CHAPTER VII

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

It remains for us to summarise and conclude. To summarise the history of a science is to summarise the science itself, and we are therefore to recapitulate the great principles of initiation, as preserved and transmitted through all the ages. Magical science is the absolute science of equilibrium. It is essentially religious; it presided at the formation of dogmas in the antique world and has been thus the nursing mother of all civilisations. O chaste and mysterious mother who, in giving milk of poetry and inspiration to the dawning generations, didst cover thy face and breast. Before all things she directs us to believe in God and to adore without seeking to define Him, since a God in definition is to some extent a finite God. And after Deity she points to eternal mathematics and equilibrated forces as to the sovereign principles of things. It is said in the Bible that God has ordered all things according to weight, number and measure. _Omnia in pondere et numero et mensura disposuit Deus._ Weight is equilibrium, number is quantity, measure is proportion—these three, and these are the eternal or divine basis of the science of Nature. Here now is the formula of equilibrium: Harmony results from the analogy of contraries. Number is the scale of analogies, the proportion of which is measure. The entire occult philosophy of the _Zohar_ might be termed the science of equilibrium.[368] The key of numbers is found in the _Sepher Yetzirah_; their generation is analogous to the affiliation of ideas and the production of forms. On this account the illuminated hierophants of the Kabalah combined the hieroglyphic signs of numbers, ideas and forms in their sacred alphabet. The combinations of this alphabet give equations of ideas, and comprise by way of indication all possible combinations in natural forms. According to Genesis, God made man in His image, but as man is the living synthesis of creation, it follows that creation itself is made in the likeness of God. There are three things in the universe—the Spirit, the plastic mediator and matter. The ancients assigned to spirit, as its immediate instrument, that igneous fluid to which they gave the generic name of Sulphur; to the plastic mediator, they assigned the name of Mercury, because of the symbolism represented by the Caduceus; to matter, they gave the name of Salt, because of the fixed salt which remains after combustion, resisting the further action of fire. Sulphur was compared with the Father on account of the generative action of fire; Mercury with the Mother, because of its power of attraction and reproduction; and Salt, in fine, was the Child, or that substance which is subjected to education by Nature. For them also the creative substance was one, and the name which they gave it was Light. Positive or igneous light was volatile Sulphur; light in the negative state, or made visible by the vibrations of fire, was the fluidic or ethereal Mercury; and light neutralised, or shadow, the coagulated or fixed composite under the form of earth, was termed Salt.

After such manner did Hermes Trismegistus formulate his symbol, which is called the Emerald Tablet: “That which is above is like that which is below, and that which is below is like that which is above, for the operations of the wonders of the one thing.”[369] This means that the universal movement is produced by the analogies of fixed and volatile, the volatile tending to be fixed and the fixed to become volatile, thus producing a continual exchange between the modes of the one substance and, from the fact of the exchange, the combinations of universal form in everlasting renewal.

The fire is Osiris, or the sun; the light is Isis, or the moon; they are the father and mother of that grand Telesma which is the universal substance—not that they are its creators but rather its generating powers, the combined effort of which produces the fixed or earth, whence Hermes says that this force has reached its plenary manifestation when earth has been formed therefrom. Osiris is not therefore God, even for the great hierophants of the Egyptian sanctuary; he is the igneous or luminous shadow of the intellectual principle of life, and hence in the supreme moment of initiation a flying voice whispered in the ear of the adept that dubious revelation: “Osiris is a black god.” Woe to the recipient whose understanding had not been raised by faith above the purely physical symbols of Egyptian revelation. Such words would become for him a formula of atheism, and his mind would be struck with blindness. But for the believer, more exalted in intelligence, those same words sounded like an earnest of the most sublime hopes. It was as if the initiator said to him: “My child, you mistake a lamp for the sun, but that lamp is only a star of night. Still, the true sun exists; leave therefore the night and seek the day.”

That which the ancients understood by the four elements in no wise signified simple bodies, but rather the four elementary manifestations of the one substance. These modes were represented by the sphinx, its wings corresponding to air, the woman’s breasts to water, the body of the bull to earth, and the lion’s claws to fire. The one substance, thrice threefold in essential mode and tetradic in the form of manifestation—such is the secret of the three pyramids, triangular in respect of their elevation, square at the base and guarded by the sphinx. In raising these monuments Egypt attempted to erect the Herculean pillars of universal science. Sands have accumulated, centuries have passed, but the pyramids in their eternal greatness still propound to the nations that enigma of which the solution is lost. As to the sphinx, it seems to have sunk in the dust of ages. The great empires of Daniel have reigned by turn upon the earth and have gone down into the tomb, overwhelmed by their own weight. Conquests on the field of battle, monuments of labour, results of human passions—all are engulphed with the symbolic body of the sphinx; now only the human head rises over the desert sands as if looking for the universal empire of thought.

Divine or die—such was the terrible dilemma proposed by the sphinx to the Candidates for Theban royalty. The reason is that the secrets of science are actually those of life; the alternatives are to reign or to serve, to be or not to be. The natural forces will break us if we do not put them to use for the conquest of the world. There is no mean between the height of kinghood and the abyss of the victim state, unless we are content to be counted among those who are nothing because they ask not why or what they are.

The composite form of the sphinx also represents by hieroglyphical analogy the four properties of the universal agent, that is to say, the Astral Light—dissolving, coagulating, heating and cooling. These four properties, directed by the will of man, can modify all phases of Nature, producing life or death, health or disease, love or hatred, wealth even or poverty, in accordance with the given impulsion. They can place all the reflections of the light at the service of imagination; they are the paradoxical solution of the wildest questions which can be set for Transcendental Magic. Specimens of these paradoxical questions shall here follow, together with the answers thereto: (1) Is it possible to escape death? (2) Is there such a thing as the Philosophical Stone, and what must be done to find it? (3) Is it possible to be served by spirits? (4) What is meant by the Key, Ring and Seal of Solomon? (5) Is it possible to predict the future by reliable calculations? (6) Can good or evil be worked at will by means of magical power? (7) What must be done to become a true magician? (8) What are the precise forces put in operation by Black Magic?

We term these questions paradoxical because they are outside all that is understood as science, while at the same time they seem negatived by faith. If propounded by an uninitiated person, they are merely foolhardy, while their complete solution, if given by an adept, would seem like a sacrilege. God and Nature alike have closed the Sanctuary of Transcendent Science and this in such a manner that, beyond a certain limit, he who knows would speak to no purpose, because he would not be understood. The revelation of the Great Magical Secret is therefore happily impossible. The replies which we are about to give will be the last possible expression of the word in Magic, and they will be put in all clearness, but we do not guarantee to make them comprehensible to our readers.

In respect of the first and second, it is possible to escape death after two manners—in time and in eternity. We escape it in time by the cure of diseases and by avoiding the infirmities of old age; we escape it in respect of eternity by perpetuating in memory personal identity amidst the transformations of existence. Let it be certified (1) that the life resulting from motion can only be maintained by the succession and the perfecting of forms; (2) that the science of perpetual motion is the science of life; (3) that the purpose of this science is the correct apprehension of equilibrated influences; (4) that all renewal operates by destruction, each generation therefore involving a death and each death a generation. Let us now further certify, with the ancient sages, that the universal principle of life is a substantial movement or a substance which is eternally and essentially moved and mover, invisible and impalpable, in a volatile state and manifesting materially when it becomes fixed by the phenomena of polarisation. This substance is indefectible, incorruptible and consequently immortal; but its manifestations in the world of form are subject to eternal mutation by the perpetuity of movement. Thus all dies because all lives, and if it were possible to make any form eternal, then motion would be arrested and the only real death would be thus created. To imprison a soul for ever in a mummified human body, such would be the terrible solution of that magical paradox concerning pretended immortality in the same body and on the same earth. All is regenerated by the universal dissolvant of the first substance. The force of this dissolvant is concentrated in the quintessence—that is to say, at the equilibrating centre of a dual polarity. The four elements of the ancients are the four forces of the universal magnet, represented by the figure of a cross, which cross revolves indefinitely about its own centre and so propounds the enigma respecting the quadrature of the circle. The Creative Word speaks from the middle of the cross and cries: “It is finished.” It is in the exact proportion of the four elementary forms that we must seek the Universal Medicine of bodies, even as the Medicine of the Soul is offered by religion in Him Who gives Himself eternally on the cross for the salvation of the world. The magnetic state and polarisation of the heavenly bodies results from their equilibrated gravitation about suns, which are the common reservoirs of their electro-magnetism. The vibration of the quintessence about common reservoirs manifests by light, and the polarisation of light is revealed by colours. White is the colour of the quintessence; this colour condenses towards its negative pole as blue and becomes fixed as black; while it condenses towards its positive pole as yellow and becomes fixed as red. Thus centrifugal life proceeds always from black to red, passing by white, and centripetal life returns from red to black, following the same path. The four intermediates or mixed hues produce with the three primary colours what are called the seven colours of the prism and the solar spectrum. These seven colours form seven atmospheres or seven luminous zones round each sun, and the planet which is dominant in each zone is magnetised in a manner analogous to the colour of its atmosphere. In the depths of the earth, metals are formed like planets in the sky, by the particular influences of a latent light which decomposes when traversing certain regions. To take possession of a subject in which the metallic light is latent, before it becomes specialised, and drive it to the extreme positive pole, that is to say, to the live red, by the help of a fire derived from the light itself—such is the secret in full of the Great Work. It will be understood that this positive light at its extreme degree of condensation is life itself in a fixed state, serving as a universal dissolvant and as a medicine for all Kingdoms of Nature. But to extract from marcassite, stibium and philosophical arsenic the living and bisexual metallic sperm, we must have a prime dissolvant which is a mineral saline menstruum, and there must be, moreover, the concurrence of magnetism and electricity. The rest proceeds of itself in a single vessel, being the athanor, and by the graduated fire of one lamp. The adepts say that it is a work of women and children.

The heat, light, electricity and magnetism of modern chemists and physicists were for the ancients elementary phenomenal manifestations of one substance, called _Aour_, _Od_ and _Ob_—that is to say, אוכ אוד אוד _Od_ is the active, _Ob_ the passive, and _Aour_ is the name of the bisexual and equilibrated composite which is signified when the Hermetic philosophers speak of gold. Vulgar gold is metalised _Aour_ and philosophical gold is the same _Aour_ in the state of a soluble gem. Theoretically, according to the transcendental science of antiquity, the Philosophical Stone which heals all diseases and accomplishes the transmutation of metals exists therefore incontestably. Does it, however, or can it, exist in fact? If we answer this in the affirmative, no one will believe, and the simple statement shall stand as a paradoxical solution of the paradoxes expressed by the two first questions, without dealing with the problem as to what must be done in order to find the Philosophical Stone. M. de la Palisse would reply in our place that in order to find one must of necessity seek, unless indeed discovery is a matter of chance. Enough has been said to direct and facilitate research.

The third and fourth questions concern the ministry of spirits and the Key, Seal and Ring of Solomon. When the Saviour of the world, at His temptation in the desert, overcame the three lusts which keep the soul in bondage—that is to say, the lust of the appetites, lust of ambition and lust of greed—it is written that the angels came down to serve Him. The explanation is that spirits are subject to the sovereign spirit, and he is the sovereign spirit who binds the rebellious turbulence and unlawful propensities of the flesh. It should be noted at the same time that to reverse the natural order of communication subsisting between things which are, is opposed to the law of Providence. We do not find that the Saviour of the world and his Apostles evoked the souls of the dead. The immortality of the soul, being one of the most consoling dogmas of religion, is reserved for the aspirations of faith and will never be proved by facts accessible to the criticism of science. Loss of reason, or its distraction at the very least, is hence and will be always the penalty of those who dare to pry into the other life with the eyes of this world only. Hence also magical traditions always represent the spirits of the dead as responding to evocations with sad and angry countenances. They complain of being troubled in their repose and they proffer only reproaches and menaces. The Keys of Solomon are religious and rational forces expressed by signs, and their use is not so much in the evocation of spirits as to shield us from aberration in experiences relative to the occult sciences. The Seal is the synthesis of the Keys and the Ring indicates its use. The Ring of Solomon is at once round and square, and it represents the mystery of the quadrature of the circle. It is composed of seven squares so arranged that they form a circle. Their bezels are round and square, one being of gold and the other of silver. The Ring should be a filagree of the seven metals. In the silver setting a white stone is placed and in the gold one there is a red stone. The white stone bears the sign of the Macrocosm, while the Microcosm is on the red stone. When the Ring is worn upon the finger, one of the stones should be turned inward and the other outward, accordingly as it is desired to command spirits of light or darkness. The plenary powers of this Ring can be accounted for in a few words. The will is omnipotent when armed with the living forces of Nature. Thought is idle and dead until it manifests by word or sign; it can therefore neither spur nor direct will. The sign, being the indispensable form of thought, is the necessary instrument of will. The more perfect the sign the more powerfully is the thought formulated, and the will is consequently directed with more force. Blind faith moves mountains, and what therefore would be possible to faith if enlightened by complete and indubitable science? If the soul could concentrate its plenary understanding and energy in the utterance of a single word, would not that word be all-powerful? The Ring of Solomon, with its double seal, typifies all science and faith of the Magi expressed by one sign. It symbolises the powers of heaven and earth and the sacred laws which rule them, whether in the celestial Macrocosm or in the Microcosm of man. It is the talisman of talismans and the pantacle which is above pantacles. As a sign of life it is omnipotent, but it is without efficacy as a dead sign: intelligence and faith, the intelligence of Nature and faith in its eternally Active Cause—of such is the life of signs.

The profound study of natural mysteries may alienate the casual observer from God because mental fatigue paralyses the aspirations of the heart. It is in this sense that the occult sciences may be dangerous and even fatal for certain personalities. Mathematical exactitude, the absolute rigour of natural laws, their harmony and simplicity, suggest to many an inevitable, eternal, inexorable mechanism, and for such as these Providence recedes behind the iron wheels of a clock in perpetual motion. They fail to reflect on the indubitable fact of freedom and autocracy in thinking beings. A man disposes at his will of creatures organised like himself; he can snare birds in the air, fish in the water and wild beasts in the forest; he can cut down or burn entire forests; he can mine and blast rocks, or even mountains; he can modify all forms about him; and yet, notwithstanding the supreme analogies of Nature, he refuses to believe that other intelligent beings might at their will disintegrate and consume worlds, extinguish suns by a breath or reduce them to starry dust—beings so great that they are too much for our faculty of sight, even as we, in our turn, are probably inappreciable to the eye of the mite or worm. And if such beings exist without the universe being destroyed a thousand times over, must we not admit that they are under obedience to a supreme will, a wise and omnipotent force, which forbids them to annihilate worlds, even as it forbids us to destroy the swallow’s nest and the chrysalis of the butterfly? For the Magus who is conscious of this power in the deep places of his nature and who discerns in universal law the instruments of eternal justice, the Seal of Solomon, his Keys and his Ring are tokens of supreme royalty.

The next questions concern the prediction of things to come by means of reliable calculations and the working of good or evil by magical influence. The answers are in this wise. Two chess players of equal skill being seated at a table and having opened the game, which of them will win? Assuredly the more watchful of the two. If I knew the preoccupations of both, I could foresee certainly the result of their match. To foresee is to win at chess, and it is the same in the game of life. In life nothing comes by chance; chance is the unforeseen, but that which the ignorant fail to perceive in advance has been accounted for already by the sage. All events, like all forms, result either from a conflict or from a balancing of forces, which forces can be represented by numbers. The future may thus be determined in advance by calculation. Every extreme action is counterpoised by an equivalent reaction. So laughter presages tears, and for this reason our Saviour said: “Blessed are those who mourn.” He said also, and again for the same reason: “He that exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” To-day Nebuchadnezzar is a god, to-morrow he will be changed into a beast. To-day Alexander makes his triumphal entry into Babylon and has incense offered to him on all the altars; but to-morrow he will die in a state of degraded drunkenness. The future is in the past, and the past is also in the future. When genius foresees, it remembers. Effects are linked together so inevitably and so exactly to their causes, and become on their own part the causes for further effects in such conformity with the first as regards their manner of production, that a single fact may reveal to a seer an entire succession of mysteries. The coming of Christ makes that of Anti-Christ a certainty; but the advent of Anti-Christ will precede the triumph of the Holy Spirit. The money-seeking epoch in which we now live is the precursor of more lavish charities and of greater good works than the world has yet known.

But it must be understood that the will of man modifies blind causes and that a single impetus started by him may change the equilibrium of an entire world. If such is man’s power in the world under his dominion, what must be that of the intelligences which rule the suns? The least of the _Egregores_, with a breath, and by dilating suddenly the latent caloric of our earth, might shatter and reduce it into a cloud of dust. Man also can dissipate by a breath all the happiness of one of his kind. Human beings are magnetised like worlds; like suns, they irradiate their particular light; some are more absorbent, some give forth more freely. No one is isolated in this world; each is a fatality or a providence. Augustus and Cinna encounter; both are proud and implacable; and hereof is fatality. That fatality makes Cinna seek to slay Augustus, who is impelled as fatally to punish him; but he elects to forgive. Here fatality is changed into providence, and the epoch of Augustus, inaugurated by this sublime beneficence, was worthy to witness the birth of Him Who said: “Forgive your enemies.” By extending his mercy to Cinna, Augustus atoned for all the revenge of Octavius. So long as man is subject to the dictates of fatality, he is profane—that is to say, a man who must be excluded from the sanctuary of knowledge, because in his hands knowledge would become a terrible instrument of destruction. On the contrary, the man who is free, who governs by understanding the blind instincts of life, is essentially a preserver and repairer, for Nature is the domain of his power and the temple of his immortality. When the uninitiated seeks to do good the result is evil. On the other hand, the true initiate can never will to do evil; if he strikes it is to chastise and to cure. The breath of the uninitiated is deadly, that of the initiate is life-giving. He who is profane suffers that others may suffer also, but the initiate endures in order that others may be spared. He who is profane steeps his arrows in his own blood and poisons them; he who is initiated cures the most cruel wounds by a single drop of his blood.

The last questions are what must be done to become a true magician and in what precisely do the powers of Black Magic consist? Now, he who disposes of the secret forces of Nature and yet does not risk being crushed by them—he is a true magician. He is known by his works and by his end, which is always a great sacrifice. Zoroaster created the primitive doctrines and civilisations of the East, after which he vanished in a tempest like Œdipus. Orpheus gave poetry to Greece and with that poetry the beauty of all high things; he then perished in an orgie in which he refused to join. All his virtues notwithstanding, Julian was only an initiate of Black Magic; his death was that of a victim and not of a martyr; it was an annihilation and a defeat: he failed to understand his epoch. Though acquainted with the Doctrine of Transcendental Magic, he misapplied the Ritual. Apollonius of Tyana and Synesius were simply wonderful philosophers; they cultivated the true science but did nothing for posterity. At their period the Magi of the Gospel reigned in the three parts of the known world, and the oracles were silenced by the cries of the babe of Bethlehem. The King of Kings, the Magus of all Magi, had come into the world and the ritual-worships, the laws, the empires, all were changed. There is a void in the world of marvels between Jesus Christ and Napoleon. That incarnate word of battle, that armed Messiah who was the bearer of the last name, came blindly and unconsciously to complete the Christian message. This revelation had so far taught us how to die, but the Napoleonic civilisation has shewn us how to conquer. The two messages—sacrifice and victory, how to suffer, to die, to strive and to overcome—contrary as they are in appearance—comprise in their union the great secret of honour. Cross of the Saviour and cross of valour, you are incomplete when apart from one another, for he only knows how to conquer who has learned self-devotion, even to death, and how can this be attained except by belief in eternal life? Though he died in appearance, Napoleon is destined to return in the person of one who will realise his spirit. Solomon and Charlemagne will return also in the person of a single monarch; and then St. John the Evangelist, who according to tradition shall be reborn at the end of time, will appear as sovereign pontiff, the apostle of understanding and of love. The combination of these two rulers, announced by all the prophets, will bring about the wonder of the world’s regeneration. The science of the true magician will be then at its zenith, for so far our workers of miracles have been for the most part sorcerers and bondsmen—that is to say, the blind instruments of chance. Now, the masters whom fatality casts upon the world are soon overthrown thereby, and those who conquer in the name of their passions shall fall the prey of those passions. When Prometheus in his jealousy of Jupiter stole the thunderbolts of the god, he sought to create an immortal eagle, but what he made and immortalised was a vulture. We hear in another fable of that impious king Ixion, who would have ravished the queen of heaven, but that which he received in his arms was a faithless cloud, and he was bound by fiery serpents to the inexorable wheel of destiny. These profound allegories are a warning to false adepts, profaners of Magic Science and partisans of Black Magic. The power of Black Magic is a contagion of vertigo and an epidemic of unreason. The fatality of passion is like a fiery serpent which twists and writhes about the world devouring the souls therein. But intelligence—peaceable, smiling and full of love—represented by the Mother of God, sets her foot upon its head. Fatality consumes itself and is that old serpent of Kronos eternally devouring its tail. Rather there are two hostile serpents striving one with another, until such time as harmony intervenes to enchant them and make them interlace peaceably around the caduceus of Hermes.

CONCLUSION

The most intemperate and absurd of all faiths is to believe that there is no universal and absolute intelligent principle. It is a faith, since it involves the negation of the indefinite and indefinable; it is intemperate, for it is isolating and desolating; it is absurd, because it supposes complete nothing in place of most complete perfection. In Nature all is preserved by equilibrium and renewed by activity. Equilibrium in order and activity signifies progress. The science of equilibrium and movement is the absolute science of Nature. Man by its aid can produce and direct natural phenomena as he rises ever towards intelligence that is higher and more perfect than his own. Moral equilibrium is the concurrence of science and faith, distinct in their forces but joined in their action to endow the spirit and heart of man with that rule which is reason. The science which denies faith is not less unreasonable than the faith which denies science.

The object of faith cannot be defined and still less denied by science; science, on the contrary, is itself called to substantiate the rational basis of the hypotheses of faith. An isolated belief does not constitute faith, because it lacks authority and hence moral guarantee; it tends to fanaticism and superstition. Faith is the confidence which is imparted by religion—that is to say, by the communion of belief. True religion is constituted by universal suffrage. It is therefore ever and essentially catholic—that is to say, universal. It is an ideal dictatorship proclaimed generally in the revolutionary domain of the unknown. When the law of equilibrium is understood more adequately it will put an end to all the wars and revolutions of the old world. There has been conflict between powers as between moral forces. The papacy is blamed because it clings to temporal power, but what is forgotten is the protestant tendency towards usurpation of spiritual power. So long as the royalties put forward a pretension to be popes, so long will the popes be driven, by the same law of equilibrium, to the pretension of being kings. The whole world continues to dream of unity in political power, but it does not understand the power resident in equilibrated dualism. Confronted by the royal usurpers of spiritual power, if the Pope were king no longer, he would be no longer anything. In the temporal order he is subject, like others, to the prejudgments of his time; he dare not therefore abdicate his temporal power, if such abdication would be a scandal for a considerable part of the world. When the sovereign opinion of the universe shall have proclaimed publicly that a temporal prince cannot be Pope; when the Czar of all the Russias and the King of Great Britain shall have renounced their derisive priesthood; the Pope will know that which remains to be done on his own part. Till then he must struggle, and if needs be must die, to maintain the integrity of St. Peter’s patrimony.

The science of moral equilibrium will put an end to religious disputes and philosophical blasphemies. Men of understanding will be also men of religion when it comes to be recognised that religion does not impeach the freedom of conscience, and when those who are truly religious shall respect that science which recognises on its own part the existence and necessity of an universal religion. Such science will flood the philosophy of history with new light, and will furnish a synthetic plan of all the natural sciences. The law of equilibrated forces and of organic compensations will reveal a new chemistry and a new physics. So from discovery to discovery we shall work back to Hermetic philosophy, and shall be astonished at those prodigies of simplicity and brilliance which have been for so long and long forgotten.

Philosophy in that day will be exact like mathematics, for true ideas—being those which are identical with the living order and so constituting the science of reality—shall combine with reason and justice to furnish exact proportions and equations as rigorous as numbers. Error thenceforth will be possible to ignorance alone, and true knowledge will be free from self-deception. Aestheticism will be subordinated no longer to caprices of taste which change as fashions change. If the beautiful is the splendour of the true, we shall be able to calculate without error the radiation of a light of which the source shall be certainly known and determined with exact precision. Poetry will abound no longer with foolish and subversive tendencies, nor will poets be those dangerous enchanters whom Plato crowned with flowers and banished from his republic; they will be rather magicians of reason and gracious mathematicians of harmony. Does this mean that the earth will become an Eldorado? No, for so long as humanity exists, there will be children, meaning those who are weak, small, ignorant and poor. But society will be governed by its true masters, and there will be no irremediable evil in human life. It will be understood that the divine miracles are those of eternal order, and the phantoms of imagination will be worshipped no longer on the faith of unexplained wonders. The abnormal character of certain phenomena is only a proof of our ignorance in the presence of the laws of Nature. When God designs to communicate the knowledge of Himself He enlightens our reason and does not seek to confound or surprise it. In that day we shall know the utmost limit of the power of man who is created in the image of God; we shall realise that he also is a creator in his own sphere and that his goodness, directed by Eternal Reason, is a lower providence for beings which are placed by Nature under his influence and domination. Religion will then and for evermore have nothing to fear from progress, and will follow in the course thereof. The Blessed Vincent de Lerins, a doctor justly venerated in the golden chain of catholicism, expresses admirably this accord between progress and conservative authority. According to him, true faith is worthy of our confidence only on account of that invariable authority which safeguards its dogmas from the caprices of human ignorance. “This notwithstanding,” adds Vincent de Lerins, “such immobility is not death; on the contrary, it preserves a germ of life for the future. That which we believe to-day without understanding will be understood by the future, which will rejoice in the knowledge thereof. _Posteritas intellectum gratuletur, quod ante vetustas non intellectum venerabatur._ If therefore we are asked whether all progress is excluded from the religion of Christ Jesus, the answer is no, assuredly, for great is the progress expected. Who indeed would be so jealous of humanity and at such enmity with God as to wish to hinder progress? But the condition is that it should be progress in reality, and not change of belief. Progress is the growth and development of each thing according to its class and its nature. Disorder is confusion and the medley of things and their nature. There must be undoubtedly a difference in the degrees of intelligence, science and wisdom, as much for men in general as for each man in

## particular, according to the natural succession of epochs in the

Church, but so only that all be conserved and that dogma shall ever cherish the same spirit and maintain the same definition. Religion should develop souls successively, as life develops bodies which remain the same through all the stages of their growth. How great is the difference between the infantile flower of early years and the maturity of age. The old notwithstanding are the same in respect of personality as they were in boyhood; it is the exterior and the appearances which have changed. The limbs of an infant in the cradle are exceedingly frail, yet are they the same organs, having the same root principles, as those of the man; and this must be so, for otherwise there is deformity or death.

“The analogy obtains in the religion of Jesus Christ, for progress therein is fulfilled according to the same conditions and following similar laws. It grows with the years, with the years it increases in strength, but nothing is added to the sum total of its being. It was born complete and perfect in respect of proportions, and it grows and extends without changing. Our fathers sowed the wheat, and our nephews ought not to reap tares. The intermediate crops change nothing in the nature of the grain; we leave it perforce as we take it. Catholicism planted roses, and is it for us to substitute brambles? No, unquestionably; otherwise, woe to us. The balm and cinnamon of this spiritual paradise must not change in our hands to aconite and poison. All whatsoever which in the Church, that lovely land of God, has been sown by the fathers must be cultivated and nourished by the sons. This only must grow, and this alone blossom; but it may increase, and it should develop. As a fact, God permits that the dogmas of his heavenly philosophy shall be studied, developed, polished in a certain sense; but that which is forbidden is to change them, and that which is a crime is to prune them or to mutilate. May new light come down on them and the wise distinctions multiply, but let them ever preserve their fulness, their integrity and their native quality.”

Let us therefore take it for granted that all conquests of science in the past have been achieved for the profit of the universal Church, and, with Vincent de Lerins, let us allocate thereto the undivided heritage of all progress to come. Unto her be the great aspirations of Zoroaster and all discoveries of Hermes; hers be the Key of the Holy Arch and the Ring of Solomon, for she represents the holy and immutable hierarchy. She is stronger by reason of her struggles and is grounded by her apparent falls in still greater stability. She suffers in order that she may reign; she is cast down that she may be exalted in her rising; and she dies that she may rise again. “We must be prepared,” says Comte Joseph de Maistre, “for a great event in the divine order; we are moving towards it at an accelerated pace, which must be manifest to all observers, while striking oracles announce that the hour is at hand. Many prophecies in the _Apocalypse_ have reference to these modern times. One writer has gone so far as to say that the event is already inaugurated and that the French nation is destined to become the great instrument of the most mighty of all revolutions. There is perhaps no truly religious man in all Europe—I speak of the educated classes—who is not in expectation of something extraordinary at this present moment. Does a general presentiment of the kind count for nothing? Go back through past ages, even to the birth of our Saviour. At that period a high and mysterious voice, beginning in the eastern realms, proclaimed that the East was about to triumph, that a conqueror would come out of Judea, that a divine infant was given us, that he would descend from highest heaven and restore the golden age upon the earth. Such ideas were spread abroad everywhere, and as they lent themselves to poetry above all things, they were taken over by the greatest of Latin poets and emblazoned with brilliant hues in his _Pollio_. To-day, as in the time of Virgil, the universe is in expectation, and how on our part shall we despise such strong persuasion, or by what right condemn those who are devoted to sacred researches on the indications of divine signs? If you seek proof of what is in store, look at the sciences themselves; consider the progress of chemistry, of astronomy also, and you will see where they are leading. Would you think, for example, that Newton takes us back to Pythagoras and that it will be proved presently that the heavenly bodies are set in motion, like human bodies, by intelligences joined thereto? We know not how, but this is what is on the point of being verified beyond all dispute. Such doctrine may seem paradoxical and even ridiculous, because current opinion imposes this view; but let us wait till the natural affinity of religion and science marry both in the mind of a single man of genius. His advent cannot be far off, and then the opinions which now seem bizarre or irrational will become axioms which no one will question, while people will talk of our present stupidity as they now speak of mediæval superstition.”[370]

According to St. Thomas, and it is a beautiful utterance: “All that God wills is just, but that which is just should not be so designated only because God wills it”—_Non ex hoc dicitur justum quod Deus illud vult_. The moral doctrine of the future is contained herein, and from its fruitful principle one deduction follows immediately: not only is it good from the standpoint of faith to do what is ordained by God, but even from the standpoint of reason it is excellent and rational to obey Him. Man can therefore say: I do good not only because God wills it but because I also will. The will of humanity may be thus at once free and in conformity, for reason—demonstrating in an irrecusable fashion the wisdom of the prescriptions of faith—will act on its proper impulse by following the divine law, of which reason thus becomes, as it were, the human sanction. From that time forward superstition and impiety will be no longer possible, while from these considerations it follows that in religion and in practical—that is to say, in moral—philosophy, there will be an absolute authority, and moral dogmas will alone be revealed and established. Till then we shall have the pain and consternation of seeing daily the most simple and universal questions of right and duty challenged, while if blasphemies are reduced to silence, it is one thing to impose such silence but another to persuade and convert.

So long as Transcendent Magic was profaned by the wickedness of men, the Church of necessity proscribed it. False Gnostics have discredited that name of Gnosticism which was once so pure; sorcerers have outraged the children of the Magi; but religion, that friend of tradition and guardian of the treasures of antiquity, can no longer reject a doctrine anterior to the Bible and in perfect accord with traditional respect for the past, as well as with our most vital hopes for progress in the future. The common people are initiated by toil and by faith into the right of property and knowledge. There will be always such a people, as there will be children always; but when the aristocracy, endowed with wisdom, shall become a mother to the people, the path of personal, successive, gradual emancipation will be open to all, and he that is called will thereby be enabled through his own efforts to attain the rank of the elect. This is that mystery of the future which antique initiation concealed in its dark recesses. The miracles of Nature made subject to the will of man are reserved for the elect to come. The crook of the priesthood shall become the rod of miracles; it was so in the time of Moses and of Hermes; it will be so again. The sceptre of the Magus will be that of the world’s king or emperor; and that person will by right be first among men who shall have shewn himself greatest of all in knowledge and in virtue. Magic, at that time, will be no longer an occult science except for the ignorant; it will be one that is incontestable for all. Then shall universal revelation resolder one to another all links of its golden chain; the human epic will close and even the efforts of Titans will have served only to restore the altar of the true God. All forms which have clothed the divine thought successively will be reborn immortal and perfect. All those features sketched by the successive art of nations will be united to form the perfect image of God. Having been purified and brought out of chaos, dogma will give birth naturally to an infallible ethic, and the social order will be constituted on this basis. Systems which are now in warfare are dreams of the twilight; let them pass. The sun shines and the earth follows its course; distracted is he who doubts that the day is coming. Distracted also are those who say that catholicism is only a dead trunk and that we must put the axe thereto. They do not see that beneath its dry bark the living tree is renewed unceasingly. Truth has no past and no future; it is eternal; it is not that which ends; it is our dream only. Hammer and hatchet, which destroy in the sight of man, are in God’s hand as the knife of a pruner, and the dead branches—being superstitions and heresies in religion, science and politics—can alone be lopped from the tree of everlasting convictions and beliefs.

It has been the purpose of this History of Magic to demonstrate, that, at the beginning, the symbols of religion were those also of science, which was then in concealment. May religion and science, reunited in the future, give help and shew love to one another, like two sisters, for theirs has been one cradle.

Here ends the History of Magic

APPENDIX

AUTHOR’S PREFACE PREFIXED TO THE FIRST EDITION[371]

The works of Éliphas Lévi on the science of the ancient magi are intended to form a complete course, divided into three parts. The first

## part contains the Doctrine and Ritual of Transcendental Magic; the

second is The History of Magic; and the third will be published later under the title of The Key to the Great Mysteries. Taken separately, each of these parts gives a complete instruction and seems to contain the whole science; but in order to a full understanding of one it is indispensable to study the two others carefully.

The triadic division of our undertaking has been imposed by the science itself, because our discovery of its great mysteries rests entirely upon the significance which the old hierophants attached to numbers. THREE was for them the generating number, and in the exposition of every doctrine they had regard to (_a_) the theory on which it was based, (_b_) its realisation and (_c_) its application to all possible uses. Whether philosophical or religious, thus were dogmas formed; and thus the dogmatic synthesis of that Christianity which was heir of the magi imposes on our faith the recognition of Three Persons in one God and three mysteries in universal religion.

We have followed in the arrangement of the two works already published, and shall follow in the third work, the plan indicated by the Kabalah—that is to say, by the purest tradition of occultism. Our Doctrine and Ritual are each divided into twenty-two chapters distinguished by the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. We have set at the head of each chapter the letter thereto belonging and the Latin words which, according to the best writers, represent its hieroglyphical meaning. For example, at the head of the first chapter will be found:—

1 א A

THE RECIPIENT Disciplina Ensoph Kether

The explanation is that the letter _Aleph_-equivalent to A in Latin, and having the number 1 as its numerical value—signifies the Recipient, the man who is called to initiation, the qualified personality, corresponding to the Bachelor of the Tarot. It signifies also _disciplina_, or dogmatic syllepsis; _Ensoph_, or being in its general and primary conception; and finally, _Kether_, or the Crown, which, in Kabalistic theology, is the first and obscure idea of Divinity. The chapter in question is the development of the title and the title contains hieroglyphically the whole chapter.

The History of Magic, which follows, narrates and explains, according to the general theory of the science furnished in the Doctrine and Ritual, the realisation of that science through the ages. As the introduction explains, it is constituted in harmony with the number seven—the septenary being the number of the creative week and of Divine Realisation.

The Key to the Great Mysteries will be established on the number four—which is that of the enigmatic forms of the sphinx and of elementary manifestations. It is also the number of the square and of force. In the book referred to, certitude will be established on irremovable bases. The enigma of the sphinx will have its complete solution and our readers will be provided with that Key of things kept secret from the foundation of the world which the learned Postel only dared to depict enigmatically in one of his most obscure books, giving no satisfactory explanation.

The History of Magic explains the affirmations found in the Doctrine and Ritual; the Key of the Great Mysteries will complete and explain the History of Magic. In this manner, for the attentive reader at least, we trust that nothing will be found wanting in our revelation of the secrets of Jewish Kabalism and of Supreme Magic—whether that of Zoroaster or of Hermes.

The writer of these books gives lessons willingly to serious and interested persons in search of these; but once and for all he desires to forewarn his readers that he tells no fortunes, does not teach divination, makes no predictions, composes no philtres and lends himself to no sorcery and no evocation. He is a man of science, not a man of deception. He condemns energetically whatsoever is condemned by religion, and hence he must not be confounded with persons who can be approached without hesitation on a question of applying their knowledge to a dangerous or illicit use. For the rest he welcomes honest criticism, but he fails to understand certain hostilities. Serious study and conscientious labour are superior to all attacks; and the first blessings which they procure, for those who can appreciate them, are profound peace and universal benevolence.

ÉLIPHAS LÉVI.

_September 1st, 1859._

INDEX

Abel, 21, 117

Abiram, 386

Abraham, 3, 48, 64, 101, 108, 146, 180, 219

Abraham the Jew, 331, 351, 353

Absolute, 2, 459, 500

_Acharat_, 410, 412, 414

Achilles, 133, 150

Adam, 11, 40, 41, 42, 46, 111, 188, 243, 244, 259, 301, 459

Adam, Book of the Penitence of, 41-43

_Adam Kadmon_, 51

_Adhi-Nari_, 64

Adolphus of Schleswig, 253

_Adonai_, 103, 229, 248, 249

Aeschylus, 86

Agamemnon, 150

Agde, Council of, 241

Agesilaus, 121

_Agla_, 103, 104, 248

Agrippa, H. Cornelius, 90, 335

_Ahih_, 103, 301

Ahriman, 9, 16, 25

_Al_, 300

Albertus Magnus, 89, 258, 261

Albigenses, 128, 424

Alchemy, 85, 143, 195-197, 259, 262, 263, 279, 327, 331-334, 355, 357, 411, 509, 510

Alcides, 86

Alcmene, 121

_Aleph_, 33, 34, 411

Alexandria, School of, 74, 110, 215-219

Alfarabius, 262

Alphabet, Hebrew, 78, 103, 104, 152, 211

Alphonso XI, 316

_Althotas_, 410, 412

Amasis, King, 92

Ammonius, 165, 215

Amphion, 82

Analogy, 20, 22, 176, 521

André, Françoise, 429, 432

Antichrist, 53

Apis, 80

Apocalypse, 44, 49, 101, 173, 174, 383, 522

Apocrypha, 174

Apollonius, of Tyana, 193-198, 515

Apuleius, 204-207

_Ararita_, 301

Arcanum, Great. _See_ Great Secret

Archedemus, 137

Aristeus, 262, 263, 377

Aristotle, 53, 123, 124, 261, 329

Arius, 213

Ark of the Covenant, 42

Aroux, Eugène, 346, 351

Art, Royal, 1, 77, 120

Art, Sacerdotal, 120, 121, 122

Artephius, 262

Asclepios, 115

Astarte, 61

Astrology, 88

Athanor, 196

Augury, 162

Augustine, St., 7, 207

Aupetit, Pierre, 363

Babel, 117, 118

Bacchantes, 126, 148, 161

Bacchus, 148, 152

Baldwin II, 265

Ballanche, 88

Balmes, James, 178

_Balneum Mariæ_, 196

Baphomet, 269

Bartolocci, 257

Beausoleil, Baron de, 357

Bel, 229

Belphegor, 119

Belshazzar, 157

Belus, 59, 62

Benjamin, Tribe of, 159

Bermechobus, 44

Bernard of Sienna, St., 316

Bernard of Saxe-Weimar, Prince, 415

_Berthe au Grand Pied_, 233

Berthelot, 74

_Beth_, 33

_Binah_, 116

Blaquerne, Hermit, 329

_Boaz_, 21, 42, 179, 411

Bodinus, 349, 362, 363

Boguet, Henri, 363

Bohani, 64

Böhme, Jacob, 138, 357

Boismont, Brierre de, 131, 132, 191, 241

Bonaventura, St., 50

Boniface, Bishop of Mayence, 242

_Book of Ceremonial Magic_, 130, 214, 250, 298, 299

Bossuet, 6, 30

Bouche, Madame, 446

Brahma, 47

Brahmans, 198

Brennus, 228

Bryant, Jacob, 53, 136

Buddha, 66

Cadmus, 82, 83, 148, 149

Caduceus, 149, 517

Cagliostro, Count, 409-415, 417, 473

Cahagnet, 437

Cain, 21, 45, 47, 48, 64, 72, 85, 117, 139

Calchas, 150

Calf, Golden, 80

Calvin, John, 128

Camul, 229

Canaan, 46, 119

Cardan, Jerome, 217

Cartomancy, 151, 445. _See_ Tarot

Cazotte, Jacques, 416-421

Cebes, Table of, 142, 360, 470

Cedron, 42

Certon, Salomon, 162

Chamos, 119

Charistia, 158, 159

Charity, 178, 179

Charlemagne, 245, 246-251, 252, 254, 516

Charles Martel, 242

Charles the Bald, 256

Charles VI, 316

Charles VI, of Austria, 441

Charles VII, 271

Charles IX, 349

Charvoz, Abbé, 465

Chastity, 153, 154

Chateaubriand, 200, 232

Chilperic, 235, 236

_Chokmah_, 7, 116

Christ, 1, 11, 20, 29, 42, 43, 145, 157, 171, 173, 264, 266, 405, 454, 508, 515

Christian, P., 417

Church, Catholic, 13, 20, 35, 115, 145, 171, 287, 454, 455

Circe, 90

Clairvoyance, 18, 58, 70

Clavel, 441

Clement, St., 208

Clement V, Pope, 265

Cleopatra, 262

Clothilde, St., 234, 235

Clovis, 235, 236

Cocytus, 141

_Cœlum Sephiroticum_, 137

Comte, Auguste, 459, 461

Confucius, 3, 393

Constance of Provence, 256, 257

Cooper-Oakley, Isabel, 401

Corinth, Bride of, 223 _et seq._

Cornuphis, 121

Cosmopolite, _i.e._ Alexander Seton, 357

Cremer, John, 326

Crollius, Oswald, 356, 357

Cross of Eden, 208

Cuvier, 227

Cyprian, Prayer of St., 203

Daath, 116

Dacier, 176

_Daleth_, 33, 34

Damis, 195, 197

Daniel, 52, 92

Dante, 34, 142, 345 _et seq._, 347, 351

Darboy, Monsignor, 218

Davies, 136

_Dea, Bona_, 155

De Cauzons, P., 257

De Cossé Brissac, Duc, 423

De Gabalis, Comte, 245

De Genlis, Madame, 402

Dejanira, 133, 134

Delaage, Henri, 477, 478

Delancre, 362, 363

De Lerins, Blessed Vincent, 520, 521

Deleuze, 404, 417

De Luchet, Marquis, 403, 405, 438, 483

Delrio, 362

Deluge, 40, 46, 117

De Maistre, Comte Joseph, 5, 28, 106, 177, 240, 522

De Marnier, Duc, 423

De Médicis, Catharine, 349

De Mirville, Comte, 241, 285, 335, 475, 476

Democritus, 120

De Paul, St. Vincent, 179

Desbillons, 338, 339

Desmousseux, G., 375

D’Espagnet, 357

De Sombreuil, Mdlle., 420, 424

Deussen, 67

De Vatiguerro, Jean, 443

De Villanova, Arnaldus, 327

De Villars, Abbé, 109, 110, 401

Devil, 12, 13, 14, 15, 187 _et seq._, 281 _et seq._

Diana, 161

Dionysius, 217, 218, 219

Dionysius the Younger, 137

Diseases, Astral, 159

_Doctrine and Ritual of Transcendental Magic_, 13, 29, 116, 172, 230, 393

Dodona, Oaks of, 84

Dominic, St., 262, 292

Donatists, 128

D’Ourches, Comte, 479, 481, 482, 484

Dositheus, 180

Dreams, 163

Druids, 229-231, 232, 251

Duchesne, 257

Du Fresnoy, Lenglet, 327

Du Perron, Anquetil, 67

Du Potet, Baron, 57, 60, 71, 130, 471, 472, 473, 485

Dupuis, 3, 4

_Dzenioutha Sepher_, 393

Eckartshausen, Karl von, 436

Ecstasy, 71, 109, 132

Eden and Earthly Paradise, 41, 45, 115, 244

Edmond, 493, 494

Egeria, 152

Elementary Spirits, 111, 244

Eleusis, 134, 161, 345

Elizabeth, Mme., 424

_Elohim, Elohim Tzabaoth_, 135, 247, 283

_Empusæ_, 90

_Enchiridion_, 214, 247-250, 478

Enoch, 344

_Enoch, Book of_, 39, 40, 43, 44, 46

_Ensoph_, 44, 137

Equilibrium, 149, 165, 501, 503, 517, 518, 519

Erdan, A., 453, 472, 495, 499

Eros and Anteros, 179

Esquiros, Alphonse, 477, 495, 497

Etteilla, 77, 316, 445

Eucharist, 177, 178, 210

Eudoxus, 53

Euripides, 161

Eurydice, 87

Eve, 17, 117, 244, 301, 459

Evil, 13, 14

Ezekiel, 92, 265, 381

Faber, Rev. G. S., 136

Fabré-Palaprat, 423

Faith and Science, 10, 27, 178, 517, 518

Figuier, Louis, 74, 327, 409

Fire, Secret, 196

Flamel, Nicholas, 331-334, 347, 351, 353

Fludd, Robert, 357

Fo-Hi, 392

Fontenelle, 156

Fourier, 117, 286, 453

_Four Sons of Aymon_, 246

Franck, Adolphe, 49

Fredegonde, 235, 236, 237, 238

Frederick William, King, 435

Freemasonry, Freemasons, 4, 9, 21, 29, 54, 266, 382-388

French Revolution, 190

Gaffarel, 280

Ganneau, 458, 495, 497, 499

Garden of Olives, 42

_Garden of Pomegranates_, 21

Garinet, Jules, 235, 243, 245, 252, 258, 371

Gaufridi, Louis, 364-366

Geber, 262

Genebrard, 329

Geoffrey de St. Omer, 265

Geomancy, 151

Gerle, Dom, 428-431, 497

Gilles de Laval, 272-280, 282, 361

_Gimel_, 34

Gipsies, 306-318

Girard, 373

Glauber, Richard, 357

Gnosis, Gnosticism, Gnostics, 4, 54, 65, 184, 198, 208, 209, 211, 264, 269, 291, 345, 388, 406, 415, 524

Goethe and the _Faust_, 200, 305, 320, 441, 442, 453, 458

_Göetia_, 64, 67, 89, 110, 153, 174

_Golden Ass_, 205, 206

Golden Fleece, 83, 84, 85

_Golden Legend_, 200, 204

Graces, Three, 159

Grandier, Urbain, 367-372

Gregory, St., 158

Gregory of Tours, 237, 242

Gregory XVI, Pope, 466

Grimoires, Various, 130, 279, 293, 297-305

Gringonneur, Jacques, 79

Guldenstubbé, Baron de, 286, 480, 483, 484

Gymnosophists, 66

Hagar, 48

Ham, 48, 85, 117, 118, 127

_He_, 74

Hecate, 161

Helena, 183

Helmont, J. B. van, 357

Hennequin, Victor, 474

Henry III, 349, 350

Heraclitus, 120

Hercules, 84, 123, 133

Hermanubis, 80

Hermes, 53, 73, 74, 75, 134, 260

Hiram, 383-387

Hierarchy, Descending, 191

Hierophants, 156

_Hod_, 21

Homer, 83, 133, 437

Honorius II, 298, 299

Honorius III, 292

Hugh de Payens, 265, 266, 268, 270

Hussites, 128

Hypatia, 215

Hyphasis, 194

Iao, 140

Iliad, 85

Illuminati, 4, 54, 148, 284, 435 _et seq._

Immortality, 99

Irminsul, 228

Isaac de Loria, 419

Isaiah, 11

Isis, 25, 80, 138, 233, 505

Ixion, 142

Iynx, 77, 78

Jachin, 21, 42, 179, 411

Jacob, 7, 8, 159

Jason, 84, 85

Jean d’Arras, 234

Jean de Meung, 346, 347

Jean Hachette, 230

Jechiel, Rabbi, 239, 240, 257, 258

Jehovah, 80, 103, 104, 105, 248, 249, 301, 304

Joachim, Abbé, 426

Joan, Pope, 28

Joan of Arc, 230, 234, 271, 272

Johannite Doctrine, 174, 266, 267, 268, 269, 345, 382, 424, 431

John, St., 29, 43, 44, 49, 101, 138, 208, 214, 264, 268, 328, 344, 405, 516

Jonah, 208

Joseph, 76

Josephine, Empress, 443, 444

Jude, St., 39

Julian the Apostate, 193, 198, 515

Juno, 83

Jupiter, 7, 86, 111, 152, 161; Jupiter and Semele, 19

Justina, Legend of, 200-202

Juvenal, 154

Kabalah, 3, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 33, 34, 41, 43, 48, 49, 65, 77, 101-112, 136, 138, 143, 146, 171, 174, 192, 213, 229, 263, 265, 327, 330, 335, 354, 393, 395, 409, 413, 418, 419. _See_ Zohar

_Kether_, 7

Keturah, 64

Khnoubis, 140

Khunrath, Heinrich, 29, 263, 353-356

Kircher, Athanasius, 77, 156

Klodswinthe, 235

Kölmer, 412

Koran, 241

Kotzebue, 440

Koung-Tseu, 146

Krishna, 66

Krudener, Madame de, 446-448

Labarum, 250

Lacenaire, 467

Lactantius, 141

La Harpe, 417

Lamech, 72

_Lamiæ_, 90

Lamennais, Abbé, 496

Land, Promised, 159

_Larvæ_, 111, 112, 128, 141

Lascaris, 408, 409

Lavater, 437, 483

Laysis, 93

Leibnitz, 393, 394

_Lemures_, 141

Lenormand, 444, 445, 446, 493

Leo III, Pope, 214, 248

Leon-Tao-Yuan, 392

Lethe, 99, 141

L’Étoile, 350

_Liber Mirabilis_, 44

Light, Astral, 13, 16, 18, 19, 57, 59, 61, 71, 73, 98, 104, 109, 110, 127, 131, 157, 164, 175, 181, 185, 188, 189, 190, 195, 213, 279, 332, 342, 410, 468, 506

Lilith, 418

_Little Albert_, 160, 261

Loiseaut, 427

Lopukhin, 45

Louis, St., 239, 257

Louis the Pious, 245, 256

Louis XVI, 423, 424, 425, 433

Louis XVII, 433, 434, 446, 448, 461, 462, 467, 497

Louis XVIII, 448

Lucifer, 11, 12, 14, 187, 188, 192

Lucretia, 154

Lully, Raymund, 319-330

Luther, Martin, 28, 347-349

Macrocosm, 511, 512

Magi, 1, 55, 59, 62, 67, 147, 160, 180, 186, 228, 515

Magi, the Three, 1, 66, 146, 147

Magic: as the science of the ancient Magi, 1; as certitude in philosophy and religion, 2; its profanation, 4; as the science of the devil, 9; its Great Secret, 17; opens the Temple of Nature, 30; does not explain the mysteries of religion, 30; its chief attraction, 31; distinction between good and evil, 45; spurious Magic of India, 45; term of, 58; its perfect doctrine in Egypt, 73; its summary in the Emerald Tablet, 74; miracles of Moses not referable to Magic, 79; Magic of Light, 180; Magic of the old sanctuaries, 193; Magic of works, 262; why Magic is proscribed by the Church, 524; the future of Magic, 524, 525

Magic, Black, 17, 64, 71, 89, 90, 118, 126, 129, 130, 138, 190, 209, 223, 255, 260, 273, 291, 350, 361, 468, 476, 507, 515

Magnetism, 19, 20

Mahomet, 28, 241

Maia, 157

Maier, Michael, 357

Maimonides, 393

_Malkuth_, 21

Manes, 54, 144

Manicheans, 16, 198

_Mapah._ _See_ Ganneau

Marat, 47, 418, 439

Marcellinus, 198

Marcos, 210, 212

Mars, 85

Martin de Gallardon, 432, 462

Martinists, 16

Mary the Virgin, 10, 23, 24, 88, 149, 155, 157, 175, 176, 255, 517

Matter Jacques, 210, 269

Mead, G. R. S., 56, 57, 58, 77

Medea, 84, 85, 91

Medicine, Universal, 133, 414, 508

Mediums, 164, 427 _et seq._, 475, 479-483

Melchisedek, 180, 401

Melusine, 233, 234

Memphis, 121, 134

Menander, 186, 415

Mercury, 74, 104, 196, 332, 333, 358, 504; Hymn of Mercury, 162; Astral Mercury, 414

Mesmer, Anton, 57, 396-399

Methodius, St., 44, 45, 425

Mèves, Aug., 433

Microcosm, 263, 511, 512

Minerva, 83, 150

Minos, 161

Mithraic Mysteries, 117

Molay, Jacques de, 271, 422, 424

Moloch, 119

Montanists, 211

Mopses, Order of, 440, 441

Morien, 262

Moses, 8, 18, 42, 76, 77, 79, 80, 101, 115, 135, 145, 283, 331, 524; Wand of, 8, 42, 79, 80, 115

Muller, Philip, 357

Musæus, 86

Mustapha, Benjamin, 357

Mysteries, Greek, 135

Mysteries, Ancient, 8

Napoleon, 417, 443, 444

Naudé, Gabriel, 295, 358, 433, 434

Necromancy, 144

Nehamah, 418

Nero, 184, 185

_Netzach_, 7, 21

Nicholas IV, Pope, 328

Nicodemus, Gospel of, 43

Nicæa, Council of, 213

Nimrod, 59

Ninus, 61, 63

Noah, 40, 46

Norton, Thomas, 357

Nostradamus, Michael, 444

Numa, 55, 60, 92, 152, 155

Oberon, 246

Odyssey, 85

Œdipus, 86, 134, 515

Olivarius, 444

_Om_, 69

Omphale, 134

Oracles, 174, 175

Orléans, Council of, 241

Orpheus, 3, 82, 85, 87, 88, 126, 134, 148, 149, 152, 515

Ortelius, 357

Osiris, 25, 80, 208, 505

Ostanes, 262

_Oupnek’hat_, 67-72

Pan, 174

Pantacle of Mars, 167

Pantacle of Mercury, 167

Pantacle of Saturn, 167

Pantacle of Venus, 166

Pantacle of the Moon, 166

Pantacle of the Sun, 166

Pantacle of Jupiter, 167

Pantarba, 197

Pantheism, 66

Pantheus, 146, 152

Paracelsus, 111, 231, 263, 340, 341, 342, 344

Paradise, Earthly, 41, 115, 141

Paris the Deacon, 185

Parmenides, 155

Pascal, 50, 51, 439

Pasqually, Martines de, 17, 89, 416

Paths, Thirty-two, 78

Patricius, Franciscus, 54, 56, 57

Paul, St., 11

Penelope, 150

Pentagram, 2

Pentheus, 148

Pepin the Short, 242

Pernety, A. J., 85

Peter, St., 182, 183, 185, 214

Peter Lombard, 261

Peter the Venerable, 261

Petronius, 185

Pharamond, 238

Pharaoh and his Magicians, 17, 18, 79, 80

Philalethes, 357

Philip, St., 182

Philip the Fair, 265, 270, 422

Philostratus, 193, 194

Photius, 265

Physiognomy, 97

Picus de Mirandula, 109

Pignorius, L., 77

Pillars, 140

Pison, Lucius, 55

Pistorius, 78

Planis Campe, David, 357

Platina, 293, 296

Plato, 56, 86, 121, 122, 124, 135, 136, 138, 142, 143, 167, 214, 215, 519

Pliny, 55

Plotinus, 165, 215

Polonus, Martinus, 294

Polycrates, 92

Porphyry, 160, 161, 165, 215

Postel, William, 43, 335-340

Pot of Manna, 42

Poterius, 357

Prometheus, 85, 86, 111, 207, 260, 261

Proserpine, 152, 161

Protestantism, 145, 146, 179

_Protoplastes_, 110

Psyche, 205

Punishment, Eternal, 7

Puritans, 128

Pyramids, 173

Pyrrhos, 120

Pythagoras, 88, 92-100, 135, 140, 155, 523

Ragon, J. M., 70, 382

_Regnum Sanctum_, 1, 502

_Reichstheater_ of Müller, 254

Reincarnation, 99, 100

Reuchlin, John, 3

Richard Cœur de Lion, 270

Richemont, Baron de, 433

Robert the Pious, 256

Robespierre, 47, 430, 431, 432

Roland, 246, 247

_Romance of the Rose_, 115, 351

Romarius, 262

Rose-nobles, 326

Rosenroth, Baron Knorr von, 49, 419

Rosicrucians, 4, 29, 100, 116, 249, 346, 352, 353, 358, 359, 382, 401, 402, 405, 406

Rossetti, Gabriele, 346

Rousseau, 47, 125, 177, 422

Rulandus, Martinus, 74, 414

Saint-Foix, 229

Saint-Germain, Comte de, 234, 400, 406, 407, 408, 409

Saint-Martin, L. C. de, 16, 17, 416

Saint-Médard, 374

Saint-Simon, 26

Saint-Victor, Adam de, 44

Salic Laws, 238-241

Salmanas, 262

Salt, 45, 104, 196, 504

Samaria, 182, 204

Sand, Carl, 440

Sardanapalus, 62, 63

Satan, 12, 14, 15, 16, 139, 157, 192

Schroepfer, 436

Schuré, Edouard, 92

Second Birth, 133

Secret, Great, 2, 23, 143, 199, 411; Great Magical Secret, 507

Secret Societies, 33

_Secret Tradition in Freemasonry_, 265, 437

Semiramis, 59, 61

_Sephiroth_, 7, 21, 65, 103, 116, 137, 249

Sergius IV, Pope, 296

Seth, 41, 45, 46, 48, 101

Shelley, P. B., 162

Sibyls, 150, 151

Simon Magus, 180-186, 209, 415

Sisyphus, 142

Sixtus IV, 296

Sobrier, 498

Socrates, 64, 120

Solomon, 145, 384, 385, 386, 401, 516; Keys of, 105, 393, 507, 510-513; Ring of, 502, 507, 510, 511, 513; Seal of, 507, 510, 511, 513; Star of, 75, 249; Pillars of, 21, 27; Temple of, 145, 146, 167, 179, 265, 383, 384, 385, 387

Sphinx, 475, 506

Spirits, Return of, 106, 107, 108

Sprenger, 362

Star, Blazing, 1

Steinert, 435

Stone, Corner, 173; Stone of the Philosophers, 196, 197; Philosophical Stone, 262, 510

_Stryges_, 90, 144

Sulphur, 104, 196, 504

Superstition, 158

Swedenborg, Emmanuel, 51, 394-396, 433, 453, 456

Sword of the Cherubim, 117

Sylvester II, Pope, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296

Synesius, 208, 215, 216, 217, 515

Table of Bembo, 77; Table of Emerald, 73, 74; Table of Denderah, 4; Tables of the Law, 42

Tabor, 420

Talleyrand, 297

_Talmud_, 20, 172, 239, 240

Tantalus, 142

Taranis, 228

Tarchon, 92

_Tarot_, 57, 58, 78, 79, 105, 151, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 416, 445; Chinese, 391-393

Tavernier, 342

Telesma, 73, 74, 505

Templar, Knights, 8, 265-271, 291, 328, 406, 422, 423, 424, 425, 467

Temple, Second, 266

Temporal Power, 517, 518

Tenarus, 142

Teresa, St., 9

Tertullian, 10, 204, 211

Tetrad, 93, 95

Teutas, 228, 229

Thales, 140

Thebes, 3, 82, 83

Theoclet, 268

Theosophy, 138

Théot, Catherine, 429-432, 446, 497

Thomas Aquinas, St., 6, 259, 261, 523

Thoth, 229; Book of, 43, 121. _See_ Tarot

Tieck, Ludwig, 361

Tigellinus, 185

Tiresias, 149, 150

Tissot, Hilarion, 189, 283, 360

_Toldoth Jeshu, Sepher_, 172, 268

Torneburg, John, 357

Torreblanca, F., 90, 190, 362

Tournefort, 489, 493

Tree of Knowledge, 41, 115, 116, 323

Tree of Life, 41

Trent, Council of, 336, 340

Trevisan, Bernard, 334

Tribunal, Secret, 250-254

Trigonum, 392

Trimalcyon, 184

Trithemius, Abbot, 334, 335, 352

Trois-Échelles, 349

Trophonius, 139

Tullus Hostilius, 55

Typhon, 25

Vaillant, 311, 313, 314, 315, 316

Valentine, Basil, 210, 334

Vampires, 112, 144, 147, 489-493

_Vau_, 34

Vaudois, 128, 424

Vedas, 65

Velleda, 232

Venus, 61, 82, 157, 159

Vienna, Council of, 328

Vintras, Eugène, 212, 462-470

Virgil, 86

Vishnu, 64, 65, 66

Voltaire, 3, 106, 116, 155, 373, 374

Westcott, W. Wynn, 78

William of Brunswick, 253

William of Loris, 346, 351

William of Malmesbury, 295

Williams, Eleazar, 433

Woman, 22, 25, 232-237

Wonders, Seven, 166-168

Word, Sacred, &c., 3, 20, 76, 89, 124, 135, 137, 167, 171, 172, 173, 213, 283, 286, 337, 454, 508

Work, Great, 84, 85, 133, 195, 197, 259, 351, 355, 416, 501, 509

Wronski, Hoene, 459, 460, 461

Yetzirah, Sepher, 20, 43, 48, 49, 52, 77, 78, 173, 219, 331, 336, 355, 391, 504

_Y-Kim_, 392-394

Zain, 34

Zedekias, 243

Zerubbabel, 266, 383

_Zohar_, Sepher Ha, 20, 25, 27, 34, 40, 41, 46, 48, 50, 51, 52, 82, 98, 99, 109, 117, 137, 141, 146, 147, 173, 197, 207, 211, 249, 259, 336, 358, 383, 393, 420, 503

Zoroaster, 3, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 60, 63, 66, 75, 76, 84, 180, 515, 522

THE END

_Printed wholly in England for the_ MUSTON COMPANY.

_By_ LOWE & BRYDONE, PRINTERS, LTD., PARK STREET, CAMDEN TOWN, LONDON, N.W.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The word signifies reception, and in Rabbinical Hebrew it denotes doctrine so communicated—that is to say, by a tradition handed down or received from the past. John Reuchlin specifies it as symbolical reception, signifying that the doctrine is not comprised simply in its surface meaning. He says further that it is of Divine Revelation, and that it belongs primarily to the life-giving contemplation of God. This is in the universal sense, but it is concerned also with secret teaching respecting particular things, meaning things manifest—_contemplatio formarum separatarum_.

[2] The reference is to _L’Origine de tous les Cultes, ou Religion Universelle_, 12 vols. in 8vo, together with an atlas in 4to. Paris, 1794. The work endeavoured to shew the unity of dogma under the multiplicity of symbols and allegories. In other words, it explained religion by astronomy, the cultus in the light of the calendar, mysteries of grace by means of natural phenomena. An abridgment in a small volume appeared about 1821. The Table of Denderah or Dendra was a great zodiac sculptured on the ceiling of the portico belonging to the Temple at that place, which was the ancient Tentyrio.

[3] _Sed omnia in mensura, et numero, et pondere disposuisti_: “But Thou hast ordered all things in measure and number and weight.”—WISDOM, xi. 21.

[4] The conventional Hexagram presents in pictorial symbolism the root doctrine of the Hermetic Emerald Tablet: “That which is above is equal to that which is below.” It is the sign of the interpenetration of worlds.

[5] According to the _Zohar_, Pt. I., fol. 21_a_, 21_b_, it was with the guardian angel of Esau that Jacob wrestled at the place which he named Peniel. The angel could not prevail against Jacob because the latter derived his strength from the Supreme Light, _Kether_, and from _Chokmah_, which is the second hypostasis. He therefore smote Jacob on the right thigh, which signifies the seventh _Sephira_, or _Netzach_.

[6] The more usual argument of high orthodox theology in the Latin school is that a sin against the Infinite Being is one of infinite culpability. If it were suggested in rejoinder that it must be one of infinite inconsequence, so far as that Being is concerned, it might not be more reasonable than the argument, but it would do less outrage to logic.

[7] It is to be noted, however, that there was mockery of its kind in the middle ages, that Satan and his emissaries in folk-lore appear under ridiculous lights. There is the prototypical story of the devil who gave a course of lectures on Black Magic at the University of Salamanca and demanded, as a consideration, the soul of one of his hearers; but he was cheated with the student’s shadow.

[8] In his earlier work, _The Doctrine and Ritual of Transcendental Magic_, Éliphas Lévi affirms (_a_) on the authority of a writer whom he does not name, that the devil is God, as understood by the wicked; (_b_) on another authority, that the devil is composed of God’s ruins; (_c_) that the devil is the Great Magical Agent employed for evil purposes by a perverse will; (_d_) that he is death masquerading in the cast-off garments of life; (_e_) that Satan, Beelzebub, Adramelek, &c., do not designate spiritual unities, but legions of impure spirits.

[9] In speaking of evil and a possible Prince of Darkness, it is necessary to proceed carefully, if we are confined, like Éliphas Lévi, within the measures of a theory of opposites. The definition of evil as the absence of rectitude is entirely insufficient to cover the facts of experience; it is that indeed, but it is also as much more as may be necessary to account for its positive and active side. The truth is that positive and negative are on both sides of the eternal balance of things postulated by the theory. So far as it goes, evil is the absence of rectitude, and, so far as it goes also, rectitude is the absence of evil; but the vital aspects of good and bad have slipped between the fingers of definition in both cases.

[10] Saint-Martin recognises the existence of an astral region, which is apparently that of sidereal rule. There is, in his view a certain science of this region, and of this the active branch is theurgic, while the passive engenders somnambulism. These divisions constitute the elementary science of the astral, but above these there is one which is more fatal and dangerous, of which he refuses to speak. There is no Martinistic doctrine concerning the Astral Light, understood as an universal medium. Éliphas Lévi seems to have used the term Martinism in a general sense, as if it included the school of Martines de Pasqually. Pasqually, however, has no doctrine concerning the Astral Light. Modern French Martinism has read it into Saint-Martin’s rather ridiculous “epico-magical poem” or allegory, called _Le Crocodile_, much as another school of experiment might find therein a veiled account of the Akasic records and the mode of their study. I refer to the story of Atlantis, which begins at _Chant 64_ and occupies a large part of the book. The account of the Chair of Silence is very curious in this connection.

[11] If the word is of Greek origin it seems to connect with the idea of watchers rather than leaders. Cf. [Greek ho egrêgoros] = Vigil, in the Septuagint.

[12] The Kabalistic explanation is (_a_) that Egyptian Magic was real Magic; (_b_) that its wisdom was of the lowermost degree only; (_c_) that it was overcome by the superior degrees, by which the serpent above, or Metatron, dominates the serpent below, namely, Samael. See _Zohar_, Part II., fol. 28_a_.

[13] Elsewhere Éliphas Lévi suggests that Pharaoh’s magicians refused rather than failed and that the production of flies was beneath the dignity of their Magic.

[14] It should be mentioned that this enumeration is in the reverse order of chronology, and it is not, as it happens, even in accordance with what may be called traditional chronology. Legend says—and Éliphas Lévi himself mentions subsequently—that the _Sepher Yetzirah_ was the work of Abraham and that the _Zohar_ is in its root-matter a literal record of discourses delivered by R. Simeon Ben Jochai, after the fall of Jerusalem, A.D. 70. The Jerusalem and Babylon Talmuds are admittedly growths of some centuries.

[15] The meanings ascribed to the names and inscriptions on the two Pillars of the Temple will be of curious interest to members of the Masonic Fraternity, who will be reminded of variants with which they are themselves familiar. It must be said, however, that the explanation of Lévi corresponds neither to Masonic nor Kabalistic symbolism. According to the latter _Boaz_ is the left-hand Pillar, being that of Severity in the scheme of the Sephirotic Tree; it answers to _Hod_, and the meaning attached to its name is Strength and Vigour. _Jachin_ is on the right hand, answering to _Netzach_ on the Tree; it signifies the state of becoming established. That which is made firm between _Hod_ and _Netzach_ is _Malkuth_, or the kingdom below. This is the late Kabalism of the tract entitled _Garden of Pomegranates_.

[16] This is the particular construction which is placed by Lévi on the texts with which he is assuming to deal, and it is not really justified by these. The _Zohar_ has, however, a doctrine of the Unknown Darkness. The Infinite is neither light nor splendour, though all lights emanate therefrom. It is a Supreme Will, exceeding human comprehension, and more mysterious than all mysteries. See _Zohar_, Part I., fol. 239_a_.

[17] Éliphas Lévi does not seem always to have made the most of his opportunities as regards the texts of Kabalism and the literature thereto belonging which were available at his period in Latin and certain modern languages, including his own. He had otherwise little opportunity of learning the real message of the Zoharic cycle. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, his guesses were sometimes very shrewd, and here and there carry with them the suggestion of intuitions. The teaching of the _Zohar_ on the subject of sex postulates, like so much of its doctrine, a secret tradition to which it never gives expression in fulness, though it is incessantly lifting now one and now another corner of the veil. It is, however, impossible to speak of it within the limit of a note.

[18] It was not a master-word but a mode of greeting; it was neither Masonic nor Kabalistic; it was a Rosicrucian formula. It may be added that: “Peace profound, my brethren”—was answered by: “Emanuel; God is with us.” It is a perfect and highly mystical mode of salutation.

[19] Perhaps the true explanation in respect of Henry Khunrath is that, seemingly, he was of the Lutheran persuasion as one of the accidents of his birth, but in the higher consciousness he was, as he could be only, catholic. As regards the resolute protestantism, Éliphas Lévi says in his _Ritual of Transcendental Magic_ that Khunrath “affects Christianity in expressions and in signs, but it is easy to see that his Christ is the Abraxas, the luminous pentagram radiating on the astronomical cross, the incarnation in humanity of the sovereign sun celebrated by the Emperor Julian.” See my translation of the _Doctrine and Ritual of Transcendental Magic_, p. 257.

[20] Éliphas Lévi has said previously (_a_) that the Church ignores Magic—for she must either ignore it or perish; (_b_) that Magic, as understood by him, is absolute religion as well as absolute science; (_c_) that it should regenerate all forms of worship.

[21] If it be worth while to say so the translation of this passage does not follow the text, which suggests that the act of conception—on the female side—involves suffering. The text reads: _C’est le plaisir qui féconde, mais c’est la douleur qui conçoit et enfante_.

[22] According to the _Zohar_, the letter _Aleph_ is a sacrament of the unity which is in God, and it is thereby and therein that man obtains unity. _Beth_ is the basis of the work of creation, and in a sense also its instrument. _Gimel_ represents the charity and beneficence which are the help of poverty, designated by the letter _Daleth_. The letters _He_ and _Vau_ are part of the mystery which is contained in the Divine Name— יהוה. The letter _Zain_ is likened to a sharp sword or dagger.

[23] The account which follows may be compared with that which is found, _s.v._ _Apocryphes_ in Éliphas Lévi’s _Dictionnaire de Littérature Chrétienne_, mentioned in my preface to the present translation. It describes the legend concerning the fall of certain angels as _une assez singulière histoire_. He refers also to the various extant versions of the book, and to those in particular which differ from the “primitive” codex, being (_a_) that which he uses, and (_b_) “that which St. Jude cites in his catholic epistle as an authentic” work, actually composed by the prophet Enoch, to whom it is attributed.

[24] The _Zohar_ says that the Ark of Noah was a symbol of the Ark of the Covenant, that his entrance therein saved the world, and that this mystery is in analogy with the Supreme Mystery. At this point there is a sex-implicit throughout the Kabalistic commentary, and the nature of the “unbridled appetite” which brought about the deluge is identified with that sin which caused the destruction of Judah’s second son, as told in Genesis c. xxxviii. See _Zohar_, Part I., section _Toldoth Noah_. It is intimated also that the souls of those who perished in the deluge were to be blotted out, like the remembrance of Amalek. Part I., fol. 25_a_. They will not even be included in the resurrection which shall go before the Last Judgment. Fol. 68_b_. At the same time the chastisement would have been suspended had Noah prayed to God like Moses, but the tradition supposes him to have asked only concerning himself. _Zohar_, Part III., fol. 14_b_. The Holy Land was not covered by the waters of the deluge. Part II., fol. 197_a_.

[25] It was the Rod of Aaron, not that of Moses, which, according to Heb. ix. 4, was placed in the Ark of the Covenant, together with the Tables of the Law and the Pot of Manna. It is said, however, most clearly in I Kings, viii. 9, that “there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone, which Moses put there at Horeb.”

[26] Whatever the date to which the _Book of the Penitence of Adam_ may be referable, it represents one form of a legend which was spread widely in the Middle Ages. _The Gospel of Nicodemus_ seems to have instituted the first analogy between the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of the Cross. “All ye who have died through the wood which this man”—Adam—“hath touched: all of you I will make alive again by the wood of the cross.” The legend of the triple branch, under a strange transformation, reappears in that chronicle of the Holy Graal which has been ascribed to the authorship of Walter Map. There is no end to the stories which represent Christ dying upon a tree which was a cutting from the Tree of Knowledge. This is how the Tree of Knowledge becomes the Tree of Life in Christian legend.

[27] The _Clavis Absconditorum à Constitutione Mundi_, which is the chief work of Postel, outside his translation of the _Sepher Yetzirah_, affirms that Enoch was born at the time when Christ the Mediator would have been manifested in the flesh as the incarnation of perfect Virtue, supposing that man had remained in his first estate. There is no reference to a _Genesis of Enoch_.

[28] _Hic intrat vivus foveam_—he, being still alive, enters the tomb, says Adam of St. Victor in his third Sequence for Dec. 27.

[29] There were two canonised bishops bearing the name of Methodius at widely different periods, and as both were writers it is an open question to which of them the reference is intended. It is probably to Methodius of Olympus, who was martyred about 311. Methodius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, died in 846. There is not the least reason to suppose that the Apocalypse under the name of Bermechobus was the work of either.

[30] Compare Lopukhin’s _Quelques Traits de l’Eglise Intérieure_, where the sanctuary which was inaugurated by Adam is connected more especially with Abel, and was presumably maintained afterwards by Seth. In opposition thereto was the Church of Cain, which was anti-Christian from its beginning. See my introduction to Mr. Nicholson’s translation, pp. 6, 7, and the text, p. 59—_Some Characteristics of the Interior Church_, 1912.

[31] According to the _Zohar_, the intoxication of Noah contains a mystery of wisdom. He was really sounding the depths of that sin which was the downfall of the first man, and his object was to find a remedy. In this he failed, and “was drunken,” seeking to lay bare the divine essence, without the intellectual power to explore it. _Section Toldoth Noah._

[32] The _Sepher Ha Zohar_ affirms in several places that the Law was offered to the Gentiles, and was by them refused.

[33] The authority for this statement is wanting. The _Zohar_ dwells on Genesis xxi. 9: “And Sarah saw the son of Hagar,” &c., implying that she did not acknowledge him as the son of Abraham, but of the Egyptian only. The Patriarch, however, regarded him as his own son. Sarah’s desire to expel them is justified on the ground that she had seen Ishmael worshipping the stars of heaven. See _Zohar_, Part I., fol. 118. There is no allusion to the alleged gifts of the father, the scripture making it evident abundantly that the bread and bottle of water are for once to be understood literally.

[34] Even at the period of Éliphas Lévi, it did not require a rabbinical scholar or a knowledge of Aramaic to prevent any fairly informed person from suggesting that the _Book of Concealed Mystery_, being the text here referred to, is the beginning of the _Zohar_. It follows the _Commentary on Exodus_, about midway in the whole collection, which covers the entire Pentateuch. It so happens that the little tract in question is the first of three sections rendered into Latin by Rosenroth, and this must have deceived Lévi, as a consequence of utterly careless reading. There was plenty of opportunity for correction in the _Kabbala Denudata_, and so also in _La Kabbale_—an interesting but very imperfect study by Adolphe Franck, which appeared in 1843.

[35] There is no real analogy between the image attributed to Pascal and that of the Zoharic _Book of Concealment_. I have not verified the reference to Pascal, as the opportunity is not given by Lévi, but I have explained elsewhere that the idea was probably drawn from S. Bonaventura, who speaks of that _sphæra intelligibilis, cujus centrum est ubique et circumferentia nusquam_. See _Itinerarium Mentis ad Deum_. I have inferred that S. Bonaventura himself derived from a Hermetic book. As regards the symbolism of the Balance, the _Book of Concealed Mystery_ says (_a_) that in creating the world, God weighed in the Balance what had not been weighed previously, (_b_) that the Balance was suspended in a region where before there was no Balance, (_c_) that it served for bodies as well as souls, for beings then in existence and for those who would exist subsequently. These are the only references to this subject found in the tract.

[36] As such it is old, and a monograph on the subject is included by Jacob Bryant in his _Analysis of Antient Mythology_, vol. ii. p. 38 _et seq._ Following the authorities of his period, and especially Huetius, he says that “they have supposed a Zoroaster, wherever there was a Zoroastrian: that is, wherever the religion of the Magi was adopted, or revived.” The two Zoroasters of Lévi represent two principles of religious philosophy.

[37] An English translation of the Chaldæan Oracles by Thomas Taylor, the Platonist, claims to have added fifty oracles and fragments not included in the collection of Fabricius. Mr. Mead says that the subject was never treated scientifically till the appearance of J. Kroll’s _De Oraculis Chaldaicis_ at Breslau, in 1894.

[38] It must be understood that this summary or digest is an exceedingly free rendering, and it seems scarcely in accordance with the text on which Éliphas Lévi worked. Following the text of Kroll, Mr. Mead translates the first lines as follows: “Nature persuades us that the Daimones are pure, and things that grow from evil matter useful and good.” The last lines are rendered: “But when thou dost behold the very sacred Fire with dancing radiance flashing formless through the depths of the whole world, then hearken to the Voice of Fire.”

[39] See my _Key to the Tarot_, 1910, p. 32, and the cards which accompany this handbook. See also my _Pictorial Key to the Tarot_, 1911, pp. 144-147.

[40] One of the Chaldæan Oracles has the following counsel: “Labour thou around the _Strophalos_ of Hecate,” which Mr. G. R. S. Mead translates: “Be active (or operative) round the Hecatic spinning thing.” He adds by way of commentary that _Strophalos_ may sometimes mean a top. “In the Mysteries tops were included among the playthings of the young Bacchus, or Iacchus. They represented ... the fixed stars (humming tops) and planets (whipping tops).”—_The Chaldæan Oracles_, vol. ii. pp. 17, 18.

[41] Accepting this definition of the term of occult research, we can discern after what manner it differs from the mystic term. The one, by this hypothesis, is lucidity obtained in artificial sleep which stills the senses, and the other is Divine Realisation in the spirit after the images of material things and of the mind-world have been cast out, so that the sanctified man is alone with God in the stillness.

[42] This was _La Magie Dévoilée_, which was circulated in great secrecy. Later on, and probably after the decease of the author, it appeared in the ordinary way, and in 1886 an English translation was announced under the editorship of Mr. J. S. Farmer, but I believe that it was never published.

[43] Éliphas Lévi adds in a note that, according to Suidas, Cedrenus and the _Chronicle of Alexandria_ it was Zoroaster himself who, seated in his palace, disappeared suddenly and by his own will, with all his secrets and all his riches, in a great peal of thunder. He explains that every king who exercised divine power passed for an incarnation of Zoroaster, and that Sardanapalus converted his pyre into an apotheosis.

[44] The analysis of Éliphas Lévi requires to be checked at all points. He followed the Latin version of Anquetil Duperron, made from a Persian text, and this is so rare as to be almost unobtainable. I shall therefore deserve well of my readers by furnishing the following extract from Deussen’s _Religion and Philosophy of India_, regarding the _Oupnek’hat_:

“A position apart from the 52 and the 108 Upanishads is occupied by that collection of 50 Upanishads which, under the name of _Oupnek’hat_, was translated from the Sanskrit into the Persian in the year 1656 at the instance of the Sultan Mohammed Dara Shakoh, and from the Persian into the Latin in 1801-2 by Anquetil Duperron. The _Oupnek’hat_ professes to be a general collection of Upanishads. It contains under twelve divisions the Upanishads of the three older Vedas, and with them 26 Atharva Upanishads that are known from other sources. It further comprises eight treatises peculiar to itself, five of which have not up to the present time been proved to exist elsewhere, and of which therefore a rendering from the Persian-Latin of Anquetil is alone possible. Finally the _Oupnek’hat_ contains four treatises from the Vaj. Samh. 16, 31, 32, 34, of which the first is met with in a shorter form in other collections also, as in the Nilarudra Upanishad, while the three last have nowhere else found admission. The reception of these treatises from the Samhita into the body of the Upanishads, as though there were danger of their falling otherwise into oblivion, makes us infer a comparatively later date for the _Oupnek’hat_ collection itself, although as early as 1656 the Persian translators made no claim to be the original compilers, but took the collection over already complete. Owing to the excessive literality with which Anquetil Duperron rendered these Upanishads word by word from the Persian into Latin, while preserving the syntax of the former language—a literality that stands in striking contrast to the freedom with which the Persian translators treated the Sanskrit text—the _Oupnek’hat_ is a very difficult book to read; and an insight as keen as that of Schopenhauer was required in order to discover within this repellant husk a kernel of invaluable philosophical significance, and to turn it to account for his own system. An examination of the material placed at our disposal in the _Oupnek’hat_ was first undertaken by A. Weber, Ind. Stud. I, II, ix., on the basis of the Sanskrit text. Meanwhile the original texts were published in the _Bibliotheca Indica_ in part with elaborate commentaries, and again in the Anandas’rama series. The two longest, and some of the shorter treatises have appeared in a literal German rendering by O. Bohtlingk. Max Müller translated the twelve oldest Upanishads in _Sacred Books of the East_, vol. i. 15. And my own translation of the 60 Upanishads contains complete texts of this character which, upon the strength of their regular occurrence in the Indian collections and lists of the Upanishads, may lay claim to a certain canonicity. The prefixed introductions and the notes treat exhaustively of the matter and composition of the several treatises.”

[45] This forms the second book of the collection entitled _Orthodoxie Maçonnique_, which was published in 1853. The account of magical discs and the planets corresponding to them will be found on pp. 498-501. Ragon pretended that there was a system of Occult Masonry in three Degrees.

[46] The legend concerning the Emerald Tablet is that it was found by Alexander the Great in the tomb of Hermes, which was hidden by the priests of Egypt in the depths of the Great Pyramid of Gizeh. It was supposed to have been written by Hermes on a large plate of emerald by means of a pointed diamond. I believe that there is no Greek version extant, and it is referred by Louis Figuier to the seventh century of the Christian era, or thereabouts. See _L’Alchimie et les Alchimistes_, p. 42.

[47] In his _Lexicon Alchemiæ_ Rulandus reminds us that “the old astronomers dedicated the Emerald to Mercury,” and Berthelot says that this was in conformity with Egyptian ideas, which classed the Emerald and Sapphire in their list of metals. See _Collection des Anciens Alchimistes Grecs, première livraison_, p. 269. The planet Mercury was the planet Hermes and it may be that some mystical connection was supposed between quicksilver and the precious stone. This would have been in Græco-Alexandrian times, if ever, as ancient Egypt does not seem to have been acquainted with quicksilver.

[48] The text says: _le triple binaire ou le mirage du triangle_, but it is obvious that the reflected triad cannot be termed binary. The expression is confused, but the meaning is that the first triangle equals unity, or the number 1; the second triad corresponds to the duad, or number 2; the third triad to the number 3, and so onward.

[49] The reference is to Athanasius Kircher’s _Œdipus Ægyptiacus_, 3 vols. in folio, bound usually in four, published at Rome, 1652-1654. The _Mensa Isiaca_, being the Bembine Tablet, so called because its discovery is connected with the name of Cardinal Bembo, is in the third volume—a folding plate beautifully produced. The original is exceedingly late and is roughly termed a forgery. In 1669 the Tablet was reproduced on a larger scale by means of a number of folding plates in the _Mensa Isiaca_ of Laurentius Pignorius. Both works are exceedingly rare. I suppose that these are the only records of the Tablet now extant, with the exception of a large copy in my possession made from the above sources.

[50] Mr. G. R. S. Mead tells us that _Iynx_ in its root-meaning, according to Proclus, signifies the “power of transmission” which is said in the Chaldæan Oracles “to sustain the fountains.” Mr. Mead thinks that the _Iyinges_ were reproduced (_a_) as Living Spheres and (_b_) as Winged Globes. He thinks, also, that (_a_) the Mind on the plane of reality put forth (_b_) the one _Iyinx_, (_c_) after this three _Iyinges_, called paternal and ineffable, and finally (_d_) there may have been hosts of subordinate _Iyinges_. They were “free intelligences.” It seems to follow that the _Iynx_ was not “an emblem of universal being,” but a product of the Eternal Mind.

[51] It may be mentioned that the Hebrew alphabet was divided into (_a_) Three Mother Letters, namely, _Aleph_, _Mem_ and _Shin_; (_b_) Seven Double Letters, being _Beth_, _Gimel_, _Daleth_, _Kaph_, _Pe_, _Resh_, _Tau_; and (_c_) Twelve Simple Letters, or _He_, _Vau_, _Zain_, _Heth_, _Teth_, _Yod_, _Lamed_, _Nun_, _Samech_, _Ayin_, _Tsade_, _Quoph_.

[52] The _Sepher Yetzirah_ was first made known to Latin reading Europe by William Postel. Publication took place at Bâle in 1547. It is said to have been reissued at Amsterdam in 1646. The collection of Pistorius, entitled _Artis Cabalisticæ Scriptores_, belongs to 1587. Later and modern editions of the _Book of Formation_ are fairly numerous. It was translated into French, together with the Arabic commentary of R. Saadya Gaon, by Mayor Lambert, in 1891. An English version by Dr. W. Wynn Westcott will serve the purpose of the general reader.

[53] The Tarots of this period belong to the year 1393, and it has been suggested recently in France that the artist Charles Gringonneur was really their inventor. It is useful to note this opinion, but I do not think that any importance attaches to it. The extant Gringonneur examples in the _Bibliothèque Nationale_ have also been said to be of Italian origin and not therefore his work. The Venetian Tarots have been sometimes regarded as the oldest known form. The historical question is obscure beyond all extrication at present.

[54] In face of existing evidence, the description of the Tarot Trumps Major as a Kabalistic alphabet has as much and as little to support it as the claim that they constitute an Egyptian _Book of Thoth_. It has been reported to me, however, that there is an unknown Jewish Tarot, and it may interest students of the subject to know that before long I hope to be able to give some account at first hand concerning it. There is little reason to suppose that it will prove (_a_) ancient or (_b_) Kabalistic; but as one never knows what is at one’s threshold, I put the fact on record for whatever it may be worth in the future. Meanwhile, it is quite idle to say that our popular fortune-telling Tarots are of Jewish origin.

[55] The interpretation of Lévi seems to hesitate between several fields of symbolism, and what follows at this point suggests that the Golden Fleece is an allegory of metallic transmutation by means of alchemy. It was so regarded by many of the later disciples of this art. According to Antoine Joseph Pernety, the Golden Fleece is the symbol of the matter of the Great Work; the labours of Jason are an allegory concerning the operations therein and of the signs of progress towards perfection. The attainment of this Fleece signifies that of the Powder of Projection and the Universal Medicine. See _Dictionnaire Mytho-Hermétique_ and _Les Fables Egyptiennes et Grecques_, both by Pernety, and in particular vol. i. of the latter work, pp. 437-494.

[56] Among several bearers of this name, I suppose that the reference is to him who, by tradition, was either the disciple or son of Orpheus, commemorated by Virgil. None of his poems are extant, so that the argument seems to fail. The antiquity of the Orphic poems—_Argonautica_, Hymns, etc.—is another question, and the conclusions of criticism on the subject are well known.

[57] Almost any of the demonologists will serve at need. The Jesuit Martinus Delrio, who wrote _Disquisitionum Magicarum Libri Sex_ has plenty to say about _Lamiæ_ and _Stryges_. There is also Joannes Wierus, the pupil of Cornelius Agrippa, whose famous work on the Illusions and Impostures of Sorcery—_Histoires, Disputes et Discours_—was rendered from Latin into French, in 1885.

[58] I do not know how this fable originated and the question is not worth the pains which would be necessary to elucidate it. It is narrated by Éliphas Lévi as matter of historical fact; but there is no question that M. Edouard Schuré, who owes so much to the occultist who preceded him, would have been glad to include it in his romantic biography of Pythagoras, if it had not been too mythical even for his purpose. He is content as it is to suggest that the sage of Samos had studied Jewish monotheism during a stay of twelve years at Babylon.

[59] The authorship of the _Golden Verses_ is of course a debated point; and it is an old suggestion that their real writer was Lysis, the preceptor of Epaminondas and an exponent of Pythagorean philosophy about 388 B.C., his master being referred to the beginning of the sixth century B.C. I should add that Éliphas Lévi has presented the Verses in a metrical form of his own, which reflects the originals at a very far distance. I have not followed this rendering but have had recourse to that of Mr. G. R. S. Mead.

[60] Among the appendices to the second part of the _Zohar_ there is a short section on physiognomy, and it embodies some very curious materials. We learn, for example, that if a man who has certain specified characteristics of colour and feature should turn to God, a white blemish will form on the pupil of his right eye. He who has three semi-circular wrinkles on his forehead and whose eyes are shining will behold the downfall of his enemies. A man who has committed an adultery and has not repented is recognisable by a growth beneath the navel, and thereon will be found two hairs. Should he do penance, the hairs will disappear but the swelling will remain. A man who has a beauty-spot on his ear will be a great master of the Law and will die young. Two long hairs between the shoulders indicate a person who is given to swearing incessantly in an objectless manner. It will be seen that these details belong to a neglected part of the science, and I am a little at a loss to know how Éliphas Lévi would have pressed them into his service, if he had been fully acquainted with the work which he quotes so often.

[61] It happens that the hypothesis of reincarnation was personally unwelcome to Éliphas Lévi, and he did not know enough of Zoharic Kabalism to realise that it is of some importance therein. The traditions concerning the teaching of Pythagoras must be taken at their proper value, but there is no question that, according to these, he was an important champion of what used to be called the doctrine of metempsychosis, understood as the soul’s transmigration into successive bodies. He himself had been (_a_) Æthalides, a son of Mercury; (_b_) Euphorbus, son of Panthus, who perished at the hands of Menelaus in the Trojan war; (_c_) Hermotimus, a prophet of Clazomenæ, a city of Ionia; (_d_) a humble fisherman, and finally (_e_) the philosopher of Samos.

[62] _In memoria æterna erit justus._

[63] Éliphas Lévi has forgotten that the word “ineffable” means something which cannot be expressed; he intended to say that, according to the Kabalists, the efficacious name was hidden.

[64] All later Kabalists agree that _Tetragrammaton_ is the root and foundation of the Divine Names. In the Sephirotic system one of the allocations makes _Chokmah_, or Supernal Wisdom, to correspond with the _Yod_ of Tetragrammaton. _Kether_, which is the Crown, is said to have no letter attributed thereto, because the mystery of _Ain Soph_, the hidden abyss of the Godhead, is implied therein. However, the apex of _Yod_ does in a sense intimate concerning _Kether_. _He_ is the second letter in the Divine Tetrad, and it is ascribed to _Binah_, or Supernal Understanding, wherein is all life comprehended. This is the abode of the _Shekinah_ in transcendence. The third letter is _Vau_, and it is said to contain the six _Sephiroth_ from _Chesed_ to _Yesod_. The second _He_ is the fourth and last letter; it corresponds to _Malkuth_, or the Kingdom, wherein is the mystery of the unity of God. This is the abode of the _Shekinah_ in manifestation. Thus, _Yod_, _He_, _Vau_, _He_, which we render Jehovah, contains all the ten _Sephiroth_. There are, however, other allocations.

[65] Éliphas Lévi must have meant to say seven letters, but the point does not signify. According to Rosenroth, the Tetragrammaton with vowel-points is the eighth Divine Name— יֱהֹוִה. The points are those of _Elohim_ and it is read as that Name. This signifies the concealment of the “Ineffable” Name, on account of the exile of Israel.

[66] This is the Divine Name which is most in proximity to created things. See the excursus thereon in _Kabbala Denudata_, vol. i. pp. 32-41.

[67] Cf. the _Zohar_, Part i. folio 15a, on Exodus iii. 14: “And God said unto Moses: I am that I am”— אהיה אשר אהיה

[68] According to the Rabbinical Lexicon of Buxtorf, _Agla_ is formed from the initial letters of the sentence אתה גבור לעולם אדני = _Tu potens es in sæculum, Domine_. There seems to be no Kabalistic authority for its explanation by Lévi, and the word occurs very seldom in the _Zohar_.

[69] According to Petrus Galatinus, in _De Arcanis Catholicæ Veritatis_, the word _Agla_ expresses the infinite power of the Divine Trinity. Like Éliphas Lévi, he gives us the separate significance of each letter and, like Buxtorf, he makes them the initials of the sentence already quoted, his rendering being: _Tu potens in æternum Dominus_. He terms _Agla Nomen Dei_, for which there seems to be as much and as little authority as there is for the suggestion that the _Divina potentia_ is that of the Trinity.

[70] A very full exposition of this Name will be found in the section entitled _De Cabale Hebræorum_, forming part of Kircher’s _magnum opus_, the _Œdipus Ægyptiacus_. It is curious that a tract so important as this, within its own measures, and written with the uttermost simplicity, does not appear to have been translated, even into the French language.

[71] I must admit that this reference escapes me. The Tarot consists of four suits of 14 cards each and there are 22 Trumps Major, making 78 cards in all.

[72] The axiom has rather a convincing air, but the analogy is wrong, and the word “return” is a blunder of popular speech. The possibility of communication with those who have left this life is a question of the interpenetration of worlds. To say that the human spirit departs or comes back is a symbolic expression, like the statement that heaven is above us.

[73] The analogy is again wrong and the creation of a materialistic mind. The return of the soul to God is not annihilation but life for evermore, and it is union with all life.

[74] The soul sheds one envelope, in which it has prepared another.

[75] This expression may tend to confusion. The consciousness and activity of the soul are manifested by means of that vehicle in which it happens to reside. It is not they that belong to the vehicle, but it is the vehicle that is used by them.

[76] There is no Kabalistic authority for the sun as the abode of souls.

[77] Kabalism is silent on the question of communication with those who have left this life, though tacitly it must admit the possibility on the evidence of the case of Samuel. The axiom that the spirit clothes itself to come down and unclothes itself to go up is one of the so-called _conclusiones Kabbalisticæ_ of Picus de Mirandula, but it is found substantially in the _Zohar_, and as regards the descent, this is just what occurs _ex hypothesi_ in the phenomena of spiritistic materialisations. As regards the parable of the rich man, it has nothing to do with the question of so-called spirit-return; those who were in the bosom of Abraham had as much left this life as those who were in Sheol.

[78] It depends on those who have left us. What of the earthly and the evil? Why should the bond between them and us—supposing that there is a bond—be that of our highest feelings?

[79] The fact is that he was assassinated, the inference is that it was by or at the instance of those whose secrets he was supposed to have betrayed. The murderers, also by inference, were said to be Brethren of the Rosy Cross. It may be mentioned that the _Comte de Gabalis_ contains the theory of communication with elementary spirits, being those of earth, air, fire and water; but the mode of treatment suggests that it is a _jeu d’esprit_. The _Nouveaux Entretiens sur les Sciences Secrètes_, _Génies Assistants_ and _Le Gnome Irréconcilable_, which are supposed sequels, are forgeries, of later periods.

[80] Elsewhere in his works Éliphas Lévi says that the Astral Light is (_a_) the _Od_ of the Hebrews, (_b_) an electro-magnetic ether, (_c_) a vital and luminous caloric, (_d_) the instrument of life, (_e_) the instrument of the omnipotence of Adam, (_f_) the universal glass of visions. It follows the law of magnetic currents, is subject to fixation by a supreme projection of will-power, is the first envelope of the soul, and the mirror of imagination. He terms it also magnetised electricity. It would seem that his contemporary disciples in France have abandoned the theory of their master, or perhaps I should say rather its doctrinal part. On the other hand, it has perhaps reappeared, under theosophical auspices, as the reservoir of the akasic records.

[81] There are also references to Lilith, a demon-wife of Adam, in the _Zohar_; she is called the instigator of chastisements and was really the wife of Samael, the evil angel. It may be added that, according to Paracelsus, the elementaries _non sunt progeniti ex Adamo_. See _Liber de Nymphis, Sylphis, Pygmæis et Salamandris, Tract. I, cap. 1._.

[82] In respect of male celibates, the physiological

## particulars referred to are the blind yearning of Nature after the

nuptial state and, with a tentative reserve in respect of the life of sanctity, it is shame to those who neglect the warning or turn it to the account of sin.

[83] This is one construction of the symbol and is a little tinctured by Éliphas Lévi’s sincere admiration for the understanding which lay behind the _Romance of the Rose_. The text of Genesis says that a river rose to water the Garden “and from thence it was parted and became into four heads,” or four sources of rivers. These rivers did not water the Garden but the world without, and their names are familiar in the geography of the ancient world. The mystic pantacle of Eden shews therefore an enclosure constituted by a ring or circle of water, an island like that of Avalon, which is another Garden of Apples, and the waters flow out therefrom towards the four points of heaven: they form therefore a cross, and in the centre of that cross is the Paradise. If the reader will bear in mind that, according to the secret tradition, Adam was set to grow roses in the Garden of Eden, he will understand at what place of the world the symbolism of the Rosy Cross takes its origin.

[84] This is true, but it is only the science of this world in the sense that the greater includes the lesser. It is really the supernal knowledge which is called _Daath_ in Kabalism, arising from the union of _Chokmah_ and _Binah_, or Wisdom and Understanding.

[85] The commentary of the _Zohar_ on Genesis, vi. 2—“the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair”—affirms that the angels were cast out of heaven as soon as they had conceived the desire therein suggested. Aza and Azael were the chiefs of these fallen spirits. Subsequently they taught Magic to men.

[86] The design of the builders, according to the _Zohar_,

## Part I, Fol. 75^a, was to abandon the celestial domain for that of

Satan. They desired to rebuild heaven, apparently in the likeness of their own evil desires. They were the same quality of souls as the “giants in the earth in those days” and “the mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” See Genesis, c. vi. v. 4 and _Zohar_, Part I, Fol. 25^b.

[87] Zoharic Kabalism was dissatisfied with the visitation of the offence of Ham on his apparently innocent son, Canaan, and it accounted for the malediction pronounced upon the latter by the fact that he had removed the _testes_ from the person of his grandfather Noah. On the surface this is a ridiculous enormity, but it is a concealed intimation that the whole Noetic myths is, like Paradise itself, a mystery of sex shadowed forth in symbolism.

[88] It should be needless to say that this is a mere presumption and is not even founded on any legend concerning the travels of Plato. He is said to have been in Egypt for a period which has been estimated at thirteen years.

[89] He was a disciple of Plato who is supposed not only to have been illustrious for his knowledge of geometry but to have paid the usual pilgrim’s visit to Egypt and to have returned an adept in astronomy.

[90] We have, unhappily, to remember that Éliphas Lévi himself wrote a great deal, and assuredly to little purpose, on the subject of squaring the circle and on perpetual motion. Elsewhere he tells us that the revolution of a square about its centre describes a circle, and thus the circle is squared. He also invented, in imagination, a clock which wound itself up in the process of running itself down, and this was perpetual motion—presumably, unless the mechanism happened to stop working or to wear itself out. The reader may settle for himself whether in these phantasies he was in hiding like an adept or pursuing like a fool.

[91] The only remark which is requisite on this chapter is that it involves throughout an abuse of the word Mysticism, which has nothing to do with religious anarchy, sects or magic. See, however, my preface to the present translation.

[92] The history of persecution may be left to speak for itself on the validity of this plea and the postulated principle mentioned by Éliphas Lévi may even be thought to have concealed a stab from behind in the dark. In any case, the alleged horror of blood is best illustrated by the method of pyre and faggot.

[93] “Change not the barbarous names of evocation,” says one of the oracles attributed to Zoroaster, as we have seen, and the reason given is because of their “ineffable power.” This was the true Zoroaster of Éliphas Lévi, and he was not, _ex hypothesi_, an exponent of Black Magic. “Barbarian words and signs unknown” are not less in favour with the so-called white variety.

[94] See my _Book of Ceremonial Magic_, pp. 100-102, for a study of this Grimoire.

[95] The reference is to a work entitled _Des Hallucinations, ou Histoire raisonnée des Apparitions, des Visions, des Songes, de l’Extase, du Magnétisme et du Somnambulisme_. It was first published about 1850 and was of authority at its period. Its large array of materials will be always valuable. I believe that it was translated into English.

[96] There is no need to say that the Second Birth, to which allusion is made by Christ, is not comprehended by any notion of a moral change, though such change is involved. Morality is the gate of spiritual life but is not its sanctuary.

[97] The point which escapes in this synopsis of Egyptian initiation is that which distinguishes the official mysteries—like Masonry—from vital initiation, and I mention it here because there are memorials of Egyptian mysteries which suggest that they were no mere symbolical pageants but did communicate—to those who could receive—the life which is behind such symbolism.

[98] The analogy here instituted assumes in respect of the Greek mysteries that which has been implied previously regarding those of Egypt. The laws and by-laws of the schools of philosophy, whatever they exacted from pupils, were not imitations of the grades of initiation and advancement communicated in priestly sanctuaries, if there was mystic life in those sanctuaries. Even if they were merely pageants, the comparison does not obtain; for it is obvious that Pythagoras and Plato did not confer degrees by way of ritual. Matriculation and “the little go” are not ceremonial observances in the path of symbolism.

[99] The truth is that in so far as the Jewish Kabalah contains a _Logos_ philosophy, so far it embodies confused reminiscences of Alexandrian schools of thought. Éliphas Lévi reminds one of Jacob Bryant, Davies and the respectable Mr. Faber, who explained the whole universe of history by the help of Shem, Ham and Japhet, the deluge and the Ark of Noah. He saw the Kabalah everywhere; had he spoken of a secret tradition subsisting in all times, of which Kabalism is a part in reflection, he would have been less confused and confusing; but he applied to the whole a term which is peculiar to a part. It is said in the _Zohar_ that the Word which discovers unto us the supreme mysteries is generated by the union of light and darkness.

## Part I, Fol. 32a. It is said also that the Word dwells in the superior

heavens, Fol. 33b. And there are other references.

[100] Dacier was a translator in the latter part of the eighteenth century, and his study on the _Doctrine of Plato_ appeared in the third volume of a collection entitled _Bibliothèque des Anciens Philosophes_, which began publication in 1771.

[101] Those who may wish to be acquainted with the sources from which Lévi drew some of his materials may consult _Cœlum Sephiroticum_, by J. C. Steebius, an old folio which appeared in 1679, as well as Reuchlin and Rosenroth. They will see how things change in his hands. According to the _Zohar_, _Ain Soph_ reflects immediately into _Kether_ on the path of manifestation. It is not correct to say that the king is _Ain Soph_ in Kabalism and the letter of Plato is devoid of sephirotic analogies.

[102] It must be said that the Greek word θεοσοφια did not pass into Latin in classical times and was unknown throughout the middle ages. As an illustration of its occult prevalence, I cannot trace that it was used by Paracelsus. In so far as it can be said to have become prevalent, it was in a mystic sense only, as in the proper use of words it could alone be. It was made familiar by Jacob Böhme.

[103] The classical authorities for the visitation of the cave of Trophonius include Pausanias of Cæsarea, who wrote the history of Greece, Cicero, Pliny and Philostratus, not to mention the allusion found in the _Clouds_ of Aristophanes. The account of Éliphas Lévi must be taken with certain reservations, but it is not a matter in which accuracy or its opposite is of any consequence outside scholarly research. There were various sacrifices and other ceremonies prior to the visitation, and the candidate for the experience usually descended alone. It is not, I think, on record that the effect of the visit was lasting.

[104] The actual formula seems to have been: “He has consulted the oracle of Trophonius.”

[105] There is no question that, according to the _Zohar_, the sun is the centre of the planetary system, of which planets the earth is one.

[106] There is extraordinary confusion, at the least by way of expression, in this paragraph, which will inevitably create in the reader a notion that the work of Cebes was a picture. As a fact, it is a description of human life contained in a dialogue, to which the title of _Tabula_ was given. It has been printed several times, and once, I believe, at Glasgow, in 1747.

[107] I have intimated elsewhere that the _Zohar_ is in several respects a work of high entertainment, and that its reading is much more diverting than Arabian or Ambrosial Nights. But Éliphas Lévi is right in saying that it calls for some preliminary training. He does not quite mean, however, what I mean in making the suggestion. On the serious side the _Zohar_ is assuredly a work of initiation and one of the great books of the world, though Sir John Lubbock and others of kindred enterprise did not happen to know of it. Lévi is substantially right also in saying that it requires a key, though his meaning is not expressed rightly. The explanation is that it is not a methodical system and presupposes throughout, on the part of its readers, an acquaintance with the tradition which it embodies in allusive form.

[108] It is difficult to say what authority was followed in producing this account. Pentheus was the second King of Thebes, succeeding Cadmus, who built the city. Bacchus was the son of Semele, the daughter of Cadmus, by Jupiter, but he was never a candidate for the Theban throne. The offence of Pentheus was not one of usurpation but of refusal to recognise the divinity of Bacchus. He was not torn to pieces by the daughters of Cadmus, but by a crowd of Bacchanals, among whom was his own mother. It is impossible to turn this story into an allegory of pantheism, as Lévi proceeds to do.

[109] The classical story is the very contrary of this. The effect of his experiments with the serpents was like that of passing through the foot of the rainbow; Tiresias was changed into a girl. He married in this form; but having met a second time with some other interlaced serpents, he again smote them and recovered his original sex. So far from being unable to consummate marriage in either case, he became an authority with the gods on the comparative extent of satisfaction attained by the two sexes in the act of sex.

[110] The term geometrical scarcely applies to the figures of geomancy.

[111] The Bacchus who was depicted with horns was the son of Jupiter and Proserpine. As regards the androgynous nature of Iacchos, I do not know Lévi’s authority, but such a characteristic was ascribed to several deities, though sometimes against general likelihood. It was even said of Jupiter that he was a man but also an immortal maid.

[112] Lévi affirms elsewhere that the satisfaction of all the calls of sense is required for the work of philosophy. In the present place he confuses the issue by implying that chastity means either celibacy or the virgin state. Yet he did not fail to understand that the nuptial life is also a life of chastity; he speaks eloquently of the home and its sanctity, and he alludes elsewhere to the chaste and conjugal Venus.

[113] There were two pagan festivals which have a certain likeness between them: (_a_) _Charisia_, which was in honour of Aglaia, Thalia and Euphrosyne, the _Charites_ or Graces. It was celebrated by dances at night, and the person who maintained the exercise longest was presented with a cake, (_b_) _Charistia_, a Roman festival, for the reconciliation of relations and friends, at which food was eaten. It could be wished for the perpetuity and catholicity of the sacraments that there were traces of an Eucharist in the Christian sense prior to Christian times.

[114] It may be mentioned that 13 is also the number of resurrection, or birth into new life.

[115] The Grimoire mentioned under the name of _Little Albert_ is called in the Latin edition _Alberti Parvi Lucii Libellus_, and is “a treasure of marvellous secrets.” The original intention was to father it on _Albertus Magnus_, and in fact there is another collection which is known as the _Great Albert_. It is of similar value.

[116] I have suffered these lines to stand as they are given by Éliphas Lévi, following the French translation of Salomon Certon. Shelley, who rendered Homer’s _Hymn to Mercury_ into verse which is unworthy of his name, represented the Greek original by asterisks at this point, and I have taken a lesson from the counsel. Lévi gives some further lines—I scarcely know why, but they stand as follows in Shelley’s version:

“Phœbus on the grass Him threw, and whilst all that he had designed He did perform—eager although to pass, Apollo darted from his mighty mind Towards the subtle babe the following scoff:— ‘Do not imagine this will get you off,

“‘You little swaddled child of Jove and May!’ And seized him: ‘By this omen I shall trace My noble herds, and you shall lead the way.’”

[117] We shall meet with this sect accordingly, and it will be found that the present remark is either (_a_) not intended to justify the alleged traditional interpretation or (_b_) that the initial reference has to be qualified by its subsequent extension. Johannite Christianity has been the subject of much romancing among the exponents of High-Grade Masonry. Woodford’s _Cyclopædia of Freemasonry_ identifies its followers with Nazarenes and Nasarites, and adds that they regarded St. John the Baptist as “the only true prophet.” One order of Templar Masonry, which is now extinct, seems to have claimed connection with the Johannite sect.

[118] I have quoted elsewhere the previous remark of the author on the same subject as a curious example of how things are apt to strike a French exponent of occultism at different periods of time and in other states of emotion. “St. Paul burnt the books of Trismegistus”—not Göetic texts or works of necromancy; “Omar burned the disciples of Trismegistus (?) and St. Paul. O persecutors! O incendiaries! O coffers! When will you finish your work of darkness and destruction!” This is from the _Rituel de la Haute Magie_, p. 327.

[119] In his _Fundamental Philosophy_, James Balmes seeks to shew that the Eucharistic Mystery, understood in the literal sense of transubstantiation, is not absurd in itself, that is to say, is not intrinsically contradictory. To establish that it is, one must demonstrate: (_a_) that to abstract passive sensibility from matter is to destroy the principle of contradiction; (_b_) that the correspondences between our sense organs and objects are intrinsically immutable; (_c_) that it is absolutely necessary for impressions to be transmitted to the sensitive faculties of the soul by those organs and that they can never be transmitted otherwise. See Book III, _Extension and Space_, c. 33, _Triumph of Religion_. I make this citation because it seems to me that Éliphas Lévi acted incautiously in debating the observation of Rousseau.

[120] The place of his birth is uncertain; Cyprus is one of the alternatives.

[121] This is Dositheus of Samaria, who was contemporary with Christ. There is an account of him by St. Epiphanius and he is also mentioned by Photius.

[122] It is, I believe, one of the Christian apologists who mentions that Helen was found by Simon in a house of ill-fame at Tyre. It is said otherwise that she was Helen of Troy in a previous incarnation.

[123] Because they were both favourites of Nero, or because the reference to a feast reminded Éliphas Lévi of the celebrated Banquet in the _Satyricon_ of Petronius Arbiter. Sophronius Tigellinus was one of Nero’s ministers.

[124] The dispute between St. Peter and Simon the Magician is not a matter of popular rumour; it is a methodical account contained in one of the forged _Recognitions_ ascribed to St. Clement. It will be understood that the version presented by Éliphas Lévi is decorated by his own imagination. It seems generally regarded as certain that Simon visited Rome to enrol disciples, and there is the authority of Eusebius for some kind of meeting with St. Peter.

[125] It might be more accurate to say that there were many successors, of whom Menander was the chief. So also there were many Simonian sects, including the school which followed Dositheus, described by Lévi and others as the master of Simon. Menander claimed to be the envoy of the Supreme Power of God.

[126] They were not included at the period—about 1865—in _La France Mystique_ of Erdan, though it contained _choses inouies_; and they are not found among _les petites religions de Paris_ at the present day, though it contains a Gnostic church confessing to a hierarchic government and, I believe, with an authorised branch at San Francisco—perhaps less _in partibus infidelium_ than is the sect in its own country.

[127] I have given Lévi’s version literally without pretending to account for it. In the authorised version the passage reads: “If thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” Genesis, iv. 7.

[128] I suppose that reference is intended to _Epitome Delictorum, sive de Magia, in qua aperta vel occulta invocatio Dæmonum_, &c., 4to. I have no record of the first edition, but it was reprinted at Leyden in 1679.

[129] It has to be observed that the Hyphasis was a certain river of India which is assigned by tradition as the boundary of Alexander’s conquests. Had Éliphas Lévi been acquainted with this fact he might have allegorised with success thereon.

[130] It is noticeable that the alchemists of past centuries, who were so apt to see the Hermetic Mystery at large in all literature, and who fathered many mythical treatises on the great and the holy men of old, are silent regarding Apollonius. I am far from admitting the interpretation of Éliphas Lévi, as Philostratus belongs to the dawn of the third century, when alchemy may be said to have been unborn; but I am sure that if the early expositors had known the life of Apollonius, they might almost have suspected something. Even the Abbé Pernety missed the obvious opportunity in his discourse on the Hermetic significance of the Greek and Egyptian fables.

[131] It must be remembered that the Stone in symbolism is far older than the particular symbol which is called the Philosophical Stone, or Stone of Alchemy.

[132] The last statement obtains in respect of the Mystic Stone, as understood, for example, by Zoharic writers.

[133] The introduction to the _Dogme de la Haute Magie_ says: (_a_) That Julian was one of the illuminated and an initiate of the first order; (_b_) That he was a Gnostic allured by the allegories of Greek polytheism; (_c_) That he had the satisfaction of expiring like Epaminondas with the periods of Cato.

[134] The _Golden Legend_ was compiled about 1275 by Jacobus de Voragine, Archbishop of Genoa. His authorities were (_a_) Eusebius, (_b_) St. Jerome, (_c_) legendary matter. I am sure that Kabalistic mysteries and Johannite initiation must look elsewhere for their records. The suggestion, however, is not worth debating.

[135] In the _Golden Legend_ the story is entitled “Of St. Justina,” whose festival is on September 26. St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, is entirely distinct from the Cyprian of legend.

[136] This pictorial sign appears in an old Grimoire.

[137] With this reverie of Éliphas Lévi on the subject of the mystic ass let us compare another which is of an entirely different order, though it belongs to the same category, (1) It is recorded by Josephus that a certain Jew named Onias obtained leave from Ptolemy Philometor to build a temple in honour of God at a certain place in Arabia which was subsequently called Onium, after the founder. (2) This Onium was not Heliopolis, as supposed commonly. (3) The Temple at Onium, on account of a similitude of sound, was connected with the Greek word ονος, signifying Ass. (4) The Greeks in consequence believed themselves to have discovered the secret object of Jewish worship, being the animal in question. (5) It was asserted that there was an ass’s head in the vestibule of every Jewish temple. (6) As the Greeks did not closely distinguish between Jews and Christians, the ass came also to be called the god of the Christians.—Jacob Bryant: _Analysis of Antient Mythology_, 3rd edition, vol. vi. pp. 82 _et seq._

[138] The commentary of the _Zohar_ on Genesis ii. 22, says that the words—“which the Lord God had taken from man”—signify that the Tradition has issued from the Written Doctrine. The words “and brought him to man” indicate that the Traditional Law must not remain isolated: it can only exist in union with the Written Law. Part I, Fol. 48^b. It follows, and is made plain elsewhere, that man is the Written Law and woman the Secret Doctrine.

[139] In one of the pictorial symbols of Alchemy the head of the winged solar man is represented rising from a chest. It is a recurring image.

[140] It is obvious that Éliphas Lévi pictures only the dark side of Gnosticism; he says nothing and perhaps knew nothing of the higher aspects. His stricture on the copulation of Eons reads strangely for a defender of Kabalism, seeing that the _Zohar_ abounds in similar images.

[141] This statement requires to be checked by a French authority of the period, with whom Éliphas Lévi could not fail to be acquainted. I refer to Jacques Matter and his _Histoire Critique du Gnosticisme_, a second and enlarged edition of which was published in 1843. According to the testimony of this writer: (_a_) Some Gnostics rejected the Eucharist entirely; (_b_) Those who preserved it never taught the real communication of man in the flesh and blood of the Saviour; (_c_) for them it was an emblem of their mystic union with a being belonging to the Pleroma; (_d_) The wonder-working Eucharist was particular to Marcos, but according to St. Irenæus it was the result of trickery; (_e_) He filled chalices with wine and water, pronounced over them a formula of his own, and caused these liquids to appear purple and ruby in colour. _Op. cit._, vol. ii. pp. 344-346.

[142] This assertion is merely a matter of inference.

[143] The materials here embodied come direct from Matter, and the last sentence is almost in his own words. The earlier writer says that he caused women to bless the chalice. Nothing is said as to the intervention of men, other than Marcos, in the celebration.

[144] The dream ascribed to Marcos and his followers is that, however, of the _Zohar_, the opening section of which describes the letters of the Hebrew alphabet as coming before God in succession, praying to be used in the work of creation which was about to begin. They were set aside in their turn for the reason applying to each, with the exception of _Beth_, which was taken as the basis of the work, while _Aleph_ was installed as the first of all the letters, the Master of the Universe affirming that His own Divine Unity was in virtue of this letter. The meaning was that _Aleph_ corresponds to the No. 1. This, says the _Zohar_, with ingenuous subtlety, is why the two first words of Scripture have _Beth_ as their initial and the two next words have _Aleph_.—_Zohar_, Part I, Fols. 2b-3b.

[145] It will be seen in a later section that this charge against Vintras rests upon the evidence of persons expelled from the sect which he founded, and, so far as I am aware, it has not been put forward seriously.

[146] The question, however, stood over until the appearance of _La Clef des Grands Mystères_, a considerable part of which is embodied in the digest of Lévi’s writings which I published long since as _The Mysteries of Magic_. The Astral Light is explained as “magnetised electricity “—as already quoted.

[147] In my _Book of Ceremonial Magic_ I have given full opportunities for the judgment of this so-called occult ritual, which should certainly have been kept in concealment, or better still allowed to perish, not on account of its secrets but because it is in all respects worthless, and its ascription to Leo III an insult to that pontiff.

[148] It is laid down in the work of Synesius (_a_) that chastity and temperance are indispensable for the knowledge of divination by dreams; (_b_) that these being granted, divination by dreams is both valuable and simple; (_c_) that all things past, present and future convey their images to us; (_d_) that there is no general rule of interpretation; (_e_) that each should make his divinatory science for himself, by noting his dreams. The philosopher gives some account of the profit which he had derived personally from a study of the images of sleep. Divination also preserved him from the ambushes laid by certain magicians, so that he suffered no harm at their hands.

[149] Éliphas Lévi’s knowledge of the works attributed to Dionysius is doubtless derived from the translation of Monsignor Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, which appeared in 1845. There is an elaborate introduction designed to establish the authenticity of the texts and this is excellent, at least for its period, as a piece of special pleading. The reader who refers to the treatise on Divine Names need not be distressed when he finds that it embodies no mysteries of rabbinical theology. To many of us at the present day the most important of the Dionysian writings is that on Mystical Theology, which is omitted in the enumeration of Lévi and not perhaps unnaturally, as it is a _pelagus divinitatis_ over which he would not have ventured to sail.

[150] Goethe.

[151] This explanation is not in accordance with the recorded facts for which Phlegon and Proclus are the authorities. The works of Phlegon were published at Leyden in 1620, under the editorship of Meursius and again in 1775 at Halle, by Franzius; they contain the story of Philinnion—as the name is spelt by Phlegon. Machates was a foreign friend of Demostratus from Pella, not an innkeeper. Philinnion appeared to him after her death in the house of his parents and declared her love. Her intercourse with Machates was discovered accidentally by a servant, and the _denouement_ is much as it is given in the present place. Philinnion said, however, that she acted with the consent of the gods. Éliphas Lévi accounts for his discrepancies by an appeal to the narratives of French demonographers, but he makes no references by which we can check him. He states, however, that they are answerable for the alleged fact that Machates was the keeper of a tavern. The date of the actual occurrence is the reign of Philip II of Macedon, and the “Emperor” referred to should be King Philip. Lévi confuses the date of Phlegon (Hadrian’s reign) with the date of the incident. Phlegon was merely a collector of curious stories, and could not, of course, have witnessed an incident which took place 500 years before his birth!

[152] It will be understood at the present day that this is reverie and only serves to remind us that Aristotle ascribed the philosophy of Greece to a source in Gaul, while it is affirmed by Clement of Alexandria that Pythagoras derived therefrom. It is thought now, on the other hand, that Druidism in its later developments may have been influenced not only by Greek but also by Phœnician ideas.

[153] In Druidic mythology, Belen, otherwise Heol, was the sun-god; Camael was god of war. The highest divinity is believed to have been that Esus who is mentioned by Lucan. He is represented by the circle, as a sign of infinity, and all fate was beneath him. The most important goddess was Keridwen, who presided over wisdom. The conclusion of Lévi’s enumeration is like the beginning—a dream.

[154] A note by Éliphas Lévi says that a Druidic statue was found at Chartres, having the inscription: VIRGINI PARITURÆ. It is curious that Druidic inscriptions should be in the Latin tongue.

[155] It was supposed to increase the species by preventing sterility, and it was dignified by other ascribed virtues; it was the ethereal tree and the growth of the high summit. It was included among the ingredients of the mystical cauldron of Keridwen, in which genius, inspiration and serenity were said to dwell.

[156] The same occult importance attaches to this statement as to another in the _Dogme et Rituel_, where Éliphas Lévi, explaining the superstitions of the past, affirms for those who can suffer it that the toad is not poisonous but is a sponge for poisons. I suppose, however, it is obvious that if “popular confidence” can render mistletoe magnetic, popular distrust may instil poison into toads.

[157] The floating traditions and _chansons_ concerning Melusine were collected by Jean d’Arras into a beautiful romance of chivalry, at the close of the fourteenth century.

[158] Whether this hypothesis of antiquity is warranted or not, the fact that it is adopted should have prevented Éliphas Lévi from characterising the romance of Melusine as an imitation pf the fable of Psyche: it is obviously the reverse side. The allegory in the latter case is that of the assumption of the soul by the Divine Spirit, so that all which is capable of redemption in our human nature, its emotion, its desire and its love, may enter into the glorious estate of the mystic marriage. The allegory in the former case is that of the union instituted between the psychic part and all that is of earth in our nature; but this earth is not capable of true marriage, and whereas the other experiment ends in the world of unity, this terminates, as it can only, in that of separation.

[159] See Jules Garinet: _Histoire de la Magie en France_, 1818, pp. 11, 12.

[160] The story of Fredegonde and her connection with sorcery is told by Gregory of Tours, but Éliphas Lévi derived it from Jules Garinet, already cited. The particulars concerning Klodswinthe appear to be his own invention, of which her imputed discourse bears all the marks.

[161] See Garinet, _Histoire de la Magie en France_, pp. 14-16, and Th. de Cauzons, _La Magie et la Sorcellerie en France_, vol. ii. p. 100. The original authority is again Gregory of Tours: _Histoire des Francs_, Book VI, c. 35. The account of Lévi is rather incorrect, for after unheard-of tortures, the life of Mummol was spared, but he died on the way to Bordeaux. It does not appear that he defied his executioners and the renewed torture was ordained by Chilperic.

[162] The work in question is called _Acta Disputationis cum quodam Nicolai_.

[163] A story of the days of St. Louis is obviously not Talmudic and the antiquity of the idea of immortality among the Jews fortunately rests on a better foundation than this. The criticism exposes the carelessness of Lévi if he is regarded as a man of learning. Some will think that he traded on the ignorance of his readers.

[164] What was actually intended by the expression _amatores diaboli_ should have been perfectly well understood by Éliphas Lévi. It corresponds to the legends concerning _incubi_ and _succubi_. For a specific example see Brierre de Boismont, _Des Hallucinations_, p. 151 _et seq._

[165] The story comes from Gregory of Tours.

[166] The account of Zedekias and the atmospheric marvels is taken from Garinet, pp. 34 _et seq._

[167] See pp. 34-37 of his History. But the account in Garinet is derived from the _Cinquième Entretien_ in the romance entitled _Le Comte de Gabalis_.

[168] It is not in reality an occult tradition; it is simply the unauthorised claim of the grimoire.

[169] It should be mentioned that this enumeration of assumptions expressed or implied in the claims of occult tradition, by the hypothesis of its present exponent, has nothing to do with the _Enchiridion_, which makes only two claims, and these are particular to itself. They are (_a_) that it was sent to Charlemagne by Pope Leo and (_b_) that certain prayers, which rank as its chief feature, possess mysterious power. The suggestion of Lévi’s next paragraph notwithstanding, there is no other point of view from which the book can be regarded.

[170] It is said elsewhere by Éliphas Lévi that the _Enchiridion_ has never been published with its true figures, and one is led to suppose that a more important MS. copy may have been in his possession. The plates which he describes belong to a printed edition, but there are no

## particulars concerning it. Most of the symbols are perfectly well known

otherwise, and I have given them in the _Book of Ceremonial Magic_, where they were taken from examples with which I am acquainted. Some of them correspond to the description of Lévi.

[171] _Adonai_ according to the _Zohar_ is one of the titles of _Shekinah_.

[172] He has said elsewhere (_a_) that to pronounce the word _Agla_ Kabalistically is to undergo all the trials of initiation and fulfil all its works; (_b_) that the occult forces which comprise the empire of Hermes are obedient to him who can pronounce, according to science, the incommunicable name of _Agla_; _(c_) and that its letters represent (1) unity, (2) fecundity, (3) the perfect cycle, and (4) the expression of the synthesis.

[173] He means that it symbolises the Creative Intelligence rising over the waters of creation. It is not, strictly speaking, Zoharic symbolism, but it corresponds to his own construction of one of the sections, namely, the _Book of Concealment_.

[174] It is more especially a Rosicrucian number, and its importance in Kabalism arises from its frequent recurrence in the scriptures of the Old Testament. When the days of the greater exile draw to their close, and judgment is coming upon all the peoples and all the kings of the world who have oppressed Israel, it is said that a pillar of fire shall be raised from earth to heaven and shall be visible to everyone for a period of forty days. The King Messiah will leave that place which is called the Bird’s Nest in the Garden of Eden and will manifest in the land of Galilee. At the end of the forty days a splendid star of all colours will appear in the East, &c. _Zohar_, Part II., fol. 7b.

[175] A reference to Plate III in the _Book of Ceremonial Magic_ will shew that the emblem in question is not the Labarum. For a design which is intended to represent the latter, see Plate IV, Fig. 2. There is really no connection between the Sigils of the _Enchiridion_ and the text of the work.

[176] Éliphas Lévi wrote and published much after the _History of Magic_, but the intention here expressed did not pass into realisation.

[177] At the period in question Westphalia comprehended the region between the Rhine and the Weser. Its southern boundary was the mountains of Hesse; its northern the district of Friesland, which at that time extended from Holland to Schleswig.

[178] No secret mission in the sense intended by Éliphas Lévi was ever entrusted by Charlemagne. He had overcome the Saxons of Westphalia after a thirty years’ war, had enforced the religion of the conqueror upon them, and had established a Frankish system of government therein.

[179] The origin of the Secret Tribunal is clouded, like all the history of its period, but it is quite certain that it is referable to the middle of the thirteenth century. It should be added that Éliphas Lévi was by no means author of the Charlemagne hypothesis, which had been advanced many years previously. The competitive views are numerous. It will be seen directly that a document of the Tribunal claims that it originated in the days of Charlemagne, supposing that it has been quoted correctly. Jules Garinet supported the claim without shewing any knowledge on the subject.

[180] The meetings of the Tribunal were frequently held in the town-house and the castle, sometimes in the market-place, and on rare occasions in churchyards. There is only one record concerning a session underground. The general place was under trees in the open air.

[181] An accused person had the right to conduct his own defence, or he could bring an advocate with him. There were also certain circumstances under which there was the right of appeal.

[182] The evidence is wanting for this extraordinary statement. Éliphas Lévi seems to have been under the impression that the Tribunal was like a Masonic Grand Lodge, with one mode and place of meeting. It was naturally composed of many tribunals and met, as we have seen, in all kinds of places.

[183] That this statement is amply justified may be seen by a reference to _La Magie et la Sorcellerie en France_, by T. De Cauzons, a work of considerable research published within the last few years in 4 vols. The section entitled _La Magie sous les premiers Capétiens_ is a record of trivialities concerning diabolical manifestations and can have been included only for the sake of chronological completeness.

[184] The story of Rabbi Jechiel’s device of self-protection is told by Bartolocci, _s.v._ R. Jechiel de Parisio, in the _Magna Bibliotheca Rabbinica_, vol. iii. pp. 834, 835. It is on the authority of R. Ghedalia ben David Iacchia. But although Jechiel is supposed to have been a magician there was neither electricity nor magic in his process, only a kind of trap at his own door step or threshold.

[185] It so happens that he went to see him and fell into the trap of the Jew. Garinet is the authority for the imaginary visit to the court of St. Louis. He follows Sauval.

[186] This paragraph is adapted from Garinet, _Hist. de la Magie en France_, p. 76.

[187] Many treatises on alchemy have been fathered on Albertus Magnus, including _Libellus de Alchymia_ and _Concordantia Philosophorum_.

[188] According to the _Zohar_, Adam was formed of earth brought from the four quarters, and this is really an allusion to the symbolic correspondence between the parts of his personality and the four elements of ancient physics.

[189] The universal secret which was sought by mystic Alchemy was more truly that of the life of life; it was the quest of transmutation in God.

[190] The thesis of physical Alchemy was that Nature always intended to produce gold but was thwarted by the impurity of the _media_ amidst which she worked under the earth. The inferior metals resulted. The end of Hermetic art was to complete the design of Nature and raise what is base to perfection.

[191] St. Thomas Aquinas wrote eight treatises on alchemy, if the ascriptions of the literature could be trusted. They are of the same authenticity as those of Albertus Magnus.

[192] The study in question was enjoined in a particular manner by Leo XIII.

[193] I do not know or have forgotten how this legend originated, but in any case no works on transmutation have been imputed to St. Dominic, which leads me to think that the story of his adeptship did not attain any considerable currency.

[194] A fragment of Ostanes is included in the Byzantine collection of ancient alchemists. Romarius should read Comarius, whose tract in the same collection is supposed to be addressed to Cleopatra. Salmanas wrote on the fabrication of artificial pearls and was supposed to be an Arab. A treatise on weights and measures is attributed to Cleopatra and there are also some Latin forgeries. The other names are well known in the literature of Alchemy.

[195] This must be understood in the general sense of the Secret Tradition perpetuated in various forms through Christian times. The Templars had no concern in the secret schools of Jewry. On the basis of the official process which resulted in their condemnation, they have been accused of Black Magic, Sorcery and of entering into a league with the Order of Assassins.

[196] I have dealt with the claims of this speculation in my _Secret Tradition in Freemasonry_, vol. i. p. 300 _et seq._

[197] The reference is really to the fourth chapter of the apocryphal _Book of Nehemiah_, which is the _Second Book of Esdras_, and to the Masons of Nehemiah, not of Zerubbabel. The latter was concerned with the building of the Second Temple and the former with that of the walls about Jerusalem. Half of the young men did the work of restoring the fortifications and half stood in readiness to fight. The builders also were girded with a sword about the reins. The sword in one hand and trowel in another is a symbolical expression.

[198] It is obvious that the arrangement of four triangular blades in a cruciform pattern would constitute an ordinary Maltese cross or cross of the Knights of St. John. This was an Assyrian emblem in pre-Christian times.

[199] The blasphemous fiction is well known and its root is in the _Sepher Toldos Jeshu_; it is inaccurate to call it a tradition; more properly it is a lying invention. I have failed to discover a source for the Theoclet story, but it is barely possible that it may have risen up within the circle of Fabré Palaprat’s _Ordre du Temple_.

[200] In the year 1844 Jacques Matter made a special study of the accusations against Knights Templar in his _Histoire Critique du Gnosticisme_, vol. iii. p. 315 _et seq._ He states that the alleged preference of the Templars for St. John’s Gospel is nowhere attested by the history of the Order. They were not therefore tinctured by remanents of Paulician Gnosticism, as it is not likely that they would be.

[201] Elsewhere Éliphas Lévi says: (_a_) That the hypothetical idol Baphomet was a symbolical figure representing the First Matter of the _Magnum Opus_, which is the Astral Light; (_b_) That it signified further the god Pan, which may be identified with “the Christ of dissident sacerdotalism”; (_c_) That the Baphometic head is “a beautiful allegory which attributes to thought alone the first and creative cause”; and finally, (_d_) That it is “nothing more than an innocent and even a pious hieroglyph.”

[202] The suggestion is that they were summoned by Jacques de Molay to appear before the Divine Tribunal within a year and a day, there to answer for their injustice, and that they died within the time mentioned, which does not happen to be true.

[203] The revision of the process which condemned the Maid of Orléans was begun by Charles VII himself in 1449. In 1552 twelve articles were drawn up, designed to exhibit its illegality and injustice. For political reasons, meaning the relations between France and England, the mother and brothers of Joan were made plaintiffs at Rome, and Pope Callixtus V appointed a commission. In 1456 the commission pronounced its judgment, reversing and annulling the first process on the ground of roguery, calumny, injustice, contradictions and manifest error in fact and law.—_La Magie et la Sorcellerie en France_, vol. ii. pp. 514-518.

[204] It has been suggested that the charge of sorcery covered a political conspiracy for his destruction and was of the same value as the same charge in respect of the Knights Templar.

[205] Francesco Prelati seems to have been a magician by profession and as regards Gilles de Sillé, it is said otherwise that he was a priest of St. Malo.

[206] This was Catherine de Thouars, and it was to her that the bulk of his fortune was due. He is said to have been one of the richest nobles in Europe.

[207] It will be understood that what follows is merely romantic narrative. See _Gilles de Rais, dit Barbe Bleue_, by Bossard et Maulde.

[208] The account at this point represents the admixture of the Blue-Beard or folk-element and may be read in conjunction with Perrault.

[209] It does not appear that Francesco Prélati and Gilles de Sillé were brought to account subsequently.

[210] He was really cited to appear before Jean de Malestroit, Bishop of Nantes and Chancellor of Brittany. He obeyed this summons.

[211] The records say that he was insolent at the beginning but soon changed his methods, and the confession which he made involved two of his servants, named Henri and Poitou.

[212] It was the servants of Gilles de Rais who accused him under torture.

[213] This explanation is absolutely supposititious, there being no tittle of evidence for the existence of such a process in the records of Black Magic. It is of course possible that some readers may ascribe secret sources of information to Éliphas Lévi. Speaking generally, Black Magic and the synonymous white variety were concerned little enough in alchemical processes, good or bad. Their amateurs and adepts sought enrichment by the discovery of buried treasures with the assistance of demons; they sought also to communicate with evil spirits who could bring gold and precious stones from the mines, or who could themselves accomplish transmutation.

[214] It is just to say that Gaffarel wrote in defence of the Jews and to clear them of many accusations besides those made by Philo. His thesis was that many things were falsely imposed upon them.

[215] His fate was shared by the servants already mentioned, who are said to have been his accomplices.

[216] The Marquis Eudes de Mirville wrote _Des Esprits et de leurs Manifestations Fluidiques devant la Science Moderne_, 1858, and other large books, which were highly recommended by ecclesiastical authority of the day. He saw the intervention of Satanism everywhere in psychic and occult phenomena. Remove the personality of Satan and Éliphas Lévi says exactly the same thing.

[217] The reference is to _La Réalité des Esprits et le Phénomène Merveilleux de leur Écriture Directe_. It appeared in 1857 and is a very curious collection of materials. Long after, or in 1875, the same writer published _La Morale Universelle_, which seems to be a plea for secular education.

[218] The reader should understand that Éliphas Lévi is only giving expression to a point of view; it must not be supposed that there were adepts—either true or false—who said or thought the things which are here set down at the period in question, or indeed at any other period.

[219] See Gabriel Naudé: _Apologie pour les Grands Hommes faussement accusés de la Magie_.

[220] Bartholemæus Platina was assistant-librarian of the Vatican, and his _Opus in Vitas Summorum Pontificum_ appeared at Venice in 1479, two years before his death.

[221] “Let the popes see to it,” he remarks, according to a Note of Lévi; “it is they who are concerned in the question.”

[222] Éliphas Lévi, in his defence of the Catholic Religion, by which he means that of Rome, reminds one of Talleyrand proceeding to consecrate and entreating his familiars about him not to make him laugh: in the symbolic language of the man in the street, his tongue is so evidently in his cheek. An open enemy of Rome would think twice before saying that the pope who authorised the instruments which were used in the execrable massacres of Albigensians and Vaudois was “so eminently catholic.”

[223] I refer the readers of this section to my _Book of Ceremonial Magic_, where the content and history of this Grimoire are considered with special reference to the criticism of Éliphas Lévi.

[224] I have mentioned in the _Book of Ceremonial Magic_ that the first edition of the _Grimoire of Honorius_ is referred to 1629, being about 900 years after the death of its alleged author. I have also referred it to its proper source in the _Sworn Book of Honorius_, which belongs to the fourteenth century. The Honorius here in question was the spokesman of magicians assembled at a mythical place. He is described as the son of Euclid and Master of the Thebans.

[225] This is another way of stating that it is precisely of the same character as the _Key of Solomon the King_, the _Keys of Rabbi Solomon_ and the _Magical Elements of Peter de Abano_, which correspond to the description given.

[226] The Grimoire is, on the contrary, a Ritual for the evocation of evil spirits and, granting only the legality of this operation, it is conformable in all respects to the doctrine of the Latin Church. Now, it is idle to say that this Church substitutes the passive for the

## active principle, the cultus of the Blessed Virgin notwithstanding.

[227] I am not acquainted with this frontispiece, but I have seen a copy having a design on the title-page representing the sun within an inverted triangle.

[228] This exegesis is personal to Éliphas Lévi and has no authority in Kabalism, as there is no need to say, seeing that the Secret Tradition in Jewry did not maintain the hierarchy of the Latin Church. In the _Zohar_, Adonai is a title of _Shekinah_, as already stated.

[229] On the assumption of course that the letter _Aleph_ stands for _Adam_, while _Cheth_ and _Vau_ are the first letters in the name of _Eve_. The interpretation throughout is of the same value and Éliphas Lévi was not more serious in expressing it than I am in translating it. The _Grimoire of Honorius_ is no such abyss of decorative philosophical iniquity.

[230] I have used the translation made from the Grimoire itself, published in my _Book of Ceremonial Magic_, p. 107.

[231] It affirms that the power to command demons is resident in the Seat of Peter and then proceeds to communicate that power by dispensation to “venerable brethren and dear sons in Jesus Christ,” being those comprised in the ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy.

[232] It must be explained that the oration in the Grimoire is not rhythmic, but the “when I shall impose my will upon them” recurs several times, literally or in substance. In this manner Éliphas Lévi gets the refrain of his verses: _Je leur imposerai ma volonté pour loi_. His metrical rendering is well conceived and executed.

[233] I have rendered in prose that which is given by Lévi in verse, which is anything but in the words of the Ritual. Compare my translation of the prayer taken from the Grimoire in the _Book of Ceremonial Magic_, pp. 280-282.

[234] The Ritual proceeds to the conjuration of the Kings presiding in the four quarters of heaven and the evil angels who rule over the days of the week.

[235] The presence of the gipsies in Europe can be traced prior to the fifteenth century.

[236] The authority of George Borrow is quoted for this statement.

[237] Long before Vaillant, this Chinese inscription was described by Court de Gebelin, who also believed that it was a form of the Tarot.

[238] If certain beautiful Tarot cards preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi and at the Musée Carrer are the work of Jacques Gringonneur, which is disputed, as we have seen, then the Tarot is first heard of in 1393 and as it was in 1423 that St. Bernardin of Sienna preached against playing cards, which were no doubt Tarots, it is probable that they were put to the same use at the earlier date that they were put to at the later.

[239] The romantic history of Raymund Lully on which Éliphas Lévi worked was written by Jean Marie de Vernon.

[240] What is certain historically is as follows: (_a_) That the story of Ambrosia di Castello, so far as regards its root-matter, concerns the original and only Raymund Lully, who was the author of the _Ars Magna_; (_b_) That it is in all probability fictitious; (_c_) That it has been decorated and dramatised by Éliphas Lévi, who has done his work admirably; (_d_) That concerning the father of the illuminated doctor we know only that he was a great soldier; (_e_) That the author of the alchemical treatises was not the author of the _Ars Magna_; (_f_) That the alchemical writer is said to have been (1) another Raymund Lully, which, I think, means only that he assumed the name in order to father his works upon a celebrated person, and (2) a proselyte of the gate, being a person who becomes a Jew, but this is manifestly contradicted by the evidence of the alchemical texts; (_g_) That when the works of Raymund Lully were collected, at the end of the eighteenth century, into eight enormous folio volumes, we find, as I have said elsewhere, a third Raymund Lully, who was a mystic; but as to his real identity we know nothing.

[241] Rose Nobles were replaced by Angels in 1465, _temp._ Edward IV.

[242] Louis Figuier wrote occult romances under the guise of history, and did not know what he was talking about in respect of the _Ars Magna_. There is no reason to suppose that it had even passed through his hands. It was otherwise as regards the little alchemical texts; and there is no reason to question what he says concerning them.

[243] The story of a transmutation performed by some one called Raymund Lully in England depends from the alchemical texts mentioned, and is therefore no evidence, and from a forged Testament of John Cremer, who called himself Abbot of Westminster, but no person of this name filled the office in question, either at the supposed period or any other.

[244] The tracts extant under the name of the alchemical Raymund Lully are enumerated by Lenglet du Fresnoy in connection with those attributed to the author of the _Ars Magna_. Mangetus printed sixteen in his _Bibliotheca Chemica Curiosa_, 1702. The _Codicillus_, _Vade Mecum_, or _Cantilena_ is a considerable work, divided into 74 chapters.

[245] The reader may consult at this point my study of the life and writings of Raymund Lully in the _Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers_, pp. 68-88.

[246] There is no reference to a title in the original text.

[247] It is stated once only in the Apocalypse that “there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.” See