world as . . composed of two elements: the one real and of a nature permanent and absolute, and the other relative, flowing, variable, and phenomenal; the one spirit, the other matter, but both proceeding from an inseparable unity, a single substance.” — p. 161
“That which is not the Absolute and the One . . .”
see: Epes Sargent, The Proof Palpable of Immortality, 1876: “. . . higher Theism . . . while it regards God as in Nature, regards him at the same time as beyond Nature, — at once the God in whom we live and move and have our being . . . and the God transcendent, absolute, and infinite, the incomprehensible Unity.” — p. 187
“Many of these mystics, by following what they were taught . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “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.” — 1:64-5

— 582 —

“Let us start at the moment . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Let us start at the moment when the first element came into existence.  Before this time matter, as we know it, was not.  It is equally impossible to conceive of matter without energy, as of energy without matter; from one point of view the two are convertible terms.  Before the birth of atoms all those forms of energy which become evident when matter acts upon matter, could not have existed, — they were locked up in the protyle as latent potentialities only.  Coincident with the creation of atoms all those attributes and properties which form the means of discriminating one chemical element from another start into existence fully endowed with energy.” — p. 124 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
the Jagad-Yoni the material causative womb of the world
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-7: “Jagad-yoni . . . is scarcely so much ‘the mother of the world,’ or ‘the womb of the world,’ as ‘the material cause of the world.’ ” — 1:21 fn.
Pradhâna . . . and Purusha . . . are Nirupadhi, (without adventitious qualities or attributes)
p/q: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-7: “The two forms which are other than the essence of unmodified Vishṇu are Pradhāna (matter) and Purusha (spirit) {that is, from the nature of Vishṇu when he is Nirupādhi or without adventitious attributes} . . .” — 1:24-5 & fn. (i.2)
Both Purusha and Pradhâna are immutable and unconsumable . . .
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-7: “Pradhāna is styled Vyaya . . . ‘that which may be expended’; or Pariṇāmin . . . ‘which may be modified’; and Purusha is called Avyaya . . . ‘inconsumable,’ or apariṇāmin, ‘immutable.’ ” — 1:27 fn.
it is the substance of the world, its soul, the all-permeant “Sarvaga”
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-7: “. . . the supreme Brahma, the supreme soul, the substance of the world {‘all-permeant’ sarvaga} . . .” — 1:27 & fn. (i.2)

— 583 —

“Let us pause at the end of the first complete vibration . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Let us pause at the end of the first complete vibration and examine the result.  We have already formed the elements of water, ammonia, carbonic acid, the atmosphere, plant and animal life, phosphorus for the brain, salt for the sea, clay for the solid earth . . . phosphates, and silicates, sufficient for a world and inhabitants not so very different from what we enjoy at the present day.  True the human inhabitants would have to live in a state of more than Arcadian simplicity, and the absence of calcic phosphate would be awkward as far as the bone is concerned.” — p. 124 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“At the lower end of our curve . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “At the lower end of our curve what is there to be noted?  We see a great hiatus . . . This oasis, and the blanks which precede and follow it, may be referred with much probability to the particular way in which our earth developed into a member of our solar system.  If this be so it may be that on our earth only these blanks occur, and not generally throughout the universe.” — p. 125 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“that neither stars nor the sun can be said to be constituted of those terrestrial elements . . .”
p/q: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” 1885: “. . . the body of the sun . . . cannot be said to be constituted of those terrestrial elements with the state of which the chemist is familiar, yet that these elements are all present in the sun’s outward robes, and a host more of elements unknown so far to science.” — pp. 252-3 (Five Years of Theosophy)
no element present on our earth could ever be possibly found wanting in the sun . . .
p/q: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” 1885: “There seems to be little need, indeed, to have waited so long for the lines belonging to these respective elements to correspond with dark lines of the solar spectrum to know that no element present on our earth could ever be possibly found wanting in the sun; although, on the other hand, there are many others in the sun which have either not reached or as yet been discovered on our globe.  Some may be missing in certain stars and heavenly bodies still in the process of formation; or . . . though present in them, these elements on account of their undeveloped state may not respond as yet to the usual scientific tests.” — p. 253 (Five Years of Theosophy)
an element of still lower atomic weight than hydrogen, an element purely hypothetical . . .
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Suppose that the unit of the scale . . . is not hydrogen, but some element of still lower atomic weight?  We are here at once reminded of helium, — an element purely hypothetical as far as our earth is concerned.” — p. 118 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“Dr. Carnelly’s weighty argument . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “We have studied Carnelley’s weighty argument in favour of the compound nature of the so-called elements from their analogy to the compound radicals.” — p. 126 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— Footnotes

the primitive race was boneless.  (See Book II.)
see: Stanza IV, 15: “The Fathers, the Boneless, could give no Life to Beings with Bones.”  “. . . since those progenitors (Pitar), the formless and the intellectual, refuse to build man, but endow him with mind; the four corporeal classes creating only his body.” — SD 2:90-1, 92

— 584 —

a particle of homogeneous matter, the Mysterium Magnum of Paracelsus
see: Franz Hartmann, The Life of Paracelsus, 1887: “Mysterium magnum. — Original matter; the matter of all things; the ultimate essence . . . All forms come originally from the Mysterium magnum . . .” — p. 37
“Let us now turn to the upper portion of the scheme. . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Let us now turn to the upper portion of the scheme.  With hydrogen of atomic weight = 1, there is little room for other elements, save perhaps for hypothetical helium.  But what if we get ‘through the looking-glass,’ and cross the zero-line in search of new principles, — what shall we find on the other side of zero?  Dr. Carnelley asks for an element of negative atomic weight; here is ample room and verge enough for a shadow series of such unsubstantialities.  Helmholtz says that electricity is probably as atomic as matter: is electricity one of the negative elements? and the luminiferous ether another?  Matter, as we now know it, does not here exist; the forms of energy which are apparent in the motions of matter are as yet only latent possibilities.  A substance of negative weight is not inconceivable.  But can we form a clear conception of a body which combines with other bodies in proportions expressible by negative quantities?” — p. 125 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“A genesis of the elements such as is here sketched out . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “A genesis of the elements such as is here sketched out would not be confined to our little solar system, but would probably follow the same general sequence of events in every centre of energy now visible as a star.  Before the birth of atoms to gravitate towards one another, no pressure could be exercised; but at the outskirts of the fire-mist sphere, within which all is protyle, — at the shell on which the tremendous forces involved in the birth of a chemical element exert full sway, — the fierce heat would be accompanied by gravitation sufficient to keep the newly born elements from flying off into space.  As temperature increases expansion and molecular motion increase, molecules tend to fly asunder, and their chemical affinities become deadened; but the enormous pressure of the gravitation of the mass of atomic matter outside what I may for brevity call the birth-shell would counteract this action of heat.” — p. 125 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“Beyond the birth-shell would be a space . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Beyond this birth-shell would be a space in which no chemical action could take place, owing to the temperature there being above what is called the dissociation-point for compounds.  In this space the lion and the lamb would lie down together; phosphorus and oxygen would mix without union; hydrogen and chlorine would show no tendency to closer bonds . . .” — p. 125 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— Footnotes

“The first riddle which we encounter in chemistry is . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “The first riddle, then, 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 away 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.” — p. 116 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“I can easily conceive that there are plenty of bodies about us . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “ ‘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.’ — Sir George Airy.  ‘Faraday’s Life and Letters.’ ” — p. 125 fn. (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
metaphysics, called by Mr. Tyndall “poetry”
see: H. P. Blavatsky, “War in Olympus,” Nov. 1879: “Mr. Tyndall . . . declares (‘Science and Man’) that ‘Metaphysics will be welcomed when it abandons its pretensions to scientific discovery, and consents to be ranked as a kind of poetry’ . . . his spiritualistic opponents retort with the answer that ‘physics will always be welcomed, when it abandons its pretension to psychological discovery.’ ” — p. 42 (The Theosophist, v. 1)

— 584-5 —

“and even fluorine, that energetic gas . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “. . . and even fluorine, that energetic gas which chemists have only isolated within the last month or two, would float about free and uncombined.  Outside this space of free atomic matter would be another shell, in which the formed chemical elements would have cooled down to the combination-point, and the sequence of events so graphically described by Mr. Mattieu Williams in ‘The Fuel of the Sun’ would now take place, culminating in the solid earth and the commencement of geological time.” — pp. 125-6 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— 585 —

(Vide § XV., “Gods, Monads, and Atoms.”)
see: “Gods, Monads, and Atoms,” SD 1: 610-34.
“We have glanced at the difficulty of defining an element . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “We have glanced at the difficulty of defining an element; we have noticed too the revolt of many leading physicists and chemists against the ordinary acceptation of the term element.  We have weighed the improbability of their eternal self-existence, or their origination by chance.  As a remaining alternative we have suggested their origin by a process of evolution like that of the heavenly bodies according to Laplace, and the plants and animals of our globe according to Lamarck, Darwin, and Wallace.  In the general array of the elements, as known to us, we have seen a striking approximation to that of the organic world.  In lack of direct evidence of the decomposition of any element, we have sought and found indirect evidence. . . . We have next glanced at the view of the genesis of the elements; and lastly, we have reviewed a scheme of their origin suggested by Professor Reynolds’s method of illustrating the periodic classification.” — p. 126 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— 585-6 —

“Summing up all the above considerations . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Summing up all the above considerations we cannot, indeed, venture to assert positively that our so-called elements have been evolved from one primordial matter; but we may contend that the balance of evidence, I think, fairly weighs in favour of this speculation.” — p. 126 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— Footnotes

Professor Emerson Reynolds . . . “points out that in each period . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “Professor Emerson Reynolds . . . 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 Mendeleeff’s third period, contrasts sharply both with 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.” — pp. 119-20 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)
“If we thus recognise a contrast in properties . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “If we thus recognise 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 properties 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.” — pp. 120-1 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— 586 —

— Footnotes

he does not “wish to infer that the gaps in Mendeleef’s table . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Address to the Chemical Section of the British Association,” Sept. 2, 1886: “I do not, however, wish to infer that the gaps in Mendeleeff’s table, and in this graphic representation of it, 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.” — p. 121 (Chemical News, Sept. 3, 1886)

— 587 —

“Ether produced Sound” is said in the Purânas
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-7: “From the great principle (Mahat) Intellect, threefold Egotism (Ahaṃkāra) . . . Elementary Egotism, then becoming productive, as the rudiment of sound, produced from it Ether, of which sound is the characteristic, investing it with its rudiment of sound.” — 1:32-4 (i.2)

— Footnotes

“Jules Bourdin, in the name of the group . . . whose war-cry . . . is A bas l’Ether”
p/q: G. A. Hirn, “La Notion de Force dans La Science Moderne,” Oct. 1885: “M. Jules Bourdin, dans la lettre qu’il a écrite à M. Clausius au nom du groupe d’étudiants électriciens dont le cri de ralliement est: ‘A bas l’ether,’ proteste vivement contre l’hypothèse d’un fluide électrique pouvant traverser un conducteur plein [Jules Bourdin, in the letter that he wrote to Clausius on behalf of the group of student electricians whose war-cry is: ‘Down with ether,’ protests sharply against the hypothesis of an electric fluid that can flow through a solid conductor].” — p. 106 (Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne, v. 13)

— 588 —

Without metaphysics, as Mr. H. J. Slack says, real science is inadmissible.
see: Henry J. Slack, “What is the Meaning of Human Personality?” 1876: “But if intermittence and change be the condition of our lives, is there nothing permanent to which we can cling?  Physical Science has to do, in its present stage, only with facts belonging to the regions of incessant change; but man must, from his constitution, form an ideal of the continuous and the enduring towards which he aspires, and in which, in spite of doubts, he in the long run believes.” — p. 397 (Popular Science Review, v. 15)
The sixty-two “coincidences” . . . confirming the nebular theory
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Prof. Stephen Alexander enumerates 62 ‘consistencies’ or confirmations of the nebular theory (Smithsonian Contributions xxi, Art. I).” — p. 150 fn.
“there is in Laplace’s theory . . . nothing hypothetical . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “ ‘There is thus, in Laplace’s theory,’ says John Stuart Mill, ‘nothing hypothetical; it is an example of legitimate reasoning from a present effect to its past cause, according to the known laws of that cause; it assumes nothing more than that objects which really exist, obey the laws which are known to be obeyed by all terrestrial objects resembling them.’ ” — p. 153 fn.
see: John Stuart Mill, A System of Logic, 1858, p. 299

— 589 —

The many objections against the homogeneity of original diffuse matter . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The want of uniformity in the composition of the fixed stars. — Mr. Rutherford [says] ‘. . . we have now the strongest evidence that they also differ in constituent materials — some of them, perhaps, having no elements to be found in some other.  What, then, becomes of that homogeneity of original diffuse matter which is almost a logical necessity of the nebular hypothesis?’ ” — p. 191
the Ultima Thule of the Universe
see: Edward Everett, The Uses of Astronomy, 1856: “But there is no Ultima Thule [farthest place] in the progress of science. . . . the details of the nebular theory, proposed by Sir W. Herschell . . . have been drawn in question.” — p. 34

— 590 —

sidereal bodies were formed through the progressive condensation of a primordial pregenetic matter
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “C’est une opinion très répandue chez les Astronomes, et qui était déjà enseignée par Anaximène et l’École Ionienne, que les astres se sont formés par la condensation progressive d’une matière primitive excessivement légère disséminée dans l’espace [It is a widespread belief among astronomers, and it was already taught by Anaximenes and the Ionian School, that the stars were formed by the progressive condensation of exceedingly light primordial matter spread out through space].” — p. 2
Tycho Brahè . . . thought the new star . . . in 1572, had been formed out of that matter.
see: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Tycho Brahe regardait l’étoile nouvelle, apparue en 1572 dans Cassiopée, comme formée de la substance éthérée de la Voie lactée (Progymnasmata, p. 795) [Tycho Brahe regarded the new star that appeared in Cassiopeia in 1572 as being formed of the ethereal substance of the Milky Way].” — p. 2
Kepler believed the star of 1606 had been likewise formed . . .
see: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Kepler supposait que l’étoile de 1606 avait été engendrée par une substance éthérée, qui remplit tout l'espace (De stella nova in pede Serpentarii, p. 115) [Kepler assumed that the star of 1606 was produced by an ethereal substance which fills all space].” — p. 2
He attributed to that same ether the apparition of a luminous ring around the moon . . .
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Il attribuait à ce même éther l’apparition d’un anneau lumineux autour de la Lune, pendant l’éclipse totale de Soleil observée à Naples en 1605 [He attributed to this same ether the appearance of a luminous ring around the moon, during the total solar eclipse observed in Naples in 1605].” — p. 2
Still later, in 1714 . . . self-luminous matter was recognized by Halley
see: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Plus tard l’existence d’une matière nébulaire, lumineuse par elle-même, était admise par Halley (Phil. Transactions, 1714) [Later the existence of a nebulous matter that was self-luminous was accepted by Halley].” — p. 2
the famous hypothesis on the transformation of nebulæ into stars . . .
see: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Mais il faut arriver à W. Herschel pour trouver établie sur des données d’observation l’existence de la matière nébulaire.  C’est en 1811 que cet illustre Astronome communiqua à la Société Royale le Mémoire dans lequel il expose son hypothèse fameuse sur la transformation des nébuleuses en étoiles (Phil. Transactions, 1811, p. 269 et suivantes) [But we must turn to W. Herschel to find the existence of nebulous matter established by observed data.  It was in 1811 that this illustrious astronomer submitted to the Royal Society the Memoir in which he explains his famous hypothesis on the transformation of nebulæ into stars].” — p. 2
“No; they do not deny its general propositions . . .”
p/q: “Do the Adepts Deny the Nebular Theory?” 1885: “No; they do not deny its general propositions, nor the approximative truths of the scientific hypotheses.  They only deny the completeness of the present, as well as the entire error of the many so-called ‘exploded’ old theories, which, during the last century, have followed each other in such rapid succession.” — p. 245 (Five Years of Theosophy)
surmises of Sir W. Herschell . . . about the sun being called “globe of fire”
see: Nouveau Dictionnaire d’Histoire Naturelle, v. 6, 1803: “Mais il paroît plus probable de supposer, avec Herschel, que le soleil est un corps purement lumineux, et nullement un globe de feu [But it seems more probable to suppose, with Herschel, that the sun is a purely luminous body, and not at all a globe of fire] . . .” — p. 106
his early speculations about the nature of that which is now called the Nasmyth willow-leaf theory
see: E. W. Brayley, “Physical Constitution and Functions of the Sun,” Oct. 1864: “. . . having described the willow-leaves of Nasmyth . . . [Herschel] proceeds, ‘and these flakes . . . are evidently the immediate sources of the solar light and heat . . . we cannot refuse to regard them as organisms of some peculiar and amazing kind . . .’ ” — pp. 68-9 (The British Almanac, 1865)

— 591 —

“imaginative and fanciful theories”
see: Richard Proctor, Other Worlds Than Ours, 1871: “I do not propose to dwell in this chapter on the views which have been propounded respecting the sun’s habitability. . . . I regard those views as too bizarre and fanciful to find a place in a serious consideration of the subject . . .” — p. 35
it is “sufficient to make a résumé of what the solar physicists do not know”
p/q: “Is the Sun Merely a Cooling Mass?” 1885: “Were the astronomers to be asked — what definite and positive fact exists at the root of their solar theory . . . they might, perchance, feel embarrassed when confronted with all their present theories.  For it is sufficient to make a résumé of what the solar physicists do not know, to gain conviction that they are as far as ever from a definite knowledge of the constitution and ultimate nature of the heavenly bodies.” — pp. 258-9 (Five Years of Theosophy)
Cosmic matter . . . “so fine that its presence could hardly have been suspected.”
p/q: William Whewell, Astronomy and General Physics, 1833: “ ‘This anterior state was itself preceded by other states, in which the nebulous matter was more and more diffuse, the nucleus being less and less luminous.  We arrive,’ Laplace says, ‘in this manner, at a nebulosity so diffuse, that its existence could scarcely be suspected.’ ” — pp. 186-7

— 592 —

(“Laplace conceived that the external and internal zones of the ring . . .”)
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “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.” — p. 121
“Almost always each ring of vapours must have been broken up . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Almost always each ring of vapors must have broken up into numerous masses, which, moving with a nearly uniform velocity, must have continued to circulate at the same distance around the sun.  These masses must have taken a spheroidal form, with a motion of rotation in the same direction as their revolution, since the inner molecules (those nearest the sun) would have less actual velocity than the exterior ones.  They must then have formed as many planets in a state of vapor.  But if one of them was sufficiently powerful to unite successively, by its attraction, all the others around its centre, the ring of vapors must have been thus transformed into a single spheroidal mass of vapors circulating around the sun with a rotation in the same direction as its revolution.  The latter case has been the more common, but the solar system presents us the first case in the four small planets which move between Jupiter and Mars.” — p. 614

— 593 —

the satellites of Neptune and Uranus display a retrograde motion
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Retrograde Motions.  The satellites of Uranus revolve in a plane which makes an angle of 98° with the plane of the ecliptic . . . and the satellites thus have an apparent retrograde motion.  Similarly, the plane of Neptune’s satellite is tilted over 145°, so that it seems to have a retrograde motion . . .” — pp. 153-4
“They (the Occultists) find that the centrifugal theory . . .”
p/q: “Do the Adepts Deny the Nebular Theory?” 1885: “. . . they find that the centrifugal theory of Western birth is unable to cover all the ground.  That, unaided, it can neither account for every spheroid oblate, nor explain away such evident difficulties as are presented by the relative density of some planets.  How indeed can any calculation of centrifugal force explain to us, for instance, why Mercury, whose rotation is, we are told, only ‘about one-third that of the Earth, and its density only about one-fourth greater than the Earth,’ should have a polar compression more than ten times greater than the latter?  And again, why Jupiter, whose equatorial rotation is said to be ‘twenty-seven times greater, and its density only about one-fifth that of the Earth,’ should have its polar compression seventeen times greater than that of the Earth?  Or, why Saturn, with an equatorial velocity fifty-five times greater than Mercury for centrifugal force to contend with, should have its polar compression only three times greater than Mercury’s?” — pp. 249-50 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“To crown the above contradictions . . .”
p/q: “Do the Adepts Deny the Nebular Theory?” 1885: “To crown the above contradictions, we are asked to believe in the Central Forces as taught by modern science, even when told that the equatorial matter of the sun, with more than four times the centrifugal velocity of the earth’s equatorial surface and only about one-fourth part of the gravitation of the equatorial matter, has not manifested any tendency to bulge out at the solar equator, nor shown the least flattening at the poles of the solar axis.  In other and clearer words, the sun, with only one-fourth of our earth’s density for the centrifugal force to work upon, has no polar compression at all!  We find this objection made by more than one astronomer, yet never explained away satisfactorily so far as the ‘Adepts’ are aware.” — p. 250 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“Therefore, do they (the Adepts) say . . .”
p/q: “Do the Adepts Deny the Nebular Theory?” 1885: “Therefore do they say that the great men of science of the West, knowing nothing or next to nothing either about cometary matter, centrifugal and centripetal forces, the nature of the nebulae, or the physical constitution of the sun, stars, or even the moon, are imprudent to speak so confidently as they do about the ‘central mass of the sun’ whirling out into space planets, comets, and what-not.” — p. 250 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 593-4 —

“We maintain that it (the Sun) evolves out . . .”
p/q: “Do the Adepts Deny the Nebular Theory?” 1885: “. . . we maintain: that it evolutes out, but the life principle, the soul of these bodies, giving and receiving it back in our little solar system, as the ‘Universal Life-giver,’ the One Life gives and receives it in the Infinitude and Eternity; that the Solar System is as much the Microcosm of the One Macrocosm, as man is the former when compared with his own little solar cosmos.” — pp. 250-1 (Five Years of Theosophy)

— 594 —

Newton . . . forced to abandon the idea of ever explaining . . . the original impulse . . .
see: Sir Isaac Newton, Four Letters to Doctor Bentley, 1756: “You sometimes speak of Gravity as essential and inherent to Matter.  Pray do not ascribe that Notion to me; for the Cause of Gravity is what I do not pretend to know . . .” — p. 20 (Letter II, Jan. 17, 1693)

— 595 —

Sir W. Herschell’s paper . . . showing the existence of nebular matter
see: William Herschel, “Astronomical Observations relating to the Construction of the Heavens,” June 20, 1811, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1811, part I, pp. 269-336.
Laplace demanded some kind of primitive “world stuff” . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “But what of the irresolvable nebulæ? . . . They are incandescent cosmical dust. . . . The world-stuff which Laplace demanded is at hand.” — p. 41
substances remained motionless . . . until finally “the Mind” . . . began to work . . .
see: Friedrich Ueberweg, A History of Philosophy, tr. G. S. Morris, 1875: “In the primitive condition of things the most heterogeneous substances were, according to Anaxagoras, everywhere intermingled . . . When matter had thus remained inert . . . the Mind worked upon it, communicating to it motion and order (Arist. Phys., VIII, I . . .).” — 1:65-6
The spectra of the resolvable and the irresolvable nebulæ are . . . entirely different . . .
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . the irresolvable nebulæ . . . yield only bright lines.  Similar as they are in general aspect, to the resolvable nebulæ, their spectra are fundamentally different.  Their physical condition, accordingly, is that of a glowing gas or vapor.” — p. 41
The bright lines of one nebula reveal the existence of hydrogen . . .
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Les lignes brillantes du spectre d’une nébuleuse nous y révèlent l’existence de l’hydrogène, peut-être de l’azote et d’une autre matière inconnue.  Dans les atmosphères des étoiles et du Soleil, le même procédé d’analyse nous montre les vapeurs de presque tous les métaux [The bright lines of the spectrum of one nebula reveal to us the existence of hydrogen, perhaps of nitrogen and another unknown substance.  In the atmospheres of the stars and the Sun, the same analytical procedure shows us the vapors of almost all the metals.].” — p. 2

— 595-6 —

This leads to the direct inference that a star is formed by the condensation of a nebula . . .
see: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Supposer qu’une étoile se forme par la condensation d’une nébuleuse, c’est donc admettre que nos métaux sont eux-mêmes formés par la condensation de l’hydrogène ou de quelque matière primitive inconnue, problème que la Chimie est encore impuissante à résoudre [To suppose that a star is formed by the condensation of a nebula is thus to admit that our metals are themselves formed by the condensation of hydrogen or some primitive unknown matter, and this is a problem that chemistry is still unable to solve].” — pp. 2-3

— 596 —

Astronomy could anticipate Chemistry in proving the existence of the fact . . .
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “L’Astronomie pourrait devancer la Chimie dans cette voie, si elle nous montrait une nébuleuse planétaire, à spectre de trois ou quatre lignes brillantes, se condensant peu à peu, et se transformant en une étoile à spectre sillonné de lignes noires et nombreuses [Astronomy could anticipate chemistry in this way, if it showed us a planetary nebula with a spectrum of three or four bright lines, gradually condensing and transforming into a star with a spectrum marked by numerous dark lines].” — p. 3
“the question of the variability of the nebula . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Mais la question de la variabilité des nébuleuses, même au point de vue de la forme, est encore un des mystères de l’Astronomie.  Les données d’observation que nous possédons sur ce sujet sont trop récentes et trop peu sûres pour qu’il soit permis de rien affirmer [But the question of the variability of the nebulae, even as to their form, is still one of the mysteries of astronomy.  The data of observation that we possess on this subject are too recent and too uncertain to allow us to affirm anything] . . .” — p. 3
a star transforming itself into a planetary nebula
see: “Change of a Star into a Planetary Nebula,” The Observatory, Sept. 20, 1877: “Lord Lindsay makes the important announcement that Schmidt’s Nova Cygni . . . which blazed forth suddenly last November, exhibiting a continuous spectrum with numerous bright lines, now gives monochromatic light, the spectrum consisting of a single bright line . . . From this fact Lord Lindsay infers that this star . . . has now actually become a planetary nebula . . .” — p. 185

— 596-7 —

the hypothesis of the planets and their satellites originating in the bosom of the Sun
see: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Avant Laplace, Buffon, frappé comme lui de cette remarquable identité des mouvements des planètes et . . . fit naître les planètes et leurs satellites du globe même du Soleil, auquel une puissante comète aurait arraché, par un choc oblique, la quantité de matière nécessaire à leur formation.  Je ne m’arrêterai pas à cette hypothèse, dont Laplace a fait justice dans la Note VII de son Exposition du Système du monde [Before Laplace, Buffon was, like him, struck by this remarkable identity of the movements of the planets and . . . [he] originated the planets and their satellites from the sun-globe itself, from which a powerful comet would have torn away by an oblique blow the quantity of matter necessary for their formation.  I will not stop at this hypothesis, to which Laplace did justice in Note VII of his Exposition du Système du monde].” — pp. 6-7

— 597 —

“The essence of cometary matter and of that which composes the stars . . .”
p/q: “Reply to an English F.T.S.,” 1885: “The essence of cometary matter must be . . . totally different from any of the chemical or physical characteristics with which the greatest chemists and physicists of the earth are familiar . . .” — pp. 241-2 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“While the spectroscope has shown the probable similarity . . .”
p/q: “Reply to an English F.T.S.,” 1885: “While the spectroscope has shown the probable similarity of terrestrial and sidereal substance, the chemical actions peculiar to the variously progressed orbs of space have not been detected, nor proven to be identical with those observed on our own planet.” — p. 239 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“At the utmost,” observes C. Wolf . . .
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Tout au plus peut-on invoquer en sa faveur, avec W. Herschel, l’existence de nébuleuses planétaires à divers degrés de condensation, et celle de nébuleuses en spirale avec nœuds de condensation sur les branches et au centre.  Mais, en réalité, la connaissance du lien qui unit les nébuleuses aux étoiles nous est encore interdite; et à défaut d’observation directe, nous ne pouvons même l’établir sur l’analogie de composition chimique [At the utmost, we could cite in its favour, with W. Herschel, the existence of planetary nebulæ in various degrees of condensation, and that of spiral nebulæ, with nuclei of condensation on the branches and in the center.  But, in fact, knowledge of the bond that unites the nebulæ to the stars is still denied to us; and because of a lack of direct observation, we cannot even establish it on the analogy of chemical composition].” — p. 3

— 598 —

“Some of these,” Wolf tells us, “have a spectrum of three or four bright lines . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Les unes donnent un spectre de trois ou quatre lignes brillantes, les autres un spectre continu.  Les premières sont gazeuses, les autres formées d’une matière pulvérulente.  Les premières doivent constituer une véritable atmosphère: c’est parmi elles qu’il faudra ranger la nébuleuse solaire de Laplace [Some have a spectrum of three or four bright lines, others a continuous spectrum.  The first are gaseous, the others formed of a pulverulent matter.  The former must build up a veritable atmosphere: it is among these that the solar nebula of Laplace has to be placed].” — p. 4

— Footnotes

“The question of the resolvability of the nebulæ . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “La question de la résolubilité des nébuleuses a été souvent présentée d’une manière trop affirmative et contraire aux idées exprimées par l’illustre observateur des spectres de ces astres, M. Huggins.  Toute nébuleuse dont le spectre ne contient que des lignes brillantes est gazeuse et, par suite, dit-on, irrésoluble; toute nébuleuse dont le spectre est continu doit finir par se résoudre en étoiles avec un instrument suffisamment puissant.  Cet énoncé est contraire à la fois aux résultats de l’observation et à la théorie spectroscopique [The question of the resolvability of the nebulæ has been often presented in a too affirmative manner and quite contrary to the ideas expressed by the illustrious observer of the spectra of these stars — Huggins.  Every nebula of which the spectrum contains only bright lines is gaseous, and hence, it is said, irresolvable; every nebula of which the spectrum is continuous, must finally – with a sufficiently powerful instrument – resolve into stars.  This assertion is at the same time contrary to the results of observation and to spectroscopic theory].” — p. 4 fn.
“The Lyra nebula, the Dumb-bell nebula, the central region of the nebula of Orion . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “La nébuleuse de la Lyre, la Dumbbell nebula, la région centrale de la nébuleuse d’Orion, paraissent résolubles, et donnent un spectre de lignes brillantes; la nébuleuse des Chiens de chasse n’est pas résoluble et donne un spectre continu.  C’est qu’en effet le spectroscope nous renseigne sur l’état physique de la matière constitutive des astres, mais non sur son mode d’agrégation.  Une nébuleuse formée de globes gazeux (ou même de noyaux peu lumineux entourés d’une puissante atmosphère) donnerait un spectre de lignes et serait cependant résoluble; tel parait être l’état de la région d’Huygens dans la nébuleuse d’Orion.  Une nébuleuse formée de particules solides ou liquides incandescentes, un véritable nuage, donnera un spectre continu et sera irrésoluble [The Lyra nebula, the Dumb-bell nebula, and the central region of the nebula of Orion, appear resolvable, and show a spectrum of bright lines; the nebula of Canis Venatici is not resolvable, and gives a continuous spectrum.  It is indeed the spectroscope that informs us about the physical state of the constituent matter of the stars, but affords us nothing about its mode of aggregation.  A nebula formed of gaseous globes (or even of nuclei, faintly luminous, surrounded by a powerful atmosphere) would give a spectrum of lines and be still resolvable; such seems to be the state of Huygens region in the Orion nebula.  A nebula formed of solid particles or incandescent fluids, a true cloud, will give a continuous spectrum and will be irresolvable].” — p. 4 fn.

— 598-9 —

“The latter form an ensemble of particles that may be considered as independent . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Les autres forment un ensemble de particules qui peuvent être considérées comme indépendantes et dont la circulation obéira aux lois de la pesanteur interne: telles sont les nébuleuses adoptées par Kant et par M. Faye. L’observation nous permet de placer l’une ou l’autre à l’origine du monde planétaire [The others form an aggregate of particles that may be considered as independent, and the rotation of which will obey the laws of internal weight: such are the nebulæ adopted by Kant and Faye.  Observation allows us to place the one or the other at the very origin of the planetary world].” — p. 4

— 599 —

“But when we try to go beyond and ascend to the primitive chaos . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “Mais lorsque nous voulons aller plus loin et remonter jusqu’au chaos primitif qui a produit l’ensemble de tous les astres, nous avons à rendre compte de l’existence actuelle de ces deux ordres de nébuleuses.  Si le chaos originel était un gaz froid, on comprendra comment la contraction résultant de l’attraction a pu l’échauffer et le rendre lumineux; il faudra expliquer la condensation de ce gaz à l’état de particules incandescentes dont le spectroscope nous révèle l’existence dans certaines nébuleuses.  Si le chaos était formé de telles particules, comment certaines portions ont-elles passé à l’état gazeux, tandis que d’autres conservaient leur état primitif [But when we want to go further and return to the primitive chaos which produced the totality of the heavenly bodies, we have to account for the actual existence of these two classes of nebulae.  If the original chaos was a cold gas, one would understand how the contraction resulting from attraction could have heated it and made it luminous.  We would have to explain the condensation of this gas to the state of incandescent particles, the existence of which in certain nebulae is revealed to us by the spectroscope.  If the chaos was composed of such particles, how did certain portions pass into the gaseous state, while others have preserved their primitive state]?” — pp. 4-5
“The first part of the Cosmogonical problem . . .”
p/q: C. Wolf, Les Hypothèses Cosmogoniques, 1886: “La première partie du problème cosmogonique, quelle est la matière primitive du chaos et comment a-t-elle donné naissance aux étoiles et au Soleil, reste donc, aujourd’hui encore, dans le domaine du roman et de l’imagination pure [The first part of the cosmogonical problem, which is the primitive matter of chaos and how it gave birth to the stars and the sun, remains to this day in the domain of fiction and of mere imagination].” — p. 5
It “is not a theory of the evolution of the Universe . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “1. It is not a theory of the evolution of the Universe. — It is primarily a genetic explanation of the phenomena of the solar system; and accessorily a coördination in a common conception, of the principal phenomena in the stellar and nebular firmament, as far as human vision has been able to penetrate.
      2. It does not regard the Comets as involved in that particular evolution which has produced the Solar System; — but it recognizes the comets as forms of cosmic existence coördinated with earlier stages of nebular evolution.
      3. It does not deny an antecedent history of the luminous fire-mist. —  It makes no claim to having reached an absolute beginning.” — p. 196

— 600 —

this “fire mist may have previously existed . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The fire-mist may have previously existed in a cold, non-luminous and invisible condition.” — p. 196
“. . . it does not profess to discover the origin of things . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “4. It does not profess to discover the origin of things, but only a stadium in material history. . . . It makes no affirmation concerning the origin of these.  It leaves the philosopher and the theologian as free as they ever were to seek the origin of the modes of being.” — pp. 196-7
“The problem of existence is not resolved . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “ ‘The problem of existence is not resolved. . . . The nebular hypothesis throws no light upon the origin of diffused matter. . . . The nebular hypothesis implies a First Cause. . . .’ (H. Spencer, Westminster Review, lxx, 127, July, 1858.)” — p. 197 fn.
“There is an evident convergence of all sciences . . .”
p/q: H. J. Slack, “Recent Researches in Minute Life,” 1875: “There is an evident convergence of all sciences from physics to chemistry and physiology toward some doctrine of evolution and development, of which the facts of Darwinism will form a part; but what ultimate aspect this doctrine will take there is little if any evidence to show, and perhaps it will not be shaped by the human mind until metaphysical as well as physical inquiries are much more advanced.” — p. 252 (Popular Science Review, v. 14)

— 601 —

intelligences . . . called in the Hermetic works the “Seven Governors”
see: Divine Pymander, tr. Everard, 1884: “But the Workman, Mind, together with the Word . . . turned round as a wheel, his own Workmanships . . . he considered the Operations or Workmanships of the Seven . . . . and made manifest the downward-born Nature . . . and all the operations of the Seven Governors . . .” — pp. 10-11 (ii.15, 20, 22, 23)
whom Asklepios calls the “Supernal Gods”
see: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford and Maitland, 1885: “These are the primordial principles, the first sources, of all things. . . . it has been said that the souls of the Gods are intelligences.  As for me, I say not this of all of them, but of the great supernal Gods.” — pp. 63-4 (Asclepios, vii)

— 601-2 —

if it is once admitted . . . harmony of the stars . . . “that cause cannot really be the matter . . .”
p/q: Emmanuel Kant, Du Ciel, tr. C. Wolf, 1886: “Si l’on admet . . . que l’harmonie parfaite des mouvements des astres et la coïncidence des plans de leurs orbites démontrent l’existence d’une cause naturelle qui en est la source, cette cause ne peut pourtant pas être la matière qui remplit aujourd’hui les espaces célestes [If it is admitted . . . that the perfect harmony of the movements of the stars and the planets and the coincidence of their orbital planes demonstrate the existence of a natural cause, which is its Source, that cause cannot be the matter which today fills the heavenly spaces].” — p. 227

— 602 —

It must be that which filled space . . .
p/q: Emmanuel Kant, Du Ciel, tr. C. Wolf, 1886: “Il faut donc que ce soit celle qui primitivement remplissait ces espaces, dont le mouvement a été l’origine des mouvements actuels des astres, et qui, en se condensant dans ces astres mêmes, a abandonné l’espace que l’on trouve vide aujourd’hui [Therefore the motion of that which originally filled these spaces, must have been the origin of the current movements of the sidereal bodies, and in condensing itself in those very bodies, it must have abandoned the space that is found empty today].” — pp. 227-8
In other words, it is that same matter . . .
p/q: Emmanuel Kant, Du Ciel, tr. C. Wolf, 1886: “En d’autres termes, il faut que la matière même dont se sont formées les planètes, les comètes et le Soleil lui-même ait été au commencement diffusée dans toute l’étendue du système planétaire, et dans cet état se soit mise en mouvement, mouvement qu’elle a conservé en se réunissant dans les noyaux isolés des astres, qui contiennent aujourd’hui toute la masse primitivement dispersée de la matière du monde [In other words, it must be that the same matter of which the planets, the comets and the Sun itself were formed, was initially distributed throughout the planetary system, and in this state was set in motion, motion that it preserved by reuniting itself in the isolated nuclei of stars, which now contain all the mass of the matter which originally was dispersed in the universe].” — p. 228
the matter of . . . the inhabitants . . . is of a lighter and more subtle nature . . .
p/q: Emmanuel Kant, Du Ciel, tr. C. Wolf, 1886: “La matière dont sont formés les habitants des diverses planètes, les animaux aussi bien que les plantes, doit avant tout être d’une nature d’autant plus légère et plus subtile, l’élasticité des fibres et en même temps la conformation de leur corps doivent être d’autant plus parfaites que les astres sont plus éloignés du Soleil [The material of which the inhabitants of different planets, animals as well as plants, are formed, must above all be of a nature so much lighter and more subtle, the elasticity of the fibers, and at the same time the constitution of their bodies, must be more perfect as the planets are farther from the Sun].” — p. 246

— 603 —

“I speak only of a veritable material agent . . .”
p/q: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871: “I speak only of a veritable material agent, refined, it may be, to the world at large, but actual and substantial: an agent having quality of weight and of volume; an agent susceptible of chemical combination, and thereby of change of physical state and condition; an agent passive in its action, moved always, that is to say, by influences apart from itself, obeying other influences; an agent possessing no initiative power, no vis, or energia naturæ, but still playing a most important, if not a primary part in the production of the phenomena resulting from the action of the energia upon visible matter.” — pp. 379-80 (Popular Science Review, v. 10)
de Quatrefages’ admission, is a clear confirmation . . .
see: A. de Quatrefages, The Human Species, 1879: “It is very true that we do not know what Life is; but no more do we know what the force is that set the stars in motion and retains them in their orbits.  If astronomers have been right in giving to the force, or unknown cause, which gives the worlds their mathematical movements, naturalists have a perfect right to designate by a special term that unknown cause which produces filiation, birth and death.” — p. 10

— 604 —

De Maistre was right in calling the law of gravitation merely a word . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Mais, comme le dit si bien le comte de Maistre, ‘l’attraction ne pourra jamais être qu’un mot mis à la place d’une chose’ {Soirées de Saint-Pétersbourg} [But, as count De Maistre says so well, ‘attraction can never be more than a word replacing a thing’] . . .” — 2:25 & fn.
we may cite Le Couturier . . . Herschell and many others
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Suivant le très-savant M. Le Couturier, ‘l’attraction ne serait plus pour tout le monde que ce qu’elle était pour Newton lui-même, un simple mot, une idée’ . . . Mais il fallait bien permettre à J.-F.-W. Herschell de dire: ‘En étudiant les phénomènes de l’attraction, nous nous pénétrons, à chaque instant, de l’existence de causes qui n’agissent que sous un voile qui nous dérobe leur action directe {Musée des sciences, août 1856} [According to the very-learned Lecouturier, ‘for the whole world attraction would not be a simple word, an idea, any more than it was for Newton himself’ . . . But we must allow J. F. W. Herschel to say: ‘When studying the phenomena of attraction, at each moment we become aware of the existence of causes that act only under a veil which conceals to us their direct action’].” — 4:145 & fn.

— 605 —

“other worlds” . . . blended with our world — interpenetrating it . . .
see: John Oxlee, Three Letters, 1827: “ ‘In this manner are there seven earths below, and all . . . inhabitable . . . he so divideth all those earths, that they are all found below, in the same manner as those firmaments are above, one upon another.’ ”  “ ‘. . . seven firmaments are the root of all the rest . . .’ ” — pp. 124-5 (Zohar Gadol, Sepher Raziel)

— 606 —

Society . . . hails with mirth . . . the Count de Gabalis . . . open satire is the securest mask
see: Le Comte de Gabalis [by Nicolas de Montfaucon], 1670.
see: Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia, ed. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, 1877: “Villars [Abbé Montfaucon de Villars] . . . is celebrated as the author of “The Count of Gabalis; or, Conversations on the Secret Sciences,” published at Paris in 1670.  Although professedly a satire on the ideas then current about the Rosicrucians, it contains much worthy of consideration, being a work in which flashes of wit continually abound.” — 2:759

— Footnotes

see what the great astronomer, Camille Flammarion, says in his “Pluralité des Mondes.”
see: Camille Flammarion, La Pluralité des Mondes Habités [The Plurality of Inhabited Worlds], “Étude ou l’on Expose Les Conditions d’Habitabilité des Terres Célestes” [A Study Explaining the Conditions of Habitability of Celestial Worlds], 1869.

— 607 —

the principles contained in the Newtonian philosophy are those “which lie at the foundation . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “. . . the habitability of other worlds has been denied on theological grounds {Maxwell: Plurality of Worlds, 1820.  He holds that the Newtonian philosophy contains principles ‘which lie at the foundation of all atheistical systems.’}.” — p. 497 & fn.
“Dr. Whewell disputed the plurality of worlds . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Dr. Whewell disputed the plurality of worlds by appeal to scientific evidence {Whewell: Of the Plurality of Worlds}.” — p. 497 & fn.
clothed in “coats of skin” like those that Adam and Eve were provided
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skin, and clothed them.” — p. 4 (Genesis, 3:21)
Corporeality . . . “may exist under very divergent conditions.”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The question of the habitability of other worlds has generally been discussed from the assumption that all other corporeal beings must be clothed in flesh and bones similar to those of terrestrial animals, and must be adapted to a similar physical environment.  But it is manifest . . . that corporeality may exist under very divergent conditions.” — p. 497

— 607-8 —

— Footnotes

on the testimony of the Bible itself, and . . . Cardinal Wiseman . . .
see: J. P. Lange, Genesis, Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, v. 1, 1869: “In this connection no portion of Scripture is more worthy of attention than Psalm xc. . . . ‘O Lord, thou hast been our dwelling-place in all generations. . . . Before the mountains were born, before the earth and the tebel were brought forth . . . from Olam to Olam, from world to world . . .” — p. 140 (Psalms, 90:1-2)
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “Through 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.” — p. 294 (Hebrews, 11:3)
see: Nicholas Wiseman, Twelve Lectures on the Connexion Between Science and Revealed Religion, 1842: “. . . who will assert that it clashes with His sacred word, seeing that in this indefinite period, wherein this work of gradual development is placed . . . we suppose allusion made to such primeval revolutions, that is destructions and reproductions . . . wherein worlds are said to have been created in their most literal sense.” — p. 193
“It is not at all improbable that substances of a refractory nature . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “It is not at all improbable that substances of a refractory nature might be so mixed with other substances, known or unknown to us, as to be capable of enduring vastly greater vicissitudes of heat and cold than is possible with terrestrial organisms.  The tissues of terrestrial animals are simply suited to terrestrial conditions.  Yet even here we find different types and species of animals adapted to the trials of extremely dissimilar situations.” — pp. 497-8
“That an animal should be a quadruped or a biped . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “That an animal should be a quadruped or a biped is something not depending on the necessities of organization, or instinct, or intelligence.  That an animal should possess just five senses is not a necessity of percipient existence.  There may be animals on the earth which neither smell nor taste.  There may be beings on other worlds, and even on this, who possess more numerous senses than we.  The possibility of this is apparent when we consider the high probability that other properties and other modes of existence lie among the resources of the cosmos, and even of terrestrial matter.” — p. 498
“There are animals which subsist where rational man would perish . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “There are animals which subsist where rational man would perish — in the soil, in the river, and the sea. . . . Nor is incorporated rational existence conditioned on warm blood, nor on any temperature which does not change the forms of matter of which the organism may be composed.  There may be intelligences corporealized after some concept not involving the processes of injestion, assimilation, and reproduction.  Such bodies would not require daily food and warmth.  They might be lost in the abysses of the ocean, or laid up on a stormy cliff through the tempests of an arctic winter, or plunged in a volcano for a hundred years, and yet retain consciousness and thought.  It is conceivable.” — pp. 498-9
“Why might not psychic natures be enshrined in indestructible flint . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Why might not psychic natures be enshrined in indestructible flint and platinum?  These substances are no further from the nature of intelligence than carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and lime.  But, not to carry the thought to such an extreme, might not high intelligence be embodied in frames as indifferent to external conditions as the sage of the western plains or the lichens of Labrador — the rotifers which remain dried for years or the bacteria which pass living through boiling water.” — p. 499
“These suggestions are made simply to remind the reader . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “These suggestions are made simply to remind the reader how little can be argued respecting the necessary conditions of intelligent, organized existence, from the standard of corporeal existence found upon the earth.  Intelligence is, from its nature, as universal and as uniform as the laws of the Universe.  Bodies are merely the local fitting of intelligence to particular modifications of universal matter and force.” — pp. 499-500

— 609 —

cosmic dust . . . “which had never belonged to the earth before”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “And yet I will venture the opinion that some dust comes to the earth daily which had never belonged to the earth before.” — p. 4 (Ch. 1, “Cosmical Dust”)
“Behold, I have showed thee all things. . . .”
p/q: The Book of Enoch, tr. Richard Laurence, 1883: “. . . Behold, I have showed thee all things, O Enoch . . . Thou seest the sun, the moon, and those which conduct the stars of heaven, which cause all their operations, seasons, and arrivals to return.  In the days of sinners the years shall be shortened. . . . and everything done on earth shall be subverted, and disappear in its season.  The rain shall be restrained, and heaven shall stand still. . . . The moon shall change its laws . . .” — p. 111 (79:1-4, 6)

— 610 —

“the Esoteric Doctrine may well be called the ‘thread-doctrine’ . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, “The Septenary Principle in Esotericism,” 1885: “Verily the Esoteric doctrine may well be called in its turn the ‘thread-doctrine,’ since, like Sutratman or Pranatman, it passes through and strings together all the ancient philosophical religious systems, and, what is more, reconciles and explains them.” — p. 197 (Five Years of Theosophy)
Nature behaving in actu . . . and being, as the Kabalists say, in abscondito
see: S. F. Dunlap, Sōd, The Son of the Man, 1861: “ ‘Senior occultatus est et absconditus: Microprosopus manifestus est, et non manifestus’ [The Ancient One is hidden and concealed; the Microprosopus is manifested, and is not manifested].” — p. 32 fn. (The Sohar, Liber Mysterii, iv. 1; Rosenroth)

— 611 —

the idea that Kosmos . . . is full of invisible, intelligent Existences
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “In the Speculative Qabbalah, four Conditions or Worlds are enumerated.  The first of these is termed, Olam A’tzeel-ooth . . . the World of Emanation par excellance. . . . containing only the Holy Upper Ten Sephiroth . . .”  “From the A’tzeel-oothic World . . . proceeds the World of Creation . . . It is considered as the abode of only pure Spirits. . . . Following, and also proceeding . . . by emanation, is . . . the World of Formation.  It is the abode of the Angels, the Intelligences of the Celestial planets and stars . . .”  “The fourth and last Condition is . . . the World of Action . . . It contains the actual matter of the planets or spheres . . .” — pp. 320, 328-30
Epicurus . . . believing in gods
see: Albert Schwegler, Handbook of the History of Philosophy, tr. J. H. Stirling, 1868: “Epicurus crowns his general view by his doctrine of the gods . . . The gods lead, he thinks, in human form, but without human wants, and without permanent bodies, in the empty interspaces of the infinite worlds, an untroubled, unalterable life . . .” — p. 134

— 612 —

The ten points inscribed within that “Pythagorean triangle” . . .
see: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “Thus, in the celebrated Pythagorean triangle, consisting of ten points, the upper single dot or jod is monad or unity . . . the beginning of all things; a line was thought to correspond with duality, because it was produced by the first motion from invisible nature . . . But a triangle . . . was considered by the Pythagoreans to be the author of all sublunary [terrestrial] things.” — pp. 18-19
they reveal the order in which were evolved the Kosmos . . . and the primordial elements
see: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “The Pythagorean world, according to Plutarch, consisted of a double quaternary.  The quaternary of the intellectual world is T’Agathon [the Good, or 1st Logos], Nous [Divine Mind], Psyche [World Soul], Hyle [Primordial Matter]; while that of the sensible world, which is properly what Pythagoras meant by the word Kosmos, is Fire, Air, Water, and Earth.” — p. 112

— 613 —

“A point . . . is enough to put all the schools in the world . . .”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “ ‘A point is enough to put all the schools in the world in a combustion.  But what need has man to know that point, since the creation of such a small being is beyond his power?  A fortiori, philosophy acts against probability when, from that point which absorbs and disconcerts all her meditations, she presumes to pass on to the generation of the world . . .’ — La Pluche.” — p. 32
read “the Great Architect of the Universe”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle; or, The Science of Numbers, 1875: “. . . Freemasonry has a peculiar reference for the Monad . . . ‘God, the great Architect of the Universe . . .’ . . . from India and Japan to the extremest west, including the Goths, the Celts . . . All acknowledge the unity of T.G.A.O.T.U. . . .” — pp. 45-6

— 613-14 —

the “hierogram within a Circle, or equilateral Triangle” . . .
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “Amongst these sages, the Monad represented the throne of the Omnipotent Deity, placed in the centre of the empyrean, to indicate T.G.A.O.T.U., by whom all things were made and are preserved.  This disposition was symbolised by the hierogram of a Point within a circle or equilateral triangle, to exemplify equally the unity of the divine essence . . .” — p. 36

— 614 —

Kant’s Thesis . . . his second Antinomy
see: Emmanuel Kant, Critique de la Raison Pure, tr. Jules Barni, 1869: “Deuxième Antinomie — Deuxième Conflit des Idées Transcendentales [Second Antinomy — Second Conflict of the Transcendental Ideas].” — 2:53-64
see: Albert Schwegler, Handbook of the History of Philosophy, 1868: “. . . the idea of the world as totality of all phenomena . . . the idea of God as ultimate condition of the possibility of all things . . . Through these ideas, in which reason attempts to apply the categories to the unconditioned, it gets only entangled in unavoidable show and deception. . . . it is the fate of reason to find itself compelled to make contradictory assertions (the antinomies) . . .” — p. 227 (ch. 38, “Kant”)
(see the Kabalistic Tree of Life)
see: The Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “This is the qabalistical ‘tree of life,’ on which all things depend [Plate III, facing page].” — p. 28 (Introduction)
the Monad is degraded into a Vehicle — a “throne”!
see: The Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “Now the Sephiroth are also called the World of Emanations . . . or archetypal world . . . and this gave birth to three other worlds, each containing a repetition of the Sephiroth, but in a descending scale of brightness.  The second world is . . . the world of creation, also called . . . the throne.” — p. 29 (Introduction)
the Duad . . . the evil, counteracting principle (Plutarch, De Placitis . . .)
see: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “. . . De Placitis Philosophorum, doth affirm Pythagoras to have asserted two substantial principles self-existent, a Monad and a Dyad . . . the latter of them is . . . interpreted to be a demon, or a principle of evil . . . And doubtless, this book, De Placitis Philosophorum, was either written by Plutarch himself, or else by some disciple and follower of his according to his principles.” — 2:5-6

— 615 —

Space, Force, and Matter — “the potencies of an interacting Unity.”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Force and Matter, Potencies of Space.  In the original simple unity termed space, force and matter are primarily latent. . . . Hence force and matter originate in changes in the substance of space . . .”  “The terms force and matter . . . represent the potencies of an interacting unity — of a unity proceeding from the primary unity . . .” — pp. 6, 10
“Space, Force, Matter, are, what signs in algebra are to the mathematician . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “The terms space, and force, and matter, are, to the physicist, what signs in algebra are to the mathematician, merely conventional symbols.” — p. 7
“Force as force, and Matter as matter . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Force, as force, and matter, as matter, are as absolutely unknowable as is the assumed empty space in which they are held to interact.” — p. 7
“the physicist bases reasoned hypotheses . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “As symbols, they represent abstract ideas — ideas drawn from and resting on the assumptions on which the physicist bases reasoned hypotheses of the origin of things.” — p. 7
“and sees three needs in what he terms creation . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Judging from the necessities of his own works, he thinks he sees three needs in what he terms creation: A place wherein to create.  A medium by which to create.  A material from which to create.  And in giving a logical expression to this hypothesis through the terms space, force, matter, he believes he has proved the existence of that which each of these represents, as he conceives it to be.” — pp. 7-8
Space . . . which Locke defined as capable of neither resistance nor motion
p/q: John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 1828: “. . . our idea of solidity is distinguished both from pure space, which is capable neither of resistance nor motion, and from the ordinary idea of hardness.” — 1:107 (II.iv.3)
“Space is a substantial though . . . an absolutely unknowable living Entity.”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Force and Matter, unknown Revealers of the Unknown.  But if space be a substantial though unknowable living entity . . . the phenomena of nature . . . will simply be the functional expression of the action of the potencies through . . . which the unknown becomes knowable . . .” — p. 8
there is “a connection of all matter in the plenum”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. D. Nolen, 1881: “. . . ce corps exprime tout l’univers par la connexion de toute la matière dans le plein [this body expresses the entire universe through the connection of all matter in the plenum] . . .” — p. 220 (62.1)

— 616 —

It consists of ten points . . . The upper single dot is a Monad . . .
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “Thus, in the celebrated Pythagorean triangle, consisting of ten points, the upper single dot or jod is monad or unity . . .” — p. 18
“Pythagoras considered a point to correspond in proportion to unity . . .”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “Pythagoras considered a point to correspond in proportion to unity; a line to 2; a superfice to 3; a solid to 4; and he defined a point as a monad having position, and the beginning of all things; a line was thought to correspond with duality, because it was produced by the first motion from indivisible nature, and formed the junction of two points.  A superfice was compared to the number three, because it is the first of all causes that are found in figures; for a circle, which is the principal of all round figures, comprises a triad, in centre — space — circumference.  But a triangle, which is the first of all rectilineal figures, is included in a ternary, and receives its form according to that number; and was considered by the Pythagoreans to be the author of all sublunary things.  The four points at the base of the Pythagorean triangle correspond with a solid or cube, which combines the principles of length, breadth, and thickness, for no solid can have less than four extreme boundary points.” — pp. 18-19
“the human mind cannot conceive an indivisible unit . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “The human mind cannot conceive an indivisible unit, short of the annihilation of the idea, with its subject . . .” — p. 386
“one whose base, and each of its sides, form equal triangles . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “The triangle . . . is commonly called three-sided, as in the equilateral triangle.  But this is an evident misnomer; for a solid equilateral triangular body — one whose base as well as each of its sides form equal triangles — must have four co-equal sides or surfaces, while a triangular plane will as necessarily possess five . . .” — p. 387

— 617 —

an ideal triangle, depicted by mathematical imaginary lines “can have no sides at all . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “. . . an ideal triangle, depicted by mathematical, that is, imaginary lines, can have no sides at all, being simply a phantom of the mind, to which, if sides be imputed, these must be the sides of the object it constructively represents.” — p. 387
the ideal triangle — “as the abstract idea of a triangular body . . .”
see: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Hence an ideal triangle, as the abstract idea of a triangular body and therefore as the type of an abstract idea . . .” — p. 387
an “imaginary figure constructed of three mathematical lines” . . .
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “. . . [it] can only be correctly defined as an imaginary figure constructed of three mathematical lines enclosing a mathematical space — which is equal to nothing enclosing nothing.” — pp. 387-8
if “the possible unit is only a possibility as an actuality of nature . . .”
p/q: Henry Pratt, New Aspects of Life and Religion, 1886: “Now the possible unit is only a possibility as an actuality of nature — as an individual of any kind.  But every individual natural object is capable of division, and by division loses its unity, or ceases to be a unit.” — pp. 385-6

— 618 —

“that most simple Being, the cause of all unity and the measure of all things”
p/q: Ralph Cudworth, The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1845: “Thus, according to Porphyrius, by the Pythagoric Dyad is not so much meant matter, as the infinite and indeterminate nature, and the passive capability of things.  So that the Monad . . . only is substantial, that first most simple being, the cause of all unity, and the measure of all things.” — 2:7
Numbers which proceeded from that, “which was before all Numbers”
p/q: G. Oliver, The Pythagorean Triangle, 1875: “The Rabbi Barahiel taught that numbers proceed from Him who was before all numbers . . .” — p. 22
“in the treatment of the Primal cause . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . in the treatment of the Primal Cause, two things must be considered, the Primal Cause per se, and the relation and connection of the Primal Cause, with the visible and unseen universe.” — p. 174
Thus he shows the early Hebrews following in the steps of the Oriental philosophy . . .
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Arabian peripateticians, in order to give an explanation of this most abstruse subject, were obliged to step into the mazes of the Chaldean, Persian, Hindu, and the generally called, Oriental Philosophy.” — pp. 174-5
Their Primal Cause was designated at first “by the triadic Shaddaï . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Hebrews . . . designated the Primal Cause, at first by the triadic . . . Shaddaï, the Almighty, subsequently by the Tetragrammaton . . . YHVH, symbol of the Past, Present and Future, and also the equivalent for the really highest name of the Deity . . . Eh’yeh, i.e., I Am.” — p. 175
in the Kabala the name YHVH (or Jehovah) expresses a He and a She . . .
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “In the Qabbalah the Name . . . YHVH, expresses a He and a She, two persons in one Deity . . .” — p. 175
“In the name of Unity, of the Holy and Blessed Hû . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “See also the Jewish Liturgy, for Pentecost, also the daily ‘In the Name of Unity, of the Holy and Blessed Hû and His She’keen-ah, the Hidden and Concealed Hû, blessed be YHVH forever.’ ” — p. 175
“Hû is said to be masculine and YAH feminine . . .”
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Hû is said to be masculine and YaH feminine, together they make the יהוה אחד i.e., One YHVH.  One but of a male-female nature.  The She’keen-ah is always considered in the Qabbalah as feminine.” — p. 175

— 619 —

the Elohim . . . with the true Kabalists the lowest designation, translated in the Bible “God”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . the lowest designation, or the Deity in Nature, the more general term Elohim, is translated, God.” — p. 175
Out of these issue the Scintillas.
see: Stanza IV, 5: “. . . the Kabalistic ‘Archetypal World,’ from whence proceed the ‘Creative, Formative, and the Material Worlds’; the Scintillæ or Sparks . . .” — SD 1:98-9
“Every atom . . . passing through the mineral, vegetable, and animal Kingdoms, becomes man.”
see: “Commentary”: “Every form on earth, and every speck (atom) in Space strives in its efforts towards self-formation to follow the model placed for it in the ‘heavenly man.’ ” — SD 1:183
Spirit, Mind, and Body . . . the “Heavenly Man”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . a symbol of the Makrokosm, the Great Universal Heavenly Man, composed of the Four Worlds of the Qabbalah . . .”
“. . . the World of Emanation . . . the direct emanation of Ain Soph . . .”
“. . . the World of Creation . . . the abode of only pure spirits.”
“. . . the World of Formation.  It is the abode of the Angels, the Intelligences . . .”
“. . . the World of Action . . . contains the actual matter . . .” — pp. 216, 320-1, 328-30
“The Monads . . . the Souls of the Atoms . . . the fabric in which the Chohans . . .”
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “. . . such a garment as it is given to the soul to clothe itself in it so as to exist in this world, so here too (Above) He gives her a garment of the splendor Above . . .” — pp. 399-400

— Footnotes

Such recent works . . . justify our attitude towards the Jehovistic Deity.
see: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “The Deity may be considered from four points of view, following each other:  1. As the Ain Soph, the Without End . . . above man’s comprehension . . . 2. Eh’yeh . . . abstract thought.  3. YHVH [Jehovah], It, who was, and is, and will be, therefore in Time.  4. Elohim, the Deity in Nature . . .” — p. 128
see: Kabbalah Unveiled, tr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, 1887: “The name of the Deity, which we call Jehovah, is in Hebrew a name of four letters, IHVH . . .”  “But IHVH . . . signifies the Lesser Countenance, Microprosopus . . .” — pp. 30, 31-2 (Introduction)

— 620 —

Figuier and . . . D’Assier, two Positivists and Materialists, have succumbed before this logical necessity.
see: Louis Figuier, The Day After Death; or, Our Future Life, According to Science, 1874: “Thus it was with the author of this book. . . . The power of logic forced him to study those beings, impossible to be seen by our organs of vision . . . So that you will find in this book, not only an attempt at the solution of the problem of the future life by science, but also the statement of a complete theory of nature . . .” — pp. 3-4
see: Adolphe d’Assier, Posthumous Humanity, tr. H. S. Olcott, 1887: “Never transcending the domain of facts, nor invoking any supernatural cause to explain them, I have designed to give my book the stamp of Positivism.” — p. vi

— 620-1 —

“Into the details of the evolution of the solar system . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Into the details of the evolution of the solar system itself, it is not necessary for me to enter.  You may gather some idea as to the way in which the various elements start into existence from these three principles into which Mulaprakriti is differentiated, by examining the lecture delivered by Professor Crookes a short time ago upon the so-called elements of modern chemistry.  This lecture will at least give you some idea of the way in which the so-called elements spring from Vishwanara, the most objective of these three principles, which seems to stand in the place of the protyle mentioned in that lecture.  Except in a few particulars, this lecture seems to give the outlines of the theory of physical evolution on the plane of Vishwanara and is, as far as I know, the nearest approach made by modern investigators to the real occult theory on the subject.” — p. 308 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 621 —

Much from the lectures by Prof. Crookes has already been quoted . . .
see: “Ancient Thought in Modern Dress,” SD 1:580-6.
“What are these elements, whence do they come . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “. . . what are these elements, whence do they come, what is their signification? . . . These elements perplex us in our researches, baffle us in our speculations, and haunt us in our very dreams.  They stretch like an unknown sea before us — mocking, mystifying, and murmuring strange revelations and possibilities.” — p. 83 (Chemical News, Feb. 25, 1887)

— Footnotes

“Vishwanara is not merely the manifested objective world . . .”
p/q: T. Subba Row, “Notes on the Bhagavad Gita — I,” Feb. 1887: “Now this Vishwanara is not to be looked upon as merely the manifested objective world, but as the one physical basis from which the whole objective world starts into existence.” — p. 307 (The Theosophist, v. 8)

— 622 —

“If I venture to say that our commonly received elements are not simple . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “If I venture to say that our commonly received elements are not simple and primordial, that they have not arisen by chance or have not been created in a desultory and mechanical manner but have been evolved from simpler matters — or perhaps indeed from one sole kind of matter — I do but give formal utterance to an idea which has been, so to speak, for some time ‘in the air’ of science.  Chemists, physicists, philosophers of the highest merit declare explicitly their belief that the seventy (or thereabouts) elements of our text-books are not the pillars of Hercules which we must never hope to pass.”  “Philosophers in the present as in the past, — men who certainly have not worked in the laboratory, — have reached the same view from another side.  Thus Mr. Herbert Spencer records his conviction that ‘the chemical atoms are produced from the true or physical atoms by processes of evolution under conditions which chemistry has not yet been able to produce.’ ” — p. 83 (Chemical News, Feb. 25, 1887)
“And the poet has forestalled the philosopher.  Milton (‘Paradise Lost,’ Book V.) . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “And the poet has forestalled the philosopher.  Milton (‘Paradise Lost,’ Book V.) makes the Archangel Raphael say to Adam, instinct with the evolutionary idea, that the Almighty had created . . . ‘one first matter all / Indued with various forms, various degrees / Of substance.’ ” — p. 83 (Chemical News, Feb. 25, 1887)
“An idea,” says Plutarch, “is a being incorporeal . . .”
p/q: Plutarch’s Morals, ed. William Goodwin, 1874: “An idea is a being incorporeal, which has no subsistence by itself, but gives figure and form unto shapeless matter, and becomes the cause of its manifestation.” — 3:123 (Sentiments Concerning Nature [De Placitis Philosophorum], i.10)
The revolution produced in old chemistry by Avogadro . . .
see: Josiah Cooke, The New Chemistry, 1874: “. . . while the prominent facts of science have remained the same, its history has been marked by very frequent revolutions in its theories or systems.” — pp. 9-10 (Lecture I, “Molecules and Avogadro’s Law”)

— 623 —

Descartes’ plenum of matter differentiated into particles . . .
p/q:  Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883: “. . . several cosmogonic systems and conceptions contributed to the modern theory . . .
Chaos. . . .
Solar emanation. . . .
Plenum of matter becoming differentiated into Particles.  Descartes.
Ethereal Fluid.  Leibnitz. . . .
Primitive fluid formed of all the matter of the solar system dissolved into its elements.  Kant.” — p. 619
Elemental Vortices inaugurated by the universal mind — through Anaxagoras . . . Galileo, Torricelli, and Swedenborg
p/q:  Alexander Winchell, World-Life, 1883:
“Elemental Vortices.  1. Inaugurated by The Mind.  Anaxagoras, Torricelli, Galileo, Descartes, Swedenborg. . . .
Systematic Vortices.  1. One Solar Vortex.  Kepler.” — p. 619
“The Monads (of Leibnitz) may from one point of view be called force . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “The monads may from one point of view be called force, from another matter.  To occult science force and matter are only two sides of the same substance.” — pp. 297-8 (The Path, v. 1)
these “Monads” of Leibnitz, every one of which is a living mirror of the universe . . .
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “Every monad reflects every other.  Every monad is a living mirror of the universe, within its own sphere.” — p. 297 (The Path, v. 1)
“Hidden in a veil of thick darkness . . .”
p/q: Cyclopædia of Sacred Poetical Quotations, ed. L. G. Adams, 1854:
“Hidden in a veil of thick darkness.
  He formed mirrors of the atoms of the world,
  And He cast a reflection from His own face on every atom!” — p. 252 (“Jami, from the Persian”)
“If we can show how the so-called chemical elements might have been generated . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “If we can show how the so-called chemical elements might have been generated we shall be able to fill up a formidable gap in our knowledge of the universe.” — p. 83 (Chemical News, Feb. 25, 1887)

— 624 —

“Our notions of a chemical element have expanded. . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “Our notions of a chemical element have expanded.  Hitherto the molecule has been regarded as an aggregate of two or more atoms, and no account has been taken of the architectural design on which these atoms have been joined.  We may consider that the structure of a chemical element is more complicated than has hitherto been supposed.  Between the molecules we are accustomed to deal with in chemical reactions and ultimate atoms as first created, come smaller molecules or aggregates of physical atoms; then sub-molecules differ one from the other, according to the position they occupied in the yttrium edifice.” — p. 86 (Chemical News, Feb. 25, 1887)
“Perhaps this hypothesis can be simplified . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “Perhaps this hypothesis can be simplified if we imagine yttrium to be represented by a five-shilling piece.  By chemical fractionation I have divided it into five separate shillings, and find that these shillings are not counterparts, but like the carbon atoms in the benzol ring, have the impress of their position, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, stamped on them. . . . if I throw my shillings into the melting-pot or dissolve them chemically, — the mint stamp disappears and they all turn out to be silver.” — p. 86 (Chemical News, Feb. 25, 1887)

— 625 —

“Hitherto, it has been considered that . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “Hitherto it has been considered that if the atomic weight of a metal, determined by different observers, setting out from different compounds, was always found to be constant . . . then such metal must rightly take rank among the simple or elementary bodies.  We learn from Nordenskiold’s gandolinium that this is no longer the case.  Again, we have here wheels within wheels.  Gadolinium is not an element, but a compound.” — p. 95 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
“We have shown that yttrium is a complex . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “We have shown that yttrium is a complex of five or more new constituents.  And who shall venture to gainsay that each of these constituents, if attacked in some different manner, and if the results were submitted to a test more delicate and searching than the radiant-matter test, might not be still further divisible!  Where, then, is the actual ultimate element?  As we advance it recedes like the tantalising mirage lakes and groves seen by the tired and thirsty traveller in the desert.  Are we in our quest for truth to be thus deluded and baulked?  The very idea of an element, as something absolutely primary and ultimate, seems to be growing less and less distinct.” — p. 95 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
“the mystery of first creation, which was ever the despair of Science . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “This mystery of first creation, which was ever the despair of science, is unfathomable, unless we accept the doctrine of the Hermetists. . . . Darwin begins his evolution of species at the lowest point and traces upward.  His only mistake may be that he applies his system at the wrong end.  Could he remove his quest from the visible universe into the invisible, he might find himself on the right path.  But then, he would be following in the footsteps of the Hermetists.” — 1:429
“an antecedent form of energy having periodic cycles of ebb and swell, rest and activity” . . .
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “. . . let there be granted an antecedent form of energy having periodic cycles of ebb and swell, rest and activity.” — p. 97 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
“an internal action akin to cooling . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “Let there also be granted an internal action akin to cooling operating slowly in the protyle.” — p. 97 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)

— 626 —

“Spirit which is invisible Flame, which never burns, but sets on fire all that it touches . . .”
see: George Berkeley, Works, 1871: “. . . the ancients distinguish a pure elementary invisible fire from . . . that which appears in ignited bodies . . . That therefore which smokes and flames is not pure fire . . . But this active element is supposed to be everywhere, and always present, imparting different degrees of life . . .” — 2:433-4 (Siris, § 190)
“the first-born element . . . most nearly allied to protyle” . . . “hydrogen . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “The first-born element would, in its simplicity, be most nearly allied to protyle . . . For some time hydrogen would be the only existing form of matter . . .” — p. 97 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)
the “two very reasonable postulates” . . . “to get a glimpse of some few of the secrets . . .”
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “We require two very reasonable postulates . . . an antecedent form of energy . . . an internal action akin to cooling . . . Let us batter at the door of the Unknown and do our utmost to get a glimpse of some few of the secrets so darkly hidden.” — p. 97 (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)

— Footnotes

“The Lord is a consuming fire.”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “For the Lord thy God is a consuming fire . . .” — p. 240 (Deuteronomy, 4:24)
“In him was life, and the life was the light of men.”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “In him was life; and the life was the light of men.” — p. 120 (John, 1:4)

— 627 —

like Descartes, they . . . are incapable of explaining the phenomenon of motion
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “The distinction (peculiar to Descartes) of extension and thought, the former being the property of external things, was incapable of explaining the phenomena of motion; for if external things were merely extended, their properties must be purely geometrical.” — p. 140
“this property of inertia is not a purely geometrical property . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “Leibniz maintained . . . that this property of inertia was not a purely geometrical property, that it pointed to the existence of something in external bodies, which was not extension merely.” — pp. 140-1
he called this something Force . . .
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “This something he called force, and maintained that external things were endowed with force, and in order to be the bearers of this force they must have a substance. . . . With the conclusion that external things were not lifeless and inert masses, but that they were the centres and bearers of force — i.e., of an active principle — the contrast between mind and matter promised to disappear.” — p. 141
“The mathematical and dynamical inquiries of Leibnitz . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “The mathematical and dynamical inquiries of Leibniz would not have led to the same result in the mind of a purely scientific inquirer.  But Leibniz was not a scientific man in the modern sense of the word.  Had he been so, he might have worked out the conception of energy, defined mathematically the ideas of force and mechanical work, and arrived at the conclusion that, even for purely scientific purposes, it is desirable to look upon force, not as a primary quantity, but as a quantity derived from some other value.” — p. 141
“Leibniz was a philosopher . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “Leibniz was a philosopher, and as such he had certain primary principles, which biassed him in favour of certain conclusions, and his discovery that external things were substances endowed with force was at once used for the purpose of applying these principles.  One of these principles was the law of continuity, the conviction that everything in the world was connected, that there were no gaps and chasms which could not be bridged over.  The contrast of extended and thinking substances was unbearable to him.  The definition of the extended substances had already been found untenable: it was natural that a similar inquiry was made into the definition of mind, the thinking substance.” — pp. 141-2
With him there existed ever an infinite gradation of thought. . . .
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “Leibniz . . . could not agree with [Descartes] in limiting the thinking process merely to clear and distinct thoughts.  On the contrary, there existed an infinite gradation of thoughts.  Only a small portion of the contents of our thoughts rises into the clearness of apperception, ‘into the light of perfect consciousness.’  Many remain in a confused or obscure state in the state of ‘perceptions,’ but they are nevertheless there . . .” — p. 142
Descartes denied soul to the animal, Leibnitz endowed . . . “the whole creation with mental life . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “The Cartesians had denied that animals were endowed with souls; but Leibniz . . . saw no obstacle in the theory which endows the whole creation with mental life, this being, according to him, capable of infinite gradations.” — p. 142

— 628 —

this . . . “at once widened the realm of mental life . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “If this conception of mind . . . at once widened the realm of mental life, destroying the contrast of animate and inanimate nature, it did yet more: it reacted on the conception of matter, of the extended substance.  For it became evident that external or material things presented this property of extension only to our senses, not to our thinking faculties.  The mathematician, in order to calculate geometrical figures, had been obliged to divide them into an infinite number of infinitely small parts, and the physicist saw no limit to the divisibility of matter into atoms.  The bulk, through which external things seemed to fill space, was a property which they acquired only through the coarseness of our senses.” — pp. 142-3
“Leibnitz followed these arguments to some extent . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “Leibniz followed the arguments of Gassendi to some extent, but he could not rest content in assuming that matter was composed of a finite number of very small (though not infinitely small) parts.  His mathematical mind forced him to carry out the argument in infinitum.  And what became of the atoms then?  They lost their extension, and they retained only the property of resistance — they were the centres of force.  They were reduced to mathematical points . . .” — pp. 143-4
“but if their extension in space was nothing . . .”
p/q: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “. . . but if their extension in space was nothing, so much fuller was their inner life.  Assuming that inner existence, such as that of the human mind, is a new dimension — not a geometrical but a metaphysical dimension — we might say that Leibniz, after having reduced the geometrical extension of the atoms to nothing, endowed them with an infinite extension in the direction of their metaphysical dimension.  After having lost sight of them in the world of space, the mind has, as it were, to dive into a metaphysical world to find and grasp the real essence of what appears in space merely as a mathematical point.  As a cone standing on its point, or a perpendicular straight line, cuts a horizontal plane only in one mathematical point, but may extend indefinitely in height and depth, so the essences of things real have only a punctual existence in this physical world of space, but have an infinite depth of inner life in the metaphysical world of thought.” — p. 144

— Footnotes

The real spelling of the name — as spelt by himself — is Leibniz. . . .
see: A. Foucher de Careil, “Leibniz — Sa Vie et Sa Doctrine,” 1861: “Leibniz écrivait son nom comme nous l’avons figuré, et non pas Leibnitz. . . . Il regardait ce nom comme d’origine slave [Leibniz wrote his name as we figured, not Leibnitz. . . . He regarded this name as of Slavonic origin].” — p. 368 (Séances et Travaux de l’Academie, v. 55)

— 629 —

metaphysics of Descartes. . . . the contrast of two substances ― Extension and Thought . . .
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “La métaphysique de Descartes consistait essentiellement dans l’opposition de deux substances radicalement différentes, irréductibles l’une à l’autre, l’Étendue . . . et la Pensée . . . Leibniz est, avec Spinoza, l’adversaire du dualisme cartésien [The metaphysics of Descartes consisted essentially of the contrast of two radically different substances, irreducible the one to the other, Extention . . . and Thought . . . Leibniz is, with Spinoza, the opponent of Cartesian dualism].” — pp. 9, 10
Leibnitz made of the two Cartesian substances . . . one universal unity
see: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “The critical writings of Leibniz . . . show us plainly how, simultaneously with transcending Descartes in mathematics, he recognised the necessity of superseding his philosophical teachings.  As there was wanting in Descartes’ mathematical labours the unity of a principle . . . so there was wanting in his philosophy, which established the existence of two substances . . . the unity of a common principle, actuating and uniting both.” — p. 66
Spinoza recognized but one universal indivisible substance . . .
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Spinoza . . . pensa que la réalité devait être une, et, des deux substances de Descartes . . . il fit deux manifestations, deux attributs d’une substance unique, qu’il appela Dieu. . . . la substance de Spinoza reste une sorte de tout indivisible [Spinoza . . . thought that reality had to be one, and of the two substances of Descartes . . . he made two manifestations, two attributes of one unique substance which he called God. . . . the substance of Spinoza remains a kind of indivisible all].” — pp. 9-10
Leibnitz, on the contrary perceived the existence of a plurality of substances.
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Mais tandis que la substance de Spinoza reste une sorte de tout indivisible, Leibniz reconnait l’existence d’une pluralité de substances [But while the substance of Spinoza remains a kind of indivisible all, Leibniz recognizes the existence of a plurarity of substances].” — p. 10
“the primitive Element of every material body being Force . . .”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “L’élément primitif de tout corps matériel, la Force, n’a donc rien de ce qui caractérise la matière.  Leibniz affirme ‘qu’on peut bien le concevoir, mais qu’il ne peut être l’objet d’aucune représentation imaginative’ [So the primitive Element of every material body, Force, has none of the characteristics of matter.  Leibniz affirms ‘that it can be conceived, but that it cannot be the object of any imaginative representation’].” — p. 12
the primordial and ultimate element . . . not the material atoms . . . as those of Epicurus and Gassendi
see: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “The divisibility of matter was a property which had, long before Leibniz, been made the basis of the corpuscular or atomic theory, and this theory had been recently revived by several philosophers, notably by Gassendi.” — p. 143
but, as Mertz shows, immaterial and metaphysical atoms, ‘mathematical points’
see: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “And what became of the atoms then? . . . They were reduced to mathematical points . . . but if their extension in space was nothing, so much fuller was their inner life. . . . a new dimension — not a geometrical but a metaphysical dimension . . .” —  p. 144
immaterial and metaphysical atoms . . . real souls
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Les choses ont donc pour derniers éléments, non pas des atomes de matière, nécessairement plus ou moins étendus, comme ceux d’Épicure ou de Gassendi, mais des atomes immatériels et métaphysiques, c’est-à-dire de véritables âmes [Thus things have, as ultimate elements, not atoms of matter, which are necessarily more or less extended, like those of Epicurus or Gassendi, but immaterial and metaphysical atoms, in other words, real souls].” — p. 12
see: Leibnitz, Philosophical Works, tr. G. M. Duncan, 1890: “Only atoms of substance, i.e., unities which are real . . . only metaphysical points or those of substance (constituted by forms or souls) are exact and real . . .” — p. 76 (“A New System of Nature. 1695,” § 11)
as explained by Henri Lachelier (Professeur agrégé de Philosophie)
see: Leibniz, La Monadologie, “Publiée d’apres les Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de Hanovre avec Introduction, Notes et Suppléments par Henri Lachelier, Professeur agrégé de Philosophie [Published according to the Manuscripts of the Library of Hanover, with an Introduction, Notes, and Supplements, by Henri Lachelier, Professor of Philosophy],” Paris, 1881.
“That which exists outside of us in an absolute manner, are Souls whose essence is force”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Ce qui existe d’une façon absolue, en dehors de nous, ce sont donc des âmes dont l’essence est la force [So that which exists outside of us in an absolute manner, are Souls whose essence is force].” — p. 12
Thus, reality . . . is composed of a unity of units . . .
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “La réalité se compose donc d’unités de Force. Ces unités tout immatérielles, en nombre infini, sont les Monades [Thus reality is made up of units of force.  These totally immaterial units, infinite in number, are the monads].” — p. 13

— 629-30 —

“Monads” . . . “the expression of the universe” . . .
see: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “. . . les atomes substantiels, les Monades, ont ‘quelque chose de vital et une espèce de perception.’  Ils ‘expriment l’univers’ [the substantial atoms, the monads, have ‘something vital and a kind of perception.’  They ‘express the universe’].” — p. 14

— 630 —

every physical point . . . the phenomenal expression of the . . . metaphysical point
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Tout point physique n’est pour ainsi dire que l’expression phénoménale d’un point metaphysique [Every physical point is, so to speak, but the phenomenal expression of a metaphysical point].” — p. 13
His distinction between perception and apperception
see: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “Only a small portion of the contents of our thoughts rises into the clearness of apperception, ‘into the light of perfect consciousness.’  Many remain in a confused or obscure state in the state of ‘perceptions’ . . .” — p. 142
His “reduced universes”
see: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Il y a autant d’ ‘univers réduits’ que de Monades [There are as many reduced universes as monads].” — p. 21
see: John Theodore Merz, Leibniz, 1884: “And what became of the atoms then?  They lost their extension . . . They were reduced to mathematical points . . .” — p. 144
“there are as many as there are Monads”
p/q: “The Monadologie of Leibnitz,” Dec. 30, 1871: “Through the connexion (liaison) of each Monad with all the others, each is a living mirror of the universe, and we may even say that there are as many universes as there are monads . . .” — p. 850 (Saturday Review, v. 32)
“To Spinoza, substance is dead and inactive . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “To Spinoza substance is dead and inactive, but to Leibnitz’s penetrating powers of mind everything is living activity and active energy.  In holding this view he comes infinitely nearer the Orient than any other thinker of his day or after him.  His discovery that an active energy forms the essence of substance is a principle that places him in direct relationship to the Seers of the East.” — p. 297 (The Path, v. 1)
atoms and elements are centres of force, or rather “spiritual beings . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “They are centres of force or better ‘spiritual beings, whose very nature it is to act.’  These elementary particles are vital forces, not acting mechanically, but from an internal principle.  They are incorporeal or spiritual units, inaccessible to all change from without, but only subject to internal movement.  They are indestructible by any external force.” — p. 297 (The Path, v. 1)
Leibnitz’s monads . . . “differ from atoms . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “Leibniz’s monads differ from atoms in the following particulars, which are very important for us to remember, otherwise we shall not be able to see the difference between Elementals and mere matter.  Atoms are not distinguished from each other, they are qualitatively alike, but one monad differs from every other monad, qualitatively; and every one is a peculiar world to itself.  Not so with atoms; they are absolutely alike quantitatively and qualitatively and possess no individuality of their own.” — p. 297 (The Path, v. 1)

— Footnotes

“Leibnitz’s Dynamism . . . would offer but little difficulty . . .”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Le dynamisme de Leibniz présenterait peu de difficultés, si la Monade y était restée un simple atome de force aveugle [Leibniz’s Dynamism would offer but little difficulty, if in his system the Monad had remained a simple atom of blind force].” — p. 13
“material atoms are contrary to reason”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Aussi Leibniz déclare-t-il nettement que ‘les atomes de matière sont contraires à la raison [Therefore Leibniz stated clearly: ‘material atoms are contrary to reason’].” — p. 23
see: Leibniz, Opera Philosophica, ed. J. E. Erdmann, v. 1, 1840: “. . . les atomes de matiére sont contraires à la raison [material atoms are contrary to reason] . . .” — p. 126 (“Système Nouveau,” 36.11)

— 630-1 —

“Again, the atoms . . . of materialistic philosophy . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “Again, the atoms of materialistic philosophy can be considered as extended and divisible, while the monads are mere ‘metaphysical points’ and indivisible.  Finally, and this is a point where these monads of Leibnitz closely resemble the Elementals of mystic philosophy, these monads are representative beings.  Every monad reflects every other.  Every monad is a living mirror of the universe, within its own sphere.  And mark this, for upon it depends the power possessed by these monads, and upon it depends the work they can do for us: in mirroring the world, the monads are not mere passive reflective agents, but spontaneously self-active; they produce the images spontaneously, as the soul does a dream.  In every monad, therefore, the adept may read everything, even the future.  Every monad — or elemental — is a looking-glass that can speak.” — p. 297 (The Path, v. 1)

— 631 —

“God has ever made anything but Monads or substances without extension.”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Et dans l’Examen des principes du P. Malebranche: ‘Il y a même grand sujet de douter si Dieu a fait d’autre chose que des Monades, ou des substances sans étendue’ [And in Examen des principes du P. Malebranche: ‘There is even great reason to doubt whether God has made anything other than Monads, or substances without extension’] . . .” — p. 24
“bodies with all their qualities are only phenomenal, like the rainbow . . .”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Leibniz est souvent revenu sur cette idée que les corps avec toutes leurs qualités ne sont que des phénomènes comme l’arc-en-ciel: Corpora omnia cum omnibus qualitatibus suis non [sunt] aliud quam phænomena bene fundata ut Iris {Correspond. avec Desbosses, lettre xviii} [Leibniz often returned to this idea that the bodies with all their qualities are but phenomena like the rainbow].” — p. 24 & fn.
a certain metaphysical bond between the monads — vinculum substantiale
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Leibniz dit qu’il en serait ainsi sans la présence d’un certain lien métaphysique entre les substances, le vinculum substantiale [Leibniz said that it would thus be without the presence of a certain metaphysical bond between the substances, the vinculum substantiale].” — p. 24 fn.

— Footnotes

The atoms of Leibnitz have . . . nothing but the name in common . . .
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “. . . les véritable atomes de Leibniz n’ont de commun que le nom avec ceux d’Épicure [the real atoms of Leibniz have only the name in common with those of Epicurus].” — p. 44 fn.
He calls them formal atoms . . .
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Il les appelle ailleurs atomes formels (Syst. nouv. § 3) et les rapproche des formes substantialles d’Aristote [Elsewhere he calls them formal atoms and he brings them closer to the substantial forms of Aristotle].” — p. 44 fn.

— 631-2 —

“It is not in the object, but in the modification . . .”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Ce n’est pas dans l’objet, mais dans la modification de la connaissance de l’objet, que les Monades sont bornées.  Elles vont toutes confusément à l’infini, au tout, mais elles sont limitées et distinguées par les degrés des perceptions distinctes.” — p. 67 [Monadologie, § 60]
see: Leibnitz, Philosophical Works, tr. G. M. Duncan, 1890: “It is not in the object but only in the modification of the knowledge of the object, that monads are limited.  They all tend confusedly toward the infinite, toward the whole, but they are limited, and distinguished by their degrees of distinct perceptions.” — p. 227 (“The Monadology. 1714,” § 60)

— 632 —

“All the portions of the Universe are distinctly represented in the Monads . . .”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881:  “Toutes les parties de l’univers sont exprimées distinctement, mais les unes dans une Monade, les autres dans une autre; il faut un nombre infini de Monades pour que tout l’univers soit exprimé distinctement [All the parts of the universe are expressed distinctly, but some in one monad, others in another; there has to be an infinite number of monads so that the entire universe can be expressed distinctly] . . .” — p. 21
a number of monads could represent . . . two millions of inhabitants of Paris
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “Si je suis dans ma chambre, (à) Paris, ma Monade ne perçoit clairement qu’un petit coin de Paris . . . Mais au même moment d’autres Monades, celles des passants, perçoivent clairement la façade de ma maison et toute ma rue . . . si bien que tous les coins et recoins de Paris se trouvent distinctement représentés dans deux millions d’âmes [When I am in my room in Paris, my monad perceives clearly only a small corner of Paris . . . But at the same time other monads, those of passers-by, perceive clearly the front of my house and the entire street . . . so well that all nooks and crannies of Paris find themselves distinctly represented in two million souls].” — pp. 21-22

— Footnotes

the created . . . monads . . . Entelechies . . . “incorporeal automata”
p/q: Leibniz, La Monadologie, ed. Henri Lachelier, 1881: “18. On pourrait donner le nom d’Entéléchies à toutes les substances simples, ou Monades créées, car elles ont en elles une certaine perfection . . . il y a une suffisance . . . qui les rend sources de leurs actions internes, et pour ainsi dire, des Automates incorporels{Entéléchies.  Ἐντελέχεια, chez Aristote, est à peu près synonyme d’ἐνέρχεια} [18. The name Entelechies could be given to all simple substances or created Monads, for they have within themselves a certain perfection . . . there is a sufficiency . . . which renders them the sources of their internal actions, and so to speak, of incorporeal Automata {Entelechies. . . . is with Aristotle almost synonymous with energy}].” — pp. 49-50 & fn.
not to regard the Sephiroth . . . as individualities . . . [or] abstractions
see: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “But it is not enough that we escape the mistakes which we would fall into if we regarded the Sephiroth as individualities, we must also beware of regarding them as mere abstractions, which the terms wisdom and intellect might lead us into.” — p. 296 (The Path, v. 1)
“We shall never arrive at the truth . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Jan. 1887: “We shall never arrive at the truth, much less the power of associating with those 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 (The Path, v. 1)
“There are several designations for ‘angels’ in the Bible . . .”
p/q: C. H. A. Bjerregaard, “The Elementals, The Elementary Spirits,” Feb. 1887: “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,’ (Job 38, 7); ‘flaming fires,’ (Ps. 104, 4.); ‘the mighty ones,’ (Ps. 103, 20) and St. Paul sees them in his cosmogonic vision (1 Col. 1, 16) 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. 321-2 (The Path, v. 1)

— 633 —

Mr. Tyndall’s scientific discovery.  He traced . . . the whole course of the atmospheric vibrations . . .
see: John Tyndall, Sound, 1875: “Chapter VIII.  Law of Vibratory Motions in Water and Air . . . Resultant Tones — Conditions of Their Production — Experimental Illustrations . . .” — pp. 324-54

— 634 —

Sterling’s work “Concerning Protoplasm”
see: James Hutchison Stirling, As Regards Protoplasm, London, 1872.
Beale’s decision is also in favour of a Vital Principle
see: Lionel S. Beale, The Mystery of Life, 1871: “Life is a power, force, or property of a special and peculiar kind, temporarily influencing matter and its ordinary forces, but entirely different from, and in no way correlated with, any of these.” — p. 2
Richardson’s lectures on the “Nervous Ether”
see: B. W. Richardson, “Theory of a Nervous Ether,” 1871, Popular Science Review, v. 10.
“Divine Providence tempers His blessings . . .”
p/q: Suggestive Thoughts on Religious Subjects, compiled by Henry Southgate, 1881: “Divine Providence tempers His blessings to secure their better effect.” — p. 308 (Rev. John Wogan)

— 635 —

Svâbhâvat, “the mutable radiance of the Immutable Darkness unconscious in Eternity”
see: “What is Theosophy?” [by H. P. Blavatsky], Oct. 1879: “The Primeval Monad of the Pythagorean system, which retires into darkness and is itself Darkness . . . was made the basis of all things . . . the Vedantic conception of Brahma . . . is represented as ‘without life, without mind, pure,’ unconscious, for Brahma is ‘Absolute Consciousness.’  Or . . . ‘Svabhāvāt’ (substance or nature) which exists by itself without any creator . . .” — pp. 433-4 (The Theosophist, v. 1)
“The one Cosmic atom becomes seven . . .”
see: T. Subba Row, “Brahmanism on the Sevenfold Principle in Man,” 1885: “. . . whenever seven entities are mentioned in the ancient occult science in India . . . you must suppose that those seven entities come into existence from three primary entities; and that those three entities, again, are evolved out of a single entity or Monad.” — p. 160 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“one the right, the other the left . . . in close embrace.  What unites them?”
see: Marie, Countess of Caithness, The Mystery of the Ages, 1887: “ ‘Karma,’ says Buddha, ‘is the most essential property of all beings . . . It is like the shadow which always accompanies the body.’ . . . our every thought, word, and action . . . is helping to build the Karma which is to accompany our Soul for ever as its shadow, either for good or ill . . .” — p. 144 fn.
“Thyan-kam” is the power or knowledge . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Letters of H. P. Blavatsky to A. P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1925: “Thyan kam (= the knowledge of bringing about) giving the impulse to Kosmic energy in the right direction.”   “Then coming within the Universal mind Dyan Kam develops these germs, conceives, and . . . runs along the lines of cosmic manifestations and frames all and everything . . .” — pp. 376, 380 (“Cosmological Notes” by M. and K.H.)
The “Yin-Sin”
see: Samuel Beal, A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, 1871: “. . . the idea of a universally diffused essence (dharmakaya) was accepted . . . And from this consideration appears to have proceeded . . . the several names Vairochana (the Omnipresent), Amitābha (for Amrita) the Eternal, and Adi-Buddha (yih-sin) the ‘one form of existence.’ ” — p. 373
see: The Mahatma Letters to A.  P. Sinnett, comp. A. T. Barker, 1926: “. . . the manifested ‘Voice’ (or Logos) . . . ‘the Self manifested in Self — Yih-sin, the ‘one form of existence,’ the child of Dharmakaya (the universally diffused Essence) . . .” — p. 346 (Letter LIX, by K.H., about July 1883)
regarding a personal God “as only a gigantic shadow . . .”
p/q: Henry S. Olcott, A Buddhist Catechism, 1887: “A Personal God Buddhists regard as only a gigantic shadow thrown upon the void of space by the imagination of ignorant men.” — p. 55 (§ 122)
they teach that only “two things are (objectively) eternal . . .”
p/q: Henry S. Olcott, A Buddhist Catechism, 1887: “Buddha taught that two things are eternal; namely, ‘Akāsa’ and ‘Nirvāna.’ ” — p. 56 (§ 123)

— 635-6 —

“Buddhists deny creation . . . Everything has come out of Akâsa . . .”
p/q: Henry S. Olcott, A Buddhist Catechism, 1887: “Everything has come out of Akāsa in obedience to a law of motion inherent in it, and, after a certain existence, passes away.  Nothing ever came out of nothing.  Buddhists . . . deny creation, and cannot conceive of a Creator.” — p. 56 (§ 123)

— 636 —

“I am myself ‘God’ ” . . . “an immortal portion of the immortal matter”
p/q: Louis Jacolliot, La Genèse de l’Humanité, 1879: “Je suis moi-même un Dieu.  Qu’entendez-vous par là?  J’entends que chaque être sur la terre, si petit qu’il soit, est une portion immortelle de l’immortelle matière [I am myself a God.  What do you mean by that?  I mean that every being on earth, however small, is an immortal portion of immortal matter].” — p. 339
“So far, and no farther shalt thou go.”
see: John Stuart Mill, Auguste Comte and Positivism, 1866: “. . . [Comte] says, it is absolutely necessary that the basis of numeration should be a prime number. . . . His reason is that they are the type of irreductibility . . . Nothing can exceed his delight in anything which says to the human mind, Thus far shalt thou go and no farther.” — p. 196

— 637 —

Yugas and Kalpas by the Hindus . . . Κύκλος . . . ring or circle, by the Greeks
see: Godfrey Higgins, Anacalypsis, 1836: “. . . the Hindoos formed another period, which consisted of ten ages or Calpas or Yugs . . . {The first Cali . . . may be the Chaldee word . . . klo. . . . Klo is found in the Greek word κυκλος, circle or cycle}.” — 1:176 & fn.

— Footnotes

“Probably then, in regard to any continuity . . .”
p/q: James Hutchison Stirling, As Regards Protoplasm, 1872: “Probably, then, in regard to any continuity in protoplasm of power, of form, or of substance, we have seen lacunae 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 premises are still to collect.” — pp. 33-4
“Again, here is a passage in which he is seen to cut his own ‘basis’ . . .”
p/q: James Hutchison Stirling, As Regards Protoplasm, 1872: “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 the one being necessarily true of the other, it follows that Mr. Huxley 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;’ . . . ‘caution’ in the use of the term protoplasm.” — p. 34 (“In Reply to Mr. Huxley in ‘Yeast’ ”)

— 638 —

There are “Cycles of Matter”
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life or Comparative Geology, 1883: “These recurrences of cosmical activity and rest were traced in my essay of 1860, and designated ‘The Cycles of Matter.’ ” — pp. 494-5
“The possibility of rising to a comprehension . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The possibility of rising to a comprehension of a system of coördination so far outreaching in time and space all range of human observation, is a circumstance which signalizes the power of man to transcend the limitations of changing and inconstant matter, and assert his superiority over all insentient and perishable forms of being.” — pp. 534-5
“There is a method in the succession of events . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life or Comparative Geology, 1883: “There is a method in the succession of events, and in the relation of coexistent things, which the mind of man seizes hold of; and by means of this as a clew, he runs back or forward over aeons of material history of which human experience can never testify.  Events germinate and unfold.  They have a past which is connected with their present, and we feel a well justified confidence that a future is appointed which will be similarly connected with the present and the past.  This continuity and unity of history repeat themselves before our eyes in all conceivable stages of progress.  The phenomena furnish us the grounds for the generalization of two laws which are truly principles of scientific divination, by which alone the human mind penetrates the sealed records of the past and the unopened pages of the future.  The first of these is the law of evolution, or, to phrase it for our purpose, the law of correlated successiveness or organized history in the individual, illustrated in the changing phases of every single maturing system of results . . .” — p. 535
“These thoughts summon into our immediate presence the measureless past . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life or Comparative Geology, 1883: “These thoughts summon into our immediate presence the measureless past and the measureless future of material history.  They seem almost to open vistas through infinity, and to endow the human intellect with an existence and a vision exempt from the limitations of time and space and finite causation, and lift it up toward a sublime apprehension of the Supreme Intelligence whose dwelling place is eternity.” — p. 548

— 639 —

“the events of humanity do run co-ordinately with the number forms”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, The Source of Measures, 1875: “It seems also that . . . all this was known to rest upon an astronomical basis . . . Is it possible that the events of humanity do run co-ordinately with these number forms?” — pp. 260-1
This is not superstition, least of all is it Fatalism.  The latter implies a blind course . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “They [the Ancients] rejected fatalism, for fatalism implies a blind course of some still blinder power.” — 2:593
there are external and internal conditions . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Furthermore, they believed that there are external and internal conditions which affect the determination of our will upon our actions.” — 2:593
destiny, which, from birth to death, every man is weaving thread by thread . . .
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “But they believed in destiny, which from birth to death every man is weaving thread by thread around himself, as a spider does his cobweb; and this destiny is guided either by that presence termed by some the guardian angel, or our more intimate astral inner man, who is but too often the evil genius of the man of flesh.  Both these lead on the outward man, but one of them must prevail; and from the very beginning of the invisible affray the stern and implacable law of compensation steps in and takes its course, following faithfully the fluctuations.  When the last strand is woven, and man is seemingly enwrapped in the net-work of his own doing, then he finds himself completely under the empire of this self-made destiny.  It then either fixes him like the inert shell against the immovable rock, or like a feather carries him away in a whirlwind raised by his own actions.” — 2:593
periodical creations of our globe . . . “The whole past of the Earth . . .”
p/q: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, ed. J. F. Collingwood, 1864: “It is now known that there can be no discussion about those periodic creations of the earth of which so much was said, and which to this day an erroneous conception of nature tries to identify with the so-called days of creation of the Bible; but that the whole past of the earth is nothing but an unfolded present.” — p. 57

— 640 —

“the historical investigation of the development of the Earth . . .”
p/q: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, ed. J. F. Collingwood, 1864: “ ‘The historical investigation of the development of the earth has proved that now and then rest upon the same base; that the past has been developed in the same manner as the present rolls on; and that the forces which were in action, ever remained the same.’ (Burmeister.)” — p. 59
“this eternal conformity in the essence of phenomena . . .”
p/q: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, ed. J. F. Collingwood, 1864: “ ‘This eternal conformity in the essence of phenomena renders it certain that fire and water possessed at all times the same powers, and ever will possess them’ . . . (Rossmässler.) ” — p. 59
Who are they “that darken counsel with words without knowledge”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906:
“Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
  Who is this that darkeneth counsel
  By words without knowledge?” — p. 701 (Book of Job, 38:1-2)
it is absolutely false . . . that all the great geological changes and terrible convulsions . . .
p/q: Louis Büchner, Force and Matter, ed. J. F. Collingwood, 1864: “ ‘There have been great changes, terrible convulsions . . . in all cases they have been produced by ordinary and known physical forces.’ ” — p. 60
“The history of the World begins . . .”
p/q: G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, tr. J. Sibree, 1857: “The History of the World begins with its general aim — the realization of the Idea of Spirit — only in an implicit form (an sich) that is, as Nature; a hidden, most profoundly hidden, unconscious instinct; and the whole process of History . . . is directed to rendering this unconscious impulse a conscious one.  Thus appearing in the form of merely natural existence, natural will — that which has been called the subjective side, — physical craving, instinct, passion, private interest, as also opinion and subjective conception, — spontaneously present themselves at the very commencement.” — p. 26

— Footnotes

“So be it, but have you at least demonstrated the contrary? . . .”
p/q: Ch. Richet, “La suggestion mentale et le calcul des probabilités,” Dec. 1884: “Soit, mais au moins avez-vous démontré le contraire? . . . En tout cas, ne niez pas à priori.  La science actuelle n’est pas assez avancée pour vous donner ce droit-là [So be it, but did you at least demonstrate the contrary? . . . Do not, at any rate, deny a priori.  Actual Science is not sufficiently advanced to give you that right].” — pp. 612-13 (Revue Philosophique, v. 18)

— 640-1 —

“This vast congeries of volitions, interests and activities . . .”
p/q: G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, tr. J. Sibree, 1857: “This vast congeries of volitions, interests and activities, constitute the instruments and means of the World-Spirit for attaining its object; bringing it to consciousness, and realizing it.  And this aim is none other than finding itself — coming to itself — and contemplating itself in concrete actuality.  But that those manifestations of vitality on the part of individuals and peoples, in which they seek and satisfy their own purposes, are, at the same time, the means and instruments of a higher and broader purpose of which they know nothing, — which they realise unconsciously, — might be made a matter of question; rather has been questioned . . .” — p. 26

— 641 —

“on this point I announced my view . . .”
p/q: G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, tr. J. Sibree, 1857: “. . . on this point I announced my view at the very outset, and asserted our hypothesis . . . and our belief, that Reason governs the world and has consequently governed its history.  In relation to this independently universal and substantial existence — all else is subordinate, subservient to it, and the means for its development.” — p. 26
Isis Unveiled, p. 268, Vol. II [p. 34, Vol. I] . . . “As our planet revolves once every year . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “As our planet revolves once every year around the sun and at the same time turns once in every twenty-four hours upon its own axis, thus traversing minor circles within a larger one, so is the work of the smaller cyclic periods accomplished and recommenced, within the Great Saros.  The revolution of the physical world, according to the ancient doctrine, is attended by a like revolution in the world of intellect — the spiritual evolution of the world proceeding in cycles, like the physical one.” — 1:34
“Thus we see in history a regular alteration of ebb and flow . . .”
p/q: H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “Thus we see in history a regular alternation of ebb and flow in the tide of human progress.  The great kingdoms and empires of the world, after reaching the culmination of their greatness, descend again, in accordance with the same law by which they ascended; till, having reached the lowest point, humanity reasserts itself and mounts up once more, the height of its attainment being, by this law of ascending progression by cycles, somewhat higher than the point from which it had before descended.” — 1:34

— 642 —

the Racial division of Cycles (See sub-section 6 [7].)
see: “§ VII.  The Days and Nights of Brahmā.” — SD 1:368-78
“Wise are they who worship Nemesis”
p/q: Æschylus, The Dramas, tr. Anna Swanwick, 1873:
“Prometheus.  What should I fear who am not doomed to die?
Chorus.  To keener struggle he [Zeus] may sentence thee.
Prometheus.  So let him then! all is by me foreseen.
Chorus.  Yet wise are they who worship Nemesis.” — 2:202-3 (Prometheus Bound, 956-7)

— Footnotes

the names of the Kabiri appear to be all allegorical . . .
p/q: George Stanley Faber, A Dissertation on the Mysteries of the Cabiri, 1803: “Col. Vallancey adopts the opinion of M. Court de Gebelin concerning pagan mythology in general; and asserts, that the ‘names and explanations of the Cabiri appear to be all allegorical, and to have signified no more than an almanack of the vicissitudes of the seasons, calculated for the operations of agriculture’ {Collect. de Reb. Hibern. No. 13. Præf. Sect. 5}.” — 1:7, 8 fn.
his assertion that Æon, Kronos, Saturn and Dagon are all one . . . the “patriarch Adam”
p/q: George Stanley Faber, A Dissertation on the Mysteries of the Cabiri, 1803: “. . . he maintains, that Eon, Cronus, Saturn, and Dagon, are all one person, and are equally the patriarch Adam . . .” — 1:7

— 643 —

“The triform Fates and ever mindful Furies”
p/q: Æschylus, The Dramas, tr. Anna Swanwick, 1873:
“Prometheus.  Not yet nor thus is it ordained that fate
  These things shall compass; but by myriad pangs
  And tortures bent, so shall I ‘scape these bonds . . .
Chorus.  Then who is the helmsman of necessity?
Prometheus.  The triform Fates and ever-mindful Furies.” — 2:181 (Prometheus Bound, 523-4)

— 644 —

If one breaks the laws of Harmony, or . . . “the laws of life” . . .
see: Archibald Keightley, “A Law of Life: Karma,” Sept. 15, 1887: “. . . Karma may be defined as a manifestation of the One, Universal, Divine Principle in the phenomenal world.  Thus, it may be further defined as ‘the great law of Harmony’ which governs the Universe . . . The man who denies the existence of harmony in the universe has transgressed the law and is experiencing the punishment.” — p. 39 (Lucifer, v. 1)
“every avenging Angel is only a typified representation of their re-action.”
see: Archibald Keightley, “A Law of Life: Karma,” Sept. 15, 1887: “. . . Nemesis became simply the avenging deity . . . the personification of the moral reverence for law, of the natural fear of committing a wrong action . . .” — pp. 40-1 (Lucifer, v. 1)
It is a law of occult dynamics that “a given amount of energy . . .”
p/q: Mohini Chatterji, “Morality and Pantheism,” 1885: “. . . it will be easily seen, by any one who examines the nature of occult dynamics, that a given amount of energy expended on the spiritual or astral plane is productive of far greater results than the same amount expended on the physical objective plane of existence.” — p. 217 (Five Years of Theosophy)
“. . . virtue in distress, and vice in triumph . . .”
p/q: John Dryden, Dramatic Works, 1882:
“Yet sure the gods are good . . .
But virtue in distress, and vice in triumph,
Make atheists of mankind.” — 8:339 (Cleomenes, V.ii)
“Just, though mysterious, leads us on unerring . . .”
p/q: David Mallet, Eurydice, 1735:
“. . . That heaven thou dar’st accuse,
  Just, tho’ mysterious, lead us on unerring,
  Thro’ ways unmark’d from Guilt to Punishment.” — p. 74 (V.i)

— 645 —

“With centric and eccentric scribbled o’er . . .”
p/q: John Milton, Poetical Works, 1809:
“Hereafter; when they come to model Heaven
  And calculate the stars, how they will wield
  The mighty frame; how build, unbuild, contrive
  To save appearances; how gird the sphere
  With centrick and eccentrick scribbled o’er,
  Cycle and epicycle, orb in orb . . .” — 3:426 (Paradise Lost, viii.79-84)
“. . . Time, cyclical time, was their abstraction of the Deity . . .”
p/q: Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Complete Works, 1884: “Wherever the powers of nature had found a cycle for themselves . . . there the Egyptian sages predicated life and mind.  Time, cyclical time, was their abstraction of the deity . . .” — 4:347 (“On the Prometheus of Aeschylus”)

— Footnotes [645-6]

“. . . all in Nature for us is the unknown . . .”
p/q: Albert de Rochas, Les Forces Non Définies, 1887: “. . . tout dans la nature est l’inconnu pour nous . . . Ils sont nombreux cependant les esprits superficiels pour qui rien ne peut se produire, par le jeu des forces naturelles, en dehors des faits observés depuis longtemps, consacrés par les livres et groupés plus ou moins habilement à l’aide de théories dont la durée éphémère devrait cependant bien démontrer l’insuffisance [everything in Nature is for us the unknown . . . Yet they are numerous, the superficial minds for whom nothing can be produced by the play of natural forces outside of facts observed for a long time, consecrated by books and grouped more or less skilfully with the help of theories whose ephemeral duration should have in the meantime demonstrated their insufficiency].” — pp. 1-2
“I do not pretend to contest the possibility of invisible Beings . . .”
p/q: Albert de Rochas, Les Forces Non Définies, 1887: “Je ne prétends point contester la possibilité d’êtres invisibles, d’une nature différente de la nôtre et susceptibles d’actionner la matière.  De profonds philosophes l’ont admise à toutes les époques comme conséquence de la grande loi de continuité qui régit l’univers.  [I do not pretend to contest the possibility of invisible beings, of a nature different from ours and able to spur matter into action.  In all ages profound philosophers have admitted it as a consequence of the great law of continuity which rules the universe].” — p. 2
“That intellectual life, which we see starting . . .”
p/q: Albert de Rochas, Les Forces Non Définies, 1887: “Cette vie intellectuelle, que nous voyons en quelque sorte partir du néant et arriver graduellement jusqu’à l’homme, s’arrêterait-elle brusquement à lui pour ne reparaître qu’à l’infini, dans le souverain régulateur des mondes? c’est peu probable.  Je ne nie pas plus l’existence des Esprits que je ne nie celle de l’Ame en cherchant à expliquer certains faits sans avoir recours à leur hypothèse [That intellectual life, which we see starting in some way from non-being and gradually reaching man, would it stop abruptly with him to reappear only in the infinite, in the sovereign regulator of the worlds?  It is not very probable.  I no more deny the existence of Spirits than I deny that of the soul while trying to explain certain facts without having recourse to their hypothesis] . . .” — pp. 2-3

— 646 —

racial Karma
see: “Helena Petrovna Blavatsky – III” [by Charles Johnston], June, 1900: “[HPB] said . . . ‘what is the use of material benefits, if you are despised and trampled down morally all the time?  If your ideals of national honour and glory are crushed in the mud, and you are made to feel all the time that you are an inferior race . . . There are really no ‘inferior races,’ for all are one in our common humanity . . . we have all had incarnations in each of these races . . .’ ” — pp. 25-6 (Theosophical Forum, 6:2)

— 647 —

“All men are apt to have a high conceit of their own understanding . . .”
p/q: Many Thoughts of Many Minds, comp. Henry Southgate, 1862: “All men are apt to have a high conceit of their own understanding, and to be tenacious of the opinions they profess; and yet almost all men are guided by the understandings of others, not by their own; and may be said more truly to adopt, than to beget, their opinions.” — p. 500 (Jerdan)
Professor Weber’s opinion that the peoples of India had no idea . . . of the Zodiac . . .
see: Albrecht Weber, History of Indian Literature, 1882: “. . . the signs of the zodiac, which were unquestionably borrowed by the Hindus from the Greeks . . .” — p. 229

— 647-8 —

the making “of Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades (Ash, Kesil, and Cimah) and the chambers of the South”
p/q: Holy Bible, “With a Commentary and Critical Notes” by Adam Clarke, 1833: “[It is the power of God] Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades {âash, kesil, ve-chimah}, and the chambers of the south . . .” — 2:752 & fn. (Book of Job, 9:9)

— 648 —

[Job speaks] of Scorpio
see: Holy Bible, “With a Commentary and Critical Notes” by Adam Clarke, 1833: “Which maketh Arcturus [âash], Orion [kesil], and Pleiades [kimah] {Dr. Hales translates kimah and kesil by Taurus and Scorpio} . . .” — 2:752 & fn. (Book of Job, 9:9)
and the Mazzaroths — the twelve signs
see: Holy Bible, “With a Commentary and Critical Notes” by Adam Clarke, 1833: “Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth {the signs of the zodiac} . . .” — 2:865 & fn. (Book of Job, 38:32)
The Book of Job . . . precedes Homer and Hesiod by at least one thousand years
see: Rev. Joseph Cross, Alone With God, 1884: “Who knows the antiquity of Job?  Evidently it antedates the Exodus . . . Some of the greatest scholars and critics have assigned him to the twenty-second century before Christ, which is more than a thousand years before Homer . . .” — p. 163
Homer . . . flourished some eight centuries before the Christian era
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Car ce n’est rien de retrouver quelques-uns de nos signes zodiacaux dans Orphée et dans Homère, c’est-à-dire huit cents ans environ avant notre ère, puisque, mille ans auparavant, pour le moins, Job parle de la création des pléiades [For it is nothing to find some of our signs of the zodiac also in Orpheus or in Homer, that is to say about eight hundred years before our era, since at least a thousand years before that, Job speaks of the creation of the Pleiades] . . .” — 4:52
hypothesis of some modern critics . . . Homer and Hesiod . . . forgery of the Jew Aristobulus
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “La critique moderne . . . ne s’est pas contentée de rejeter l’existence d’Orphée, elle en a fait autant de celle de ses deux grands collègues, Homère et Hésiode; selon elle, ce serait Aristobule le Juif qui aurait forgé . . . tous ces poëmes auxquels il aurait joint ceux de Linus [Modern criticism . . . did not merely reject the existence of Orpheus, it has done the same to that of his two great colleagues, Homer and Hesiod; according to it, it was the Jew Aristobulus who forged . . . all those poems and added those of Linus].” — 4:52-3 fn.
Bailly devised a very ingenious means of proving . . . 3700 years B.C. as the correct age of the science
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Bailly . . . se voyait obligé de remonter à trois mille et même à trois mille sept cents ans avant notre ère. . . . il se voyait obligé d’admettre l’existence d’un peuple primitif et antédiluvien, et de proclamer Thaut, Seth, Fohi, autrement dit nos patriarches, ‘comme les premiers instituteurs de la science’ [Bailly . . . was compelled to go back to three thousand or even thirty-seven hundred years before our era. . . . he was obliged to admit the existence of a primitive and antediluvian people, and to proclaim Thot, Seth, Fohi, in other words, our patriarchs, ‘as the first instructors of that science’].” — 4:53
Bailly then calculated the period at which the constellations manifested the atmospheric influence . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Le savant Bailly, calculant l’époque à laquelle les constellations devaient manifester l’influence atmosphérique qui leur est attribuée dans l’écrivain sacré par l’expression de douceur ou température élevée (à propos de kimah-pléiades), et par celle de pluies tristes (à propos de kemil-scorpion) [The learned Bailly, calculating the time period at which the constellations had to manifest the atmospheric influence, attributed to them by the sacred writer, and described as the mild influence or raised temperature (because of kimah-Pleiades), and the sad rains (because of kemil-scorpion)] . . .” — 4:53
“sweet influences of the Pleiades”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906:
“Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades,
  Or loose the bands of Orion?” — p. 703 (Book of Job, 38:31)

— 648-9 —

the eternal conformity . . . the impossibility of attributing it all to chance . . . “which never creates . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Devant l’éternelle conformité de ces divisions du zodiaque et de ces noms de planètes, appliqués dans le même ordre, toujours et partout, et devant l’impossibilité d’attribuer cette conformité ‘au hasard, qui, dit-il, ne produit jamais de pareilles ressemblances [In the presence of the eternal conformity of these divisions of the zodiac and these names of the planets, applied in the same order, always and everywhere, and in the presence of the impossibility of attributing this conformity to chance, which, he says, never produces such similarities] . . .” — 4:53 (Bailly, Astronomie Antique)

— 649 —

Before the “book of the law” was “found” by Hilkiah
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Hilkiah the high priest said . . . I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord.” — p. 523 (II Kings, 22:8)
the “priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense . . .”
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense . . . unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon . . .” — p. 524 (II Kings, 23:5)
“and to the planets . . .” or the twelve signs
p/q: Holy Bible, “With a Commentary and Critical Notes” by Adam Clarke, v. 2, 1833: “. . . and to the planets {mazzaroth . . . the twelve signs, i.e. the zodiac}, and to all the host of heaven.” — p. 456 & fn. (II Kings, 23:5)
They were stopped in their idolatry only by King Josiah, 624 years b.c.
see: The Historical Books of the Bible, ed. Adolph & Isaac Moses, 1884: “In the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah (624) the Book of the Law (Deuteronomy) is found . . . in accordance with that Book . . . He removes every trace of idolatry.” — p. 243
the dream of Joseph, who saw eleven “stars” bowing to the twelfth . . .
see: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “. . . Behold, I have dreamed a dream . . . the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.” — p. 49 (Genesis, 37:9)
The twelve sons of Jacob are again a reference to the same . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘. . . puis entouré par les douze signes du zodiaque, comme dans les camps d’Israël la tribu sacerdotale séparée en quatre phalanges marchait toujours entourée par les douze autres; les quatre premiers chefs portaient sur leurs étendards sacrés, Juda un lion, Ruben un homme ou verseau, Éphraïm un bœuf, Dan un scorpion, car chacun des signes se trouvait appliqué à chacune des tribus [then surrounded by the twelve signs of the zodiac, as in the camps of Israel, the priestly tribe separated into four phalanges, and always marched surrounded by the twelve others, the first four leaders carried on their sacred banners, Judah a lion, Ruben a man or Aquarius, Ephraim an ox, Dan a scorpion, because each of the signs was applied to one of the tribes].’ ” — 4:58 (Villapandus, Temple de Jérusalem, II, 2e xxx)
Malcolm . . . shows the Dabistan echoing all such traditions . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “C’était, il est vrai, une tradition constante et générale que celle de la révélation positive de ces signes, et nous remercions le savant Malcolm de nous en montrer un écho dans le Dabistan (l’un des livres de la Perse) . . . [et] remonter cette invention aux beaux jours de l’âge d’or de l’Iran [It is true, there was a constant and general tradition like that about the positive revelation of these signs, and we thank the scholar Malcolm for showing us an echo in the Dabistan (one of the books of Persia) . . . (and) tracing that invention to the heyday of the golden age in Iran] . . .” — 4:55
see: Sir John Malcolm, The History of Persia, 1829: “While his generals were subduing the Roman empire, [the Persian King] Khoosroo was devoted to the enjoyment of unheard-of luxury and magnificence.  His noble palaces, of which he had built one for every season; his thrones . . . formed to represent the twelve signs of the zodiac . . .” — 1:125
the genii of the planets . . . showed themselves to several holy prophets . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . il ajoute que ‘les génies des planètes sont représentés avec les mêmes figures sous lesquelles ils s’étaient montrés à plusieurs saints prophètes et avaient ainsi donné lieu à tous les rites’ [he adds that ‘the genii of the planets are represented with the same figures under which they were shown to several holy prophets and had thus given rise to all the rites].” — 4:55 [History of Persia, ch. 7]
the number 12 . . . “a perfect number” . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Philon le Juif avait donc bien raison de remarquer à son tour que ‘ce nombre duodénaire est parfait. C’est celui . . . des signes du zodiaque, que le soleil parcourt en douze mois . . . {de Profugis} [Philo the Jew had thus good reason to remark in his turn that ‘this duodenary number is perfect.  It is the number . . . of the signs of the zodiac, that the sun passes through in twelve months’].” — 4:58 & 59 fn.
it is to honour that sign that Moses . . . established the twelve cakes . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ . . . et c’est encore ce nombre que Moïse honora en divisant sa nation en douze tribus, en instituant les douze pains de proposition et en plaçant les douze pierres précieuses autour du rational des pontifes’ {de Profugis.} [and it is again this number that Moses honored when dividing his nation into twelve tribes, when establishing the twelve loaves of the shewbread, and when placing the twelve precious stones around the breastplate (ephod) of the High Priests].” —  4:58 & fn.
Berosus taught prophecy of every future event and cataclysm by the Zodiac
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “Berossus . . . says that these events take place according to the course of the stars; and affirms it so positively, as to assign the time for the Conflagrations and the Deluge.” — p. 322 (Seneca Nat. Quæst.)
at every renewal of the cycle . . . of 25,868 years
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Thus when Herodotus was in Egypt . . . priests informed the Greek inquirer that time had been reckoned by them so long that the sun had twice risen where it then set, and twice set where it then arose.  This . . . can only be realized as a fact in nature by means of two cycles of Precession [2 x 25,868], or a period of 51,736 years.” — 2:318

— 649-50 —

The names of the Akkadian months . . .
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “The Akkadian months derive their names from the signs of the zodiac . . .” — 2:214

— 650 —

Mr. Proctor shows . . . that the ancient astronomers had acquired a system . . .
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Mr. Proctor's observations lead him to the conclusion that about 2,400 B.C. the observers of the heavens had attained a system of exact astronomy {Myths and Marvels of Astronomy}.” — 2:336 & fn.
see: Richard A. Proctor, Myths and Marvels of Astronomy, 1877: “We may feel tolerably sure that the period when the old southern constellations were formed must have been between 2,400 and 2,000 years before the present era . . .” — p. 346
the Hindus date their Kali Yug from a great periodical conjunction . . .
see: Godfrey Higgins, Anacalypsis, 1836: “The time the Brahmins fixed for their Cali Yug and the entrance of the Sun into Aries being 3100 years B.C. . . . In or about the year 3100 was a remarkable conjunction of the planets . . .” — 2:140
the Egyptians had kept astronomical observations . . . 630,000 years
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Simplicius . . . of the sixth century, had heard that the Egyptians were in possession of recorded observations extending over a period of 630,000 years.” — 2:318
“if we read this number of years by the month which Euxodus [Eudoxus] said . . .”
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “If we read this number of years by the month which Eudoxus said the Egyptians termed a year, i.e. a course of time, that would still yield the length of two cycles of precession.” — 2:318
Diogenes Laertius carried back . . . calculations . . . to 48,863 years before Alexander
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Diogenes Laertius states that the Egyptian astronomers possessed observations of 373 eclipses of the sun . . . these he carried back by calculation to 48,863 years before Alexander {Diog. Laertius, Proem. 2}.” — 2:318-19 & fn.
Martianus Capella corroborates . . . that the Egyptians had secretly studied astronomy for over 40,000 years . . .
see: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “Martianus Capella reproduces a declaration that the Egyptians had secretly cultivated the science of astronomy for 40,000 years before it was made known to the rest of the world {Cited by Lewis, Astronomy of the Ancients, p. 264}.” — 2:319 & fn.
“One day when the sky was serene . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘One day when the sky was serene and clear, there was heard in it the sound of a trumpet, so loud, shrill, and mournful, that it affrighted and astonished the world.  The Tuscan sages said that it portended a new race of men and a renovation of the world; for they affirmed that there were eight several kinds of men, all being different in life and manners; and that heaven had allotted each its time, which was limited by the circuit of the great year.’ ” — 2:319 (Plutarch, Life of Sulla)
“The Assyrians . . . have not only preserved the memorials . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “ ‘The Assyrians . . . have not only preserved the memorials of seven-and-twenty myriads of years, as Hipparchus says they have, but likewise of the whole apocatastases and periods of the Seven Rulers of the World.’ {Proclus in Timæus, b. i}” — 2:321 & fn.

— 651 —

these writers . . . recognise . . . the Zodiac, in the words addressed by the dying Jacob to his Sons
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . le patriarche Jacob, qui, sur son lit de mort et dans la prophétie la plus solennelle qui fut jamais, annonce les destins d’Israël, et, . . . l’entoure aussi de ses douze fils, qui représentent, par conséquent, les douze étoiles de Joseph, . . . aussi, les douze signes du zodiaque dont les douze tribus d’Israël, chose étonnante, vont désormais porter les noms et les emblèmes sur chacun de leurs drapeaux, et désigner ce que désignaient les pierres de l’ummim [thummim] et les ailes des chérubs! [the patriarch Jacob, who on his deathbed and in the most solemn prophecy that ever was, announces the fates of Israel . . . was also surrounded by his twelve sons, who thus represent the twelve stars of Joseph . . . and also the twelve signs of the zodiac of which the twelve tribes of Israel surprisingly henceforth bear the names and emblems on each of their banners, and designate what was shown in the stones of thummim and on the wings of the cherubs!].” — 4:56
stones of the Urim and Thummim
see: Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopædia of Freemasonry, 1874: “Urim and Thummim . . . the most generally received interpretation is, ‘light and truth.’ . . . they were sacred lots [oracular stones] to be worn concealed in or behind the breastplate, and to be consulted by the high priest alone, for the purpose of obtaining a revelation of the will of God in matters of great moment.” — pp. 848-9
Aquarius, is in the sphere of Reuben . . . Gemini, in . . .  Simeon and Levi; Leo, in that of Judah . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ainsi, comment ne pas reconnaître l’homme ou le Verseau de la sphère dans Ruben, qui, dans la prophétie de Jacob, ‘se précipite comme de l’eau;’ les Gémeaux dans ‘l’association fraternelle de Siméon et de Lévi;’ le Lion dans ‘Juda, qui se repose comme le lion;’ [So why not recognize man or Aquarius in the sphere of Ruben, which in the prophecy of Jacob, ‘rushes like water’; Gemini in ‘the fraternal association of Simeon and Levi’; Leo in ‘Judah, who rests as the lion’] . . .” — 4:56-7
Pisces, in Zabulon . . . Taurus, in Issachar . . . Scorpio, in Dan . . . Capricornus in Naphtali . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . les Poissons dans ‘Zabulon, qui habitera les mers et les rivières;’ le Taureau dans ‘Issacar, qui se tient dans ses étables;’ le Scorpion chez ‘Dan, qui sera comme le serpent, mordens;’ le Capricorne dans ‘Nephtali le Cerf;’ le Cancer dans ‘Benjamin, qui change du soir au matin;’ les Balances dans ‘Aser le boulanger;’ le Sagittaire dans ‘Joseph, dont l’arc est resté dans sa force;’ la Vierge dans Dina, fille unique de Jacob, etc.?’ [Pisces, in ‘Zebulun, who will live in the seas and rivers’; Taurus in ‘Issachar, who stays in his stables’; Scorpio in ‘Dan who will be like the serpent, biting’; Capricorn in ‘Naphtali the stag’; Cancer in ‘Benjamin, who changes from evening to morning’; Libra in ‘Asher the baker’; Sagittarius in ‘Joseph, whose bow retained its strength’; Virgo in Dina, the only daughter of Jacob].” — 4:57
(See Genesis xlix.)
p/q: The Interlinear Bible, 1906: “And Jacob called unto his sons, and said . . . Reuben, thou art my firstborn . . . Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel . . . Simeon and Levi are brethren; instruments of cruelty are in their habitations. . . . Judah is a lion’s whelp . . . he stooped down, he couched as a lion . . . Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea . . . Issachar is a strong ass couching down between two burdens . . . Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward. . . . Out of Asher his bread shall be fat . . . Naphtali is a hind let loose: he giveth goodly words.  Joseph is a fruitful bough . . . whose branches run over the wall:  The archers have sorely grieved him . . . But his bow abode in strength . . . Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil.” — pp. 67-9 (Genesis, 49:1, 3-5, 9, 13-14, 17, 20-24, 27)

— 652 —

Newton believed . . the Zodiac could be traced as far back as . . the Argonauts
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Newton en faisait remonter l’invention à l’expédition des Argonautes [Newton  traced the invention of it (the Zodiac) back to the expedition of the Argonauts].” — 4:54
see: George Cornewall Lewis, Historical Survey of the Astronomy of the Ancients, 1862: “Newton, in his treatise on Ancient Chronology . . . the people of Corcyra attributed the invention of the [zodiacal] sphere to Nausicaa . . . she appears to have obtained her knowledge of it from the Argonauts . . .” — pp. 73-4
Dulaure fixed its origin at 6,500 years B.C. . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Dulaure, qui ne regarde pas aux années, la fixait à six mille cinq cents ans avant notre ère [Dulaure, who was not particular as to a few years or so, put it at six thousand five hundred years before our era] . . .” — 4:54
see: J. A. Dulaure, Des Cultes Qui Ont Précédé et Amené l’Idolatrie, 1805: “C’est lorsque cet équinoxe était sous ce dernier signe, c’est-à-dire, plus de 6500 ans avant le commencement du dix-huitième siècle, qu’il faut placer la première institution du zodiaque [It is when this equinox was under that last sign, that is, more than 6500 years before the beginning of the 18th century, that one has to place the first establishment of the zodiac] . . .” — p. 78
Creuzer believes . . . the theogonies . . . point to the Zodiac as their prime origin
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ . . . dit Creuzer . . . il ne sera pas très-difficile de démontrer que la plupart des théogonies et leur intime connexion avec le calendrier religieux supposent, sinon le zodiaque tel que nous le connaissons, du moins quelque chose de très-analogue [Creuzer said . . . it will not be very difficult to prove that most theogonies, and their intimate connection with the religious calendar, assume — if not the zodiac as we know it — at least something very similar to it] . . .” — 4:54
and that it had existed in the old form for ages . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . et qu’il préexistait, en quelque sorte, au sein de toutes les mythologies, sous des formes diverses, lorsqu’un concours singulier de circonstances vint le coordonner dans cet ensemble astronomique plus complet et plus déterminé que nous possédons {Creuzer, liv. III, p. 930}[and that it pre-existed somehow, at the core of all mythologies, under various forms, when a singular concurrence of circumstances arranged it into this more complete and defined astronomical whole that we now have].” — 4:54 & fn.
“the genii of the planets” . . . showed themselves to “holy prophets”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . il ajoute que ‘les génies des planètes sont représentés avec les mêmes figures sous lesquelles ils s’étaient montrés à plusieurs saints prophètes et avaient ainsi donné lieu à tous les rites’ [he adds that ‘the genii of the planets are represented with the same figures under which they are shown to several holy prophets and had thus given rise to all the rites].” — 4:55 [History of Persia, ch. 7]
Cyrus . . . giving ardent thanks to gods and heroes . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Ceci s’accorde parfaitement avec ce que Xénophon . . . nous raconte de Cyrus . . . [qui] remerciait, au moment de sa mort, les dieux et les héros de l’avoir tant de fois instruit par eux-mêmes de tous les signes du ciel, ἐν οὐράνιοῖς σημειοῖς {Cyropédie}[This corresponds perfectly with what Xenophon . . . tells us about Cyrus . . . who at the moment of his death, thanked the gods and heroes for instructing him so often about all the constellations of heaven].” — 4:55 & fn.
Laplace . . . struck with amazement . . . days of . . . Venus . . . Jupiter . . . with the same names in India
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Le marquis de Laplace se disait ‘frappé d’étonnement’ lorsqu’il voyait, soit le jour de Jupiter (ou le jeudi), soit le jour de Vénus (ou le vendredi), observés aux Indes comme au nord de l’Europe [The Marquis de Laplace said that ‘he was struck with amazement’ when he saw that the day of Jupiter (or Thursday), the day of Venus (or Friday), were treated in India in the same way as in northern Europe].” — 4:59
“Try, if you can, with the present system of autochthonous civilizations . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Allez donc, avec le système des civilisations autochthones, si en vogue aujourd’hui, essayer d’expliquer comment des peuples sans parenté, sans traditions communes, sans berceau commun, s’y seraient pris pour inventer une sorte de fantasmagorie céleste, un véritable imbroglio de dénominations sidérales, sans suite et sans dessein, n’ayant aucun rapport figuratif avec les constellations qu’ils désignent, et moins encore . . . avec les phases de la vie terrestre qu’on veut leur faire signifier [So go and try, with the system of autochthonous civilizations, so fashionable today, to explain how peoples without ancestry, without common traditions, without common birthplace, would be led to invent a kind of celestial phantasmagoria, a veritable imbroglio of sidereal denominations, without sequence and without object, having no figurative relation with the constellations that they designate, and still less . . . with the phases of terrestrial life which they are made to signify]!” — 4:59-60
“Il est impossible de découvrir le moindre trait . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Il est impossible de découvrir le moindre trait de ressemblance entre les parties du ciel et les figures que les astronomes y ont arbitrairement tracées, et de l’autre côté le hasard est impossible {Origine des cultes, ch. Zodiaque} [It is impossible to discover the least trace of similarity between parts of the heavens and the figures that astronomers have arbitrarily drawn of them, and on the other hand chance is impossible].” — 4:61 & fn.

— 653 —

“Chance . . . is but the pseudonym of God . . .”
p/q: Many Thoughts of Many Minds, comp. Henry Southgate, 1862: “ ‘Chance is but the pseudonyme of God for those particular cases which He does not choose to subscribe openly with His own sign-manual.’ — Coleridge.” — p. 81
at the moment of the Sun entering into the sign of the Fish . . . “the Elect Messiah . . . had to be born.”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . dans notre curieux testament de Jacob, ce signe est celui d’Éphraïm ou l’élu. . . . c’est encore au moment de l’entrée du soleil dans le signe des Poissons, que l’élu Messie, l’Ιχθύς des premiers chrétiens, fera son entrée dans le monde [in our curious testament of Jacob, that sign is that of Ephraim or the elected. . . . it is still at the moment of the entrance of the sun into the sign of Pisces, that the elect Messiah, the Fish of the early Christians, will be born in the world]!” — 4:66
the word Dag . . . both “fish” and “Messiah” . . . Dag-on . . . the Man-Fish and Prophet
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Chez les rabbins Dag signifie également poisson et messie, et l’on sait que l’idole de Dagon était moitié homme et moitié poisson; aussi le dauphin est-il appelé poisson-prophète [With the rabbis Dag also means both fish and messiah, and it is known that the idol of Dagon was half human and half fish; the dolphin is also called fish-prophet].” — 4:66
Brahmins also connect their “Messiah,” the eternal Avatar Vishnu, with a fish
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “On sait que chez les Brahmes Vichnou, leur Messie incarné, est aussi poisson [We know that with the Brahmins, Vishnu, their incarnated Messiah, is also a fish] . . .” — 4:66

— 653-4 —

“When the Pharisees sought a ‘sign from heaven’ . . .”
p/q: Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis, 1883: “When the Pharisees sought a ‘sign from heaven,’ Jesus said, ‘there shall no sign be given but the sign of Jonas’ {Matthew xvi. 4}. . . . The sign of Jonas is that of the Oan or fish-man of Nineveh. . . . Assuredly there was no other sign than that of the sun reborn in Pisces.  The voice of the secret wisdom says, those who are looking for signs can have no other than that of the returning fish-man, Ichthys, Oannes, or Jonas — who could not be made flesh.” — 2:391

— 654 —

at the moment of the “incarnation,” all the planets were in conjunction in the sign of Pisces . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘C’est un fait affirmé (par Keppler), dit le docteur Sepp, que toutes les planètes, au moment de l’incarnation, étaient en conjonction dans le signe des Poissons que les Juifs appelaient . . . la constellation du Messie.  C’est dans cette constellation, ajoute-t-il, que se trouvait l’étoile des mages . . .’ [It is a confirmed fact (by Kepler), says Dr. Sepp, that, at the moment of the Incarnation, all the planets were in conjunction in the sign of Pisces, which the Jews called . . . the constellation of the Messiah.  It is in this constellation, he adds, that one could find the star of the Magi] . . .” — 4:67
all the Jewish traditions . . . announcing that star . . . would absorb the seventy planets . . .
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Toutes les traditions juives, en annonçant cette étoile que beaucoup de peuples ont vue . . . ‘qu’elle absorberait les soixante-dix planètes qui président aux diverses nations de l’univers.  En vertu de ces prophéties naturelles, dit le docteur Sepp, il était écrit dans les astres du firmament que le Messie paraîtrait dans l’année lunaire du monde 4320, dans cette année mémorable où le chœur entier des planètes fêtait son jubilé’ {Vie de Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ, 1:9} [All the Jewish traditions, when announcing that star that many nations have seen . . . ‘that it would absorb the seventy planets that preside over the various nations of the universe.  In virtue of these natural prophecies, says doctor Sepp, it was written in the stars of the firmament that the Messiah would appear in the lunar year of the world 4320, in that memorable year when the entire choir of the planets celebrated its jubilee’].” — 4:67 & fn.
It was Wilford who had recognized Noah in Prithee [Pṛithī, Pṛithu] . . .
p/q: Sampson Arnold Mackey, Mythological Astronomy, 1822-3: “By supposing Prithu to be Noah at one time; and Satyavrata, to be Noah at another: and Dhruva, to be Enos; and Iswara, is made to be Assur, &c. it is astonishing to see what wonderful things Captain W. can prove.” — p. 24 (“Key of Urania”)
and even Assur in Iswara
see: Francis Wilford, “A Dissertation on Semiramis,” 1799: “Ninus is with good reason supposed to be the Assur of Scripture, who built Nineveh; and Assur is obviously the Iśwara of the Purānas . . .” — p. 392 (Asiatic Researches, v. 4)
“Christian theologians think it their duty to write against the long periods . . .”
p/q: Sampson Arnold Mackey, Mythological Astronomy, 1822-3: “Christian Theologians think it their duty to write against the long periods of Hindu Chronology . . . but when a man of learning crucify the names and the numbers, of the ancients; and wring and twist them into a form, which means something quite foreign to the intention of the ancient authors; but which, so mutilated, fits in with the birth of some maggot pre-existing in his own brain with so much exactness, that he pretends to be amazed at the discovery, I cannot think him quite so pardonable.” — pp. 23-4 (“Key of Urania”)
S. A. Mackey, the Norwich “philosopher, astronomer, and shoemaker”
see: “Mackey’s ‘Theory of the Earth’,” Dec. 10, 1853: “Mackey . . . was an entirely self-educated man, but a learned shoemaker, residing in Norwich.  He devoted all his leisure time to astronomical, geological, and philological pursuits . . .” — pp. 566-7 (Notes and Queries, v. 8)

— 655 —

dwarfing the figures to 4,320 years . . . Dr. Sepp has simply plagiarized the idea . . .
p/q: Sampson Arnold Mackey, Mythological Astronomy, 1822-3: “To cut down the Hindu divine age of 4,320,000 years, with the cleaver of ‘probablity:’ to 4,320 years, is, at best, but a clownish way to make things fit. And then, to make his 4,320 years to have commenced 4,320 years before a certain event took place . . “ — p. 24 (“Key of Urania”)
see: Samuel J. Andrews, “Works on the Life of Christ,” April 1865: “. . . J. N. Sepp, is a Professor of History in the Royal University of Munich.”  “From the creation to the birth of Christ he makes a period of four thousand three hundred and twenty lunar years to have elapsed . . .” — pp. 179, 181 (Bibliotheca Sacra, v. 22)
he persisted in seeing in them Jewish property, as well as a Christian prophecy
see: Samuel J. Andrews, “Works on the Life of Christ,” April 1865: “He holds that heathenism in all its forms . . . illustrate and confirm the scriptures. . . . Thus Christianity is the total religion, illustrated and confirmed by the sacred records, the worship, and the history of every people.” — p. 180 (Bibliotheca Sacra, v. 22)
These figures of 4,320 lunar years . . . the distorted echo of the . . . doctrine concerning the Yugas.
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “If these divine years are converted into years of mortals, by multiplying them by 360 (a year of men being a day of the gods), we obtain the years of which the Yugas of mortals are respectively said to consist:
4800 x 360 = 1.728.000  [Krita Yuga]
3600 x 360 = 1.296.000  [Tretā Yuga]
2400 x 360 =    864.000  [Dwāpara Yuga]
1200 x 360 =    432.000  [Kali Yuga]
                    4.320.000, a Mahāyuga.” — 1:50 fn.
A “Day” of Brahmâ equals 4,320,000,000 years, as also a “Night” of Brahmâ
see: Vishṇu Purāṇa, tr. Wilson, ed. Hall, 1864-77: “The most simple, and, probably, the original, calculation of a Kalpa is its being 1000 great ages, or ages of the gods . . . Then 4.320.000 years, or a divine age, x 1000 = 4.320.000.000 years, or a day or night of Brahmā.” — 1:51 fn.

— Footnotes

the Chaldeans claimed the same figures (432) or (432,000) . . . as the Hindus do for their Mahayuga
see: Ancient Fragments, comp. Isaac Preston Cory, 1832: “(In the second book was contained the history of the ten kings of the Chaldæans, and the periods of the continuance of each reign, which consisted collectively of an hundred and twenty sari, or four hundred and thirty-two thousand years; reaching to the time of the Deluge. . . .)” — p. 26 (Berossus, “Of the Cosmogony and Deluge”)
the Jews . . . expected their Messiah in . . . 4320
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Toutes les traditions juives, en annonçant cette étoile que beaucoup de peuples ont vue . . . ‘qu’elle absorberait les soixante-dix planètes qui président aux diverses nations de l’univers.  En vertu de ces prophéties naturelles, dit le docteur Sepp, il était écrit dans les astres du firmament que le Messie paraîtrait dans l’année lunaire du monde 4320, dans cette année mémorable où le chœur entier des planètes fêtait son jubilé’ {Vie de Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ, 1:9} [All the Jewish traditions, when announcing that star that many nations have seen . . . ‘that it would absorb the seventy planets that preside over the various nations of the universe.  In virtue of these natural prophecies, says Doctor Sepp, it was written in the stars of the firmament that the Messiah would appear in the lunar year of the world 4320, in that memorable year when the entire choir of the planets celebrated its jubilee’].” — 4:67 & fn.
As these figures . . . were based by Berosus on the 120 Saroses . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . mais le Dr. Sepp a . . . jeté la plus vive lumière sur ces périodes indéfinies, et notamment sur celle de 432,000 ans, réclamée par les Babyloniens; cette prétention était appuyée sur les 120 saros des fragments de Bérose; chacune de ces divisions, disait-on, comprenant six néros de 600 ans chacun, ce chiffre de 432,000 ans paraissait péremptoire [but Dr. Sepp has . . . thrown the clearest light on these undefined periods, and more particularly on that of 432,000 years, claimed by the Babylonians; this claim was founded on the 120 saroses of the fragments of Berosus; each of these divisions is said to include six neroses of 600 years each, this total amount of 432,000 years seemed peremptory].” — 3:24
But the pious professor . . . claims . . . “the saros being composed according to Pliny . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Or, le savant professeur de Munich l’a prouvé; le saros se composant, d’après Pline, de 222 mois synodiques, c’est-à-dire de 18 ans 6/10, on retombe dans les chiffres de Suidas affirmant que les 120 saros font 2,222 années sacerdotales et cycliques, égales à 1,656 années solaires {Vie de Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ, 2:417}[But the learned professor of Munich has proved it, the saros consisting, according to Pliny, of 222 synodical months, that is to say, 18 and 6/10 years, one falls back to the numbers of Suidas, who affirmed that the 120 saroses make 2,222 sacerdotal and cyclic years, equal to 1,656 solar years].” — 3:24 & fn.

— 656 —

The teaching . . . centuries before the Christian era (see Isis Unveiled II. 132 [I. 30-1])
see: H. B. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877: “At the close of each ‘great year,’ called by Aristotle . . . the greatest . . . our planet is subjected to a thorough physical revolution.  The polar and equatorial climates gradually exchange places . . . attended by cataclysms, earthquakes, and other cosmical throes.” — 1:30-1
the 25th of December, the day on which all the solar gods were said to have been incarnated
see: J. G. R. Forlong, Rivers of Life, 1883: “All these Solar gods, including such as Bacchus, are said to have been born at midnight on the 25th of December, when Virgo is cut in two by the Eastern horizon . . .” — 1:415
Kepler . . . recognised the . . . importance of all such planetary conjunctions, “each of which . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Keppler . . . reconnaissait l’extrême importance de toutes ces conjonctions planétaires, dont ‘chacune . . . était une année climatérique de l’humanité’ [Kepler . . . recognized the extreme importance of all these planetary conjunctions, ‘each of which . . . was a climacteric year of humanity’].” — 4:68
The rare conjunction of Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . ‘cette conjonction si rare des trois planètes, Saturne, Jupiter et Mars, dans une contrée du zodiaque si féconde en significations (la constellation du poisson-messie), qui attira l’attention des mages’ [that so very rare conjunction of three planets, Saturn, Jupiter and Mars, in a region of the zodiac which is so rich in meaning (the constellation of the Piscean Messiah), which attracted the attention of the Magi] . . .” — 4:68
archaic architects of the Zodiac . . . mark with the asterisk (a) the figure of Taurus . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Oui, le hasard est impossible . . . trois ou quatre mille ans avant l’incarnation du Verbe qui s’appelait lui-même l’alpha ou le premier . . . marqué de l’astérisque a cette figure de taureau, dont le nom aleph signifie aussi le premier [Yes, chance is impossible . . . three or four thousand years before the incarnation of the Word, which was itself called the alpha or the first . . . marked with the asterisk (a) this figure of Taurus, whose name aleph also means the first].” — 4:61

— Footnotes

“climacteric year” . . .
see: “Climacterics,” Notes and Queries, Aug. 22, 1857: “. . . the mystic numbers 7 and 9 . . . have had their influence with many persons.  It was believed that the constitution of man changed every seven years; and that during every septime the whole of the solids and fluids of the body were periodically renewed. . . . ‘the climacteric is every seventh year . . . The grand climacteric is the 63rd year . . .” — p. 148

— 657 —

“It is not simple chance . . . that has placed . . . on a throne, the head of that bull (Taurus) . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Remercions encore Dupuis de nous avoir répété . . . ‘Il est impossible . . .’  Oui, le hasard est impossible . . . Ce n’est pas lui qui dans certaines sphères aura placé sur un trône la tête de ce taureau essayant de faire reculer un dragon en lui présentant une croix ansée [Let us again thank Dupuis, who has repeated . . . ‘It is impossible . . .’  Yes, chance is impossible.  Chance has not placed in certain spheres, on a throne, the head of that bull, trying to push away a dragon by holding out to it an ansated cross] . . .” — 4:61
Taurus was called ‘the great city of God . . .’
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . il faut savoir que cette constellation du Taureau était appelée ‘la grande cité de Dieu et la mère des révélations, ou bien encore l’Interprète de la voix de Dieu, l’Apis pacis de Hermontis, en Égypte, lequel proférait, dit-on, des oracles qui se rapportaient à la naissance du Sauveur’ [one should know that this constellation of Taurus was called ‘the great city of God and the mother of revelations, or even the Interpreter of God’s voice, the Apis pacis of Hermontis in Egypt, which, we are told, uttered oracles that related to the birth of the Savior’].” — 4:61
the Tau, or Cross . . . “the foundation and framework of all construction”
p/q: J. Ralston Skinner, Source of Measures, 1875: “ת t, th.  Tau.  Cross, ┼ .  Foundation framework of construction.” — p. 11
Erard-Mollien read . . . a paper tending to prove the antiquity of the Indian Zodiac . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . en 1853 M. Érard-Mollien lisait à l’Institut, . . . un article ayant pour but de prouver l’accord du zodiaque indien avec la plus ancienne théologie de ce pays et avec tout cet ensemble de fêtes qui remonte au moins à trois mille ans [in 1853, Erard-Mollien read before the Institute . . . an article intending to prove the similarity of the Indian zodiac with the oldest theology of that country and with that entire ensemble of festivals which goes back at least three thousand years].” — 4:62
The Zodiac of the Hindus, he thought, was far anterior to the Zodiac of the Greeks . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Tout prouve . . . que ces figures zodiacales avaient été transmises aux Grecs par les Chaldéens, qui les tenaient � leur tour des Brachmanes� [All this proves . . . that these zodiacal figures were handed down to the Greeks by the Chaldeans, who got them in their turn from the Brahmins].” — 4:62
In it one sees the Dragon on a tree, at the foot of which the “Virgin” . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Si le dragon qu’elle foule sous les pieds est uniquement une constellation hivernale, pourquoi aurait-on placé ce dragon sur un arbre [If the dragon that she treads with her feet is uniquely a Winter constellation, why would that dragon be placed in a tree]?” — 4:63

— 657-8 —

“This is the reason why . . . this Virgin Durga is not the simple memento . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘C’est pourquoi, . . . cette vierge Dourga n’est pas le simple memento d’un fait astronomique, mais bien la plus ancienne divinité de l’Olympe indien; elle est bien positivement celle dont tous les livres sibyllins, d’après lesquels parlait Virgile, annonçaient le retour comme une époque de rénovation universelle’ [This is why . . . this virgin Durga is not the simple memento of an astronomical fact, but truly the most ancient divinity of the Indian Olympus; she is exactly the one whom all the Sibylline books — mentioned by Virgil — spoke of and announced that her return is a period of universal renovation] . . .” — 4:62

— 658 —

“And why . . . should that people have abandoned their ancestral Zodiac . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “Pourquoi donc, ajoutait-il encore, lorsque au Maleyalam les mois portent encore les noms de ce zodiaque solaire les Indiens auraient-ils été l’abandonner pour prendre celui des Grecs?  Tout prouve, au contraire, que ces figures zodiacales avaient été transmises aux Grecs par les Chaldéens, qui les tenaient à leur tour des Brachmanes {Recueil de l’Academie des Inscriptions, 1853} [Why then . . . when the months with the Malayalam still bear the names of that solar zodiac — why would the Hindus have abandoned them to take on those of the Greeks?  This all proves, on the contrary, that these zodiacal figures were handed down to the Greeks by the Chaldeans, who got them in their turn from the Brahmins].” — 4:62 & fn.
as Aries was in its fifteenth degree 1447 B.C.
p/q: Volney, The Ruins, 1796: “. . . observing that Aries was in its fifteenth degree, 1447 years before Christ, it follows, that the first degree of Libra could not have coincided with the vernal equinox more lately than 15,194 years before Christ, to which if you add 1790 years since Christ, it appears that 16,984 have elapsed since the origin of the Zodiac.” — p. 360
Dr. Schlegel . . . assigns to the Chinese Astronomical Sphere an antiquity of 18,000 years
p/q: Qabbalah, tr. Isaac Myer, 1888: “Dr. Schlegel, Uranographie chinoise . . . gives the great antiquity of 18,000 to the Chinese astronomical sphere.” — p. 140 fn.
“The astronomers who preceded the epoch 1,491 . . .”
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Les Astronomes qui ont précédé l’époque de 1491, sont d’abord les Grecs d’Alexandrie; Hypparque a fleuri 125 ans avant notre ère, & Ptolémée 260 ans après Hypparque.  Ce sont ensuite les Arabes qui ont cultivé de nouveau l’Astronomie dans le IX siècle.  Les Persans & les Tartares ont succédé, & nous leur devons les Tables de Nassireddin en 1269, & celles d’Ulug-beg en 1437.  Voilà quelle a été 1a succession connue des choses en Asie avant l’époque indienne de 1491.  Or, cela posé, qu’est-ce qu’une époque?  C’est l’observation de la longitude d’un astre pour un tems déterminé, le lieu du ciel où il a été vu, & qui sert de point fixe, de point de départ pour calculer, au moyen du mouvement observé, son lieu dans le ciel, tant pour le passé que pour l’avenir.  Une époque n’est d’aucun usàge quand le mouvement n’a pas été determiné [(ad. SD) The astronomers who preceded the epoch of 1,491 are, first, the Greeks of Alexandria; Hipparchus, who flourished 125 years before our era, and Ptolemy, 260 years after Hipparchus.  Following these were the Arabs, who revived astronomy in the ninth century.  These were succeeded by the Persians and the Tartars, to whom we owe the tables of Nasireddin in 1269, and those of Ulug-beg in 1437.  Such has been the succession of events in Asia as known prior to the Indian epoch of 1491.  What, then, is an epoch?  It is the observation of the longitude of a star at a given time, the place in the sky where it was seen, and which serves as a point of reference, a starting-point from which to calculate both the past and future positions of the star from its observed motion.  But an epoch is useless unless the motion of the star has been determined].” — p. xx

— 658-9 —

“A people, new to science and obliged to borrow a foreign astronomy . . .”
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Un peuple nouveau dans la science, un peuple obligé d’emprunter une Astronomie étrangère, n’est pas embarrassé d’établir une époque, il lui suffit d’une observation qu’il peut faire à chaque instant.  Ce qui lui est nécessaire, ce qu’il a besoin d’emprunter, ce sont les élémens qui dépendent d’une détermination délicate, & qui exigent des recherches suivies; ce sont sur-tout les mouvemens qui dépendent du tems, & qu’on ne connoît avec précision que par des siècles d’observation.  II faut donc qu’il demande, avant tout, ces mouvemens aux peuples qui ont fait les observations, & qui ont derrière eux des siècles de travaux.  Concluons qu’un peuple nouveau n’empruntera pas les époques d’un peuple ancien, sans emprunter ses moyens mouvemens.  En partant de ce principe, on ne trouve point que les époques indiennes de 1491 & de l’an 3102 aient pu être déduites des époques ni de Ptolémée ni d’Ulug-beg [A people, new to science and obliged to borrow a foreign astronomy, finds no difficulty in fixing an epoch, since the only observation needed is one which can be made at any moment.  But what it needs above all, what it is required to borrow, are the elements which depend on accurate determination, and which require continuous observation; above all, those motions that depend on time, and which can only be accurately determined by centuries of observation.  These motions, then, must be borrowed from a nation that has made such observations, and has behind it the labors of centuries.  Let us conclude, therefore, that a new people will not borrow the epochs of an ancient one, without also borrowing from them the ‘average motions.’  Starting from this principle we find that the Hindu epochs 1491 and 3102 could not have been derived from those of either Ptolemy or Ulug-beg].” — pp. xx-xxi

— 659 —

There remains the supposition that the Hindus, comparing their observations . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Il reste à supposer que les Indiens, comparant leurs observations en 1491 aux observations faites antérieurement par Ulug-beg & par Ptolémée, se soient servis des intervalles de ces observations pour déterminer les moyens mouvemens.  Les tems d’Ulug-beg étoient trop proches pour une pareille détermination; ceux de Ptolémée & d’Hypparque étoient à peine à une distance suffisante.  Mais si les mouvemens indiens avoient été déterminés par ces comparaisons, les époques seroient enchainées.  En partant des époques d’Ulug-beg & de Ptolémée, on retrouverait toutes les époques des Indiens.  Les époques étrangères ont donc été inconnues ou inutiles aux Indiens [There remains the supposition that the Hindus, comparing their observations in 1491 with those previously made by Ulug-beg and Ptolemy, made use of the periods between these observations to determine the ‘average motions.’  The dates of Ulug-beg were too recent for such a determination; while those of Ptolemy and Hipparchus were barely remote enough.  But if the Hindu motions had been determined from these comparisons, the epochs would be connected together.  Starting from the epochs of Ulug-beg and Ptolemy we should arrive at all those of the Hindus.  Hence foreign epochs were either unknown or useless to the Hindus].” — pp. xxi-xxii
We may add to this another important consideration. . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Nous ajouterons encore une considération importante; c’est que lorsqu’un peuple est obligé de prendre chez ses voisins les méthodes ou les moyens mouvemens de ses Tables astronomiques, il a bien plus besoin de leur emprunter & la connoissance des inégalités du mouvement, & le mouvement de l’apogée, des nœuds, & l’obliquité de l’écliptique; enfin tous les élémens dont la détermination exacte suppose l’art d’observer, un appareil quelconque d’instrumens & beaucoup d’industrie.  Tous ces élémens de la science, plus ou moins différens chez les Grecs d’Alexandrie, les Arabes, les Perses, les Tartares n’ont aucune ressemblance avec ceux des indiens.  Les Indiens n’ont donc rien emprunté de leurs voisins [We may add to this another important consideration.  When a nation is obliged to borrow from its neighbours the methods or the average motions of its astronomical tables, it has even greater need to borrow, besides these, the knowledge of the inequalities of the motions of the heavenly bodies, the motions of the apogee, of the nodes, and of the inclination of the ecliptic; in short, all those elements the exact determination of which requires the art of observing, some instrumental appliances, and great industry.  All these elements of this science, differing more or less with the Greeks of Alexandria, the Arabs, the Persians and the Tartars, exhibit no resemblance whatever with those of the Hindus.  The Hindus, therefore, borrowed nothing from their neighbours].” — p. xxii
If the Hindus did not borrow their epoch, they must have possessed a real one of their own . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787:  “Si les Indiens n’ont point emprunté leur époque, il faut qu’ils en aient une réelle, fondée sur leurs propres observations; ce ne peut être que l’époque de l’an 1491, ou celle de l’an 3102 avant notre ère, & qui précède de 4592 ans l’époque de 1491.  Il s’agit de choisir entre ces deux époques, & de décider laquelle est fondée sur une observation [If the Hindus did not borrow their epoch, they must have possessed a real one of their own, based on their own observations; and this can only be either the epoch of the year 1491, or that of the year 3102 before our era, and the latter preceding by 4592 years the epoch of 1491. We have to choose between these two epochs and decide which of them is based on observation].” — p. xxii

— 659-60 —

But before stating the arguments which can and must decide the question . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Mais avant d’exposer les raisons qui peuvent & doivent résoudre le problême, qu’il nous soit permis de proposer quelques réflexions à ceux qui seroient tentés de croire que ce sont des observations & des calculs modernes qui ont fait établir aux Indiens l’état passé du ciel.  Ce n’est pas une chose aisée que de connoître les mouvemens célestes avec assez de précision pour remonter dans les tems à une distance de 4592 ans, & pour décrire les phénomènes qui ont dû arriver à cette époque [But before stating the arguments which can and must resolve the problem, we may be permitted to make a few remarks to those who may be inclined to believe that these are modern observations and calculations which have enabled the Hindus to determine the past positions of the heavenly bodies.  It is far from easy to determine the celestial movements with sufficient accuracy to ascend the stream of time for 4592 years, and to describe the phenomena which must have occurred at that period].” — pp. xxii-xxiii

— 660 —

We possess to-day excellent instruments; exact observations have been made . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787:  “Nous avons aujourd’hui d’excellens instrumens, nous faisons depuis deux ou trois siècles des observations exactes, qui suffisent déjà pour nous faire connoître assez bien les moyens mouvemens des planètes; nous avons les observations des Chaldéens, d’Hypparque & de Ptolémée, qui par leur éloignement des tems où nous sommes . . . permettent de déterminer ces mouvemens avec plus de précision.  Cependant nous ne pouvons répondre de représenter toujours fidellement les observations dans ce grand intervalle depuis les Chaldéens jusqu’à nous; nous pouvons encore moins répondre de retrouver avec exactitude les phénomènes arrivés 4592 ans avant nous [We possess to-day excellent instruments; exact observations have been made for some two or three centuries, which already permit us to calculate with considerable accuracy the average motions of the planets; we have the observations of the Chaldeans, of Hipparchus and of Ptolemy, which, owing to their remoteness from the present time, permit us to fix these motions with greater certainty.  Still we cannot undertake to represent with invariable accuracy the observations throughout the long period intervening between the Chaldeans and ourselves; and still less can we undertake to determine with exactitude events occurring 4592 years before our day].” — p. xxiii
Cassini and Maier have each determined the secular motion of the moon . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Cassini & Maïer ont établi l’un & l’autre le mouvement séculaire de la lune, & ils diffèrent de 3' 43".  Cette différence produiroit en quarante-six siècles, sur le lieu de la lune, une incertitude de près de trois degrés.  Sans doute un de ces deux mouvemens est plus exact que l’autre; c’est aux observations très-anciennes à le décider.  Mais dans les tems éloignés, où les observations manquent, il résulte de cette différence que nous sommes incertains des phénomènes.  Comment donc auroient fait les Indiens, s’ils étoient modernes dans l’Astronomie, pour remonter de l’an 1491 à l’an 3102 avant notre ère [Cassini and Maier have each determined the secular motion of the moon, and they differ by 3' 43".  This difference would give rise in forty-six centuries to an uncertainty of nearly three degrees in the place of the moon.  No doubt one of these two determinations is more accurate than the other; and it is for observations of very great antiquity to decide between them.  But in very remote periods, where observations are lacking, it follows that we are uncertain as to the phenomena.  How, then, could the Hindus have calculated back from the year 1491 A.D. to the year 3102 before our era, if they were only recent students of astronomy]?” — p. xxiii
The Orientals have never been what we are. . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Les Orientaux n’ont jamais été ce que nous sommes.  Quelque bonne opinion que l’examen de leur Astronomie puisse donner de leur savoir, on ne peut supposer qu’ils aient eu jamais ni ce grand appareil d’instrumens qui distingue nos obsèrvatoires modernes, & qui est le produit des progrès simultanés de plusieurs arts, ni ce génie des découvertes, qui a paru appartenir jusqu’ici à l’Europe seule, & qui suppléant au tems, fait faire des progrès rapides aux sciences & à l’esprit humain [The Orientals have never been what we are.  However high an opinion we may form from the examination of their astronomy, we cannot suppose them ever to have possessed that great array of instruments which distinguishes our modern observatories, and which is the product of simultaneous progress in various arts, nor could they have possessed that genius for discovery, which has hitherto seemed to belong exclusively to Europe, and which, supplying the place of time, causes the rapid progress of science and of the human mind].” — p. xxiv
If the Asiatics have been powerful, learned and wise . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Si les Asiatiques ont été puissans, savans & sages, la force & le tems ont fait leur mérite & leurs succès dans tous les genres.  La force a fondé ou détruit des empires; tantôt elle a élevé des édifices imposans par leur masse, tantôt elle en a fait des ruines respectables; & tandis que ces grandes vicissitudes s’opéroient, la patience accumuloit lentement des connoissances, & une longue expérience produisoit la sagesse.  C’est la vieillesse des nations orientales qui a fait leur gloire dans les sciences [If the Asiatics have been powerful, learned and wise, it is power and time which have produced their merit and success of all kinds.  Power has founded or destroyed their empires; now it has erected edifices imposing by their bulk, now it has reduced them to venerable ruins; and while these great vicissitudes alternated with each other, patience slowly accumulated knowledge; and prolonged experience produced wisdom.  It is the antiquity of the nations of the East which has produced their scientific fame].” — p. xxiv

— 660-1 —

If the Hindus possessed in 1491 a knowledge of the heavenly motions sufficiently accurate . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Si les Indiens avoient en 1491 une connoissance assez exacte des mouvemens célestes pour remonter à un intervalle de 4592 ans, ils ne pouvoient tenir cette connoissance que des anciennes observations [If the Hindus possessed in 1491 a knowledge of the heavenly motions sufficiently accurate to enable them to calculate backwards for 4,592 years, it follows that they could only have obtained this knowledge from very ancient observations].” — p. xxiv

— 661 —

To grant them such knowledge, while refusing them the observations from which it is derived . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Leur accorder cette connoissance, & leur refuser les observations antiques, c’est supposer l’impossible; c’est vouloir qu’en entrant dans la carrière, ils aient cueilli les fruits du tems & de l’expérience; au lieu que si leur époque de l’an 3102 est regardée comme réelle, on voit que, partis de cette époque, les Indiens sont descendus jusqu’à l’an 1491 de notre ère avec les siècles mêmes: c’est le tems qui les a successivement instruits; ils ont bien connu les mouvemens célestes dans ces intervalles, parce qu’ils les ont vus; & la durée de ce peuple sur la terre, est la raison de la fidélité de ses récits & de l’exactitude de ses calculs [To grant them such knowledge, while refusing them the very ancient observations from which it is derived, is to suppose the impossible; it would be equivalent to assuming that at the outset of their career they had already reaped the fruits of time and experience.  While on the other hand, if their epoch of 3102 is assumed to be real, we would see that the Hindus had simply kept pace with successive centuries down to the year 1491 of our era.  Thus, time itself was their teacher; they knew well the motions of the heavenly bodies during these periods, because they had seen them; and the duration of the Hindu people on earth is the reason for the fidelity of their records and the accuracy of their calculations.].” — pp. xxiv-xxv
It would seem that the problem as to which of the two epochs of 3102 and 1491 . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “La question de savoir quelle est l’époque réelle entre les époques de l’an 3102 & celle de l’an 1491, semble devoir être résolue par une seule considération, c’est que les anciens en général, & les Indiens en particulier . . .  n’ont jamais calculé, & par conséquent observé que les eclipses [The question of knowing which of the two epochs of 3102 and 1491 is the real one, seems to be solved by one consideration, viz., that the ancients in general, and particularly the Hindus, calculated, and therefore observed, eclipses only].” — p. xxv
Now, there was no eclipse of the sun at the moment of the epoch 1492 . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Or il ne se trouve point d’éclipse de soleil au moment de l’époque de 1491; & il n’y a point eu d’éclipse de lune ni quinze jours avant, ni quinze jours après.  L’époque de l’an 1491 n’est donc point fondée sur une observation.  Quant à celle de l’an 3102, les Brames de Tirvalour la placent au moment du lever du soleil, le 18 Février.  Le soleil étoit alors au premier point du zodiaque par sa longitude vraie.  Les autres Tables nous sont reconnoître qu’au minuit précédent la lune étoit au même point, mais par sa longitude moyenne.  Les Brames nous apprennent en même tems que ce premier point, l’origine de leur zodiaque, étoit l’an 3102 moins avancé de 54° que l’équinoxe.  Il en resulte que cette origine étoit alors au sixième degré du Verseau [Now, we do not find an eclipse of the sun at the moment of the epoch 1491; and there had been no eclipse of the moon either 14 days before or after that moment.  Therefore the epoch 1491 is not based on an observation.  As regards the epoch 3102, the Brahmins of Tirvalur place it at sunrise on February 18th.  The sun was then in the first point of the Zodiac according to its true longitude.  The other tables show us that at the preceding midnight the moon was in the same place, but according to its average longitude.  The Brahmins tell us also that this first point, the origin of their Zodiac, was, in the year 3102, 54 degrees behind the equinox.  It follows that that origin was therefore in the sixth degree of Aquarius].”  — pp. xxv-xxvi
There occurred, therefore, about this time and place an average conjunction . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Il y a donc eu vers ce tems, & dans ce point, une conjonction moyenne; les meilleures de nos Tables, favoir, celles de la Caille pour le soleil, & celles de Maïer pour la lune, donnent en effet cette conjonction.  Il n’y a point eu alors d’éclipse de soleil, la lune étoit trop éloignée de son nœud; mais quinze jours après, la lune s’en étant rapprochée, a dû s’éclipser.  Les Tables de Maïer, employées sans accélération, donnent cette éclipse; seulement elles la font arriver de jour; & le phénomène n’auroit pu être observé dans l’Inde.  Les Tables de Cassini la font arriver la nuit; ce qui montre que le mouvement de Maïer est trop rapide pour les siècles éloignés, lorsqu’on ne tient pas compte de l’accélération; & ce qui prouve en même tems que malgré nos connoissances perfectionnées, nous pouvons être encore dans quelque incertitude sur l’état du ciel dans les tems passés [There occurred, therefore, about this time and place an average conjunction; and indeed this conjunction is given in our best tables: those of La Caille for the sun and of Maier for the moon.  There had been no eclipse of the sun, the moon being too distant from her node; but fourteen days later, the moon having approached the node, must have been eclipsed.  Maier’s tables, used without correction for acceleration, give this eclipse; but they place it during the day; and the phenomenon could not have been observed in India.  Cassini’s tables give it as occurring at night, which shows that Maier’s motions are too rapid for distant centuries, when the acceleration is not allowed for; and which also proves that in spite of our perfected knowledge, we can still be uncertain as to the actual state of the heavens in past times].” — p. xxvi

— 661-2 —

Therefore we believe that as between the two Hindu epochs, the real one is the year 3102 . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Nous croyons donc qu’entre les deux époques indiennes, l’époque réelle est celle de l’an 3102, parce qu’elle est accompagnée d’une éclipse qui a pu être observée, & qui a dû servir à la déterminer.  C’est une première preuve de la vérité des longitudes que les Indiens assignent pour cet instant au soleil & à la lune; & cette preuve suffiroit peut-être si cette ancienne détermination, qui devient très-importante pour la vérification des mouvemens de ces deux astres, ne devoit pas être revêtue de toutes les preuves qui en constatent l’authenticité [Therefore we believe that between the two Hindu epochs, the real one is the year 3102, because it was accompanied by an eclipse which could have been observed, and which must have served to determine it.  This is a first proof of the truth of the longitudes which the Hindus assign to the sun and the moon at that instant; and this proof would perhaps be sufficient, were it not that this ancient determination becomes of the greatest importance for the verification of the motions of these two heavenly bodies, and must therefore be borne out by all the proofs that show its authenticity].” — pp. xxvi-xxvii

— 662 —

We notice, first, that the Hindus seemed to have combined two epochs . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Nous remarquons 1º. que les Indiens semblent avoir réuni deux époques dans celle de l’an 3102.  Les Brames de Tirvalour comptent d’abord du premier instant de l’âge caliougam; puis ils ont une séconde époque placée  2j 3h 32' 30" plus tard.  Celle-ci est la véritable époque astronomique, l’autre paroît être une époque civile.  Mais si cette époque du caliougam n’avoit rien de réel & n’étoit que le résultat d’un calcul, pourquoi seroit-elle ainsi divisée?  Leur époque astronomique calculée seroit devenue celle du caliougam, qui auroit été placée dans la conjonction du soleil & de la lune, comme le sont les époques des trois autres Tables.  Il faut qu’ils aient eu une raison pour en distinguer deux; & cette raison ne peut appartenir qu’aux circonstances des tems de cette époque: cette époque n’est donc pas un calcul [We notice, first, that the Hindus seem to have combined two epochs together into the year 3102.  The Brahmins of Tirvalur reckon primarily from the first moment of the Kali-Yuga age; then they have a second epoch placed 2d. 3h. 32m. 30s. later.  The latter is the true astronomical epoch, while the former seems to be a civil era.  But if this epoch of the Kali-Yuga had no reality, and was only the result of a calculation, why should it be thus divided?  Their calculated astronomical epoch would have become that of the Kali-Yuga, which would have been placed at the conjunction of the sun and the moon, as is the case with the epochs of the three other tables.  They must have had a reason for distinguishing between the two; and this reason can only be due to the circumstances of the time of that epoch; which therefore could not be the result of calculation].” — p. xxvii
This is not all; starting from the solar epoch determined by the rising of the sun . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Ce n’est pas tout; en partant de l’époque solaire fixée au lever du soleil . . . le 18 Février de l’an 3102, & remontant de 2j 3h 32' 30", on arrivera à 2h 27' 30" du matin le 16 Février.  C’est le moment où commence l’âge caliougam.  Il est singulier qu’on n’ait pas fait commencer cet âge à une des quatre grandes divisions qui partagent le jour.  On pourroit soupçonner que l’époque doit être à minuit, & que les 2h 27' 30" sont une réduction de méridiens.  Mais quelle que soit la cause de cette fixation, si l’époque étoit le résultat d’un calcul, il auroit été aussi facile de le conduire jusqu’à minuit, pour faire répondre l’époque à une des divisions principales de la journée, & non à un instant marqué par une fraction de jour [This is not all; starting from the solar epoch determined by the rising of the sun . . . on February 18th, 3102, and tracing back events 2d. 3h. 32m. 30s., we come to 2h. 27m. 30s. a.m. of February 16th.  This is the instant of the beginning of Kali-Yuga.  It is curious that this age had not been made to begin at one of the four great divisions of the day.  It might be suspected that the epoch should be at midnight, and that the 2h. 27m. 30s. are a meridian correction.  But whatever may have been the reason for fixing on this moment, if the epoch were the result of a calculation, it would have been just as easy to carry it back to midnight, so as to make the epoch correspond to one of the chief divisions of the day, instead of placing it at a moment fixed by a fraction of a day].” — pp. xxvii-xxviii
2nd. . . . at the first moment of Kali-Yug there was a conjunction of all the planets . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “2°. Les Indiens disent qu’à l’instant du caliougam il y a eu une conjonction de toutes les planètes; leurs Tables en effet indiquent cette conjonction, & les nôtres montrent qu’elle a pu réellement avoir lieu.   Jupiter & Mercure étoient précisément dans le même degré de l’écliptique; Mars s’en éloignoit de huit degrés & Saturne de dix-sept.  Il en résulte que vers ce tems ou environ quinze jours après le caliougam . . . les Indiens ont vu quatre planètes se dégager successivement des rayons du soleil; d’abord Saturne, ensuite Mars, puis Jupiter & Mercure, & ces planètes se sont montrées réunies dans un assez petit espace.  Quoique Vénus n’y parût pas, le goût du merveilleux y a fait placer une conjonction générale de toutes les planètes.  Le témoignage des Brames est ici d’accord avec celui de nos Tables; & ce témoignage, qui résulte d’une tradition, doit être fondé sur une véritable observation [2nd. The Hindus say that at the first moment of Kali-Yuga, there was a conjunction of all the planets; and their tables show this conjunction, while ours indicate that it might actually have occurred.  Jupiter and Mercury were in exactly the same degree of the ecliptic; Mars being 8 degrees and Saturn 17 degress distant from it.  It follows that about this time, or some fourteen days after the Kali-Yuga (began) . . . the Hindus saw four planets emerge successively from the Sun’s rays; first Saturn, then Mars, then Jupiter and Mercury, and these planets appeared united in a somewhat small space.  Although Venus had not appeared there, the taste for the marvellous caused it to be called a general conjunction of all the planets.  The testimony of the Brahmins here coincides with that of our tables; and this evidence, the result of a tradition, must be founded on actual observation].” — p. xxviii

— 663 —

3rd. We may remark that this phenomenon was visible about a fortnight after the epoch . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “3°.  Remarquons que ce phénomène a été visible environ quinze jours après l’époque, & précisément dans le tems où a dû être observée l’éclipse de lune qui a réglé cette époque.  Ces deux observations se confirment donc mutuellement; qui a fait l’une doit avoir fait l’autre [3rd. We may remark that this phenomenon had been visible about a fortnight after the epoch, and exactly at the time when the eclipse of the moon must have been observed, which served to fix this epoch.  These two observations mutually confirm each other; and whoever made the one must have made the other also].” — pp. xxviii-xxix
4th. We may believe also that the Hindus made at the same time a determination . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “4°.  On peut croire encore que les Indiens ont fait dans le même tems une détermination du lieu du nœud de la lune; leur calcul semble l’indiquer.  Ils donnent la longitude de ce point de l’orbite lunaire pour le tems de leur époque, puis ils y ajoutent une quantité constante de 40', qui est le mouvement du nœud en 12j 14h.  C’est comme s’ils déclaroient que cette détermination a été faire treize jours après leur époque, & que pour qu’elle réponde à leur époque même, il faut y ajouter 40' dont le nœud a rétrogradé dans l’intervalle.  Cette observation est donc encore de la même date que celle de leur éclipse de lune; & voilà trois observations qui se rendent mutuellement témoignage [4th. We may believe also that the Hindus made at the same time a determination of the place of the moon’s node; this seems indicated by their calculation.  They give the longitude of this point of the lunar orbit for the time of their epoch, and to this they add as a constant 40m., which is the node’s motion in 12d. 14h.  It is as if they stated that this determination was made 13 days after their epoch, and that to make it correspond to their epoch, we must add the 40m. through which the node has retrograded in the interval.  This observation is, therefore, of the same date as that of their lunar eclipse; thus giving three observations, which are mutually confirmatory].” —  p. xxix
5th. It appears from the description of the Hindu Zodiac . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “5°.  Il résulte de la description que M. le Gentil nous a donnée du zodiaque indien, que l’on peut y déterminer les lieux des étoiles nommées l’Œil du Taureau & l’Epi de la Vierge pour le commencement de l’âge caliougam.  Or, en comparant ces positions aux positions actuelles, réduites par notre précession des équinoxes au tems de l’époque, on voit que l’origine du zodiaque indien devoit être entre le cinquième & le sixième degré du Verseau.  Les Brames ont donc raison de la placer au sixième degré de ce signe; d’autant que la différence assez petite peut appartenir au mouvement propre & inconnu de ces étoiles.  C’est donc encore une observation qui a guidé les Indiens dans cette détermination assez exacte du premier point de leur zodiaque mobile [5th. It follows from the description of the Hindu Zodiac given by G. Le Gentil, that on it the places of the stars named The Eye of Taurus and the Wheat Ear of Virgo can be determined for the beginning of the Kali-Yuga.  Now, comparing these places with the actual positions, reduced by our precession of the equinoxes to the moment of the epoch, we see that the point of origin of the Hindu zodiac must lie between the fifth and sixth degree of Aquarius.  The Brahmins, therefore, were right in placing it in the sixth degree of that sign, the more so since this small difference may be due to the proper motion of these stars which is unknown.  Thus it was yet another observation which guided the Hindus in this fairly accurate determination of the first point of their movable zodiac].” — pp. xxix-xxx
It does not seem possible to doubt the existence in antiquity of observations of this date. . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Qu’il y ait des observations de cette date dans l’antiquité, c’est ce dont il ne semble pas possible de douter.  Les Perses disent que quatre belles étoiles ont été établies pour garder les quatre coins du monde.  Or il se rencontre qu’au tems du commencement de l’âge caliougam, 3000 ou 3100 ans avant notre ère, l’Œil du Taureau & le Cœur du Scorpion étoient précisément dans les équinoxes, le Cœur du Lion & le Poisson austral assez près des solstices.  Une observation du lever des Pleïades le soir, sept jours avant l’équinoxe d’automne, appartient encore à l’an 3000 avant notre ère.  Cette observation & celles de la même espèce, qui ont été recueillies dans les calendriers de Ptolémée, sans qu’il en ait nommé les auteurs, ces observations, qui sont plus anciennes que celles des Chaldéens, pourroient bien être l‘ouvrage des Indiens.  Ils connoissent parfaitement la constellation des Pleïades, & tandis que nous la nommons vulgairement la Poussinière, ils la nomment Pillalou codi, les petits & la poule [It does not seem possible to doubt the existence in antiquity of observations of this date.  The Persians say that four beautiful stars were placed as guardians at the four corners of the world.  Now it so happens that at the beginning of Kali Yuga, 3000 or 3100 years before our era, the Eye of the Bull and the Heart of the Scorpion were exactly at the equinoctial points, while the Heart of the Lion and the Southern Fish were close enough to the solstitial points.  An observation of the rising of the Pleiades in the evening, seven days before the autumnal equinox, also belongs to the year 3000 before our era.  This and similar observations which were collected in Ptolemy’s calendars, though he does not name their authors, these observations, which are much older than those of the Chaldeans, may well be the work of the Hindus.  They are well acquainted with the constellation of the Pleiades, and while we call it vulgarly the ‘Poussinière,’ they name it: Pillaloo-codi — the ‘Hen and chickens’].” — p. xxx

— 663-4 —

This name has therefore, passed from people to people . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Ce nom a donc passé de peuple en peuple, & nous vient des plus anciennes nations de l’Asie. On reconnoît que les Indiens ont dû observer le lever des Pleïades, & s’en servir pour régler leurs années & leurs mois; car cette constellation est aussi nommée chez eux Cartiguey.  Or ils ont un mois qui porte le même nom; & cette conformité n’a pu avoir lieu que parce que le tems de ce mois étoit annoncé par le lever ou le coucher de la constellation.  Mais ce qui est plus décisif pour montrer que les Indiens ont observé les étoiles, & de la même manière que nous, en désignant leur posîtion par leur longitude, c’est qu’Augustin Riccius rapporte que, suivant des observations attribuées à Hermès & faites 1985 ans avant Ptolémée, l’étoile brillante de la Lyre & celle du Cœur de l’Hydre étoient plus avancées chacune de sept degrés qu’au tems de cet Astronôme [This name has therefore passed from people to people, and comes to us from the most ancient nations of Asia.  We see that the Hindus must have observed the rising of the Pleiades, and have made use of it to regulate their years and their months; for this constellation is also called Krittika.  Now they have a month of the same name; and this coincidence can only be due to the fact that this month was announced by the rising or setting of the constellation.  But what is even more decisive for showing that the Hindus observed the stars, and in the same way that we do, marking their position by their longitude, is a fact mentioned by Augustinus Riccius that, according to observations attributed to Hermes, and made 1,985 years before Ptolemy, the brilliant star in the Lyre and that in the Heart of the Hydra were each seven degrees in advance of their respective positions in the time of that astronomer].” — pp. xxx-xxxi

— 664 —

This determination seems very extraordinary.  The stars advance regularly . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Cette détermination paroît fort extraordinaire.  Les étoiles avancent constamment à l’égard de l’équinoxe; Ptolémée devoit trouver les longitudes plus grandes de 28 degrés qu’elles ne l’étoient 1985 ans avant lui.  Il y avoit même dans ce fait une circonstance singulière; on retrouvoit la même erreur ou la même différence sur le lieu des deux étoiles; cette différence appartenoit donc à une cause qui les affectoit toutes deux également.  C’est pour expliquer cette singularité, que l’Arabe Thebith imagina que les étoiles avoient un mouvement d’oscillation, qui les faisoit tantôt avancer & tantôt reculer [This determination seems very extraordinary.  The stars advance regularly with respect to the equinox; and Ptolemy ought to have found the longitudes 28 degrees in excess of what they were 1985 years before his time.  Besides, there is a remarkable peculiarity about this fact; the same error or difference was found in the position of both stars; therefore that difference was due to some cause that affected both stars equally.  It was to explain this peculiarity that the Arab Thābit imagined that the stars had an oscillatory movement, causing them to advance and recede alternately].” — p. xxxi
This hypothesis was easily disproved . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Cette hypothèse a été facilement détruite; mais les observations attribuées à Hermès restoient sans explication.  Cette explication se rencontre dans l’Astronomie indienne.  Au tems marqué de ces observations, 1985 ans avant Ptolémée, l’origine du zodiaque indien précédoit l’équinoxe de 35 degrés; les longitudes qui y étoient comptées, étoient donc de 35 degrés plus avancées que celles qui sont comptées de l’équinoxe.  Mais après 1985 ans écoulés, les étoiles ayant avancé de 28 degrés, il ne se trouve plus que 7 degrés de différence entre les longitudes de Ptolémée & celles d’Hermès, & la différence est la même pour les deux étoiles, parce qu’elle appartient à la différence des origines du zodiaque indien & du zodiaque de Ptolémée qui commence à l’équinoxe.  Cette explication est si simple & si naturelle, qu’elle ne peut manquer d’être vraie.  Nous ignorons si l’Hermès, célèbre dans l’antiquité, a été Indien, mais nous voyons que les observations, qui lui sont attribuées, sont notées à la manière indienne; nous en concluons que ce sont des Indiens qui les ont faites: ils ont par consequent pu faire toutes les observations que nous venons de détailler & que leurs Tables nous ont fait connoître [This hypothesis was easily disproved; but the observations attributed to Hermes remained unexplained.  This explanation is found again in Hindu astronomy.  At the date fixed for these observations, 1985 years before Ptolemy, the first point of the Hindu Zodiac was 35 degrees in advance of the equinox; therefore the longitudes reckoned for this point were 35 degrees in excess of those reckoned from the equinox.  But after the lapse of 1985 years the stars would have advanced 28 degrees, and there would remain a difference of only 7 degrees between the longitudes of Ptolemy and those of Hermes, and the difference would be the same for the two stars, since it is due to the difference between the starting-points of the Hindu zodiac and that of Ptolemy, which begins at the equinox.  This explanation is so simple and so natural that it must be true.  We do not know whether Hermes, so celebrated in antiquity, was a Hindu, but we see that the observations, which are attributed to him, are reckoned in the Hindu manner, and we conclude that they were made by the Hindus: therefore, they were able to make all the observations we have enumerated, and which we find noted in their tables].” — pp. xxxi-xxxii

— 664-5 —

6th. The observation of the year 3102, which seems to have fixed their epoch . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “6°. L’observation de l’an 3102 qui paroît avoir fondé l’époque, n’a pas été difficile à faire.  On apperçoit que les Indiens, lorsqu’ils ont connu le mouvement journalier de la lune de 13° 10' 35", s’en sont servis pour diviser le zodiaque en 27 constellations, relativement à la lune qui employe environ 27 jours à le parcourir [6th. The observation of the year 3102, which seems to have fixed the epoch, was not a difficult one to make.  We see that the Hindus, when they knew the moon’s daily motion of 13º 10' 35", made use of it to divide the zodiac into 27 constellations, related to the period of the moon, which takes about 27 days to describe it].” — p. xxxii

— 665 —

It was by this method that they determined the positions of the stars in this Zodiac . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “C’est par ce moyen qu’ils ont déterminé le lieu des étoiles dans ce zodiaque; c’est ainsi qu’ils ont trouvé que la Claire de la Lyre étoit dans 8s 24°, le Cœur de l’Hydre dans 4s 7°: longitudes attribuées à Hermès, mais qui sont comptées dans le zodiaque indien.  C’est ainsi qu’ils ont encore reconnu que l’Epi de la Vierge faisoit le commencement de leur quinzième constellation, & l’Œil du Taureau la fin de la quatrième; ces étoiles étant, l’une dans 6s 6° 40', & l’autre dans 1s 23° 20' du zodiaque indien.  Cela posé, l’éclipse de lune arrivée quinze jours après l’époque caliougam, a eu lieu dans un point placé entre l’Epi de la Vierge & l’étoile θ de la même constellation.  Ces étoiles sont éloignées assez précisément de l’intervalle d’une constellation; l’une commence la quinzième, l’autre la seizième.  Il n’a donc pas été difficile de déterminer le lieu de la lune, en mesurant sa distance à l’une de ces deux étoiles; on a conclu le lieu du soleil qui est opposé: & puis par la connoissance des moyens mouvemens, on a calculé que la lune avoit été au point de l’origine de ce zodiaque par sa longitude moyenne au minuit entre le 17 & le 18 Février de l’an 3102 avant notre ère, & que le soleil s’y étoit trouvé six heures après par sa longitude vraie; circonstance qui fixe le commencement de l’année indienne [It was by this method that they determined the position of the stars in this zodiac; it was thus they found that the bright star of the Lyre was in 8s 24°, the Heart of the Hydra in 4s 7°, longitudes which are ascribed to Hermes, but which are calculated on the Hindu zodiac.  Similarly, they discovered that the ‘Wheat Ear of Virgo’ formed the beginning of their fifteenth constellation, and the ‘Eye of Taurus’ the end of the fourth; these stars being the one in 6s 6° 40', the other in 1s 23° 20' of the Hindu zodiac.  This being so, the eclipse of the moon which occurred 14 days after the Kali-Yuga epoch, took place at a point between the ‘Wheat Ear’ of Virgo and the star θ of the same constellation.  These stars are exactly distanced at the period of a constellation, the one beginning the fifteenth, the other the sixteenth.  Thus it would not be difficult to determine the moon’s place by measuring her distance to one of these two stars; from this they deduced the position of the sun, which is opposite to the moon, and then, by knowing their average motions, they calculated that the moon had been at the point of origin of that zodiac according to her average longitude at midnight between the 17th and the 18th of February of the year 3102 before our era, and that the sun had occupied the same place six hours later according to its true longitude; an event which fixes the beginning of the Hindu year].” — pp. xxxii-xxxiii
7th. The Hindus state that 20,400 years before the age of the Kali . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “7°. Les Indiens établissent que l’an 20400 avant l’âge caliougam, l’origine de leur zodiaque répondoit à l’équinoxe du printems, & que le soleil & la lune y étoient en conjonction.  Il est bien visible que cette époque est fictive; mais on peut chercher de quel point, de quelle époque les Indiens sont partis pour l’établir.  Si l’on prend la révolution indienne du soleil 365j 6h 12' 30", & celle de la lune 27j 7h 43' 13".
20400 révolutions du soleil sont   7451277j  2h
272724   révolutions de la lune 7451277  7
[7th. The Hindus state that 20,400 years before the age of Kali Yuga, the first point of their zodiac coincided with the vernal equinox, and that the sun and moon were in conjunction there.  This epoch is obviously fictitious; but we may inquire from what point, from what epoch, the Hindus set out in establishing it.  If we take the Hindu values for the revolution of the sun, viz., 365d. 6h. 12m. 30s., and those of the moon, 27d. 7h. 43m. 13s., we have —
20,400 revolutions of the sun 7,451,277d. 2h.  
272,724   revolutions of the moon   7,451,277    7 ].” — pp. xxxiii-xxxiv

— 665-6 —

Such is the result obtained by starting from the Kali Yuga epoch . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Voilà ce qu’on trouve en partant de l’époque du caliougam; & l’assertion des Indiens, qu’il y a eu alors une conjonction, est en effet fondée sur leurs Tables; mais si, en employant les mêmes élémens, on part des époques de l’an 1491, ou d’une autre placée en 1282, dont nous parlerons dans la suite, on trouvera presque un ou deux jours de différence.   Il est naturel & juste, en vérifiant le calcul des Indiens, de prendre ceux de leurs élémens qui donnent le même résultat que le leur, & de partir de celle de leurs époques qui fait retrouver l’époque fictive.  Or, comme pour établir ce calcul, ils ont dû partir de leur époque réelle, de celle qui étoit fondée sur une observation, & non pas de celles qui en ont été dérivées par le calcul même, il s’ensuit que leur époque réelle est celle de l’an 3102 avant notre ère [Such is the result obtained by starting from the Kali Yuga epoch; and the assertion of the Hindus, that there had been a conjunction at the time stated, is founded on their tables; but if, using the same elements, we start from the epoch of the year 1491, or from another placed in the year 1282, of which we shall speak later, there will always be a difference of almost one or two days.  It is just and natural, in verifying the Hindu calculations, to take those among their elements which give the same result as they had themselves arrived at, and to set out from that one among their epochs which enables us to arrive at the fictitious epoch.  Hence, since to make this calculation they must have set out from their real epoch, the one which was founded on an observation and not from any of those which were derived by this very calculation from the former, it follows that their real epoch is that of the year 3102 before our era].” — p. xxxiv

— 666 —

8th. The Tiravalore Brahmins give the Moon’s motion as 7d. 2h. 8m. . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “8°. Les Brames de Tirvalour nous donnent le mouvement de la lune de 7s 2° 0' 7" dans le zodiaque mobile, ou de 9s 7° 45' l" relativement à l’équinox dans un grand intervalle de 1600984 jours ou de 4383 ans 94 jours.  Nous croyons que ce mouvement a été déterminé par observation.  Nous dirons d’abord que cet intervalle a une étendue qui le rend peu commode pour . . . le calcul des moyens mouvemens [8th. The Brahmins of Tiravalur give us the moon’s motion as 7s 2° 0' 7" on the movable zodiac, and as 9s 7° 45' 1" as referred to the equinox in a great period of 1,600,984 days, or 4,383 years and 94 days.  We believe that this motion was determined by observation.  We will say at the outset that this period is of an extent which renders it but ill suited to . . . the calculation of the mean motions].” — pp. xxxiv-xxxv
In their astronomical calculations the Hindus make use of periods . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Les Indiens employent dans leurs calculs astronomiques des intervalles de 248, 3031, 12372 jours; mais indépendamment de ce que ces intervalles, beaucoup plus courts, n’ont pas l’incommodité du premier, c’est qu’ils renferment un nombre complet de révolutions de la lune à l’égard de son apogée.  Ce sont réellement des moyens mouvemens.  Le grand intervalle de 1600984 jours n’est point une somme de révolutions accumulées; il n’y a point de raison pour qu’il embrasse plutôt 1600984 que 1600985 jours.  Il semble que l’observation seule doit avoir décidé du nombre de jours, & en avoir marqué le commencement & la fin.  Cet intervalle finit le 21 Mai de l’an 1282 de notre ère à 5h 15' 30" à Bénarès.  La lune étoit alors dans son apogée, suivant les Indiens, &
avoit de longitude 7s 13° 45' 1"
Maïer donne au même instant   7  13   53 48
& il place l’apogée 7  14     6 54
[In their astronomical calculations the Hindus make use of periods of 248, 3031, and 12,372 days; but apart from the fact that these periods, though much too short, do not present the inconvenience of the former, they contain an exact number of revolutions of the moon with respect to its apogee.  They are in reality mean motions.  The great period of 1,600,984 is not a sum of accumulated revolutions; there is no reason why it should contain 1,600,984 rather than 1,600,985 days.  It seems that observation alone must have fixed the number of days and marked the beginning and the end.  This period ends on the 21st of May, 1282, of our era at 5h 15' 30" at Benares.  The moon was then in her apogee, according to the Hindus, and
her longitude was 7s13° 45' 1"  
Maier gives the longitude as   7  13   53 48  
and places the apogee at 7  14     6 54  ].” — p. xxxv
The determination of the moon’s place by the Brahmins . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “La détermination des Brames ne diffère donc que de huit à neuf minutes sur le lieu de la lune, & de vingt-deux min. sur celui de l’apogée; & il est bien évident qu’ils n’ont pu obtenir cet accord avec nos meilleures Tables & cette exactitude dans le ciel que par observation.  Si l’observation a en effet déterminé la fin de l’intervalle, il y a tout lieu de croire que c’est une semblable observation qui en a marqué le commencement.  Mais alors ce mouvement, déterminé directement & pris dans la nature, doit avoir une grande conformité avec les vrais mouvemens célestes [The determination of the moon’s place by the Brahmins thus differs only by eight or nine minutes from ours, and that of the apogee by twenty-two minutes, and it is very evident that they could only have obtained this agreement with our best tables and this exactitude in the celestial positions by observation.  If then, observation fixed the end of this period, there is every reason to believe that a similar observation marked the beginning of it.  But then this motion, determined directly, and taken from nature, would of necessity be in close agreement with the true motions of the heavenly bodies].” — pp. xxxv-xxxvi
And in fact the Hindu motion during this long period of 4,883 years, does not differ by a minute . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “En effet le mouvement indien dans ce long intervalle de 4383 ans, ne diffère pas d’une minute de celui de Cassini; il est également conforme à celui des Tables de Maïer.  Ainsi deux peuples, les Indiens & les Européens, placés aux deux extrémités du monde, & par des institutions peut-être aussi éloignées dans le tems, ont obtenu précisément les mêmes résultats quant au mouvement de la lune, & une conformité qui ne seroit pas concevable, si elle n’étoit pas fondée sur l’observation & sur une imitation réciproque de la nature.  Remarquons que les quatre Tables des Indiens sont toutes les copies d’une même Astronomie [And in fact the Hindu motion during this long period of 4,883 years, does not differ by a minute from that of Cassini, and agrees equally with that of Maier’s tables.  Thus two peoples, the Hindus and the Europeans, placed at the two ends of the world, and perhaps just as distant by their institutions, have obtained precisely the same results as regards the moon’s motions; and an agreement which would not be conceivable, if it were not based on the observation and mutual imitation of nature.  We must remark that the four tables of the Hindus are all copies of the same astronomy].” — p. xxxvi

— 666-7 —

It cannot be denied that the Siamese tables existed in 1687, when they were brought from India . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “On ne peut nier que les Tables de Siam n’existassent en 1687, dans le tems que M. de la Loubere les rapporta de l’Inde.  A cette époque les Tables de Cassini & de Maïer n’existoient pas; les Indiens avoient déjà le mouvement exact que renferment ces Tables, & nous ne l’avions pas encore.  Il faut donc convenir que l’exactitude de ce mouvement indien est le fruit de l’observation.  Il est exact dans cette durée de 4383 ans, parce qu’il a été pris sur le ciel même; & si l’observation en a déterminé la fin, elle en a marqué également le commencement.  C’est le plus long intervalle qui ait été observé & dont le souvenir se soit conservé dans les fastes de l’Astronomie.  Il a son origine dans l’époque de 3102, & il est une preuve démonstrative de la réalité de cette époque [It cannot be denied that the Siamese tables existed in 1687, in the time when De la Loubère brought them back from India.  At that time period the tables of Cassini and Maier did not exist, and the Hindus were already in possession of the exact motion contained in these tables, while we did not yet possess it.  It must, therefore, be admitted that the accuracy of this Hindu motion is the result of observation.  It is exact throughout this period of 4,383 years, because it was taken from the sky itself; and if observation determined the end of it, it also fixed its beginning.  It is the longest period which had been observed and of which the recollection is preserved in the annals of astronomy.  It has its origin in the epoch of the year 3102, B.C., and it is a demonstrative proof of the reality of that epoch].” — pp. xxxvi-xxxvii

— 667 —

From John Bentley down to Burgess’ “Sûrya-Siddhânta”
see: John Bentley, Historical View of the Hindu Astronomy, 1825; & Sūrya Siddhānta, tr. [& cm.] Ebenezer Burgess [& W. D. Whitney], 1860.

— Footnotes

The following is an answer to those men of science who might suspect that our Astronomy . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Ceci répond aux Savans qui pourroient soupçonner que notre Astronomie a été portée dans l’Inde & communiquée aux Indiens par nos Missionnaires.  1º.  L’Astronomie indienne a des formes qui lui sont propres, des formes qui caractérisent l’originalité; si c’étoit notre Astronomie que l’on eût traduire, il auroit fallu beaucoup d’art & de science pour déguiser ainsi le larcin. 2º.  En adoptant le moyen mouvement de la lune, on auroit adopté également l’obliquité de l’écliptique, l’équation du centre du soleil, la durée de l’année; ces élémens diffèrent absolument des nôtres, ils sont singulièrement exacts lorsqu’ils appartiennent à l’époque de l’an 3102; ils feroient très-erronés s’ils avoient été établis dans le siècle dernier. 3º. enfin nos Missionnaires n’ont pu communiquer aux Indiens en 1687 le moyen mouvement de la lune des Tables de Cassini qui n’existoient pas alors, ils ne pouvoient connoître que les moyens mouvemens de Tycho, de Riccioli, de Copernic, de Bouillaud, Képler, Longomontanus, ou ceux des Tables d’Alphonse [The following is an answer to those scientists who might suspect that our astronomy had been carried to India and communicated to the Hindus by our Missionaries.  1st. Hindu astronomy has its own peculiar forms, forms which characterized its originality; if it had been our astronomy that had been translated, great skill and knowledge would have been needed to disguise the theft.  2nd. When adopting the mean movement of the moon, they would have adopted also the inclination of the ecliptic, the equation of the sun’s centre, the length of the year; these elements differ completely from ours, and are remarkably accurate when they are applied to the epoch of 3102; while they would be exceedingly erroneous if they had been established in the last century.  3rd, finally, our missionaries could not have communicated to the Hindus in 1687 the mean motions of the moon in the tables of Cassini, which then did not exist, they could have known only the mean motions of Tycho, Riccioli, Copernicus, Bouillaud, Kepler, Longomontanus, and those of the tables of Alphonso].” — pp. xxxvi-xxxvii fn.
I will now give a tabular view of these mean motions for 4383 years and 94 days . . .
p/q: J. S. Bailly, Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, 1787: “Je vais présenter ici le tableau de ces moyens mouvemens pour 4383 ans & 94 jours.
table Moy. mouv. Dif. avec les Ind.
d’Alphonse 9s  7o  2'  47"       – 0o  42'  14"
Copernic 9   6    2  13 – 1   42   48
Tycho 9   7  54  40 + 0     9   39
Képler 9   6  57  35 – 0   47   26
Longomontanus     9   7    2  13 – 0   42   48
Bouillaud 9   6  48    8 – 0   58   53
Riccioli 9   7  53  57 + 0     8   56
Cassini 9   7  44  11 – 0     0   50
Indiens 9   7  45    1  
      On voit qu’aucun de ces moyen mouvemens, celui de Cassini excepté, ne s’accorde avec le mouvement donné par les Indiens.  On n’a donc point emprunté ces moyens mouvemens.  Il n’y a de conformité qu’avec le mouvement de Cassini, dont les Tables n’existoient pas en 1687.  Ce mouvement de la lune appartient donc aux Indiens, & ils n’ont pu l’obtenir que de l’observation.
      [I will now give a tabular view of these mean motions for 4383 years and 94 days:
table Mean Motion Diff. from Hindu
Alphonso 9s  7o  2'  47"       – 0o  42'  14"
Copernicus 9   6    2  13 – 1   42   48
Tycho 9   7  54  40 + 0     9   39
Kepler 9   6  57  35 – 0   47   26
Longomontanus     9   7    2  13 – 0   42   48
Bouillaud 9   6  48    8 – 0   58   53
Riccioli 9   7  53  57 + 0     8   56
Cassini 9   7  44  11 – 0     0   50
Indian 9   7  45    1  
      We see that none of these mean motions, except Cassini’s, agree with the motion given by the Hindus.  They therefore did not borrow their mean motions.  There is an agreement only with those of Cassini, whose tables did not exist in 1687.  This mean motion of the moon belongs, therefore, to the Hindus, and they could only have obtained it by observation].” — p. xxxvii fn.

— 668 —

the aim of all the Gnostic schools . . . “was to accomodate the old faith . . .”
p/q: C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1887: “The aim of all the school was to accommodate the old faith to the influence of the Buddhistic theosophy, the very essence of which was that the innumerable gods of the Hindoo mythology were but names for the Energies of the First Triad in its successive Avatars, or manifestations unto man.” — p. 132
the theory that “two lights make darkness”
see: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “. . . if one wave overtakes another when the crest of the pursuing wave just coincides with the hollow of the wave before it the effect is neutralised . . . In other words, two lights will make darkness.” — p. 52

— 669 —

According to Mr. Tyndall, metaphysics is fiction, like poetry.
see: John Tyndall, Fragments of Science for Unscientific People, 1871: “I carried with me to the Alps this year . . . two volumes of poetry, Goethe’s ‘Farbenlehre’ [Theory of Colors] and the work on ‘Logic’ recently published by Mr. Alexander Bain.” — p. 127
the author . . . “exhibits with much power and effect the immense discoveries of Science . . .”
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “. . . Mr. Laing exhibits with much power and effect the immense discoveries of Science, and its numerous victories over old opinions whenever they have had the rashness to challenge conclusions with it.” — p. 371 (“Some Opinions of the Press — From The Times”)
“What is the material universe composed of?” . . . “Ether is not actually known . . .”
p/q: Samuel Laing, Modern Science and Modern Thought, 1888: “What is the material universe composed of?  Ether, Matter, Energy.  Ether is not actually known to us by any test of which the senses can take congnizance, but is a sort of mathematical substance which we are compelled to assume in order to account for the phenomena of light and heat.” — p. 51
“In perfect strictness, it is true . . .”
p/q: Thomas Henry Huxley, “On the Physical Basis of Life,” Nov. 8, 1868: “In perfect strictness, it is true that chemical investigation can tell us little or nothing, directly, of the composition of living matter . . . it is also, in strictness, true that we know nothing about the composition of any body whatever, as it is.” — p. 129 (Lay Sermons)
“Energy is that which is only known to us by its effects.”
see: Atkinson and Ganot, Elementary Treatise on Physics, 1883: “. . . we assume the existence of physical agents, or natural forces acting upon matter; as examples of such we have gravitation, heat, light, magnetism, and electricity.  Since these physical agents are disclosed to us only by their effects, their intimate nature is completely unknown.” — p. 3

— 670 —

“the various phenomena which bodies present . . .”
p/q: Atkinson and Ganot, Elementary Treatise on Physics, 1883: “The various phenomena which bodies present show that their molecules are under the influence of two contrary forces, one which tends to bring them together, and the other to separate them from each other.  The first force . . . is called molecular attraction . . . The second force is due to the vis viva, or moving force, which the molecules possess.” — p. 68
“It is an empty shadow of my imagination”
p/q: Thomas Henry Huxley, “On the Physical Basis of Life,” Nov. 8, 1868: “For, after all, what do we know of this terrible ‘matter,’ except as a name for the unknown . . . And what is the dire necessity . . . that a stone, unsupported, must fall to the ground. . . . what is this Necessity, save an empty shadow of my own mind’s throwing?” — pp. 143-4 (Lay Sermons)
“Substance which eludes the senses”
see: Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, tr. F. Max Müller, 1881: “. . . we may attenuate and dilute matter itself until it eludes the senses . . . but matter continues matter, and remains for evermore unable to create from itself the opposite principle of consciousness.” — 1:134
“Self-moving ARCHÆUS”
see: P. M. Orfila, Practical Chemistry, tr. J. R. Coxe, 1818: “. . . the universal archæus, or principle of Van Helmont; the internal efficient cause of all things; anima mundi . . . the active principle of the material world . . .” — p. xvii
“MYSTERY is the fatality of Science” . . . “Science cannot escape it!”
p/q: Gougenot des Mousseaux, Les Hautes Phénomènes de la Magie, 1864: “Vous demandez qu’on vous montre directement que la science, à la rigueur, peut admettre le mystère: je vous dis résolument qu’elle n’y peut échapper. Le mystère est la fatalité de la science [You ask that we show you directly that science can, if necessary, admit mystery: I say to you resolutely that it cannot escape it.  Mystery is the fate of science].” — p. xvi
see: Père Felix, “Le Mystère et La Science,” 1862: “Le mystère est la fatalité de la science [Mystery is the fate of science].” — p. 281 (La Tribune Sacrée, v. 18)
“. . . [Who] has been able to penetrate . . . the formation of a body . . .”
p/q: Gougenot des Mousseaux, Les Hautes Phénomènes de la Magie, 1864: “ ‘Qui a pu pénétrer la formation d’un corps, la génération d’un atome?  Qu’y a-t-il, je ne dirai pas au centre d’un soleil, mais au centre d’un atome?  qui a sondé jusqu’au fond l’abîme d’un grain de sable?  Le grain de sable, messieurs, depuis quatre mille ans la science le regarde, elle le tourne et le retourne; elle le divise et le subdivise; elle le harcèle de ses expériences, elle le tourmente de ses calculs pour lui arracher le dernier mot de sa constitution intime; elle lui demande avec une curiosité qui ne parvient pas à se satisfaire: Te diviserai-je à l’infini?   Et suspendue sur cet abîme, la science hésite, elle trébuche, elle s’éblouit elle-même, elle prend le vertige, et elle dit à la fin: Je ne sais pas [Who has been able to penetrate the formation of a body, the generation of an atom?  What is there, I will not say at the center of a sun, but at the center of an atom?  who has sounded to the bottom the abyss in a grain of sand?  The grain of sand, gentlemen, has been studied by science for four thousand years, science has looked at it, she has turned it and turned it again; she divides it and subdivides it; she torments it with her experiments; she vexes it with her calculations to snatch from it the final word as to its inner constitution; she asks it, with a curiosity that does not manage to satisfy: ‘Shall I divide you ad infinitum?’  And suspended over this abyss, science hesitates, she stumbles, she feels dazzled, she becomes dizzy, and she finally says: I do not know].’ ” — p. xix
p/q: Père Felix, “Le Mystère et La Science,” 1862, p. 285 (La Tribune Sacrée, v. 18)
“But if you are so fatally ignorant of the genesis . . .”
p/q: Gougenot des Mousseaux, Les Hautes Phénomènes de la Magie, 1864: “ ‘Et si vous ignorez fatalement la genèse et la constitution intime d’un grain de sable, comment auriez-vous l’intuition de la génération d’un seul être vivant?  Où est, dans l’être vivant, le point de départ de la vie?  le commencement de la vie?  le principe de la vie? [And if you are fatally ignorant of the genesis and inner nature of a grain of sand, how would you have an intuition as to the generation of a single living being?  Where in a living being is the starting point of life?  Where does life begin?  What is the principle of life?].’ ” — p. xix
see: Père Felix, “Le Mystère et La Science,” 1862, p. 285 (La Tribune Sacrée, v. 18)

— 670-1 —

“The first marshalling of the atoms, on which all subsequent action depends . . .”
p/q: John Tyndall, Fragments of Science for Unscientific People, 1871: “This first marshalling of the atoms on which all subsequent action depends baffles a keener power than that of the microscope.  Through pure excess of complexity, and long before observation can have any voice in the matter, the most highly-trained intellect, the most refined and disciplined imagination, retires in bewilderment from the contemplation of the problem.  We are struck dumb by an astonishment which no microscope can relieve, doubting not only the power of our instrument, but even whether we ourselves possess the intellectual elements which will ever enable us to grapple with the ultimate structural energies of Nature.” — pp. 153-4

— 671 —

“Concerning the void . . . my judgment is that it does not exist . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford and Maitland, 1885: “Concerning the Void . . . my judgment is that it does not exist, that it never has existed, and that it never will exist.  For all the various parts of the universe are filled, as the earth also is complete and full of bodies, differing in quality and in form, having their species and their magnitude, one larger, one smaller, one solid, one tenuous.  The larger and more solid are easily perceived; the smaller and more tenuous are difficult to apprehend, or altogether invisible.  We know only of their existence by the sensation of feeling, wherefore many persons deny such entities to be bodies, and regard them as simply spaces, but it is impossible there should be such spaces.  For if indeed there should be anything outside the universe . . . then it would be a space occupied by intelligent beings analogous to its Divinity . . . I speak of the genii, for I hold they dwell with us, and of the heroes who dwell above us, between the earth and the highest airs; wherein are neither clouds nor any tempest.” — pp. 83-4 (Asclepios, VII)

— Footnotes

official teachers, who speak of the Forces of nature as . . . modes of motion
see: Grove, Helmholtz, Mayer, Faraday, Liebig and Carpenter, The Correlation and Conservation of Forces, 1873: “. . . heat, light, electricity, magnetism . . . have been formerly regarded as . . . ‘imponderable elements’ . . . Heat, light, electricity, and magnetism are now no longer regarded as substantive and independent existences . . . but simply as modes of motion in ordinary matter . . .” — pp. xii-xiii (Introduction)
and yet hold electricity . . . as being as atomic as matter
p/q: William Crookes, “Genesis of the Elements,” Feb. 18, 1887: “Helmholtz says that electricity is probably as atomic as matter {‘we cannot avoid concluding that electricity also . . . is divided into definite elementary portions, which behave like atoms of electricity.’ — Helmholtz, Faraday Lecture, 1881}.” — p. 99 & fn. (Chemical News, March 4, 1887)

— 672 —

“There are many orders of the gods . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford and Maitland, 1885: “There are many orders of the Gods; and in all there is an intelligent part.  It is not to be supposed they do not come within the range of our senses; on the contrary, we perceive them, better even than those which are called visible . . .” — p. 64 (Asclepios, VIII)
“There are then gods, superior to all appearances . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford and Maitland, 1885: “There are, then, Gods superior to all appearances; after them come the Gods whose principle is spiritual; these Gods being sensible, in conformity with their double origin, manifest all things by a sensible nature, each of them illuminating his works one by another.  The supreme Being of heaven, or of all that is comprehended under this name, is Zeus, for it is by heaven that Zeus gives life to all things.  The supreme Being of the sun is light, for it is by the disk of the sun that we receive the benefit of the light.  The thirty-six horoscopes of the fixed stars have for supreme Being or prince, him whose name is Pantomorphos, or having all forms, because he gives divine forms to divers types.  The seven planets, or wandering spheres, have for supreme Spirits Fortune and Destiny, who uphold the eternal stability of the laws of Nature throughout incessant transformation and perpetual agitation.  The ether is the instrument or medium by which all is produced.” — p. 65 (Asclepios, VIII)
(See also § X., The Coming Force)
see: “The Coming Force.  Its Possibilities and Impossibilities,” SD 1:554-66.
in Stanza VI., “Fohat sets in motion the primordial World-germs . . .”
see: Stanza VI: “The Swift and Radiant One produces the Seven Laya Centres . . . and seats the Universe on these Eternal Foundations surrounding Tsien-Tchan [the Universe] with the Elementary Germs. . . . then sets them in motion; some one way, some the other way.” — SD 1:32-3

— Footnotes

“Hermes here includes as gods the sensible Forces of nature . . .”
p/q: The Virgin of the World, tr. Kingsford and Maitland, 1885: “Hermes here includes as Gods the sensible Forces of Nature, the elements and phenomena of the universe.” — p. 65 fn. (Asclepios, VIII)

— 672-3 —

“The meteoric showers (periodical in November and August) . . .”
see: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “Arago was the first to suggest the periodicity of meteoric showers . . . It has been shown by the researches of H. A. Newton . . . and others, that the meteors which fall within our atmosphere at regular periods, in August and November, are derived from swarms of meteoric bodies revolving about the sun in orbits which intersect that of the earth.” — pp. 16-17
“The aphelion of this ring is 1,732 millions of miles beyond the orbit of Neptune . . .”
p/q: Alexander Winchell, World-Life, or Comparative Geology, 1883: “The aphelion of this ring is 1, 732 million miles beyond the orbit of Neptune.  The plane of the ring, or more properly, ellipse, is inclined at an angle of 64° 3' to the plane of the earth’s orbit, and its orbital motion is contrary to that of the earth.”  — p. 17

— 673 —

the mysterious “central Sun” (the “Abode of the invisible deity” . . .)
see: Edward Falconer Litton, Life or Death, 1866: “The Persians, as well as the Chaldeans, regarded the sun as an object of adoration.  It was believed to be the abode of the invisible deity . . . Zoroaster is said to have thought, that the various order of spiritual beings — gods, demons, and heroes — proceeded from the Deity . . . He taught that the human soul is a particle of divine light . . . that matter was the last and most distant emanation . . .” — p. 46
Indra . . . older and more important in the Rig Veda
see: John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology, 1879: “INDRA . . . In the Vedas he stands in the first rank among the gods . . .”  “In the Ṛig Veda Vishṇu is not in the first rank of gods.  He is a manifestaton of solar energy . . .” — pp. 123-4, 360
Toum issued of Noot . . . primordial god, creator of heaven and of beings
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Toum, issu de Nout . . . Presenté comme dieu primordial et créateur du ciel et des êtres (commencem. du ch. xvii . . .) [Tum, issued from Nūt . . . Presented as a primordial god and creator of heaven and of beings (beginning of ch. xvii)].” — p. 655 (Index Analytique)
Toum . . . who generates other gods and gives himself the form he likes . . .
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Toum . . . qui enfante les dieux et se donne la forme à lui-même [Tum . . . who gives birth to the gods and gives form to himself] . . .” — pp. 655-6 (Index Analytique)
the “master of life” “giving . . . vigour to the gods” . . .
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . maître de la vie, donnant la vigueur aux dieux, lxxix, 1 [master of life, giving vigor to the gods].” — p. 656 (Index Analytique)
He is the overseer of the gods . . . “who creates spirits and gives them shape . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “[Toum] créant des esprits, leur donnant la forme . . . [Tum] surveillant unique des dieux [Tum creating spirits and giving them form . . . Tum, unique overseer of the gods].” — p. 656 (Index Analytique)
he is “the north wind and the spirit of the west”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Le vent du nord issu de Toum . . . Toum esprit de l’occident [The north wind issued from Tum . . . Tum, spirit of the west] . . .” — p. 656 (Index Analytique)
the “Setting Sun of Life”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Paroles à dire quand le soleil se couche dans la montagne de vie . . . L’Osiris N dit en adorant Toum se couchant dans la montagne de vie et donnant ses clartés au Tiaou [Words to be said when the Sun is setting in the Land of Life . . . The Defunct (the Osirified soul) says while adoring Tum setting in the Land of Life and giving his light to the Tuat (the Underworld)] . . .” — pp. 47-8 (xv.41-3)

— Footnotes

“Oh Toum, Toum! issued from the great . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “O Toum! Toum! issu de la Grande qui est au sein de l’eau, lumineux par les deux Lions {c’est Nout au sein de l’espace céleste . . . Les deux Lions désignent la double force des deux yeux solaires. Cf. Panthéon égypt., ch. ii}[Oh Tum, Tum! issued from the Great Goddess who is in the bosom of the water luminous through the two Lions {this is Nūt (the Great Deep) in the bosom of Space . . . the two Lions designate the dual Force of the two solar eyes}.” — pp. 15-16 (iii.1 & note 1)

— 673-4 —

the defunct begs that Toum should give him the breath . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Vents du nord issus de Toum par la narine du Résident de l’Ouest, est ton nom. . . . donnez-moi les provisions pour ma narine. . . . des approvisionnements de sortie le jour en toutes formes désirables [North-winds coming from Tum through the nostril of the One Residing in the West, is your name. . . . give me the supply for my nostril. . . . the supply of going out by day (coming forth into life) in all desirable forms].” — pp. 300-2 (xcix.24, 29, 32)

— 674 —

a man standing erect with the hieroglyph of the breaths in his hands
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Tableau: Un homme debout, tenant l’hiéroglyphe des souffles [Vignette: A man standing erect, holding the hieroglyph of the breaths].” — p. 189 (lxii, Tableau)
“I open to the chief of An . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “J’ouvre au chef d’An.  Je suis Toum.  Je traverse l’eau répandue par Thot-Hapi, seigneur de l’horizon, en ce nom de diviseur de la terre.  . . [I open to the chief of An, I am Tum.  I cross the water spilt by Thot-Hapi, the lord of the horizon, and in the name of the divider of the earth].” — p. 189 (lxii.1-2)
“I cross the heavens, and am the two Lions.  I am Ra, I am Aam . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je traverse le ciel, je suis les deux Lions.  Je suis Ra, je suis Aam.  Je mange mon héritier. . . . Je circule sur le sol du champ Aanrou que me donne le maître de l’éternité sans limites.  Je suis un germe d’éternité.  Je suis Toum à qui est accordée l’éternité [I cross the heavens, and am the two Lions.  I am Ra, I am Aam, I eat up my heir. . . . I glide over the soil of the field of Aanroo, given me by the master of limitless eternity.  I am a germ of eternity.  I am Tum, to whom eternity is granted].” — p. 189 (lxii.2-3)
“The Great Water . . . is said to be seven cubits deep”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Eau.  La grande . . . lequel a une hauteur de 7 coudées [Water.  The Great One . . . which has a depth of 7 cubits] . . .” — p. 605 (Index Analytique)
“in the great mother, all the Gods . . . are born”
see: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “. . . le mot Noutir, nouti . . . Les textes nous apprennent qu’il est le père des dieux, la mère des dieux [the word Nūt . . . The texts teach us that it is the father of the gods, the mother of the gods] . . .” — p. 152
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis le dieu grand qui s’est donné la forme à lui-même, c’est-à-dire l’Eau, c’est à-dire le Noun . . . créateur de ses membres qui deviennent les dieux [I am the great Supreme Being that gave shape to itself, that is the Water, that is Nūt (the Cosmic Abyss) . . . creator of its limbs who become the gods] . . .” — p. 54 (xvii.3-4)
“the seven great ones”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . les sept Lumineux, ce sont Amset, Hapi, Tiaumautef, Kebhsennouf, Maa-tef-f, Ker-bek-f, Har-Khent-an-mer-ti [the seven Luminous Ones, these are Amset, Hapi, Tiaumautef, Kebhsennouf, Maa-tef-f, Ker-bek-f, Har-Khent-an-mer-ti] . . .” — p. 61 (xvii.38)
the “Great ones of the Seven Magic Forces,” who, “conquer the Serpent Apap”
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis le grand des forces magiques . . . C’est ainsi que je conjure celui qui marche sur son ventre . . . je repousse Apap [I am the Great One of the magic forces . . . It is in this way that I conjure the one that moves on its belly . . . I repel Apap].” — pp. 322-3 (cviii.7-8, 10)

— Footnotes

An image expressing the succession of divine functions . . .
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Le dieu qui mange son héritier . . . Image par laquelle est exprimée la succession des rôles divins, la substitution d’une forme à une autre [The god who eats up his heir . . . An image expressing the succession of divine functions, the substitution of one form for another.” — p. 587 (Index Analytique)
Aanroo is the domain of Osiris . . . “surrounded with an iron enclosure . . .”
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Aanrou . . . C’est là qu’est le domaine d’Osiris [Aanroo . . . There is the domain of Osiris] . . .” — pp. 587-8 (Index)
      “Il est divisé en quatorze sections . . . dans ce champ Aanrou dont l’enciente est en fer, où le blé a 7 coudées [It is divided into fourteen sections . . . in this field of Aanroo, of which the enclosure is of iron, where the grain is 7 cubits high] . . .” — pp. 507-8 (cxlix: Intro., 4)
In Amenti, one becomes pure spirit for the eternity
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “. . . je ne suis pas mort dans l’Amenti, j’y suis pur esprit pour l’éternité [I am not dead in Amenti, there I am pure spirit for eternity].” — p. 114 (xxx.4)
while in Aanroo “the soul of the spirit” . . . is devoured each time by Uræus
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Je suis Ra sortant de l’abîme céleste, c’est-à-dire l’âme divine [I am Ra going out of the heavenly Abyss, that is, the divine soul].”  “. . . la flamme sort de l’horizon. . . . j’ai anéanti les impuretés que je gardais sur terre.  . . . Je connais les chemins mystérieux conduisant aux portes du champ Aanrou [the flame bursts out of the horizon . . . I annihilated the impurities I was holding on to on earth. . . . I know the mysterious ways leading to the gates of the Field of Aanru].” — pp. 263, 267-8 (lxxxv.1, lxxxvi.1, 5-7)
The soul quits the fields of Aanroo . . .
see: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “On sort du champ Aanrou dans toutes les formes qu’on désire [One leaves the field of Aanroo in all the forms one desires] . . .” — p. 302 (xcix.34)

— 675 —

one Absolute cause of all . . . in the conception of Mr. Herbert Spencer
see: Herbert Spencer, First Principles, 1880: “. . . in our search for a cause, we discover no resting place until we arrive at the hypothesis of a First Cause; and we have no alternative but to regard this First Cause as Infinite and Absolute.” —  1:38 (§ 12)
As for the Egyptian in general . . . whenever he “arrived at the notion of divine Unity . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Pour l’Égyptien qui arrivait à la notion de l’unité divine, le dieu un n’était jamais dieu tout court: M. Lepage-Renouf a fait remarquer très finement que le mot Noutir, nouti, dieu, n’a jamais cessé d’être nom commun pour devenir nom propre.  Dieu est toujours le dieu unique Ammon, le dieu unique Phtah, le dieu unique Osiris . . . il faut admettre que le Dieu unique régnait sur des réalités de dieux.  Mais ce monothéïsme est avant tout géographique [As for the Egyptian who arrived at the notion of divine Unity, the ‘One God’ was never ‘God,’ simply.  Lepage-Renouf very justly observed that the word Nouter, nouti, god, had never ceased to be a generic name in order to become a proper name.  God is always the unique god Ammon, the unique god Phtah, the unique god Osiris . . . We have to admit that the unique God reigned over the realities of gods.  But this monotheism was above all geographical].” — p. 152
“If the Egyptian of Memphis proclaimed the unity of Phtah . . .”
p/q: Gaston Maspero, Guide du Visiteur au Musée de Boulaq, 1883: “Si l’Egyptien de Memphis proclamait l’unité de Phtah à l’exclusion d’Ammon, l’Égyptien de Thèbes proclamait l’unité d’Ammon à l’exclusion de Phtah.  Râ dieu un à Héliopolis n’est pas le même qu’Osiri dieu un à Abydos et peut être adoré à côté de lui sans s’absorber en lui.  Le dieu unique n’est que le dieu du nome ou de la ville, noutir noutti, qui n’exclut pas l’existence du dieu unique de la ville ou du nome voisin.  En résumé, ce n’est pas du dieu unique de l’Égypte qu’on devrait parler, quand on traite du monothéïsme égyptien, mais des dieux uniques de l’Égypte [If the Egyptian of Memphis proclaimed the unity of Phtah to the exclusion of Ammon, the Egyptian of Thebes proclaimed the unity of Ammon to the exclusion of Phtah.  Ra, the ‘One God’ at Heliopolis is not the same as Osiris, the ‘One God’ at Abydos, and can be worshipped side by side with him, without being absorbed by him.  The one god is but the god of the province or the city, noutir noutti, which does not exclude the existence of the one god of that town or of the neighbouring province.  In short, whenever speaking of Egyptian Monotheism, one ought to speak of the unique gods of Egypt, and not of the one unique god].” — p. 152
Thot (Hermes) the directing intelligence of the Universe
p/q: Livre des Morts, tr. Paul Pierret, 1882: “Thot . . . intelligence directrice du monde, xciv [Thot . . . directing intelligence of the universe].” — p. 653 (Index Analytique)

— 675-6 —

Augustin Thierry . . . deplored the erroneous principle . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Augustin Thierry, déplorant le principe qui l’avait égaré trop longtemps, accordait dans ses dernières années à celles [historiens] du moyen âge [Augustin Thierry, deploring the principle which had lead him astray for too long, agreed in his later years with those historians of the Middle Ages] . . .” — p. 45

— 676 —

vox populi . . . is vox Dei
see: Sir William Hamilton, “On the Philosophy of Common Sense,” 1872: “Hesiod thus terminates his Works and Days: — ‘The Word proclaimed by the concordant voice / Of mankind fails not; for in man speaks God.’ . . . Hence . . . ‘Vox Populi, vox Dei’ [The voice of the people is the voice of God]. ” — 2:770 (“Supplementary Dissertation” in The Works of Thomas Reid)
“legend . . . is living tradition, and three times out of four it is truer than what we call History”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . il y trouvait la véritable histoire, et il avait raison; car la légende est la tradition vivante, et trois fois sur quatre elle est plus vraie que l’histoire [he found there the true history, and he was right, because legend is living tradition, and three times out of four it is truer than history].” — 2:45 (Revue des Deux Mondes, pp. 157-58)
Our present-day Orientalists and Historical writers are . . . that which the white ants are . . .
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . Michelet nous fait une peinture saissante de cette variété d’insectes rongeurs qu’on appelle les termites. . . . Nos critiques modernes sont les termites de l’histoire [Michelet gives us a striking picture of that kind of gnawing insects which we call termites. . . . Our modern critics are the termites of history].” — 2:45
“History will tumble down and break into atoms . . .”
see: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “. . . l’histoire vient de s’effondrer sur elle-même [history will collapse onto itself].” — 2:46
“By opening so freely their lunatic asylums . . .”
p/q: J.-E. de Mirville, Des Esprits, 1863-8: “ ‘Les hommes, a dit Montesquieu, en ouvrant quelques asiles à leurs fous, ont voulu faire croire qu’ils ne l’étaient pas eux-mêmes’ {Lettres persanes} [‘Montesquieu has said that men, by opening some asylums to their madmen, wanted to make themselves believe that they themselves were not mad’].” — 2:37

Table of Contents