chapter cclxxii

, the dynasty of ten Moryas, or Maureyas, is spoken of. In the same chapter, it is stated that the Moryas will one day reign over India, after restoring the Kshattriya race many thousand years hence. Only that reign will be purely spiritual and “not of this world.” It will be the kingdom of the next Avatâra. Colonel Tod believes the name Morya, or Maurya, a corruption of Mori, a Rajpût tribe, and the commentary on the _Mahâvanso_ thinks that some princes have taken their name Maurya from their town called Mori, or as Professor Max Müller gives it, Morya‐Nâgara, which is more correct, after the original _Mahâvanso_. The Sanskrit Encyclopedia, _Vâchaspattya_, we are informed by our Brother, Devan Bâdhâdur R. Ragoonath Rao, of Madras, places Katâpa (Kalâpa) on the northern side of the Himâlayas, hence in Tibet. The same is stated in the _Bhâgavata Purâna_, Skanda xii.

611 _Ibid._, ch. iv. The _Vayu Purâna_ declares that Moru will reëstablish the Kshattriyas in the Nineteenth coming Yuga. (See _Five Years of Theosophy_, 483, art. “The Moryas and Koothoomi.”)

612 See _Dissertations Relating to Asia_.

613 Ch. lxxxi.

614 I. 11.

615 In the Indian _Purânas_, it is Vishnu, the First, and Brahmâ, the Second Logos, or the Ideal and Practical Creators, who are respectively represented, one as manifesting the Lotus, the other as issuing from it.

616 Not the efforts, however, of the trained psychic faculties of an Initiate into Eastern Metaphysics, and the Mysteries of Creative Nature. It is the Profane of the past ages, who have degraded the pure ideal of cosmic creation into an emblem of mere human reproduction and sexual functions: it is the Esoteric Teachings, and the Initiates of the Future, whose mission it is, and will be, to redeem and ennoble once more the primitive conception, so sadly profaned by its crude and gross application to exoteric dogmas and personations, by theological and ecclesiastical religionists. The silent worship of abstract or noumenal Nature, the only divine manifestation, is the one ennobling religion of Humanity.

617 Surely the words of the old Initiate into the _primitive_ Mysteries of Christianity, “Know ye not ye are the Temple of God” (1 _Corinth_, iii. 16), could not be applied in _this_ sense to _men_; though the meaning _was_, undeniably, so stated, in the minds of the Hebrew compilers of the _Old Testament_. And here is the abyss that lies between the symbolism of the _New Testament_ and the Jewish canon. This gulf would have remained, and have ever widened, had not Christianity, especially and most glaringly the Latin Church, thrown a bridge over it. Modern Popery has now spanned it entirely, by its dogma of the two immaculate conceptions, and the anthropomorphic and, at the same time idolatrous, character it has conferred upon the Mother of its God.

618 It was so carried _only_ in the Hebrew _Bible_, and its servile copyist, Christian theology.

619 The same idea is carried out exoterically in the incidents of the exodus from Egypt. The Lord God tempts Pharaoh sorely, and “plagues him with great plagues,” lest the king should escape punishment, and thus afford no pretext for one more triumph to his “chosen people.”

620 _Exodus_, ii. 10. Even to the seven daughters of the Midianite priest, who came to draw _water_, and whom Moses helped to _water_ their flock; for which service the Midian gives Moses his daughter Zipporah, or Sippara, the _shining_ Wave, as wife. (_Exod._ ii. 16‐21.) All this has the same secret meaning.

621 With the Egyptians it was the resurrection in rebirth, after 3,000 years of purification, either in Devachan or the “Fields of Bliss.”

622 Such “frog‐Goddesses” may be seen at Boulak, in the Cairo Museum. For the statement about the Church‐lamps and inscriptions, the learned ex‐director of the Boulak Museum, M. Gaston Maspero, must be held responsible. (See his _Guide au Musée de Boulaq_, p. 146.)

623 The Goddess Τρίμορφος in the statuary of Alcamenes.

624 Ancient Mythology includes ancient Astronomy as well as Astrology. The planets were the hands pointing out, on the dial of our Solar System, the hours of certain periodical events. Thus, Mercury was the _messenger_, appointed to keep time during the daily solar and lunar phenomena, and was otherwise connected with the God and Goddess of Light.

625 A caricatured and dwarfed Vedântin notion of Parabrahman containing within _itself_ the whole Universe, as being that boundless Universe itself, and _nothing existing outside of itself_.

626 Just as they are to this day in India; the bull of Shiva, and the cow representing several Shaktis or Goddesses.

627 Hence the worship of the Moon by the Hebrews.

628 “_Male_ and _female_, created he them.”

629 Because it was too sacred. It is referred to as THAT in the _Vedas_. It is the “Eternal Cause,” and cannot, therefore, be spoken of as a “First Cause,” a term implying the absence of Cause, at one time.

630 _Pneumatologie: Des Esprits_, tom. III. p. 117; “Archéologie de la Vierge Mère.”

631 p. 23.

632 Myer’s _Qabbalah_, 335‐6.

633 _Moreh Nebhuchim_, III. xxx.

634 See _De Diis Syriis_, Teraph., II. Synt. p. 31.

635 I. i. 21.

636 See _Pausanias_, viii. 35‐8.

637 Cornutus, _De Natura Deorum_, xxxiv. 1.

638 The Roman Catholics are indebted for the idea of consecrating the month of May to the Virgin to the pagan Plutarch, who shows that “May is sacred to Maia (Μαῖα) or Vesta” (Aulus Gellius, _sub voc._ Maia), our mother‐earth, our nurse and nourisher, personified.

639 Thot‐Lunus is the Budha‐Soma of India, or Mercury and the Moon.

640 _Ezekiel_, viii. 16.

641 The Earth flees for her life, in the allegory, before Prithu, who pursues her. She assumes the shape of a cow, and, trembling with terror, runs away and hides even in the regions of Brahmâ. Therefore, it is _not_ our Earth. Again, in every _Purâna_, the calf changes name. In one it is Manu Svâyambhuva, in another Indra, in a third the Himavat (Himâlayas) itself, while Meru was the milker. This is a deeper allegory than one may be inclined to think.

642 His _clear_ realization is, that the Egyptians _prophesied_ Jehovah (!) and his incarnated Redeemer (the good serpent), etc.; even to identifying Typhon with the _wicked_ dragon of the garden of Eden. And this passes as serious and sober _science_!

643 Hathor is the _infernal_ Isis, the Goddess preëminently of the West or the Nether World.

644 This is from De Mirville, who proudly confesses the similarity, and he _ought to know_. See “Archéologie de la Vierge Mère,” in his _Des Esprits_, pp. 111‐113.

645 _Magie_, p. 153.

646 De Mirville, _Ibid._, pp. 116 and 119.

647 _Hymns to Minerva_, p. 19.

648 _Sermon sur la Sainte Vierge._

649 _Apoc._, ch. xii.

650 Wägner and McDowall, _Asgard and the Gods_, p. 86.

651 See _De Vitâ Apollionii_, I. xiv.

652 _Adv. Hæres._ xxxvii.

653 Gerald Massey, _The Natural Genesis_, I. 340.

654 Ch. xv.

655 Ch. xi.

656 _De Mundi Opif._, _Par._, pp. 30 and 419.

657 For the same reason the division of the principles in man into seven is thus reckoned, as they describe the same circle in the higher and lower human nature.

658 Thus the septenary division is the oldest and preceded the four‐fold division. It is the root of archaic classification.

659 In Chinese Buddhism and Esotericism, the Genii are represented by four Dragons—the Mahârâjahs of the Stanzas.

660 _Op. cit._, II. 312‐13.

661 _Ibid._, I. 321.

662 Proclus, _Tim._, I.

663 _Prep. Evang._, I. iii. 3.

664 _Op. cit._, pp. 366‐8.

665 _Job_, ii.

666 _Genesis_, vi.

667 _James_, i. 13.

668 _James_, i. 2, 12; _Matth._, vi. 13. See Cruden, _sub voc._

669 _Padma Purâna._

670 _Vishnu Purâna_, I. i.

671 Vol. II. ch. x.

672 See Chwolsohn, _Nabathean Agriculture_, II. 217.

673 One Day of Brahmâ lasts 4,320,000,000 years—multiply this by 360! The A‐suras (No‐gods, or Demons) are here still Suras, Gods higher in hierarchy than such secondary Gods as are not even mentioned in the _Vedas_. The duration of the War shows its significance, and also shows that the combatants are only the personified Cosmic Powers. It is evidently for sectarian purposes and out of _odium theologicum_ that the illusive form Mâyâmoha, assumed by Vishnu, was attributed in later reärrangements of old texts to Buddha and the Daityas, as in the _Vishnu Purâna_, unless it was a fancy of Wilson himself. He also fancied he found an allusion to Buddhism in the _Bhagavadgîtâ_, whereas, as proved by K. T. Telang, he had only confused the Buddhists and the older Chârvâka materialists. The version exists nowhere in other _Purânas_ if the inference does, as Professor Wilson claims, in the _Vishnu Purâna_; the translation of which, especially of Book III. ch. xviii, where the reverend Orientalist arbitrarily introduces Buddha, and shows him teaching Buddhism to Daityas, led to another “great war” between himself and Col. Vans Kennedy. The latter charged him publicly with wilfully distorting Purânic texts. “I affirm,” wrote the Colonel at Bombay, in 1840, “that the _Purânas_ do not contain what Professor Wilson has stated is contained in them; ... until such passages are produced I may be allowed to repeat my former conclusions that Professor Wilson’s opinion, that the _Purânas_ as now extant are compilations made between the eighth and seventeenth centuries [A.D.!], rests solely _on gratuitous assumptions and unfounded assertions_, and that his reasoning in support of it is either futile, fallacious, contradictory, or improbable.” (See _Vishnu Purâna_, trans. by Wilson, edit, by Fitzedward Hall, Vol. V, Appendix.)

674 This statement belongs to the _third_ War, since the terrestrial continents, seas and rivers are mentioned in connection with it.

675 _Vishnu Purâna_, III. xvii (Wilson, Vol. III. 204‐5).

676 Book I. chap. xvii (Wilson, Vol. II. 36), in the story of Prahlâda—the Son of Hiranyakashipu, the Purânic Satan, the great enemy of Vishnu, and the King of the Three Worlds—into whose heart Vishnu entered.

677 _Ibid._, I. iv (Wilson, Vol. I. 64).

678 II _Chronicles_, ii. 5.

679 “There was a day when the _Sons of God_ came before the Lord, and Satan came _with his brothers_, also before the Lord.” (_Job_ ii., Abyss., Ethiopic text.)

680 _Ibid._, Vol. III. 205‐7.

681 _Journal of the Royal Asiat. Society_, xix. 302.

682 Wilson’s opinion that the _Vishnu Purâna_ is a production _of our era_, and that in its present form it is not earlier than between the VIIIth and the XVIIth (!!) century, is absurd beyond noticing.

683 P. 3.

684 _Ibid._, p. 2.

685 _Ibid._, p. 21.

686 See _The Monthly Magazine_, for April, 1797.

687 Ἤτοι μὲν πρώτιστα Χάος γ’eνετ᾽ (l. 166); γένετο being considered in antiquity as meaning: “was _generated_” and not simply “_was_.” (See Taylor’s “Introd. to the _Parmenides_ of Plato,” p. 260.)

688 It is the confusion between the “Bound,” and the “Infinite,” that Kapila overwhelms with sarcasms in his disputations with the Brâhman Yogis, who claim in their mystical visions to see the “Highest One.”

689 _Ibid._

690 See T. Taylor’s article in his _Monthly Magazine_, quoted in the _Platonist_ of Feb., 1887, edited by T. M. Johnson, F.T.S., Osceola, Missouri.

691 _Vit. Pythag._, p. 47.

692 _Asgard and the Gods_, 22.

693 Vâch—the “melodious cow, who milks sustenance and Water,” and yields us “nourishment and sustenance,” as described in the _Rig Veda_.

694 _The Theosophist_, Feb., 1887, pp. 302‐3.

695 _Ibid._, p. 304.

696 _The Masonic Review_, June, 1886.

697 Objective—in the world of Mâyâ, of course; still as real as we are.

698 “In the course of cosmic manifestation, this Daiviprakriti, instead of being the Mother of the Logos, should, strictly speaking, be called his Daughter.” (“Notes on the _Bhagavad Gîtâ_,” _op. cit._, p. 305.)

699 The wise men who, like Stanley Jevons amongst the moderns, invented a method to make the incomprehensible assume a tangible form, could only do so by resorting to numbers and geometrical figures.

700 The Pranava, Om, is a mystic term pronounced by the Yogis during meditation; of the terms called, according to exoteric commentators, Vyâkritis, or Aum, Bhûh, Bhuvah, Svah, (Om, Earth, Sky, Heaven), Pranava is, perhaps, the most sacred. They are pronounced with breath suppressed. See _Manu_ II. 76‐81, and Mitakshara commenting on the _Yâjnavâkhya‐Smriti_, I. 23. But the esoteric explanation goes a great deal further.

701 “Lectures on the _Bhagavad Gîtâ_,” _ibid._, p. 307.

702 It is this Trinity that is allegorized by the “Three Steps of Vishnu,” which mean—Vishnu being considered as the Infinite in exotericism—that from Parabrahman issued Mûlaprakriti, Purusha (the Logos) and Prakriti; the four forms—with itself, the synthesis—of Vâch. And in the _Kabalah_, Ain Suph, Shekinah, Adam Kadmon and Sephira, the four, or the three, emanations being distinct—yet One.

703 Chaldean _Book of Numbers_. In the current _Kabalah_ the name Jehovah replaces that of Adam Kadmon.

704 Justin Martyr tells us that, owing to his ignorance of these four sciences, he was rejected by the Pythagoreans as a candidate for admission into their school.

705 Diogenes Laërtius, in _Vit. Pythag._

706 31415, or π, the synthesis, or the Host _unified_ in the Logos and the Point, called in Roman Catholicism the “Angel of the Face,” and in Hebrew, Michael, מיכאל, “who [is like unto, or the same] as God,” the manifested representation.

707 Appearing at the beginning of Cycles, as also of every Sidereal Year, of 25,868 years. Therefore, the Kabeira or Kabarim received their name in Chaldæa, for it means the Measures of Heaven, from _Kob_, “measure of,” and _Urim_, “Heavens.”

708 _The Natural Genesis_, II. 316.

709 See Kircher’s _Œdipus Ægypt._, II. 423.

710 This Egyptian word Naja reminds one a good deal of the Indian Nâga, the Serpent‐God. Brahmâ and Shiva and Vishnu are all crowned and connected with Nâgas—a sign of their cyclic and cosmic character.

711 _Comment. on the Yashna_, 174.

712 First Treatise, p. 59.

713 Says the translator of Avicebron’s _Qabbalah_ of this “Sum Total”: “The letter of Kether is י (Yod), of Binah ה (Heh), together YaH, the feminine Name; the third letter, that of ’Hokhmah, is ו (Vav), making together יהו YHV of יהוה YHVH, the Tetragrammaton, and really the complete symbols of its efficaciousness. The last ה (Heh) of this Ineffable Name _being always applied to the Six Lower and the last, together the Seven_ remaining Sephiroth.” (Myer’s _Qabbalah_, p. 263). Thus the Tetragrammaton is holy only in its abstract synthesis. As a Quaternary containing the lower Seven Sephiroth, _it is phallic_.

714 The statement will, of course, be found preposterous and absurd, and simply laughed at. But if one believes in the final submersion of Atlantis, 850,000 years ago, as taught in _Esoteric Buddhism_—the gradual first sinking having begun during the Eocene Age—one has also to accept the statement for the so‐called Lemuria, the continent of the Third Root‐Race, which was first nearly destroyed by combustion, and then submerged. As the Commentary teaches: “_The First Earth having been purified by the Forty‐nine Fires, her people, born of Fire and Water, could not die ...; the Second Earth [with its Race] disappeared as vapour vanishes in the air ...; the Third Earth had everything consumed on it after the Separation, and went down into the lower Deep [the Ocean]. This was twice eighty‐two Cyclic Years ago._” Now a Cyclic Year is what we call a Sidereal Year, and is founded on the Precession of the Equinoxes. The length of this Sidereal Year is 25,868 years, and the period mentioned in the Commentary is, therefore, in all equal to 4,242,352 years. More details will be found in Volume II. Meanwhile, this doctrine is embodied in the “Kings of Edom.”

715 The same reserve is found in the _Talmud_ and in every national system of religion whether monotheistic or exoterically polytheistic. From the superb religious poem by the Kabalist Rabbi Solomon ben Yehudah Ibn Gabirol, the “Kether Malchuth,” we select a few definitions given in the prayers of Kippûr: “Thou art One, the beginning of all numbers, and the foundation of all edifices; Thou art One, and in the secret of Thy unity the wisest of men are lost, because they know it not. Thou art One, and Thy Unity is never diminished, never extended, and cannot be changed. Thou art One, but _not as an element of numeration; for Thy Unity admits not of multiplication, change or form_. Thou art Existent; but the understanding and vision of mortals cannot attain to thy existence, nor determine for thee the Where, the How, and the Why. Thou art Existent, but in thyself alone, there being none other that can exist with thee. Thou art Existent, before all time and without place. Thou art Existent, and thy existence is so profound and secret that none can penetrate and discover thy secrecy. Thou art living, but within no time that can be fixed or known; Thou art living, but not by a spirit or a soul, for _Thou art Thyself_, the Soul of all Souls.” There is a distance between this Kabalistical Deity and the Biblical Jehovah, the spiteful and revengeful God of Abram, Isaac, and Jacob, who tempted the first and wrestled with the last. No Vedântin but would repudiate such a Parabrahman!

716 Edkins, _Chinese Buddhism_, ch. xx. And very wisely have they acted.

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

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

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

720 _Matth._, xxiv. 28.

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

722 From an unpublished MS.

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

724 Wilson, _Vishnu Purâna_, I. 73‐5.

725 Origen, _Contra Celsum_, VI. xxii.

726 _Timæus._

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

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

729 _Vishnu Purâna_, _ibid._

730 _Op. cit._, I. ix.

731 Myer’s _Qabbalah_, 415‐16.

732 _Contra Hær._, I. xvii. 1.

733 _Ibid._, I. xxx.

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

735 _Ibid._, I. v. 2.

736 See _Isis Unveiled_, II. 183.

737 See also King’s _Gnostics and their Remains_, p. 97. Other sects regarded Jehovah as Ialdabaoth himself. King identifies him with Saturn.

738 _Ordinances of Manu_, I. 33.

739 _Irenæus_, _op. cit._, I. xxx. 6.

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

741 This must not be confused with _precosmic_ “DARKNESS,” the Divine ALL.

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

743 The quotations that follow in treating of the seven Creations, except when otherwise stated, are all from _Vishnu Purâna_, Bk. I. Ch. i‐v.

744 I. 240.

745 Brucker, _ibid._

746 Compare _Genesis_ xix. 34‐8 and iv. 1.

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

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

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

750 _Vâyu Purâna._

751 _Collected Works_, III. 381.

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

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

754 _Five Years of Theosophy_, p. 276, art., “Mineral Monad.”

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

756 See _Sânkhya Kârikâ_, v. 46. p. 146.

757 Parâshara, the Vedic Rishi, who received the _Vishnu Purâna_ from Pulastya and taught it to Maitreya, is placed by the Orientalists at various epochs. As correctly observed, in the _Hindû Classical Dictionary_: “Speculations as to his era differ widely, from 575 B.C. to 1391 B.C., and _cannot be trusted_.” Quite so; but they are no more untrustworthy than any other date, as assigned by the Sanskritists, so famous in the department of arbitrary fancy.

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

759 _Hindû Classical Dictionary._

760 _Linga Purâna_, Prior Section, lxx. 174.

761 See _Manu_, I. 10.

762 See _Linga_, _Vâyu_ and _Mârkandeya Purânas_.

763 Movers, _Phoinizer_, 282.

764 Weber, _Akad. Vorles_, 213, 214, etc.

765 IX. 850.

766 _Stromata_, I. v. 6.

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

768 I. vi. i.

769 _Cod. Naz._, I. 47; see also _Psalms_, lxxxix. 18.

770 I _Cor._, viii. 5.

771 _Concerning Divine Names_, traduction Darboy, 364.

772 See de Mirville, _Des Esprits_, ii. 322.

773 _The Correlation of Physical Forces_, p. 89.

774 _Ibid._, xiv.

775 II _Sam._, xxii. 9, 11.

776 _Deut._, iv. 24.

777 _Op. cit._, III. 415.

778 II _Sam._, xxii. 14, 15.

779 Herodotus, _Polymnia_, 190, 191.

780 viii. 24.

781 _Fa‐hwa‐King._

782 See _La Mission des Juifs_.

783 _China Revealed_, as quoted in Hargrave Jennings’ _Phallicism_, p. 273.

784 p. 202.

785 _Op. cit._, p. 60.

786 _Ibid._

787 O’Brien, _Round Towers of Ireland_, p. 61, quoted by Hargrave Jennings in his _Phallicism_, p. 246.

788 _Introduction to the Science of Religion_, p. 332.

789 _Pantheon_, text 3.

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

791 See his Third Letter to Bentley.

792 _Concepts of Modern Physics_, pp. xi, xii, Introd. to 2nd Ed.

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

794 From the criticism of _Concepts of Modern Physics_, in _Nature_. See Stallo’s work, p. xvi of Introduction.

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

796 See _Correlation of the Physical Forces_, Preface.

797 _Soirées_, vol. ii.

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

799 Stallo, _loc. cit._, p. x.

800 _Silliman’s Journal_, vol. viii. pp. 364 _et seq._

801 See Clerk Maxwell’s _Treatise on Electricity_, and compare with Cauchy’s _Mémoire sur la Dispersion de la Lumière_.

802 Stallo, _loc. cit._, p. x.

803 _Nature_, vol. xxvii. p. 304.

804 _Op. cit._, p. xxiv.

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

806 _Veræ causæ_ for Physical Science are mâyâvic or illusionary causes for the Occultist, and _vice versâ_.

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

808 _Op. cit._, pp. xxiv‐xxvi.

809 _Sept Leçons de Physique Générale_, p. 38, _et seq._, Ed. Moigno.

810 Defin. 8, B. I. Prop. 69, “Scholium.”

811 See _Modern Materialism_, by the Rev. W. F. Wilkinson.

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

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

814 To liken the “immateriate species to wooden iron,” and to laugh at Spiller for referring to them as “incorporeal matter” does not solve the mystery. (See _Concepts of Modern Physics_, p. 165 _et infra_.)

815 See _Vossius_, Vol. II. p. 528.

816 _De Carlo_, I. 9.

817 _De Motibus Planetarum Harmonicis_, p. 248.

818 _World‐Life_, Prof. Winchell, LL.D., pp. 49 and 50.

819 _Panorama des Mondes_, pp. 47 and 53.

820 Newton, _Optics_, III. Query 28, 1704; quoted in _World‐Life_, p. 50.

821 _Ibid._

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

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

824 From Winchell’s _World‐Life_, p. 379.

825 _Correl. Phys. Forces_, p. 173.

826 See _Revue Germanique_ of the 31st Dec. 1860, art., “Lettres et Conversations d’Alexandre Humboldt.”

827 Prof. Winchell.

828 _World‐Life_, p. 553.

829 But see _Astronomie du Moyen Age_, by Delambre.

830 See _Isis Unveiled_, I. 270, 271.

831 _World‐Life_, 554.

832 Godefroy, _Cosmogonie de la Révélation_.

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

834 Jacob Ennis, _The Origin of the Stars_.

835 P. 99, note.

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

837 Laplace, _Système du Monde_, p. 414, ed. 1824.

838 Faye, _Comptes Rendus_, t. xc. pp. 640‐2.

839 Wolf.

840 _Panorama des Mondes_, Le Couturier.

841 _World‐Life_, Winchell, p. 140.

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

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

844 Coulomb’s Law.

845 _Musée des Sciences_, 15 August, 1857.

846 _Panorama des Mondes_, p. 55.

847 _Revue des Deux Mondes_, July 15, 1860.

848 _Cosmographie._

849 _Soirées._

850 _Discours_, 165.

851 p. 28.

852 _Des Esprits_, III. 155, Deuxième Mémoire.

853 Laing’s _Modern Science and Modern Thought_.

854 _Ibid._, p. 17.

855 _Heaven and Earth._

856 Winchell, _World‐Life_, p. 196.

857 _L’Univers expliqué par la Révélation_, and _Cosmogonie de la Révélation_. But see De Mirville’s _Deuxième Mémoire_. The author, a terrible enemy of Occultism, was yet one who wrote great truths.

858 See _Kabbala Denudata_, II. 67.

859 “Sur la Distinction des Forces,” published in the _Mémoires de l’Académie des Sciences de Montpellier_, Vol. II. fasc. i, 1854.

860 P. 123.

861 _Der Weltæther als Kosmische Kraft_, p. 4.

862 See _Popular Science Review_, Vol. V. pp. 329‐34.

863 See _Correlation of Physical Forces_, p. 110.

864 See Buckwell’s _Electric Science_.

865 Schelling, _Ideen_, etc., p. 18.

866 _Op. cit._, p. 161.

867 _Princ._, Def. iii.

868 _Philosophical Magazine_, Vol. II. p. 252.

869 _Concepts of Modern Physics_, xxxi., Introductory to the 2nd Edition.

870 _Loc. cit._

871 J. P. Cooke, _The New Chemistry_, p. 13.

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

873 Wundt, _Die Theorie der Materie_, p. 381.

874 Nazesmann, _Thermochemie_, p. 150.

875 Krœnig, Clausius, Maxwell, etc., _Philosophical Magazine_, Vol. XIX. p. 18.

876 _Philosophical Magazine_, Vol. XIV. p. 321.

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

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

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

880 Leslie’s _Fluid Theory of Light and Heat_.

881 Buckle’s _History of Civilization_, Vol. III. p. 384.

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

883 Neutral, or Laya.

884 _Scientific Letters_, Professor Butlerof.

885 _Ibid._

886 _Ibid._

887 _Ibid._

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

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

890 Its founder, Râmânujâchârya, was born A.D. 1017.

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

892 Pp. 329‐334.

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

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

895 And how can it be otherwise? Gross ponderable matter is the body, the shell, of Matter or Substance, the female passive principle; and this Fohatic Force is the second principle, Prâna—the male and the

## active. On our globe this Substance is the second principle of the

septenary Element—Earth; in the atmosphere, it is that of Air, which is the cosmic gross body; in the Sun it becomes the Solar Body and that of the Seven Rays; in Sidereal Space it corresponds with another principle, and so on. The whole is a homogeneous Unity alone, the parts are all differentiations.

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

897 An honest admission, this.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

906 _Geology_, by Professor A. Winchell.

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

908 _Philosophie Naturelle_, art. 142.

909 _Astronomie_, p. 342.

910 Commentary on Stanza IV, _ante_, pp. 126‐7.

911 _Popular Science Review_, Vol. IV. p. 148.

912 And the _central mass_, too, as will be found, or rather the centre of the reflection.

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

914 See _Five Years of Theosophy_, p. 258, for an answer to this speculation of Herschell.

915 _Ibid._, p. 156.

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

917 _Alchemical_ “composition,” rather.

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

919 _Popular Science Review_, Vol. X. pp. 380‐3.

920 _De Generatione Hominis._

921 _De Viribus Membrorum_. See _Life of Paracelsus_, by Franz Hartmann, M.D., F.T.S.

922 P. 384.

923 Ch. xiii; Telang’s translation, p. 292.

924 _Ibid._, ch. xxxvi; p. 385.

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

926 _Ibid._, ch. x: pp. 277, 278.

927 _Mundakopanishad_, p. 298.

928 _Bhagavadgîtâ_, ch. vii; _ibid._, pp. 73, 74.

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

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

931 _Anugîtâ_, ch. xx; _ibid._, p. 313.

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

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

934 P. 387.

935 _Paragranum; Life of Paracelsus_, by Dr. F. Hartmann.

936 In a recent work on Symbolism in Buddhism and Christianity—in Buddhism and Roman Catholicism, rather, many later rituals and dogmas in Northern Buddhism, in its popular exoteric form, being identical with those of the Latin Church—some curious facts are to be found. The author of this volume, with more pretensions than erudition, has indiscriminately crammed into his work ancient and modern Buddhist teachings, and has sorely confused Lamaïsm with Buddhism. On page 404 of this volume, called _Buddhism in Christendom, or Jesus the Essene_, our _pseudo_‐Orientalist devotes himself to criticizing the “Seven Principles” of the “Esoteric Buddhists,” and attempts to ridicule them. On page 405, the closing page, he speaks enthusiastically of the Vidyâdharas, “the seven great legions of dead men made wise.” Now, these Vidyâdharas, whom some Orientalists call “demi‐gods,” are in fact, exoterically, a kind of Siddhas, “affluent in devotion,” and, esoterically, they are identical with the seven classes of Pitris, one class of which endow man in the Third Race with Self‐consciousness, by incarnating in the human shells. The “Hymn to the Sun,” at the end of his queer volume of mosaic, which endows Buddhism with a Personal God (!!), is an unfortunate thrust at the very proofs so elaborately collected by the unlucky author.

Theosophists are fully aware that Mr. Rhys Davids has likewise expressed his opinion on their beliefs. He said that the theories propounded by the author of _Esoteric Buddhism_ “were not Buddhism, and were not esoteric.” The remark is the result of (_a_) the unfortunate mistake of writing “Buddhism” instead of “Budhaïsm,” or “Budhism,” _i.e._, of connecting the system with Gautama’s religion instead of with the Secret Wisdom taught by Krishna, Shankarâchârya, and many others, as much as by Buddha; and (_b_) of the impossibility of Mr. Rhys Davids knowing anything of the true Esoteric Teachings. Nevertheless as he is the greatest Pâli and Buddhist scholar of the day, whatever he may say is entitled to respectful hearing. But when one who knows no more of exoteric Buddhism on Scientific and Materialistic lines, than he knows of Esoteric Philosophy, defames those whom he honours with his spite, and assumes with the Theosophists the airs of a profound scholar, one can only smile or—heartily laugh at him.

937 _The Human Species_, pp. 10, 11.

938 _The Theosophist._

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

940 _Le Soleil_, II. 184.

941 _World‐Life_, p. 48.

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

943 _Vishnu Purâna_, Wilson, I. 16, Fitzedward Hall’s rendering.

944 _Popular Astronomy_, p. 444.

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

946 _Concepts of Modern Physics_, p. vi.

947 Book I. ch. II. p. 25. _Vishnu Purâna_, Fitzedward Hall’s Translation.

948 _Vide_ in preceding Section VII., “Life, Force, or Gravity,” quotation from _Anugitâ_.

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

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

951 Independent, in a certain sense, but not _disconnected_ with it.

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

953 The reason for such psychic capacities is given farther on.

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

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

956 _Theosophical Siftings_, No. 9.

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

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

959 From Mrs. Bloomfield‐Moore’s paper, _The New Philosophy_.

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

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

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

963 Valentinus’ _Esoteric Treatise on the Doctrine of Gilgul_.

964 See Mackenzie’s _Royal Masonic Cyclopædia_.

965 See _Isis Unveiled_, II. 152.

966 See Mackenzie, _ibid._, _sub voc._

967 _Isis Unveiled_, I. 317.

968 _Viveka Chudamani_, translated by Mohini M. Chatterji, as “The Crest Jewel of Wisdom.” See _Theosophist_, July and August, 1886.

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

970 Ch. xxxvi; Telang’s translation, pp. 387‐8.

971 See _Theosophist_, August, 1886.

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

973 _John_, x. 30.

974 _Ibid._, xx. 17.

975 _Ibid._, xiv. 28.

976 _Matt._, v. 16.

977 _Ibid._, xiii. 43.

978 1 _Cor._, iii. 16.

979 _Theosophist_, Aug., 1886.

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

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

982 _Numb._, xi. 16.

983 _Deut._, xxxii. 8, 9.

984 _Ibid._, 9.

985 C. W. King in _The Gnostics and their Remains_ (p. 344), identifies it with “that _summum bonum_ of Oriental aspiration, the Buddhist Nirvâna, ‘perfect repose, the Epicurean _Indolentia_’;” a view that looks flippant enough in its expression, though not quite untrue.

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

987 See also Section XIV.

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

989 _John_, viii. 37, 38, 41, 44.

990 _Matthew_, v. 22.

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

992 I have often been taken to task for using expressions in _Isis_ denoting belief in a _personal_ and anthropomorphic God. This is _not_ my idea. Kabalistically speaking, the “Architect” is the generic name for the Sephiroth, the Builders of the Universe, as the “Universal Mind” represents the collectivity of the Dhyân Chohanic Minds.

993 _Timæus._

994 I. 258.

995 _Researches on Light in its Chemical Relations_.

996 _Modern Chemistry._

997 _Isis Unveiled_, I. 137.

998 _Faraday Lectures_, 1881.

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

1000 Just so; “those forms of energy ... _which become evident_ ...” in the laboratory of the Chemist and Physicist; but _there are other forms of energy_ wedded to _other forms_ of matter, _which are supersensuous_, yet are known to the Adepts.

1001 _Presidential Address_, p. 16.

1002 It is just the existence of such worlds on other planes of consciousness that is asserted by the Occultist. The Secret Science teaches that the primitive race was boneless, and that there are worlds invisible to us, peopled as our own, besides the _populations_ of Dhyân Chohans.

1003 _Five Years of Theosophy_, p. 258 _et seq._

1004 Says Mr. Crookes in the same address: “The first riddle which we encounter in chemistry is: ‘What are the elements?’ Of the attempts hitherto made to define or explain an element, none satisfy the demands of the human intellect. The text books tell us that an element is ‘a body which has not been decomposed;’ that it is ‘a something to which we can add, but from which we can take nothing,’ or ‘a body which increases in weight with every chemical change.’ Such definitions are doubly unsatisfactory: they are provisional, and may cease to‐morrow to be applicable in any given case. They take their stand, not on any attribute of the things to be defined, but on the limitations of human power: they are confessions of intellectual impotence.”

1005 And the lecturer quotes Sir George Airy, who says (in _Faraday’s Life and Letters_, Vol. II., p. 354): “I can easily conceive that there are plenty of bodies about us not subject to this intermutual

## action, and therefore not subject to the law of gravitation.”

1006 The Vedântic philosophy conceives of such; but then it is not physics, but metaphysics, called by Mr. Tyndall “poetry” and “fiction.”

1007 In the form they are now, we conceive?

1008 And to Kapila and Manu—especially and originally.

1009 Here is a scientific corroboration of the eternal law of correspondences and analogy.

1010 This method of illustrating the periodic law in the classification of elements is, in the words of Mr. Crookes, proposed by Professor Emerson Reynolds, of Dublin University, who ... “points out that in each period, the general properties of the elements vary from one to another, with approximate regularity until we reach the _seventh member_, which is in more or less striking contrast with the first element of the same period, as well as with the first of the next. Thus chlorine, the seventh member of Mendeleef’s third period, contrasts sharply with both sodium, the first member of the same series, and with potassium, the first member of the next series; whilst on the other hand, sodium and potassium are closely analogous. The six elements, whose atomic weights intervene between sodium and potassium, vary in properties, step by step, until chlorine, the contrast to sodium, is reached. But from chlorine to potassium, the analogue of sodium, there is a change in properties _per saltum_..... If we thus recognize a contrast in properties—more or less decided—between the first and the last members of each series, we can scarcely help admitting the existence of a point of mean variation within each system. In general the _fourth_ element of each series possesses the property we might expect a transition‐ element to exhibit.... Thus for the purpose of graphic translation, Professor Reynolds considers that the fourth member of a period—silicon, for example—may be placed at the apex of a symmetrical curve, which shall represent for that particular period, the direction in which the properties of the series of elements vary with rising atomic weights.”

Now, the writer humbly confesses complete ignorance of modern Chemistry and its mysteries. But she is pretty well acquainted with the Occult Doctrine with regard to _correspondences of types and antetypes_ in nature, and to perfect analogy as a fundamental law in Occultism. Hence she ventures on a remark which will strike every Occultist, however it may be derided by orthodox Science. This method of illustrating the periodic law in the behaviour of elements, whether or not still a hypothesis in Chemistry, _is a law in Occult Sciences_. Every well‐read Occultist knows that the _seventh_ and _fourth_ members—whether in a septenary chain of worlds, the septenary hierarchy of angels, or in the constitution of man, animal, plant, or mineral atom—that the _seventh_ and _fourth_ members, we say, in the geometrically and mathematically uniform workings of the immutable laws of Nature, always play a distinct and specific part in the septenary system. From the stars twinkling high in heaven, to the sparks flying asunder from the rude fire built by the savage in his forest; from the hierarchies and the essential constitution of the Dhyân Chohans—organized for diviner apprehensions and a loftier range of perception than the greatest Western Psychologist ever dreamed of, down to Nature’s _classification_ of species among the humblest insects; finally from Worlds to Atoms, everything in the Universe, from great to small, proceeds in its spiritual and physical evolution, cyclically and septennially, showing its seventh and fourth number (the latter the turning point) behaving in the same way as is shown in that periodic law of Atoms. Nature never proceeds _per saltum_. Therefore, when Mr. Crookes remarks on this that he does not “wish to infer that the gaps in Mendeleef’s table, and in this graphic representation of it [the diagram showing the evolution of Atoms] necessarily mean that there are elements actually existing to fill up the gaps; these gaps may only mean that at the birth of the elements there was an easy potentiality of the formation of an element which would fit into the place”—an Occultist would respectfully remark to him that the latter hypothesis can only hold good, if the septenary arrangement of Atoms is not interfered with. This is _the one law_, and an infallible method that must always lead one who follows it to success.

1011 A group of electricians has just protested against the new theory of Clausius, the famous professor of the University of Bonn. The character of the protest is shown in the signature, which has “Jules Bourdin, in the name of the group of Electricians, which had the honour of being introduced to Professor Clausius in 1881, and whose war‐cry (_cri de ralliement_) is _À bas l’Ether_”—down with Ether, even; they want Universal _Void_, you see!

1012 _Smithsonian Contributions_, xxi., Art. 1. pp. 79‐97.

1013 _System of Logic_, p. 229.

1014 Beyond the zero‐line of action.

1015 _Progymnasmata_, p. 795.

1016 _De Stellâ Novâ in Pede Serpentarii_, p. 115.

1017 _Hypothèses Cosmogoniques_, p. 2, C. Wolf, 1886.

1018 See _Philosophical Transactions_, p. 269, _et seq._

1019 Laplace conceived that the external and internal zones of the ring would rotate with the same angular velocity, which would be the case with a solid ring; but the principle of equal areas requires the inner zones to rotate more rapidly than the outer. (_World‐Life_, p. 121.) Prof. Winchell points out a good many mistakes of Laplace; but as a geologist he is not infallible himself in his “astronomical speculations.”

1020 _Five Years of Theosophy_, pp. 249‐251, Art. “Do the Adepts deny the Nebular Theory?”

1021 Had Astronomers, in their present state of knowledge, merely held to the hypothesis of Laplace, which was simply the formation of the Planetary System, it might in time have resulted in something like an approximate truth. But the two parts of the general problem—that of the formation of the Universe, or the formation of the Suns and Stars from the Primitive Matter, and then the development of the Planets round their Sun—rest on quite different facts in Nature and are even so viewed by Science itself. They are at the opposite poles of Being.

1022 Aristotle’s _Physica_, viii. 1.

1023 _Hypothèses Cosmogoniques_, p. 3, Wolf.

1024 Vol. I., p. 185, quoted by Wolf, p. 3. Wolf’s argument is here summarised.

1025 Note vii. Summarized from Wolf, p. 6.

1026 _Five Years of Theosophy_, pp. 241, 242, and 239.

1027 But the spectra of these nebulæ have never yet been ascertained. When they _are_ found with bright lines, then only may they be cited.

1028 _Hypothèses Cosmogoniques_, p. 3.

1029 Mr. Crookes’ Protyle must not be regarded as the _primary_ stuff, out of which the Dhyân Chohans, in accordance with the immutable laws of Nature, wove our Solar System. This Protyle cannot even be the Prima Materia of Kant, which that great mind saw used up in the formation of the worlds, and thus existing no longer in a diffused state. Protyle is a _mediate_ phase in the progressive differentiation of Cosmic Substance from its normal undifferentiated state. It is, then, the aspect assumed by Matter in its middle passage into full objectivity.

1030 See Stanza III, Commentary 9, (p. 109) about “Light,” or “_Cold_ Flame,” where it is explained that the “Mother”—Chaos—is a cold Fire, a cool Radiance, colourless, formless, devoid of every quality. “_Motion as the One Eternal_ IS, _and contains the potentialities of every quality in the Manvantaric Worlds_,” it is said.

1031 _Hypothèses Cosmogoniques_, pp. 4, 5.

1032 _World‐Life_, p. 196.

1033 _Westminster Review_, XX., July 27, 1868.

1034 Vol. XIV. p. 252.

1035 _Hypothèses Cosmogoniques._

1036 Which “Light” we call Fohat.

1037 This is a mistake, which implies a material agent, distinct from the influences which move it, _i.e._, blind matter and perhaps “God” again, whereas this One Life is the very God and Gods “Itself.”

1038 The same error.

1039 _Popular Science Review_, Vol. X.

1040 “Is the Jîva a myth, as Science says, or is it not?” ask some Theosophists, wavering between materialistic and idealistic Science. The difficulty of really grasping Esoteric problems concerning the “ultimate state of Matter” is again the old crux of the _objective_ and the _subjective_. What is Matter? Is the Matter of our present objective consciousness anything but our _sensations_? True, the sensations we receive come _from without_, but can we really—except in terms of phenomena—speak of the “gross matter” of this plane as an entity apart from and independent of us? To all such arguments Occultism answers: True, in _reality_ Matter is not independent of, or existent outside, our perceptions. Man is an _illusion_: granted. But the existence and actuality of other, still more illusive, but not less _actual_, entities than we are, is not a claim which is lessened, but rather strengthened, by this doctrine of Vedântic and even Kantian Idealism.

1041 See _Musée des Sciences_, August, 1856.

1042 Book II. of the _Commentary on the Book of Dzyan_.

1043 Even the question of the plurality of worlds inhabited by sentient creatures is rejected, or is approached with the greatest caution! And yet see what the great astronomer, Camille Flammarion, says in his _Pluralité des Mondes_.

1044 Nevertheless, it may be shown on the testimony of the _Bible_ itself, and of such good Christian theologians as Cardinal Wiseman, that this plurality is taught in both the _Old_ and the _New Testaments_.

1045 See _Plurality of Worlds_, Vol. II.

1046 See on this _La Pluralité des Mondes Habités_, par C. Flammarion, wherein is given a list of the many men of Science who have written to prove the theory.

1047 _World‐Life_, pp. 496‐498, _et seq._

1048 _World‐Life._

1049 _The Book of Enoch._ Trans. by Archbishop Laurence, Ch. LXXIX.

1050 The Âtmâ, or Spirit, the Spiritual SELF, passing like a thread through the five Subtle Bodies, or Principles, Koshas, is called “Thread‐soul,” or Sûtrâtmâ in Vedântic Philosophy.

1051 “The Septenary Principle,” _Five Years of Theosophy_, p. 197.

1052 _Pythagorean Triangle_, by the Rev. G. Oliver, p. 36.

1053 See Kant’s _Critique de la Raison Pure_, Barui’s transl., II. 54.

1054 Plutarch, _De Placitis Philosophorum_.

1055 In the Greek and Latin Churches—which regard marriage as one of the sacraments—the officiating priest during the marriage ceremony represents the apex of the triangle; the bride, its left feminine side, and the bridegroom the right side, while the base line is symbolized by the row of witnesses, the bridesmaids and best men. But behind the priest there is the Holy of Holies, with its mysterious containments and symbolic meaning, inside of which no one but the consecrated priests should enter. In the early days of Christianity the marriage ceremony was a mystery and a true symbol. Now, however, even the Churches have lost the true meaning of this symbolism.

1056 _New Aspects of Life and Religion_, by Henry Pratt, M.D., p. 7. Ed. 1886.

1057 _Ibid._, pp. 7, 8.

1058 _Ibid._, p. 9.

1059 _Pythagorean Triangle_, by the Rev. G. Oliver, pp. 18, 19.

1060 P. 387.

1061 P. 387.

1062 In the World of Form, symbolism finding expression in the Pyramids, has in them both triangle and square, four co‐equal triangles or surfaces, four basic points, and the fifth—the apex.

1063 Pp. 385, 386.

1064 _Op. cit._ By Isaac Myer. P. 174.

1065 P. 175.

1066 P. 175.

1067 “The lowest designation, or the Deity in Nature, the more general term Elohim, is translated God.” (P. 175.) Such recent works as the _Qabbalah_ of Mr. Isaac Myer, and of Mr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, fully justify our attitude towards the Jehovistic Deity. It is not the transcendental, philosophical, and highly metaphysical abstraction of the original Kabalistic thought—Ain‐Suph‐Shekinah‐ Adam‐Kadmon, and all that follows—that we oppose, but the crystallization of all these into the highly unphilosophical, repulsive, and anthropomorphic Jehovah, the androgynous and _finite_ deity, for which eternity, omnipotence, and omniscience are claimed. We do not war against the _Ideal Reality_, but the hideous theological _Shadow_.

1068 Let not the word “Psychology” cause the reader, by association of ideas, to carry his thought to modern “Psychologists,” so‐called, whose _Idealism_ is another name for uncompromising Materialism, and whose pretended Monism is no better than a mask to conceal the void of final annihilation—even of consciousness. Here _spiritual_ Psychology is meant.

1069 “Vishvânara is not merely the manifested objective world, but the one physical basis [the horizontal line of the triangle] from which the whole objective world starts into existence.” And this is the Cosmic Duad, the Androgynous Substance. Only beyond this is the true Protyle.

1070 T. Subba Row. See _Theosophist_, Feb. 1887.

1071 By W. Crookes, F.R.S., V.P.C.S., delivered at the Royal Institution, London, on Friday, February 18th, 1887.

1072 How true it is will be fully demonstrated only on that day when Mr. Crookes’ discovery of radiant matter will have resulted in a further elucidation with regard to the true source of light, and will have revolutionized all the present speculations. Further familiarity with the northern streamers of the _aurora borealis_ may help the recognition of this truth.

1073 _Genesis of the Elements_, p. 1.

1074 _De Placit. Philos._

1075 _The Path_, I. 10, p. 297.

1076 P. 11.

1077 Corresponding on the cosmic scale with the Spirit, Soul, Mind, Life, and the three Vehicles—the Astral, the Mâyâvic and the Physical Bodies (of mankind), whatever division is made.

1078 _Ibid._ p. 16.

1079 Vol. I, p. 429.

1080 _Ibid._, p. 21.

1081 “The Lord is a consuming _fire_.” “In him was _life_, and the life was the light of men.”

1082 Which if separated _alchemically_ would yield the Spirit of Life, and its Elixir.

1083 Foremost of all, the postulate that there is no such thing in Nature as _inorganic_ substances or bodies. Stones, minerals, rocks, and even chemical “atoms” are simply organic units in profound lethargy. Their coma has an end and their inertia becomes activity.

1084 _Ibid._, p. 144.

1085 The orthography of the name—as spelt by himself—is Leibniz. He was of Slavonian descent though born in Germany.

1086 _Monadologie_, Introd.

1087 “Leibnitz’s dynamism,” says Professor Lachelier, “would offer but little difficulty if, with him, the monad had remained a simple atom of _blind force_. But....” One perfectly understands the perplexity of Modern Materialism!

1088 _The Path_, I. 10, p. 297.

1089 Leibnitz was an _absolute_ Idealist in maintaining that “material atoms are contrary to reason.” (_Système Nouveau_, Erdmann, p. 126, col. 2.) For him Matter was a simple representation of the Monad, whether human or atomic. Monads, he thought (as do we), are everywhere. Thus the human soul is a Monad, and every cell in the human body has its Monad, as has every cell in animal, vegetable, and even in the so‐called _inorganic_ bodies. His Atoms are the molecules of modern Science, and his Monads those _simple atoms_ that Materialistic Science takes on faith, though it will never succeed in _interviewing_ them—except in imagination. But Leibnitz is rather contradictory in his views about Monads. He speaks of his “Metaphysical Points” and “Formal Atoms,” at one time as _realities_, occupying space; at another as pure spiritual _ideas_; then he again endows them with objectivity and aggregates and positions in their co‐relations.

1090 _Examen des Principes du P. Malebranche._

1091 The Atoms of Leibnitz have, in truth, nothing but the name in common with the atoms of the Greek Materialists, or even the molecules of Modem Science. He calls them “Formal Atoms,” and compares them to the “Substantial Forms” of Aristotle. (See _Système Nouveau_, § 3.)

1092 Letter to Father Desbosses, _Correspondence_, xviii.

1093 _Monadologie_, § 60. Leibnitz, like Aristotle, calls the “created” or _emanated_ Monads (the Elementals issued from Cosmic Spirits or Gods)—Entelechies, Ἐντελέχειαι, and “incorporeal automata.” (_Monadologie_ § 18.)

1094 These three “rough divisions” correspond to Spirit, Mind (or Soul), and Body, in the human constitution.

1095 Brother C. H. A. Bjerregaard, in the lecture already mentioned, warns his audience not to regard the Sephiroth too much as _individualities_, but to avoid at the same time seeing in them _abstractions_. “We shall never arrive at the truth,” he says, “much less the power of associating with these celestials, until we return to the simplicity and fearlessness of the primitive ages, when men mixed freely with the gods, and the gods descended among men and guided them in truth and holiness.” (P. 296.) “There are several designations for ‘angels’ in the Bible, which clearly show that beings like the elementals of the Kabbala and the monads of Leibnitz, must be understood by that term rather than that which is commonly understood. They are called ‘morning stars,’ ‘flaming fires,’ ‘the mighty ones,’ and St. Paul sees them in his cosmogonic vision as ‘Principalities and Powers.’ Such names as these preclude the idea of personality, and we find ourselves compelled to think of them as impersonal existences ... as an _influence_, a spiritual substance, or _conscious_ force.” (Pp. 321, 322.)

1096 _Buddhist Catechism_, by H. S. Olcott, President of the Theosophical Society, p. 51.

1097 _Ibid._ 51, 52.

1098 We refer those who would regard the statement as an impertinence or irreverence levelled at accepted Science, to Dr. James Hutchinson Stirling’s work _As regards Protoplasm_, which is a defence of a Vital Principle _versus_ the Molecularists—Huxley, Tyndall, Vogt, and Co.—and request them to examine whether it is true or not to say that, though the scientific premisses may not be always correct, they are, nevertheless, accepted, to fill up a gap or a hole in some beloved materialistic hobby. Speaking of protoplasm and the organs of man, as “viewed by Mr. Huxley,” the author says: “Probably then, in regard to any continuity in protoplasm of power, of form, or of substance, we have seen _lacunæ_ enow. Nay, Mr. Huxley himself can be adduced in evidence on the same side. Not rarely do we find in his essay admissions of _probability_, where it is _certainty_ that is alone in place. He says, for example: ‘It is more than probable that _when_ the vegetable world is thoroughly explored we _shall_ find all plants in possession of the same powers.’ When a conclusion is decidedly announced, it is rather disappointing to be told, as here, that the premisses are still to collect [!!].... Again, here is a passage in which he is seen to cut his own ‘_basis_’ from beneath his own feet. After telling us that all forms of protoplasm consist of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen ‘in very complex union,’ he continues: ‘To this complex combination, _the nature of which has never been determined with exactness_ [!!], the name of _protein_ has been applied.’ This, plainly, is an identification, on Mr. Huxley’s own part, of protoplasm and _protein_; and what is said of one, being necessarily true of the other, it follows that he admits the nature of protoplasm never to have been determined with exactness, and that even in his eyes the _lis_ is still _sub judice_. This admission is strengthened by the words, too, ‘If we use this term (protein) with such _caution_ as may properly arise out of our _comparative ignorance_ of the things for which it stands’ ” ... etc. (pp. 33 and 34, ed. 1872, in reply to Mr. Huxley in _Yeast_).

This is the eminent Huxley, the king of physiology and biology, who is proven playing at blind man’s buff with _premisses_ and _facts_! What may not the “smaller fry” of Science do after this!

1099 “The Cycles of Matter,” a name given by Professor Winchell to an Essay written in 1860.

1100 _World‐Life_, pp. 535, 548.

1101 Quoted in Büchner’s _Force and Matter_.

1102 Men of Science will say: We deny, because nothing of the kind has ever come within the scope of our experience. But, as argued by Charles Richet, the Physiologist: “So be it, but have you at least demonstrated the contrary?... Do not, at any rate, deny _à priori_. Actual Science is not sufficiently advanced to give you such right.”—_La Suggestion Mentale et le Calcul des Probabilités._

1103 _Lectures on the Philosophy of History_, p. 26. Sibree’s Eng. Transl.

1104 _Isis Unveiled_, Vol. 1, p. 34.

1105 This symbolism does not prevent these now seemingly mythic personages from having ruled the Earth once upon a time under the human form of actual living, though truly divine and god‐like Men. The opinion of Colonel Vallancey—and also of Count de Gebelin—that the “names of the Kabiri appear to be all allegorical, and to have signified no more [?] than an almanac of the vicissitudes of the seasons—calculated for the operations of agriculture” (_Collect. de Reb. Hibern._, No. 13, Præf. Sect. 5), is as absurd as his assertion that Æon, Cronus, Saturn and Dagon are all one, namely, the “Patriarch Adam.” The Kabiri were the instructors of mankind in agriculture, because they were the Regents over the seasons and Cosmic Cycles. Hence it was they who regulated, as Planetary Spirits or Angels (Messengers), the _mysteries_ of the _art_ of agriculture.

1106 “Who dread Karma‐Nemesis,” would be better.

1107 Dryden.

1108 Not all, however, for there are men of Science awakening to truth. This is what we read: “Whatever way we turn our eyes we encounter a mystery ... all in Nature for us is the unknown.... Yet they are numerous, those superficial minds for whom nothing can be produced by natural forces outside of facts observed long ago, consecrated in books and grouped more or less skilfully with the help of theories whose ephemeral duration ought, by this time, to have demonstrated their insufficiency, .... I do not pretend to contest the possibility of invisible beings, of a nature different from ours and capable of moving matter to action. Profound philosophers have admitted this in all epochs, as a consequence of the great law of continuity which rules the universe. That intellectual life, which we see starting in some way from non‐being (_néant_) and gradually reaching man, can it stop abruptly at man to reäppear only in the infinite, in the sovereign regulator of the world? This is little probable.” Therefore, “I no more deny the existence of spirits than I deny soul, while I yet try to explain certain facts without this hypothesis.” _The Non‐Defined Forces, Historical and Experimental Researches_, p. 3. (Paris, 1877.) The author is A. de Rochas, a well‐known man of Science in France, and his work is one of the signs of the time.

1109 ix. 9.

1110 xxxviii. 31, 32.

1111 _Astronomie Antique._

1112 The Pleiades, as all know, are the seven stars beyond the Bull, which appear at the beginning of spring. They have a very Occult meaning in the Hindû Esoteric Philosophy, and are connected with _Sound_ and other mystic principles in Nature.

1113 See _Astronomie Antique_, pp. 63 to 74.

1114 _Temple de Jerusalem_, Vol. II, Part II, Chap. xxx.

1115 Ch. vii.

1116 Quoted by De Mirville, _Des Esprits_, iv. p. 58.

1117 _Natural Genesis_, ii. p. 318.

1118 _Proœm_, 2.

1119 _Astronomy of the Ancients_, Lewis, p. 264.

1120 _Natural Genesis_, ii. p. 319.

1121 Proclus, _In Timæum_, i.

1122 _Genesis_, xlix.

1123 Creuzer, iii. p. 930.

1124 _Cyropædia_, viii. p. 7, as quoted in _Des Esprits_, iv. p. 55.

1125 _Des Esprits_, iv. pp. 59, 60.

1126 _Origine de tous les Cultes_, “Zodiaque.”

1127 _Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus Christ_, I. p. 9.

1128 Whether many nations have seen that identical star, or not, we all know that the sepulchres of the “three Magi”—who rejoice in the quite Teutonic names of Kaspar and Melchior, Balthazar being the only exception, and the two having little of the Chaldean ring in them—are shown by the priests in the famous cathedral of Cologne, where the Magian bodies are not only supposed, but firmly believed to have been buried.

1129 This tradition about the “seventy planets” that preside over the destinies of nations, is based on the Occult cosmogonical teaching that besides our own septenary chain of World‐Planets, there are many more in the Solar System.

1130 _Des Esprits_, iv. p. 67.

1131 _The Mythological Astronomy of the Ancients Demonstrated_; Part the Second, or The Key of Urania: pp. 23, 24. Ed. 1823.

1132 Every scholar is aware, of course, that the Chaldeans claimed the same digits (432), or 432,000, for their Divine Dynasties as the Hindûs do for their Mahâyuga, namely 4,320,000. Therefore has Dr. Sepp, of Munich, undertaken to support Kepler and Wilford in their charge that the Hindûs borrowed them from the Christians, and the Chaldeans from the Jews, who, it is claimed, expected their Messiah in the lunar year of the world 4,320!!! As these figures, according to ancient writers, were based by Berosus on the 120 Saroses—each of the divisions meaning six Neroses of 600 years each, making a sum total of 432,000 years—they would appear to be peremptory, remarks De Mirville (_Des Esprits_, iii. p. 24). So the pious professor of Munich undertook to explain them _in the correct way_. He claims to have solved the riddle by showing that “the saros being composed, according to Pliny, of 222 synodial months, to wit, 18 years 6/10,” the calculator naturally fell back on the figures “given by Suidas,” who affirmed that the “120 saroses made 2,222 sacerdotal and cyclic years, which equalled 1,656 solar years.” (_Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus Christ_, ii. p. 417.)

But Suidas said nothing of the kind; and, even supposing he had, he would prove little, if anything, by such a statement. The Neroses and Saroses were the same thorn in the side of _uninitiated_ ancient writers as the apocalyptic 666 of the “Great Beast” is in that of the modern, and the former figures have found their unlucky Newtons, as have the latter.

1133 See _Isis Unveiled_, ii. p. 132.

1134 The reader has to bear in mind that the phrase “climacteric year” has more than the usual significance, when used by Occultists and Mystics. It is not only a critical period, during which some great change is periodically expected, whether in human or cosmic constitution, but it likewise pertains to universal spiritual changes. The Europeans called every 63rd year the “grand climacteric,” and perhaps justly supposed those years to be the years produced by multiplying 7 into the odd numbers 3, 5, 7 and 9. But 7 is the real scale of Nature, in Occultism, and 7 has to be multiplied in quite a different way and method than is as yet known to European nations.

1135 _Des Espirits_; iv. p. 61.

1136 ii. p. 490.

1137 See _Recueil de l’Académie des Inscriptions_, 1853, quoted in _Des Esprits_, iv. p. 62.

1138 _Ruins of Empires_, p. 360.

1139 See pp. 54, 196, _et seqq_.

1140 For a detailed scientific proof of this conclusion, see page 121 of M. Bailly’s work, where the subject is discussed technically.

1141 Why it should be “fictitious” can never be made plain by European Scientists.

1142 Bailly’s _Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale_, pp. xx. _et seq._ Ed. 1787.

1143 Ch. III. “On Matter.”

1144 _Lecture on Protoplasm_, by Mr. Huxley.

1145 Ganot’s _Physics_, p. 68, Atkinson’s Translation.

1146 See Vol. I. pp. 338, 339, quoted from _Le Mystère et la Science_, Conférences, Père Félix de Notre Dame.

1147 Behold the work of Cycles and their periodical return! Those who denied such “Entities” (Forces) to be bodies, and called them “Spaces,” were the prototypes of our modern “science‐struck” public, and their official teachers, who speak of the Forces of Nature as the imponderable energy of Matter and as modes of motion, and yet hold electricity, for one, as being as _atomic as Matter_ itself—(Helmholtz). Inconsistency and contradiction reign as much in official as in heterodox Science.

1148 _The Virgin of the World_ of Hermes Mercurius Trismegistus, rendered into English by Dr. Anna Kingsford and Edward Maitland. Pp. 83, 84.

1149 “Hermes here includes as Gods the sensible Forces of Nature, the elements and phenomena of the Universe,” remarks Dr. A. Kingsford in a foot‐note explaining it very correctly. So does Eastern Philosophy.

1150 _Ibid._, pp. 64, 65.

1151 See also Section IX, THE COMING FORCE.

1152 “O Toom, Toom! issued from the great [female] which is in the bosom of the waters [the great Deep or Space], luminous through the two Lions,” the dual Force, or power of the two _solar eyes_, or the electro‐positive and the electro‐negative forces. See _Book of the Dead_, ch. iii.

1153 See _Book of the Dead_, chapter xvii .

1154