.
Get your own
Free Website now!
|
This website is hosted for free by .
Get your own
Free Website now!
|
Theosophical Enquirer
No 36 . April 2007
"We may not have all
the answers, but at least we can start asking the questions."
* * * * * * *
Theosophical Enquirer is an independent publication. Its focus is the study/promulgation of Theosophy as taught/recorded by H P Blavatsky and her Teachers. The use of original/facsimile copies of H P Blavatsky's works is strongly recommended.
Theosophical Enquirer can be viewed on the world wide web at:
www.freewebs.com/theos357/TE.htm
Thank you.
* * * * * * *
THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY
We continue a study of The Key To Theosophy by H P Blavatsky. Text from the book is highlighted in bold typeface.
Pages: 163 - 171
WHAT IS REALLY MEANT BY ANNHILATION.
ENQ. I have heard some Theosophists speak of a golden thread on which their lives were strung. What do they mean by this?
THEO. In the Hindu Sacred books it is said that that which undergoes periodical incarnation is the Sutratma, which means literally the "Thread Soul." It is a synonym of the reincarnating Ego - Manas conjoined with Buddhi - which absorbs the Manasic recollections of all our preceding lives. It is so called, because, like the pearls on a thread, so is the long series of human lives strung together on that one thread. In some Upanishad these recurrent re-births are likened to the life of a mortal which oscillates periodically between sleep and waking.
Minus the "Thread" (Manas conjoined with Buddhi) there is no continuity. It is that "one thread"; thread of One-ness. Sever the "Thread" and the pearls (human lives) run/roll hither and thither. Is it possible to sever/cut the "Thread"? A pearl may shine or become tarnished. Does this affect the "Thread" itself? Does the "Thread" become stronger/weaker according to the nature (Manasic recollections) of the re-incarnating pearls? Can a pearl become so hard/heavy that is slides off the thread?
ENQ. This, I must say, does not seem very clear, and I will tell you why. For the man who awakes, another day commences, but that man is the same in soul and body as he was the day before; whereas at every incarnation a full change takes place not only of the external envelope, sex, and personality, but even of the mental and psychic capacities. The simile does not seem to me quite correct. The man who arises from sleep remembers quite clearly what he has done yesterday, the day before, and even months and years ago. But none of us has the slightest recollection of a preceding life or of any fact or event concerning it. . . . I may forget in the morning what I have dreamt during the night, still I know that I have slept and have the certainty that I lived during sleep; but what recollection can I have of my past incarnation until the moment of death? How do you reconcile this?
THEO. Some people do recollect their past incarnations during life; but these are Buddhas and Initiates. This is what the Yogis call Samma-Sambuddha, or the knowledge of the whole series of one's past incarnations.
ENQ. But we ordinary mortals who have not reached Samma-Sambuddha, how are we to understand this simile?
THEO. By studying it and trying to understand more correctly the characteristics and the three kinds of sleep. Sleep is a general and immutable law for man as for beast, but there are different kinds of sleep and still more different dreams and visions.
ENQ. But this takes us to another subject. Let us return to the materialist who, while not denying dreams, which he could hardly do, yet denies immortality in general and the survival of his own individuality.
THEO. And the materialist, without knowing it, is right. One who has no inner perception of, and faith in, the immortality of his soul, in that man the soul can never become Buddhi-taijasi, but will remain simply Manas, and for Manas alone there is no immortality possible. In order to live in the world to come a conscious life, one has to believe first of all in that life during the terrestrial existence. On these two aphorisms of the Secret Science all the philosophy about the post-mortem consciousness and the immortality of the soul is built. The Ego receives always according to its deserts. After the dissolution of the body, there commences for it a period of full awakened consciousness, or a state of chaotic dreams, or an utterly dreamless sleep undistinguishable from annihilation, and these are the three kinds of sleep. If our physiologists find the cause of dreams and visions in an unconscious preparation for them during the waking hours, why cannot the same be admitted for the post-mortem dreams? I repeat it: death is sleep. After death, before the spiritual eyes of the soul, begins a performance according to a programme learnt and very often unconsciously composed by ourselves: the practical carrying out of correct beliefs or of illusions which have been created by ourselves. The Methodist will be Methodist, the Mussulman a Mussulman, at least for some time - in a perfect fool's paradise of each man's creation and making. These are the post-mortem fruits of the tree of life. Naturally, our belief or unbelief in the fact of conscious immortality is unable to influence the unconditioned reality of the fact itself, once that it exists; but the belief or unbelief in that immortality as the property of independent or separate entities, cannot fail to give colour to that fact in its application to each of these entities. Now do you begin to understand it?
Although the "unconditioned reality" of the fact of immortality is, the materialist (Manas minus the light of Buddhi) not believing or having any perception of this fact reaps the fruit of the seed sown. There is no conscious immortality for the ardent materialist simply because there is no "inner perception" of the fact of immortality. The personality is transient/perishable (thank goodness!) but the Real Man (Atma-Buddhi and the perfume/nectar gleaned from the periodically incarnated Manas) is immortal. Thus, the Master in The Mahatma Letters to A P Sinnett states "immortality is conditional" (Letter XLVIII).
Death is sleep. The three states of post-mortem existence (awakened consciousness, chaotic dreams and utterly dreamless) are analogous to the three states of consciousness during sleep . The "sleep" following so-called death is the fruit of the motives/thoughts/tendencies of the personality that was, just as the "sleep" state(s) during the night are the fruit of the motives/thoughts/actions of the day gone bye. The crucial determining factor of both, it seems, is what goes on during the waking state. It is the waking state which determines not only the sleep of sleep and the sleep of death but also the underlying note/tune of the next waking state(s).
ENQ. I think I do. The materialist, disbelieving in everything that cannot be proven to him by his five senses, or by scientific reasoning, based exclusively on the data furnished by these senses in spite of their inadequacy, and rejecting every spiritual manifestation, accepts life as the only conscious existence. Therefore according to their beliefs so will it be unto them. They will lose their personal Ego, and will plunge into a dreamless sleep until a new awakening. Is it so?
THEO. Almost so. Remember the practically universal teaching of the two kinds of conscious existence: the terrestrial and the spiritual. The latter must be considered real from the very fact that it is inhabited by the eternal, changeless and immortal Monad; whereas the incarnating Ego dresses itself up in new garments entirely different from those of its previous incarnations, and in which all except its spiritual prototype is doomed to a change so radical as to leave no trace behind.
ENQ. How so? Can my conscious terrestrial "I" perish not only for a time, like the consciousness of the materialist, but so entirely as to leave no trace behind?
THEO. According to the teaching, it must so perish and in its fulness, all except the principle which, having united itself with the Monad, has thereby become a purely spiritual and indestructible essence, one with it in the Eternity. But in the case of an out-and-out materialist, in whose personal no Buddhi has ever reflected itself, how can the latter carry away into the Eternity one particle of that terrestrial personality? Your spiritual "I" is immortal; but from your present self it can carry away into Eternity that only which has become worthy of immortality, namely, the aroma alone of the flower that has been mown by death.
What is the "principle" which having untied itself with the Monad becomes "one with it in the Eternity"? Manas? Nonetheless, its immortality - "a purely spiritual and indestructible essence" - is conditional on there being an aroma of the flower(s) of personality. This "aroma" has been described as the 'spiritualisation of Matter' undertaken during the vast Cycles of races/rounds/manvantaras.
"The MONAD emerges from its state of spiritual and intellectual unconsciousness; and, skipping the first two planes - to near the ABSOLUTE to permit of any correlation with anything on a lower plane - it gets direct into the plane of Mentality. But there is no plane in the whole universe with a wider margin, or a wider field of action in its almost endless gradations of perceptive and apperceptive qualities, than this plane, which has in its turn an appropriate smaller plane for every "form", from the "mineral" monad up to the time when that monad blossoms forth by evolution into the DIVINE MONAD." (The Secret Doctrine, I, 175).
ENQ. Well, and the flower, the terrestrial "I"?
THEO. The flower, as all past and future flowers which have blossomed and will have to blossom on the mother bough, the Sutratma, all children of one root or Buddhi - will return to dust. Your present "I," as you yourself know, is not the body now sitting before me, nor yet is it what I would call Manas-Sutratma, but Sutratma-Buddhi.
What is your present "I". . as you . . yourself . . . know? Pre-sent? Sent Presence? : from your present self it can carry away into Eternity that only which has become worthy of immortality. The spiritual "I"/Self is always present (i.e. immortal, Timeless) whether the terrestrial "I" knows/realises it or not.
ENQ. But this does not explain to me, at all, why you call life after death immortal, infinite and real, and the terrestrial life a simple phantom or illusion; since even that post-mortem life has limits, however much wider they may be than those of terrestrial life.
THEO. No doubt. The spiritual Ego of man moves in eternity like a pendulum between the hours of birth and death. But if these hours, marking the periods of life terrestrial and life spiritual, are limited in their duration, and if the very number of such stages in Eternity between sleep and awakening, illusion and reality, has its beginning and its end, on the other hand, the spiritual pilgrim is eternal. Therefore are the hours of his post-mortem life, when, disembodied, he stands face to face with truth and not the mirages of his transitory earthly existences, during the period of that pilgrimage which we call "the cycle of re-births" - the only reality in our conception. Such intervals, their limitation notwithstanding, do not prevent the Ego, while ever perfecting itself, from following undeviatingly, though gradually and slowly, the path to its last transformation, when that Ego, having reached its goal, becomes a divine being. These intervals and stages help towards this final result instead of hindering it; and without such limited intervals the divine Ego could never reach its ultimate goal. I have given you once already a familiar illustration by comparing the Ego, or the individuality, to an actor, and its numerous and various incarnations to the parts it plays. Will you call these parts or their costumes the individuality of the actor himself? Like that actor, the Ego is forced to play during the cycle of necessity, up to the very threshold of Paranirvana, many parts such as may be unpleasant to it. But as the bee collects its honey from every flower, leaving the rest as food for the earthly worms, so does our spiritual individuality, whether we call it Sutratma or Ego. Collecting from every terrestrial personality, into which Karma forces it to incarnate, the nectar alone of the spiritual qualities and self-consciousness, it unites all these into one whole and emerges from its chrysalis as the glorified Dhyan Chohan. So much the worse for those terrestrial personalities from which it could collect nothing. Such personalities cannot assuredly outlive consciously their terrestrial existence.
The spiritual pilgrim is eternal. Is spiritual pilgrim (Monad; Atma-Buddhi) the same as spiritual Ego (Buddhi-Manas; Manas conjoined with Buddhi)? "'Pilgrim' is the appellation given to our Monad (the two in one) during its cycle of incarnations. It is the only immortal and eternal principle in us, being an indivisible part of the integral whole - the Universal Spirit, from which it emanates, and into which it is absorbed at the end of the cycle. When it is said to emanate from the one spirit, an awkward and incorrect expression has to be used, for lack of appropriate words in English. The Vedantins call it Sutratma (Thread-Soul), but their explanation, too, differs somewhat from that of the occultists; to explain which difference, however, is left to the Vedantins themselves". (The Secret Doctrine, Proem, pg 16-17, footnote).
The spiritual Ego moves in eternity, the spiritual pilgrim is eternal.
To decry the intervals of night and day, birth and death, as unnecessary/inconvenient/irrelevant is hopelessly off-track. "These intervals and stages help towards this final result [i.e. a divine being] instead of hindering it; and without such limited intervals the divine Ego could never reach its ultimate goal".
ENQ. Thus, then, it seems that, for the terrestrial personality, immortality is still conditional. Is, then, immortality itself not unconditional?
THEO. Not at all. But immortality cannot touch the non-existent: for all that which exists as SAT, or emanates from SAT, immortality and Eternity are absolute. Matter is the opposite pole of spirit, and yet the two are one. The essence of all this, i.e., Spirit, Force and Matter, or the three in one, is as endless as it is beginningless; but the form acquired by this triple unity during its incarnations, its externality, is certainly only the illusion of our personal conceptions. Therefore do we call Nirvana and the Universal life alone a reality, while relegating the terrestrial life, its terrestrial personality included, and even its Devachanic existence, to the phantom realm of illusion.
ENQ. But why in such a case call sleep the reality, and waking the illusion?
THEO. It is simply a comparison made to facilitate the grasping of the subject, and from the standpoint of terrestrial conceptions it is a very correct one.
ENQ. And still I cannot understand, if the life to come is based on justice and the merited retribution for all our terrestrial suffering, how in the case of materialists, many of whom are really honest and charitable men, there should remain of their personality nothing but the refuse of a faded flower.
THEO. No one ever said such a thing. No materialist, however unbelieving, can die for ever in the fulness of his spiritual individuality. What was said is that consciousness can disappear either fully or partially in the case of a materialist, so that no conscious remains of his personality survive.
ENQ. But surely this is annihilation?
THEO. Certainly not. One can sleep a dead sleep and miss several stations during a long railway journey, without the slightest recollection or consciousness, and awake at another station and continue the journey past innumerable other halting-places till the end of the journey or the goal is reached. Three kinds of sleep were mentioned to you: the dreamless, the chaotic, and the one which is so real, that to the sleeping man his dreams become full realities. If you believe in the latter why can't you believe in the former; according to the after life a man has believed in and expected, such is the life he will have. He who expected no life to come will have an absolute blank, amounting to annihilation, in the interval between the two re-births. This is just the carrying out of the programme we spoke of, a programme created by the materialists themselves. But there are various kinds of materialists, as you say. A selfish, wicked Egoist, one who never shed a tear for anyone but himself, thus adding entire indifference to the whole world to his unbelief, must, at the threshold of death, drop his personality for ever. This personality having no tendrils of sympathy for the world around and hence nothing to hook on to Sutratma, it follows that with the last breath every connection between the two is broken. There being no Devachan for such a materialist, the Sutratma will re-incarnate almost immediately. But those materialists who erred in nothing but their disbelief will oversleep but one station. And the time will come when that ex-materialist will perceive himself in the Eternity and perhaps repent that he lost even one day, one station, from the life eternal.
ENQ. Still, would it not be more correct to say that death is birth into a new life, or a return once more into eternity?
THEO. You may if you like. Only remember that births differ, and that there are births of "still-born" beings, which are failures of nature. Moreover, with your Western fixed ideas about material life, the words "living" and "being" are quite inapplicable to the pure subjective state of post-mortem existence. It is just because, save in a few philosophers who are not read by the many, and who themselves are too confused to present a distinct picture of it, it is just because your Western ideas of life and death have finally become so narrow, that on the one hand they have led to crass materialism, and on the other, to the still more material conception of the other life, which the spiritualists have formulated in their Summer-land. There the souls of men eat, drink, marry, and live in a paradise quite as sensual as that of Mohammed, but even less philosophical. Nor are the average conceptions of the uneducated Christians any better, being if possible still more material. What between truncated angels, brass trumpets, golden harps, and material hell-fires, the Christian heaven seems like a fairy scene at a Christmas pantomime.
It is because of these narrow conceptions that you find such difficulty in understanding. It is just because the life of the disembodied soul, while possessing all the vividness of reality, as in certain dreams, is devoid of every grossly objective form of terrestrial life, that the Eastern philosophers have compared it with visions during sleep.
* * * * * * *
SUN/RAIN/HEAT/CLIMATE CHANGE
"Gaseous matter is continually added to our atmosphere from the never ceasing fall or meteoric strongly magnetic matter, and yet it seems with them still an open question whether magnetic conditions have anything to do with the precipitation of rain or not! I do not know of any "set of motions established by pressures, expansions, etc, due in the first instance to solar energy." Science makes too much and too little at the same time of "solar energy" and even of the Sun itself; and the Sun has nothing to do whatever with rain and very little with heat".
The Mahatma Letters to A P Sinnett, Letter XXIIIB
* * * * * * *
THE THEOSOPHIST, Vol. 1, Bombay, October 1879
This question has been so often asked, and misconception so widely prevails, that the editors of a journal devoted to an exposition of the world's Theosophy would be remiss were its first number issued without coming to a full understanding with their readers. But our heading involves two further queries: What is the Theosophical Society; and what are the Theosophists? To each an answer will be given.
According to lexicographers, the term theosophia is composed of two Greek words - theos, "god," and sophos, "wise." So far, correct. But the explanations that follow are far from giving a clear idea of Theosophy. Webster defines it most originally as "a supposed intercourse with God and superior spirits, and consequent attainment of superhuman knowledge, by physical processes, as by the theurgic operations of some ancient Platonists, or by the chemical processes of the German fire-philosophers."
This, to say the least, is a poor and flippant explanation. To attribute such ideas to men like Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, Jamblichus, Porphyry, Proclus - shows either intentional misrepresentation, or Mr. Webster's ignorance of the philosophy and motives of the greatest geniuses of the later Alexandrian School. To impute to those whom their contemporaries as well as posterity styled "theodidaktoi," god-taught - a purpose to develope their psychological, spiritual perceptions by "physical processes," is to describe them as materialists. As to the concluding fling at the fire-philosophers, it rebounds from them to fall home among our most eminent modern men of science; those, in whose mouths the Revd. James Martineau places the following boast: "matter is all we want; give us atoms alone, and we will explain the universe."
Vaughan offers a far better, more philosophical definition. "A Theosophist," he says - "is one who gives you a theory of God or the works of God, which has not revelation, but an inspiration of his own for its basis." In this view every great thinker and philosopher, especially every founder of a new religion, school of philosophy, or sect, is necessarily a Theosophist. Hence, Theosophy and Theosophists have existed ever since the first glimmering of nascent thought made man seek instinctively for the means of expressing his own independent opinions.
There were Theosophists before the Christian era, notwithstanding that the Christian writers ascribe the development of the Eclectic theosophical system, to the early part of the third century of their Era. Diogenes Laertius traces Theosophy to an epoch antedating the dynasty of the Ptolemies; and names as its founder an Egyptian Hierophant called Pot-Amun, the name being Coptic and signifying a priest consecrated to Amun, the god of Wisdom. But history shows it revived by Ammonius Saccas, the founder of the Neo-Platonic School. He and his disciples called themselves "Philalethians" - lovers of the truth; while others termed them the "Analogists," on account of their method of interpreting all sacred legends, symbolical myths and mysteries, by a rule of analogy or correspondence, so that events which had occurred in the external world were regarded as expressing operations and experiences of the human soul. It was the aim and purpose of Ammonius to reconcile all sects, peoples and nations under one common faith - a belief in one Supreme Eternal, Unknown, and Unnamed Power, governing the Universe by immutable and eternal laws. His object was to prove a primitive system of Theosophy, which at the beginning was essentially alike in all countries; to induce all men to lay aside their strifes and quarrels, and unite in purpose and thought as the children of one common mother; to purify the ancient religions, by degrees corrupted and obscured, from all dross of human element, by uniting and expounding them upon pure philosophical principles. Hence, the Buddhistic, Vedantic and Magian, or Zoroastrian, systems were taught in the Eclectic Theosophical School along with all the philosophies of Greece. Hence also, that pre-eminently Buddhistic and Indian feature among the ancient Theosophists of Alexandria, of due reverence for parents and aged persons; a fraternal affection for the whole human race; and a compassionate feeling for even the dumb animals. While seeking to establish a system of moral discipline which enforced upon people the duty to live according to the laws of their respective countries; to exalt their minds by the research and contemplation of the one Absolute Truth; his chief object in order, as he believed, to achieve all others, was to extract from the various religious teachings, as from a many-chorded instrument, one full and harmonious melody, which would find response in every truth-loving heart.
Theosophy is, then, the archaic Wisdom-Religion, the esoteric doctrine once known in every ancient country having claims to civilization. This "Wisdom" all the old writings show us as an emanation of the divine Principle; and the clear comprehension of it is typified in such names as the Indian Buddh, the Babylonian Nebo, the Thoth of Memphis, the Hermes of Greece; in the appellations, also of some goddesses - Metis, Neitha, Athena, the Gnostic Sophia, and finally - the Vedas, from the word "to know." Under this designation, all the ancient philosophers of the East and West, the Hierophants of old Egypt, the Rishis of Aryavart, the Theodidaktoi of Greece, included all knowledge of things occult and essentially divine. The Mercavah of the Hebrew Rabbis, the secular and popular series, were thus designated as only the vehicle, the outward shell which contained the higher esoteric knowledges. The Magi of Zoroaster received instruction and were initiated in the caves and secret lodges of Bactria; the Egyptian and Grecian hierophants had their apporrheta, or secret discourses, during which the Mysta became an Epopta - a Seer.
The central idea of the Eclectic Theosophy was that of a single Supreme Essence, Unknown and Unknowable - for - "How could one know the knower?" as enquires Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Their system was characterized by three distinct features: the theory of the above-named Essence; the doctrine of the human soul - an emanation from the latter, hence of the same nature; and its theurgy. It is this last science which has led the Neo-Platonists to be so misrepresented in our era of materialistic science. Theurgy being essentially the art of applying the divine powers of man to the subordination of the blind forces of nature, its votaries were first termed magicians - a corruption of the word "Magh," signifying a wise, or learned man, and - derided. Skeptics of a century ago would have been as wide of the mark if they had laughed at the idea of a phonograph or telegraph. The ridiculed and the "infidels" of one generation generally become the wise men and saints of the next.
As regards the Divine essence and the nature of the soul and spirit, modern Theosophy believes now as ancient Theosophy did. The popular Diu of the Aryan nations was identical with the Iao of the Chaldeans, and even with the Jupiter of the less learned and philosophical among the Romans; and it was just as identical with the Jahve of the Samaritans, the Tiu or "Tiusco" of the Northmen, the Duw of the Britains, and the Zeus of the Thracians. As to the Absolute Essence, the One and all - whether we accept the Greek Pythagorean, the Chaldean Kabalistic, or the Aryan philosophy in regard to it, it will all lead to one and the same result. The Primeval Monad of the Pythagorean system, which retires into darkness and is itself Darkness (for human intellect) was made the basis of all things; and we can find the idea in all its integrity in the philosophical systems of Leibnitz and Spinoza. Therefore, whether a Theosophist agrees with the Kabala which, speaking of En-Soph propounds the query: "Who, then, can comprehend It, since It is formless, and Non-existent" - or, remembering that magnificent hymn from the Rig-Veda (Hymn 129th, Book 10th) -- enquire:
"Who knows
from whence this great creation sprang?
Whether his will created or was mute.
He knows it - or perchance even He knows not."
Or, again, accepts the Vedantic conception of Brahma, who in the Upanishads is represented as "without life, without mind, pure," unconscious, for - Brahma is "Absolute Consciousness." Or, even finally, siding with the Svabhavikas of Nepaul, maintains that nothing exists but "Svabhavat" (substance or nature) which exists by itself without any creator - any one of the above conceptions can lead but to pure and absolute Theosophy. That Theosophy which prompted such men as Hegel, Fichte and Spinoza to take up the labors of the old Grecian philosophers and speculate upon the One Substance - the Deity, the Divine All proceeding from the Divine Wisdom - incomprehensible, unknown and unnamed - by any ancient or modern religious philosophy, with the exception of Christianity and Mahommedanism. Every Theosophist, then, holding to a theory of the Deity "which has not revelation, but an inspiration of his own for its basis," may accept any of the above definitions or belong to any of these religions, and yet remain strictly within the boundaries of Theosophy. For the latter is belief in the Deity as the ALL, the source of all existence, the infinite that cannot be either comprehended or known, the universe alone revealing It, or, as some prefer it, Him, thus giving a sex to that, to anthropomorphize which is blasphemy. True, Theosophy shrinks from brutal materialization; it prefers believing that, from eternity retired within itself, the Spirit of the Deity neither wills nor creates; but that, from the infinite effulgency everywhere going forth from the Great Centre, that which produces all visible and invisible things, is but a Ray containing in itself the generative and conceptive power, which, in its turn, produces that which the Greeks called Macrocosm, the Kabalists Tikkun or Adam Kadmon - the archetypal man, and the Aryans Purusha, the manifested Brahm, or the Divine Male. Theosophy believes also in the Anastasis or continued existence, and in transmigration (evolution) or a series or changes in the soul* which can be defended and explained on strict philosophical principles; and only by making a distinction between Paramatma (trancendental, supreme soul) and Jiveatma (animal, or conscious soul) of the Vedantins.
To fully define Theosophy, we must consider it under all its aspects. The interior world has not been hidden from all by impenetrable darkness. By that higher intuition acquired by Theosophia - or God-knowledge, which carried the mind from the world of form into that of formless spirit, man has been sometimes enabled in every age and every country to perceive things in the interior or invisible world. Hence, the "Samadhi," or Dyan Yog Samadhi, of the Hindu ascetics; the "Daimonlon-photi," or spiritual illumination of the Neo-Platonists; the "Sidereal confabulation of soul," of the Rosicrucians or Fire-philosophers; and, even the ecstatic trance of mystics and of the modern mesmerists and spiritualists, are identical in nature, though various as to manifestation. The search after man's diviner "self," so often and so erroneously interpreted as individual communion with a personal God, was the object of every mystic, and belief in its possibility seems to have been coeval with the genesis of humanity, - each people giving it another name. Thus Plato and Plotinus call "Noetic work" that which the Yogas and the Shrotriya term Vidya. "By reflection, self-knowledge and intellectual discipline, the soul can be raised to the vision of eternal truth, goodness, and beauty - that is, to the Vision of God - this is the epopteia," said the Greeks. "To unite one's soul to the Universal Soul," says Porphyry, "requires but a perfectly pure mind. Through self-contemplation, perfect chastity, and purity of body, we may approach nearer to It, and receive, in that state, true knowledge and wonderful insight." And Swami Saraswati, who has read neither Porphyry nor other Greek authors, but who is a thorough Vedic scholar, says in his Veda Bhashya (opasna prakaru ank. 9) - "To obtain Diksh (highest initiations) and Yog, one has to practise according to the rules . . . The soul in human body can perform the greatest wonders by knowing the Universal Spirit (or God) and acquainting itself with the properties and qualities (occult) of all the things in the universe. A human being (a Dikshit or initiate) can thus acquire a power of seeing and hearing at great distances." Finally, Alfred R. Wallace, F. R. S., a spiritualist and yet a confessedly great naturalist, says, with brave candour: "It is 'spirit' that alone feels, and perceives, and thinks - that acquires knowledge, and reasons and aspires . . . there not unfrequently occur individuals so constituted that the spirit can perceive independently of the corporeal organs of sense, or can perhaps, wholly or partially, quit the body for a time and return to it again . . . the spirit . . . communicates with spirit easier than with matter." We can now see how, after thousands of years have intervened between the age of the Gymnosophists** and our own highly civilized era, notwithstanding, or, perhaps, just because of such an enlightenment which pours its radiant light upon the psychological as well as upon the physical realms of nature, over twenty millions of people today believe, under a different form, in those same spiritual powers that were believed in by the Yogins and the Pythagoreans, nearly 3,000 years ago. Thus, while the Aryan mystic claimed for himself the power of solving all the problems of life and death, when he had once obtained the power of acting independently of his body, through the Atman - "self," or "soul;" and the old Greeks went in search of Atmu - the Hidden one, or the God-Soul of man, with the symbolical mirror of the the Thesmophorian mysteries;- so the spiritualists of to-day believe in the faculty of the spirits, or the souls of the disembodied persons, to communicate visibly and tangibly with those they loved on earth. And all these, Aryan Yogis, Greek philosophers, and modern spiritualists, affirm that possibility on the ground that the embodied soul and its never embodied spirits - the real self, - are not separated from either the Universal Soul or other spirits by space, but merely by the differentiation of their qualities; as in the boundless expanse of the universe there can be no limitation. And that when this difference is once removed - according to the Greeks and Aryans by abstract contemplation, producing the temporary liberation of the imprisoned Soul; and according to spiritualists, through mediumship - such an union between embodied and disembodied spirits becomes possible. Thus was it that Patanjali's Yogis and, following in their steps, Plotinus, Porphyry and other Neo-Platonists, maintained that in their hours of ecstacy, they had been united to, or rather become as one with, God, several times during the course of their lives. This idea, erroneous as it may seem in its application to the Universal Spirit, was, and is, claimed by too many great philosophers to be put aside as entirely chimerical. In the case of the Theodidaktoi, the only controvertible point, the dark spot on this philosophy of extreme mysticism, was its claim to include that which is simply ecstatic illumination, under the head of sensuous perception. In the case of the Yogins, who maintained their ability to see Iswara "face to face," this claim was successfully overthrown by the stern logic of Kapila. As to the similar assumption made for their Greek followers, for a long array of Christian ecstatics, and, finally, for the last two claimants to "God-seeing" within these last hundred years - Jacob Bohme and Swedenborg - this pretension would and should have been philosophically and logically questioned, if a few of our great men of science who are spiritualists had had more interest in the philosophy than in the mere phenomenalism of spiritualism.
The Alexandrian Theosophists were divided into neophytes, initiates, and masters, or hierophants; and their rules were copied from the ancient Mysteries of Orpheus, who, according to Herodotus, brought them from India. Ammonius obligated his disciples by oath not to divulge his higher doctrines, except to those who were proved thoroughly worthy and initiated, and who had learned to regard the gods, the angels, and the demons of other peoples, according to the esoteric hyponia, or under-meaning. "The gods exist, but they are not what the oi polloi, the uneducated multitude, suppose them to be," says Epicurus." He is not an atheist who denies the existence of the gods whom the multitude worship, but he is such who fastens on these gods the opinions of the multitude." In his turn, Aristotle declares that of the "Divine Essence pervading the whole world of nature, what are styled the gods are simply the first principles."
Plotinus, the pupil of the "God-taught" Ammonius, tells us, that the secret gnosis or the knowledge of Theosophy, has three degrees - opinion, science, and illumination. "The means or instrument of the first is sense, or perception; of the second, dialectics; of the third, intuition. To the last, reason is subordinate; it is absolute knowledge, founded on the identification of the mind with the object known." Theosophy is the exact science of psychology, so to say; it stands in relation to natural, uncultivated mediumship, as the knowledge of a Tyndall stands to that of a school-boy in physics. It develops in man a direct beholding; that which Schelling denominates "a realization of the identity of subject and object in the individual;" so that under the influence and knowledge of hyponia man thinks divine thoughts, views all thing as they really are, and, finally, "becomes recipient of the Soul of the World," to use one of the finest expressions of Emerson. "I, the imperfect, adore my own perfect" - he says in his superb Essay on the Oversoul. Besides this psychological, or soul-state, Theosophy cultivated every branch of sciences and arts. It was thoroughly familiar with what is now commonly known as mesmerism. Practical theurgy or "ceremonial magic," so often resorted to in their exorcisms by the Roman Catholic clergy - was discarded by the theosophists. It is but Jamblichus alone who, transcending the other Eclectics, added to Theosophy the doctrine of Theurgy. When ignorant of the true meaning of the esoteric divine symbols of nature, man is apt to miscalculate the powers of his soul, and, instead of communing spiritually and mentally with the higher, celestial beings, the good spirits (the gods of the theurgists of the Platonic school), he will unconsciously call forth the evil, dark powers which lurk around humanity - the undying, grim creations of human crimes and vices - and thus fall from theurgia (white magic) into goetia (or black magic, sorcery.) Yet, neither white, nor black magic are what popular superstition understands by the terms. The possibility of "raising spirit" according to the key of Solomon, is the height of superstition and ignorance. Purity of deed and thought can alone raise us to an intercourse "with the gods" and attain for us the goal we desire. Alchemy, believed by so many to have been a spiritual philosophy as well as a physical science, belonged to the teachings of the theosophical school.
It is a noticeable fact that neither Zoroaster, Buddha, Orpheus, Pythagoras, Confucius, Socrates, nor Ammonius Saccas, committed anything to writing. The reason for it is obvious. Theosophy is a double-edged weapon and unfit for the ignorant or the selfish. Like every ancient philosophy it has its votaries among the moderns; but, until late in our own days, its disciples were few in numbers, and of the most various sects and opinions. "Entirely speculative, and founding no schools, they have still exercised a silent influence upon philosophy; and no doubt, when the time arrives, many ideas thus silently propounded may yet give new directions to human thought" - remarks Mr. Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie IX degree . . . himself a mystic and a Theosophist, in his large and valuable work, The Royal Masonic Cyclopoedia (articles Theosophical Society of New York and Theosophy, p. 731).*** Since the days of the fire-philosophers, they had never formed themselves into societies, for, tracked like wild beasts by the Christian clergy, to be known as a Theosophist often amounted, hardly a century ago, to a death-warrant. The statistics show that, during a period of 150 years, no less than 90,000 men and women were burned in Europe for alleged witchcraft. In Great Britain only, from A. D. 1640 to 1660, but twenty years, 3,000 persons were put to death for compact with the "Devil." It was but late in the present century - in 1875 - that some progressed mystics and spiritualists, unsatisfied with the theories and explanations of Spiritualism, started by its votaries, and finding that they were far from covering the whole ground of the wide range of phenomena, formed at New York, America, an association which is now widely known as the Theosophical Society. And now, having explained what is Theosophy, we will, in a separate article, explain what is the nature of our Society, which is also called the "Universal Brotherhood of Humanity."
Footnotes:
*In a series of articles entitled "The World's Great Theosophists," we intend showing that from Pythagoras, who got his wisdom in India, down to our best known modern philosophers and theosophists - David Hume, and Shelley, the English poet - the Spiritists of France included - many believed and yet believe in metempsychosis or reincarnation of the soul; however unelaborated the system of the Spiritists may fairly be regarded.
*The reality of the Yog-power was affirmed by many Greek and Roman writers, who call the Yogins Indian Gymnosophists; by Strabo, Lucan, Plutarch, Cicero (Tusculum), Pliny (vii, 2), etc.
*** The Royal Masonic Cyclopoedia of History, Rites, Symbolism, and Biography. Edited by Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie IX degree (Cryptonymus) Hon. Member of the Canongate Kilwinning Lodge, No. 2, Scotland. New York, J. W. Boutun, 706, Broadway, 1877.
* * * * * * *
THE SECRET DOCTRINE
We continue our attempt at a study of The Secret Doctrine by H P Blavatsky. Text from the book is highlighted in bold typeface.
Stanza III, sloka 7 (pg 71 -72).
STANZA III. - Continued.
7.
BEHOLD, OH LANOO!† THE
RADIANT CHILD OF THE TWO, THE UNPARALLELED REFULGENT GLORY,
BRIGHT SPACE, SON
OF DARK SPACE, WHO EMERGES FROM THE
DEPTHS OF THE GREAT DARK WATERS. IT IS OEAOHOO,
THE YOUNGER, THE * * * (whom thou knowest now as
Kwan-Shai-Yin.—Comment) (a). HE
SHINES FORTH AS THE SUN. HE IS THE
BLAZING DIVINE DRAGON OF WISDOM.
THE EKA IS CHATUR
(four), AND CHATUR TAKES TO ITSELF THREE, AND THE
UNION PRODUCES THE SAPTA (seven) IN WHOM ARE THE
SEVEN WHICH BECOME THE TRIDASA‡ (the thrice ten)
THE HOSTS AND THE MULTITUDES (b). BEHOLD
HIM LIFTING THE VEIL, AND UNFURLING IT FROM EAST
TO WEST. HE
SHUTS OUT THE ABOVE AND LEAVES THE BELOW TO BE SEEN AS THE GREAT
ILLUSION. HE
MARKS THE PLACES FOR THE SHINING ONES (stars) AND TURNS THE UPPER (space)
INTO A SHORELESS SEA OF FIRE, AND
THE ONE MANIFESTED (element) INTO THE GREAT
WATERS (c).
It is sloka 7 of Stanza III. BEHOLD, OH LANOO!† BE-hold? Hold BE(ing), BE(ness)? What/who does, attempts, tries? LANOO !†
What have we missed? It is OH Lanoo and not O Lanoo. Why? Is there really any significance to it being written BEHOLD, OH LANOO!† (correct) rather than BEHOLD, O LANOO!† (incorrect)? It would be relatively easy to incorrectly correct/change/alter OH to O. What is Lanoo asked/encouraged to behold. "IT IS OEAOHOO, THE YOUNGER". OEAOHOO. Behold OEAOHOO within "BEHOLD, OH LANOO!†" . . . . . but not within "BEHOLD, O LANOO!†". Minus the H there is no OEAOHOO to behold.
Eka (ONE, 1) is Chatur (four, 4) which takes to itself three (3) and the union (One, 'second' 1) produces the Sapta (seven, 7). The four takes to itself three. It seems the 'reverse' of the triad/three taking to itself the quaternary/four. Is there a suggestion here that Man is the 'reflection' (literally, as in a mirror?) of the noumenal 'four takes to itself three'?; the 'reflection' of the Divine Dragon of Wisdom?; "the Incorporeal man who contains in himself the divine Idea".
“Bright
Space, son of dark Space,” corresponds to the Ray dropped at the first thrill
of the new “Dawn” into the great Cosmic depths, from which it re-emerges
differentiated as Oeaohoo the younger, (the “new LIFE”), to become, to the
end of the life-cycle, the germ of all things.
He is “the Incorporeal man who contains in himself the divine
Idea,”—the generator of Light and Life, to use an expression of Philo Judæus.
He is called the “Blazing Dragon of Wisdom,” because, firstly, he is
that which the Greek philosophers called the Logos, the Verbum of the Thought
Divine; and secondly, because in Esoteric philosophy this first manifestation,
being the synthesis or the aggregate of Universal Wisdom, Oeaohoo, “the Son of
the Son,” contains in himself the Seven Creative Hosts (The Sephiroth), and is
thus the essence of manifested Wisdom. “He
who bathes in the light of Oeaohoo will never be deceived by the veil of Mâyâ.”
"Bright Space, son of dark Space". We had the space to see that "D" of "DARK SPACE" (Sloka) has become "d" of "dark Space". It is the same, but not the same. "d" is less space and faces another way to "D". "Disk" is different from "disk" (PROEM, first page) or "disc" (PROEM, pg. 4). Oeaohoo the Younger is different from OEAOHOO (Noumenon). Chela is different from Lanoo. Cosmos is different from Kosmos ("Kosmos - the NOUMENON - has nought to do with the causal relations of the phenomenal World", PROEM, 3).
Kwan-Shai-Yin
is identical with, and an equivalent of the Sanskrit Avalokitêshvara,
and as such he is an androgynous deity, like the Tetragrammaton and all the
Logoi* of antiquity. It is only by
some sects in China that he is anthropomorphized and represented with female
attributes,** when, under his female aspect, he becomes Kwan-Yin, the goddess of
mercy, called the “Divine Voice.”*** The latter is the patron deity of
Thibet and of the island of Puto in China, where both deities have a number of
monasteries.§ (See Part II. Kwan-Shai-Yin and Kwan-yin.)
Footnotes:
†
Lanoo is a student, a chela who studies practical Esotericism.
‡
“Tri-dasa,” or three times ten (30), alludes to the Vedic deities, in round
numbers, or more accurately 33—a sacred number.
They are the 12 Adityas, the 8 Vasus, the 11 Rudras, and 2 Aswins—the
twin sons of the Sun and the Sky.
This is the root-number of the Hindu Pantheon, which enumerates 33 crores
or over three hundred millions of gods and goddesses.
*
Hence all the higher gods of antiquity are all “Sons of the Mother” before
they become those of the “Father,” The Logoi, like Jupiter or Zeus, Son of
Kronos-Saturn, “Infinite Time” (or Kâla), in their origin were represented
as male-female Zeus is said to be the “beautiful Virgin,” and Venus is made
bearded. Apollo
is originally bisexual, so is Brahmâ-Vâch in Manu and the Purânas.
Osiris is interchangeable with Isis, and Horus is of both sexes.
Finally St. John’s vision in Revelation, that of the Logos, who is now
connected with Jesus—is hermaphrodite, for he is described as having female
breasts. So
is the Tetragrammaton =Jehovah.
But there are two Avalôkitêshwaras in Esotericism; the first and the
second Logos.
**
No religious symbol can escape profanation and even derision in our days of
politics and Science.
In Southern India the writer has seen a converted native making pujah
with offerings before a statue of Jesus clad in woman’s clothes and with a
ring in his nose.
When asking the meaning of the masquerade we were answered that it was
Jesu-Maria blended in one, and that it was done by the permission of the Padri,
as the zealous convert had no money to purchase two statues or “idols” as
they, very properly, were called by a witness—another but a non-converted
Hindu. Blasphemous
this will appear to a dogmatic Christian, but the Theosophist and the Occultist
must award the palm of logic to the converted Hindu.
The esoteric Christos in the gnosis is, of course, sexless, but in
exoteric theology he is male and female.
***The
Gnostic Sophia, “Wisdom” who is “the Mother” of the Ogdoad (Aditi, in a
certain sense, with her eight sons), is the Holy Ghost and the Creator of all,
as in the ancient systems.
The “father” is a far later invention.
The earliest manifested Logos was female everywhere—the mother of the
seven planetary powers.
Sloka 7 to be continued next issue..........
* * * * * * *
UPADESA SAHASRI
THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS
"The teacher said, 'You are the non-transmigratory Supreme Self, but you wrongly think that you are one liable to transmigration. (Similarly), not being an agent or an experiencer you wrongly consider yourself to be so. Again, you are eternal but mistake yourself to be non-eternal. This is Ignorance.'".
* * * * * * *
Caduceus/Serpents/Sound
"Every one knows what
the caduceus is, already modified by the Greeks.
The original symbol – with the triple head of the serpent – became
altered into a rod with a knob, and the two lower heads were separated, thus
disfiguring somewhat the original meaning.
Yet it is as good an illustration as can be for our purpose, this laya
rod entwined by two serpents. Verily
the wonderful powers of the magic caduceus were sung by all the ancient poets,
with a very good reason for those who understood the secret meaning.”
The
Secret Doctrine, Vol I, pg.
550.
“We say and maintain
that SOUND,
for one thing, is a tremendous Occult power; that it is a stupendous force, of
which the electricity generated by a million Niagaras could never counteract the
smallest potentiality when directed with occult knowledge.
Sound may be produced of such a nature that the pyramid of Cheops would
be raised in the air, or that a dying man, nay, one at his last breath, would be
revived and filled with new energy and vigour.”
The
Secret Doctrine, Vol I, pg.
555.
“I saw a pair of
serpents rising from the base of my spine in a crisscross, spiralling manner.
They rose to the crown of my head and spread their hoods. One was red; the other
blue. The whole cranium became suffused with a bright light. My attention was
fixed upon the point between my eyebrows where the serpents’ heads were
pointed.”
The Power of the Presence, by David Godman.
* * * * * * *
THE MAHATMA LETTERS
In each issue we hope to reproduce one (or more) of the letters from The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett from the Mahatmas M. and K.H. (Second Edition, Rider & Company) as transcribed and compiled by A. T. Barker. We continue with Letter Letter XLI and XLII :
LETTER No. XLI
Received about February, 1882.
I believe verily I am unfit to express my ideas clearly in your language. I never thought of giving any importance to the circular letter - I had asked you to draft for them - appearing in the Pioneer, or ever meant to imply that it should so appear. I had asked you to compose it for them, send your drafted copy to Bombay and make them issue it as a circular letter; which, once out, and on its round in India might be copied in your journal as other papers would be sure to copy it. Her letter B.G. was foolish, childish and silly. I have overlooked it. But you must not so labour under the impression that it will undo all the good yours has done. There are a few sensitive persons on whose nerves it will jar, but the rest will never appreciate its true spirit; nor is it in any way libellous - only vulgar and foolish. I will force her to stop.
At the same time I must say she suffers acutely and I am unable to help her for all this is effect from causes which cannot be undone - occultism in theosophy. She has now to either conquer or die. When the hour comes she will be taken back to Tibet. Do not blame the poor woman, blame me. She is but a "shell" at times and I, often careless in watching her. If the laugh is not turned on the Statesman the ball will be caught up by other papers and flung at her again.
Do not feel despondent. Courage my good friend and remember you are working off by helping her your own law of retribution for more than one cruel fling she receives is due to K.H.'s friendship for you, for his using her as the means of communication. But - Courage.
I saw the lawyer's papers and perceive he is averse to taking up the case. But for the little he is needed for, he will do. No law suit will help - but publicity in the matter of vindication as much as in the question of accusation - 10,000 circular letters sent throughout to prove the accusations false.
Yours till the morrow.
M.
LETTER No. XLII I
Received about February, 1882.
I say again what you like me not to say, namely that no regular instruction, no regular communication is possible between us before our mutual path is cleared of its many impediments. The greatest being the public misconception about the Founders. For your impatience you cannot nor will you be blamed. But if you fail to make a profitable use of your newly-acquired privileges, you would indeed be unworthy, friend. Three, four weeks more - and I will retire to give room with you all, to him to whom that room belongs, and whose place I could but very unadequately occupy, for I am neither a scribe nor a Western scholar. Whether the Chohan finds yourself and Mr. Hume more qualified than he did before to receive instructions through us - is another question. But you ought to prepare for it. For much remains yet to break forth. You perceived, hitherto but the light of a new day - you may, if you try, see with K.H.'s help the sun of full noon-day when it reaches its meridian. But you have to work for it, work for the shedding of light upon other minds through yours. How, will you say? Hitherto of you two, Mr. H. was positively antagonistic to our advice, you - passively resisting it at times often yielding against what you conceived your better judgment - such is my answer. The results were - what they had to be expected. No good or very little came out of a kind of spasmodic defence - the solitary defence of a friend presumably prejudiced in favour of those whose champion he had come out and a member of the Society. Mr. Hume would never listen to K.H.'s suggestion of a lecture in his house during which he might have well disabused the public mind of a part of the prejudice at least, if not entirely. You thought it was unnecessary to publish and spread among the readers as to who she was.
Think ye, Prinrose and Rattigan are likely to spread the knowledge and give out reports of what they know to be the case? And so on. Hints are all sufficient to an intelligence like yours. I tell you this for I know how profound and sincere is your feeling for K.H. I know how bad y'll feel, if when among us again you find that communication between you has not improved. And its sure to pass when the Chohan finds no progress since he made him have you. See what the Fragments - the most superb of articles - has done; how little effect it will produce unless the opposition is stirred up, discussion provoked and spiritualists forced to defend their foolish claims. Read editorial in Spiritualist November 18, "Speculation-Spinning"- she cannot answer it as either he or you might and the result will be that the most precious hints will fail to reach the minds of those craving for truth for a solitary pearl is soon outshone in the midst of a heap of false diamonds, when there's no jeweller to point out its worth. So on again. What can we do! I hear already K.H. exclaiming.
It is so, friend. The pathway through earth-life leads through many conflicts and trials, but he who does naught to conquer them can expect no triumph. Let then the anticipation of a fuller introduction into our mysteries under more congenial circumstances the creation of which depends entirely upon yourself inspire you with patience to wait for, perseverance to press on to, and full preparation to receive the blissful consummation of all your desires. And for that you have to remember that when K.H. shall say to you, Come up hither - you should be ready. Otherwise the all powerful hand of our Chohan will appear once more between you and Him.
Send both portraits sent to you from Odessa back to H.P.B., the O.L. when you done with them. Write a few lines to the old Generaless to Odessa - for she sorely wants your autograph - I know. Remind her that both you belong to one Society and are - Brothers and promise help for her niece.