Section III. The “Holy of Holies.” Its Degradation…

Section III. The “Holy of Holies.” Its Degradation

The Sanctum Sanctorum of the Ancients, also called the Adytum—the recess at the West end of the Temple which was enclosed on three sides by blank walls and had its only aperture or door hung over with a curtain—was common to all ancient nations.

A great difference is now found between the secret meaning of this symbolical place as given in the Esotericism of the Pagans and in that of the later Jews, though its symbology was originally identical throughout the ancient races and nations. The Gentiles placed in the Adytum a sarcophagus, or a tomb (taphos), in which was the Solar God to whom the temple was consecrated, holding it, as Pantheists, in the greatest veneration. They regarded it, in its Esoteric meaning, as the symbol of resurrection, cosmic, solar, or diurnal, and human. It embraced the wide range of periodical, and (in time) punctual, Manvantaras, or the reäwakenings of Kosmos, Earth, and Man to new existences; the Sun being the most poetical and also the most grandiose symbol of such Cycles in Heaven, and man—in his reïncarnations—on Earth. The Jews—whose realism, if judged by the dead‐letter, was as practical and gross in the days of Moses as it is now(1045)—in the course of their estrangement from the Gods of their Pagan neighbours, consummated a national and levitical polity, by the device of setting forth their Holy of Holies as the most solemn sign of their Monotheism—exoterically, while seeing in it but a universal phallic symbol—esoterically. While the Kabalists knew but Ain Suph and the “Gods” of the Mysteries, the Levites had no tomb, no God in their Adytum but the “Sacred” Ark of the Covenant—their “Holy of Holies.”

When the esoteric meaning of this recess is made clear, however, the profane will be better able to understand why David danced “uncovered” before the Ark of the Covenant, and was so anxious to appear vile for the sake of his “Lord,” and base in his own sight.(1046)

The Ark is the navi‐form Argha of the Mysteries. Parkhurst, who has a long dissertation upon it in his Greek dictionary, and who never breathes a word about it in his Hebrew lexicon, explains it thus:

Archê (Ἀρχὴ) in this application answers to the Hebrew Rasit or wisdom, ... a word which had the meaning of the emblem of the female generative power, the Arg or Arca, in which the germ of all nature was supposed to float or brood on the great abyss during the interval which took place after every mundane cycle.

Quite so; and the Jewish Ark of the Covenant had precisely the same significance; with the supplementary addition that, instead of a beautiful and chaste sarcophagus (the symbol of the Matrix of Nature and Resurrection), as in the Sanctum Sanctorum of the Pagans, they had the Ark made still more realistic in its construction by the two Cherubs set up on the coffer or Ark of the Covenant, facing each other, with their wings spread in such a manner as to form a perfect Yoni (as now seen in India). Besides which, this generative symbol had its significance enforced by the four mystic letters of Jehovah’s name, namely, IHVH (יהוה); Jod (י) meaning the membrum virile; Hé (ה), the womb; Vau (ו), a crook or a hook, a nail, and Hé (ה) again, meaning also “an opening”; the whole forming the perfect bisexual emblem or symbol or I(e)H(o)V(a)H, the male and female symbol.

Perhaps also, when people realize the true meaning of the office and title of the Kadesh Kadeshim, the “holy ones,” or “the consecrated to the Temple of the Lord”—the “Holy of Holies” of these “holy ones” may assume an aspect far from edifying.

Iacchus again is Iao or Jehovah; and Baal or Adon, like Bacchus, was a phallic God.

“Who shall ascend into the hill [the high place] of the Lord?” asks the holy king David, “Who shall stand in the place of his Kadushu (קדשו)?”(1047) Kadesh may mean in one sense to “devote,” “hallow,” “sanctify,” and even to “initiate” or to “set apart”; but it also means the ministry of lascivious rites—the Venus‐ worship—and the true interpretation of the word Kadesh is bluntly rendered in Deuteronomy, xxiii. 17; Hosea, iv. 14; and Genesis, xxxviii. 15‐22. The “holy” Kadeshim of the Bible were identical, as to the duties of their office, with the Nautch‐girls of the later Hindû pagodas. The Hebrew Kadeshim, or Galli, lived “by the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the grove,” or the bust of Venus‐Astarte.(1048)

The dance performed by David round the Ark was the “circle‐dance,” said to have been prescribed by the Amazons for the Mysteries. Such was the dance of the daughters of Shiloh,(1049) and the leaping of the prophets of Baal.(1050) It was simply a characteristic of the Sabæan worship, for it denoted the motion of the Planets round the Sun. That the dance was a Bacchic frenzy is apparent. Sistra were used on the occasion, and the taunt of Michal and the King’s reply are very expressive.(1051)

The Ark, in which are preserved the germs of all living things necessary to repeople the Earth, represents the survival of life, and the supremacy of Spirit over Matter, through the conflict of the opposing powers of Nature. In the Astro‐theosophic chart of the Western Rite, the Ark corresponds with the navel, and is placed at the sinister side, the side of the woman (the Moon), one of whose symbols is the left pillar of Solomon’s Temple—Boaz. The umbilicus is connected (through the placenta) with the receptacle in which are fructified the embryos of the race. The Ark is the sacred Argha of the Hindûs, and thus the relation in which it stands to Noah’s Ark may be easily inferred when we learn that the Argha was an oblong vessel, used by the high priests as a sacrificial chalice in the worship of Isis, Astarte, and Venus‐ Aphrodite, all of whom were Goddesses of the generative powers of Nature, or of Matter—hence representing symbolically the Ark containing the germs of all living things.(1052)

Mistaken is he who accepts the kabalistic works of to‐day, and the interpretations of the Zohar by the Rabbis, for the genuine kabalistic lore of old!(1053) For no more to‐day than in the day of Frederick von Schelling does the Kabalah accessible to Europe and America contain much more than

Ruins and fragments, much distorted, remnants still of that primitive system which is the key to all religious systems.(1054)

The oldest system and the Chaldæan Kabalah were identical. The latest renderings of the Zohar are those of the Synagogue in the early centuries—i.e., the Thorah (or Law), dogmatic and uncompromising.

The “King’s Chamber” in Cheops’ Pyramid is thus an Egyptian “Holy of Holies.” On the days of the Mysteries of Initiation, the Candidate, representing the Solar God, had to descend into the Sarcophagus, and represent the energizing ray, entering into the fecund womb of Nature. Emerging from it on the following morning, he typified the resurrection of Life after the change called Death. In the Great Mysteries his figurative “death” lasted two days, when with the Sun he arose on the third morning, after a last night of the most cruel trials. While the Postulant represented the Sun—the all‐vivifying orb that “resurrects” every morning but to impart life to all—the Sarcophagus was symbolic of the female principle. This, in Egypt; its form and shape changed with every country, provided it remained a vessel, a symbolic “navis” or boat‐shaped vehicle, and a “container,” symbolically, of germs or the germ of life. In India, it is the “Golden” Cow through which the Candidate for Brâhmanism has to pass if he desires to be a Brâhman, and to become Dvi‐ja, “born a second time.” The crescent‐form Argha of the Greeks was the type of the Queen of Heaven—Diana, or the Moon. She was the Great Mother of all Existences, as the Sun was the Father. The Jews, previous to, as well as after, their metamorphosis of Jehovah into a male God, worshipped Astoreth, which made Isaiah declare: “Your new moons and ... feasts my soul hateth”;(1055) in saying which, he was evidently unjust. Astoreth and the New Moon (the crescent Argha) Festivals, had no worse significance as a form of public worship than had the hidden meaning of the Moon in general, which was kabalistically connected directly with, and sacred to, Jehovah, as is well known; with the sole difference, however, that one was the female and the other the male aspect of the Moon, and of the star Venus.

The Sun (the Father), the Moon (the Mother), and Mercury‐Thoth (the Son), were the earliest Trinity of the Egyptians, who personified them in Osiris, Isis, and Thoth (Hermes). In the Gnostic Gospel Pistis Sophia, the seven Great Gods, divided into two Triads and the highest God (the Sun), are the lower Triple Powers (Τριδυνάμεις), whose powers reside respectively in Mars, Mercury and Venus; and the higher Triad—the three “Unseen Gods,” who dwell in the Moon, Jupiter and Saturn.(1056)

This requires no proof. Astoreth was in one sense an impersonal symbol of Nature, the Ship of Life carrying throughout the boundless Sidereal Ocean the germs of all being. And when she was not identified with Venus, like every other “Queen of Heaven” to whom cakes and buns were offered in sacrifice, Astoreth became the reflection of the Chaldæan “Nuah, the Universal Mother” (the female Noah, considered as one with the Ark), and of the female Triad, Ana, Belita and Davkina; called, when blended into one, “Sovereign Goddess, Lady of the Nether Abyss, Mother of Gods, Queen of the Earth, and Queen of Fecundity.” Later, Belita or Tamtu(1057) (the sea), the Mother of the City of Erech (the great Chaldæan Necropolis), became Eve; and now she is Mary the Virgin, in the Latin Church, represented as standing on the Crescent Moon, and, at times on the Globe, to vary the programme. The Navis, or ship‐like form of the crescent, which blends in itself all those common symbols of the Ship of Life, such as Noah’s Ark, the Yoni of the Hindûs, and the Ark of the Covenant, is the female symbol of the Universal “Mother of the Gods,” and is now found under its Christian symbol in every Church, as the “nave” (from navis).(1058) The Navis, the Sidereal Vessel, is fructified by the Spirit of Life—the male God; or, as the learned Kenealy, in his Apocalypse, very appropriately calls it—the Holy Spirit. In Western religious symbology the crescent was the male, the full Moon the female, aspect of that universal Spirit. The mystic word ALM, which the prophet Mahomet prefixed to many chapters of the Korân, alludes to her as the Alm, the Immaculate Virgin of the Heavens.(1059) And—the sublime ever falling into the ridiculous—it is from this root Alm that we have to derive the word Almeh—the Egyptian dancing‐girls. The latter are “virgins” of the same type as the Nautchees in India, and the (female) Kadeshim, the “holy ones” of the Jewish temples—consecrated to Jehovah, who represented both sexes—whose holy functions in the Israelite fanes were identical with those of the Nautchees.

Now Eustathius declares that IO (ΙΩ) means the Moon, in the dialect of the Argians; it was also one of the names of the Moon in Egypt. Says Jablonski:

ΙΩ, Ioh, Ægyptiis Lunam significat neque habent illi, in communi sermonis usu, aliud nomen quo Lunam designent præter IO.

The Pillar and Circle (IO), which with Pythagoras was the perfect number contained in the Tetraktys,(1060) became later a preëminently phallic number—amongst the Jews, foremost of all, with whom it is the male and female Jehovah.

This is how a scholar explains it:

I find, on the Rosetta stone of Uhlemann, the word mooth (also in Seiffarth), the name of the moon, used as a cycle of time, hence the lunar month, from the hieroglyph [Symbol: half circle], with [Symbol: five‐pointed star] and [Symbol: circle with middle dot] as determinatives, given as the Coptic I O H, or I O H. The Hebrew הוי may also be used as I O H, for the letter vau (ו) was used for o and for u, and for v or w. This, before the Massora, of which the point (·) was used as וֹ = o, וּ = u, and ו = v or w. Now I had worked it out by original search that the great distinctive function of the god‐name Jehovah was designative of the influence of the moon as the causative of generation, and as of its exact value as a lunar year in the natural measure of days, as you will fully see,... And here comes this linguistic same word from a source far more ancient; viz., the Coptic, or rather from the old Egyptian in time of the Coptic.(1061)

This is the more remarkable when Egyptology compares this with the little which it knows about the Theban Triad—composed of Ammon, Mooth (or Moot), and their son Khonsoo. This Triad was, when united, contained in the Moon as their common symbol; and when separated, it was Khonsoo who was the God Lunus, being thus confounded with Thoth and Phtah. His mother Moot—the name signifying “Mother,” by the bye, and not the Moon, which was only her symbol—is called the “Queen of Heaven,” the “Virgin,” etc., as she is an aspect of Isis, Hathor, and other Mother Goddesses. She was less the wife than the mother of Ammon, whose distinct title is the “husband of his mother.” In a statuette at Boulaq, Cairo, this Triad is represented as a mummy‐god holding in his hand three different sceptres, and bearing the lunar disk on his head, the characteristic tress of hair showing the design of representing it as that of an infant God, or the “Sun,” in the Triad. He was the God of Destinies in Thebes, and appears under two aspects (1) as Khonsoo, the Lunar God, and Lord of Thebes, Nofir‐hotpoo, “he who is in absolute repose,” and (2) as “Khonsoo p. iri‐sokhroo,” or “Khonsoo, who executes Destiny”; the former preparing the events and conceiving them for those born under his generative influence, the latter putting them into action.(1062) Under theogonic permutations Ammon becomes Horus, Hor‐Ammon, and Moot(h)‐Isis is seen suckling him in a statuette of the Saïtic period.(1063) In his turn, in this transformed Triad, Khonsoo becomes Thoth‐Lunus, “he who operates salvation.” His brow is crowned with the head of an ibis decorated with the lunar disk and the diadem called Io‐tef (IO‐tef).(1064)

Now all these symbols are certainly found reflected in (some believe them identical with) the Yave, or Jehovah of the Bible. This will be made plain to anyone who reads The Source of Measures, or “The Hebrew‐ Egyptian Mystery,” and understands its undeniable, clear, and mathematical proofs that the esoteric foundations, or the system used in the building of the Great Pyramid, and the architectural measurements in the Temple of Solomon (whether the latter be mythical or real), Noah’s Ark, and the Ark of the Covenant, are the same. If anything in the world can settle the dispute that the old, as much as the later Post‐Babylonian, Jews, and especially the former, built their Theogony and Religion on the very same foundation as did all the Pagans, it is the work in question.

And now it may be as well to remind the reader of what we said of IAO in Isis Unveiled:

No other deity affords such a variety of etymologies as Iaho, nor is there any name which can be so variously pronounced. It is only by associating it with the Masoretic points that the later Rabbins succeeded in making Jehovah read “Adonaï”—or Lord. Philo Byblus spells it in Greek letters ΙΕΥΩ—IEVO. Theodoret says that the Samaritans pronounced it Iabé (Yahva), and the Jews Yaho; which would make it as we have shown, I—Ah—O. Diodorus states that “among the Jews they relate that Moses called the God IAO.” It is on the authority of the Bible itself, that we maintain that, before his initiation by Jethro, his father‐in‐law, Moses had never known the word Iaho.(1065)

The above receives corroboration in a private letter from a very learned Kabalist. In our first volume,(1066) it is stated that exoterically Brahma (neuter), so flippantly and so often confused by the Orientalists with Brahmâ (the male), is sometimes called Kâla‐hansa, the “Swan in Eternity,” and the Esoteric meaning of Aham‐sa, is given as “I [am] he,” So‐ham being equal to Sah “he,” and Aham “I”—a mystic anagram and permutation. It is also the “four‐faced” Brahmâ, the Chatur‐mukham (the Perfect Cube) forming itself within, and from, the Infinite Circle; and again the use of the 1, 3, 5, and 7/7 = 14, as the Esoteric Hierarchy of the Dhyân Chohans, is explained. On this, the said correspondent comments in the following manner:

Of the 1, 3, 5, and twice 7, intending, and very especially, 13514, which on a circle may be read as 31415 (or π value), I think there cannot be a possibility of doubting; and especially when considered with symbol marks on Sacr’,(1067) “Chakra,” or Circle of Vishnu.

But let me carry your description a step further: You say, “The One from the Egg, the Six, and the Five,(1068) give the numbers 1065, the value of the First‐born.” If it be so, then in 1065 we have the famous Jehovah’s name, the Jve or Jave, or Jupiter, and by change of ה to נ, or h to n, then נוי or the Latin Jun or Juno, the base of the Chinese riddle, the key measuring numbers of Sni (Sinai) and Jehovah coming down on that Mount, which numbers (1065) are but the use of our ratio of 113 to 355, because 1065 = 355 × 3 which is circumference to a diameter of 113 × 3 = 339. Thus the first born of Brahmâ‐Prajâpati (or any Demiurgus) indicates a measuring use of a circular relation taken from the Chakra (or Vishnu) and, as stated above, the Divine Manifestation takes the form of Life and the First‐born.

It is a most singular thing: At the entrance passage to the King’s Chamber the measurement from the surface of the Great Step(1069) and the Grand Gallery to the top of the said Gallery is, by the very careful measures of Piazzi Smyth, 339 inches. Take a as a centre and with this radius describe a circle; the diameter of that circle will be 339 × 2 = 678, and these numbers are those of the expression and the raven, in the “dove and raven” scenes or pictures of the Flood of Noah; (the radius is taken to show division into two parts, which are 1065 each) for 113 (man) × 6 = 678, and the diameter to a circumference of 1065 × 2—so we have here an indication of cosmic man on this high grade or step, at the entrance of the King’s Chamber (the Holy of Holies)—which is the womb. Now this passage is of such a height that a man to enter it must stoop. But a man upright is 113, and broken, or stooping, he becomes 113/2 = 56·5 or 5·65 x 10 (יהוה), or Jehovah. That is, he personifies(1070) him as entering the Holy of Holies. But by Hebrew Esotericism the chief function of Jehovah was child giving, etc., and that because, by the numbers of his name, he was the measure of the lunar year, which cycle of time—because by its factor of 7 (seven) it ran so coördinately with the periods of the quickening, viability, and gestation—was taken as the causative of the generative action and therefore was worshipped and besought.

This discovery connects Jehovah still more with all the other Creative and Generative Gods, Solar and Lunar, and especially with “King” Soma, the Hindû Deus Lunus, the Moon, because of the Esoteric influence attributed to this Planet in Occultism. There are other corroborations of this, however, in Hebrew tradition itself. Adam is spoken of in the More Nevochim (or “Guide of the Perplexed”—truly!) of Maimonides in two aspects; as a man, like all others born of a man and a woman, and—as the Prophet of the Moon; the reason of which is now made apparent, and has to be explained.

Adam, as the supposed great “Progenitor of the Human Race,” is, as Adam Kadmon, made in the image of God—a priapic image, therefore. The Hebrew words Sacr’ and N’cabvah are, literally translated, Lingam (Phallus) and Yoni (Cteïs), notwithstanding their translation in the Bible “male and female.”(1071) As said there, “God creates ‘man in his own image,’ in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them”—the androgyne Adam Kadmon. Now this kabalistic name is not that of a living man, nor even of a human or divine Being, but of the two sexes or organs of procreation, called in Hebrew with that usual sincerity of language preëminently biblical, Sacr’ and N’cabvah(1072); these two being, therefore, the image under which the “Lord God” appeared usually to his chosen people. That this is so, is now undeniably proven by almost all the symbologists and Hebrew scholars as well as by the Kabalah. Therefore Adam is in one sense Jehovah. This makes plain another general tradition in the East mentioned in Gregorie’s Notes and Observations upon several Passages in Scripture,(1073) and quoted by Hargrave Jennings in his Phallicism:

That Adam was commanded by God that his dead body should be kept above ground till a fulness of time should come to commit it ... to the middle of the earth by a priest of the Most High God....

Therefore,

Noah daily prayed in the Ark before the “Body of Adam”—(1074)

or before the Phallus in the Ark, or Holy of Holies, again. He who is a Kabalist and accustomed to the incessant permutation of biblical names, once they are interpreted numerically and symbolically, will understand what is meant.

The two words of which Jehovah is composed, make up the original idea of male‐female, as birth‐originator, for the י was the membrum virile and Hovah was Eve. So ... the perfect one, as originator of measures, takes also the form of birth origin, as hermaphrodite one; hence, the phallic use of form.(1075)

Besides, the same author shows and demonstrates numerically and geometrically that (a) Arets, “earth,” Adam, “man,” and H‐adam‐h, are cognate with each other, and are personified in the Bible under one form, as the Egyptian and Hebrew Mars, God of Generation;(1076) and (b) that Jehovah, or Jah, is Noah, for Jehovah is Noah in Hebrew would be ינח or literally in English, Inch.

The above affords, then, a key to the said traditions. Noah, a divine permutation, the supposed Saviour of Humanity, who carries in his Ark or Argha (the Moon), the germs of all living things, worships before the “Body of Adam,” which body is the image of the Creator, and a Creator itself. Hence Adam is called the “Prophet of the Moon,” the Argha or “Holy of Holies” of the Yod (י). This also shows the origin of the Jewish popular belief that the face of Moses is in the Moon—i.e., the spots in the Moon. For Moses and Jehovah are kabalistically once more permutations, as has been shown. Says the author of The Source of Measures:

There is one fact in regard to Moses and his works too important to be omitted. When he is instructed by the Lord as to his mission, the power name assumed by the Deity is, I am that I am, the Hebrew words being

אהיה אשר אהיה ;

a various reading of יהוה. Now, Moses is משה, and equals

345.

Add the values of the new form of the name Jehovah, 21 + 501 + 21 = 543, or, by a reverse reading, 345; thus showing Moses to be a form of Jehovah in this combination. 21 ÷ 2 = 105, or, reversed, 501, so that the asher or the that in I am‐that‐I am is simply a guide to a use of 21 or 7 × 3.501^2 = 251 +, a very valuable pyramid number, etc.(1077)

For a clearer explanation for the benefit of Non‐Kabalists we put it thus: “I am that I am” is in Hebrew:

Âhiyé is ה י ה א, or 5 10 5 1.

Asher is ר ש א, or 200 300 1.

Âhiyé is ה י ה א, or 5 10 5 1.

Add the numbers of these separate words and you have:

אהיה (21) אשר (501) אהיה (21).

This relates to the process of descending in Fire on the Mount to make Man, etc., and is explained to be but a check and use of the numbers of the mountains; for on one side we have 10 + 5 + 6 = 21, down the middle 501, and on the other side 6 + 5 + 10 = 21.(1078)

The “Holy of Holies,” both kabalistic and rabbinical, is thus shown as an international symbol, and common property. Neither had originated with the Hebrews; but owing to the too realistic handling of the half‐initiated Levites, the symbol had acquired with them a significance which it scarcely has with any other people to this day, and which it was originally never meant to have by the true Kabalist. The Lingam and Yoni of the modern average Hindû is, on the face of it, of course, no better than the rabbinical “Holy of Holies”—but it is no worse; and this is a point gained on the Christian traducers of the Asiatic religious Philosophies. For, in such religious myths, in the hidden symbolism of a creed and philosophy, the spirit of the tenets propounded ought to decide their relative value. And who will say, that, examined either way, this so‐called “Wisdom,” applied solely to the uses and benefit of one little nation, has ever developed in it anything like national ethics. The Prophets are there, to show the walk in life of the chosen but “stiff‐ necked” people before, during, and after, the days of Moses. That they have had at one time the Wisdom‐Religion and the use of its universal language and symbols is proved by the same Esotericism existing to this day in India with regard to the “Holy of Holies.” This, as said above, was and still is the passage through the “Golden” Cow in the same stooping position as was necessitated by the Gallery of the Pyramid, which identified man with Jehovah in Hebrew Esotericism. The whole difference lies in the spirit of the interpretation. With the Hindûs as with the ancient Egyptians that spirit was and is entirely metaphysical and psychological; with the Hebrews it was realistic and physiological. It pointed to the first sexual separation of the human race—Eve giving birth to Cain‐Jehovah, as shown in The Source of Measures; to the consummation of terrestrial physiological union and conception—as in the allegory of Cain shedding Abel’s blood, Habel being the feminine principle; and to child‐bearing—a process shown to have begun in the Third Race, or with Adam’s Third Son, Seth, with whose Son Henoch, men began to call themselves Jehovah or Jah‐hovah, the male Jod and Havah or Eve, to wit, male and female beings.(1079) Thus the difference lies in the religious and ethical feeling, but the two symbols are identical. There is no doubt that, with the fully initiated Judæan Tanaim, the inner sense of the symbolism was as holy in its abstraction as with the ancient Âryan Dvijas. The worship of the “God in the Ark” dates only from David; and for a thousand years Israel knew of no phallic Jehovah. And now the old Kabalah edited and reëdited, has become tainted with it.

With the ancient Âryans the hidden meaning was grandiose, sublime and poetical, however much the external appearance of their symbol may now militate against the claim. The ceremony of passing through the Holy of Holies—now symbolized by the Cow, but in the beginning through the temple Hiranya‐garbha, the Radiant Egg, in itself a symbol of Universal, Abstract Nature—meant spiritual conception and birth, or rather the re‐birth of the individual and his regeneration; the stooping man at the entrance of the Sanctum Sanctorum, ready to pass through the Matrix of Mother Nature, or the physical creature ready to re‐become the original Spiritual Being, pre‐natal MAN. With the Semite, that stooping man meant the fall of Spirit into Matter, and that fall and degradation were apotheosized by him with the result of dragging Deity down to the level of man. For the Âryan, the symbol represented the divorce of Spirit from Matter, its merging into and return to its primal Source; for the Semite, the wedlock of Spiritual Man with Material Female Nature, the physiological taking preëminence over the psychological and the purely immaterial. The Âryan views of the symbolism were those of the whole Pagan world; the Semite interpretations emanated from, and were preëminently those of a small tribe, thus marking its national features and the idiosyncratic defects that characterize many of the Jews to this day—gross realism, selfishness, and sensuality. They had made a bargain, through their father Jacob, with their tribal deity, self‐exalted above all others, and a covenant that his “seed shall be as the dust of the earth”; and that deity could have no better image henceforth than that of the symbol of generation, and as representation a number and numbers.

Carlyle has wise words for both these nations. With the Hindû Âryan—the most metaphysical and spiritual people on earth—religion has ever been, in his words,

An everlasting lode‐star, that beams the brighter in the heavens the darker here on earth grows the night around him.

The religion of the Hindû detaches him from this Earth; therefore, even now, the cow‐symbol is one of the grandest and most philosophical among all others in its inner meaning. To the “Masters” and “Lords” of European potencies, the Israelites, certain words of Carlyle apply still more admirably; for them

Religion is a wise prudential feeling grounded on mere calculation—

and it was so from its beginnings. Having burdened themselves with it, Christian nations feel bound to defend and poetize it, at the expense of all other religions.

But it was not so with the ancient nations. For them the passage‐entrance and the sarcophagus in the King’s Chamber meant regeneration—not generation. It was the most solemn symbol, a Holy of Holies, indeed, wherein were created Immortal Hierophants and “Sons of God”—never mortal men and sons of lust and flesh, as now in the hidden sense of the Semite Kabalist. The reason for the difference in the views of the two races is easy to account for. The Âryan Hindû belongs to the oldest races now on Earth; the Semite Hebrew to the latest. The former is nearly one million years old; the latter is a small sub‐race some 8,000 years of age and no more.(1080)

But phallic worship has developed only with the gradual loss of the keys to the inner meaning of religious symbols, and there was a day when the Israelites had beliefs as pure as the Âryans have. But now Judaism, built solely on phallic worship, has become one of the latest creeds in Asia, and theologically a religion of hate and malice toward everyone and everything outside itself. Philo Judæus shows what was the genuine Hebrew faith. The Sacred Writings, he says, prescribe what we ought to do, commanding us to hate the heathen and their laws and institutions. True, they did hate Baal or Bacchus worship publicly, but left its worst features to be followed secretly. It is with the Talmudic Jews that the grand symbols of Nature were the most profaned. With them, as now shown by the discovery of the key to the correct Bible reading, Geometry, the fifth Divine Science—“fifth” in the series of the Seven Keys to the universal Esoteric Language and Symbology—was desecrated, and by them applied to conceal the most terrestrial and grossly sexual mysteries, wherein both Deity and Religion were degraded.

We are told that it is just the same with our Brahmâ‐Prajâpati, with Osiris and all other Creative Gods. Quite so, when their rites are judged exoterically and externally; the reverse when their inner meaning is unveiled, as we see. The Hindû Lingam is identical with Jacob’s “Pillar”—most undeniably. But the difference, as said, seems to consist in the fact that the Esoteric significance of the Lingam was too truly sacred and metaphysical to be revealed to the profane and the vulgar; hence its superficial appearance was left to the speculations of the mob. Nor would the Âryan Hierophant and Brâhman, in their proud exclusiveness and the satisfaction of their knowledge, go to the trouble of concealing its primeval nakedness under cunningly devised fables; whereas the Rabbi, having interpreted the symbol to suit his own tendencies, had to veil the crude significance; and this served a double purpose—that of keeping his secret to himself and of exalting himself in his supposed monotheism over the Heathen, whom his Law commanded him to hate(1081)—a commandment now gladly accepted by the Christian too, in spite of another and later commandment, “Love one another.” Both India and Egypt had and have their sacred lotuses, symbolic of the same “Holy of Holies”—the lotus growing in the water, a double feminine symbol—the bearer of its own seed and root of all. Virâj and Horus are both male symbols, emanating from Androgyne Nature, one from Brahmâ and his female counterpart Vâch, the other, from Osiris and Isis—never from the One Infinite God. In the Judæo‐Christian systems it is different. Whereas the lotus, containing Brahmâ, the Universe, is shown growing out of Vishnu’s Navel, the Central Point in the Waters of Infinite Space, and whereas Horus springs from the lotus of the Celestial Nile—all these abstract pantheistic ideas are dwarfed and made terrestrially concrete in the Bible. One is almost inclined to say that in the esoteric they are grosser and still more anthropomorphic, than in their exoteric rendering. Take as an example the same symbol, even in its Christian application—the lilies in the hand of the Archangel Gabriel.(1082) In Hindûism—the “Holy of Holies” is a universal abstraction, whose dramatis personæ are Infinite Spirit and Nature; in Christian Judaism, it is a personal God, outside of that Nature, and the human womb—Eve, Sarah, etc.; hence, an anthropomorphic phallic God, and his image—man.

Thus it is maintained, that with regard to the contents of the Bible, one of two hypotheses has to be admitted. Either behind the symbolic substitute Jehovah, there was the Unknown, Incognizable Deity, the kabalistic Ain Suph; or, the Jews have been from the beginning no better than the dead‐letter Lingam‐worshippers(1083) of the India of to‐day. We say it was the former; and that, therefore, the secret or esoteric worship of the Jews was the same Pantheism that the Vedântin Philosophers are reproached with to‐day; Jehovah was a substitute for purposes of an exoteric national faith, and had no importance or reality in the eyes of the erudite Priests and Philosophers—the Sadducees, the most refined and the most learned of all the Israelite sects, who stand as a living proof of it, with their contemptuous rejection of every belief, save the Law. For how could those who invented the stupendous scheme now known as the Bible, or their successors who knew, as all Kabalists do, that it was so invented for a popular “blind”—how could they, we ask, feel reverence for such a phallic symbol and a number, as Jehovah is shown most undeniably to be in the kabalistic works? How could anyone worthy of the name of a Philosopher, and knowing the real secret meaning of their “Pillar of Jacob,” their Bethels, oil‐anointed Phalli, and their “Brazen Serpent,” worship such a gross symbol, and minister unto it, seeing in it their “Covenant”—the Lord Himself! Let the reader turn to Gemara Sanhedrim and judge. As various writers have shown, and as brutally stated in Hargrave Jennings’ Phallicism:

We know from the Jewish records that the Ark contained a table of stone; and if it can be demonstrated that that stone was phallic, and yet identical with the sacred name Jehovah or Yehovah, which, written in unpointed Hebrew with four letters, is J‐E‐V‐E or J‐H‐V‐H (the H being merely an aspirate and the same as E). This process leaves us the two letters I and V (or in another of its forms U); then if we place the I in the U we have the “Holy of Holies”; we also have the Linga and Yoni and Argha of the Hindûs, the Iswarra [Îshvara] or “supreme Lord”; and here we have the whole secret of its mystic and arc‐celestial import, confirmed in itself by being identical with the Linyoni [?] of the Ark of the Covenant.(1084)

The biblical Jews of to‐day do not date from Moses but from David—even admitting the identity of the old and genuine with the later and remodelled Mosaic scrolls. Before that time their nationality is lost in the mists of pre‐historic darkness, the veil from which is now withdrawn as much as we have space to do. It is only to the days of the Babylonian captivity that the Old Testament may be referred by the most lenient criticism as the approximately correct views that were current about the days of Moses. Even such fanatical Christians and worshippers of Jehovah as the Rev. Mr. Horne, have to admit the numerous changes and alterations made by the later compilers of the “Book of God,” since it was found by Hilkiah,(1085) and since

The Pentateuch arose out of the primitive or older documents, by means of a supplementary one.

The Elohistic texts were re‐written 500 years after the date of Moses; the Jehovistic 800, on the authority of the biblical chronology itself. Hence, it is maintained that the deity, represented as the organ of generation in his pillar‐form, and as a symbol of the double‐sexed organ in the numeral value of the letters of his name—the Yod, י or “phallus,” and Hé, ה, the “opening,” or the “womb,” according to kabalistic authority—is of a far later date than the Elohim‐symbols and is borrowed from the Pagan exoteric rites; and Jehovah is thus on a par with the Lingam and Yoni found on every roadside in India.

Just as the Iao of the Mysteries was distinct from Jehovah, so was the later Iao and Abraxas, or Abrasax, of some Gnostic sects identical with the God of the Hebrews, who was the same as the Egyptian Horus. This is undeniably proven on “Heathen” as on the Gnostic “Christian” gems. In Matter’s collection of such gems there is a “Horus”—

Seated on the lotus, inscribed ΑΒΡΑΣΑΞ ΙΑΩ (Abrasax Iao)—an address exactly parallel to the so frequent ΕΙΣ ΖΕΥΣ ΣΑΡΑΠΙ (Eis Zeus Sarapi) on the contemporary Heathen gems, and therefore only to be translated by “Abraxas is the One Jehovah.”(1086)

But who was Abraxas? As the same author shows:

The numerical or Kabbalistic value of the name Abraxas directly refers to the Persian title of the god “Mithras,” Ruler of the year, worshipped from the earliest times under the appellation of Iao.(1087)

Thus, he was the Sun, in one aspect, the Moon or the Lunar Genius, in another, that Generative Deity whom the Gnostics saluted as “Thou that presidest over the Mysteries of the Father and the Son, who shinest in the night‐time, holding the second rank, the first Lord of Death.”

It is only in his capacity of the Genius of the Moon—the latter being credited in the old cosmogony with being the parent of our Earth—that Jehovah could ever be regarded as the Creator of our Globe and its Heaven, namely, the Firmament.

The knowledge of all this will be no proof, however, to the average bigot. Missionaries will go on with the most virulent attacks on the religions of India, and Christians read with the same benighted smile of satisfaction as ever these preposterously unjust words of Coleridge:

It is highly worthy of observation that the inspired writings received by Christians are distinguishable from all other books pretending to inspiration, from the Scriptures of the Brahmins, and even from the Koran, in their strong and frequent recommendation of truth [!!].

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Section IV. On the Myth of the “Fallen Angels” in its Various Aspects

A. The Evil Spirit: Who, And What?

Our present quarrel is exclusively with Theology. The Church enforces belief in a Personal God and a Personal Devil, while Occultism shows the fallacy of such a belief. For the Pantheists and Occultists, as much as for the Pessimists, “Nature” is no better than “a comely mother, but stone cold”; but this is true only so far as regards external Physical Nature. They both agree that, to the superficial observer, she is no better than an immense slaughter‐house wherein butchers become victims, and victims executioners in their turn. It is quite natural that the pessimistically inclined profane, once convinced of Nature’s numerous shortcomings and failures, and especially of her autophagous propensities, should imagine this to be the best evidence that there is no Deity in abscondito within Nature, nor anything divine in her. Nor is it less natural that the Materialist and the Physicist should imagine that everything is due to blind force and chance, and to the survival of the strongest, even more often than of the fittest. But the Occultists, who regard Physical Nature as a bundle of most varied illusions on the plane of deceptive perceptions; who recognize in every pain and suffering but the necessary pangs of incessant procreation; a series of stages toward an ever‐growing perfectibility, which is visible in the silent influence of never‐erring Karma, or Abstract Nature—the Occultists, we say, view the Great Mother otherwise. Woe to those who live without suffering. Stagnation and death is the future of all that vegetates without change. And how can there be any change for the better without proportionate suffering during the preceding stage? Is it not those only who have learnt the deceptive value of earthly hopes and the illusive allurements of external nature who are destined to solve the great problems of life, pain, and death?

If our modern Philosophers—preceded by the mediæval scholars—have helped themselves to more than one fundamental idea of antiquity, Theologians have built their God and his Archangels, their Satan and his Angels, along with the Logos and his staff, entirely out of the dramatis personæ of the old heathen Pantheons. They would have been welcome to these, had they not cunningly distorted the original characters, perverted the philosophical meaning, and, taking advantage of the ignorance of Christendom—the result of long ages of mental sleep, during which humanity was permitted to think only by proxy—tossed every symbol into the most inextricable confusion. One of their most sinful achievements in this direction, was the transformation of the divine Alter Ego into the grotesque Satan of their Theology.

As the whole philosophy of the problem of evil hangs upon the correct comprehension of the constitution of the Inner Being of Nature and Man, of the divine within the animal, and hence also the correctness of the whole system as given in these pages, with regard to the crown piece of evolution—Man—we cannot take sufficient precautions against theological subterfuges. When the good St. Augustine and the fiery Tertullian call the Devil the “monkey of God,” we can attribute it to the ignorance of the age they lived in. It is more difficult to excuse our modern writers on the same ground. The translation of Mazdean literature has afforded Roman Catholic writers the pretext for proving their point in the same direction once more. They have taken advantage of the dual nature of Ahura Mazda and of his Amshaspands in the Zend Avesta and the Vendîdâd, to emphasize still further their wild theories. Satan is the plagiarist and the copyist by anticipation of the religion which came ages later. This was one of the master strokes of the Latin Church, its best trump‐card after the appearance of Spiritualism in Europe. Though only a succès d’estime, in general, even among those who are not interested in either Theosophy or Spiritualism, yet the weapon is often used by the Christian (Roman Catholic) Kabalists against the Eastern Occultists.

Now even the Materialists are quite harmless, and may be regarded as the friends of Theosophy, when compared to some fanatical “Christian”—as they call themselves, “Sectarian” as we call them—Kabalists, on the Continent. These read the Zohar, not to find in it ancient Wisdom, but, by mangling the texts and meaning, to discover in its verses Christian dogmas, where none could ever have been meant; and, having fished them out with the collective help of Jesuitical casuistry and learning, the supposed “Kabalists” proceed to write books and to mislead less far‐sighted students of the Kabalah.(1088)

May we not then be permitted to drag the deep rivers of the Past, and thus bring to the surface the root idea that led to the transformation of the Wisdom‐God, who had first been regarded as the Creator of everything that exists, into an Angel of Evil—a ridiculous horned biped, half goat and half monkey, with hoofs and a tail? We need not go out of the way to compare the Pagan Demons of either Egypt, India, or Chaldæa with the Devil of Christianity, for no such comparison is possible. But we may stop to glance at the biography of the Christian Devil, a piratical reprint from the Chaldæo‐Judæan mythology.

The primitive origin of this personification rests upon the Akkadian conception of the Cosmic Powers—the Heavens and the Earth—in eternal feud and struggle with Chaos. Their Silik‐Muludag (? Murudug), “the God amongst all the Gods,” the “merciful guardian of men on Earth,” was the son of Hea (or Ea) the great God of Wisdom, called by the Babylonians Nebo. With both peoples, as also in the case of the Hindû Gods, their deities were both beneficent and maleficent. As evil and punishment are the agents of Karma, in an absolutely just retributive sense, so Evil was the servant of the Good.(1089) The reading of the Chaldæo‐Assyrian tiles has now demonstrated this beyond a shadow of doubt. We find the same idea in the Zohar. Satan was a Son and an Angel of God. With all the Semitic nations, the Spirit of the Earth was as much the Creator in his own realm as the Spirit of the Heavens. They were twin brothers and interchangeable in their functions, when not two in one. Nothing of that which we find in Genesis is absent from the Chaldæo‐Assyrian religious beliefs, even in the little that has hitherto been deciphered. The great “Face of the Deep” of Genesis is traced in the Tohu Bohu (“Deep” or “Primeval Space”), or Chaos, of the Babylonians. Wisdom, the Great Unseen God—called in Genesis the “Spirit of God”—lived, for the older Babylonians as for the Akkadians, in the Sea of Space. Toward the days described by Berosus, this Sea became the Visible Waters on the face of the Earth—the crystalline abode of the Great Mother, the Mother of Ea and all the Gods, which became, still later, the great Dragon Tiamat, the Sea Serpent. Its last stage of development was the great struggle of Bel with the Dragon—the Devil!

Whence the Christian idea that God cursed the Devil? The God of the Jews, whosoever he was, forbids cursing Satan. Philo Judæus and Josephus both state that the Law (the Pentateuch and the Talmud) undeviatingly forbid one to curse the Adversary, and also the Gods of the Gentiles. “Thou shalt not revile the Gods,” quoth the God of Moses,(1090) for it is God who “hath divided [them] unto all nations”;(1091) and those who speak evil of “Dignities” (Gods) are called “filthy dreamers” by Jude.

For even Michael the Archangel ... durst not bring against him [the Devil] a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.(1092)

Finally the same is repeated in the Talmud:(1093)

Satan appeared one day to a man who used to curse him daily, and said to him: “Why dost thou this?” Consider that God himself would not curse me, but merely said: “The Lord rebuke thee, Satan.”(1094)

This piece of Talmudic information shows plainly (a) that St. Michael is called “God” in the Talmud, and somebody else the “Lord,” and (b) that Satan is a God, of whom even the “Lord” is in fear. All we read in the Zohar and other kabalistic works on Satan shows plainly that this “personage” is simply the personification of the abstract Evil, which is the weapon of Karmic Law and Karma. It is our human nature and man himself, as it is said that “Satan is always near and inextricably interwoven with man.” It is only a question of that Power being latent or active in us.

It is a well‐known fact—to learned Symbologists at all events—that in every great religion of antiquity, it is the Logos Demiurge—the Second Logos, or the first emanation from the Mind, Mahat—who is made to strike, so to say, the key‐note of that which may be called the correlation of Individuality and Personality in the subsequent scheme of evolution. It is the Logos who is shown, in the mystic symbolism of Cosmogony, Theogony, and Anthropogony, playing two parts in the drama of Creation and Being—that of the purely human Personality and the divine Impersonality of the so‐called Avatâras, or divine Incarnations, and of the Universal Spirit, called Christos by the Gnostics, and the Fravarshi (or Ferouer) of Ahura Mazda in the Mazdean Philosophy. On the lower rungs of Theogony the Celestial Beings of lower Hierarchies had each a Fravarshi, or a Celestial “Double.” It is the same, only still more mystic, reässertion of the kabalistic axiom, “Deus est Demon inversus”; the word “Demon,” however, as in the case of Socrates, and in the spirit of the meaning given to it by the whole of antiquity, standing for the Guardian Spirit, an “Angel,” not a Devil of Satanic descent as Theology would have it. The Roman Catholic Church shows its usual logic and consistency by accepting St. Michael as the Ferouer of Christ. This Ferouer was his “Angel Guardian,” as proved by St. Thomas,(1095) who, however, calls the prototypes and synonyms of Michael, such as Mercury for example, Devils!

The Church positively accepts the tenet that Christ has his Ferouer as any other God or mortal has. Writes De Mirville:

Here we have the two heroes of the Old Testament, the Verbum [?] (or second Jehovah), and his Face [“Presence,” as the Protestants translate], both making but one, and yet being two, a mystery which seemed to us unsolvable before we had studied the doctrine of the Mazdean Ferouers, and learnt that the Ferouer was the spiritual potency, at once image, face, and guardian of the Soul which finally assimilates the Ferouer.(1096)

This is almost correct.

Among other absurdities, the Kabalists maintain that the word Metatron, being divided into meta‐thronon (μετὰ, θρόνον), means “near the throne.”(1097) It means quite the reverse, as meta means “beyond” and not “near.” This is of great importance in our argument. St. Michael, then, the “quis ut Deus,” is the translator, so to speak, of the invisible world into the visible and the objective.

They maintain, furthermore, along with the Roman Catholic Church, that in the Biblical and Christian Theology there does not exist a “higher celestial personality, after the Trinity, than that of the Archangel, or the Seraphim, Michael.” According to them, the conqueror of the Dragon is the Archisatrap of the Sacred Militia, the Guardian of the Planets, the King of the Stars, the Slayer of Satan and the Powerful Rector. In the mystic Astronomy of these gentlemen, he is the Conqueror of Ahriman, who having upset the Sidereal Throne of the usurper, bathes in his stead in the Solar Fires; and, Defender of the Christ‐Sun, he approaches so near his Master, “that he seems to become one with him.”(1098) Owing to this fusion with the Word (Verbum) the Protestants, and among them Calvin, ended by losing sight entirely of the duality, and saw no Michael “but only his Master,” writes the Abbé Caron. The Roman Catholics, and especially their Kabalists, know better; and it is they who explain to the world this duality, which affords them the means of glorifying the chosen ones of the Church, and of rejecting and anathematizing all those Gods who may be in the way of their dogmas.

Thus the same titles and the same names are given in turn to God and the Archangel. Both are called Metatron, “both have the name of Jehovah applied to them when they speak one in the other” (sic), for, according to the Zohar, the term signifies equally the Master and the Ambassador. Both are the Angel of the Face, because, as we are informed, if on the one hand the “Word” is called “the Face [or the Presence] and the Image of the Substance of God,” on the other, “when speaking of the Saviour to the Israelites, Isaiah [?] tells them” that “the Angel of his Presence saved them in their affliction”—“so he was their Saviour.”(1099) Elsewhere Michael is called very plainly the “Prince of the Faces of the Lord,” the “Glory of the Lord.” Both Jehovah and Michael are the “Guides of Israel(1100) ... Chiefs of the Armies of the Lord, Supreme Judges of the Souls and even Seraphs.”(1101)

The whole of the above is given on the authority of various works by Roman Catholics, and must, therefore, be orthodox. Some expressions are translated to show what subtle Theologians and Casuists mean by the term Ferouer,(1102) a word borrowed by some French writers from the Zend Avesta, as said, and utilized in Roman Catholicism for a purpose Zoroaster was very far from anticipating. In Fargard xix (verse 14), of the Vendîdâd it is said:

Invoke, O Zarathushtra! my Fravarshi, who am Ahura Mazda, the greatest, the best, the fairest of all beings, the most solid, the most intelligent, ... and whose soul is the holy Word (Mâthra Spenta).(1103)

The French Orientalists translate Fravarshi by Ferouer.

Now what is a Ferouer, or Fravarshi? In some Mazdean works it is plainly implied that Fravarshi is the inner, immortal Man, or the Ego which reïncarnates; that it existed before the physical body and survives all such bodies it happens to be clothed in.

Not only man was endowed with a Fravarshi, but gods too, and the sky, fire, waters, and plants.(1104)

This shows as plainly as can be shown that the Ferouer is the “spiritual counterpart” of either God, animal, plant, or even element, i.e., the refined and the purer part of the grosser creation, the soul of the body, whatever the body may happen to be. Therefore does Ahura Mazda recommend Zarathushtra to invoke his Fravarshi and not himself (Ahura Mazda); that is to say, the impersonal and true Essence of Deity, one with Zoroaster’s own Âtmâ (or Christos), not the false and personal appearance. This is quite clear.

Now it is on this divine and ethereal prototype that the Roman Catholics have seized so as to build up the supposed difference between their God and Angels and the Deity and its aspects, or the Gods of the old religions. Thus, while calling Mercury, Venus, Jupiter (whether as Gods or Planets) Devils, they at the same time make of the same Mercury the Ferouer of their Christ. This fact is undeniable. Vossius(1105) proves that Michael is the Mercury of the Pagans, and Maury and other French writers corroborate him, and add that according to great Theologians Mercury and the Sun are one, (?) and no wonder, they think, since Mercury being so near the Wisdom and the Verbum (the Sun), must be absorbed by and confounded with him.(1106)

This “Pagan” view was accepted from the first century of our era, as shown in the original Acts of the Apostles (the English translation being worthless). So much is Michael the Mercury of the Greeks and other nations, that when the inhabitants of Lystra mistook Paul and Barnabas for Mercury and Jupiter, saying, “The Gods have come down to us in the likeness of men”—the text adds: “And they called Barnabas Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the leader of the Word (Logos),” and not “the chief speaker,” as erroneously translated in the Authorized, and repeated even in the Revised, English Bible. Michael is the Angel of the vision in Daniel, the Son of God, “who was like unto a Son of Man.” It is the Hermes‐Christos of the Gnostics, the Anubis‐Syrius of the Egyptians, the Counsellor of Osiris in Amenti, the Leontoid Michael‐Ophiomorphos (ὀφιομόρφος) of the Ophites, who wears on certain Gnostic jewels a lion’s head, like his father Ildabaoth.(1107)

Now to all this the Roman Catholic Church tacitly consents, many of her writers even avowing it publicly. Unable to deny the flagrant “borrowing” of their Church, who “spoiled” her seniors of their symbols, as the Jews had “spoiled” the Egyptians of their jewels of silver and gold, they explain the fact quite coolly and seriously. Thus the writers who have hitherto been timid enough to see, in this repetition by Christian dogmas of old Pagan ideas, “a legendary plagiarism perpetrated by man,” are gravely assured that, far from such a simple solution of the almost perfect resemblance, it has to be attributed to quite another cause—“to a pre‐historical plagiarism, of a superhuman origin.”

If the reader would know how, he must again kindly turn to the same volume of De Mirville’s work.(1108) Please note that this author was the official and recognized defender of the Roman Church, and was helped by the learning of all the Jesuits. There we read:

We have pointed out several demi‐gods, and also “very historical” heroes of the Pagans, who were predestined from the moment of their birth, to ape, while at the same time they dishonoured, the nativity of the hero, who was quite God, before whom the whole earth had to bow; we have traced them being born as he was, from an immaculate mother; we have seen them strangling serpents in their cradles, fighting against demons, performing miracles, dying as martyrs, descending to the nether world and rising again from the dead. And we have bitterly deplored that timid and shy Christians should feel compelled to explain all such identities on the ground of coincidence of myth and symbol. They forget apparently these words of the Saviour, all that came before me are thieves and robbers—a word which explains all without any absurd negation and which I have commented on in these words, “The Evangel is a sublime drama, parodied and played before its appointed time by ruffians.”

The “ruffians” (les drôles), are of course Demons whose manager is Satan. Now this is the easiest and the most sublime and simple way of getting out of the difficulty! The Rev. Dr. Lundy, a Protestant De Mirville, followed the happy suggestion in his Monumental Christianity, and so did Dr. Sepp of Munich in his works written to prove the divinity of Jesus and the Satanic origin of all other Saviours. So much greater the pity that a systematic and collective plagiarism which went on for several centuries on the most gigantic scale, should be explained by another plagiarism, this time in the fourth Gospel. For the sentence quoted from it, “All that ever came before me,” etc., is a verbatim repetition of words written in the Book of Enoch. In the Introduction to Archbishop Laurence’s translation from an Ethiopic MS. in the Bodleian Library, the editor, author of the Evolution of Christianity, remarks:

In revising the proof‐sheets of the Book of Enoch, we have been still further impressed by relationship with New Testament Scripture. Thus, the parable of the sheep, rescued by the good Shepherd from hireling guardians and ferocious wolves, is obviously borrowed by the fourth Evangelist from Enoch lxxxix, in which the author depicts the shepherds as killing and destroying the sheep before the advent of their Lord, and thus discloses the true meaning of that hitherto mysterious passage in the Johannine parable—“All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers”—language in which we now detect an obvious reference to the allegorical shepherds of Enoch.(1109)

It is too late in the day to claim that it is Enoch who borrowed from the New Testament, instead of vice versâ. Jude (14, 15) quotes verbatim from Enoch a long passage about the coming of the Lord with his ten thousand saints, and naming the prophet specifically acknowledges the source.

In ... perfecting the parallelism between prophet and apostle, [we] have placed beyond controversy that, in the eyes of the author of an Epistle accepted as Divine revelation, the Book of Enoch was the inspired production of an antediluvian patriarch....

The cumulative coincidence of language and ideas in Enoch and the authors of New Testament Scripture, ... clearly indicates that the work of the Semitic Milton was the inexhaustible source from which Evangelists and Apostles, or the men who wrote in their names, borrowed their conceptions of the resurrection, judgment, immortality, perdition, and of the universal reign of righteousness under the eternal dominion of the Son of Man. This evangelical plagiarism culminates in the Revelation of John, which adapts the visions of Enoch to Christianity, with modifications in which we miss the sublime simplicity of the great master of apocalyptic prediction, who prophesied in the name of the antediluvian Patriarch.(1110)

“Antediluvian,” truly; but if the phraseology of the text dates hardly a few centuries or even millenniums before the historical era, then it is no longer the original prediction of the events to come, but is, in its turn, a copy of some scripture of a pre‐historic religion.

In the Krita age, Vishnu, in the form of Kapila and other (inspired teachers) ... imparts ... true wisdom [as Enoch did]. In the Tretâ age he restrains the wicked, in the form of a universal monarch [Chakravartin, the “Everlasting King” of Enoch(1111)] and protects the three worlds [or Races]. In the Dvâpara age, in the person of Veda‐vyâsa, he divides the one Veda into four, and distributes it into hundreds (Shata) of branches.(1112)

Truly so; the Veda of the earliest Âryans, before it was written, went forth into every nation of the Atlanto‐Lemurians, and sowed the first seeds of all the now existing old religions. The off‐shoots of the never dying Tree of Wisdom have scattered their dead leaves even on Judæo‐ Christianity. And at the end of the Kali, our present Age, Vishnu, or the “Everlasting King,” will appear as Kalki, and reëstablish righteousness upon earth. The minds of those who live at that time shall be awakened, and become as pellucid as crystal.

The men who are thus changed by virtue of that peculiar time [the Sixth Race] shall be as the seeds of other human beings, and shall give birth to a race who shall follow the laws of the Krita age of purity;

i.e., it shall be the Seventh Race, the Race of “Buddhas,” the “Sons of God,” born of immaculate parents.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

B. The Gods Of Light Proceed From The Gods Of Darkness

Thus it is pretty well established that Christ, the Logos, or the God in Space and the Saviour on Earth, is but one of the echoes of this same antediluvian and sorely misunderstood Wisdom. Its history begins by the descent on Earth of the “Gods” who incarnate in mankind, and this is the “Fall.” Whether Brahmâ hurled down on Earth by Bhagavân in the allegory, or Jupiter by Cronus, all are the symbols of the human races. Once having touched this Planet of dense Matter, the snow‐white wings of even the highest Angel can no longer remain immaculate, or the Avatâra (or incarnation) be perfect, as every such Avatâra is the fall of a God into generation. Nowhere is the metaphysical truth more clear, when explained Esoterically, or more hidden from the average comprehension of those who instead of appreciating the sublimity of the idea can only degrade it—than in the Upanishads, the Esoteric glossaries of the Vedas. The Rig Veda, as Guignault characterized it, “is the most sublime conception of the great highways of humanity.” The Vedas are, and will remain for ever, in the Esotericism of the Vedânta and the Upanishads, “the mirror of the Eternal Wisdom.”

For upwards of sixteen centuries the new masks, forced over the faces of the old Gods, have screened them from public curiosity, but they have finally proved a misfit. Yet the metaphorical Fall, and the as metaphorical Atonement and Crucifixion, have led Western Humanity through roads knee‐deep in blood. Worse than all, they have led it to believe in the dogma of the Evil Spirit distinct from the Spirit of all Good, whereas the former lives in all Matter and preëminently in man. Finally it has created the God‐slandering dogma of Hell and eternal perdition; it has spread a thick film between the higher intuitions of man and divine verities; and, most pernicious result of all, it has made people remain ignorant of the fact that there were no fiends, no dark demons in the Universe before man’s own appearance on this, and probably on other Earths. Hence the people have been led to accept, as the problematical consolation for this world’s sorrows, the thought of original sin.

The philosophy of that Law in Nature, which implants in man as well as in every beast a passionate, inherent, and instinctive desire for freedom and self‐guidance, pertains to Psychology and cannot be touched on now, for to demonstrate this feeling in higher Intelligences, to analyze and give a natural reason for it, would necessitate an endless philosophical explanation for which there here is no room. Perhaps the best synthesis of this feeling is found in three lines of Milton’s Paradise Lost. Says the “Fallen One”:

Here we may reign secure; and in my choice, To reign is worth ambition, though in hell! Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven!

Better be man, the crown of terrestrial production and king over its opus operatum, than be lost among the will‐less Spiritual Hosts in Heaven.

We have said elsewhere that the dogma of the first Fall rested on a few verses in Revelation, which are now shown to be a plagiarism from Enoch by some scholars. These have given rise to endless theories and speculations, which have gradually acquired the importance of dogma and inspired tradition. Every one sought to explain the verse about the seven‐ headed dragon with his ten horns and seven crowns, whose tail “drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth,” and whose place, with that of his Angels, “was found no more in heaven.” What the seven heads of the Dragon (or Cycle) mean, and its five wicked kings also, may be learned in the Addenda which close Part III of this Volume.

From Newton to Bossuet speculations were incessantly evolved in Christian brains with regard to these obscure verses. Says Bossuet:

The star that falls is the heresiarch Theodosius.... The clouds of smoke are the heresies of the Montanists.... The third part of the stars are the martyrs, and especially the doctors of divinity.

Bossuet ought to have known, however, that the events described in Revelation were not original, and may, as shown, be found in other and Pagan traditions. There were no scholastics nor Montanists during Vedic times, nor yet far earlier in China. But Christian Theology had to be protected and saved.

This is only natural. But why should truth be sacrificed in order to protect from destruction the lucubrations of Christian Theologians?

The “princeps aeris hujus,” the “Prince of the Air,” of St. Paul, is not the Devil, but the effects of the Astral Light, as Éliphas Lévi correctly explains. The Devil is not the “God of this period,” as he says, for it is the Deity of every age and period since Man appeared on Earth, and Matter in its countless forms and states had to fight for its evanescent existence against other disintegrating Forces.

The “Dragon” is simply the symbol of the Cycle and of the “Sons of Manvantaric Eternity,” who had descended on Earth during a certain epoch of its formative period. The “clouds of smoke” are geological phenomena. The “third part of the stars of heaven,” cast down to the Earth, refers to the Divine Monads—the Spirits of the Stars in Astrology—that circumambulate our Globe; i.e., the human Egos destined to perform the whole Cycle of Incarnations. The sentence, “qui circumambulat terram,” however, is again referred to the Devil in Theology, the mythical Father of Evil being said to “fall like lightning.” Unfortunately for this interpretation, the “Son of Man,” or Christ, is expected, on the personal testimony of Jesus, to descend on Earth likewise, “as the lightning cometh out of the East,”(1113) just in the same shape and under the same symbol as Satan, who is seen to fall “as lightning ... from heaven.”(1114) All these metaphors and figures of speech, preëminently Oriental in their character, must have their origin searched for in the East. In all the ancient Cosmogonies Light comes from Darkness. In Egypt, as elsewhere, Darkness was “the principle of all things.” Hence Pymander, the “Thought Divine,” issues as Light from Darkness. Behemoth(1115) is the principle of Darkness, or Satan, in Roman Catholic Theology, and yet Job says of him that Behemoth is “the chief [principle] of the ways of God”—“Principium viarum Domini Behemoth!”(1116)

Consistency does not seem to be a favourite virtue in any portion of Divine Revelation, so‐called—not as interpreted by Theologians, at any rate.

The Egyptians and the Chaldæans referred the birth of their Divine Dynasties to that period when creative Earth was in her last final throes in giving birth to her pre‐historic mountain ranges, which have since disappeared, her seas and her continents. Her face was covered with “deep Darkness and in that [Secondary] Chaos was the principle of all things” that developed on the Globe later on. Our Geologists have now ascertained that there was such a terrestrial conflagration in the early geological periods, several hundred millions of years ago.(1117) As to the tradition itself, every country and nation had it, each under its respective national form.

It is not alone Egypt, Greece, Scandinavia or Mexico, that had its Typhon, Python, Loki, and its “falling” Demon, but China also. The Celestials have a whole literature upon the subject. It is said that in consequence of the rebellion against Ti of a proud Spirit, who said he was Ti himself, seven Choirs of Celestial Spirits were exiled upon Earth, which “brought a change in all Nature, Heaven itself bending down and uniting with Earth.”

In the Y‐King, one reads:

The flying Dragon, superb and rebellious, suffers now, and his pride is punished; he thought he would reign in Heaven, he reigns only on the Earth.

Again, the Tchoon‐Tsieoo says allegorically:

One night the stars ceased shining in darkness, and deserted it, falling down like rain upon the Earth, where they are now hidden.

These stars are the Monads.

Chinese Cosmogonies have their “Lord of the Flame” and their “Celestial Virgin,” with little “Spirits to help and minister to her; and big Spirits to fight those who are the enemies of other Gods.” But all this does not prove that the said allegories are presentments or prophetic writings which all refer to Christian Theology.

The best proof one can offer to Christian Theologians that the Esoteric statements in the Bible—in both Testaments—are the assertion of the same idea as in our Archaic Teachings, to wit, that the “Fall of the Angels” referred simply to the Incarnation of Angels “who had broken through the Seven Circles”—is found in the Zohar. Now the Kabalah of Simeon Ben Iochaï is the soul and essence of the allegorical narrative, as the later Christian Kabalah is the “dark cloaked” Mosaic Pentateuch. And it says (in the Agrippa MSS.):

The Wisdom of the Kabalah rests in the Science of the Equilibrium and Harmony.

Forces that manifest without having been first equilibrized perish in Space [“equilibrized” meaning differentiated].

Thus perished the first Kings [the Divine Dynasties] of the Ancient World, the self‐produced Princes of Giants. They fell like rootless trees, and were seen no more; for _they were the Shadow of the Shadow_ [to wit, the Chhâyâ of the Shadowy Pitris].(1118)

But those that came after them, who shooting down like falling stars were enshrined in the Shadows—prevailed to this day [Dhyânîs, who by incarnating in those “empty Shadows,” inaugurated the era of mankind].

Every sentence in the ancient Cosmogonies unfolds to him who can read between the lines the identity of the ideas, though under different garbs.

The first lesson taught in Esoteric Philosophy is, that the Incognizable Cause does not put forth evolution, whether consciously or unconsciously, but only exhibits periodically different aspects of Itself to the perception of finite minds. Now the Collective Mind—the Universal—composed of various and numberless Hosts of Creative Powers, however infinite in Manifested Time, is still finite when contrasted with the Unborn and Undecaying Space in its supreme essential aspect. That which is finite cannot be perfect. Therefore there are inferior Beings among those Hosts, but there never have been any Devils or “disobedient Angels,” for the simple reason that they are all governed by Law. The Asuras (call them by any other name you will) who incarnated, followed in this a law as implacable as any other. They had manifested prior to the Pitris, and as Time (in Space) proceeds in Cycles, their turn had come—hence the numerous allegories. The name “Asura” was first given by the Brâhmans indiscriminately to those who opposed their mummeries and sacrifices, as did the great Asura called Asurendra. It is to those ages, probably, that the origin of the idea of the Demon, as opposer and adversary, has to be traced.

The Hebrew Elohim, called “God” in the translations, who create “Light,” are identical with the Âryan Asuras. They are also referred to as the “Sons of Darkness,” as a philosophical and logical contrast to Light Immutable and Eternal. The earliest Zoroastrians did not believe in Evil or Darkness being coëternal with Good or Light, and they give the same interpretation. Ahriman is the manifested Shadow of Ahura Mazda (Asura Mazda), himself issued from Zeruâna Âkerne, the “Boundless [Circle of] Time,” or the Unknown Cause. They say of the latter:

Its glory is too exalted, its light too resplendent for either human intellect or mortal eye to grasp and see.

Its primal emanation _is Eternal Light, which, from having been previously concealed in Darkness, was called to manifest itself and thus was formed Ormazd, the __“__King of Life.__”_ He is the “First‐born” in Boundless Time, but, like his own antetype (preëxisting spiritual idea), has lived within Darkness from all Eternity. The six Amshaspands—seven with himself, the Chief of all—the primitive Spiritual Angels and Men, are collectively his Logos. The Zoroastrian Amshaspands create the World in six Days or periods also, and rest on the seventh; but in the Esoteric Philosophy, that seventh is the first period or “Day,” the so‐called Primary Creation in Âryan Cosmogony. It is that intermediate Æon which is the Prologue to Creation, and which stands on the borderland between the Uncreated Eternal Causation and the produced finite effects; a state of nascent activity and energy as the first aspect of the Eternal Immutable Quiescence. In Genesis, on which no metaphysical energy has been spent, but only an extraordinary acuteness and ingenuity to veil the Esoteric Truth, Creation begins at the third stage of manifestation. “God” or the Elohim are the “Seven Regents” of Pymander. They are identical with all the other Creators. But even in Genesis that period is hinted at by the abruptness of the picture, and the “Darkness” that was on the face of the Deep. The Elohim are shown to “create”—that is to say, to build or to produce the two Heavens or “double” Heaven (not Heaven and Earth); which means, in so many words, that they separated the upper manifested (Angelic) Heaven, or plane of consciousness, from the lower or terrestrial plane; the (to us) Eternal and Immutable Æons from those Periods that are in space, time and duration; Heaven from Earth, the Unknown from the Known—to the profane. Such is the meaning of the sentence in Pymander, which says that:

Thought, the divine, which is Light and Life [Zeruâna Âkerne] produced through its Word, or first aspect, the other, operating Thought, which being the God of Spirit and Fire, constructed Seven Regents enclosing within their Circle the World of Senses named “Fatal Destiny.”

The latter refers to Karma; the “Seven Circles” are the seven planets and planes, as also the seven Invisible Spirits, in the Angelic Spheres, whose visible symbols are the seven planets,(1119) the seven Rishis of the Great Bear and other glyphs. As said of the Âdityas by Roth:

They are neither sun, nor moon, nor stars, nor dawn, but the eternal sustainers of this luminous life which exists as it were behind all these phenomena.

It is they—the “Seven Hosts”—who, having “considered in their Father [Divine Thought] the plan of the operator,” as says Pymander, desired to operate (or build the world with its creatures) likewise; for, having been born “within the Sphere of Operation”—the manifesting Universe—such is the Manvantaric Law. And now comes the second portion of the passage, or rather of two passages merged into one to conceal the full meaning. Those who were born within the Sphere of Operation were “the brothers who loved him well.” The latter—the “him”—were the Primordial Angels; the Asuras, the Ahriman, the Elohim, or “Sons of God,” of whom Satan was one—all those Spiritual Beings who were called the “Angels of Darkness,” because that Darkness is absolute Light, a fact now neglected if not entirely forgotten in Theology. Nevertheless, the spirituality of those much abused “Sons of Light” which is Darkness, must be evidently as great, in comparison with that of the Angels next in order, as the ethereality of the latter would be when contrasted with the density of the human body. The former are the “First‐born,” and therefore so near to the confines of Pure Quiescent Spirit as to be merely the “privations”—in the Aristotelian sense—the Ferouers or the ideal types of those who followed. They could not create material, corporeal things; and, therefore, were said in process of time to have “refused” to create, as “commanded” by “God”—otherwise, to have “rebelled.”

Perchance, this is justified on the principle of the scientific theory which teaches us as to the effect of two sound waves of equal length meeting:

If the two sounds be of the same intensity, their coincidence produces a sound four times the intensity of either, while their interference produces absolute silence.

While explaining some of the “heresies” of his day, Justin Martyr shows the identity of all the world religions at their starting points. The first Beginning opens invariably with the Unknown and Passive Deity, from which emanates a certain Active Power or Virtue, the Mystery that is sometimes called Wisdom, sometimes the Son, very often God, Angel, Lord, and Logos.(1120) The latter is sometimes applied to the very first Emanation, but in several systems it proceeds from the first Androgyne or Double Ray produced at the beginning by the Unseen. Philo depicts this Wisdom as male and female. But though its first manifestation had a beginning—for it proceeded from Oulom(1121) (Aiôn, Time), the highest of the Æons when emitted from the Father—it had remained with the Father before all creations, for it is part of him.(1122) Therefore Philo Judæus calls Adam Kadmon by the name “Mind”—the Ennoia of Bythos in the Gnostic System. “The Mind, let it be named Adam.”(1123)

As the old Magian books explain it, the whole event becomes clear. A thing can only exist through its opposite—Hegel teaches us; and only a little philosophy and spirituality are needed to comprehend the origin of the later dogma, which is so truly satanic and infernal in its cold and cruel wickedness. The Magians accounted for the Origin of Evil in their exoteric teachings in this way. “Light can produce nothing but Light, and can never be the origin of Evil”; how then was Evil produced, since there was nothing coëqual or like the Light in its production? Light, say they, produced several Beings, all of them spiritual, luminous, and powerful. But a Great One (the “Great Asura,” Ahriman, Lucifer, etc.) had an evil thought, contrary to the Light. He doubted, and by that doubt he became dark.

This is a little nearer to the truth, but still wide of the mark. There was no “evil thought” that originated the opposing Power, but simply Thought per se; something which, being cogitative, and containing design and purpose, is therefore finite, and must thus find itself naturally in opposition to pure Quiescence, the as natural state of absolute Spirituality and Perfection. It was simply the Law of Evolution that asserted itself; the progress of Mental Unfolding, differentiated from Spirit, involved and entangled already with Matter, into which it is irresistibly drawn. Ideas, in their very nature and essence, as conceptions bearing relation to objects, whether true or imaginary, are opposed to Absolute Thought, that Unknowable All of whose mysterious operations Mr. Spencer predicates that nothing can be said, but that “it has no kinship of nature with Evolution”(1124)—which it certainly has not.(1125)

The Zohar gives it very suggestively. When the “Holy One” (the Logos) desired to create man, he called the highest Host of Angels and spake unto them what he wanted, but they doubted the wisdom of this desire and answered: “Man will not continue one night in his glory”—for which they were burnt (annihilated?), by the “Holy” Lord. Then he called another, lower Host, and said the same. And they contradicted the “Holy One”: “What is the good of Man?”—they argued. Still Elohim created Man, and when Man sinned there came the Hosts of Uzza and Azael, and twitted God: “Here is the Son of Man that thou hast made”—they said. “Behold, he sinned!” Then the Holy One replied: “If you had been among them [Men] you would have been worse than they.” And he threw them from their exalted position in Heaven even down on to the Earth; and “they were changed [into Men] and sinned after the women of the earth.”(1126) This is quite plain. No mention is made in Genesis (vi) of these “Sons of God” receiving punishment. The only reference to it in the Bible is in Jude:

And the angels which kept not their first estate but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.(1127)

And this means simply that the “Angels,” doomed to incarnation, are in the chains of flesh and matter, under the darkness of ignorance, till the “Great Day,” which will come as always after the Seventh Round, after the expiration of the “Week,” on the Seventh Sabbath, or in the Post‐ Manvantaric Nirvâna.

How truly Esoteric and consonant with the Secret Doctrine is Pymander, the Thought Divine, of Hermes, may be inferred from its original and primitive translations in Latin and Greek only. On the other hand how disfigured it has been later on by Christians in Europe, is seen from the remarks and unconscious confessions made by De St. Marc, in his Preface and Letter to the Bishop of Ayre, in 1578. Therein, the whole cycle of transformations from a Pantheistic and Egyptian into a Mystic Roman Catholic treatise is given, and we see how Pymander has become what it is now. Still, even in St. Marc’s translation, traces are found of the real Pymander—the “Universal Thought” or “Mind.” This is the translation from the old French translation, the original being given in the foot‐ note(1128) in its quaint old French:

Seven men [principles] were generated in Man.... The nature of the harmony of the Seven of the Father and of the Spirit. Nature ... produced seven men in accordance with the natures of the Seven Spirits ... having in them, potentially, the two sexes.

Metaphysically, the Father and the Son are the “Universal Mind” and the “Periodical Universe”; the “Angel” and the “Man.” It is the Son and the Father at one and the same time; in Pymander, the active Idea and the passive Thought that generates it; the radical keynote in Nature which gives birth to the seven notes—the septenary scale of the Creative Forces, and to the seven prismatic aspects of colour, all born from the one White Ray, or Light—itself generated in Darkness.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

C. The Many Meanings Of The “War In Heaven.”

The Secret Doctrine points out, as a self‐evident fact, that Mankind, collectively and individually, is with all manifested Nature the vehicle (a) of the Breath of One Universal Principle, in its primal differentiation; and (b) of the countless “breaths” proceeding from that One Breath in its secondary and further differentiations, as Nature with its many “mankinds” proceeds downwards toward the planes that are ever increasing in materiality. The Primary Breath informs the higher Hierarchies; the secondary—the lower, on the constantly descending planes.

Now there are many passages in the Bible which prove on their face, exoterically, that this belief was at one time universal; and the two most convincing are Ezekiel, xxviii and Isaiah, xiv. Christian Theologians are welcome to interpret both as referring to the great War before Creation, the Epos of Satan’s Rebellion, etc., if they so choose, but the absurdity of the idea is too apparent. Ezekiel addresses his lamentations and reproofs to the King of Tyre; Isaiah—to King Ahaz, who indulged in the worship of idols, as did the rest of the nation with the exception of a few Initiates (the Prophets, so‐called), who tried to arrest it on its way to exotericism—or idolatry, which is the same thing. Let the student judge.

In Ezekiel, it is said:

Son of Man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord God [as we understand it, the “God” Karma]; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said I am a God, ... yet thou art a man.... Behold, therefore, I will bring strangers upon thee: ... and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, ... and they shall bring thee down to the pit [or Earth‐ life].(1129)

The origin of the “prince of Tyrus” is to be traced to the “Divine Dynasties” of the iniquitous Atlanteans, the Great Sorcerers. There is no metaphor in the words of Ezekiel, but actual history this time. For the voice in the prophet, the voice of the “Lord,” his own Spirit, which spake unto him, says:

Because ... thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God(s) [Divine Dynasties], in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man.... Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee: with thy wisdom ... thou hast increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches. Behold, therefore ... strangers ... shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom ... They shall bring thee down ... and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.(1130)

All such imprecations are not prophecy, but simply reminders of the fate of the Atlanteans, the “Giants on Earth.”

What can be the meaning of this last sentence if it is not a narrative of the fate of the Atlanteans? Again, “Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty,”(1131) may refer to the “Heavenly Man” in Pymander, or to the Fallen Angels, who are accused of having fallen through pride on account of the great beauty and wisdom which became their lot. There is no metaphor here, except in the preconceived ideas of our Theologians, perhaps. These verses relate to the Past and belong more to the Knowledge acquired at the Mysteries of Initiation than to retrospective clairvoyance! Says the voice, again:

Thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God [in the Satya Yuga]; every precious stone was thy covering: ... the workmanship of thy tabrets and thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day thou wast created. Thou art the anointed cherub; ... thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.... Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. Therefore I will cast thee ... out of the mountain of God, and ... destroy thee.(1132)

The “Mountain of God” means the “Mountain of the Gods” or Meru, whose representative in the Fourth Race was Mount Atlas, the last form of one of the divine Titans, so high in those days that the ancients believed that the Heavens rested on its top. Did not Atlas assist the Giants in their War against the Gods (Hyginus)? Another version shows the fable as arising from the fondness of Atlas, son of Iapetus and Clymene, for Astronomy, and from his dwelling for that reason on the highest mountain peaks. The truth is that Atlas, the “Mountain of the Gods,” and also the hero of that name, are the Esoteric symbols of the Fourth Race, and his seven daughters, the Atlantides, are the symbols of its seven sub‐races. Mount Atlas, according to all the legends, was three times as high as it is now; for it has sunk at two different times. It is of a volcanic origin, and therefore the voice within Ezekiel says:

Therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee.(1133)

Surely it does not mean, as seems to be the case from the translated texts, that this fire was to be brought from the midst of the Prince of Tyrus, or his people, but from Mount Atlas, symbolizing the proud Race, learned in Magic and high in arts and civilization, whose last remnant was destroyed almost at the foot of the range of those once gigantic mountains.

Truly, “thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more”;(1134) as the very name of the Race and its fate is now annihilated from man’s memory. Bear in mind that almost every ancient king and priest was an Initiate; that from toward the close of the Fourth Race there had been a feud between the Initiates of the Right and those of the Left Path; finally, that the Garden of Eden is referred to by other personages than the Jews of the Adamic Race, since even Pharaoh is compared to the fairest tree of Eden by this same Ezekiel, who shows:

All the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, ... comforted in the nether parts of the earth. [For] they also went down into hell with him [Pharaoh](1135)

—unto the nether parts, which are in fact the bottom of the ocean, whose floor gaped wide to devour the lands of the Atlanteans and themselves. If one bears all this in mind and compares the various accounts, then one will find out that chapters xxviii and xxxi of Ezekiel do not relate to Babylon, Assyria, nor yet to Egypt, since none of these have been so destroyed, having simply fallen into ruins on the surface, not beneath the earth—but indeed to Atlantis and most of its nations. And he will see that the “Garden of Eden” of the Initiates was no myth, but a locality now submerged. Light will dawn upon him, and he will appreciate such sentences as these at their true Esoteric value: “Thou hast been in Eden; ... thou wast upon the holy mountain of God”(1136)—for every nation had and many still have holy mountains; some Himâlayan Peaks, others Parnassus and Sinai. They were all places of Initiation and the abodes of the Chiefs of the communities of ancient and even modern Adepts. And again:

Behold, the Assyrian [why not Atlantean, Initiate?] was a cedar in Lebanon; ... his height was exalted above all the trees.... The cedars in the garden of God could not hide him: ... so that all the trees of Eden ... envied him.(1137)

Throughout all Asia Minor, the Initiates were called the “Trees of Righteousness,” and the Cedars of Lebanon, as also were some kings of Israel. So were the great Adepts in India, but only the Adepts of the Left Hand. When Vishnu Purâna narrates that “the world was over‐run with trees,” while the Prachetasas, who “passed 10,000 years of austerity in the vast ocean,” were absorbed in their devotions, the allegory relates to the Atlanteans and the Adepts of the early Fifth Race—the Âryans. Other “trees [Adept Sorcerers] spread, and over‐shadowed the unprotected earth; and the people perished ... unable to labour for ten thousand years.” Then the Sages, the Rishis of the Âryan Race, called Prachetasas, are shown “coming forth from the deep,”(1138) and destroying by the wind and flame issuing from their mouths the iniquitous “Trees” and the whole vegetable kingdom; until Soma (the Moon), the sovereign of the vegetable world, pacifies them by making alliance with the Adepts of the Right Path, to whom he offers as bride Mârishâ, the “offspring of the trees.”(1139) This hints at the great struggle between the “Sons of God” and the Sons of the Dark Wisdom—our forefathers; or the Atlantean and the Âryan Adepts.

The whole history of that period is allegorized in the Râmâyana, which is the mystic narrative in epic form of the struggle between Râma—the first king of the Divine Dynasty of the early Âryans—and Râvana, the symbolical personation of the Atlantean (Lankâ) Race. The former were the incarnations of the Solar Gods; the latter, of the Lunar Devas. This was the great battle between Good and Evil, between White and Black Magic, for the supremacy of the divine forces over the lower terrestrial, or cosmic powers.

If the student would understand better the last statement, let him turn to the Anugîtâ episode of the Mahâbhârata, where the Brâhmana tells his wife:

I have perceived by means of the Self the seat abiding in the Self—(the seat) where dwells the Brahman free from the pairs of opposites, and the moon, together with the fire [or the sun], upholding (all) beings (as) the mover of the intellectual principle.(1140)

The Moon is the deity of the mind (Manas) but only on the lower plane. Says a Commentary:

Manas is dual—Lunar in the lower, Solar in its upper portion.

That is to say, it is attracted in its higher aspect towards Buddhi, and in its lower descends into, and listens to the voice of, its animal Soul full of selfish and sensual desires; and herein is contained the mystery of an Adept’s and of a profane man’s life, as also that of the post mortem separation of the divine from the animal Man. The Mahâbhârata—every line of which has to be read Esoterically—discloses in magnificent symbolism and allegory the tribulations of both Man and Soul. Says the Brâhmana in the Anugîtâ:

In the interior (within the body), in the midst of all these (life‐winds) [? principles], which move about in the body and swallow up one another,(1141) blazes the Vaishvânara fire(1142) sevenfold.(1143)

But the chief “Soul” is Manas or mind; hence, Soma, the Moon, is shown as making an alliance with the solar portion in it, personified as the Prachetasas. But of the seven keys that open the seven aspects of the Râmâyana, as of every other Scripture, this is only one—the metaphysical.

The symbol of the “Tree” standing for various Initiates was almost universal. Jesus is called the “Tree of Life,” as are also all the Adepts of the Good Law, while those of the Left Path are referred to as the “withering trees.” John the Baptist speaks of the “axe” which “is laid to the root of the trees”;(1144) and the king of Assyria’s armies are called “trees.”(1145)

The true meaning of the Garden of Eden has been sufficiently given in Isis Unveiled. Now the writer has more than once heard surprise expressed that Isis Unveiled should contain so few of the doctrines now taught. This is quite erroneous. For the allusions to such teachings are plentiful, even if the teachings themselves were withheld. The time had not arrived then, as the hour has not struck even now, to say all. “No Atlanteans, or the Fourth Race which preceded our Fifth Race, are mentioned in Isis Unveiled,” wrote a critic on Esoteric Buddhism one day. I, who wrote Isis Unveiled, maintain that the Atlanteans are mentioned as our predecessors. For what can be plainer than the following statement, when speaking of the Book of Job:

In the original text, instead of “dead things,” it is written dead Rephaim (giants, or mighty primitive men), from whom “Evolution” may one day trace our present race.(1146)

It is invited to do so now, now that this hint is explained quite openly; but Evolutionists are as sure to decline nowadays as they did ten years ago. Science and Theology are against us: therefore we question both, and have to do so in self‐defence. On the strength of hazy metaphors scattered throughout the prophets, and in St. John’s Revelation, a grand but reëdited version of the Book of Enoch, on these insecure grounds Christian Theology has built its dogmatic Epos of the War in Heaven. It has done more: it has used the symbolical visions, intelligible only to the Initiates, as pillars upon which to support the whole bulky edifice of its religion; and now the pillars have been found very weak reeds, and the cunning structure is foundering. The entire Christian scheme rests upon this Jakin and Boaz—the two contrary forces of Good and Evil, Christ and Satan, αἱ ἀγαθαὶ καὶ αἱ κακαὶ δυνάμεις. Take away from Christianity its main prop of the Fallen Angels, and the Eden Bower vanishes, with its Adam and Eve, into thin air; and Christ, in the exclusive character of the One God and Saviour, and the Victim of Atonement for the sin of animal‐man, becomes forthwith a useless, meaningless myth.

In an old number of the Revue Archéologique, a French writer, M. Maury, remarks:

This universal strife between good and bad spirits seems to be only the reproduction of another more ancient and more terrible strife, which, according to an ancient myth, took place before the creation of the universe, between the faithful and the rebellious legions.(1147)

Once more, it is a simple question of priority. Had John’s Revelation been written during the Vedic period, and were not one sure now of its being simply another version of the Book of Enoch and the Dragon legends of Pagan antiquity—the grandeur and the beauty of the imagery might have biassed the critics’ opinion in favour of the Christian interpretation of that first War, whose battle‐field was starry Heaven, and the first slaughterers—the Angels. As the matter now stands, however, one has to trace Revelation, event by event, to other and far older visions. For the better comprehension of the apocalyptic allegories and of the Esoteric epos we ask the reader to turn to Revelation, and to read chapter xii, from verse 1 to verse 7.

This has several meanings, and much has been found out with regard to the astronomical and numerical keys of this universal myth. That which may be now given, is a fragment, a few hints as to its secret meaning, as embodying the record of a real war, the struggle between the Initiates of the two Schools. Many and various are the still existing allegories built on this same foundation stone. The true narrative—that which gives the full Esoteric meaning—is in the Secret Books, but the writer has had no access to these.

In the exoteric works, however, the episode of the Târaka War, and some Esoteric Commentaries, may offer a clue perhaps. In every Purâna the event is described with more or less variations which show its allegorical character.

In the Mythology of the earliest Vaidic Âryans as in the later Paurânic narratives, mention is made of Budha, the “Wise,” one “learned in the Secret Wisdom,” who is the planet Mercury in his euhemerization. The Hindû Classical Dictionary credits Budha with being the author of a hymn in the Rig Veda. Therefore, he can by no means be “a later fiction of the Brâhmans,” but is a very old personation indeed.

It is by enquiring into his genealogy, or theogony rather, that the following facts are disclosed. As a myth, he is the son of Târâ, the wife of Brihaspati, the “gold coloured,” and of Soma, the (male) Moon who, Paris‐like, carries this new Helen of the Hindû Sidereal Kingdom away from her husband. This causes a great strife and war in Svarga (Heaven). The episode brings on a battle between the Gods and the Asuras. King Soma finds allies in Ushanas (Venus), the leader of the Dânavas; and the Gods are led by Indra and Rudra, who side with Brihaspati. The latter is helped by Shankara (Shiva), who, having had for his Guru Brihaspati’s father, Angiras, befriends his son. Indra is here the Indian prototype of Michael, the Archistrategus and the slayer of the “Dragon’s” Angels—since one of his names is Jishnu, “leader of the celestial host.” Both fight, as some Titans did against other Titans in defence of revengeful Gods, the one party in defence of Jupiter Tonans (in India, Brihaspati is the planet Jupiter, which is a curious coincidence); the other in support of the ever‐thundering Rudra. During this war, Indra is deserted by his body‐ guard, the Storm‐Gods (Maruts). The story is very suggestive in some of its details.

Let us examine some of them, and seek to discover their meaning.

The presiding Genius, or “Regent” of the planet Jupiter is Brihaspati, the wronged husband. He is the Instructor or Spiritual Guru of the Gods, who are the representatives of the Procreative Powers. In the Rig Veda, he is called Brahmanaspati, the name “of a deity in whom the action of the worshipped upon the gods is personified.” Hence Brahmanaspati represents the materialization of the “Divine Grace,” so to say, by means of ritual and ceremonies, or the exoteric worship.

Târâ,(1148) his wife, is, on the other hand, the personification of the powers of one initiated into Gupta Vidyâ (Secret Knowledge), as will be shown.

Soma is the Moon astronomically; but in mystical phraseology it is also the name of the sacred beverage drunk by the Brâhmans and the Initiates during their mysteries and sacrificial rites. The Soma plant is the asclepias acida, which yields a juice from which that mystic beverage, the Soma drink, is made. Alone the descendants of the Rishis, the Agnihotris, or Fire‐priests, of the great Mysteries knew all its powers. But the real property of the true Soma was (and is) to make a “new man” of the Initiate, after he is “reborn,” namely once that he begins to live in his Astral Body;(1149) for, his spiritual nature overcoming the physical, he would soon snap it off and part even from that etherealized form.(1150)

Soma was never given in days of old to the non‐initiated Brâhman—the simple Grihasta, or priest of the exoteric ritual. Thus Brihaspati, “Guru of the Gods” though he was, still represented the dead‐letter form of worship. It is Târâ, his wife, the symbol of one who, though wedded to dogmatic worship, longs for true Wisdom, who is shown as initiated into his mysteries by King Soma, the giver of that Wisdom. Soma is thus made to carry her away in the allegory. The result of this is the birth of Budha, Esoteric Wisdom—Mercury, or Hermes, in Greece and Egypt. He is represented as “so beautiful,” that even the husband, though well aware that Budha is not the progeny of his dead‐letter worship—claims the “new‐ born” as his Son, the fruit of his ritualistic and meaningless forms.(1151) Such is, in brief, one of the meanings of the allegory.

The War in Heaven refers to several events of this kind on various and different planes of being. The first is a purely astronomical and cosmical fact pertaining to Cosmogony. Mr. John Bentley thought that with the Hindûs the War in Heaven was only a figure referring to their calculations of time periods.(1152)

This served as a prototype, he thinks, for the Western nations to build their War of the Titans upon. The author is not quite wrong, but neither is he quite right. If the sidereal prototype refers indeed to a pre‐ manvantaric period, and rests entirely on the knowledge which the Âryan Initiates claim they have of the whole programme and progress of cosmogony,(1153) the War of the Titans is but a legendary and deified copy of the real war that took place in the Himâlayan Kailâsa (Heaven) instead of in the depths of cosmic interplanetary Space. It is the record of the terrible strife between the “Sons of God” and the “Sons of the Shadow” of the Fourth and the Fifth Races. It is on these two events, blended together by legends borrowed from the exoteric account of the War waged by the Asuras against the Gods, that every subsequent national tradition on the subject has been built.

Esoterically, the Asuras, transformed subsequently into evil Spirits and lower Gods, who are eternally at war with the Great Deities—are the Gods of the Secret Wisdom. In the oldest portions of the Rig Veda, they are the Spiritual and the Divine, the term Asura being used for the Supreme Spirit and being the same as the great Ahura of the Zoroastrians.(1154) There was a time when the Gods Indra, Agni, and Varuna themselves belonged to the Asuras.

In the Taittirîya Brâhmana, the Breath (Asu) of Brahmâ‐Prajâpati became alive, and from that Breath he created the Asuras. Later on, after the War, the Asuras are called the enemies of the Gods, hence—“A‐suras,” the initial a being a negative prefix—or “No‐Gods”; the “Gods” being referred to as Suras. This then connects the Asuras and their “Hosts,” enumerated further on, with the “Fallen Angels” of the Christian Churches, a Hierarchy of Spiritual Beings to be found in every Pantheon of ancient and even modern nations—from the Zoroastrian down to that of the Chinaman. They are the Sons of the primeval Creative Breath at the beginning of every new Mahâ Kalpa, or Manvantara, in the same rank as the Angels who had remained “faithful.” These were the allies of Soma (the parent of the Esoteric Wisdom) as against Brihaspati (representing ritualistic or ceremonial worship). Evidently they have been degraded in Space and Time into opposing Powers or Demons by the ceremonialists, on account of their rebellion against hypocrisy, sham‐worship, and the dead‐letter form.

Now what is the real character of all those who fought along with them? They are:

(1) Ushanas, or the “Host” of the Planet Venus, become now in Roman Catholicism Lucifer, the Genius of the “day star,”(1155) the Tsaba, or Army of “Satan.”

(2) The Daityas and Dânavas are the Titans, the Demons and Giants whom we find in the Bible(1156)—the progeny of the “Sons of God” and the “Daughters of Men.” Their generic name shows their alleged character, and discloses at the same time the secret animus of the Brâhmans; for they are the Kratu‐dvishas—the “enemies of the sacrifices” or exoteric shams. These are the “Hosts” that fought against Brihaspati, the representative of exoteric popular and national religions; and Indra—the God of the visible Heaven, the Firmament, who, in the early Veda, is the highest God of cosmic Heaven, the fit habitation for an extra‐cosmic and personal God, higher than whom no exoteric worship can ever soar.

(3) Then come the Nâgas,(1157) the Sarpas, Serpents or Seraphs. These, again, show their character by the hidden meaning of their glyph. In mythology they are semi‐divine beings with a human face and the tail of a dragon. They are therefore, undeniably, the Jewish Seraphim (compare Serapis, Sarpa, Serpent); the singular being Saraph, “burning, fiery.” Christian and Jewish angelology distinguishes between the Seraphim and the Cherubim or Cherubs, who come second in order: Esoterically, and kabalistically, they are identical; the Cherubim being simply the name for the images or likenesses of any of the divisions of the celestial Hosts. Now, as said before, the Dragons and Nâgas were the names given to the Initiate‐hermits, on account of their great Wisdom and Spirituality and their living in caves. Thus, when Ezekiel(1158) applies the adjective Cherub to the King of Tyre, and tells him that by his wisdom and his understanding there is no secret that can be hidden from him, he shows the Occultist that it is a “Prophet,” perhaps still a follower of exoteric worship, who fulminates against an Initiate of another school and not against an imaginary Lucifer, a fallen Cherub from the stars, and then from the Garden of Eden. Thus the so‐called “War” is, in one of its many meanings, also an allegorical record of the strife between the two classes of Adepts—of the Right and of the Left Path. There were three classes of Rishis in India, who were the earliest Adepts known; the Royal, or Râjarshis, kings and princes, who adopted the ascetic life; the Divine, or Devarshis, or the sons of Dharma or Yoga; and the Brahmarshis, descendants of those Rishis who were the founders of Gotras of Brâhmans, or caste‐races. Now, leaving the mythical and astronomical keys for one moment aside, the secret teachings show many Atlanteans who belonged to these divisions; and there were strifes and wars between them, de facto and de jure. Nârada, one of the greatest Rishis, was a Devarshi; and he is shown in constant and everlasting feud with Brahmâ, Daksha, and other Gods and Sages. Therefore we may safely maintain that whatever the astronomical meaning of this universally accepted legend may be, its human phase is based on real and historical events, disfigured into a theological dogma only to suit ecclesiastical purposes. As above so below. Sidereal phenomena, and the behaviour of the celestial bodies in the Heavens, were taken as a model, and the plan was carried out below, on Earth. Thus, Space, in its abstract sense, was called the “realm of divine knowledge,” and by the Chaldees or Initiates Ab Soo, the habitat (or father, i.e., the source) of knowledge, because it is in Space that dwell the intelligent Powers which invisibly rule the Universe.(1159)

In the same manner, and on the plan of the Zodiac in the upper Ocean or the Heavens, a certain realm on Earth, an inland sea, was consecrated and called the “Abyss of Learning”; twelve centres on it, in the shape of twelve small islands, representing the Zodiacal Signs—two of which remained for ages the “mystery Signs”(1160)—were the abodes of twelve Hierophants and Masters of Wisdom. This “Sea of Knowledge” or learning(1161) remained for ages there, where now stretches the Shamo or Gobi Desert. It existed until the last great glacial period, when a local cataclysm, which swept the waters South and West and so formed the present great desolate desert, left only a certain oasis, with a lake and one island in the midst of it, as a relic of the Zodiacal Ring on Earth. For ages the Watery Abyss—which, with the nations that preceded the later Babylonians, was the abode of the “Great Mother,” the terrestrial post‐ type of the “Great Mother Chaos” in Heaven, the parent of Ea (Wisdom), himself the early prototype of Oannes, the Man‐Fish of the Babylonians—for ages, then, the “Abyss” or Chaos was the abode of Wisdom and not of Evil. The struggle of Bel and then of Merodach, the Sun‐God, with Tiamat, the Sea and its Dragon—a “War” which ended in the defeat of the latter—has a purely cosmic and geological meaning, as well as a historical one. It is a page torn out of the history of the Secret and Sacred Sciences, their evolution, growth and death—for the profane masses. It relates (a) to the systematic and gradual drying up of immense territories by the fierce Sun at a certain pre‐historic period, one of the terrible droughts which ended by a gradual transformation of once fertile lands abundantly watered into the sandy deserts which they are now; and (b) to the as systematic persecution of the Prophets of the Right Path by those of the Left. The latter, having inaugurated the birth and evolution of the sacerdotal castes, have finally led the world into all those exoteric religions, which have been invented to satisfy the depraved taste of the “hoi polloi” and the ignorant for ritualistic pomp and the materialization of the ever‐ immaterial and Unknowable Principle.

This was a certain improvement on the Atlantean sorcery, the memory of which lingers in the remembrance of all the literary and Sanskrit‐reading portion of India, as well as in the popular legends. Still it was a parody on, and the desecration of, the Sacred Mysteries and their Science. The rapid progress of anthropomorphism and idolatry led the early Fifth, as it had already led the Fourth Race, into sorcery once more, though on a smaller scale. Finally, even the four “Adams” (symbolizing, under other names, the four preceding Races) were forgotten, and, passing from one generation into another, each loaded with some additional myths, were at last drowned in that ocean of popular symbolism called the Pantheons. Yet they exist to this day in the oldest Jewish traditions: the first as the Tzelem, the “Shadow‐Adam,” the Chhâyâs of our doctrine; the second, the “Model” Adam, the copy of the first, and the “male and female” of the exoteric Genesis; the third, the “Earthly Adam” before the Fall, an androgyne; and the fourth, the Adam after his “fall,” i.e., separated into sexes, or the pure Atlantean. The Adam of the Garden of Eden, or the forefather of our Race—the fifth—is an ingenious compound of the above four. As stated in the Zohar, Adam, the first Man, is not found now on Earth, he “is not found in all Below.” For where does the lower Earth come from? “From the Chain of the Earth, and from the Heaven Above,” i.e., from the superior Globes, those which precede and are above our Earth.

And there came out from it [the Chain] creatures differing one from the other. Some of them in garments [solid] (skins), some in shells (Q’lippoth), ... some in red shells, some in black, some in white, and some from all the colours.(1162)

As in the Chaldæan Cosmogony of Berosus and the Stanzas just given, some treatises on the Kabalah speak of creatures with two faces, some with four, and some with one face; for “the highest Adam did not come down in all the countries, or produce progeny and have many wives,” but is a mystery.

So is the Dragon a mystery. Truly says Rabbi Simeon Ben Iochaï, that to understand the meaning of the Dragon is not given to the “companions” (students, or Chelâs), but only to the “little ones,” i.e., the perfect Initiates.(1163)

The work of the beginning the companions understand; but it is only the little ones who understand the parable on the work in the Principium by the Mystery of the Serpent of the Great Sea.(1164)

And those Christians, who may happen to read this, will also understand by the light of the above sentence who their “Christ” was. For Jesus states repeatedly that he who “shall not receive the Kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein”; and if some of his sayings have been meant to apply to children without any metaphor, most of the references to the “little ones” in the Gospels, relate to the Initiates, of whom Jesus was one. Paul (Saul) is referred to in the Talmud as the “little one.”

The “Mystery of the Serpent” was this: Our Earth, or rather terrestrial life, is often referred to in the Secret Teachings as the Great Sea, the “Sea of Life” having remained to this day a favourite metaphor. The Siphra Dtzenioutha speaks of Primeval Chaos and the Evolution of the Universe after a Destruction (Pralaya), comparing it to an uncoiling serpent:

Extending hither and thither, its tail in its mouth, the head twisting on its neck, it is enraged and angry.... It watches and conceals itself. Every thousand Days it is manifested.(1165)

A commentary on the Purânas says:

Ananta‐Shesha is a form of Vishnu, the Holy Spirit of Preservation, and a symbol of the Universe, on which it is supposed to sleep during the intervals of the Days of Brahmâ. The seven heads of Shesha support the Universe.

So the Spirit of God “sleeps,” or is “breathing” over the Chaos of Undifferentiated Matter, before each new “Creation,” says the Siphra Dtzenioutha. Now one Day of Brahmâ is composed, as already explained, of one thousand Mahâ Yugas; and as each Night, or period of rest, is equal in duration to this Day, it is easy to see what this sentence in the Siphra Dtzenioutha refers to—viz., that the Serpent manifests “once in a thousand days.” Nor is it more difficult to see whither the initiated writer of the Siphra is leading us, when he says:

Its head is broken in the waters of the Great Sea, as it is written: Thou dividest the sea by thy strength, thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters.(1166)

It refers to the trials of the Initiates in this physical life, the “Sea of Sorrow,” if read with one key; it hints at the successive destruction of the seven Spheres of a Chain of Worlds in the Great Sea of Space, when read with another key; for every sidereal globe or sphere, every world, star, or group of stars, is called in symbolism a “Dragon’s Head.” But however it may read, the Dragon was never regarded as Evil, nor was the Serpent either—in antiquity. In the metaphors, whether astronomical, cosmical, theogonical or simply physiological (or phallic), the Serpent was always regarded as a divine symbol. When mention is made of “the [Cosmic] Serpent which runs with 370 leaps,”(1167) it means the cyclic periods of the great Tropical Year of 25,868 years, divided in the Esoteric calculation into 370 periods or cycles, as one solar year is divided into 365 days. And if Michael was regarded by the Christians as the Conqueror of Satan, the Dragon, it is because in the Talmud this fighting personage is represented as the Prince of Waters, who had seven subordinate Spirits under him—a good reason why the Latin Church made him the patron saint of every promontory in Europe. In the Siphra Dtzenioutha the Creative Force “makes sketches and spiral lines of his creation in the shape of a Serpent.” It “holds its tail in its mouth,” because it is the symbol of endless eternity and of cyclic periods. Its meanings, however, would require a volume, and we must end.

Thus the reader may now see for himself what are the several meanings of the “War in Heaven,” and of the “Great Dragon.” Thus the most solemn and dreaded of Church dogmas, the alpha and omega of the Christian faith, and the pillar of its Fall and Atonement, dwindles down to a Pagan symbol, in the many allegories of these pre‐historic struggles.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Section V. Is Plerôma Satan’s Lair?

The subject is not yet exhausted, and has to be examined from still other aspects.

Whether Milton’s grandiose description of the three days’ Battle of the Angels of Light against those of Darkness justifies the suspicion that he must have heard of the corresponding Eastern tradition—it is impossible to say. Nevertheless, if not himself in connection with some Mystic, then it must have been through some one who had obtained access to the secret works of the Vatican. Among these there is a tradition concerning the “Beni Shamash”—the “Children of the Sun”—relating to the Eastern allegory, with far more minute details in its triple version, than one can get either from the Book of Enoch, or the far more recent Revelation of St. John concerning the “Old Dragon” and his various Slayers, as has been just shown.

It seems inexplicable to find, to this day, authors belonging to mystical societies who yet continue in their preconceived doubts as to the “alleged” antiquity of the Book of Enoch. Thus, while the author of the Sacred Mysteries among the Mayas and Quiches is inclined to see in Enoch an Initiate converted to Christianity (!!),(1168) the English compiler of Éliphas Lévi’s works, The Mysteries of Magic, is also of a like opinion. He remarks that:

Outside the erudition of Dr. Kenealy, no modern scholarship attributes any more remote antiquity to the latter work [the Book of Enoch] than the fourth century B.C.(1169)

Modern scholarship has been guilty of worse errors than this one. It seems but yesterday that the greatest literary critics in Europe denied the very authenticity of that work, together with the Orphic Hymns, and even the Book of Hermes or Thoth, until whole verses from the latter were discovered on Egyptian monuments and tombs of the earliest dynasties. The opinion of Archbishop Laurence is quoted elsewhere.

The “Old Dragon” and Satan, which have now become singly and collectively the symbol of, and the theological term for, the “Fallen Angel,” are not so described either in the original Kabalah (the Chaldæan Book of Numbers) or in the modern. For the most learned, if not the greatest of modern Kabalists, namely Éliphas Lévi, describes Satan in the following glowing terms:

It is that Angel who was proud enough to believe himself God; brave enough to buy his independence at the price of eternal suffering and torture; beautiful enough to have adored himself in full divine light; strong enough to still reign in darkness amidst agony, and to have made himself a throne out of his inextinguishable pyre. It is the Satan of the republican and heretical Milton ... the prince of anarchy, served by a hierarchy of pure spirits(!!).(1170)

This description—one which reconciles so cunningly Theological dogma and Kabalistic allegory, and even contrives to include a political compliment in its phraseology—is, when read in the right spirit, quite correct.

Yes, indeed; it is this grandest of ideals, this ever‐living symbol—nay apotheosis—of self‐sacrifice for the intellectual independence of humanity; this ever Active Energy protesting against Static Inertia—the principle to which Self‐assertion is a crime, and Thought and the Light of Knowledge odious. As Éliphas says with unparalleled justice and irony:

It is this pretended hero of tenebrous eternities, who, slanderously charged with ugliness, is decorated with horns and claws, which would fit far better his implacable tormentor.(1171)

It is he who has been finally transformed into a Serpent—the Red Dragon. But Éliphas Lévi was yet too subservient to his Roman Catholic authorities—one may add, too jesuitical—to confess that this Devil was mankind, and never had any existence on Earth outside of that mankind.(1172)

In this, Christian Theology, although following slavishly in the steps of Paganism, has only been true to its own time‐honoured policy. It had to isolate itself, and to assert its authority. Hence it could not do better than turn every Pagan Deity into a Devil. Every bright Sun‐God of antiquity—a glorious Deity by day, and its own Opponent and Adversary by night, named the Dragon of Wisdom, because it was supposed to contain the germs of night and day—has now been turned into the antithetical Shadow of God, and has become Satan on the sole and unsupported authority of despotic human dogma. After which all these producers of light and shadow, all the Sun‐ and the Moon‐Gods, have been cursed, and thus the one God chosen out of the many and Satan have both been anthropomorphized. But Theology seems to have lost sight of the human capacity for discriminating and finally analyzing all that is artificially forced upon its reverence. History shows in every race and even tribe, especially in the Semitic nations, the natural impulse to exalt its own tribal deity above all others to the hegemony of the Gods, and proves that the God of the Israelites was such a tribal God, and no more, even though the Christian Church, following the lead of the “chosen” people, is pleased to enforce the worship of that one particular deity, and to anathematize all the others. Whether originally a conscious or an unconscious blunder, nevertheless, it was one. Jehovah has ever been in antiquity only a God “among” other “Gods.”(1173) The Lord appears to Abraham, and while saying, “I am the Almighty God,” yet adds, “I will establish my covenant ... to be a God unto thee” (Abraham); and unto his seed after him(1174)—but not unto Âryan Europeans.

But, then, there was the grandiose and ideal figure of Jesus of Nazareth to be set off against a dark background, to gain in radiance by the contrast; and a darker one the Church could hardly invent. Lacking the Old Testament symbology, ignorant of the real connotation of the name of Jehovah—the Rabbinical secret substitute for the Ineffable and Unpronounceable Name—the Church mistook the cunningly fabricated shadow for the reality, the anthropomorphized generative symbol for the one Secondless Reality, the ever Unknowable Cause of All. As a logical sequence the Church, for purposes of duality, had to invent an anthropomorphic Devil—created, as taught by her, by God himself. Satan has now turned out to be the monster fabricated by the Jehovah‐ Frankenstein—his father’s curse and a thorn in the divine side, a monster, than whom no earthly Frankenstein could have fabricated a more ridiculous bogey.

The author of New Aspects of Life describes the Jewish God very correctly from the kabalistic standpoint as:

The Spirit of the Earth, which had revealed itself to the Jew as Jehovah.(1175)... It was that Spirit again who, after the death of Jesus, assumed his form and personated him as the risen Christ

—the doctrine of Cerinthus and several Gnostic sects with slight variation, as one can see. But the author’s explanations and deductions are remarkable:

None knew ... better than Moses, ... [and] so well as he, how great was the power of those [Gods of Egypt] with whose priests he had contended, ... the gods of which Jehovah is claimed to be the God [by the Jews only].

Asks the author:

What were these gods, these Achar of which Jehovah, the Achad, is claimed to be the God ... by overcoming them?

To which our Occultism answers: Those whom the Church now calls the Fallen Angels and collectively Satan, the Dragon—overcome, if we have to accept her dictum, by Michael and his Host, that Michael being simply Jehovah himself, one of the subordinate Spirits at best. Therefore, the author is again right in saying:

The Greeks believed in the existence of ... daimons. But ... they were anticipated by the Hebrews, who held that there was a class of personating spirits which they designated demons, “personators.”... Admitting with Jehovah, who expressly asserts it, the existence of other gods, which ... were personators of the One God, were these other gods simply a higher class of personating spirits, ... which had acquired and exercised greater powers? And is not personation the key to the mystery of the spirit state? But once granting this position, how are we to know that Jehovah was not a personating spirit, a spirit which arrogated to itself that it was, and thus became, the personator of the one unknown and unknowable God? Nay, how do we know that the spirit calling itself Jehovah, in arrogating to itself his attributes did not thus cause its own designation to be imputed to the One who is in reality as nameless as incognizable?(1176)

Then the author shows that “the spirit Jehovah is a personator” on its own admission. It acknowledged to Moses “that it had appeared to the patriarchs as the God Shaddai” and the “God Helion.”

With the same breath it assumed the name of Jehovah; and it is on the faith of the assertion of this personator that the names El, Eloah, Elohim, and Shaddai, have been read and interpreted in juxtaposition with Jehovah as the “Lord God Almighty.” [Then when] the name Jehovah became ineffable, the designation Adonai, “Lord,” was substituted for it, and ... it was owing to this substitution that the “Lord” passed from the Jewish to the Christian “Word” and World as a designation of God.(1177)

And how are we to know, the author may add, that Jehovah was not many spirits personating even that seemingly one—Jod or Jod‐He?

But if the Christian Church was the first to make the existence of Satan a dogma, it was because, as shown in Isis Unveiled, the Devil—the powerful Enemy of God (?!!) had to become the corner stone and pillar of the Church. For, as a Theosophist, M. Jules Baissac, truly observes in his Satan ou le Diable:

Il fallait éviter de paraître autoriser le dogme du double principe en faisant de ce Satan créateur une puissance réelle, et pour expliquer le mal originel, on profère contre Manes l’hypothèse d’une permission de l’unique Tout‐Puissant.(1178)

The choice and policy were unfortunate, anyhow. Either the personator of the lower God of Abraham and Jacob ought to have been made entirely distinct from the mystic “Father” of Jesus, or—the “Fallen” Angels should have been left unslandered by further fictions.

Every God of the Gentiles is connected with, and closely related to, Jehovah—the Elohim; for they are all One Host, whose units differ only in name in the Esoteric Teachings. Between the “Obedient” and the “Fallen” Angels there is no difference whatever, except in their respective functions, or rather in the inertia of some, and the activity of others, among those Dhyân Chohans, or Elohim, who were “commissioned to create,” i.e., to fabricate the manifested world out of the eternal material.

The Kabalists say that the true name of Satan is that of Jehovah turned upside down, for “Satan is not a black God but the negation of the white Deity,” or the Light of Truth. God is Light and Satan is the necessary Darkness or Shadow to set it off, without which pure Light would be invisible and incomprehensible.(1179) “For the Initiates,” says Éliphas Lévi, “the Devil is not a person but a creative Force, for Good as for Evil.” The Initiates represented this Force, which presides at physical generation, under the mysterious form of God Pan—or Nature; whence the horns and hoofs of that mythical and symbolic figure, as also the Christian “goat” of the “Witches’ Sabbath.” With regard to this too, Christians have imprudently forgotten that the “goat” was also the victim selected for the atonement of all the sins of Israel, that the scape‐goat was indeed the sacrificial martyr, the symbol of the greatest mystery on earth—the “fall into generation.” Only, the Jews have long forgotten the real meaning of their (to the non‐initiated) ridiculous hero, selected from the drama of life in the Great Mysteries enacted by them in the desert; and the Christians have never known it.

Éliphas Lévi seeks to explain the dogma of his Church by paradoxes and metaphors, but succeeds very poorly in the face of the many volumes written by pious Roman Catholic Demonologists under the approbation and auspices of Rome, in this nineteenth century of ours. For the true Roman Catholic, the Devil or Satan is a reality; the drama enacted in the Sidereal Light according to the seer of Patmos—who desired, perhaps, to improve upon the narrative in the Book of Enoch—is as real, and as historical a fact as any other allegory and symbolical event in the Bible. But the Initiates give an explanation which differs from that given by Éliphas Lévi, whose genius and crafty intellect had to submit to a certain compromise dictated to him from Rome.

Thus, the true and “uncompromising” Kabalists admit that, for all purposes of Science and Philosophy, it is enough that the profane should know that the Great Magic Agent—called by the followers of the Marquis de St. Martin, the Martinists, the Astral Light, by the mediæval Kabalists and Alchemists the Sidereal Virgin and the Mysterium Magnum, and by the Eastern Occultists Æther, the reflection of Âkâsha—is that which the Church calls Lucifer. That the Latin scholastics have succeeded in transforming the Universal Soul and Plerôma—the Vehicle of Light and the receptacle of all forms, a Force spread throughout the whole Universe, with its direct and indirect effects—into Satan and his works, is no news to any one. But now they are prepared to give out to the above‐mentioned profane even the secrets hinted at by Éliphas Lévi, without adequate explanation, for the latter’s policy of veiled revelations could only lead to further superstition and misunderstanding. What, indeed, can a student of Occultism, who is a beginner, gather from the following highly poetical sentences of Éliphas Lévi, which are as apocalyptic as the writings of any of the Alchemists?

Lucifer [the Astral Light] ... is an intermediate force existing in all creation; it serves to create and to destroy, and the Fall of Adam was an erotic intoxication which has rendered his generation a slave to this fatal Light, ... every sexual passion that overpowers our senses is a whirlwind of that Light which seeks to drag us towards the abyss of death. Madness, hallucinations, visions, extasies, are all forms of a very dangerous excitation due to this interior phosphorus[?]. Thus light, finally, is of the nature of fire, the intelligent use of which warms and vivifies, and the excess of which, on the contrary, dissolves and annihilates.

Thus man is called upon to assume a sovereign empire over this [Astral] Light and conquer thereby his immortality, and is threatened at the same time with being intoxicated, absorbed, and eternally destroyed by it.

This Light, therefore, inasmuch as it is devouring, revengeful, and fatal, would thus really be hell‐fire, the serpent of the legend; the tormented errors of which it is full, the tears and the gnashing of teeth of the abortive beings it devours, the phantom of life that escapes them, and seems to mock and insult their agony, all this would be the Devil or Satan indeed.(1180)

There is no false statement in all this; nothing save a superabundance of ill‐applied metaphors, as, for instance, in the application of the myth of Adam to the illustration of the astral effects. Âkâsha,(1181) the Astral Light, can be defined in a few words; it is the Universal Soul, the Matrix of the Universe, the Mysterium Magnum from which all that exists is born by separation or differentiation. It is the cause of existence; it fills all the infinite Space, is Space itself, in one sense, or both its sixth and seventh principles.(1182) But as the finite in the Infinite, as regards manifestation this Light must have its shadowy side—as already remarked. And as the Infinite can never be manifested, hence the finite world has to be satisfied with the shadow alone, which its actions draw upon humanity and which men attract and _force into __ activity_. Hence, while the Astral Light is the Universal Cause in its unmanifested unity and infinity, it becomes, with regard to mankind, simply the effects of the causes produced by men in their sinful lives. It is not its bright denizens—whether they are called Spirits of Light or Darkness—that produce Good or Evil, but mankind itself that determines the unavoidable action and reaction in the Great Magic Agent. It is mankind which has become the “Serpent of Genesis,” and thus causes daily and hourly the Fall and Sin of the “Celestial Virgin”—which thus becomes the Mother of Gods and Devils at one and the same time; for she is the ever‐ loving, beneficent Deity to all those who stir her Soul and Heart, instead of attracting to themselves her shadowy manifested essence, called by Éliphas Lévi—the “fatal light” which kills and destroys. Humanity, in its units, can overpower and master its effects; but only by the holiness of their lives and by producing good causes. It has power only on the manifested lower principles—the shadow of the Unknown and Incognizable Deity in Space. But in antiquity and reality, Lucifer, or Luciferus, is the name of the Angelic Entity presiding over the Light of Truth as over the light of the day. In the great Valentinian Gospel Pistis Sophia it is taught that of the three Powers emanating from the Holy Names of the three Triple Powers (Τριδυνάμεις), that of Sophia (the Holy Ghost according to these Gnostics—the most cultured of all), resides in the planet Venus or Lucifer.

Thus to the profane, the Astral Light may be God and Devil at once—Demon est Deus inversus—that is to say, through every point of Infinite Space thrill the magnetic and electrical currents of animate Nature, the life‐ giving and death‐giving waves, for death on earth becomes life on another plane. Lucifer is divine and terrestrial Light, the “Holy Ghost” and “Satan,” at one and the same time, visible Space being truly filled with the differentiated Breath invisibly; and the Astral Light, the manifested effects of the two who are one, guided and attracted by ourselves, is the Karma of Humanity, both a personal and impersonal entity—personal, because it is the mystic name given by St. Martin to the Host of Divine Creators, Guides and Rulers of this Planet; impersonal, as the Cause and Effect of Universal Life and Death.

The Fall was the result of man’s knowledge, for his “eyes were opened.” Indeed, he was taught Wisdom and the Hidden Knowledge by the “Fallen Angel,” for the latter had become from that day his Manas, Mind and Self‐ consciousness. In each of us that golden thread of continuous Life—periodically broken into active and passive cycles of sensuous existence on Earth, and super‐sensuous in Devachan—is from the beginning of our appearance upon this Earth. It is the Sûtrâtmâ, the luminous thread of immortal impersonal Monadship, on which our earthly “lives” or evanescent Egos are strung as so many beads—according to the beautiful expression of the Vedântic Philosophy.

And now it stands proven that Satan, or the Red Fiery Dragon, the “Lord of Phôsphoros”—brimstone was a Theological improvement—and Lucifer, or “Light‐Bearer,” is in us: it is our Mind, our Tempter and Redeemer, our intelligent Liberator and Saviour from pure animalism. Without this principle—the emanation of the very essence of the pure divine principle Mahat (Intelligence), which radiates direct from the Divine Mind—we would be surely no better than animals. The first man Adam was made only a living soul (Nephesh), the last Adam was made a quickening spirit(1183)—says Paul, his words referring to the building or creation of man. Without this quickening spirit, or human mind or soul, there would be no difference between man and beast; as there is none, in fact, between animals with respect to their actions. The tiger and the donkey, the hawk and the dove, are each one as pure and as innocent as the other, because irresponsible. Each follows its instinct, the tiger and the hawk killing with the same unconcern as the donkey eats a thistle, or the dove pecks at a grain of corn. If the Fall had the significance given to it by Theology; if that Fall occurred as a result of an act never intended by Nature—a sin, how about the animals? If we are told that they procreate their species in consequence of that same “original sin,” for which God cursed the Earth—hence everything living on it—we will put another question. We are told by Theology, as also by Science, that the animal was on Earth far earlier than man. We ask the former: How did it procreate its species, before the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil had been plucked off? As said:

The Christians—far less clear‐sighted than the great Mystic and Liberator whose name they have assumed, whose doctrines they have misunderstood and travestied, and whose memory they have blackened by their deeds—took the Jewish Jehovah as he was, and of course strove vainly to reconcile the Gospel of Light and Liberty with the Deity of Darkness and Submission.(1184)

But it is sufficiently proven now that all the soi‐disant evil Spirits who are credited with having made war on the Gods, are identical as personalities; that, moreover, all the ancient religions taught the same tenet, save the final conclusion, which differs from the Christian. The seven primeval Gods had all a dual state, one essential, the other accidental. In their essential state they were all the Builders or Fashioners, the Preservers and the Rulers of this World; and in the accidental state, clothing themselves in visible corporeality, they descended on the Earth and reigned on it as Kings and Instructors of the lower Hosts, who had incarnated once more upon it as men.

Thus, Esoteric Philosophy shows that man is truly the manifested deity in both its aspects—good and evil, but Theology cannot admit this philosophical truth. Teaching as it does the dogma of the Fallen Angels in its dead‐letter meaning, and having made of Satan the corner‐stone and pillar of the dogma of redemption—to do so would be suicidal. Having once shown the rebellious Angels distinct from God and the Logos in their personalities, to admit that the downfall of the disobedient Spirits means simply their fall into generation and matter, would be equivalent to saying that God and Satan were identical. For since the Logos, or God, is the aggregate of that once divine Host accused of having fallen, it would naturally follow that the Logos and Satan are one.

Yet such was the real philosophical view in antiquity of the now disfigured tenet. The Verbum, or the “Son,” was shown in a dual aspect by the Pagan Gnostics—in fact, he was a duality in full unity. Hence, the endless and various national versions. The Greeks had Jupiter, the son of Cronus, the Father, who hurls him down into the depths of Kosmos. The Âryans had Brahmâ (in later theology) precipitated by Shiva into the Abyss of Darkness, etc. But the Fall of all these Logoi and Demiourgoi from their primitive exalted position, contained in all cases one and the same Esoteric signification; the Curse, in its philosophical meaning, of being incarnated on this Earth; an unavoidable rung in the Ladder of Cosmic Evolution, a highly philosophical and fitting Karmic Law, without which the presence of Evil on Earth would have to remain for ever a closed mystery to the understanding of true Philosophy. To say, as the author of Esprits Tombés des Paiens does, that since—

Christianity is made to rest on two pillars, that of evil (πουηροῦ), and of good (ἀγαθοῦ); on two forces, in short (ἀγαθαὶ καὶ κακαὶ δυνάμεις): hence, if we suppress the punishment of the evil forces, the protecting mission of the good powers will have neither value nor sense

—is to utter the most unphilosophical absurdity. If it fits in with, and explains, Christian dogma, it obscures the facts and truths of the primitive Wisdom of the ages. The cautious hints of Paul have all the true Esoteric meaning, and it took centuries of scholastic casuistry to give them the false colouring in their present interpretations. The Verbum and Lucifer are one in their dual aspect; and the “Prince of the Air” (princeps aeris hujus) is not the “God of that period,” but an everlasting principle. When the latter was said to be ever circling around the world (qui circumambulat terram), the great Apostle referred simply to the never‐ceasing cycles of human incarnations, in which evil will ever predominate unto the day when Humanity is redeemed by the true divine Enlightenment which gives the correct perception of things.

It is easy to disfigure vague expressions written in dead and long‐ forgotten languages, and palm them off on the ignorant masses as truths and revealed facts. The identity of thought and meaning is the one thing that strikes the student in all the religions which mention the tradition of the Fallen Spirits, and in those great religions there is not one that fails to mention and describe it in one or another form. Thus, Hoang‐ty, the Great Spirit, sees his Sons, who had acquired active wisdom, falling into the Valley of Pain. Their leader, the Flying Dragon, having drunk of the forbidden Ambrosia, fell to the Earth with his Host (Kings). In the Zend Avesta, Angra Mainyu (Ahriman), surrounding himself with Fire (the “Flames” of the Stanzas), seeks to conquer the Heavens,(1185) when Ahura Mazda, descending from the solid Heaven he inhabits, to the help of the Heavens that revolve (in time and space, the manifested worlds of cycles including those of incarnation), and the Amshaspands, the “seven bright Sravah,” accompanied by their stars, fight Ahriman, and the vanquished Devas fall to the Earth along with him.(1186) In the Vendîdâd the Daêvas are called “evil‐doing,” and are shown to rush away “into the depths of the ... world of hell,” or Matter.(1187) This is an allegory which shows the Devas compelled to incarnate, once that they have separated themselves from their Parent Essence, or, in other words, after the Unit had become multiple, after differentiation and manifestation.

Typhon the Egyptian Python, the Titans, the Suras and the Asuras, all belong to the same legend of Spirits peopling the Earth. They are not “Demons commissioned to create and organize this visible universe,” but the Fashioners or “Architects” of the Worlds, and the Progenitors of Man. They are the Fallen Angels, metaphorically—the “true mirrors” of the “Eternal Wisdom.”

What is the complete truth as well as the Esoteric meaning about this universal myth? The whole essence of truth cannot be transmitted from mouth to ear. Nor can any pen describe it, not even that of the Recording Angel, unless man finds the answer in the sanctuary of his own heart, in the innermost depths of his divine intuition. It is the great Seventh Mystery of Creation, the first and the last; and those who read St. John’s Apocalypse may find its shadow lurking under the seventh seal. It can be represented only in its apparent, objective form, like the eternal riddle of the Sphinx. If the Sphinx threw herself into the sea and perished, it is not because Œdipus had unriddled the secret of the ages, but because, by anthropomorphizing the ever‐spiritual and the subjective, he had dishonoured the great truth for ever. Therefore, we can give it only from its philosophical and intellectual planes, unlocked with three keys respectively—for the last four keys of the seven that throw wide open the portals to the Mysteries of Nature are in the hands of the highest Initiates, and cannot be divulged to the masses at large—not in this century, at any rate.

The dead‐letter is everywhere the same. The dualism in the Mazdean religion was born from exoteric interpretation. The holy Airyaman, the “bestower of weal,”(1188) invoked in the prayer called Airyama‐ishyô, is the divine aspect of Ahriman, “the deadly, the Daêva of the Daêvas,”(1189) and Angra Mainyu is the dark material aspect of the former. “Keep us from our hater, O Mazda and Ârmaita Spenta,”(1190) has, as a prayer and invocation, an identical meaning with “Lead us not into temptation,” and is addressed by man to the terrible spirit of duality in man himself. For Ahura Mazda is the Spiritual, Divine, and Purified Man, and Ârmaita Spenta, the Spirit of the Earth or materiality, is the same as Ahriman or Angra Mainyu in one sense.

The whole of the Magian or Mazdean literature—or what remains of it—is magical, occult, hence allegorical and symbolical, even its “mystery of the law.”(1191) Now the Mobed and the Parsî keep their eye on the Baresma during the sacrifice—the divine twig off Ormazd’s “Tree” having been transformed into a bunch of metallic rods—and wonder why neither the Amesha Spentas, nor “the high and beautiful golden Haômas, nor even their Vohu‐Manô (good thoughts), nor their Râta (sacrificial offering),” help them much. Let them meditate on the “Tree of Wisdom,” and by study assimilate, one by one, the fruits thereof. The way to the Tree of Eternal Life, the white Haôma, the Gaokerena, is through one end of the Earth to the other; and Haôma is in Heaven as it is on Earth. But to become once more a priest of it, and a “healer,” man must heal himself, for this must be done before he can heal others.

This proves once more that, in order to be dealt with, with at least an approximate degree of justice, the so‐called “myths” have to be closely examined from all their aspects. In truth, every one of the seven keys has to be used in its right place, and never mixed with the others—if we would unveil the entire cycle of mysteries. In our day of dreary soul‐killing Materialism, the ancient Priest‐Initiates have become, in the opinion of our learned generations, the synonyms of clever impostors, kindling the fires of superstition in order to obtain an easier sway over the minds of men. This is an unfounded calumny, generated by scepticism and uncharitable thoughts. No one believed more than they did in Gods—or, we may call them, the spiritual and now invisible Powers, or Spirits, the Noumena of the phenomena; and they believed simply because they knew. And though after being initiated into the Mysteries of Nature, they were forced to withhold their knowledge from the profane, who would have surely abused it, such secrecy was undeniably less dangerous than the policy of their usurpers and successors. The former taught only that which they well knew. The latter, teaching what they do not know, have invented, as a secure haven for their ignorance, a jealous and cruel Deity, who forbids man to pry into his mysteries under the penalty of damnation; as well they may, for his mysteries can at best be only hinted at in polite ears, never described. Turn to King’s Gnostics and their Remains, and see for yourself what was the primitive Ark of the Covenant, according to the author, who says:

There is a Rabbinical tradition ... that the Cherubim placed over it were represented as male and female, in the act of copulation, in order to express the grand doctrine of the Essence of Form and Matter, the two principles of all things. When the Chaldeans broke into the Sanctuary and beheld this most astounding emblem, they naturally enough exclaimed, “Is this your God, of whom you boast, that He is such a lover of purity!”(1192)

King thinks that this tradition “savours too much of Alexandrian philosophy to demand any credit,” to which we demur. The shape and form of the wings of the two Cherubim standing on the right and left sides of the Ark, these wings meeting over the “Holy of Holies,” are an emblem quite eloquent in itself, not to speak of the “holy” Jod within the Ark! The Mystery of Agathodæmon, whose legend states, “I am Chnumis, Sun of the Universe, 700,” can alone solve the mystery of Jesus, the number of whose name is “888.” It is not the key of St. Peter, or the Church dogma, but the Narthex—the Wand of the Candidate for Initiation—that has to be wrenched from the grasp of the long‐silent Sphinx of the ages. Meanwhile:

The augurs, who, upon meeting each other, have to thrust their tongues into their cheeks to suppress a fit of laughter, may be more numerous in our own age than they ever were in the day of Sylla.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Section VI. Prometheus, the Titan

His Origin In Ancient India.

In our modern day there is not the slightest doubt in the minds of the best European symbologists that the name Prometheus possessed the greatest and most mysterious significance in antiquity. While giving the history of Deucalion, whom the Bœotians regarded as the ancestor of the human races, and who was the son of Prometheus, according to the significant legend, the author of the Mythologie de la Grèce Antique remarks:

Thus Prometheus is something more than the archetype of humanity; he is its generator. In the same way that we saw Hephæstus moulding the first woman [Pandora] and endowing her with life, so Prometheus kneads the moist clay, of which he fashions the body of the first man whom he will endow with the soul‐spark.(1193) After the flood of Deucalion, Zeus, they said, had commanded Prometheus and Athena to call forth a new race of men from the mire left by the waters of the deluge,(1194) and, in the day of Pausanias, the slime which the hero had used for this purpose was still shown in Phocis.(1195) On several archaic monuments we still see Prometheus modelling a human body, either alone or with Athena’s help.(1196)

The same author reminds us of another equally mysterious personage, though one less generally known than Prometheus, whose legend offers remarkable analogies with that of the Titan. The name of this second ancestor and generator is Phoroneus, the hero of an ancient poem, now unfortunately no longer extant, the Phoroneidæ. His legend was localized in Argolis, where a perpetual flame was preserved on his altar as a reminder that he was the bringer of fire upon earth.(1197) A benefactor of men, like Prometheus, he had made them participators of every bliss on earth. Plato(1198) and Clemens Alexandrinus(1199) say that Phoroneus was the first man, or the “father of mortals.” His genealogy, which assigns to him the river Inachos as his father, reminds us of that of Prometheus, which makes that Titan the son of the Oceanid Clymene. But the mother of Phoroneus was the nymph Melia: a significant descent which distinguishes him from Prometheus.(1200)

Melia, Decharme thinks, is the personification of the “Ash‐tree,” whence, according to Hesiod, issued the race of the age of Bronze,(1201) and which with the Greeks is the celestial tree common to every Âryan mythology. This Ash is the Yggdrasil of Norse antiquity, which the Norns sprinkle daily with the waters from the fountain of Urd, that it may not wither. It remains verdant till the last days of the Golden Age. Then the Norns—the three sisters who gaze respectively into the Past, the Present, and the Future—make known the decree of Orlog or Fate (Karma), but men are conscious only of the Present.

[But when] Gultweig (gold‐ore) comes, the bewitching enchantress ... who, thrice cast into the fire, arises each time more beautiful than before and fills the souls of gods and men with unappeasable longing, then the Norns ... enter into being, and the blessed peace of childhood’s dreams passes away, and sin comes into existence with all its evil consequences [and Karma].(1202)

The thrice‐purified Gold is—Manas, the Conscious Soul.

With the Greeks, the Ash‐tree represented the same idea. Its luxuriant boughs are the Sidereal Heaven, golden by day and studded with stars by night—the fruits of Melia and Yggdrasil, under whose protecting shadow humanity lived during the Golden Age without desire as without fear. “That tree had a fruit, or an inflamed bough, which was lightning”—Decharme guesses.

And here steps in the killing Materialism of the age, that peculiar twist in the modern mind, which, like a Northern blast, bends all on its way, and freezes every intuition, allowing it no hand in the physical speculations of the day. After having seen in Prometheus no more than “fire by friction,” the learned author of the Mythologie de la Grèce Antique perceives in this “fruit” a trifle more than an allusion to terrestrial fire and its discovery. It is no longer fire, owing to the fall of lightning setting some dry fuel in a blaze, and thus revealing all its priceless benefits to palæolithic men—but something more mysterious this time, though still as earthly!

A divine bird, nestled in the branches [of the celestial Ash‐ tree], stole that bough [or the fruit] and carried it down on the earth in its bill. Now the Greek word Φορώνευς is the rigid equivalent of the Sanskrit word bhuranyu, “the rapid,” an epithet of Agni, considered as the carrier of the divine spark. Phoroneus, son of Melia or of the celestial ash, thus corresponds to a conception far more ancient, probably, than that one which transformed the pramantha [of the old Âryan Hindûs] into the Greek Prometheus. Phoroneus is the [personified] bird, that brings the heavenly lightning to the earth. Traditions relating to the birth of the race of Bronze, and those which made of Phoroneus the father of the Argolians, are an evidence to us that this thunderbolt [or lightning], as in the legend of Hephæstus or Prometheus, was the origin of the human race.(1203)

This still affords us no more than the external meaning of the symbols and the allegory. It is now supposed that the name of Prometheus has been unriddled. But the modern Mythologists and Orientalists see in it no longer what their fathers saw on the authority of the whole of classical antiquity. They only find therein something far more appropriate to the spirit of the age, namely, a phallic element. But the name of Phoroneus, as well as that of Prometheus, bears not one, nor even two, but a series of esoteric meanings. Both relate to the seven Celestial Fires; to Agni Abhimânin, his three sons, and their forty‐five sons, constituting the Forty‐nine Fires. Do all these numbers relate only to the terrestrial mode of fire and to the flame of sexual passion? Did the Hindû Âryan mind never soar above such purely sensual conceptions; that mind which is declared by Prof. Max Müller to be the most spiritual and mystically inclined on the whole globe? The number of those fires alone ought to have suggested an inkling of the truth.

We are told that one is no longer permitted, in this age of rational thought, to explain the name of Pro‐metheus as the old Greeks did. The latter, it seems:

Basing themselves on the apparent analogy of προμηθεύς with the verb προμανθύνειν, saw in him the type of the “foreseeing” man, to whom, for the sake of symmetry, a brother was added—Epi‐metheus, or “he who takes counsel after the event.”(1204)

But now the Orientalists have decided otherwise. They know the real meaning of the two names better than those who invented them. The legend is based upon an event of universal importance. It was built to commemorate

A great event which must have strongly impressed itself upon the imagination of the first witnesses, and its remembrance has never since faded out from popular memory.(1205)

What was this? Laying aside every poetical fiction, all those dreams of the Golden Age, let us imagine—argue the modern scholars—in all its gross realism, the first miserable state of humanity, the striking picture of which was traced for us after Æschylus by Lucretius, and the exact truth of which is now confirmed by Science; and then we may understand better that a new life really began for man, on that day when he saw the first spark produced by the friction of two pieces of wood, or from the veins of a flint. How could men help feeling gratitude to that mysterious and marvellous being which they were henceforth enabled to create at their will, and which was no sooner born, than it grew and expanded, developing with singular power.

This terrestrial flame, was it not analogous in nature to that which sent them from above its light and heat, or which frightened them in the thunderbolt? Was it not derived from the same source? And if its origin was in heaven, must it not have been brought down some day on earth? If so, who was the powerful being, the beneficent being, God or man, who had conquered it? Such are the questions which the curiosity of the Âryans offered in the early days of their existence, and which found their answer in the myth of Prometheus.(1206)

The Philosophy of Occult Science finds two weak points in the above reflections, and proceeds to point them out. The miserable state of Humanity described by Æschylus and Lucretius was no more wretched then, in the early days of the Âryans, than it is now. That “state” was limited to the savage tribes; and the now‐existing savages are not a whit more happy or unhappy than their forefathers were a million years ago.

It is an accepted fact in Science that “rude implements, exactly resembling those in use among existing savages,” are found in river‐ gravels and caves, geologically “implying an enormous antiquity.” So great is that resemblance that, as the author of The Modern Zoroastrian tells us:

If the collection in the Colonial Exhibition of stone celts and arrow‐heads used by the Bushmen of South Africa were placed side by side with one from the British Museum of similar objects from Kent’s Cavern or the Caves of Dordogne, no one but an expert could distinguish between them.(1207)

And if there are Bushmen existing now, in our age of the highest civilization, who are no higher intellectually than the race of men which inhabited Devonshire and Southern France during the Palæolithic age, why could not the latter have lived simultaneously with, and have been the contemporary of, other races as highly civilized for their day as we are for ours? That the sum of knowledge increases daily in mankind, “but that intellectual capacity does not increase with it,” is shown when the intellect, if not the physical knowledge, of the Euclids, Pythagorases, Pâninis, Kapilas, Platos, and Socrates, is compared with that of the Newtons, Kants, and the modern Huxleys and Hæckels. On comparing the results obtained by Dr. J. Barnard Davis, the Craniologist,(1208) with regard to the internal capacity of the skull—its volume being taken as the standard and test for judging of the intellectual capacities—Dr. Pfaff finds that this capacity among the French (certainly in the highest rank of mankind) is 88.4 cubic inches, being thus “perceptibly smaller than that of the Polynesians generally, which, even among many Papuans and Alfuras of the lowest grade, amounts to 89 and 89.7 cubic inches”; which shows that it is the quality and not the quantity of the brain that is the cause of intellectual capacity. The average index of skulls among various races having been now recognized to be “one of the most characteristic marks of difference between different races,” the following comparison is suggestive:

The index of breadth among the Scandinavians [is] at 75; among the English at 76; among Holsteiners at 77; in Bresgau at 80; Schiller’s skull shows an index of breadth even of 82 ... the Madurese also 82!

Finally, the same comparison between the oldest skulls known and the European, brings to light the startling fact that:

Most of these old skulls, belonging to the stone period, are above rather than below the average of the brain of the now living man in volume.

Calculating the measures for the height, breadth, and length in inches from the average measurements of several skulls, the following sums are obtained:

1. Old Northern skulls of the stone age: 18.877 ins. 2. Average of 48 skulls of the same period from England: 18.858 ins. 3. Average of 7 skulls of the same period from Wales: 18.649 ins. 4. Average of 36 skulls of the stone age from France: 18.220 ins.

The average of the now living Europeans is 18.579 inches; of Hottentots, 17.795 inches!

These figures show plainly that:

The size of the brain of the oldest populations known to us is not such as to place them on a lower level than that of the now living inhabitants of the Earth.(1209)

Besides which, they show the “missing link” vanishing into thin air. Of these, however, more anon: we must return to our direct subject.

As the “Prometheus Vinctus” of Æschylus tells us, the race which Jupiter so ardently desired “to quench, and plant a new one in its stead” (v. 241), suffered mental, not physical misery. The first boon Prometheus gave to mortals, as he tells the Chorus, was to hinder them “from foreseeing death” (v. 256); he “saved the mortal race from sinking blasted down to Hades’ gloom” (v. 244); and then only, “besides” that, he gave them fire (v. 260). This shows plainly the dual character at any rate of the Promethean myth, if Orientalists will not accept the existence of the seven keys taught in Occultism. This relates to the first opening of man’s spiritual perceptions, not to his first seeing or “discovering” fire. For fire was never discovered, but existed on Earth since its beginning. It existed in the seismic activity of the early ages, volcanic eruptions being as frequent and constant in those periods as fog is in England now. And if we are told that men appeared so late on Earth that all but a few volcanoes were already extinct, and that geological disturbances had made room for a more settled state of things, we answer: Let a new race of men—whether evolved from Angel or Gorilla—appear now on any uninhabited spot of the Globe, with the exception perhaps of the Sahara, and a thousand to one it would not be a year or two old before “discovering fire,” through lightning setting the grass or something else in flames. This assumption, that primitive man lived ages on Earth before he was made acquainted with fire, is one of the most painfully illogical of all. But old Æschylus was an Initiate, and knew well what he was giving out.(1210)

No Occultist acquainted with symbology and the fact that Wisdom came to us from the East, will for a moment deny that the myth of Prometheus has reached Europe from Âryâvarta. Nor is he likely to deny that in one sense Prometheus represents “fire by friction.” Therefore, he admires the sagacity of M. F. Baudry, who shows in “Les Mythes du Feu et du Breuvage Céleste”(1211) one of the aspects of Prometheus and his origin from India. He shows the reader the supposed primitive process to obtain fire, still in use to‐day in India to light the sacrificial flame. This is what he says:

This process, such as it is minutely described in the Vedic Sûtras, consists in rapidly turning a stick in a socket made in the centre of a piece of wood. The friction develops intense heat and ends by setting on fire the particles of wood in contact. The motion of the stick is not a continuous rotation, but a series of motions in contrary senses, by means of a cord fixed to the stick in its middle; the operator holds one of the ends in each hand and pulls them alternately.... The full process is designated in Sanskrit by the verb manthâmi, mathnáni, which means “to rub, agitate, shake and obtain by rubbing,” and is especially applied to rotatory friction, as is proved by its derivative mandala, which signifies a circle.... The pieces of wood serving for the production of fire have each their name in Sanskrit. The stick which turns is called pramantha; the discus which receives it is called arani and aranî: “the two aranis” designating the ensemble of the instrument.(1212)

It remains to be seen what the Brâhmans will say to this. But even supposing that Prometheus, in one of the aspects of his myth, was conceived as the producer of fire by means of the Pramantha, or as an animate and divine Pramantha, would this imply that the symbolism had no other than the phallic meaning attributed to it by modern symbologists? Decharme, at any rate, seems to have a correct glimmering of the truth; for he unconsciously corroborates all that the Occult Sciences teach with regard to the Mânasa Devas, who have endowed man with the consciousness of his immortal soul—that consciousness which hinders man “from foreseeing death,” and makes him know he is immortal.(1213) “How did Prometheus come into possession of the [divine] spark?” he asks.

Fire having its abode in heaven, it is there he must have gone to find it before he could carry it down to men, and, to approach the gods, he must have been a god himself.(1214)

The Greeks held that he was of the Divine Race, “the son of the Titan Iapetos”;(1215) the Hindûs, that he was a Deva.

But celestial fire belonged in the beginning to the gods alone; it was a treasure they reserved for themselves ... over which they jealously watched.... “The prudent son of Iapetus,” says Hesiod, “deceived Jupiter by stealing and concealing in the cavity of a narthex, the indefatigable fire of the resplendent glow.”(1216) ... Thus the gift made by Prometheus to men was a conquest made from heaven. Now according to Greek ideas [in this identical with those of the Occultists], this possession forced from Jupiter, this human trespassing upon the property of the gods, had to be followed by an expiation.... Prometheus, moreover, belongs to that race of Titans who had rebelled(1217) against the gods, and whom the master of Olympus had hurled down into Tartarus; like them, he is the genius of evil, doomed to cruel suffering.(1218)

What is most revolting in the explanations that follow, is the one‐sided view taken of this grandest of all myths. The most intuitional among modern writers cannot, or will not, rise in their conceptions above the level of the Earth and cosmic phenomena. It is not denied that the moral idea in the myth, as presented in the Theogony of Hesiod, plays a certain part in the primitive Greek conception. The Titan is more than a thief of the celestial fire. He is the representation of humanity—active, industrious, intelligent, but at the same time ambitious, which aims at equalling divine powers. Therefore it is humanity punished in the person of Prometheus, but it is only so with the Greeks. With them, Prometheus is not a criminal, save in the eyes of the Gods. In his relation with the Earth, he is, on the contrary, a God himself, a friend of mankind (φιλάνθρωπος), which he has raised to civilization and initiated into the knowledge of all the arts; a conception which found its most poetical expounder in Æschylus. But with all other nations Prometheus is—what? The Fallen Angel, Satan, as the Church would have it? Not at all. He is simply the image of the pernicious and dreaded effects of lightning. He is the “evil fire” (mal feu)(1219) and the symbol of the divine reproductive male organ.

Reduced to its simple expression, the myth we are trying to explain is then simply a [cosmic] genius of fire.(1220)

It is the former idea (the phallic) which was preëminently Âryan, if we believe Adalbert Kuhn(1221) and F. Baudry. For:

The fire used by man being the result of the action of pramantha in the arani, the Âryas must have ascribed [?] the same origin to celestial fire, and they must have(1222) imagined [?] that a god armed with the pramantha, or a divine pramantha, caused a violent friction in the bosom of the clouds, which gave birth to lightning and thunderbolts.(1223)

This idea is supported by the fact that, according to Plutarch’s testimony,(1224) the Stoics thought that thunder was the result of the struggle of storm‐clouds, and lightning a conflagration due to friction; while Aristotle saw in the thunderbolt only the action of clouds which clashed with each other. What was this theory, if not the scientific translation of the production of fire by friction?... Everything leads us to think that, from the highest antiquity, and before the dispersion of the Âryas, it was believed that the pramantha lighted the fire in the storm‐cloud as well as in the aranis.(1225)

Thus, suppositions and idle hypotheses are made to stand for discovered truths. Defenders of the biblical dead‐letter could not help the writers of missionary tracts more effectually than do materialistic Symbologists in thus taking for granted that the ancient Âryans based their religious conceptions on no higher thought than the physiological.

But it is not so, and the very spirit of Vedic Philosophy is against such an interpretation. For if, as Decharme himself confesses:

This idea of the creative power of fire is explained ... by the ancient assimilation of the human soul to a celestial spark(1226)

—as shown by the imagery often made use of in the Vedas when speaking of Arani, it would mean something higher than simply a gross sexual conception. A Hymn to Agni in the Veda is cited as an example:

Here is the pramantha; the generator is ready. Bring the mistress of the race (the female aranî). Let us produce Agni by attrition, according to ancient custom.

This means no worse than an abstract idea expressed in the tongue of mortals. The female Aranî, the “mistress of the race,” is Aditi, the Mother of the Gods, or Shekinah, Eternal Light—in the World of Spirit, the “Great Deep” and Chaos; or Primordial Substance in its first remove from the Unknown, in the Manifested Kosmos. If, ages later, the same epithet is applied to Devakî, the Mother of Krishna, or the incarnated Logos; and if the symbol, owing to the gradual and irrepressible spread of exoteric religions, may now be regarded as having a sexual significance, this in no way mars the original purity of the image. The subjective had been transformed into the objective; Spirit had fallen into Matter. The universal kosmic polarity of Spirit‐Substance had become, in human thought, the mystic, but still sexual, union of Spirit and Matter, and had thus acquired an anthropomorphic colouring which it had never had in the beginning. Between the Vedas and the Purânas there is an abyss of which they are the poles, like as are the seventh principle, the Âtmâ, and the first or lowest principle, the Physical Body, in the septenary constitution of Man. The primitive and purely spiritual language of the Vedas, conceived many decades of millenniums earlier than the Paurânic accounts, found a purely human expression for the purpose of describing events which took place 5,000 years ago, the date of Krishna’s death, from which day the Kali Yuga, or Black Age, began for mankind.

As Aditi is called Surârani, the Matrix or “Mother” of the Suras or Gods, so Kuntî, the mother of the Pândavas, is called in the Mahâbhârata Pândavârani(1227)—and the term is now physiologized. But Devakî, the antetype of the Roman Catholic Madonna, is a later anthropomorphized form of Aditi. The latter is the Goddess‐mother, or Deva‐mâtri, of seven Sons (the six and the seven Âdityas of early Vedic times); the mother of Krishna, Devakî, has six embryos conveyed into her womb by Jagad‐dhâtri, the “Nurse of the World,” the seventh, Krishna, the Logos, being transferred to that of Rohinî. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is the mother of seven children, of five sons and two daughters (a later transformation of sex), in Matthew’s Gospel.(1228) No one of the worshippers of the Roman Catholic Virgin would object to reciting in her honour the prayer addressed by the Gods to Devakî. Let the reader judge.

Thou art that Prakriti [essence], infinite and subtile, which formerly bore Brahmâ in its womb.... Thou, eternal being, comprising, in thy substance, the essence of all created things, wast identical with creation; thou wast the parent of the tri‐form sacrifice, becoming the germ of all things. Thou art sacrifice, whence all fruit proceeds; thou art the Aranî, whose attrition engenders fire.(1229) As Aditi, thou art the parent of the gods.... Thou art light [Jyotsnâ, the morning twilight],(1230) whence day is begotten. Thou art humility [Samnati, a daughter of Daksha], the mother of wisdom; thou art Niti, the parent of harmony (Naya);(1231) thou art modesty, the progenitrix of affection [Prashraya, explained by Vinaya]; thou art desire, of whom love is born.... Thou art ... the mother of knowledge [Avabodha]; thou art patience [Dhriti], the parent of fortitude [Dhairya].(1232)

Thus Aranî is shown here to be the same as the Roman Catholic “Vase of Election.” As to its primitive meaning, it was purely metaphysical. No unclean thought traversed these conceptions in the ancient mind. Even in the Zohar—far less metaphysical in its symbology than any other symbolism—the idea is an abstraction and nothing more. Thus, when the Zohar says:

All that which exists, all that which has been formed by the ancient, whose name is holy, can only exist through a male and female principle.(1233)

It means no more than that the divine Spirit of Life is ever coalescing with Matter. It is the Will of the Deity that acts; and the idea is purely Schopenhauerian.

When Atteekah Kaddosha, the ancient and the concealed of the concealed, desired to form all things, it formed all things like male and female. This wisdom comprises all when it goeth forth.

Hence Chokmah (male Wisdom) and Binah (female Consciousness or Intellect) are said to create all between the two—the active and the passive principles. As the eye of the expert jeweller discerns under the rough and uncouth oyster shell the pure immaculate pearl, enshrined within its bosom, his hand touching the shell but to get at its contents, so the eye of the true Philosopher reads between the lines of the Purânas the sublime Vedic truths, and corrects the form with the help of the Vedântic Wisdom. Our Orientalists, however, never perceive the pearl under the thick coating of the shell and—act accordingly.

From all that has been said in this Section, one sees clearly that, between the Serpent of Eden and the Devil of Christianity, there is an abyss. Alone the sledge hammer of Ancient Philosophy can kill this dogma.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Section VII. Enoïchion‐Henoch

The history of the evolution of the Satanic Myth would not be complete if we omitted to notice the character of the mysterious and cosmopolitan Enoch, variously called Enos, Hanoch, and finally Enoïchion by the Greeks. It is from his book that the first notions of the Fallen Angels were taken by the early Christian writers.

The Book of Enoch is declared apocryphal. But what is an apocryphon? The very etymology of the term shows that it is simply a secret book, i.e., one that belonged to the catalogue of temple‐libraries under the guardianship of the Hierophants and Initiated Priests, and was never meant for the profane. Apocryphon comes from the verb crypto (κρύπτω), “to hide.” For ages the Enoïchion, the Book of the Seer, was preserved in the “city of letters” and secret works—the ancient Kirjath‐sepher, later on, Debir.(1234)

Some of the writers interested in the subject—especially Masons—have tried to identify Enoch with Thoth of Memphis, the Greek Hermes, and even with the Latin Mercury. As individuals, all of these are distinct one from the other; professionally—if one may use this word, now so limited in its sense—one and all belong to the same category of sacred writers, of Initiators and Recorders of Occult and ancient Wisdom. Those who in the Korân(1235) are generically termed the Edris, or the “Learned,” the Initiated, bore in Egypt the name of “Thoth,” the inventor of Arts, Sciences, of writing or letters, of Music and Astronomy. Among the Jews Edris became “Enoch,” who, according to Bar‐Hebræus, “was the first inventor of writing,” books, Arts, and Sciences, the first who reduced to a system the progress of the planets.(1236) In Greece he was called Orpheus, and thus changed his name with every nation. The number seven being attached to, and connected with, each of those primitive Initiators,(1237) as well as the number 365, of the days in the year, astronomically, it identifies the mission, character, and the sacred office of all these men, but certainly not their personalities. Enoch is the seventh Patriarch; Orpheus is the possessor of the Phorminx, the seven‐stringed lyre, which is the seven‐fold mystery of Initiation. Thoth, with the seven‐rayed Solar Discus on his head, travels in the Solar Boat (the 365 degrees), jumping out every fourth (leap) year for one day. Finally, Thoth‐Lunus is the septenary God of the seven days, or the week. Esoterically and spiritually, Enoïchion means the “Seer of the Open Eye.”

The story about Enoch, told by Josephus, namely, that he had concealed his precious Rolls or Books under the pillars of Mercury or Seth, is the same as that told of Hermes, the “Father of Wisdom,” who concealed his Books of Wisdom under a pillar, and then, discovering the two pillars of stone, found the Science written thereon. Yet Josephus, notwithstanding his constant efforts in the direction of Israel’s unmerited glorification, and though he does attribute that Science (of Wisdom) to the Jewish Enoch—writes history. He shows these pillars as still existing during his own time.(1238) He tells us that they were built by Seth; and so they may have been, only neither by the Patriarch of that name, the fabled son of Adam, nor by the Egyptian God of Wisdom—Teth, Set, Thoth, Tat, Sat (the later Sat‐an), or Hermes, who are all one—but by the “Sons of the Serpent‐ God,” or “Sons of the Dragon,” the name under which the Hierophants of Egypt and Babylon were known before the Deluge, as were their forefathers, the Atlanteans.

What Josephus tells us, therefore, with the exception of the application made of it, must be true allegorically. According to his version the two famous pillars were entirely covered with hieroglyphics, which, after their discovery, were copied and reproduced in the most secret corners of the inner temples of Egypt, and thus became the source of its Wisdom and exceptional learning. These two “pillars,” however, are the prototypes of the two “tables of stones” hewn by Moses at the command of the “Lord.” Hence, in saying that all the great Adepts and Mystics of antiquity—such as Orpheus, Hesiod, Pythagoras and Plato—got the elements of their Theology from those hieroglyphics, he is right in one sense, and wrong in another. The Secret Doctrine teaches us that the Arts, Sciences, Theology, and especially the Philosophy of every nation which preceded the last universally known, but not universal, Deluge, had been recorded ideographically from the primitive oral records of the Fourth Race, and that these were the inheritance of the latter from the early Third Root‐ Race before the allegorical Fall. Hence, also, the Egyptian pillars, the tablets, and even the “white oriental porphyry stone” of the Masonic legend—which Enoch, fearing that the real and precious secrets would be lost, concealed before the Deluge in the bowels of the Earth—were simply the more or less symbolical and allegorical copies from the primitive Records. The Book of Enoch is one of such copies, and is, moreover, a Chaldæan, and now very incomplete, compendium. As already said, Enoïchion means in Greek the “Inner Eye,” or the Seer; in Hebrew, with the help of Masoretic points, it means the “Initiator” and “Instructor” (חֲנוֹךּ). Enoch is a generic title; and, moreover, his legend is that of several other prophets, Jewish and Heathen, with changes of made‐up details, the root‐form being the same. Elijah is also taken up into Heaven “alive”; and the Astrologer, at the court of Isdubar, the Chaldæan Hea‐bani, is likewise raised to Heaven by the God Hea, who was his patron, as Jehovah was of Elijah, whose name means in Hebrew “God‐Jah,” Jehovah (אֶלְיָה),(1239) and again of Elihu, which has the same meaning. This kind of easy death, or euthanasia, has an Esoteric meaning. It symbolizes the “death” of any Adept who has reached the power and degree, and also the purification, which enable him to “die” in the Physical Body, and still live and lead a conscious life in his Astral Body. The variations on this theme are endless, but the secret meaning is ever the same. The Pauline expression,(1240) “that he should not see death” (ut non videret mortem), has thus an Esoteric meaning, but nothing supernatural in it. The mangled interpretation given of some biblical hints to the effect that Enoch, “whose years will equal those of the world” (of the solar year, 365 days), will share with Christ and the prophet Elijah the honours and bliss of the last Advent and of the destruction of Antichrist(1241)—signify Esoterically, that some of the Great Adepts will return in the Seventh Race, when all Error will be made away with, and the advent of Truth will be heralded by those Shishta, the holy “Sons of Light.”

The Latin Church is not always logical, nor prudent. She declares the Book of Enoch an apocryphon, and has gone so far as to claim, through Cardinal Cajetan and other luminaries of the Church, the rejection from the Canon of even the Book of Jude, who, otherwise, as an inspired apostle, would quote from and thus sanctify the Book of Enoch, which is alleged to be an apocryphal work. Fortunately, some of the dogmatics perceived the peril in time. Had they accepted Cajetan’s resolution, they would have been forced to reject likewise the Fourth Gospel; as St. John borrows literally from Enoch, and places a whole sentence from him, in the mouth of Jesus!(1242)

Ludolph, the “father of Ethiopic literature,” commissioned to investigate the various Enochian MSS. presented by Pereisc, the traveller, to the Mazarine Library, declared that “no Book of Enoch could exist among the Abyssinians”! Further researches and discoveries worsted this too dogmatic assertion, as all know. Bruce and Ruppel did find the Book of Enoch in Abyssinia, and what is more, brought it to Europe some years later, and Bishop Laurence translated it. But Bruce despised it, and scoffed at its contents; as did all the rest of the Scientists. He declared it a Gnostic work, concerning the Age of Giants who devour men—and bearing a strong resemblance to the Apocalypse.(1243) Giants! another fairy‐ tale!

Such, however, has not been the opinion of all the best critics. Dr. Hanneberg places the Book of Enoch along with the Third Book of the Maccabees—at the head of the list of those whose authority stands the nearest to that of the canonical works.(1244)

Verily, “where doctors disagree...”!

As usual, however, they are all right and all wrong. To accept Enoch as a biblical character, a single living person, is like accepting Adam as the first man. Enoch was a generic title, applied to, and borne by, scores of individuals, at all times and ages, and in every race and nation. This may be easily inferred from the fact that the ancient Talmudists and the teachers of Midrashim are not agreed generally in their views about Hanokh, the Son of Yered. Some say Enoch was a great Saint, beloved by God, and “taken alive to heaven,” i.e., one who reached Mukti or Nirvâna, on Earth, as Buddha did and others still do; and others maintain that he was a sorcerer, a wicked magician. This shows only that “Enoch,” or its equivalent, was a term, even during the days of the later Talmudists, which meant “Seer,” “Adept in the Secret Wisdom,” etc., without any specification as to the character of the title‐bearer. Josephus, speaking of Elijah and Enoch,(1245) remarks that:

It is written in the sacred books they [Elijah and Enoch] disappeared, but so that nobody knew that they died.

It means simply that they had died in their personalities, as Yogîs die to this day in India, or even some Christian monks—to the world. They disappear from the sight of men and die—on the terrestrial plane—even for themselves. A seemingly figurative way of speaking, yet literally true.

“Hanokh transmitted the science of (astronomical) calculation and of computing the seasons to Noah,” says the Midrash Pirkah;(1246) R. Eliezar referring to Enoch that which others did to Hermes Trismegistus, for the two are identical in their Esoteric meaning. “Hanokh” in this case, and his “Wisdom,” belong to the cycle of the Fourth Atlantean Race,(1247) and Noah to that of the Fifth.(1248) In this case both represent the Root‐Races, the present one and the one that preceded it. In another sense, Enoch disappeared, “he walked with God, and he was not, for God took him”; the allegory referring to the disappearance of the Sacred and Secret Knowledge from among men; for “God” (or Java Aleim—the high Hierophants, the Heads of the Colleges of Initiated Priests(1249)) took him; in other words, the Enochs or the Enoïchions, the Seers and their Knowledge and Wisdom, became strictly confined to the Secret Colleges of the Prophets with the Jews, and to the Temples with the Gentiles.

Interpreted with the help of merely the symbolical key, Enoch is the type of the dual nature of man—spiritual and physical. Hence he occupies the centre of the Astronomical Cross, as given by Éliphas Lévi from a secret work, which is a Six‐pointed Star, the “Adonai.” In the upper angle of the upper Triangle is the Eagle; in the left lower angle stands the Lion; in the right, the Bull; while between the Bull and the Lion, over them and under the Eagle, is the face of Enoch or Man.(1250) Now the figures on the upper Triangle represent the Four Races, omitting the First, the Chhâyâs or Shadows, and the “Son of Man,” Enos or Enoch, is in the centre, where he stands between the Fourth and the Fifth Races, for he represents the Secret Wisdom of both. These are the four Animals of Ezekiel and of the Revelation. This Double Triangle which, in Isis Unveiled, is faced by the Hindû Ardhanârî, is by far the best. For in the latter, only the three (for us) historical Races are symbolized; the Third, the Androgynous, by Ardha‐nârî; the Fourth, symbolized by the strong, powerful Lion; and the Fifth, the Âryan, by that which is its most sacred symbol to this day, the Bull (and the Cow).

A man of great erudition, a French savant, M. de Sacy, finds several most singular statements in the Book of Enoch, “worthy of the most serious examination,” he says. For instance:

The author [Enoch] makes the solar year consist of 364 days, and seems to know periods of three, of five, and of eight years, followed by four supplementary days, which, in his system, appear to be those of the equinoxes and solstices.(1251)

To which he adds, later on:

I see but one means to palliate them [these “absurdities”]; it is to suppose that the author expounds some fanciful system which may have existed before the order of Nature had been altered at the period of the Universal Deluge.(1252)

Precisely so; and the Secret Doctrine teaches that this “order of nature” has been thus altered, and the series of the Earth’s humanities too. For, as the angel Uriel tells Enoch:

Behold, I have showed thee all things, O Enoch; and all things have I revealed to thee. Thou seest the sun, the moon, and those which conduct the stars of heaven, which cause all their operations, seasons, and arrivals to return. In the days of sinners the years shall be shortened.... The moon shall change its laws....(1253)

In those days also, years before the Great Deluge that carried away the Atlanteans and changed the face of the whole Earth (because “the Earth [or its axis] became inclined”), Nature, geologically, astronomically, and cosmically in general, could not have been the same, just because the Earth had inclined. To quote from Enoch:

And Noah cried with a bitter voice, Hear me; hear me; hear me; three times. And he said,... The earth labours and is violently shaken. Surely, I shall perish with it.(1254)

This, by the way, looks like one of those many “inconsistencies,” if the Bible is read literally. For, to say the least, this is a very strange fear in one who had “found grace in the eyes of the Lord” and been told to build an Ark! But here we find the venerable Patriarch expressing as much fear as if, instead of a “friend” of God, he had been one of the Giants doomed by the wrathful Deity. The Earth had already inclined, and the deluge of waters had become simply a question of time, and yet Noah seems to know nothing of his intended salvation.

A decree had come indeed; the decree of Nature and the Law of Evolution, that the Earth should change its Race, and that the Fourth Race should be destroyed to make room for a better one. The Manvantara had reached its turning point of three and a half Rounds, and gigantic physical Humanity had reached the acme of gross materiality. Hence the apocalyptic verse that speaks of a commandment gone forth that they may be destroyed, “that their end may be”—the end of the Race:

For they knew [truly] every secret of the angels, every oppressive and secret power of the Satans, and every power of those who commit sorcery, as well as of those who make molten images in the whole earth.(1255)

And now a natural question. Who could have informed the apocryphal author of this powerful vision—no matter to what age he may be assigned before the day of Galileo—that the Earth could occasionally incline her axis? Whence did he derive such astronomical and geological knowledge if the Secret Wisdom, of which the ancient Rishis and Pythagoras had drunk, is but a fancy, an invention of later ages? Has Enoch read prophetically perchance in Fréderic Klée’s work on the Deluge the lines:

The position of the terrestrial globe with reference to the sun has evidently been, in primitive times, different from what it is now; and this difference must have been caused by a displacement of the axis of rotation of the earth.

This reminds one of that unscientific statement made by the Egyptian priests to Herodotus, namely, that the Sun has not always risen where it rises now, and that in former times the ecliptic had cut the equator at right angles.(1256)

There are many such “dark sayings” scattered throughout the Purânas, Bible and other Mythologies, and to the Occultist they divulge two facts; (a) that the Ancients knew as well as, and perhaps better than, the moderns do, Astronomy, Geognosy and Cosmography in general; and (b) that the behaviour of the Globe has altered more than once since the primitive state of things. Thus, Xenophantes—on the blind faith of his “ignorant” religion, which taught that Phaeton, in his desire to learn the hidden truth, made the Sun deviate from its usual course—asserts somewhere that, “the Sun turned toward another country”; which is a parallel—slightly more scientific, however, if not as bold—of Joshua stopping the course of the Sun altogether. Yet it may explain the teaching of the Northern Mythology that before the actual order of things the Sun arose in the South, and its placing the Frigid Zone (Jeruskoven) in the East, whereas now it is in the North.(1257)

The Book of Enoch, in short, is a résumé, a compound of the main features of the history of the Third, Fourth and Fifth Races; a very few prophecies from the present age of the world; a long retrospective, introspective and prophetic summary of universal and quite historical events—geological, ethnological, astronomical, and psychic—with a touch of Theogony out of the antediluvian records. The Book of this mysterious personage is referred to and quoted copiously in the Pistis Sophia, and also in the Zohar and its most ancient Midrashim. Origen and Clement of Alexandria held it in the highest esteem. To say, therefore, that it is a Post‐Christian forgery is to utter an absurdity and to become guilty of an anachronism, for Origen, among others, who lived in the second century of the Christian era, mentions it as an ancient and venerable work. The secret and sacred Name and its potency are well and clearly though allegorically described in the old volume. From the eighteenth to the fiftieth chapter, the Visions of Enoch are all descriptive of the Mysteries of Initiation, one of which is the Burning Valley of the “Fallen Angels.”

Perhaps St. Augustine was quite right in saying that the Church rejected the Book of Enoch out of her canon owing to its too great antiquity (ob nimiam antiquitatem).(1258) There was no room for the events noticed in it within the limit of the 4004 years B.C. assigned to the world from its “creation”!

Section VIII. The Symbolism of the Mystery‐Names Iao and Jehovah, with their Relation to the Cross and Circle.

When the Abbé Louis Constant, better known as Éliphas Lévi, said in his Histoire de la Magie that the Sepher Jetzirah, the Zohar, and the Apocalypse of St. John, are the masterpieces of the Occult Sciences, he ought, if he had wished to be correct and clear, to have added—in Europe. It is quite true that these works contain “more significance than words”; and that their “expression is poetical,” while “in numbers” they are “exact.” Unfortunately, however, before any one can appreciate the poetry of the expressions, or the exactness of the numbers, he will have to learn the real significance and meaning of the terms and symbols employed. But man will never learn this so long as he remains ignorant of the fundamental principle of the Secret Doctrine, whether in Oriental Esotericism, or in the kabalistical Symbology—the key, or value, in all their aspects, of the God‐names, Angel‐names, and Patriarch‐names in the Bible, their mathematical or geometrical value, and their relations to manifested Nature.

Therefore, if, on the one hand, the Zohar “astonishes” the mystic, by the profundity of its views and the great simplicity of its images, or the other hand, that work misleads the student by such expressions as those used with respect to Ain Suph and Jehovah, notwithstanding the assurance that:

The book is careful to explain that the human form with which it clothes God is but an image of the Word, and that God should not be expressed by any thought, or any form.

It is well known that Origen Clement, and the Rabbis confessed that the Kabalah and the Bible were veiled and secret books; but few know that the Esotericism of the kabalistic books in their present reëdited form is simply another and still more cunning veil thrown upon the primitive symbolism of these secret volumes.

The idea of representing the hidden Deity by the circumference of a circle, and the Creative Power—male and female, or the Androgynous Word—by the diameter across it, is one of the oldest symbols. It is upon this conception that every great Cosmogony has been built. With the old Âryans, the Egyptians, and the Chaldæans, the symbol was complete, as it embraced the idea of the eternal and immovable Divine Thought in its absoluteness, separated entirely from the incipient stage of the so‐called “creation,” and comprised psychological and even spiritual evolution, and its mechanical work, or cosmogonical construction. With the Hebrews, however, though the former conception is to be distinctly found in the Zohar, and the Sepher Jetzirah, or what remains of the latter—that which has been subsequently embodied in the Pentateuch proper, and especially in Genesis, is simply this secondary stage, to wit, the mechanical law of creation, or rather of construction; while Theogony is hardly, if at all, outlined.

It is only in the first six chapters of Genesis, in the rejected Book of Enoch, and the misunderstood and mistranslated poem of Job, that true echoes of the Archaic Doctrine may now be found. The key to it is lost now, even among the most learned Rabbis, whose predecessors in the early period of the Middle Ages, in their national exclusiveness and pride, and especially in their profound hatred of Christianity, preferred to cast it into the deep sea of oblivion, rather than to share their knowledge with their relentless and fierce persecutors. Jehovah was their own tribal property, inseparable from, and unfit to play a part in, any other but the Mosaic Law. Violently torn out of his original frame, which he fitted and which fitted him, the “Lord God of Abraham and Jacob” could hardly be crammed without damage and breakage into the new Christian Canon. Being the weaker, the Judeans could not help the desecration. They kept, however, the secret of the origin of their Adam Kadmon, or male‐ female Jehovah, and the new tabernacle proved a complete misfit for the old God. They were, indeed, avenged!

The statement that Jehovah was the tribal God of the Jews and no higher, will be denied like many other things. Yet the Theologians are not in a position to tell us, in that case, the meaning of the verses in Deuteronomy, which say quite plainly:

When the Most High [not the “Lord,” or “Jehovah” either] divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds ... according to the number of the children of Israel.... The Lord’s [Jehovah’s] portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.(1259)

This settles the question. So impudent have been the modern translators of Bibles and Scriptures, and so damaging are these verses, that, following in the steps traced for them by their worthy Church Fathers, each translator has rendered these lines in his own way. While the above‐cited quotation is taken verbatim from the English Authorized Version, in the French Bible,(1260) we find the “Most High” translated by “Souverain” (Sovereign!!), the “sons of Adam” rendered by “the children of men,” and the “Lord” changed into the “Eternal.” For impudent sleight‐of‐hand, the French Protestant Church seems thus to have surpassed even English ecclesiasticism.

Nevertheless, one thing is patent: the “Lord’s [Jehovah’s] portion” is his “chosen people” and none else, for, Jacob alone is the lot of his inheritance. What, then, have other nations, who call themselves Âryans, to do with this Semitic Deity, the tribal God of Israel? Astronomically, the “Most High” is the Sun, and the “Lord” is one of his seven planets, whether it be Iao, the Genius of the Moon, or Ildabaoth‐Jehovah, the Genius of Saturn, according to Origen and the Egyptian Gnostics.(1261) Let the “Angel Gabriel,” the “Lord” of Iran, watch over his people, and Michael‐Jehovah, over his Hebrews. These are not the Gods of other nations, nor were they ever those of Jesus. As each Persian Dev is chained to his planet,(1262) so each Hindû Deva (a “Lord”) has its allotted portion, a world, a planet, a nation or a race. Plurality of worlds implies plurality of Gods. We believe in the former, and may recognize, but will never worship the latter.(1263)

It has been repeatedly stated in this work that every religious and philosophical symbol had seven meanings attached to it, each pertaining to its legitimate plane of thought, i.e., either purely metaphysical or astronomical; psychic or physiological, etc. These seven meanings and their applications are difficult enough to learn when taken by themselves; but the interpretation and the right comprehension of them become tenfold more puzzling, when, instead of being correlated, or made to flow consecutively out of, and to follow, each other, each, or any one of these meanings, is accepted as the one and sole explanation of the whole symbolical idea. An instance may be given, as it admirably illustrates the statement. Here are two interpretations, given by two learned Kabalists and scholars, of one and the same verse in Exodus. Moses beseeches the Lord to show him his “glory.” Evidently it is not the crude dead‐letter phraseology as found in the Bible that is to be accepted. There are seven meanings in the Kabalah, of which we may give two as interpreted by the said two scholars. One of them translates while explaining:

“Thou canst not see My face;... I will put thee in a cleft of the rock and I will cover thee with My hand while I pass by. And then I will take away Mine hand, and thou shalt see My a’hoor,” i.e., My back.(1264)

And then the translator adds in a gloss:

That is, I will show you “My back,” i.e., My visible universe, My lower manifestations, but, as a man still in the flesh, thou canst not see My invisible nature. So proceeds the Qabbalah.(1265)

This is correct, and is the cosmo‐metaphysical explanation. And now speaks the other Kabalist, giving the numerical meaning. As it involves a good many suggestive ideas, and is far more fully given, we may allow it more space. This synopsis is from an unpublished MS., and explains more fully what was given in Section III, on the “Holy of Holies.”(1266)

The numbers of the name “Moses” are those of “I am that I am,” so that the names Moses and Jehovah are at one in numerical harmony. The word Moses is משה (5 + 300 + 40), and the sum of the values of its letters is 345; Jehovah—the Genius par excellence of the Lunar Year—assumes the value of 543, or the reverse of 345.

In the third chapter of Exodus, in the 13th and 14th verses, it is said: And Moses said, ... Behold I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them. The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say unto me, What is his name? What shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses,

I Am That I Am.

The Hebrew words for this expression are âhiyé asher âhiyé, and in the value of the sums of their letters stand thus:

אהיה אשר אהיה 21 501 21

... This being his [God’s] name, the sum of the values composing it, 21, 501, 21 is 543, or simply a use of the simple digit numbers in the name of Moses, ... but now so ordered that the name of 345 is reversed, and reads 543.

So that when Moses asks, “Let me see Thy face or glory,” the other rightly and truly replies, “Thou canst not see my face ... but thou shalt see me behind”—the true sense, though not the precise words; for the corner and the behind of 543 is the face of 345. This is

For check and to keep a strict use of a set of numbers to develop certain grand results, for the object of which they are specifically employed.

As the learned Kabalist adds:

In other uses of the numbers, they saw each other face to face. It is strange that if we add 345 to 543 we have 888, which was the Gnostic Cabbalistic value of the name Christ, who was Jehoshua or Joshua. And so also the division of the 24 hours of the day gives three eights as quotient.... The chief end of all this system of Number Checks was to preserve in perpetuity the exact value of the Lunar Year in the Natural measure of Days.

These are the astronomical and numerical meanings in the secret Theogony of sidereo‐cosmical Gods invented by the Chaldæo‐Hebrews,—two meanings out of seven. The other five would astonish the Christians still more.

The series of Œdipuses who have endeavoured to interpret the riddle of the Sphinx, is long indeed. For many ages she has been devouring the brightest and the noblest intellects of Christendom; but now the Sphinx is conquered. In the great intellectual struggle which has ended in the complete victory of the Œdipuses of Symbolism, it is, however, not the Sphinx, who, burning with the shame of defeat, has had to bury herself in the sea, but verily the many‐sided symbol, named Jehovah, whom Christians—the civilized nations—have accepted for their God. The Jehovah symbol has collapsed under the too close analysis, and is—drowned. Symbologists have discovered with dismay that their adopted Deity was only a mask for many other Gods, a euhemerized extinct planet, at best, the Genius of the Moon and Saturn with the Jews, of the Sun and Jupiter with early Christians; that the Trinity—unless they accepted the more abstract and metaphysical meanings given to it by the Gentiles—was, in truth, only an astronomical triad, composed of the Sun (the Father), and the two planets Mercury (the Son) and Venus (the Holy Ghost), Sophia, the Spirit of Wisdom, Love and Truth, and Lucifer, as Christ, the “bright and morning star.”(1267) For, if the Father is the Sun (the “Elder Brother,” in the Eastern Inner Philosophy), the nearest planet to it is Mercury (Hermes, Budha, Thoth), the name of whose Mother on Earth was Maia. Now this planet receives seven times more light than any other; a fact which led the Gnostics to call their Christos, and the Kabalists their Hermes (in the astronomical meaning), the “Seven‐fold Light.” Finally, this God was Bel—the Sun being Bel with the Gauls; Helios, with the Greeks; Baal, with the Phœnicians; El, in Chaldæan, hence El‐ohim, Emanu‐el, and El, “God,” in Hebrew. But even the kabalistic God has vanished in the rabbinical workmanship, and one has now to turn to the innermost metaphysical sense of the Zohar to find in it anything like Ain Suph, the Nameless Deity and the Absolute, so authoritatively and loudly claimed by the Christians. But it is certainly not to be found in the Mosaic books, at any rate by those who try to read without a key to them. Ever since this key was lost, Jews and Christians have tried their best to blend these two conceptions, but in vain. They have only succeeded in finally robbing even the Universal Deity of Its majestic character and primitive meaning.

As was said in Isis Unveiled:

It would seem, therefore, but natural to make a difference between the mystery‐god Ιαω, adopted from the highest antiquity by all who participated in the esoteric knowledge of the priests, and his phonetic counterparts, whom we find treated with so little reverence by the Ophites and other Gnostics.(1268)

In the Ophite gems of King,(1269) we find the name of Iao repeated, and often confounded with that of Ievo, while the latter simply represents one of the Genii antagonistic to Abraxas.... But the name Iao neither originated with, nor was it the sole property of the Jews. Even if it had pleased Moses to bestow the name upon the tutelary “Spirit,” the alleged protector and national deity of the “chosen people of Israel,” there is yet no possible reason why other nationalities should receive Him as the Highest and One‐ living God. But we deny the assumption altogether. Besides, there is the fact that Iaho or Iao was a “mystery name” from the beginning, for יהיה and יה never came into use before the time of king David. Anterior to his time, few or no proper names were compounded with Iah or Jah. It looks rather as though David, being a sojourner among the Tyrians and Philistines,(1270) brought thence the name of Jehovah. He made Zadok high priest, from whom came the Zadokites or Sadducees. He lived and ruled first at Hebron (חברון), Habir‐on or Kabeir‐town, where the rites of the four (mystery‐gods) were celebrated. Neither David nor Solomon recognized either Moses or the law of Moses. They aspired to build a temple to יהוה, like the structures erected by Hiram to Hercules and Venus, Adon and Astarte.

Says Fürst: “The very ancient name of God, Yâho, written in the Greek Ιαω, appears, apart from its derivation, to have been an old mystic name of the Supreme Deity of the Shemites. Hence it was told to Moses when he was initiated at Hor‐eb—the Cave—under the direction of Jethro, the Kenite (or Cainite) priest of Midian. In an old religion of the Chaldæans, whose remains are to be found among the Neo‐Platonists, the highest Divinity, enthroned above the seven Heavens, representing the Spiritual Light‐Principle, ... and also conceived of as Demiurgus,(1271) was called Ιαω (יהו), who was, like the Hebrew Yâho, mysterious and unmentionable, and whose name was communicated to the Initiated. The Phœnicians had a Supreme God, whose name was triliteral and secret, and he was Ιαω.”(1272)

The cross, say the Kabalists, repeating the lesson of the Occultists, is one of the most ancient—nay, perhaps, the most ancient of symbols. This has been demonstrated at the very beginning of the Proem in Volume I. The Eastern Initiates show it coëval with the circle of Deific Infinitude and the first differentiation of the Essence, the union of Spirit and Matter. This interpretation has been rejected, and the astronomical allegory alone has been accepted and made to fit into cunningly imagined terrestrial events.

Let us demonstrate this statement. In Astronomy, as said, Mercury is the son of Cœlus and Lux—of the Sky and Light, or the Sun; in Mythology he is the progeny of Jupiter and Maia. He is the “Messenger” of his Father Jupiter, the Messiah of the Sun; in Greek, his name Hermes means, among other things, the “Interpreter”—the Word, the Logos, or Verbum. Now Mercury is born on Mount Cyllene among shepherds, and is the patron of the latter. As a psychopompic Genius, he conducted the Souls of the Dead to Hades and brought them back again, an office attributed to Jesus after his Death and Resurrection. The symbols of Hermes‐Mercury (Dii Termini) were placed along, and at the turning points of, highways, as crosses are now placed in Italy, and they were cruciform.(1273) Every seventh day the priests anointed these Termini with oil, and once a year hung them with garlands, hence they were the anointed. Mercury, when speaking through his oracles, says:

I am he whom you call the Son of the Father [Jupiter] and Maia. Leaving the King of Heaven [the Sun] I come to help you, mortals.

Mercury heals the blind and restores sight, mental and physical.(1274) He was often represented as three‐headed and called Tricephalus, Triplex, as one with the Sun and Venus. Finally, Mercury, as Cornutus(1275) shows, was sometimes figured under a cubic form, without arms, because “the power of speech and eloquence can prevail without the assistance of arms or feet.” It is this cubic form which connects the Termini directly with the cross, and it is the eloquence or the power of speech of Mercury which made the crafty Eusebius say, “Hermes is the emblem of the Word which creates and interprets all,” for it is the Creative Word; and he shows Porphyry teaching that the Speech of Hermes—now interpreted “Word of God” (!) in Pymander—a Creative Speech (Verbum), is the Seminal Principle scattered throughout the Universe.(1276) In Alchemy “Mercury” is the radical “Moyst” Principle, Primitive or Elementary Water, containing the Seed of the Universe, fecundated by the Solar Fires. To express this fecundating principle, a phallus was often added to the cross (the male and female, or the vertical and the horizontal united) by the Egyptians. The cruciform Termini also represented this dual idea, which was found in Egypt in the cubic Hermes. The author of Source of Measures tells us why.(1277)

As shown by him, the cube unfolded becomes in display a cross of the Tau, or the Egyptian, form; or again, “the circle attached to the Tau gives the ansated cross” of the old Pharaohs. They had known this from their priests and their “King‐Initiates” for ages, and also what was meant by “the attachment of a man to the cross,” which idea “was made to coördinate with that of the origin of human life, and hence the phallic form.” Only the latter came into action æons and ages after the idea of the Carpenter and Artificer of the Gods, Vishva‐karmâ, crucifying the “Sun‐Initiate” on the cruciform lathe. As the same author writes:

The attachment of a man to the cross ... was made use of in this form of display by the Hindûs.(1278)

But, it was made “to coördinate” with the idea of the new rebirth of man by spiritual, not physical regeneration. The Candidate for Initiation was attached to the Tau or astronomical cross with a far grander and nobler idea than that of the origin of mere terrestrial life.

On the other hand, the Semites seem to have had no other or higher purpose in life than that of procreating their species. Thus, geometrically, and according to the reading of the Bible by means of the numerical method, the author of The Source of Measures is quite correct.

The entire [Jewish] system seems to have been anciently regarded as one resting in nature, and one which was adopted by nature, or God, as the basis or law of the exertion practically of creative power—i.e., it was the creative design, of which creation was practically the application. This seems to be established by the fact that, under the system set forth, measures of planetary times serve coördinately as measures of the size of planets, and of the peculiarity of their shapes—i.e., in the extension of their equatorial and polar diameters.... This system [that of creative design] seems to underlie the whole Biblical structure, as a foundation for its ritualism and for its display of the works of the Deity in the way of architecture, by use of the sacred unit of measure in the Garden of Eden, the Ark of Noah, the Tabernacle, and the Temple of Solomon.(1279)

Thus, on the very showing of the defenders of this system, the Jewish Deity is proved to be, at best, only the manifested Duad, never the One Absolute All. Geometrically demonstrated, he is a number; symbolically, a euhemerized Priapus; and this can hardly satisfy a mankind thirsting after the demonstration of real spiritual truths, and the possession of a God with a divine, not anthropomorphic, nature. It is strange that the most learned of modern Kabalists can see in the cross and circle nothing but a symbol of the manifested creative and androgyne Deity in its relation to, and interference with, this phenomenal world.(1280) One author believes that:

However man [read, the Jew and Rabbi] obtained knowledge of the practical measure, ... by which nature was thought to adjust the planets in size to harmonize with the notation of their movements, it seems he did obtain it, and esteemed its possession as the means of his realization of the Deity—that is, he approached so nearly to a conception of a Being having a mind like his own, only infinitely more powerful, as to be able to realize a law of creation established by that Being, which must have existed prior to any creation (kabalistically called the Word).(1281)

This may have satisfied the practical Semite mind, but the Eastern Occultist has to decline the offer of such a God; indeed, a Deity, a Being, “having a mind like that of man, only infinitely more powerful,” is no God that has any room beyond the cycle of creation. He has nought to do with the ideal conception of the Eternal Universe. He is, at best, one of the subordinate creative powers, the Totality of which is called the Sephiroth, the Heavenly Man, and Adam Kadmon, the Second Logos of the Platonists.

This very same idea is clearly found at the bottom of the ablest definitions of the Kabalah and its mysteries, e.g., by John A. Parker, as quoted in the same work:

The key of the Kabala is thought to be the geometrical relation of the area of the circle inscribed in the square, or of the cube to the sphere, giving rise to the relation of diameter to circumference of a circle, with the numerical value of this relation expressed in integrals. The relation of diameter to circumference, being a supreme one connected with the god‐names Elohim and Jehovah (which terms are expressions numerically of these relations, respectively—the first being of circumference, the latter of diameter), embraces all other subordinations under it. Two expressions of circumference to diameter in integrals are used in the Bible: (1) The perfect, and (2) The imperfect. One of the relations between these is such that (2) subtracted from (1) will leave a unit of a diameter value in terms, or in the denomination of the circumference value of the perfect circle, or a unit straight line having a perfect circular value, or a factor of circular value.(1282)

Such calculations can lead one no further than to unriddle the mysteries of the third stage of Evolution, or the “Third Creation of Brahmâ.” The initiated Hindûs know how to “square the circle” far better than any European. But of this more anon. The fact is that the Western Mystics commence their speculation only at that stage when the Universe “falls into matter,” as the Occultists say. Throughout the whole series of kabalistic books we have not met with one sentence that would hint in the remotest way at the psychological and spiritual, as well as at the mechanical and physiological secrets of “creation.” Shall we, then, regard the evolution of the Universe as simply a prototype, on a gigantic scale, of the act of procreation; as “divine” phallicism, and rhapsodize on it as the evilly‐inspired author of a late work of this name has done? The writer does not think so. And she feels justified in saying so, since the most careful reading of the Old Testament—esoterically, as well as exoterically—seems to have carried the most enthusiastic enquirers no further than a certainty on mathematical grounds that from the first to the last chapter of the Pentateuch every scene, every character or event are shown connected, directly or indirectly, with the origin of birth in its crudest and most brutal form. Thus, however interesting and ingenious the rabbinical methods, the writer, in common with other Eastern Occultists, must prefer those of the Pagans.

It is not, then, in the Bible that we have to search for the origin of the cross and circle, but beyond the Flood. Therefore, returning to Éliphas Lévi and the Zohar, we answer for the Eastern Occultists and say that, applying practice to principle, they agree entirely with Pascal, who says that:

God is a circle, the centre of which is everywhere and the circumference nowhere.

Whereas the Kabalists say the reverse, and maintain it, solely out of their desire to veil their doctrine. By the way, the definition of Deity by the circle is not Pascal’s at all, as Éliphas Lévi thought. It was borrowed by the French Philosopher from either Mercury Trismegistus or Cardinal Cusa’s Latin work, De Doctâ Ignorantiâ, in which he makes use of it. It is, moreover, disfigured by Pascal, who replaces the words “Cosmic Circle,” which stand symbolically in the original inscription, by the word Theos. With the Ancients both words were synonymous.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us