SECTION I. PRELIMINARY SURVEY.

The Secret Doctrine

The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy

By

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky

Author of “Isis Unveiled.”

Third and Revised Edition.

SATYÂT NÂSTI PARO DHARMAH.

“There is no Religion higher than Truth.”

Volume III.

The Theosophical Publishing House

London

1897

CONTENTS

Preface.

Introductory.

Section I. Preliminary Survey.

Section II. Modern Criticism and the Ancients.

Section III. The Origin of Magic.

Section IV. The Secresy of Initiates.

Section V. Some Reasons for Secresy.

Section VI. The Dangers of Practical Magic.

Section VII. Old Wine in New Bottles.

Section VIII. The Book of Enoch the Origin and the Foundation of

Christianity.

Section IX. Hermetic and Kabalistic Doctrines.

Section X. Various Occult Systems of Interpretations of Alphabets and

Numerals.

Section XI. The Hexagon with the Central Point, or the Seventh Key.

Section XII. The Duty of the True Occultist toward Religions.

Section XIII. Post‐Christian Adepts and their Doctrines.

Section XIV. Simon and his Biographer Hippolytus.

Section XV. St. Paul the real Founder of present Christianity.

Section XVI. Peter a Jewish Kabalist, not an Initiate.

Section XVII. Apollonius of Tyana.

Section XVIII. Facts underlying Adept Biographies.

Section XIX. St. Cyprian of Antioch.

Section XX. The Eastern Gupta Vidya & the Kabalah.

Section XXI. Hebrew Allegories.

Section XXII. The “Zohar” on Creation and the Elohim.

Section XXIII. What the Occultists and Kabalists have to say.

Section XXIV. Modern Kabalists in Science and Occult Astronomy.

Section XXV. Eastern and Western Occultism.

Section XXVI. The Idols and the Teraphim.

Section XXVII. Egyptian Magic.

Section XXVIII. The Origin of the Mysteries.

Section XXIX. The Trial of the Sun Initiate.

Section XXX. The Mystery “Sun of Initiation.”

Section XXXI. The Objects of the Mysteries.

Section XXXII. Traces of the Mysteries.

Section XXXIII. The Last of the Mysteries in Europe.

Section XXXIV. The Post‐Christian Successors to the Mysteries.

Section XXXV. Symbolism of Sun and Stars.

Section XXXVI. Pagan Sidereal Worship, or Astrology.

Section XXXVII. The Souls of the Stars—Universal Heliolatry.

Section XXXVIII. Astrology and Astrolatry.

Section XXXIX. Cycles and Avataras.

Section XL. Secret Cycles.

Section XLI. The Doctrine of Avataras.

Section XLII. The Seven Principles.

Section XLIII. The Mystery of Buddha.

Section XLIV. “Reincarnations” of Buddha.

Section XLV. An Unpublished Discourse of Buddha.

Section XLVI. Nirvana‐Moksha.

Section XLVII. The Secret Books of “Lam‐Rin” and Dzyan.

Section XLVIII. Amita Buddha Kwan‐Shai‐yin, and Kwan‐yin.—What the “Book

of Dzyan” and the Lamaseries of Tsong‐Kha‐pa say.

Section XLIX. Tsong‐Kha‐pa.—Lohans in China.

Section L. A few more Misconceptions Corrected.

Section LI. The “Doctrine of the Eye” & the “Doctrine of the Heart,” or

the “Heart’s Seal.”

Some Papers On The Bearing Of Occult Philosophy On Life.

Paper I. A Warning.

Paper II. An Explanation.

Paper III. A Word Concerning the Earlier Papers.

Appendix. Notes on Papers I., II. and III.

Notes On Some Oral Teachings.

Footnotes

[Cover Art]

[Transcriber’s Note: The above cover image was produced by the submitter

at Distributed Proofreaders, and is being placed into the public domain.]

As for what thou hearest others say, who persuade the many that

the soul when once freed from the body neither suffers ... evil

nor is conscious, I know that thou art better grounded in the

doctrines received by us from our ancestors and in the sacred

orgies of Dionysus than to believe them; for the mystic symbols

are well known to us who belong to the Brotherhood.

PLUTARCH.

The problem of life is man. Magic, or rather Wisdom, is the

evolved knowledge of the potencies of man’s interior being, which

forces are divine emanations, as intuition is the perception of

their origin, and initiation our induction into that knowledge....

We begin with instinct; the end is omniscience.

A. WILDER.

PREFACE.

The task of preparing this volume for the press has been a difficult and

anxious one, and it is necessary to state clearly what has been done. The

papers given to me by H. P. B. were quite unarranged, and had no obvious

order: I have, therefore, taken each paper as a separate Section, and have

arranged them as sequentially as possible. With the exception of the

correction of grammatical errors and the elimination of obviously un‐

English idioms, the papers are as H. P. B. left them, save as otherwise

marked. In a few cases I have filled in a gap, but any such addition is

enclosed within square brackets, so as to be distinguished from the text.

In “The Mystery of Buddha” a further difficulty arose; some of the

Sections had been written four or five times over, each version containing

some sentences that were not in the others; I have pieced these versions

together, taking the fullest as basis, and inserting therein everything

added in any other versions. It is, however, with some hesitation that I

have included these Sections in the _Secret Doctrine_. Together with some

most suggestive thought, they contain very numerous errors of fact, and

many statements based on exoteric writings, not on esoteric knowledge.

They were given into my hands to publish, as part of the Third Volume of

the _Secret Doctrine_, and I therefore do not feel justified in coming

between the author and the public, either by altering the statements, to

make them consistent with fact, or by suppressing the Sections. She says

she is acting entirely on her own authority, and it will be obvious to any

instructed reader that she makes—possibly deliberately—many statements so

confused that they are mere blinds, and other statements—probably

inadvertently—that are nothing more than the exoteric misunderstandings of

esoteric truths. The reader must here, as everywhere, use his own

judgment, but feeling bound to publish these Sections, I cannot let them

go to the public without a warning that much in them is certainly

erroneous. Doubtless, had the author herself issued this book, she would

have entirely re‐written the whole of this division; as it was, it seemed

best to give all she had said in the different copies, and to leave it in

its rather unfinished state, for students will best like to have what she

said as she said it, even though they may have to study it more closely

than would have been the case had she remained to finish her work.

The quotations made have been as far as possible found, and correct

references given; in this most laborious work a whole band of earnest and

painstaking students, under the guidance of Mrs. Cooper‐Oakley, have been

my willing assistants. Without their aid it would not have been possible

to give the references, as often a whole book had to be searched through,

in order to find a paragraph of a few lines.

This volume completes the papers left by H. P. B., with the exception of a

few scattered articles that yet remain and that will be published in her

own magazine _Lucifer_. Her pupils are well aware that few will be found

in the present generation to do justice to the occult knowledge of H. P.

B. and to her magnificent sweep of thought, but as she can wait to future

generations for the justification of her greatness as a teacher, so can

her pupils afford to wait for the justification of their trust.

ANNIE BESANT.

INTRODUCTORY.

“Power belongs to him who knows;” this is a very old axiom. Knowledge—the

first step to which is the power of comprehending the truth, of discerning

the real from the false—is for those only who, having freed themselves

from every prejudice and conquered their human conceit and selfishness,

are ready to accept every and any truth, once it is demonstrated to them.

Of such there are very few. The majority judge of a work according to the

respective prejudices of its critics, who are guided in their turn by the

popularity or unpopularity of the author, rather than by its own faults or

merits. Outside the Theosophical circle, therefore, the present volume is

certain to receive at the hands of the general public a still colder

welcome than its two predecessors have met with. In our day no statement

can hope for a fair trial, or even hearing, unless its arguments run on

the line of legitimate and accepted enquiry, remaining strictly within the

boundaries of official Science or orthodox Theology.

Our age is a paradoxical anomaly. It is preëminently materialistic and as

preëminently pietistic. Our literature, our modern thought and progress,

so called, both run on these two parallel lines, so incongruously

dissimilar and yet both so popular and so very orthodox, each in its own

way. He who presumes to draw a third line, as a hyphen of reconciliation

between the two, has to be fully prepared for the worst. He will have his

work mangled by reviewers, mocked by the sycophants of Science and Church,

misquoted by his opponents, and rejected even by the pious lending

libraries. The absurd misconceptions, in so‐called cultured circles of

society, of the ancient Wisdom‐Religion (Bodhism) after the admirably

clear and scientifically‐presented explanations in _Esoteric Buddhism_,

are a good proof in point. They might have served as a caution even to

those Theosophists who, hardened in an almost life‐long struggle in the

service of their Cause, are neither timid with their pen, nor in the least

appalled by dogmatic assumption and scientific authority. Yet, do what

Theosophical writers may, neither Materialism nor doctrinal pietism will

ever give their Philosophy a fair hearing. Their doctrines will be

systematically rejected, and their theories denied a place even in the

ranks of those scientific ephemera, the ever‐shifting “working hypotheses”

of our day. To the advocate of the “animalistic” theory, our

cosmogenetical and anthropogenetical teachings are “fairy‐tales” at best.

For to those who would shirk any moral responsibility, it seems certainly

more convenient to accept descent from a common simian ancestor and see a

brother in a dumb, tailless baboon, than to acknowledge the fatherhood of

Pitris, the “Sons of God,” and to have to recognise as a brother a

starveling from the slums.

“Hold back!” shout in their turn the pietists. “You will never make of

respectable church‐going Christians Esoteric Buddhists!”

Nor are we, in truth, in any way anxious to attempt the metamorphosis. But

this cannot, nor shall it, prevent Theosophists from saying what they have

to say, especially to those who, in opposing to our doctrine Modern

Science, do so not for her own fair sake, but only to ensure the success

of their private hobbies and personal glorification. If we cannot prove

many of our points, no more can they; yet we may show how, instead of

giving historical and scientific facts—for the edification of those who,

knowing less than they, look to Scientists to do their thinking and form

their opinions—the efforts of most of our scholars seem solely directed to

killing ancient facts, or distorting them into props to support their own

special views. This will be done in no spirit of malice or even criticism,

as the writer readily admits that most of those she finds fault with stand

immeasurably higher in learning than herself. But great scholarship does

not preclude bias and prejudice, nor is it a safeguard against self‐

conceit, but rather the reverse. Moreover, it is but in the legitimate

defence of our own statements, _i.e._, the vindication of Ancient Wisdom

and its great truths, that we mean to take our “great authorities” to

task.

Indeed, unless the precaution of answering beforehand certain objections

to the fundamental propositions in the present work be adopted—objections

which are certain to be made on the authority of this, that, or another

scholar concerning the Esoteric character of all the archaic and ancient

works on Philosophy—our statements will be once more contradicted and even

discredited. One of the main points in this Volume is to indicate in the

works of the old Âryan, Greek, and other Philosophers of note, as well as

in all the world‐scriptures, the presence of a strong Esoteric allegory

and symbolism. Another of the objects is to prove that the key of

interpretation, as furnished by the Eastern Hindu‐Buddhistic canon of

Occultism—fitting as well the Christian Gospels as it does archaic

Egyptian, Greek, Chaldæan, Persian, and even Hebrew‐Mosaic Books—must have

been one common to all the nations, however divergent may have been their

respective methods and exoteric “blinds.” These claims are vehemently

denied by some of the foremost scholars of our day. In his Edinburgh

Lectures, Prof. Max Müller discarded this fundamental statement of the

Theosophists by pointing to the Hindu Shâstras and Pandits, who know

nothing of such Esotericism.(1) The learned Sanskrit scholar stated in so

many words that there was no hidden meaning, no Esoteric element or

“blinds,” either in the _Purânas_ or the _Upanishads_. Considering that

the word “Upanishad” means, when translated, the “Secret Doctrine,” the

assertion is, to say the least, extraordinary. Sir M. Monier Williams

again holds the same view with regard to Buddhism. To hear him is to

regard Gautama, the Buddha, as an enemy of every pretence to Esoteric

teachings. He himself never taught them! All such “pretences” to Occult

learning and “magic powers” are due to the later Arhats, the subsequent

followers of the “Light of Asia”! Prof. B. Jowett, again, as

contemptuously passes the sponge over the “absurd” interpretations of

Plato’s _Timæus_ and the Mosaic Books by the Neoplatonists. There is not a

breath of the Oriental (Gnostic) spirit of Mysticism in Plato’s

_Dialogues_, the Regius Professor of Greek tells us, nor any approach to

Science, either. Finally, to cap the climax, Prof. Sayce, the

Assyriologist, although he does not deny the actual presence, in the

Assyrian tablets and cuneiform literature, of a hidden meaning—

Many of the sacred texts ... so written as to be intelligible only

to the initiated—

yet insists that the “keys and glosses” thereof are now in the hands of

the Assyriologists. The modern scholars, he affirms, have in their

possession clues to the interpretation of the Esoteric Records,

Which even the initiated priests [of Chaldæa] did not possess.

Thus, in the scholarly appreciation of our modern Orientalists and

Professors, Science was in its infancy in the days of the Egyptian and

Chaldæan Astronomers. Pânini, the greatest Grammarian in the world, was

unacquainted with the art of writing. So was the Lord Buddha, and everyone

else in India until 300 B.C. The grossest ignorance reigned in the days of

the Indian Rishis, and even in those of Thales, Pythagoras, and Plato.

Theosophists must indeed be superstitious ignoramuses to speak as they do,

in the face of such learned evidence to the contrary!

Truly it looks as if, since the world’s creation, there has been but one

age of real knowledge on earth—the present age. In the misty twilight, in

the grey dawn of history, stand the pale shadows of the old Sages of world

renown. They were hopelessly groping for the correct meaning of their own

Mysteries, the spirit whereof has departed without revealing itself to the

Hierophants, and has remained latent in space until the advent of the

initiates of Modern Science and Research. The noontide brightness of

knowledge has only now arrived at the “Know‐All,” who, basking in the

dazzling sun of induction, busies himself with his Penelopeian task of

“working hypotheses,” and loudly asserts his rights to universal

knowledge. Can anyone wonder, then, that according to present views the

learning of the ancient Philosopher, and even sometimes that of his direct

successors in the past centuries, has ever been useless to the world and

valueless to himself? For, as explained repeatedly in so many words, while

the Rishis and the Sages of old have walked far over the arid fields of

myth and superstition, the mediæval Scholar, and even the average

eighteenth century Scientist, have always been more or less cramped by

their “supernatural” religion and beliefs. True, it is generally conceded

that some ancient and also mediæval Scholars, such as Pythagoras, Plato,

Paracelsus, and Roger Bacon, followed by a host of glorious names, had

indeed left not a few landmarks over precious mines of Philosophy and

unexplored lodes of Physical Science. But then the actual excavation of

these, the smelting of the gold and silver, and the cutting of the

precious jewels they contain, are all due to the patient labours of the

modern man of Science. And is it not to the unparalleled genius of the

latter that the ignorant and hitherto‐deluded world owes a correct

knowledge of the real nature of the Kosmos, of the true origin of the

universe and man, as revealed in the automatic and mechanical theories of

the Physicists, in accordance with strictly scientific Philosophy? Before

our cultured era, Science was but a name, Philosophy a delusion and a

snare. According to the modest claims of contemporary authority on genuine

Science and Philosophy, the Tree of Knowledge has only now sprung from the

dead weeds of superstition, as a beautiful butterfly emerges from an ugly

grub. We have, therefore, nothing for which to thank our forefathers. The

Ancients have at best prepared and fertilised the soil; it is the Moderns

who have planted the seeds of knowledge and reared the lovely plants

called blank negation and sterile agnosticism.

Such, however, is not the view taken by Theosophists. They repeat what was

stated twenty years ago. It is not sufficient to speak of the “untenable

conceptions of an uncultured past” (Tyndall); of the “_parler enfantin_”

of the Vaidic poets (Max Müller); of the “absurdities” of the

Neoplatonists (Jowett); and of the ignorance of the Chaldæo‐Assyrian

initiated Priests with regard to their own symbols, when compared with the

knowledge thereon of the British Orientalist (Sayce). Such assumptions

have to be proven by something more solid than the mere word of these

scholars. For no amount of boastful arrogance can hide the intellectual

quarries out of which the representations of so many modern Philosophers

and Scholars have been carved. How many of the most distinguished European

Scientists have derived honour and credit for the mere dressing‐up of the

ideas of these old Philosophers, whom they are ever ready to disparage, is

left to an impartial posterity to say. Thus it does seem not altogether

untrue as stated in _Isis Unveiled_, to say of certain Orientalists and

Scholars of dead languages, that they will allow their boundless conceit

and self‐opinionatedness to run away with their logic and reasoning

powers, rather than concede to the ancient Philosophers the knowledge of

anything the modern do not know.

As part of this work treats of the Initiates and the secret knowledge

imparted during the Mysteries, the statements of those who, in spite of

the fact that Plato was an Initiate, maintain that no hidden Mysticism is

to be discovered in his works, have to be first examined. Too many of the

present scholars, Greek and Sanskrit, are but too apt to forego facts in

favour of their own preconceived theories based on personal prejudice.

They conveniently forget, at every opportunity, not only the numerous

changes in language, but also that the allegorical style in the writings

of old Philosophers and the secretiveness of the Mystics had their _raison

d’être_; that both the pre‐Christian and the post‐Christian classical

writers—the great majority at all events—were under the sacred obligation

never to divulge the solemn secrets communicated to them in the

sanctuaries; and that this alone is sufficient to sadly mislead their

translators and profane critics. But these critics will admit nothing of

the kind, as will presently be seen.

For over twenty‐two centuries everyone who has read Plato has been aware

that, like most of the other Greek Philosophers of note, he had been

initiated; that therefore, being tied down by the Sodalian Oath, he could

speak of certain things only in veiled allegories. His reverence for the

Mysteries is unbounded; he openly confesses that he writes

“enigmatically,” and we see him take the greatest precautions to conceal

the true meaning of his words. Every time the subject touches the greater

secrets of Oriental Wisdom—the cosmogony of the universe, or the ideal

preëxisting world—Plato shrouds his Philosophy in the profoundest

darkness. His _Timæus_ is so confused that no one but an Initiate can

understand the hidden meaning. As already said in _Isis Unveiled_:

The speculations of Plato in the _Banquet_ on the creation, or

rather the evolution, of primordial men, and the essay on

cosmogony in the _Timæus_, must be taken allegorically if we

accept them at all. It is this hidden Pythagorean meaning in

_Timæus_, _Cratylus_, and _Parmenides_, and a few other trilogies

and dialogues, that the Neoplatonists ventured to expound, as far

as the theurgical vow of secresy would allow them. The Pythagorean

doctrine that God is the Universal Mind diffused through all

things, and the dogma of the soul’s immortality, are the leading

features in these apparently incongruous teachings. His piety and

the great veneration he felt for the Mysteries are sufficient

warrant that Plato would not allow his indiscretion to get the

better of that deep sense of responsibility which is felt by every

Adept. “Constantly perfecting himself in perfect Mysteries a man

in them alone becomes truly perfect,” says he in the _Phædrus_.

He took no pains to conceal his displeasure that the Mysteries had

become less secret than formerly. Instead of profaning them by

putting them within the reach of the multitude, he would have

guarded them with jealous care against all but the most earnest

and worthy of his disciples.(2) While mentioning the Gods on every

page, his monotheism is unquestionable, for the whole thread of

his discourse indicates that by the term “Gods” he means a class

of beings lower in the scale than Deities, and but one grade

higher than men. Even Josephus perceived and acknowledged this

fact, despite the natural prejudice of his race. In his famous

onslaught upon Apion, this historian says: “Those, however, among

the Greeks who philosophized in accordance with truth were not

ignorant of anything, ... nor did they fail to perceive the

chilling superficialities of the mythical allegories, on which

account they justly despised them.... By which thing Plato, being

moved, says it is not necessary to admit any one of the other

poets into ‘the Commonwealth,’ and he dismisses Homer blandly,

after having crowned him and pouring unguent upon him, in order

that indeed he should not destroy by _his myths_, the orthodox

belief respecting one God.”(3)

And this is the “God” of every Philosopher, God infinite and impersonal.

All this and much more, which there is no room here to quote, leads one to

the undeniable certitude that (_a_), as all the Sciences and Philosophies

were in the hands of the temple Hierophants, Plato, as initiated by them,

must have known them; and (_b_), that logical inference alone is amply

sufficient to justify anyone in regarding Plato’s writings as allegories

and “dark sayings,” veiling truths which he had no right to divulge.

This established, how comes it that one of the best Greek scholars in

England, Prof. Jowett, the modern translator of Plato’s works, seeks to

demonstrate that none of the Dialogues—including even the _Timæus_—have

any element of Oriental Mysticism about them? Those who can discern the

true spirit of Plato’s Philosophy will hardly be convinced by the

arguments which the Master of Balliol College lays before his readers.

“Obscure and repulsive” to him, the _Timæus_ may certainly be; but it is

as certain that this obscurity does not arise, as the Professor tells his

public, “in the infancy of physical science,” but rather in its days of

secresy; not “out of the confusion of theological, mathematical, and

physiological notions,” or “out of the desire to conceive the whole of

Nature without any adequate knowledge of the parts.”(4) For Mathematics

and Geometry were the backbone of Occult cosmogony, hence of “Theology,”

and the physiological notions of the ancient Sages are being daily

verified by Science in our age; at least, to those who know how to read

and understand ancient Esoteric works. The “knowledge of the parts” avails

us little, if this knowledge only leads us the more to ignorance of the

Whole, or the “nature and reason of the Universal,” as Plato called Deity,

and causes us to blunder most egregiously because of our boasted inductive

methods. Plato may have been “incapable of induction, or generalization in

the modern sense”;(5) he may have been ignorant also, of the circulation

of the blood, which, we are told, “was absolutely unknown to him,”(6) but

then, there is naught to disprove that he knew what blood _is_—and this is

more than any modern Physiologist or Biologist can claim nowadays.

Though a wider and far more generous margin for knowledge is allowed the

“physical philosopher” by Prof. Jowett than by nearly any other modern

commentator and critic, nevertheless, his criticism so considerably

outweighs his laudation, that it may be as well to quote his own words, to

show clearly his bias. Thus he says:

To bring sense under the control of reason; to find some way

through the labyrinth or chaos of appearances, either the highway

of mathematics, or more devious paths suggested by the analogy of

man with the world and of the world with man; to see that all

things have a cause and are tending towards an end—this is the

spirit of the ancient physical philosopher.(7) But we neither

appreciate the conditions of knowledge to which he was subjected,

nor have the ideas which fastened upon his imagination the same

hold upon us. For he is hovering between matter and mind; he is

under the dominion of abstractions; his impressions are taken

almost at random from the outside of nature; he sees the light,

but not the objects which are revealed by the light; and he brings

into juxtaposition things which to us appear wide as the poles

asunder, because he finds nothing between them.

The last proposition but one must evidently be distasteful to the modern

“physical philosopher,” who sees the “objects” before him, but fails to

see the light of the Universal Mind, which reveals them, _i.e._, who

proceeds in a diametrically opposite way. Therefore the learned Professor

comes to the conclusion that the ancient Philosopher, whom he now judges

from Plato’s _Timæus_, must have acted in a decidedly unphilosophical and

even irrational way. For:

He passes abruptly from persons to ideas and numbers, and _from

ideas and numbers to persons_,(8) he confuses subject and object,

_first_ and _final_ causes, and in dreaming of geometrical

figures(9) is lost in a flux of sense. And now an effort of mind

is required on our parts _in order to understand his double

language_, or to apprehend _the twilight character of the

knowledge_ and the genius of ancient philosophers which, under

such conditions [?], seems by a divine power in many instances to

have anticipated the truth.(10)

Whether “such conditions” imply those of ignorance and mental stolidity in

“the genius of ancient philosophers” or something else, we do not know.

But what we do know is that the meaning of the sentences we have

italicized is perfectly clear. Whether the Regius Professor of Greek

believes or disbelieves in a hidden sense of geometrical figures and of

the Esoteric “jargon,” he nevertheless admits the presence of a “double

language” in the writings of these Philosophers. Thence he admits a hidden

meaning, which must have had an interpretation. Why, then, does he flatly

contradict his own statement on the very next page? And why should he deny

to the _Timæus_—that preëminently Pythagorean (mystic) Dialogue—any Occult

meaning and take such pains to convince his readers that

The influence which the _Timæus_ has exercised upon posterity is

partly due to a misunderstanding.

The following quotation from his Introduction is in direct contradiction

with the paragraph which precedes it, as above quoted:

In the supposed depths of this dialogue the Neo‐Platonists found

hidden meanings and connections with the Jewish and Christian

Scriptures, and out of them they dictated doctrines quite at

variance with the spirit of Plato. Believing that he was inspired

by the Holy Ghost, or had received his wisdom from Moses,(11) they

seemed to find in his writings the Christian Trinity, the Word,

the Church ... and the Neo‐Platonists had a method of

interpretation which could elicit any meaning out of any words.

They were really incapable of distinguishing between the opinions

of one philosopher and another, or between the serious thoughts of

Plato and his passing fancies.(12)... [But] there is no danger of

the modern commentators on the _Timæus_ falling into the absurdity

of the Neo‐Platonists.

No danger whatever, of course, for the simple reason that the modern

commentators have never had the key to Occult interpretations. And before

another word is said in defence of Plato and the Neoplatonists, the

learned master of Balliol College ought to be respectfully asked: What

does, or can he know of the Esoteric canon of interpretation? By the term

“canon” is here meant that key which was communicated orally from “mouth

to ear” by the Master to the disciple, or by the Hierophant to the

candidate for initiation; this from time immemorial throughout a long

series of ages, during which the inner—not public—Mysteries were the most

sacred institution of every land. Without such a key no correct

interpretation of either the _Dialogues_ of Plato or any Scripture, from

the _Vedas_ to Homer, from the _Zend Avesta_ to the Mosaic Books, is

possible. How then can the Rev. Dr. Jowett know that the interpretations

made by the Neoplatonists of the various sacred books of the nations were

“absurdities?” Where, again, has he found an opportunity of studying these

“interpretations”? History shows that all such works were destroyed by the

Christian Church Fathers and their fanatical catechumens, wherever they

were found. To say that such men as Ammonius, a genius and a saint, whose

learning and holy life earned for him the title of Theodidaktos (“God‐

taught”), such men as Plotinus, Porphyry, and Proclus, were “incapable of

distinguishing between the opinions of one philosopher and another, or

between the serious thoughts of Plato and his fancies,” is to assume an

untenable position for a Scholar. It amounts to saying that, (_a_) scores

of the most famous Philosophers, the greatest Scholars and Sages of Greece

and of the Roman Empire were dull fools, and (_b_) that all the other

commentators, lovers of Greek Philosophy, some of them the acutest

intellects of the age—who do not agree with Dr. Jowett—are also fools and

no better than those whom they admire. The patronising tone of the last

above‐quoted passage is modulated with the most _naïve_ conceit,

remarkable even in our age of self‐glorification and mutual‐admiration

cliques. We have to compare the Professor’s views with those of some other

scholars.

Says Prof. Alexander Wilder of New York, one of the best Platonists of the

day, speaking of Ammonius, the founder of the Neoplatonic School:

His deep spiritual intuition, his extensive learning, his

familiarity with the Christian Fathers, Pantænus, Clement, and

Athenagoras, and with the most erudite philosophers of the time,

all fitted him for the labour which he performed so

thoroughly.(13) He was successful in drawing to his views the

greatest scholars and public men of the Roman Empire, who had

little taste for wasting time in dialectic pursuits or

superstitious observances. The results of his ministration are

perceptible at the present day in every country of the Christian

world; every prominent system of doctrine now bearing the marks of

his plastic hand. Every ancient philosophy has had its votaries

among the moderns; and even Judaism ... has taken upon itself

changes which were suggested by the “God‐taught” Alexandrian....

He was a man of rare learning and endowments, of blameless life

and amiable disposition. His almost superhuman ken and many

excellencies won for him the title of Theodidaktos; but he

followed the modest example of Pythagoras, and only assumed the

title of Philalethian, or lover of truth.(14)

It would be happy for truth and fact were our modern scholars to follow as

modestly in the steps of their great predecessors. But not

they—Philalethians!

Moreover, we know that:

Like Orpheus, Pythagoras, Confucius, Socrates, and Jesus

himself,(15) Ammonius committed nothing to writing.(16) Instead he

... communicated his most important doctrines to persons duly

instructed and disciplined, imposing on them the obligations of

secresy, as was done before him by Zoroaster and Pythagoras, and

in the Mysteries. Except a few treatises of his disciples we have

only the declarations of his adversaries from which to ascertain

what he actually taught.(17)

It is from the biassed statements of such “adversaries,” probably, that

the learned Oxford translator of Plato’s Dialogues came to the conclusion

that:

That which was truly great and truly characteristic of him

[Plato], his effort to realise and connect abstractions, _was not

understood_ by them [the Neoplatonists] at all [?].

He states, contemptuously enough for the ancient methods of intellectual

analysis, that:

In the present day ... an ancient philosopher is to be interpreted

from himself and by the contemporary history of thought.(18)

This is like saying that the ancient Greek canon of proportion (if ever

found), and the Athena Promachus of Phidias, have to be interpreted in the

present day from the contemporary history of architecture and sculpture,

from the Albert Hall and Memorial Monument, and the hideous Madonnas in

crinolines sprinkled over the fair face of Italy. Prof. Jowett remarks

that “mysticism is not criticism.” No; but neither is criticism always

fair and sound judgment.

La critique est aisée, mais l’art est difficile.

And such “art” our critic of the Neoplatonists—his Greek scholarship

notwithstanding—lacks from _a_ to _z_. Nor has he, very evidently, the key

to the true spirit of the Mysticism of Pythagoras and Plato, since he

denies even in the _Timæus_ an element of Oriental Mysticism, and seeks to

show Greek Philosophy reäcting upon the East, forgetting that the truth is

the exact reverse; that it is “the deeper and more pervading spirit of

Orientalism” that had—through Pythagoras and his own initiation into the

Mysteries—penetrated into the very depths of Plato’s soul.

But Dr. Jowett does not see this. Nor is he prepared to admit that

anything good or rational—in accordance with the “contemporary history of

thought”—could ever come out of that Nazareth of the Pagan Mysteries; nor

even that there is anything to interpret of a hidden nature in the

_Timæus_ or any other Dialogue. For him,

The so‐called mysticism of Plato is purely Greek, arising out of

his imperfect knowledge(19) and high aspirations, and is the

growth of an age in which philosophy is not wholly separated from

poetry and mythology.(20)

Among several other equally erroneous propositions, it is especially the

assumptions (_a_) that Plato was entirely free from any element of Eastern

Philosophy in his writings, and (_b_) that every modern scholar, without

being a Mystic and a Kabalist himself, can pretend to judge of ancient

Esotericism—which we mean to combat. To do this we have to produce more

authoritative statements than our own would be, and bring the evidence of

other scholars as great as Dr. Jowett, if not greater, specialists in

their subjects, moreover, to bear on and destroy the arguments of the

Oxford Regius Professor of Greek.

That Plato was undeniably an ardent admirer and follower of Pythagoras no

one will deny. And it is equally undeniable, as Matter has it, that Plato

had inherited on the one hand his doctrines, and on the other had drawn

his wisdom, from the same sources as the Samian Philosopher.(21) And the

doctrines of Pythagoras are Oriental to the backbone, and even

Brâhmanical; for this great Philosopher ever pointed to the far East as

the source whence he derived his information and his Philosophy, and

Colebrooke shows that Plato makes the same profession in his Epistles, and

says that he has taken his teachings “from ancient and sacred

doctrines.”(22) Furthermore, the ideas of both Pythagoras and Plato

coincide too well with the systems of India and with Zoroastrianism to

admit any doubt of their origin by anyone who has some acquaintance with

these systems. Again:

Pantænus, Athenagoras, and Clement were thoroughly instructed in

the Platonic philosophy, and _comprehended_ its essential unity

with the Oriental systems.(23)

The history of Pantænus and his contemporaries may give the key to the

Platonic, and at the same time Oriental, elements that predominate so

strikingly in the Gospels over the Jewish Scriptures.

SECTION I. PRELIMINARY SURVEY.

Initiates who have acquired powers and transcendental knowledge can be

traced back to the Fourth Root Race from our own age. As the multiplicity

of the subjects to be dealt with prohibits the introduction of such a

historical chapter, which, however historical in fact and truth, would be

rejected _à priori_ as blasphemy and fable by both Church and Science—we

shall only touch on the subject. Science strikes out, at its own sweet

will and fancy, dozens of names of ancient heroes, simply because there is

too great an element of myth in their histories; the Church insists that

biblical patriarchs shall be regarded as historical personages, and terms

her seven “Star‐angels” the “historical channels and agents of the

Creator.” Both are right, since each finds a strong party to side with it.

Mankind is at best a sorry herd of Panurgian sheep, following blindly the

leader that happens to suit it at the moment. Mankind—the majority at any

rate—hates to think for itself. It resents as an insult the humblest

invitation to step for a moment outside the old well‐beaten tracks, and,

judging for itself, to enter into a new path in some fresh direction. Give

it an unfamiliar problem to solve, and if its mathematicians, not liking

its looks, refuse to deal with it, the crowd, unfamiliar with mathematics,

will stare at the unknown quantity, and getting hopelessly entangled in

sundry _x_’s and _y_’s, will turn round, trying to rend to pieces the

uninvited disturber of its intellectual Nirvâna. This may, perhaps,

account for the ease and extraordinary success enjoyed by the Roman Church

in her conversions of nominal Protestants and Free‐thinkers, whose name is

legion, but who have never gone to the trouble of thinking for themselves

on these most important and tremendous problems of man’s inner nature.

And yet, if the evidence of facts, the records preserved in History, and

the uninterrupted anathemas of the Church against “Black Magic” and

Magicians of the accursed race of Cain, are not to be heeded, our efforts

will prove very puny indeed. When, for nearly two millenniums, a body of

men has never ceased to lift its voice against _Black_ Magic, the

inference ought to be irrefutable that if Black Magic exists as a real

fact, there must be somewhere its counterpart—_White_ Magic. False silver

coins could have no existence if there were no genuine silver money.

Nature is dual in whatever she attempts, and this ecclesiastical

persecution ought alone to have opened the eyes of the public long ago.

However much travellers may be ready to pervert every fact with regard to

abnormal powers with which certain men are gifted in “heathen” countries;

however eager they may be to put false constructions on such facts, and—to

use an old proverb—“to call white swan black goose,” and to kill it, yet

the evidence of even Roman Catholic missionaries ought to be taken into

consideration, once they swear in a body to certain facts. Nor is it

because they choose to see Satanic agency in manifestations of a certain

kind, that their evidence as to the existence of such powers can be

disregarded. For what do they say of China? Those missionaries who have

lived in the country for long years, and have seriously studied every fact

and belief that may prove an obstacle to their success in making

conversions, and who have become familiar with every exoteric rite of both

the official religion and sectarian creeds—all swear to the existence of a

certain body of men, whom no one can reach but the Emperor and a select

body of high officials. A few years ago, before the war in Tonkin, the

archbishop in Pekin, on the report of some hundreds of missionaries and

Christians, wrote to Rome the identical story that had been reported

twenty‐five years before, and had been widely circulated in clerical

papers. They had fathomed, it was said, the mystery of certain official

deputations, sent at times of danger by the Emperor and ruling powers to

their Sheu and Kiuay, as they are called among the people. These Sheu and

Kiuay, they explained, were the Genii of the mountains, endowed with the

most miraculous powers. They are regarded as the protectors of China, by

the “ignorant” masses; as the incarnation of Satanic power by the good and

“learned” missionaries.

The Sheu and Kiuay are men belonging to another state of being to

that of the ordinary man, or to the state they enjoyed while they

were clad in their bodies. They are disembodied spirits, ghosts

and larvæ, living, nevertheless, in objective form on earth, and

dwelling in the fastnesses of mountains, inaccessible to all but

those whom they permit to visit them.(24)

In Tibet certain ascetics are also called Lha, Spirits, by those with whom

they do not choose to communicate. The Sheu and Kiuay, who enjoy the

highest consideration of the Emperor and Philosophers, and of

Confucianists who believe in no “Spirits,” are simply Lohans—Adepts who

live in the greatest solitude in their unknown retreats.

But both Chinese exclusiveness and Nature seem to have allied themselves

against European curiosity and—as it is sincerely regarded in

Tibet—desecration. Marco Polo, the famous traveller, was perhaps the

European who ventured farthest into the interior of these countries. What

was said of him in 1876 may now be repeated.

The district of the Gobi wilderness, and, in fact, the whole area

of Independent Tartary and Tibet is carefully guarded against

foreign intrusion. Those who are permitted to traverse it are

under the particular care and pilotage of certain agents of the

chief authority, and are in duty bound to convey no intelligence

respecting places and persons to the outside world. But for this

restriction, many might contribute to these pages accounts of

exploration, adventure, and discovery that would be read with

interest. The time will come, sooner or later, when the dreadful

sand of the desert will yield up its long‐buried secrets, and then

there will indeed be unlooked‐for mortifications for our modern

vanity.

“The people of Pashai,”(25) says Marco Polo, the daring traveller

of the thirteenth century, “are great adepts in sorceries and the

diabolic arts.” And his learned editor adds: “This Paschai, or

Udyana, was the native country of Padma Sambhava, one of the chief

apostles of Lamaism, _i.e._, of Tibetan Buddhism, and a great

master of enchantments. The doctrines of Sakya, as they prevailed

in Udyana _in old times_, were probably strongly tinged with

Sivaïtic magic, and the Tibetans still regard the locality as the

classic ground of sorcery and witchcraft.”

The “old times” are just like the “modern times”; nothing is

changed as to magical practices except that they have become still

more esoteric and arcane, and that the caution of the adepts

increases in proportion to the traveller’s curiosity. Hiouen‐

Thsang says of the inhabitants: “The men ... are fond of study,

but pursue it with no ardour. _The science of magical formulæ has

become a regular professional business with them._”(26) We will

not contradict the venerable Chinese pilgrim on this point, and

are willing to admit that in the seventh century _some_ people

made “a professional business” of magic; so, also, do _some_

people now, but certainly not the true adepts. Moreover, in that

century, Buddhism had hardly penetrated into Tibet, and its races

were steeped in the sorceries of the Bhon,—the pre‐lamaïc

religion. It is not Hiouen‐Thsang, the pious, courageous man who

risked his life a hundred times to have the bliss of perceiving

Buddha’s shadow in the cave of Peshawur, who would have accused

the good lamas and monkish thaumaturgists of “making a

professional business” of showing it to travellers.

The injunction of Gautama, contained in his answer to King

Prasenajit, his protector, who called on him to perform miracles,

must have been ever‐present to the mind of Hiouen‐Thsang. “Great

king,” said Gautama, “I do not teach the law to my pupils, telling

them, ‘Go, ye saints, and before the eyes of the Brâhmans and

householders perform, by means of your supernatural powers,

miracles greater than any man can perform.’ I tell them when I

teach them the law, ‘Live ye saints, _hiding your good works, and

showing your sins_.’ ”

Struck with the accounts of magical exhibitions witnessed and

recorded by travellers of every age who had visited Tartary and

Tibet, Colonel Yule comes to the conclusion that the natives must

have had “at their command the whole encyclopædia of modern

Spiritualists.” Duhalde mentions among their sorceries the art of

producing by their invocations the figures of Laotseu(27) and

their divinities _in the air_, and “_of making a pencil write

answers to questions without anybody touching it_.”(28)

The former invocations pertain to the religious mysteries of their

sanctuaries; if done otherwise, or for the sake of _gain_, they

are considered _sorcery_, necromancy, and strictly forbidden. The

latter art, that of making a pencil write without contact, was

known and practised in China and other countries before the

Christian era. It is the A B C of magic in those countries.

When Hiouen‐Thsang desired to adore the shadow of Buddha, it was

not to “professional magicians” that he resorted, but to the power

of his own soul‐invocation; the power of prayer, faith, and

contemplation. All was dark and dreary near the cavern in which

the miracle was alleged to sometimes take place. Hiouen‐Thsang

entered and began his devotions. He made one hundred salutations,

but neither saw nor heard anything. Then, thinking himself too

sinful, he cried bitterly and despaired. But as he was about to

give up all hope, he perceived on the eastern wall a feeble light,

but it disappeared. He renewed his prayers, full of hope this

time, and again he saw the light, which flashed and disappeared

again. After this he made a solemn vow: he would not leave the

cave till he had the rapture to at last see the shadow of the

“Venerable of the Age.” He had to wait longer after this, for only

after two hundred prayers was the dark cave suddenly “bathed in

light, and the shadow of Buddha, of a brilliant white colour, rose

majestically on the wall, as when the clouds suddenly open, and

all at once display the marvellous image of the ‘Mountain of

Light.’ A dazzling splendour lighted up the features of the divine

countenance. Hiouen‐Thsang was lost in contemplation and wonder,

and would not turn his eyes away from the sublime and incomparable

object.” Hiouen‐Thsang adds in his own diary, _See‐yu‐kee_, that

it is only when man prays with sincere faith, and if he has

received from above a hidden impression, that he sees the shadow

clearly, but he cannot enjoy the sight for any length of time.

(Max Müller, _Buddhist Pilgrims_.)

From one end to the other the country is full of mystics,

religious philosophers, Buddhist saints and magicians. Belief in a

spiritual world, full of invisible beings who, on certain

occasions, appear to mortals objectively, is universal. “According

to the belief of the nations of Central Asia,” remarks I. J.

Schmidt, “the earth and its interior, as well as the encompassing

atmosphere, are filled with spiritual beings, which exercise an

influence, partly beneficent, partly malignant, on the whole of

organic and inorganic nature.... Especially are deserts, and other

wild and uninhabited tracts, or regions in which the influences of

nature are displayed on a gigantic and terrible scale, regarded as

the chief abode or rendez‐vous of evil spirits. And hence the

steppes of Turan, and in particular the great sandy desert of

Gobi, have been looked on as the dwelling place of malignant

beings, from days of hoary antiquity.”

The treasures exhumed by Dr. Schliemann at Mycenæ, have awakened

popular cupidity, and the eyes of adventurous speculators are

being turned toward the localities where the wealth of ancient

peoples is supposed to be buried, in crypt or cave, or beneath

sand or alluvial deposit. Around no other locality, not even Peru,

hang so many traditions as around the Gobi Desert. In independent

Tartary this howling waste of shifting sand was once, if report

speaks correctly, the seat of one of the richest empires the world

ever saw. Beneath the surface is said to lie such wealth in gold,

jewels, statuary, arms, utensils, and all that indicates

civilization, luxury, and fine arts, as no existing capital of

Christendom can show to‐day. The Gobi sand moves regularly from

east to west before terrific gales that blow continually.

Occasionally some of the hidden treasures are uncovered, but not a

native dare touch them, for the whole district is under the ban of

a mighty spell. Death would be the penalty. Bahti—hideous, but

faithful gnomes—guard the hidden treasures of this prehistoric

people, awaiting the day when the revolution of cyclic periods

shall again cause their story to be known for the instruction of

mankind.(29)

The above is purposely quoted from _Isis Unveiled_ to refresh the reader’s

memory. One of the cyclic periods has just been passed, and we may not

have to wait to the end of Mahâ Kalpa to have revealed something of the

history of the mysterious desert, in spite of the Bahti, and even the

Râkshasas of India, not less “hideous.” No tales or fictions were given in

our earlier volumes, their chaotic state notwithstanding, to which chaos

the writer, entirely free from vanity, confesses publicly and with many

apologies.

It is now generally admitted that, from time immemorial, the distant East,

India especially, was the land of knowledge and of every kind of learning.

Yet there is none to whom the origin of all her Arts and Sciences has been

so much denied as to the land of the primitive Âryas. From Architecture

down to the Zodiac, every Science worthy of the name was imported by the

Greeks, the mysterious Yavanas—agreeably with the decision of the

Orientalists! Therefore, it is but logical that even the knowledge of

Occult Science should be refused to India, since of its general practice

in that country less is known than in the case of any other ancient

people. It is so, simply because:

With the Hindus it was, and is, more esoteric, if possible, than

it was even among the Egyptian priests. So sacred was it deemed

that its existence was only half admitted, and it was only

practised in public emergencies. _It was more than a religious

matter, for it was [and is still] considered divine._ The Egyptian

hierophants, notwithstanding the practice of a stern and pure

morality, could not be compared for one moment with the ascetical

Gymnosophists, either in holiness of life or miraculous powers

developed in them by the supernatural abjuration of everything

earthly. By those who knew them well they were held in still

greater reverence than the magians of Chaldæa. “Denying themselves

the simplest comforts of life, they dwelt in woods, and led the

life of the most secluded hermits,”(30) while their Egyptian

brothers at least congregated together. Notwithstanding the slur

thrown on all who practised magic and divination, history has

proclaimed them as possessing the greatest secrets in medical

knowledge and unsurpassed skill in its practice. Numerous are the

volumes preserved in Hindu Mathams, in which are recorded the

proofs of their learning. To attempt to say whether these

Gymnosophists were the real founders of magic in India, or whether

they only practised what had passed to them as an inheritance from

the earliest Rishis(31)—the seven primeval sages—would be regarded

as mere speculation by exact scholars.(32)

Nevertheless, this must be attempted. In _Isis Unveiled_, all that could

be stated about Magic was set down in the guise of hints; and thus, owing

to the great amount of material scattered over two large volumes, much of

its importance was lost upon the reader, while it still more failed to

draw his attention on account of the faulty arrangement. But hints may now

grow into explanations. One can never repeat it too often—_Magic is as old

as man_. It cannot any longer be called charlatanry or hallucination, when

its lesser branches—such as mesmerism, now miscalled “hypnotism,” “thought

reading,” “action by suggestion,” and what not else, only to avoid calling

it by its right and legitimate name—are being so seriously investigated by

the most famous Biologists and Physiologists of both Europe and America.

Magic is indissolubly blended with the Religion of every country and is

inseparable from its origin. It is as impossible for History to name the

time when it was not, as that of the epoch when it sprang into existence,

unless the doctrines preserved by the Initiates are taken into

consideration. Nor can Science ever solve the problem of the origin of man

if it rejects the evidence of the oldest records in the world, and refuses

from the hand of the legitimate Guardians of the mysteries of Nature the

key to Universal Symbology. Whenever a writer has tried to connect the

first foundation of Magic with a particular country or some historical

event or character, further research has shown his hypothesis to be

groundless. There is a most lamentable contradiction among the

Symbologists on this point. Some would have it that Odin, the Scandinavian

priest and monarch, originated the practice of Magic some 70 years B.C.,

although it is spoken of repeatedly in the _Bible_. But as it was proven

that the mysterious rites of the priestesses Valas (Voilers) were greatly

anterior to Odin’s age(33), then Zoroaster came in for an attempt, on the

ground that he was the founder of Magian rites; but Ammianus Marcellinus,

Pliny and Arnobius, with other ancient Historians, have shown that

Zoroaster was but a reformer of Magic as practised by the Chaldæans and

Egyptians, and not at all its founder.(34)

Who, then, of those who have consistently turned their faces away from

Occultism and even Spiritualism, as being “unphilosophical” and therefore

unworthy of scientific thought, has a right to say that he has studied the

Ancients; or that, if he has studied them, he has understood all they have

said? Only those who claim to be wiser than their generation, who think

that they know all that the Ancients knew, and thus, knowing far more to‐

day, fancy that they are entitled to laugh at their ancient simple‐

mindedness and superstition; those, who imagine they have discovered a

great secret by declaring the ancient royal sarcophagus, now empty of its

King Initiate, to be a “corn‐bin,” and the Pyramid that contained it, a

granary, perhaps a wine‐cellar!(35) Modern society, on the authority of

some men of Science, calls Magic charlatantry. But there are eight hundred

millions on the face of the globe who believe in it to this day; there are

said to be twenty millions of perfectly sane and often very intellectual

men and women, members of that same society, who believe in its phenomena

under the name of Spiritualism. The whole ancient world, with its Scholars

and Philosophers, its Sages and Prophets, believed in it. Where is the

country in which it was not practised? At what age was it banished, even

from our own country? In the New World as in the Old Country (the latter

far younger than the former), the Science of Sciences was known and

practised from the remotest antiquity. The Mexicans had their Initiates,

their Priest‐Hierophants and Magicians, and their crypts of Initiation. Of

the two statues exhumed in the Pacific States, one represents a Mexican

Adept, in the posture prescribed for the Hindu ascetic, and the other an

Aztec Priestess, in a head‐gear which might be taken from the head of an

Indian Goddess; while the “Guatemalan Medal” exhibits the “Tree of

Knowledge”—with its hundreds of eyes and ears, symbolical of seeing and

hearing—encircled by the “Serpent of Wisdom” whispering into the ear of

the sacred bird. Bernard Diaz de Castilla, a follower of Cortez, gives

some idea of the extraordinary refinement, intelligence and civilization,

and also of the magic arts of the people whom the Spaniards conquered by

brute force. Their pyramids are those of Egypt, built according to the

same secret canon of proportion as those of the Pharaohs, and the Aztecs

appear to have derived their civilization and religion in more than one

way from the same source as the Egyptians and, before these, the Indians.

Among all these three peoples arcane Natural Philosophy, or Magic, was

cultivated to the highest degree.

That it was natural, not supernatural, and that the Ancients so regarded

it, is shown by what Lucian says of the “laughing Philosopher,”

Democritus, who, he tells his readers,

Believed in no [miracles] ... but applied himself to discover the

method by which the theurgists could produce them; in a word, his

philosophy brought him to the conclusion that magic was entirely

confined to the application and the imitation of the laws and the

works of nature.

Who then can still call the Magic of the Ancients “superstition”?

In this respect the opinion of Democritus is of the greatest

importance to us, since the Magi left by Xerxes, at Abdera, were

his instructors, and he had studied magic, moreover, for a

considerable time with the Egyptian priests.(36) For nearly ninety

years of the one hundred and nine of his life, this great

philosopher had made experiments, and noted them down in a book,

which, according to Petronius,(37) _treated of nature_—facts that

he had verified himself. And we find him not only disbelieving in

and utterly rejecting miracles, but asserting that every one of

those that were authenticated by eye‐witnesses, had, and could

have taken place, for all, even the most _incredible_, were

produced according to _the _“hidden laws of nature”.(38) ... Add

to this that Greece, the “later cradle of the arts and sciences,”

and India, cradle of religions, were, and one of them still is,

devoted to its study and practice—and who shall venture to

discredit its dignity as a study, and its profundity as a

science?(39)

No true Theosophist will ever do so. For, as a member of our great

Oriental body, he knows indubitably that the Secret Doctrine of the East

contains the Alpha and the Omega of Universal Science; that in its obscure

texts, under the luxuriant, though perhaps too exuberant, growth of

allegorical Symbolism, lie concealed the corner‐ and the key‐stones of all

ancient and modern knowledge. That Stone, brought down by the Divine

Builder, is now rejected by the too‐human workman, and this because, in

his lethal materiality, man has lost every recollection, not only of his

holy childhood, but of his very adolescence, when he was one of the

Builders himself; when “the morning stars sang together, and the Sons of

God shouted for joy,” after they had laid the measures for the foundations

of the earth—to use the deeply significant and poetical language of Job,

the Arabian Initiate. But those who are still able to make room in their

innermost selves for the Divine Ray, and who accept, therefore, the data

of the Secret Sciences in good faith and humility, they know well that it

is in this Stone that remains buried the absolute in Philosophy, which is

the key to all those dark problems of Life and Death, some of which, at

any rate, may find an explanation in these volumes.

The writer is vividly alive to the tremendous difficulties that present

themselves in the handling of such abstruse questions, and to all the

dangers of the task. Insulting as it is to human nature to brand truth

with the name of imposture, nevertheless we see this done daily and accept

it. For every occult truth has to pass through such denial and its

supporters through martyrdom, before it is finally accepted; though even

then it remains but too often—

A crown

Golden in show, yet but a wreath of thorns.

Truths that rest on Occult mysteries will have, for one reader who may

appreciate them, a thousand who will brand them as impostures. This is

only natural, and the only means to avoid it would be for an Occultist to

pledge himself to the Pythagorean “vow of silence,” and renew it every

five years. Otherwise, cultured society—two‐thirds of which think

themselves in duty bound to believe that, since the first appearance of

the first Adept, one half of mankind practised deception and fraud on the

other half—cultured society will undeniably assert its hereditary and

traditional right to stone the intruder. Those benevolent critics, who

most readily promulgate the now famous axiom of Carlyle with regard to his

countrymen, of being “mostly fools,” having taken preliminary care to

include themselves safely in the only fortunate exceptions to this rule,

will in this work gain strength and derive additional conviction of the

sad fact, that the human race is simply composed of knaves and congenital

idiots. But this matters very little. The vindication of the Occultists

and their Archaic Science is working itself slowly but steadily into the

very heart of society, hourly, daily, and yearly, in the shape of two

monster branches, two stray off‐shoots of the trunk of Magic—Spiritualism

and the Roman Church. Fact works its way very often through fiction. Like

an immense boa‐constrictor, Error, in every shape, encircles mankind,

trying to smother in her deadly coils every aspiration towards truth and

light. But Error is powerful only on the surface, prevented as she is by

Occult Nature from going any deeper; for the same Occult Nature encircles

the whole globe, in every direction, leaving not even the darkest corner

unvisited. And, whether by phenomenon or miracle, by spirit‐hook or

bishop’s crook, Occultism must win the day, before the present era reaches

“Shani’s (Saturn’s) triple septenary” of the Western Cycle in Europe, in

other words—before the end of the twenty‐first century “A.D.”

Truly the soil of the long by‐gone past is not dead, for it has only

rested. The skeletons of the sacred oaks of the ancient Druids may still

send shoots from their dried‐up boughs and be reborn to a new life, like

that handful of corn, in the sarcophagus of a mummy 4,000 years old,

which, when planted, sprouted, grew, and “gave a fine harvest.” Why not?

Truth is stranger than fiction. It may any day, and most unexpectedly,

vindicate its wisdom and demonstrate the conceit of our age, by proving

that the Secret Brotherhood did not, indeed, die out with the

Philalethians of the last Eclectic School, that the Gnosis flourishes

still on earth, and its votaries are many, albeit unknown. All this may be

done by one, or more, of the great Masters visiting Europe, and exposing

in their turn the alleged exposers and traducers of Magic. Such secret

Brotherhoods have been mentioned by several well‐known authors, and are

spoken of in Mackenzie’s _Royal Masonic Cyclopædia_. The writer now, in

the face of the millions who deny, repeats boldly, that which was said in

_Isis Unveiled_.

If they [the Initiates] have been regarded as mere fictions of the

novelist, that fact has only helped the “brother‐adepts” to keep

their incognito the more easily....

The St. Germains and Cagliostros of this century, having learned

bitter lessons from the vilifications and persecutions of the

past, pursue different tactics now‐a‐days.(40)

These prophetic words were written in 1876, and verified in 1886.

Nevertheless, we say again,

There are numbers of these mystic Brotherhoods which have naught

to do with “civilized” countries; and it is in their unknown

communities that are concealed the skeletons of the past. These

“adepts” could, if they chose, lay claim to strange ancestry, and

exhibit verifiable documents that would explain many a mysterious

page in both sacred and profane history.(41) Had the keys to the

hieratic writings and the secret of Egyptian and Hindu symbolism

been known to the Christian Fathers, they would not have allowed a

single monument of old to stand unmutilated.(42)

But there exists in the world another class of adepts, belonging to a

brotherhood also, and mightier than any other of those known to the

profane. Many among these are personally good and benevolent, even pure

and holy occasionally, as individuals. Pursuing collectively, however, and

as a body, a selfish, one‐sided object, with relentless vigour and

determination, they have to be ranked with the adepts of the Black Art.

These are our modern Roman Catholic “fathers” and clergy. Most of the

hieratic writings and symbols have been deciphered by them since the

Middle Ages. A hundred times more learned in secret Symbology and the old

Religions than our Orientalists will ever be, the personification of

astuteness and cleverness, every such adept in the art holds the keys

tightly in his firmly clenched hand, and will take care the secret shall

not be easily divulged, if he can help it. There are more profoundly

learned Kabalists in Rome and throughout Europe and America, than is

generally suspected. Thus are the professedly public “brotherhoods” of

“black” adepts more powerful and dangerous for Protestant countries than

any host of Eastern Occultists. People laugh at Magic! Men of Science,

Physiologists and Biologists, deride the potency and even the belief in

the existence of what is called in vulgar parlance “Sorcery” and “Black

Magic”! The Archæologists have their Stonehenge in England with its

thousands of secrets, and its twin‐brother Karnac of Brittany, and yet

there is not one of them who even suspects what has been going on in its

crypts, and its mysterious nooks and corners, for the last century. More

than that, they do not even know of the existence of such “magic halls” in

their Stonehenge, where curious scenes are taking place, whenever there is

a new convert in view. Hundreds of experiments have been, and are being

made daily at the Salpêtrière, and also by learned hypnotisers at their

private houses. It is now proved that certain sensitives—both men and

women—when commanded in trance, by the practitioner, who operates on them,

to do a certain thing—from drinking a glass of water up to simulated

murder—on recovering their normal state lose all remembrance of the order

inspired—“suggested” it is now called by Science. Nevertheless, at the

appointed hour and moment, the subject, though conscious and perfectly

awake, is compelled by an irresistible power within himself to do that

action which has been suggested to him by his mesmeriser; and that too,

whatever it may be, and whatever the period fixed by him who controls the

subject, that is to say, holds the latter under the power of his will, as

a snake holds a bird under its fascination, and finally forces it to jump

into its open jaws. Worse than this: for the bird is conscious of the

peril; it resists, however helpless in its final efforts, while the

hypnotized subject does not rebel, but seems to follow the suggestions and

voice of his own free‐will and soul. Who of our European men of Science,

who believe in such _scientific_ experiments—and very few are they who

still doubt them now‐a‐days, and who do not feel convinced of their actual

reality—who of them, it is asked, is ready to admit this as being Black

Magic? Yet it is the _genuine_, undeniable and actual _fascination_ and

_sorcery_ of old. The Mulu Kurumbas of Nîlgiri do not proceed otherwise in

their _envoûtements_ when they seek to destroy an enemy, nor do the Dugpas

of Sikkim and Bhûtân know of any more potential agent than their _will_.

Only in them that will does not proceed by jumps and starts, but acts with

certainty; it does not depend on the amount of receptivity or nervous

impressibility of the “subject.” Having chosen his victim and placed

himself _en rapport_ with him, the Dugpa’s “fluid” is sure to find its

way, for his will is immeasurably more strongly developed than the will of

the European experimenter—the self‐made, untutored, and _unconscious_

Sorcerer for the sake of Science—who has no idea (or belief either) of the

variety and potency of the world‐old methods used to develop this power,

by the _conscious_ sorcerer, the “Black Magician” of the East and West.

And now the question is openly and squarely asked: Why should not the

fanatical and zealous priest, thirsting to convert some selected rich and

influential member of society, use the same means to accomplish his end as

the French Physician and experimenter uses in his case with his subject?

The conscience of the Roman Catholic priest is most likely at peace. He

works _personally_ for no selfish purpose, but with the object of “saving

a soul” from “eternal damnation.” In his view, if Magic there be in it, it

is holy, meritorious and divine Magic. Such is the power of blind faith.

Hence, when we are assured by trustworthy and respectable persons of high

social standing, and unimpeachable character, that there are many well‐

organised societies among the Roman Catholic priests which, under the

pretext and cover of Modern Spiritualism and mediumship, hold _séances_

for the purposes of conversion by suggestion, directly and at a

distance—we answer: We know it. And when, moreover, we are told that

whenever those priest‐hypnotists are desirous of acquiring an influence

over some individual or individuals, selected by them for conversion, they

retire to an underground place, allotted and consecrated by them for such

purposes (_viz._, ceremonial Magic); and there, forming a circle, throw

their combined will‐power in the direction of that individual, and thus by

repeating the process, gain a complete control over their victim—we again

answer: Very likely. In fact we know the practice to be so, whether this

kind of ceremonial Magic and _envoûtement_ is practised at Stonehenge or

elsewhere. We know it, we say, through personal experience; and also

because several of the writer’s best and most loved friends have been

unconsciously drawn into the Romish Church and under her “benign”

protection by such means. And, therefore, we can only laugh in pity at the

ignorance and stubbornness of those deluded men of Science and cultured

experimentalists who, while believing in the power of Dr. Charcot and his

disciples to “envoûte” their subjects, find nothing better than a scornful

smile whenever Black Magic and its potency are mentioned before them.

Éliphas Lévi, the Abbé‐Kabalist, died before Science and the Faculté de

Médecine of France had accepted hypnotism and influence _par suggestion_

among its scientific experiments, but this is what he said twenty‐five

years ago, in his _Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie_, on “Les

Envoûtements et les Sorts”:

That which sorcerers and necromancers sought above all things in

their evocations of the Spirit of Evil, was that magnetic potency

which is the lawful property of the true Adept, and which they

desired to obtain possession of for evil purposes.... One of their

chief aims was the power of spells or of deleterious

influences.... That power may be compared to real poisonings by a

current of astral light. They exalt their will by means of

ceremonies to the degree of rendering it venomous at a

distance.... We have said in our “Dogma” what we thought of magic

spells, and how this power was exceedingly real and dangerous. The

true Magus throws a spell without ceremony and by his sole

disapproval, upon those with whose conduct he is dissatisfied, and

whom he thinks it necessary to punish;(43) he casts a spell, even

by his pardon, over those who do him injury, and the enemies of

Initiates never long enjoy impunity for their wrong‐doing. We have

ourselves seen proofs of this fatal law in numerous instances. The

executioners of martyrs always perish miserably; and the Adepts

are the martyrs of intelligence. Providence [Karma] seems to

despise those who despise them, and puts to death those who would

seek to prevent them from living. The legend of the Wandering Jew

is the popular poetry of this arcanum. A people had sent a sage to

crucifixion; that people had bidden him “Move on!” when he tried

to rest for one moment. Well! that people will become subject,

henceforth, to a similar condemnation; it will become entirely

proscribed, and for long centuries it will be bidden “Move on!

move on!” finding neither rest nor pity.(44)

“Fables,” and “superstition,” will be the answer. Be it so. Before the

lethal breath of selfishness and indifference every uncomfortable fact is

transformed into meaningless fiction, and every branch of the once verdant

Tree of Truth has become dried up and stripped of its primeval spiritual

significance. Our modern Symbologist is superlatively clever only at

detecting phallic worship and sexual emblems even where none were ever

meant. But for the true student of Occult Lore, White or Divine Magic

could no more exist in Nature without its counterpart Black Magic, than

day without night, whether these be of twelve hours or of six months’

duration. For him everything in that Nature has an occult—a bright and a

night side to it. Pyramids and Druid’s oaks, dolmens and Bo‐trees, plant

and mineral—everything was full of deep significance and of sacred truths

of wisdom, when the Arch‐Druid performed his magic cures and incantations,

and the Egyptian Hierophant evoked and guided Chemnu, the “lovely

spectre,” the female Frankenstein‐creation of old, raised for the torture

and test of the soul‐power of the candidate for initiation, simultaneously

with the last agonising cry of his terrestrial human nature. True, Magic

has lost its name, and along with it its rights to recognition. But its

practice is in daily use; and its progeny, “magnetic influence,” “power of

oratory,” “irresistible fascination,” “whole audiences subdued and held as

though under a spell,” are terms recognised and used by all, generally

meaningless though they now are. Its effects, however, are more determined

and definite among religious congregations such as the Shakers, the Negro

Methodists, and Salvationists, who call it “the action of the Holy Spirit”

and “grace.” The real truth is that Magic is still in full sway amidst

mankind, however blind the latter to its silent presence and influence on

its members, however ignorant society may be, and remain, to its daily and

hourly beneficent and maleficent effects. The world is full of such

unconscious magicians—in politics as well as in daily life, in the Church

as in the strongholds of Free‐Thought. Most of those magicians are

“sorcerers” unhappily, not metaphorically but in sober reality, by reason

of their inherent selfishness, their revengeful natures, their envy and

malice. The true student of Magic, well aware of the truth, looks on in

pity, and, if he be wise, keeps silent. For every effort made by him to

remove the universal cecity is only repaid with ingratitude, slander, and

often curses, which, unable to reach him, will react on those who wish him

evil. Lies and calumny—the latter a teething lie, adding actual bites to

empty harmless falsehoods—become his lot, and thus the well‐wisher is soon

torn to pieces, as a reward for his benevolent desire to enlighten.

Enough has been given, it is believed, to shew that the existence of a

Secret Universal Doctrine, besides its practical methods of Magic, is no

wild romance or fiction. The fact was known to the whole ancient world,

and the knowledge of it has survived in the East, in India especially. And

if there be such a Science, there must be naturally, somewhere, professors

of it, or Adepts. In any case it matters little whether the Guardians of

the Sacred Lore are regarded as living, actually existing men, or are

viewed as myths. It is their Philosophy that will have to stand or fall

upon its own merits, apart from, and independent of any Adepts. For in the

words of the wise Gamaliel, addressed by him to the Synedrion: “If this

doctrine is false it will perish, and fall of itself; but if true,

then—_it cannot be destroyed_.”