The Frenchman knew well, when he adopted the title of Freemason,

that it was no question of building the smallest wall, but that,

initiated into the Mysteries veiled under the name of Freemasonry,

which could only be the continuation or the renovation of the

ancient Mysteries, he was to become a “Mason” after the manner of

Apollo or Amphion. And do not we know that the ancient initiated

poets, when speaking of the _foundation of a city_, meant thereby

the establishment of a doctrine? Thus Neptune, God of reasoning,

and Apollo, God of hidden things, presented themselves as masons

before Laomedon, Priam’s father, to help him to build the city of

Troy—that is to say, to establish the Trojan religion.(1859)

Such veiled sentences with double meaning abound in ancient classical

writers. Therefore, if an attempt had been made to show that, for

instance, Laomedon was the founder of a branch of Archaic Mysteries, in

which the earth‐bound material soul, the Fourth Principle, was personified

in Menelaus’ faithless wife, the fair Helen, and if Ragon had not come to

corroborate what we asserted, we might have been told that no classical

author speaks of it, and that Homer shows Laomedon building a _city_, not

founding an _Esoteric Worship_ or _Mysteries_. Who are those left now,

save a few Initiates, who understand the language and correct meaning of

such symbolical terms?

But though we have pointed to many a misconceived symbol bearing on our

thesis, there still remains more than one difficulty to be overcome. Most

important among several such obstacles is that of chronology. But this

could hardly be helped. Wedged in between theological chronology and that

of the Geologists, backed by all the materialistic Anthropologists, who

assign dates to man and nature which fit in with their own theories

alone—what could the writer do except what she has done? Since Theology

places the Deluge 2448 B.C., and the World’s Creation only 5890 years ago;

and since the accurate researches by the methods of “exact” Science, have

led the Geologists and Physicists to assign to the incrusted age of our

Globe between ten million and one thousand million of years(1860) (a

_trifling_ difference, verily!); and since the Anthropologists, to vary

their divergence of opinion as to the appearance of man, ask for between

25,000 and 500,000 years—what can one who studies the Occult Doctrine do,

but bravely present the Esoteric calculations before the world?

But to do this, corroboration by even a few “historical” proofs has been

necessary, though all know the real value of the so‐called “historical

evidence.” For, whether man appeared on Earth 18,000 or 18,000,000 years

ago, can make no difference to profane history, since it only begins about

a couple of thousand years before our era, and since, even then, it

grapples hopelessly with the clash and din of contradictory and mutually‐

destroying opinions around it. Nevertheless, in view of the respect in

which the average reader has been brought up for exact Science, even that

short Past would remain meaningless, unless the Esoteric Teachings were

corroborated and supported on the spot—_whenever possible_—by references

to historical names of a so‐called historical period. This is the only

guide that can be given to the beginner before he is permitted to start

among the, to him, unfamiliar windings of that dark labyrinth called the

pre‐historic ages. This necessity has been complied with. It is only hoped

that the desire to do so, which has led the writer to be constantly

bringing ancient and modern evidence as a corroboration of the archaic and

quite unhistoric Past, will not bring on her the accusation of having

sorely jumbled up, without order or method, the various and widely‐

separated periods of history and tradition. But literary form and method

had to be sacrificed to the greater clearness of the general exposition.

To accomplish the proposed task, the writer has had to resort to the

rather unusual means of dividing each Volume into three Parts; the first

of which only is the consecutive, though very fragmentary, history of the

Cosmogony and the Evolution of Man on this Globe. In treating of Cosmogony

and then of the Anthropogenesis of mankind, it was necessary to show that

on religion, from the very earliest, has ever been based entirely on

fiction, that none was the object of special revelation, and that it is

dogma alone which has ever been killing primeval truth; finally, that no

human‐born doctrine, no creed, however sanctified by custom and antiquity,

can compare in sacredness with the religion of Nature. The Key of Wisdom

that unlocks the massive gates leading to the arcana of the innermost

sanctuaries can be found hidden in her bosom only; and that bosom is in

the countries pointed to by the great seer of the past century, Emanuel

Swedenborg. There lies the Heart of Nature, that shrine whence issued the

early races of primeval humanity, and which is the cradle of _physical_

man.

Thus far have proceeded the rough outlines of the beliefs and tenets of

the archaic, earliest Races, contained in their hitherto secret scriptural

Records. But our explanations are by no means complete, nor do they

pretend to give out the full text, or to have been read by the help of

more than three or four keys out of the sevenfold bunch of Esoteric

interpretation; and even this has only been partially accomplished. The

work is too gigantic for any one person to undertake, far more to

accomplish. Our main concern has been simply to prepare the soil. This, we

trust we have done. These two Volumes only constitute the work of a

pioneer who has forced his way into the well‐nigh impenetrable jungle of

the virgin forests of the Land of the Occult. A commencement has been made

in felling and uprooting the deadly upas trees of superstition, prejudice,

and conceited ignorance, so that these two Volumes should form for the

student a fitting prelude for other works. Until the rubbish of the ages

is cleared away from the minds of the Theosophists to whom these pages are

dedicated, it is impossible that the more practical teaching contained in

the Third Volume should be understood. Consequently, it entirely depends

upon the reception with which Volumes I and II shall meet at the hands of

Theosophists and Mystics, whether the last Volume will ever be published.

SATYÂT NÂSTI PARO DHARMAH.

THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN TRUTH.

END OF VOLUME II.

[Transcriber’s Note: Obvious printer’s errors have been corrected.]

FOOTNOTES

1 See _Genesis_ ii. 19. Adam is formed in verse 7, and in verse 19 it

is said: “Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the

field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see

what he would call them.” Thus man was created _before_ the animals;

for the animals mentioned in chapter i are the signs of the Zodiac,

while the man, “male and female,” is not man, but the Host of the

Sephiroth, Forces, or Angels, “made in his [God’s] image and after

his likeness.” The Adam, man, is not made in that likeness, nor is

it so asserted in the _Bible_. Moreover, the Second Adam is

Esoterically a septenary which represents seven men, or rather

groups of men. For the first Adam, the Kadmon, is the synthesis of

the _ten_ Sephiroth. Of these, the upper Triad remains in the

Archetypal World as the future “Trinity,” while the seven lower

Sephiroth create the manifested material world; and this septennate

is the Second Adam. _Genesis_, and the mysteries upon which it was

fabricated, came from Egypt. The “God” of the 1st chapter of

_Genesis_ is the Logos, and the “Lord God” of the 2nd chapter the

Creative Elohim, the lower Powers.

2 Thus saith Pymander: “This is the mystery that to this day was

hidden. Nature being mingled with the Heavenly Man [Elohim, or

Dhyânis], brought forth a wonder ... seven Men, all males and

females [Hermaphrodite] ... according to the nature of the seven

Governors” (ii. 29), or the seven Hosts of the Pitris or Elohim, who

projected or created him. This is very clear, but yet, see the

interpretations of even our modern theologians, men supposed to be

intellectual and learned. In the _Theological and Philosophical

Works of Hermes Trismegistus, Christian [?] Neoplatonist_, a work

compiled by John David Chambers, of Oriel College, Oxford, the

translator wonders “for whom these seven Men are intended?” He

solves the difficulty by concluding that, as “the original pattern

Man [Adam Kadmon of _Genesis_ i] was masculine‐feminine, ... the

seven may signify the succeeding patriarchs named in _Genesis_” (p.

9). A truly theological way of cutting the Gordian knot!

3 George Smith’s _Chaldean Account of Genesis_, p. 103.

4 Compare _Zohar_, _Siphra Dtzenioutha_, _Idra Suta_, 2928, Franck,

_La Kabbale_, p. 205.

5 _Siphra Dtzenioutha._

6 As it is now asserted that the Chaldæan tablets, which give the

allegorical description of Creation, the Fall, and the Flood, even

to the legend of the Tower of Babel, were written “before the time

of Moses” (Smith’s _Chaldean Account of Genesis_), how can the

_Pentateuch_ be called a “revelation”? It is simply another version

of the same story.

7 _Philosophumena_, v. 7; Miller’s edition, p. 98.

8 _Ibid._, p. 108.

9 P. 86.

10 See Pliny, iv, c. 12; Strabo, 10; Herodotus, vii, c. 109; Pausanias,

vii, c. 4, etc.

11 _Chaldean Account of Genesis_, p. 82.

12 See _Bund._, 79, 12.

13 By “original” we mean the Amshaspend, called “Zarathushtra, the lord

and ruler of the Vara made by Yima in that land.” There were several

Zarathushtras or Zertusts, the _Dabistan_ alone enumerating

thirteen; but these were all reincarnations of the first one. The

last Zoroaster was the founder of the Fire‐temple of Azareksh, and

the writer of the works on the primeval sacred Magian religion

destroyed by Alexander.

14 In India called a “Day of Brahmâ.”

15 x. 86.

16 See Volcker, _Mythological Geography_, pp. 145 to 170.

17 _Mythical Monsters_, p. 47.

18 It is to be remarked, however, that Mr. Wallace does not accept Mr.

Sclater’s idea, and even opposes it. Mr. Sclater supposes a land or

continent formerly uniting Africa, Madagascar, and India but not

Australia and India; and Mr. A. R. Wallace shows, in his

_Geographical Distribution of Animals_ and _Island Life_, that the

hypothesis of such a land is quite uncalled for on the alleged

zoological grounds. But he admits that a much closer proximity of

India and Australia did certainly exist, and at a time so very

remote that it was “certainly pre‐tertiary,” adding in a private

letter that “no name has been given to this supposed land.” Yet the

land did exist, and was of course “pre‐tertiary,” for Lemuria, if we

accept this name for the third Continent, had perished before

Atlantis fully developed, and Atlantis had sunk and its chief

portions disappeared before the end of the Miocene period.

19 See _Esoteric Buddhism_.

20 One more “coincidence”:

“Now it is proved that in geologically recent times, this region of

North Africa was in fact a peninsula of Spain, and that its union

with Africa (proper) was effected on the North by the rupture of

Gibraltar, and on the South by an upheaval to which the Sahara owes

its existence. The shores of this former sea of Sahara are still

marked by the shells of the same Gastropoda that live on the shores

of the Mediterranean.” (Prof. Oscar Schmidt, _Doctrine of Descent

and Darwinism_, p. 244.)

21 iii. fol. 10a.

22 A. Winchell, Professor of Geology, _World‐Life_, p. 369.

23 Mr. Charles Gould, late geological surveyor of Tasmania, in

_Mythical Monsters_, p. 84.

24 Sir Charles Lyell, who is credited with having “happily invented”

the terms Eocene, Miocene, and Pliocene, to mark the three divisions

of the Tertiary Age, ought really to have settled upon some

approximate length for his “mind‐offspring.” Having left the

duration of these periods, however, to the speculations of

specialists, the greatest confusion and perplexity are the result of

that happy thought. It seems like a hopeless task to succeed in

quoting a single set of figures from one work, without the risk of

finding it contradicted by the same author in an earlier or a

subsequent volume. Sir William Thomson, one of the most eminent

among the modern authorities, has changed his opinion about half‐a‐

dozen times upon the age of the Sun and the date of the

consolidation of the Earth’s crust. In Thomson and Tait’s _Natural

Philosophy_, we find only ten million years allowed since the time

when the temperature of the Earth permitted vegetable life to appear

on it. (App. E _et seq._; also _Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin._, xxiii. Pt.

1, 157, 1862, where 847 is cancelled.) Mr. Darwin gives Sir William

Thomson’s estimate as “a minimum of 98 and a maximum of 200 millions

of years since the consolidation of the crust.” (See Ch. Gould, _op.

cit._, p. 83.) In the same work (_Nat. Phil._) 80 millions are given

from the time of incipient incrustation to the present state of the

world. And in his last lecture, as shown elsewhere, Sir William

Thomson declares (1887) that the Sun is not older than 15 millions

of years! Meanwhile, basing his arguments as to the limits of the

age of the Sun’s heat, on figures previously established by Sir

William Thomson, Mr. Croll allows 60 millions of years since the

beginning of the Cambrian period. This is hopeful for the lovers of

_exact_ knowledge. Thus, whatever figures are given by Occult

Science, they are sure to be corroborated by those of some one among

the modern men of Science who are considered as authorities.

25 See _Proceedings_, Royal Society, London, xxviii. 281.

26 Gould, _Mythical Monsters_, p. 91.

27 Only forty‐nine Shlokas out of several hundred are here given, and

not every verse is translated verbatim, a periphrasis being

sometimes used for the sake of clearness and intelligibility, where

a literal translation would be quite unintelligible.

28 The idea and the spirit of the sentence only is here given, as a

verbal translation would convey very little to the reader.

29 The Fourth Globe, or our Earth. All the glosses on the translation

of the text of the Stanzas and Commentaries are the writer’s. In

some places they may be incomplete and even inadequate from the

Hindû standpoint; but in the meaning attached to them in Trans‐

Himâlayan Esotericism they are correct. In every case the writer

takes any blame upon herself. As she has never claimed personal

infallibility, that which is given on her own authority may leave

much to be desired, particularly in the very abstruse cases where

too deep metaphysic is involved. The teaching is offered as it is

understood; and seeing that there are seven keys of interpretation

to every symbol and allegory, a meaning which may not be suitable

from, say, the psychological or astronomical aspect, will

nevertheless be found quite correct from the physical or

metaphysical.

30 The Planetary Spirits.

31 Loka Chakshus.

32 The Planets.

33 According to Dr. A. Wilder’s learned definition, Genesis, γένεσις,

is not generation, but “_a coming out of the eternal_ into the

Cosmos and Time”; “a coming from _esse_ into _exsistere_,” or from

“Be‐ness” into “Being”—as a Theosophist would say.

34 For a clearer explanation of the origins, as contained in the

Esotericism of the _Bhagavad Gita_, see the Notes thereon published

in _The Theosophist_ for February, March and June, 1887, Madras.

35 See the Sephirothal Tree.

36 _Zohar_, _Idra Suta_, Sec. VII.

37 J. B. Alden; New York, 1888: ii. 432, 434.

38 It has been repeatedly stated that the Serpent is the symbol of

wisdom and of Occult knowledge. “The Serpent has been connected with

the god of wisdom from the earliest times of which we have any

historical notice,” writes C. Staniland Wake. “This animal was the

especial symbol of Thoth or Taut ... and of all those gods, such as

Hermes [?] and Seth who can be connected with him. This is true also

of the third member of the primitive Chaldæan triad, Hea or Hoa.”

According to Sir Henry Rawlinson, “the most important titles of this

deity refer to ‘his functions as the source of all knowledge and

science.’ Not only is he ‘the intelligent fish,’ but his name may be

read as signifying both ‘life’ and a ‘serpent’ [an initiated Adept],

and he may be considered as ‘figured by the great serpent which

occupies so conspicuous a place among the symbols of the gods on the

black stones recording Babylonian benefactions.’ ” (_The Great

Pyramid_, p. 75). Esculapius, Serapis, Pluto, Esmun and Kneph, are

all deities with the attributes of the serpent, says Dupuis. They

are all _healers_, givers of health, spiritual and physical, and of

_enlightenment_. The crown formed of an asp, the Thermuthis belongs

to Isis, Goddess of Life and Healing. The _Upanishads_ have a

treatise on the _Science of Serpents_—in other words, the Science of

Occult Knowledge; and the Nâgas of the exoteric Buddhist are not

“the fabulous creatures, of the nature of serpents ... being

superior to man, and regarded as protectors of the law of Buddha,”

as Schlagintweit believes, but real living men, some superior to men

by virtue of their Occult Knowledge, and the _protectors of Buddha’s

law_, inasmuch as _they interpret his metaphysical tenets

correctly_, others inferior _morally_ as being “black magicians.”

Therefore it is truly declared that Gautama Buddha “is said to have

taught them a more philosophical religious system than to men, who

were not sufficiently advanced to understand it at the time of his

appearance” (_ibid._, p. 72).

39 Compare the _Symbols of the Bonzes_.

40 The Mandragora is the Mandrake of the _Bible_, of Rachel and Leah.

The roots of the plant are fleshy, hairy, and forked, representing

roughly the limbs, the body, and even head of a man. Its magical and

mysterious properties have been proclaimed in fable and play from

the most archaic ages. From Rachel and Leah, who indulged in

witchcraft with them, down to Shakespeare, who speaks of

“shrieking”—

“Like mandrakes torn out of the earth

That living mortals, hearing them, run mad”

—the mandragora was _the_ magic plant _par excellence_.

These roots are without any apparent stalk, large leaves growing out

of the head of the root, like a gigantic crop of hair. They present

little similitude to man when found in Spain, Italy, Asia Minor, or

Syria, but on the Isle of Candia, and in Karamania near the city of

Adan, they have a wonderfully human form, and are very highly prized

as amulets. They are also worn by women as a charm against

sterility, and for other purposes. They are especially effective in

“Black Magic.”

41 The Sun.

42 Earth.

43 Copernicus wrote his theories on the “Revolution of the Heavenly

Bodies” in the sixteenth century, and the _Zohar_, even if compiled

by Moses de Leon in the thirteenth century, states that:

“In the Book of Hammannunah, the Old (or, the Ancient), we learn ...

that the earth turns upon itself in the form of a circle; that some

are on top, the others below; that ... there are some countries of

the earth which are lightened, whilst others are in darkness; these

have the day, when for the former it is night; and there are

countries in which it is constantly day, or in which at least the

night continues only some instants.” (_Zohar_, iii, fol. 10a, quoted

in Myer’s _Qabbalah_, p. 139.)

44 See also the 21st Fargard of the _Vendídád_ on the celestial

militia.

45 _Idolat._, II. 373.

46 Science teaches that Venus receives from the Sun twice as much light

and heat as the Earth. Thus this Planet, precursor of the dawn and

the twilight, the most radiant of all the Planets, is said to give

the Earth one‐third of the supply she receives, and has two parts

left for herself. This has an Occult as well as an astronomical

meaning.

47 “As it is above, so below,” is the fundamental axiom of Occult

Philosophy. As the Logos is seven‐fold, _i.e._, throughout Kosmos it

appears as seven Logoi under seven different forms, or, as taught by

learned Brâhmans, “each of these is the central figure of one of the

seven main branches of the ancient Wisdom Religion”; and, as the

seven principles which correspond to the seven distinct states of

Prajnâ, or Consciousness, are allied to seven states of Matter and

seven forms of Force, the division must be the same in all that

concerns the Earth.

48 Venus is thus ♀, the Earth ♁.

49 In the Esoteric Philosophy it is male and female, or hermaphrodite;

hence the “bearded” Venus in mythology.

50 Therefore, putting aside its religio‐metaphysical aspect, the Cross

of the Christians is symbolically far more phallic than the Pagan

Svastika. Compare vol. i. pp. 34, 35.

51 The ansated cross is the astronomical planetary sign of Venus,

“signifying the existence of _parturient energy_ in the sexual

sense, and this was one of the attributes of Isis, the Mother, of

Eve, Hauvah, or Mother‐Earth, and was so recognized among all the

ancient peoples in one or another mode of expression.” (From a

modern Kabalistic MS.)

52 See Moore’s _Hindû Pantheon_.

53 Athenæus shows that the first letter of Satan’s name was represented

in days of old by an arc and crescent; and some Roman Catholics,

kind, good men, would persuade the public that it is in honour of

Lucifer’s crescent‐like horns that Mussulmans have chosen the

crescent for their national arms. Venus, ever since the

establishment of Roman Catholic dogmatism, has been identified with

Satan and Lucifer, or the Great Dragon, contrary to all reason and

logic. As shown by symbologists and Astronomers:

“The association between the serpent and the idea of darkness had an

astronomical foundation. The position which the constellation Draco

at one time occupied showed that the Great Serpent was the ruler of

the night. This constellation was formerly at the very centre of the

heavens, and is so extensive that it was called the Great Dragon.

Its body spreads over seven signs of the Zodiac; and Dupuis, who

sees in the Dragon of the Apocalypse a reference to the celestial

serpent, says, ‘It is not astonishing that a constellation so

extended should be represented by the author of that book as a great

dragon with seven heads, who drew the third part of the stars from

heaven and cast them to the earth.’ ” (Staniland Wake, _The Great

Pyramid_, p. 79; Dupuis, iii. 255.)

Only Dupuis never knew _why_ Draco, once the pole‐star—the symbol of

Guide, Guru and Director—had been thus degraded by posterity. “The

Gods of our fathers are our devils,” says an Asiatic proverb. When

Draco ceased to be the “lode‐star,” the guiding sidereal divinity,

it shared the fate of all the fallen Gods. Seth and Typhon was at

one time, Bunsen tells us, “a great God universally adored

throughout Egypt, who conferred on the sovereigns of the 18th and

19th Dynasties the symbols of life and power. But subsequently, in

the course of the 20th Dynasty, he is suddenly treated as an evil

Demon, insomuch that his effigies and name are obliterated on all

the monuments and inscriptions that could be reached.” The real

Occult reason will be given in these pages.

54 _De Civitate Dei_, LXXI. viii.

55 Shukra is the son of Bhrigu the great Rishi, and one of the Seven

Prajâpati, the founder of the Race of Bhârgavas, in which Parashu

Râma is born.

56 This is a flat contradiction of Swedenborg, who _saw_, in “the first

Earth of the Astral World,” inhabitants dressed as are the peasants

in Europe; and on the Fourth Earth women clad as are the

shepherdesses in a _bal masqué_! Even the famous astronomer Huygens

laboured under the mistaken idea that other worlds and planets have

species of beings identical with those who live on our Earth,

possessing the same figures, senses, brain‐power, arts, sciences,

dwellings, even to the same fabric for their wearing apparel!

(_Théorie du Monde._)

57 This is a modern gloss. It is added to the old Commentaries for the

clearer comprehension of those disciples who study Esoteric

Cosmogony after having passed through Western learning. The earlier

Glosses are too redundant with adjectives and figures of speech to

be easily assimilated.

58 “Beyond” the Great Range, means, in this case, India, as being the

Trans‐Himâlayan region for the Tibetan region.

59 The term Pitris is used by us in these Shlokas to facilitate their

comprehension, but it is not so used in the original Stanzas, where

they have distinct appellations of their own, besides being called

“Fathers” and “Progenitors.”

60 It is erroneous to take literally the _worship_ of the human

Bodhisattvas, or Manjushrî. It is true that, exoterically, the

Mahâyâna school teaches adoration of these without distinction, and

that Huien‐Tsang speaks of some disciples of Buddha as being

worshipped. But, Esoterically, it is not the disciple or the learned

Manjushrî _personally_ that received honours, but the divine

Bodhisattvas and Dhyâni‐Buddhas that animated (_amilakha_, as the

Mongolians say) the human forms.

61 The author of this work is Augustus Le Plongeon. He and his wife are

well known in the United States for their untiring labours in

Central America. It is they who discovered the sepulchre of the

royal Kan Coh, at Cichen‐Itza. The author seems to believe and to

seek to prove that the Esoteric learning of the Âryans and the

Egyptians was derived from the Mayas. But, although certainly coëval

with Plato’s Atlantis, the Mayas belonged to the Fifth Continent,

which was preceded by Atlantis and Lemuria.

62 More correctly _In Matrem Deorum_, _Oratio_ v.

63 P. 143.

64 These _seven caves_, _seven cities_, etc., etc., stand in every case

for the seven centres, or zones, upon which the seven primitive

groups of the first Root‐Race were born.

65 The engraving is reproduced in the _Sacred Mysteries of the Mayas

and the Quiches_ on p. 134.

66 See _Source of Measures_, p. 50‐53.

67 See _Isis Unveiled_, II. pp. 300 _et seq._, for a proof of the

antiquity of the decimal system of figures.

68 See _Masonic Review_, Cincinnati, June, 1886, Art. “The

Cabbalah.—No. VI,” p. 10.

69 _Ibid._, _loc. cit._

70 _Ibid._, p. 11.

71 See _Source of Measures_, pp. 276, _et seq._, App. VII.

72 Art., _Masonic Review_, pp. 11, 12.

73 In the Book _Al‐Chazari_, by Jehuda‐ha‐Levi, translated by Dr. D.

Cassel.

74 Art. cited, pp. 12, 13.

75 i. pp. 117 _et seq._

76 Art. cited, p. 2.

77 _Ibid._, p. 14.

78 The appellation _Ak‐ad_ (or Akkadians) is of the same class as _Ad‐

m_, _Ha‐va_ (Eve) _Æd‐en_ (Eden); _Ak‐Ad_ meaning “Son of _Ad_,”

like the sons of Ad in Ancient Arabia. _Ad‐ad_, the “only one” and

the “first,” was the _Ad‐on_ or “Lord” of Syria and consort of _Ad‐

ar‐gat_ or Aster’t, the Syrian Goddess. And Gan‐Æden (Eden) or

Gandunia was Babylonia and Mesopotamia. In Assyrian _Ak_ meant

Creator, the letter _k_ being pronounced _kh_ (_ah_) gutturally.

According to Swedenborg’s mysticism Adam was not a man but a church

(?) of primitive light. In the _Vedas_, _Ad_‐iti is the primitive

light, the Âkâsha of the phenomenal world.

79 Adam‐Jehovah, Brahmâ and Mars are, in one sense, identical; they are

all symbols for primitive or initial _generative powers_ for the

purposes of human procreation. Adam is red, and so also are

Brahmâ‐Virâj and Mars—God and Planet. Water is the “blood” of the

Earth; therefore, all these names are connected with Earth and

Water. “It takes _earth_ and _water_ to create a _human_ soul,” says

Moses. Mars is identical with Kârttikeya, God of War (in one

sense)—which God is born of the Sweat of Shiva, Shiva‐gharmaja and

the Earth. In the _Mahâbhârata_ he is shown as born without the

intervention of a woman. And he is also called Lohita, the Red, like

Adam, and the other “first men.” Hence, the author of _The Source of

Measures_ is quite right in thinking that Mars (and all the other

Gods of like attributes), “being the _god of war_ and of

_bloodshed_, was but a secondary idea flowing out of the primary one

of shedding of blood in conception for the first time.” Hence

Jehovah became later a fighting God, “Lord of Hosts,” and one who

commands war. He is the aggressive Zodh—or Cain, by permutation, who

_slew_ his (female) _brother_, whose “blood crieth from the ground,”

the _Earth_ having opened _her mouth_ to receive the _blood_.

(_Genesis_ iii.)

80 Apollo Karneios is certainly a Greek transformation from the Hindû

Krishna‐Karna. Karna means radiant, and Karneios, which was a title

of Apollo with the Celts as with the Greeks, meant “Sun‐born.”

81 Kumuda‐Pati.

82 Pitri‐Pati.

83 Budha, Mercury.

84 The Moon.

85 Ushanas‐Shukra, or Venus, is our Lucifer, the Morning‐Star, of

course. The ingenuity of this allegory in its manifold meanings is

great indeed. Thus Brihaspati (the Planet Jupiter), or

Brahmanaspati, is, in the _Rig Veda_, a deity who is the symbol and

the prototype of the _exoteric_ or ritualistic worship. He is

priest, sacrificer, suppliant, and the medium through which the

prayers of mortals reach the Gods. He is the Purohita (Family

Priest, or Court Chaplain) of the Hindû Olympus and the spiritual

Guru of the Gods. Soma is the Mystery God and presides over the

mystic and Occult nature in man and the Universe. Târâ, the priest’s

wife, who symbolizes the worshipper, prefers Esoteric truths to

their mere shell, exotericism; hence she is shown as carried off by

Soma. Now Soma is the sacred juice of that name, giving mystic

visions and trance revelations, the _result of which union_ is Budha

(Wisdom), Mercury, Hermes, etc.; that Science in short which to this

day is proclaimed by the Brihaspatis of Theology as Devilish and

Satanic. What wonder that by expanding the cycle of this allegory we

find Christian Theology espousing the quarrel of the Hindû Gods, and

regarding Ushanas (Lucifer), who helped Soma against that ancient

personification of ritualistic worship (Brahmanaspati, the Lord of

the Brâhmans, now become Jupiter‐Jehovah) as Satan, the “Enemy of

God”!

86 As shown elsewhere, it is only the Heavenly Man, Adam‐Kadmon, of the

first chapter of _Genesis_, who is made “in the image and likeness

of God.” Adam of the second chapter is not said to be made in that

_image_ nor in the divine likeness, before he ate of the forbidden

fruit. The former Adam is the Sephirothal Host; the second Adam is

the mindless First human Root‐Race; the third Adam is the Race that

separated, whose eyes are opened.

87 The Earth.

88 Achyuta is an almost untranslatable term. It means that which is not

subject to fall or change for the worse: the Unfalling; and it is

the reverse of Chyuta, the Fallen. The Dhyânîs who incarnate in the

human forms of the Third Root‐Race and endow them with intellect

(Manas) are called the Chyuta for they fall into generation.

89 This is perhaps the reason why, in the _Bhagavad Gîtâ_, we are told

that Brahmâ had communicated to Nârada in the beginning that all men

whatsoever, even Mlechchhas, outcasts and barbarians, might know the

true nature of Vâsudeva and learn to have faith in that Deity.

90 See _Asiatic Researches_, i. 265.

91 _Book of God_, 60.

92 Shesha, who is also Ananta, the infinite, and the “Cycle of

Eternity” in Esotericism, is credited with having given his

astronomical knowledge to Garga, the oldest astronomer of India, who

propitiated him, and forthwith knew all about the Planets and how to

read omens.

93 See _The History of Indian Literature_, p. 253, by Prof. A. Weber:

in Trübner’s Oriental Series.

94 Even the Maya Indians of Guatemala had their Zodiac from untold

antiquity. And “primitive man acted in the same manner independently

of time or locality in every age,” observes a French writer.

95 _Ibid._, p. 2.

96 The _Tirukkanda Panchanga_, for the Kali Yuga 4986, by Chintamany

Raghauaracharya, son of the famous Government astronomer of Madras,

and Tartakamala Venkata Krishna Rao.

97 Of years, 300 million years, or Three Occult Ages. The _Rig Veda_

has the same division. In the “Physician’s Hymn,” (X 97 1) it is

said that “the plants came into being _Three Ages_ (Triyugam) before

the gods” on our Earth. (See “Chronology of the Brâhmans” at the end

of this Stanza.)

98 Forms.

99 Minerals.

100 Vegetation.

101 Sarísripa, svapada.

102 The Earth.

103 These two must not be confused with the Seven Creations or Divisions

in each Kalpa. The _Primary_ and _Secondary_ Creations are here

meant.

104 In _Bereschith Rabba_, Parscha IX.

105 i. 31.

106 See _Hibbert Lectures_, 1887, Sayce, p. 39.

107 Whence the identity of the ideas? The Chinese have the same

traditions. According to the commentator Kwoh P’oh, in the work

called _Shan‐Hai‐King_, “Wonders by Sea and Land,” a work which was

written by the historiographer Chung Ku from engravings on nine urns

made by the Emperor Yü (B.C. 2255), an interview is mentioned with

men _having two distinct faces on their heads_, before and behind,

monsters with bodies of goats and human faces, etc. Gould, in his

_Mythical Monsters_ (p. 27), giving the names of some authors on

Natural History, mentions _Shan‐Hai‐King_. “According to the

commentator Kwoh P’oh (A.D. 276‐324) this work was compiled three

thousand years before his time, or at seven dynasties’ distance.

Yang Sun of the Ming Dynasty (commencing A.D. 1368) states that it

was compiled by Kung Chia and Chung Ku (?)”—as stated above. “Chung

Ku ... at the time of the last emperor of the Hia dynasty (B.C.

1818), fearing that the emperor might destroy the books treating of

the ancient time, carried them in his flight to Yin.”

108 Cory’s _Ancient Fragments_, original edition, p. 25.

109 _Qabbalah_, p. 246.

110 From the mineral, vegetable, and animal remains.

111 Rounds.

112 Solar‐lunar.

113 Gods and Planetary Spirits, especially the Ribhus. “The three

Ribhus” who also become “thrice seven” in number of their gifts.

114 Remember the “winged races” of Plato, and the _Popol Vuh_ accounts

of the first human race, which could walk, fly, and see objects,

however distant.

115 See _Mythical Monsters_, by Charles Gould.

116 In the first volume of the lately published _Introduction à l’Étude

des Races Humaines_, by M. de Quatrefages, there is proof that since

the Post‐Tertiary Period and even before that time—since many Races

were already scattered during that Age on the face of the Earth—man

has not altered one iota in his physical structure. And if man was

surrounded for ages by a fauna that altered from one period or cycle

to another, which died out, which was reborn in other forms—so that

now there does not exist one single animal on Earth, large or small,

contemporary with the man of that period—if, then, every animal has

been transformed save man himself, this fact goes to prove not only

his antiquity, but that he is a _distinct Kingdom_. Why should he

alone have escaped transformation? Because, says de Quatrefages, the

weapon used by him, in his struggle with Nature, and the ever‐

changing geological conditions and elements, was “his _psychic

force_, not his physical strength or body,” as in the case of

animals. Give man only that dose of intelligence and reason with

which other mammalia are endowed, and with his present bodily

organization he will show himself the most helpless of creatures of

Earth. And as everything goes to prove that the human organism with

all its characteristics, peculiarities and idiosyncrasies existed

already on our Globe in those far distant geological periods when

there was not yet _one single specimen of the now‐existing forms of

mammalia_, what is the unavoidable conclusion? Why this: Since all

the human races are of one and the same species, it follows that

this species is the _most ancient of all_ the now‐living mammalia.

Therefore it is the most stable and persevering of all, and was

already as fully developed as it is now when all the other mammalia

now known had not made even their first approach to appearance on

this Earth. Such is the opinion of the great French Naturalist, who

gives thereby a terrible blow to Darwinism.

117 They said.

118 The Monads of the “presentments” of men of the Third Round, the huge

ape‐like forms.

119 The Waters.

120 In the Esoteric System the seven “principles” in man are represented

by seven letters. The first two are _more_ sacred than the four

letters of the Tetragrammaton.

121 The Intermediate Spheres, wherein the Monads, which have not reached

Nirvâna, are said to slumber in unconscious inactivity between the

Manvantaras.

122 Explained elsewhere. The Three Fires, Pâvaka, Pavamâna, and Shuchi,

who had forty‐five Sons, who, with their three Fathers, and their

Father Agni, constitute the forty‐nine Fires. Pavamâna, Fire

produced by friction, is the parent of the “Fire of the Asuras”;

Shuchi, Solar Fire, is the parent of the “Fire of the Gods”; and

Pâvaka, Electric Fire, is the Father of the “Fire of the Pitris.”

(See _Vâyu Purâna_.) But this is an explanation on the material and

terrestrial plane. The Flames are evanescent and only periodical;

the Fires—eternal in their triple unity. They correspond to the

_four_ lower, and the _three_ higher human “principles.”

123 The Suras, who become later the A‐Suras.

124 Âtmâ, Buddhi and Manas. In Devachan the higher element of the Manas

is needed to make it a state of perception and consciousness for the

disembodied Monad.

125 _Catechism_, Book iii. Sec. 9.

126 See _Vishnu Purâna_, Book I. Ch. V., closing Shloka. Fitzedward

Hall’s rendering of the text, in Wilson’s Translation, i. 88. Also

_Mânava‐Dharma Shâstra_, i. 30.

127 This has in Esotericism a direct bearing upon the seven “principles”

of the manifested Brahmâ, or Universe, in the same order as in man.

Exoterically, it is only four “principles.”

128 Wilson’s Translation, i. 81.

129 Demons is a very loose word to use, as it applies to a great number

of inferior—_i.e._, more material—Spirits, or minor Gods, who are so

termed because they “war” with the higher ones; but they are no

devils.

130 The same order of principles in man: Âtmâ (Spirit), Buddhi (Soul),

its vehicle, as Matter is the Vâhan of Spirit, and Manas (Mind), the

third, or the fifth microcosmically. On the _plane of personality_,

Manas is the first.

131 Thus, says the Commentary, the saying, “by day the Gods are most

powerful, and by night the Demons,” is purely allegorical.

132 This “thinking of oneself” as this, that, or the other, is the chief

factor in the production of every kind of psychic or even physical

phenomena. The words “whosoever shall say to this mountain be thou

removed and cast into the sea, and _shall not doubt_ ... that thing

will come to pass,” are no vain words. Only the word “faith” ought

to be translated by “Will.” Faith without Will is like a wind‐mill

without _wind_—barren of results.

133 The same idea is found in the first four chapters of _Genesis_, with

their “Lord” and “God,” which are the Elohim and the Androgynous

Eloha.

134 P. 398.

135 P. 107.

136 Spirits.

137 Also Spirits.

138 vi. 2‐6.

139 But see the difficulties suggested later, in the works of various

Geologists, against this theory. Compare Sir R. S. Ball’s articles

in _Nature_, xxv, 79‐82, 103‐107, Nov. 24 and Dec. 1, 1881.

140 The Rûpas.

141 The Goddess who gave birth to these primordial monsters, in the

account of Berosus, was Thalatth, in Greek Thalassa, the “Sea.”

142 See, for comparison, the account of creation by Berosus, as

preserved in Alexander Polyhistor, and the hideous beings born from

the two‐fold principle—Earth and Water—in the abyss of Primordial

Creation: Narâs (Centaurs, men with the limbs of horses and human

bodies), and Kinnaras (men with the heads of horses) created by

Brahmâ in the commencement of the Kalpa.

143 For a similar admission see Prof. Lefèvre’s _Philosophy_, 481.

144 xii. 10,308.

145 The Esoteric Doctrine says that this “Cosmic Evolution” refers only

to our Solar System; while exoteric Hindûism makes the figures

refer, if we do not mistake, to the whole Universal System.

146 Another point of disagreement. Occultism says that the astral

prototypes of the mineral, vegetable and animal kingdoms up to man

have taken that time (300 million years) to evolve, reforming out of

the cast‐off materials of the preceding Round, which, though very

dense and physical in their own cycle, are relatively ethereal as

compared with the materiality of our present middle Round. At the

expiration of these 300 million years, Nature, on the way to the

physical and material, down the arc of descent, begins with mankind

and works downwards, hardening or materializing forms as it

proceeds. Thus the fossils found in strata, to which an antiquity,

not of eighteen, but of many hundreds of millions of years, must be

ascribed, belong in reality to forms of the preceding Round, which,

while living, were far more ethereal than physical, _as we know the

physical_. That we perceive and disinter them as tangible forms, is

due to the process of materialization or crystallization referred

to, which took place subsequently, at the beginning of the Fourth

Round, and reached its maximum after the appearance of man,

proceeding parallel with his physical evolution. This alone

illustrates the fact that the degree of materiality of the Earth

changes _pari passu_ with that of its inhabitants. And thus man now

finds, as tangible fossils, what were once the (to his present

senses) ethereal forms of the lower kingdoms. The above Brâhmanical

figures refer to evolution beginning on Globe A, and in the First

Round. In this Volume we speak only of this, the Fourth Round.

147 This difference and the change of cyphers in the last three triplets

of figures, the writer cannot undertake to account for. According to

every calculation, once the three hundred millions are subtracted,

the figures ought to stand, 1,655,884,687. But they are given as

stated in the Tamil calendar above‐named and as they were

translated. The school of the late Pandit Dayânand Sarasvati,

founder of the Ârya Samâj, gives a date of 1,960,852,987. See the

_Ârya Magazine_ of Lahore, the cover of which bears the words:

“Âryan era 1,960,852,987.”

148 Vaivasvata Manu is the one Human Being—some versions add to him the

seven Rishis—who in the Matsya Avatâra allegory is saved from the

Deluge in a boat, like Noah in the Ark. Therefore, this Vaivasvata

Manvantara would be the “post‐diluvian” period. This, however, does

not refer to the later “Atlantean” or Noah’s Deluge, nor to the

Cosmic “Deluge” or Pralaya of obscuration, which preceded our Round,

but to the appearance of mankind in the latter Round. There is a

great difference made, however, between the Naimitika, Occasional or

Incidental, Prâkritika, Elemental, Atyantika, the Absolute, and

Nitya, the Perpetual Pralaya; the latter being described as

“Brahmâ’s contingent recoalescence of the Universe at the end of

Brahmâ’s Day.” The question was raised by a learned Brâhman

Theosophist: “Whether there is such a thing as Cosmic Pralaya;

because, otherwise, the Logos (Krishna) would have to be reborn, and

he is Aja (unborn).” We cannot see why. The Logos is said to be born

only metaphorically, as the Sun is born daily, or rather a beam of

that Sun is born in the morning and is said to die when it

disappears, whereas it is simply reäbsorbed into the parent essence.

Cosmic Pralaya is for things visible, not for the Arûpa, Formless,

World. The Cosmic or Universal Pralaya comes only at the end of one

hundred Years of Brahmâ, when the Universal Dissolution is said to

take place. Then the Avyaya, say the exoteric Scriptures, the

Eternal Life symbolized by Vishnu, assuming the character of Rudra,

the Destroyer, enters into the Seven Rays of the Sun and drinks up

all the waters of the Universe. “Thus fed, the seven Solar Rays

dilate to _seven suns_ and set fire to the whole Cosmos.”

149 Since a Mahâ Yuga is the 1,000th part of a Day of Brahmâ.

150 _Op. cit._, Art. “Geology.”

151 _Ibid._ This allows a chance even to the Biblical “Adam Chronology”

of 6,000 years.

152 _Modern Science and Modern Thought_, 48.

153 To the Silurian period as regards molluscs and animal life—granted;

but what do they know of man?

154 _Ibid._, _loc. cit._

155 _Ibid._, 49.

156 Winchell, _World‐Life_, 180.

157 _Op. cit._, 49.

158 Wilson’s _Vishnu Purâna_, i. 51.

159 i. 32.

160 The atmosphere, or the air, the firmament.

161 _Harivamsha_, i. 36.

162 _Genesis_, i. 6‐9.

163 Lords.

164 They were told.

165 _i.e._, the Jivas or Monads.

166 Mother Earth or Nature.

167 For external bodies.

168 According to the wonderful chronology of Bentley, who wrote in days

when Biblical chronology was still undisputed; and also according to

that of those modern Orientalists who dwarf the Hindû dates as far

as they can.

169 Now Shrî is the daughter of Bhrigu, one of the Prajâpatis and

Rishis, the chief of the Bhrigus, the “Consumers,” the Aërial Class

of Gods. She is Lakshmî, the wife of Vishnu, and she is Gaurî, the

“bride of Shiva,” and she is Sarasvatî, the “watery,” the wife of

Brahmâ, because the three Gods and Goddesses are one, under three

aspects. Read the explanation by Parâshara, in _Vishnu Purâna_ (I.

viii., Wilson’s Trans., i. 119), and you will understand. “The lord

of Shrî is the moon,” he says, and “Shrî is the wife of Nârâyana,

the God of Gods”: Shrî or Lakshmî (Venus) is Indrânî, as she is

Sarasvatî, for in the words of Parâshara: “Harî [or Îshvara, the

‘Lord’] is all that is called male [in the Universe]; Lakshmî is all

that is termed female. There is nothing else than they.” Hence she

is female, and “God” is male Nature.

170 Shrî is Goddess of, and herself “Fortune and Prosperity.”

171 _Masonic Review_ (Cincinnati), June, 1886. Art. “The Cabbalah.—No.

VI,” 15‐17.

172 The Moon‐Gods.

173 _Vishnu Purâna_, I. vii., Wilson’s Trans., i. 101.

174 See _Mahâbhârata_, _Mokshadharma Parvan_.

175 Because, as the allegory shows, the Gods who had no personal merit

of their own, dreading the sanctity of those self‐striving

incarnated Beings who had become Ascetics and Yogîs, and thus

threatened to upset the power of the former by their _self‐acquired_

powers—denounced them. All this has a deep philosophical meaning and

refers to the evolution and acquirement of divine powers through

_self‐exertion_. Some Rishi‐Yogîs are shown in the _Purânas_ to be

far more powerful than the Gods. Secondary Gods or temporary Powers

in Nature (the Forces) are doomed to disappear; it is only the

spiritual Potentiality in man which can lead him to become one with

the INFINITE and the ABSOLUTE.

176 The Triangle becomes a Pentagon (five‐fold) on Earth.

177 Seth, as Bunsen and others have shown, is not only the “primitive

God” of the Semites—early Jews included—but also their “semi‐divine

ancestor.” For, says Bunsen (_God in History_, i. 233, 234): “The

Seth of Genesis, the father of Enoch (the man) must be considered as

originally running parallel with that derived from the Elohim,

Adam’s father.” “According to Bunsen, the Deity (the God Seth) was

the _primitive god_ of Northern Egypt and Palestine,” says Staniland

Wake, in _The Great Pyramid_ (p. 61). And Seth became considered in

the later Theology of the Egyptians as an “evil demon,” says the

same Bunsen, for he is one with Typhon and one with the Hindû Demons

as a logical sequel.

178 _I Corinth._, xv. 47.

179 _Vâyu Purâna_; _Harivamsha_, 170.

180 See Mather’s _Kabbalah Unveiled_, p. 302.

181 Translated in Isaac Myer’s _Qabbalah_, p. 386.

182 _Zohar_ iii., 135a, 292a, _Idra Zootah_. Brody Ed., _Idrah Zootah_.

183 _Gen._ xxvi. 31 _et seq._; Myer’s _Qabbalah_, _ibid._

184 _Zohar_, iii. 290a, Brody Ed. Indrah Zootah, quoted in Isaac Myer’s

_Qabbalah_, pp. 387, 388.

185 ii. 5.

186 Or Mind‐born.

187 Fohat.

188 “Huxley, supported by the most evident discoveries in Comparative

Anatomy, could utter the momentous sentence that the anatomical

differences between man and the highest apes are less than those

between the latter and the lowest apes. In relation to our

genealogical tree of man, the necessary conclusion follows that the

human race has _evolved gradually from the true apes_.” (_The

Pedigree of Man_, by Ernst Hæckel, translated by Ed. B. Aveling, p.

49.)

What may be the scientific and logical objections to the opposite

conclusion—we would ask? The anatomical resemblances between Man and

the Anthropoids—grossly exaggerated as they are by Darwinists, as M.

de Quatrefages shows—are simply enough accounted for when the origin

of the latter is taken into consideration.

“Nowhere, in the older deposits, is an ape to be found that

approximates more closely to man, or a man that approximates more

closely to an ape.”

“The same gulf which is found to‐day between man and ape, goes back

with undiminished breadth and depth to the Tertiary period. This

fact alone is enough to make its untenability clear.” (Dr. F. Pfaff,

Prof. of Natural Science in the University of Erlangen.)

189 See _Yoga Shâstra_, ii. 32.

190 Voltaire.

191 _Mânava‐Dharma Shâstra_, iii. 196.

192 _Matsya_ and _Padma Purânas_ and Kullûka on the _Mânava‐Dharma

Shâstra_, iii. 195. We are quite aware that the _Vâyu_ and _Matsya

Purânas_ identify (agreeably to Western interpretation) the

Agnishvâtta with the seasons, and the Barhishad Pitris with the

months; adding a fourth class—Kâvyas—cyclic years. But do not

Christian Roman Catholics identify their Angels with Planets, and

are not the Seven Rishis become the Saptarshis—a constellation? They

are Deities presiding over all the cyclic divisions.

193 _Vishnu Purâna_, Wilson, iii. 158, 159.

194 Shll. 935, 936.

195 The _Vâyu Purâna_ shows the region called Virâja‐loka inhabited by

the Agnishvâttas.

196 Wilson, _ibid._, iii. 17. Note by Fitzedward Hall.

197 _Loc. cit._, _ibid._

198 See _Theosophist_, February, 1887, p. 360.

199 See Wilson, ii. 26.

200 See _Vâyu Purâna_.

201 Chhâyâs.

202 Or Amânasas.

203 Thus.

204 Complexion.

205 Also.

206 Creator.

207 Phantoms.

208 Image or shadow.

209 This was hinted at in _Isis Unveiled_ (I. xxxviii.), though the full

explanation could not then be given: “The Pitris are not the

ancestors of the present living men, but those of the [first] human

kind or Adamic race; the spirits of _human_ races, which, on the

great scale of descending evolution, preceded our races of men, and

were physically, as well as spiritually, far superior to our modern

pigmies. In _Mânava‐Dharma Shâstra_ they are called the _Lunar_

ancestors.”

210 See the “Laws of Manu”—_Mânava‐Dharma Shâstra_, iii. 203.

211 “Sacred Books of the East,” Vol. IV, _The Zend‐Avesta_, Pt. I.

lviii, Trans. by James Darmesteter.

212 Compare also what is said about Makara and the Kumâras in connection

with the Zodiac.

213 Whence the subsequent assertions of St. John’s vision, referred to

in his Apocalypse, about, “the great red dragon having seven heads

and _ten_ horns, and seven crowns upon his heads,” whose “tail drew

the _third part_ of the stars of heaven and did cast them to the

earth.” (Ch. xii.)

214 See _Harivamsha_, 932.

215 The verse “did cast them to the earth,” plainly shows its origin in

the grandest and oldest allegory of the Âryan Mystics, who, after

the destruction of the Atlantean _giants_ and _sorcerers_, concealed

the truth—_astronomical_, _physical_, and _divine_, as it is a page

out of _pre‐cosmic_ Theogony—under various allegories. Its true

Esoteric interpretation is a veritable Theodice of the “Fallen

Angels,” so called: the _willing_ and the _unwilling_, the

_creators_ and those who _refused to create_, being now mixed up

most perplexingly by Christian Catholics, who forget that their

highest Archangel, St. Michael, who is shown to conquer (to master

and to assimilate) the _Dragon of Wisdom_ and of divine Self‐

sacrifice—now miscalled and calumniated as Satan—_was the first to

refuse to create_! This has led to endless confusion. So little does

Christian Theology understand the paradoxical language of the East

and its symbolism, that it even explains, in its _dead‐letter

sense_, the Chinese Buddhist and Hindû exoteric rite of raising a

noise during certain eclipses to scare away the “great red dragon,”

which laid a plot to carry away the “light”! But here “light” means

Esoteric Wisdom, and we have sufficiently explained the secret

meaning of the terms Dragon, Serpent, etc., all of which refer to

Adepts and Initiates.

216 See _Genesis_ and Plato’s _Timæus_.

217 In spite of all efforts to the contrary, Christian Theology—having

burdened itself with the Hebrew Esoteric account of the creation of

man, which it understands _literally_—cannot find any reasonable

excuse for its “God, the Creator,” who produces a man devoid of mind

and sense; nor can it justify the punishment following an act, for

which Adam and Eve might plead _non compos_. For if the couple be

admitted to be ignorant of good and evil before the eating of the

forbidden fruit, how could it be expected to know that _disobedience

was evil_? If primeval man was meant to remain a half‐witted, or

rather witless, being, then his creation was aimless and even

_cruel_, if produced by an omnipotent and perfect God. But Adam and

Eve are shown, even in _Genesis_, to be created by a Class of lower

divine Beings, the Elohim, who are so jealous of their personal

prerogatives as reasonable and intelligent creatures, that they will

not allow man to become “as one of us.” This is plain, even from the

dead‐letter meaning of the _Bible_. The Gnostics, then, were right

in regarding the Jewish God as belonging to a Class of lower,

material and not very holy denizens of the invisible World.

218 In _Isis Unveiled_ several of these Gnostic systems are given. One

is taken from the _Codex Nazaræus_, the Scripture of the Nazarenes,

who, although they existed long before the days of Christ, and even

before the laws of Moses, were Gnostics, and many of them Initiates.

They held their “Mysteries of Life” in Nazara (ancient and modern

Nazareth), and their doctrines are a faithful echo of the teachings

of the Secret Doctrine—some of which we are now endeavouring to

explain.

219 i. 18. See the translation from the Greek by François, Monsieur de

Foix, Evesque d’Ayre: the work dedicated to Marguerite de France,

Reine de Navarre. Edition of 1579, Bordeaux.

220 _Asgard and the Gods_, p. 4.

221 Mr. James Darmesteter, the translator of the _Vendidâd_, speaking of

it, says: “The tree, _whatever it is_....”—“Sacred Books of the

East,” vol. iv. p. 209.

222 Plato’s _Timæus_.

223 See _Asgard and the Gods_, p. 305.

224 _Ibid._, _loc. cit._

225 “The father of the sacred fire,” writes Prof. Jolly, “bore the name

of Tvashtri ... His mother was Mâyâ. He himself was styled Akta

(_anointed_ χριστὸς) after the priest had poured upon his head the

spirituous (?) Soma, and on his body butter purified by sacrifice.”

(_Man before Metals_, p. 190.) The source of his information is not

given by the French Darwinist. But the lines are quoted to show that

light begins to dawn even upon the Materialists. Adalbert Kühn, in

his _Die Herabkunft des Feuers_, identifies the two signs [Symbol:

swastika] and [Symbol: swastika with dots around the center] with

Arani, and designates them under this name. He adds: “This process

of kindling fire naturally led men to the idea of sexual

reproduction,” etc. Why could not a more dignified idea, and one

more Occult, have led man to invent this symbol, in so far as it is

connected, in one of its aspects, with human reproduction? But its

chief symbolism refers to Cosmogony.

“Agni, in the condition of Akta, or anointed, is suggestive of

Christ,” remarks Prof. Jolly. “Mâyâ, Mary, His mother; Tvashtri, St.

Joseph, the carpenter of the Bible.” In the _Rig Veda_, Vishvakarman

is the highest and oldest of the Gods and their “Father.” He is the

“carpenter or builder,” because God is called even by the

Monotheists, the “Architect of the Universe.” Still, the original

idea is purely metaphysical, and had no connection with the later

Phallicism.

226 The real Manushya.

227 Barishad (?).

228 The Kavyavâhana, electric fire.

229 Shuchi, the spirit in the Sun.

230 The Pitris and the two Fires.

231 The form.

232 It is not clear why Bhûtas should be rendered by the Orientalists as

“evil spirits” in the _Purânas_. In the _Vishnu Purâna_ (I. v,

Wilson’s Trans., Fitzedward Hall’s note, i. 83) the Shloka simply

says: “Fiends, frightful from being monkey‐coloured and

carnivorous”; and the word in India now means “ghosts,” ethereal or

_astral_ phantoms, while in Esoteric Teaching it means _elementary_

substances, something made of attenuated, non‐compound essence, and,

specifically, the astral Double of any man or animal. In this case

these primitive men are the Doubles of the first ethereal Dhyânîs or

Pitris.

233 See _Pymander_, Everard’s Trans., II. 17‐29.

234 _Chaldean Account of Genesis_, p. 92.

235 P. 91.

236 _Ibid._, _loc. cit._

237 _Ibid._, _loc. cit._

238 Human Monad.

239 Astral shadow.

240 Kâma Rûpa.

241 Shuchi, the fire of passion and animal instinct.

242 Solar Fire.

243 Nascent Man.

244 Later.

245 Race.

246 See Shloka 22.

247 See _Genesis of the Elements_, by W. Crookes, p. 21.

248 _Pymander_, i. 6. The opponents of Hindûism may call the above

Pantheism, Polytheism, or anything they may please. If Science is

not entirely blinded by prejudice, it will see in this account a

profound knowledge of Natural Sciences and Physics, as well as of

Metaphysics and Psychology. But to find this out, one has to study

the personifications, and then convert them into chemical atoms. It

will then be found to satisfy both physical and even purely

materialistic Science, as well as those who see in evolution the

work of the “Great Unknown Cause” in its phenomenal and illusive

aspects.

249 _Sc._ Race.

250 Shlokas, 153, 154.

251 It is symbolized in the Pythagorean Triangle, the ten yods within,

and the seven points of the Triangle and the Square.

252 Whence the Kabalistic name of “Shells” given to the Astral Form, the

Body called Kâma Rûpa, left behind by the Higher Angels in the shape

of the Higher Manas, when the latter leaves for Devachan, forsaking

its residue.

253 Mackenzie’s _Royal Masonic Cyclopædia_, pp. 409‐411.

254 viii. 20.

255 _De Bell. Jud._, ii. 12.

256 _De Gignat_, p. 222C.; _De Somniis_, p. 455D.; which shows that the

Essenes believed in re‐birth and many reïncarnations on Earth, as

Jesus himself did, a fact we can prove from the _New Testament_

itself.

257 I. vi. 3.

258 _Zohar_, ii. 229b.

259 It is corroborated, however, as we have shown, by the Esotericism of

_Genesis_. Not only are the animals created therein after the “Adam

of Dust,” but vegetation is shown _in_ the Earth before “the heavens

and the earth were created.” “Every plant of the field before it was

in the earth” (ii. 5). Now, unless the Occult interpretation is

accepted—which shows that in this Fourth Round the Globe was covered

with vegetation, and the First (Astral) Humanity was produced before

almost anything could grow and develop thereon—what can the dead

letter mean? Simply that the grass was in the earth of the Globe

before that Globe was created? And yet the meaning of verse 6, which

says that “there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the

whole face of the ground,” before it rained, and caused the trees,

etc., to grow, is plain enough. It shows also in what geological

period it occurred, and further what is meant by “heaven” and

“earth.” It meant the firmament and dry _incrustated_ land,

separated and ridden of its vapours and exhalations. Moreover, the

student must bear in mind that, as Adam Kadmon, the “male and female

being” of _Genesis_ i, is no physical human being but the host of

the Elohim, among which was Jehovah himself—so the animals,

mentioned in that chapter as “created” before man in the dead‐letter

text, were no animals, but the zodiacal signs and other sidereal

bodies.

260 _Book of Dzyan_, iii. 19.

261 Kenealy, _The Book of God_, pp. 114, 115.

262 To those who would enquire: What has Hydrogen to do with air or

oxygenation?—it is answered: Study first the ABC of Occult Alchemy.

In their anxiety, however, to identify Pymander, the “mouth of

mystery,” with St. John the Baptist prophetically, the Christian

Symbologists thus identified also the seven Kabiri and the Assyrian

Bulls with the Cherubs of the Jews and the Apostles. Having,

moreover, to draw a line of demarcation between the _four_ and the

_three_ the latter being the _Fallen_ Angels; and furthermore to

avoid connecting these with the “Seven Spirits of the Face,” the

Archangels, they unceremoniously threw out all they did not choose

to recognize. Hence the perversion in the order of the Elements, in

order to make them dovetail with the order of the Gospels, and to

identify the Angel‐Man with Christ. With the Chaldees, the

Egyptians—from whom Moses adopted the Chroub (Cherubs in their

animal form)—and the Ophites; with all these, the Angels, the

Planets, and the Elements, were symbolized mystically and

alchemically by the Lion (Mikael); the Bull (Uriel); the Dragon

(Raphael); the Eagle (Gabriel); the Bear (Thot‐Sabaoth); the Dog

(Era‐taoth); the Mule (Uriel or Thantabaoth). All these have a

qualificative meaning.

263 See _Hibbert Lectures_, 1887, pp. 370 _et seqq._

264 Sepher _M’bo Sha‐arim_, near the end, translated by Isaac Myer,

_Qabbalah_, p. 110.

265 Form.

266 Shadow.

267 S. Laing, _Modern Science and Modern Thought_, p. 90.

268 And why not all the progenitive First Races, human as well as

animal; and why _one_ “remote progenitor”?

269 Obviously so, on the lines of Evolutionism, which traces the

Mammalia to some amphibian ancestor.

270 Second Edition, p. 161.

271 _Ibid._, p. 162.

272 De Quatrefages, _The Human Species_, p. 124; “International

Scientific Series,” Volume XXVI.

273 _Ibid._, p. 125.

274 Fol. 186.

275 _Odyssey_, xi. 298‐305; _Iliad_, iii. 243.

276 Hyg., _Fab._, 80. Ovid., _Fast._, 700, etc. See Decharme’s

_Mythologie de la Grèce Antique_, p. 6.

277 See Decharme, _ibid._, p. 652.

278 _Nem._, x. 80 _et seqq._ Theocr., xxiv. 131.

279 XXXIV. v. 5. Theocr., xxii. 1.

280 iii. 10. 7.

281 Apollodorus, iii. 1.

282 Castor’s tomb was shown in Sparta, in days of old, says Pausanias

(iii. 13, 1); and Plutarch says that he was called at Argos the

demi‐mortal or demi‐hero, μιξαρχαγέτας. (_Quæst. Gr._, 23.)

283 Pindar, _Nem._, x. 60, _seqq._, Dissen.

284 Schol. Eurip., _Orest._, 463, Dindorf. See Decharme, _op. cit._, p.

654.

285 The Monad is impersonal and a God _per se_, albeit unconscious on

this plane. For divorced from its third (often called fifth)

principle, Manas, which is the horizontal line of the first

manifested Triangle or Trinity, it can have no consciousness or

perception of things on this earthly plane. “The highest sees

through the eye of the lowest” in the manifested world; Purusha

(Spirit) remains blind without the help of Prakriti (Matter) in the

material spheres; and so does Âtmâ‐Buddhi without Manas.

286 _Moral._, p. 484f.

287 This strange idea and interpretation are accepted by Decharme in his

_Mythologie de la Grèce Antique_ (p. 655). “Castor and Pollux,” he

says, “are nothing but the Sun and Moon, conceived as twins.... The

Sun, the immortal and powerful being that disappears every evening

from the horizon and descends under the Earth, as though he would

make room for the fraternal orb which comes to life with night, is

Pollux, who sacrifices himself for Castor; Castor, who, inferior to

his brother, owes to him his immortality; for the Moon, says

Theophrastus, is only another, but feebler Sun (_De Ventis_, 17).”

288 See _Book of Enoch_, Trans. by Bishop Laurence, 1883.

289 Adam (Kadmon) is, like Brahmâ and Mars, the symbol of the

_generative_ and _creative_ power typifying Water and Earth—an

Alchemical secret. “It takes Earth and Water to create a human

Soul,” said Moses. Mars is the Hindû Mangala, the planet Mars,

identical with Kârttikeya, the “War‐God”; he is Gharma‐ja, born of

Shiva’s _sweat_, and of the Earth. He is Lohita, the red, like

Brahmâ also and Adam. The Hindû Mars is, like Adam, born from no

woman and mother. With the Egyptians, Mars was the primeval

generative Principle, and so are Brahmâ, in exoteric teaching, and

Adam, in the Kabalah.

290 Abel is Chebel, meaning “pains of birth,” conception.

291 See _Isis Unveiled_, II. 398, where Jehovah is shown to be Adam and

Eve blended, and Hevah, and Abel, the _feminine serpent_.

292 See _Isis Unveiled_, I. 305: “The union of these two Races produced

a _third_ ... Race.”

293 _Genesis_, v. 2.

294 _Ibid._, v. 3.

295 P. 159.

296 Jod in the Kabalah has for symbol the hand, the forefinger and the

lingam, while numerically it is the perfect one; but it is also the

number 10, male and female, when divided.

297 _Vishnu Purâna_, i. ii.: Wilson’s Trans., i. 20.

298 Quoted in Myer’s _Qabbalah_, p. 110.

299 See _Source of Measures_, p. 277.

300 II. 464, _et seqq._

301 _Jeremiah_, x. 11.

302 _Isis Unveiled_, II. 462, 463.

303 See for comparison _Hosea_, xii. 6, where it is so punctuated.

304 _Isis Unveiled_, I. 156.

305 Race.

306 The Moon.

307 Hamsa.

308 _Text‐Book of Physiology_, Third Edition, 1879, p. 623.

309 See the _Timæus_.

310 See Extracts from that Essay in _The Theosophist_, of February,

1883, from which the following is condensed.

311 Compare Ezekiel’s vision (chap. i) of the four Divine Beings who

“had the likeness of a man” and yet had the appearance of a wheel,

“when they went, they went upon their four sides ... for the spirit

of the living creature was in the wheels.”

312 Eugibinus, a Christian, and the Rabbis Samuel, Menasseh ben Israel,

and Maimonides taught that “Adam had _two_ faces and _one_ person,

and from the beginning he was both male and female—male on one side

and female on the other [like Manu’s Brahmâ]; but afterwards the

parts were separated.” The one hundred and thirty‐ninth Psalm of

David was cited by Rabbi Jeremiah ben Eliazar as evidence of this:

“Thou hast _fashioned_ me _behind_ and _before_,” not _beset_ as in

the _Bible_, which is absurd and meaningless, and this shows, as

Prof. Wilder thinks, “that the primeval form of mankind was

androgynous.”

313 See the union of Chokmah, Wisdom, with Binah, Intelligence, or

Jehovah, the Demiurge, called Understanding in the _Proverbs of

Solomon_ (vii). Unto men Wisdom (divine Occult Wisdom) crieth: “Oh,

ye simple, understand Wisdom; and ye fools, be of an understanding

heart.” It is Spirit and Matter, the Nous and the Psyche; of the

latter of which St. James says that it is “earthly, sensual, and

devilish.”

314 _Pluralité des Mondes_, p. 69.

315 A hypothesis evolved in 1881 by Mr. W. Mattieu Williams seems to

have impressed Astronomers but little. Says the author of “The Fuel

of the Sun,” in _Knowledge_, Dec. 23, 1881:

“Applying now the researches of Dr. Andrews to the conditions of

solar existence ... I conclude that the sun has _no nucleus_, either

solid, liquid, or gaseous, but is composed of dissociated matter in

the critical state, surrounded, first, by a flaming envelope, due

to the recombination of the dissociated matter, and outside of this,

by another envelope of vapours due to this combination.”

This is a novel theory to be added to other hypotheses, _all

scientific and orthodox_. The meaning of the “critical state” is

explained by Mr. W. Mattieu Williams in the same journal (Dec. 9,

1881), in an article on “Solids, liquids, and Gases.” Speaking of an

experiment by Dr. Andrews on carbonic acid, the Scientist says that:

“When 88° is reached, the boundary between liquid and gas vanishes;

liquid and gas have blended into one mysterious intermediate fluid;

an indefinite fluctuating something is there filling the whole of

the tube—an etherealized liquid or a visible gas. Hold a red‐hot

poker between your eye and the light; you will see an upflowing wave

of movement of what appears like liquid air. The appearance of the

hybrid fluid in the tube resembles this, but is sensibly denser, and

evidently stands between the liquid and gaseous states of matter, as

pitch or treacle stands between solid and liquid.”

The temperature at which this occurs has been named by Dr. Andrews

the “critical temperature”; here the gaseous and the liquid states

are “continuous,” and it is probable that all other substances

capable of existing in both states have their own particular

critical temperatures.

Speculating further upon this “critical” state, Mr. W. Mattieu

Williams emits some quite Occult theories about Jupiter and other

Planets. He says:

“Our notions of solids, liquids, and gases are derived from our

experiences of the state of matter here upon this Earth. Could we be

removed to another planet, they would be curiously changed. On

Mercury water would rank as one of the condensible gases; on Mars,

as a fusible solid; but what on Jupiter?

“Recent observations justify us in regarding this as a miniature

sun, with an external envelope of cloudy matter, apparently of

partially‐condensed water, but red‐hot, or probably still hotter

within. His vaporous atmosphere is evidently of enormous depth, and

the force of gravitation being on his visible outer surface two‐and‐

a‐half times greater than that on our earth’s surface, the

atmospheric pressure, in descending below this visible surface, must

soon reach that at which the vapour of water would be brought to its

critical condition. Therefore we may infer that the oceans of

Jupiter are neither of frozen, liquid, nor gaseous water, but are

oceans, or atmospheres of _critical_ water. If any fish or birds

swim or fly therein, they must be very _critically_ organized.”

As the whole mass of Jupiter is 300 times greater than that of the

Earth, and its compressing energy towards the centre proportional to

this, its materials, if similar to those of the Earth, and no

hotter, would be considerably more dense, and the whole planet would

have a higher specific gravity; but we know by the movement of its

satellites that, instead of this, its specific gravity is less than

a fourth of that of the Earth. This justifies the conclusion that it

is intensely hot; for even hydrogen, if cold, would become denser

than Jupiter under such pressure.

“As all elementary substances may exist as solids, liquids, or

gases, or, critically, according to the conditions of temperature

and pressure, I am justified in hypothetically concluding that

Jupiter is neither a solid, a liquid, nor a gaseous planet, but a

_critical_ planet, or an orb composed internally of associated

elements in the _critical_ state, and surrounded by a dense

atmosphere of their vapours and those of some of their compounds

such as water. The same reasoning applies to Saturn and other large

and rarefied planets.”

It is gratifying to see how “scientific imagination” approaches

every year more closely to the borderland of our Occult Teachings.

316 _The Day after Death_, p. 23.

317 Cremona Ed., iii. 76a; Brody Ed., iii. 159a; _Qabbalah_. Isaac Myer,

p. 420.

318 So destroyed.

319 The first occurred when what is now the North Pole was separated

from the later Continents.

320 We must remember that at the head of all the Babylonian Gods were

Ea, Anu, and the primeval Bel; and that Ea, the first, was the God

of Wisdom, the great “God of Light” and of the Deep, and that he was

identified with Oannes, or the Biblical Dagon—the Man‐Fish who rose

out of the Persian Gulf.

321 It is far later on that the Moon became a male God; with the Hindus

it was Soma, with the Chaldæans Nanak or Nanar, and Sin, the son of

Mulil, the older Bel. The Akkadians called him the “Lord of Ghosts”;

and he was the God of Nipur (Niffer) in northern Babylonia. It is

Mulil who caused the waters of the Flood to fall from Heaven on

Earth, because of which Xisuthrus would not allow him to approach

his altar. As the modern Assyriologists have now ascertained, it is

the northern Nipur which is the centre whence Chaldæan (Black) Magic

spread; and Eridu (the Southern) which was the primitive seat of the

worship of the culture God, the God of Divine Wisdom—the Sun‐God

being the Supreme Deity everywhere. With the Jews, the Moon is

connected with Israël’s Jehovah and his seed, for Ur was the chief

seat of the worship of the Moon‐God, and Abraham is said to have

come from Ur, when from A‐bra(h)m, he becomes Abraham.

322 When Nârada, the virgin‐ascetic, threatened to put an end to the

human race by preventing Daksha’s sons from procreating it.

323 x. 6.

324 This is corroborated by a learned Brahman. In his most excellent

Lectures on the _Bhagavad Gîtâ_ (_Theosophist_, April, 1887, p. 444)

the lecturer says:

“There is a peculiarity to which I must call your attention. He

[Krishna] speaks here of four Manus. Why does he speak of four? We

are now in the seventh Manvantara—that of Vaivasvata. If he is

speaking of the past Manus, he ought to speak of six, but he only

mentions four. In some commentaries an attempt has been made to

interpret this in a peculiar manner.

“The word ‘Chatvârah’ is separated from the word ‘Manavah,’ and is

made to refer to Sanaka, Sanandana, Sanatkumâra, and Sanatsujâta,

who were also included among the mind‐born sons of Prajâpati.

“But this interpretation will lead to a most absurd conclusion, and

make the sentence contradict itself. The persons alluded to in the

text have a qualifying clause in the sentence. It is well known that

Sanaka and the other three refused to create, though the other sons

had consented to do so: therefore, in speaking of those persons from

whom humanity has sprung into existence, it would be absurd to

include these four also in the list. The passage must be interpreted

without splitting the compound into two nouns. The number of Manus

will then be four, and the statement would then contradict the

Paurânic account, though it would be in harmony with the Occult

theory. You will recollect that it is stated [in Occultism] that we

are now in the Fifth Root‐Race. Each Root‐Race is considered as the

Santati of a particular Manu. Now, the Fourth Race has passed, or,

in other words, there have been four past Manus.”

325 Stockwell, _Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge_, xviii.; R. W.

McFarland, _American Journal of Science_, III. xi. 450; and Croll’s

_Climate and Time_. Lemuria was not submerged by a flood, but was

destroyed by volcanic action, and afterwards sank.

326 Coste, I. iv. 19.

327 Agruerus is Kronos, or Saturn, and the prototype of the Israëlitish

Jehovah. As connected with Argha, the Moon or Ark of salvation, Noah

is mythologically one with Saturn. But then this cannot relate to

the terrestrial flood. (See Faber’s _Cabiri_, I. 35, 43, and 45.)

328 _Ibid._, II. 240.

329 Sanchuniathon says that the Titans were the sons of Kronos, and

seven in number; and he calls them fire‐worshippers, Aletæ (Sons of

Agni?) and diluvians. Al‐ait is the God of Fire.

330 _Ibid._, i. 130, note.

331 Of which _seven_, let us remark, the Âryans, and not the Semites,

were the originators, while the Jews got that number from the

Chaldæans.

332 Seven individual Sons of God, or Pitaras, Pitris; also in this case

the sons of Kronos or Saturn (Kâla, “Time”) and Arkites, like the

Kabiri and Titans, as their name—“_Lunar_ Ancestors”—shows; the Moon

being the Ark, or Argha, on the Watery Abyss of Space.

333 _Asiatic Researches_, v. 246.

334 _Kabiri_, _ibid._, _loc. cit._

335 Orpheus apud Proclum _in Timæum_, v. 295.

336 Arnobius, _Contra Gentes_, iii. 124; quoted by Faber, _op. cit._, i.

135.

337 _Ant._, iii. 8.

338 _Bibl._, iii. 170.

339 Aretia is the female form of Artes, the Egyptian Mars. Thence the

Chaldæan (and now Hebrew) word ארצ (Arets), “Earth.” Seyffarth, the

author of _Beiträge zur Kenntniss_ (under “_Artes_,” _Mars_) quotes

as follows: “Addit Cedrenus (Salm. I. c): Stella Martis ab Ægyptiis

vocatur Ertosi (plantare, generare). Significat autem hoc omnis

generis procreationem et _vivificationem_, omnisque substantiæ et

materiæ naturam et vim ordinantem atque procreantem.” It is Earth as

“source of being”; or, as explained by the author of _The Source of

Measures_ (p. 186), Arts is the same in Hebrew and Egyptian, and

both “combine the primal idea of _earth as source_; precisely as in

the Hebrew itself, under another form, _Adam_ and _Mâdim_, _Mars_,

are the same, and combine the idea of _earth_, with _Adam_ under the

form of _h‐adam‐h_.”

340 _Ant._, v. 64.

341 Nonnus, _Dionys._, xviii. 319. Quoted by Faber, _op. cit._, i. 328.

342 See _Isis Unveiled_, II. 420 _et seq._, where one or two of the

seven meanings are hinted at.

343 Chap. lxiv (Sect. xi).

344 _Isis Unveiled_, II. 423, 424.

345 _Ibid._, 423, note.

346 One has to remember that, in the Hindû Philosophy, every

differentiated unit is such only through the Cycles of Mâyâ, being

one in its essence with the Supreme or One Spirit. Hence arises the

seeming confusion and contradiction in the various _Purânas_, and at

times in the same _Purâna_, about the same individual. Vishnu—as the

many‐formed Brahmâ, and as Brahma (neuter)—is one, and yet he is

said to be all the twenty‐eight Vyâsas.

“In every Dvâpara (or third) age, Vishnu, in the person of Vyâsa,

divides the Veda, which is (properly, but) one, into many

portions.... Twenty‐eight times have the Vedas been arranged by the

great Rishis in the Vaivasvata Manvantara, in the Dvâpara age; and,

consequently, eight and twenty Vyâsas have passed away.” (_Vishnu

Purâna_, iii. 3; Wilson’s Trans., iii. 33, 34.) “[They who were all]

in the form of Veda‐Vyâsa; who were the Vyâsas of their respective

eras.” (_Ibid._, _loc. cit._, p. 33.) “This world is Brahmâ, in

Brahmâ, from Brahmâ ... nothing further to be known.” Then, again,

in the _Harivamsha_: “There were (in the first Manvantara) seven

celebrated sons of Vasishtha, who (in the _third_ Manvantara) were

sons of Brahmâ (_i.e._, Rishis), the illustrious progeny of Ûrjâ.”

(_Ibid._, iii. 6, note.) This is plain: the Humanity of the First

Manvantara is that of the seventh and of all the intermediate ones.

The Mankind of the First Root‐Race is the mankind of the Second,

Third, Fourth, Fifth, etc. To the last it forms a cyclic and

constant reïncarnation of the Monads belonging to the Dhyân Chohans

of our Planetary Chain.

347 The Dvâpara Yuga differs for each Race. All Races have their own

Cycles, which fact causes a great difference. For instance, the

Fourth Sub‐Race of the Atlanteans was in its Kali Yuga, when they

were destroyed, whereas the Fifth was in its Satya or Krita Yuga.

The Âryan Race is now in its Kali Yuga, and will continue to be in

it for 427,000 years longer, while various “Family Races,” called

the Semitic, Hamitic, etc., are in their own special cycles. The

forthcoming Sixth Sub‐Race—which may begin very soon—will be in its

Satya (Golden) Age while we reap the fruit of our iniquity in our

Kali Yuga.

348 See _Asiatic Researches_, viii. 280.

349 See Dowson’s _Hindû Classical Dictionary_, _sub voce_ “Idâ.”

350 See _Posthumous Humanity_: Translated by H. S. Olcott London, 1887.

351 Professor Newcomb says the heat evolved by contraction would last

only 18,000,000 years. (_Popular Astronomy_, 509.) While a

temperature permitting the existence of water could not be reached

earlier than 10,000,000 years ago. (Winchell’s _World‐Life_, 356.)

But Sir William Thomson says that the whole age of the incrustation

of the Earth is 80,000,000 years, though, this year, he has again

altered his opinion and allows only 15,000,000 years as the age of

the Sun. As will be shown in the Addenda, the divergence of

scientific opinions is so great that no reliance can ever be placed

upon _scientific_ speculation.

352 The essay on _The Plurality of Worlds_ (1853)—an anonymous work, yet

well known to have been the production of Dr. Whewell—is a good

proof of this. No Christian ought to believe in either the plurality

of Worlds or the geological age of the Globe, argues the author;

because, if it is asserted that this World is only one among the

many of its kind, which are all the work of God, as it is itself;

that all are the seat of life, all the realm and dwelling of

intelligent creatures endowed with will, subject to law and capable

of free‐will; then, it would be extravagant to think that _our_

World should have been the subject of God’s favours and His special

interference, of His communications and His _personal visit_. Can

the Earth presume to be considered the centre of the moral and

religious Universe, he asks, if it has not the slightest distinction

to rely upon in the physical Universe? Is it not as absurd to uphold

such an assertion (of the plurality of inhabited worlds), as it

would be to‐day to uphold the old hypothesis of Ptolemy, who placed

the Earth in the centre of our system? The above is quoted from

memory, yet _almost textually_. The author fails to see that he is

bursting his own soap‐bubble with such a defence.

353 _Man’s Place in Nature_, p. 58.

354 _De Cœlo_, II. 13.

355 Or what is more generally known as Protoplasm. This substance

received the name of “Sarcode” from Prof. Dujardin Beaumetz far

earlier than its present appellation.

356 The Monera are indeed Protista. They are neither animals nor plants,

writes Hæckel; “the whole body of the Moneron represents nothing

more than a single thoroughly homogeneous particle of albumen in a

firmly adhesive condition.” (_Journal of Microscopical Science_,

Jan., 1869, p. 28.)

357 Behold the Iguanodon of the Mesozoic ages—the monster 100 feet

long—now transformed into the small Iguana lizard of South America.

Popular traditions about “giants” in days of old, and their mention

in every mythology, including that of the _Bible_, may some day be

shown to be founded on fact. In nature, the logic of analogy alone

should make us accept these _traditions_ as scientific verities.

358 These are the opinions of Burmeister and Czolbe. See _Force and

Matter_, by L. Büchner, edited, by J. F. Collingwood, F.R.S.L., p.

61.

359 _Vishnu Purâna_, II. viii; Fitzedward Hall’s rendering in Wilson’s

Translation, ii. 241.

360 _Ibid._, p. 242.

361 _Introduction à l’Étude des Races Humaines._

362 _Modern Science and Modern Thought_, by S. Laing, p. 32.

363 _Esoteric Buddhism_, p. 70.

364 The same fate is in store for spiritualistic phenomena and all the

other psychological manifestations of the _inner_ man. Since the

days of Hume, whose researches culminated in a nihilistic Idealism,

Psychology has gradually shifted its position to one of crass

Materialism. Hume is regarded as a Psychologist, and yet he denied

_à priori_ the possibility of phenomena in which millions now

believe, including many men of Science. The Hylo‐Idealists of to‐day

are rank Annihilationists. The schools of Spencer and Bain are

respectively positivist and materialist, and not metaphysical at

all. It is _Psychism_ and not Psychology; it reminds one as little

of the Vedântic teaching as does the pessimism of Schopenhauer and

von Hartmann recall the Esoteric Philosophy, the heart and soul of

_true_ Buddhism.

365 It must be noted that, though the astral and physical planes of

Matter ran parallel with one another even in the earliest geological

ages, yet they were not in the same phases of manifestation in which

they are _now_. The Earth did not reach its present _grade of

density_ till 18,000,000 years ago. Since then _both_ the physical

and astral planes have become grosser.

366 The conception and definition of the Absolute by Cardinal Cusa may

satisfy only the Western mind, prisoned, so unconsciously to itself,

and entirely degenerated, by long centuries of scholastic and

theological sophistry. But this “recent philosophy of the Absolute,”

traced by Sir William Hamilton to Cusa, would never satisfy the more

acutely metaphysical mind of the Hindû Vedântin.

367 Cudworth’s _Intellectual System_, I. 328.

368 Issued from the Body of Brahmâ when it became Night.

369 Intellectually vile.

370 Still senseless Race.

371 Race.

372 Intensified.

373 The vehicle of Desire.

374 Higher knowledge.

375 Monads.

376 Primitive human species.

377 _Inst. Div._, II. viii; quoted in Myer’s _Qabbalah_, 116.

378 _Op. cit._, I. v; Wilson’s Trans., Fitzedward Hall’s rendering, i.

72.

379 _Ibid._, ii. 10.

380 _Ibid._, i. 83.

381 Whom Manu calls “paternal grandfathers” (iii. 284). The Rudras are

the seven manifestations of Rudra‐Shiva, the “destroying God,” and

_also_ the grand Yogi and Ascetic.

382 To speak of _life_ as having arisen, and of the human race as having

originated, in this _absurdly unscientific_ way, in the face of the

modern Pedigrees of Man, is to court instantaneous annihilation. The

Esoteric Doctrine risks the danger, nevertheless, and even goes so

far as to ask the impartial reader to compare the above hypothesis

(if it is one) with Hæckel’s theory—now fast becoming an axiom with

Science—which we quote verbatim as follows:

“How did life, the living world of organisms, arise? And, secondly,

the special question: How did the human race originate? The first of

these two enquiries, that as to the first appearance of living

beings, can only be decided empirically [!!] by proof of the so‐

called Archebiosis, or equivocal generation, or the spontaneous

production of organisms of the simplest conceivable kind. Such are

the Monera (Protogenes, Protamœba, Protomyxa, Vampyrella),

exceedingly simple microscopic masses of protoplasm without

structure or organization, which take in nutriment and _reproduce

themselves by division_. Such a Moneron as that primordial organism

_discovered_ by the renowned English zoologist Huxley and named

Bathybius Hæckelii, appears as a continuous thick protoplasmic

covering at the greatest depths of the ocean, between 3,000 and

30,000 feet. _It is true that the first appearance of such Monera

has not up to the present moment been actually observed_; but there

is nothing intrinsically improbable in such an Evolution.” (_The

Pedigree of Man_, Aveling’s translation, p. 33.)

The Bathybius protoplasm having recently turned out to be no organic

substance at all, there remains little to be said. Nor, after

reading this, does one need to consume further time in refuting the

further assertion that: “In that case man also has, _beyond a doubt_

[to the minds of Hæckel and his like], arisen from the lower

Mammalia, apes, the earlier simian creatures, the still earlier

Marsupialia, Amphibia, Pisces, by progressive transformations” (p.

36)—all produced by “a series of _natural forces working blindly,

... without aim, without design_.”

The above‐quoted passage bears its criticism on its own face.

Science is made to teach that, which, up to the present time, “_has

never been actually observed_.” She is made to deny the phenomenon

of an _intelligent_ nature and a vital force independent of form and

matter, and to find it more scientific to teach the miraculous

performance of “natural forces _working blindly without aim or

design_.” If so, then we are led to think that the physico‐

mechanical forces of the brains of certain eminent Scientists are

leading them on as blindly to sacrifice logic and common sense on

the altar of mutual admiration. Why should the protoplasmic Moneron

producing the first living creature through _self‐division_ be held

as a very scientific hypothesis, and an ethereal pre‐human race

generating the primeval men in the same fashion be tabooed as

unscientific superstition? Or has Materialism obtained a sole

monopoly in Science?

383 The Râkshasas, regarded in Indian popular theology as Demons, are

called the “Preservers” beyond the Himâlayas. This double meaning

has its origin in a philosophical allegory, which is variously

rendered in the _Purânas_. It is stated that when Brahmâ created the

Demons, Yakshas (from _yaksh_, to eat) and the Râkshasas, both of

which kinds of Demons, as soon as born, wished to devour their

Creator, “those among them that called out ‘Not so: oh! let him be

saved [preserved]!’ were named Râkshasas.” (_Vishnu Purâna_, I. v.;

Wilson, i. 82.) The _Bhâgavata Purâna_ (III. 20, 19‐21; _ibid._,

_loc. cit._) renders the allegory differently. “Brahmâ transformed

himself into night [or ignorance] invested with a body.” This the

Yakshas and Râkshasas seized, exclaiming, “Do not spare it; devour

it.” Brahmâ cried out, “Do not devour me; spare me.” This has an

inner meaning of course. The “Body of Night” is the darkness of

ignorance, and it is the darkness of silence and secrecy. Now the

Râkshasas are shown in almost every case to be Yogîs, pious Sâdhus

and Initiates, a rather unusual occupation for Demons. The meaning

then is that while we have power to dispel the darkness of

ignorance—“devour it”—we have to preserve the sacred truth from

profanation. “Brahmâ is for the Brâhmans alone,” says that proud

caste. The moral of the _fable_ is evident.

384 The gradual evolution of man in the Secret Doctrine shows that all

the later (to the profane the earliest) Races have their _physical_

origin in the early Fourth Race. But it is the sub‐race, which

preceded the one that separated sexually, that is to be regarded as

the _spiritual_ ancestors of our present generations, and especially

of the Eastern Âryan Races. Weber’s idea that the Indo‐Germanic Race

preceded the Âryan Vedic Race is, to the Occultist, grotesque to the

last degree.

385 _Cf._ especially Schmidt’s _Doctrine of Descent and Darwinism_, pp.

39 _et seqq._, and Laing’s _A Modern Zoroastrian_, pp. 102‐111.

386 Every process of healing and cicatrization in the higher animal

groups—even in the case of reproduction of mutilated limbs with the

Amphibians—is effected by _fission_ and _gemmation_ of the

elementary morphological elements.

387 The term here means neither the dolicho‐cephalic nor the brachyo‐

cephalic, nor yet skulls of a smaller volume, but simply brains

devoid of intellect generally. The theory which would judge of the

intellectual capacity of a man according to his cranial capacity,

seems absurdly illogical to one who has studied the subject. The

skulls of the stone period, as well as those of African races

(Bushmen included) show that the first are above rather than below

the average of the brain capacity of the modern man, and the skulls

of the last are on the whole (as also in the case of Papuans and

Polynesians generally) larger by one cubic inch than that of the

average Frenchman. Again, the cranial capacity of the Parisian of

to‐day represents an average of 1437 cubic centimetres compared to

1523 of the Auvergnat.

388 A. Lefèvre, _Philosophy_, p. 498.

389 _Principles of Zoology_, p. 206.

390 i. 154.

391 The boneless.

392 The _first_ Sweat‐born. This is explained in the Section which

follows this series of Stanzas in the allegory from the _Purânas_

concerning Kandu, the holy sage, and Pramlochâ, the nymph who is

alleged to have hypnotized him; a suggestive allegory,

scientifically, as the drops of perspiration which she exuded, are

the symbols of the spores of Science.

393 This will be explained as we proceed. This unwillingness to fashion

men, or create, is symbolized in the _Purânas_ by Daksha’s dealings

with his opponent Nârada, the “strife‐making ascetic.”

394 Androgyne Third Race. The Evolutionist Professor Schmidt alludes to

“the fact of the separation of sexes, as to the derivation of which

from species _once hermaphrodite_ all [the believers in Creation

naturally excepted] are assuredly of one accord.” (_Doctrine of

Descent and Darwinism_, p. 159.) Such indeed is the incontestable

evidence drawn from the presence of rudimentary organs. Apart from

such palpable traces of a primeval hermaphroditism, the fact may be

noted that, as Laing writes, “a study of embryology ... shows that

in the _human higher animal_ species the distinction of sex is not

developed until a _considerable progress_ has been made in the

growth of the embryo.” (_A Modern Zoroastrian_, p. 106.) The Law of

Retardation—operative alike in the case of human races, animal

species, etc., when a higher type has once been evolved—still

preserves hermaphroditism as the reproductive method of the majority

of plants and many lower animals.

395 Vehicle.

396 _Vishnu Purâna_, I. vii; Wilson, i. 100.

397 See _Five Years of Theosophy_, p. 111.

398 For explanations and a philosophical account of the nature of those

Beings, which are now viewed as the “evil” and rebellious Spirits,

the Creators by Kriyâshakti, the reader is referred to the chapters

on “The Myth of the ‘Fallen Angel,’ in its Various Aspects,” in Part

II of this Volume.

399 _Vishnu Purâna_, III. ii.

400 In the oldest MS. of the _Vishnu Purâna_ in the possession of an

Initiate in Southern India, the God is not Indra, but Kâma, the God

of love and desire.

401 These are the exoteric figures given in a purposely reversed and

distorted way, being the figure of the duration of the cycle between

the First and Second human Race. All Orientalists to the contrary,

there is not a word in any of the _Purânas_ that has not a special

esoteric meaning.

402 _Vishnu Purâna_, I. xv; Wilson, ii. 5. Compare also Vivien’s

temptation of Merlin (Tennyson)—the same legend in Irish tradition.

403 x. 129.

404 The text has: “From Brahmâ, continuing to meditate, were born mind‐

engendered progeny, with forms and faculties derived from his

corporeal nature, _embodied spirits_, produced from the limbs

(Gâtra) of Dhîmat (all‐wise deity).” All these beings were the abode

of the three qualities of Devasarga, or divine creation, which, as

the five‐fold creation, is _devoid of clearness of perception,

without reflection_, dull of nature. “But as they _did not multiply

themselves_, Brahmâ created other mind‐born sons like himself,”

namely, the Brahmarshis, or the Prajâpatis, ten and seven in number.

“Sanandana and the other sons of Vedhas (Brahmâ) were previously

created,” but as shown elsewhere, they were “_without desire or

passion_, inspired with holy wisdom, estranged from the universe and

undesirous of progeny.” (_Vishnu Purâna_, X. vii; Wilson’s Trans.,

i. 100, 101.) These Sanandana and other Kumâras are then the Gods,

who after refusing to “create progeny” are forced to incarnate in

senseless men. The reader must pardon unavoidable repetitions in

view of the great number of facts given.

405 Compare Schlagintweit’s _Buddhism in Tibet_, pp. 88‐90.

406 See Edkins’ _Chinese Buddhism_, p. 208.

407 The previous Third Round.

408 Of this Round.

409 An allegorical reference to the “Sacred Animals” of the Zodiac and

other heavenly bodies. Some Kabalists see in them the prototypes of

the animals.

410 In _Hesiod_, Zeus creates his Third Race of men out of ash‐trees. In

the _Popol Vuh_ the Third Race of men is created out of the tree

Tzita and the marrow of the reed called Sibac. But Sibac means “egg”

in the mystery language of the Artufas, or Initiation caves. In a

report sent in 1812 to the Cortes by Don Baptista Pino it is said:

“All the Pueblos have their Artufas—so the natives call subterranean

rooms with only a single door where they (secretly) assemble....

These are impenetrable temples ... and the doors are always closed

to the Spaniards.... They adore the Sun and Moon ... fire and the

great _Snake_ (the creative power), whose eggs are called Sibac.”

411 There is a notable difference _esoterically_ between the words Sarpa

and Nâga, though they are both used indiscriminately. Sarpa,

serpent, is from the root _srip_, to creep, compare, Lat., _serp‐o_;

and they are called Ahi, from _hâ_, to abandon. The Sarpas were

produced from Brahmâ’s hair, which, owing to his fright at beholding

the Yakshas, whom he had created horrible to behold, fell off from

the head, each hair becoming a serpent. They are called “Sarpa from

their creeping and Ahi because they had deserted the head.” (Wilson,

i. 83.) But the Nâgas, in the allegories, their serpent’s tail

notwithstanding, do not creep, but manage to walk, run and fight.

412 Wilson translates the word as “demigods” (_Vishnu Purâna_, i. 130);

but Raumas are simply a race, a tribe.

413 xii. 10,308.

414 Wilson, _ibid._, p. 123.

415 _Ibid._, ii. 10.

416 Serpents.

417 Race.

418 Also.

419 Into male and female.

420 Then.

421 Man.

422 The “narrow‐headed.” Compare Shloka 24.

423 The “narrow‐headed.”

424 See Commentary on Shloka 36.

425 These “animals,” or monsters, are not the anthropoid or any other

apes, but verily what the Anthropologists might call the “missing

link,” the primitive lower man.

426 The shame of their animal origin which our modern Scientists would

emphasize if they could.

427 _The Doctrine of Descent and Darwinism_, pp. 186, 187. The “unknown

ancestry” referred to are the _primæval_ astral prototypes.

428 “A very strong argument in favour of variability is supplied by the

science of embryology. Is not a man in the uterus ... a simple cell,

a vegetable with three or four leaflets, a tadpole with branchiæ, a

mammal with a tail, lastly a primate [?] and a biped? It is scarcely

possible not to recognize in the embryonic evolution a rapid sketch,

a faithful summary, of the entire organic series.” (Lefèvre,

_Philosophy_, p. 484.)

The summary alluded to is, however, only that of the _store of

types_ hoarded up in man, the microcosm. This simple explanation

meets all such objections, as the presence of the rudimentary tail

in the fœtus—a fact triumphantly paraded by Hæckel and Darwin as

conclusively in favour of the Ape‐Ancestor Theory. It may also be

pointed out that _the presence of a vegetable with leaflets_ in the

embryonic stages is _not explained_ on ordinary evolutionist

principles. Darwinists have not traced man through the vegetable,

but Occultists have. _Why then this feature in the embryo_, and how

do the former explain it?

429 “The Proofs of Evolution,” a lecture by Hæckel.

430 Vol. i. pp. 388‐390.

431 See Cory, _Ancient Fragments_, pp. 21, _et seqq._

432 _Origin of Species_, pp. 448, 449, first edition.

433 Vol. i. p. 154.

434 The sin committed with the animals.

435 The Spirits, the “Sons of Wisdom.”

436 Who had refused to “create.”

437 Mindless.

438 Mind.

439 This verse in the _Rig Veda_ (x. 5, 6): “The Seven Wise Ones [Rays

of Wisdom, Dhyânis] fashion Seven Paths [or Lines, and also Races in

another sense]. To one of these may the distressed mortal come”—a

verse interpreted solely from the astronomical and cosmic aspect, is

one of the most pregnant in occult meaning. The “Paths” may mean

Lines (Maryâdâh), but they are primarily Beams of Light falling on

the Paths leading to Wisdom. (See _Rig Veda_, iv. 5‐13.) It means

“Ways” or Paths. They are, in short, the seven Rays which fall free

from the Macrocosmic Centre, the seven Principles in the

metaphysical, the seven Races in the physical sense. All depends

upon the key used.

440 _Rig Veda_, x. 10, 5, 2.

441 It is next to impossible to translate verbally some of these old

Commentaries. We are often obliged to give the meaning only, and

thus retranslate the verbatim translations.

442 Rudra, as a Kumâra, is Nîlalohita—red and blue.

443 This, regardless of modern materialistic evolution, which speculates

in this wise: “The primitive human form, whence as we think all

human species sprang, has perished this long time. [This we deny: it

has only decreased in size and changed in texture.] But many facts

point to the conclusion that it was hairy and dolichocephalic.

[African races are even _now_ dolichocephalic in a great measure,

but the palæolithic Neanderthal skull, the oldest we know of, is of

a large size, and no nearer to the capacity of the gorilla’s cranium

than that of any other now‐living man.] Let us, for the time being,

call this hypothetical species _homo primigenius_.... This first

species, or the ape‐man, the ancestor of all the others, _probably_

arose in the _tropical regions_ of the old world from _anthropoid

apes_.” Asked for proofs, the Evolutionist, not the least daunted,

replies: “Of these _no fossil remains are as yet known to us, but

they were probably akin to the Gorilla and Orang of the present

day_.” And then the Papuan negro is mentioned as the probable

descendant in the first line. (_Pedigree of Man_, p. 80.)

The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 2 of 4 The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy · 第 15 / 18 章