The opening sentence in _Genesis_, as every Hebrew scholar knows, is:
בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ
Now there are two well‐known ways of rendering this line, as any other
Hebrew writing: one exoteric, as read by the orthodox _Bible_ interpreters
(Christian), and the other Kabalistic, the latter, moreover, being divided
into the Rabbinical and the purely Kabalistic or Occult method. As in
Sanskrit writing, the words are not separated in the Hebrew, but are made
to run together—especially in the old systems. For instance, the above,
divided, would read: “_B’rashith bara Elohim eth hashamayim v’eth
h’areths_;” and it can be made to read thus: “_B’rash ithbara Elohim
ethhashamayim v’eth’arets_,” thus changing the meaning entirely. The
latter means, “In the beginning _God made the heavens_ and the earth,”
whereas the former, precluding the idea of any beginning, would simply
read that “out of the ever‐existing Essence [divine] [or out of the
_womb_—also head—thereof] the dual [or androgyne] Force [Gods] shaped the
double heaven;” the upper and the lower heaven being generally explained
as heaven and earth. The latter word means Esoterically the “Vehicle,” as
it gives the idea of an empty globe, within which the manifestation of the
world takes place. Now, according to the rules of Occult symbolical
reading as established in the old _Sepher Jetzirah_ (in the Chaldæan _Book
of Numbers_(381)) the initial fourteen letters (or “B’rasitb’ raalaim”)
are in themselves quite sufficient to explain the theory of “creation”
without any further explanation or qualification. Every letter of them is
a sentence; and, placed side by side with the hieroglyphic or pictorial
initial version of “creation” in the _Book of Dzyan_, the origin of the
Phœnician and Jewish letters would soon be found out. A whole volume of
explanations would give no more to the student of primitive Occult
Symbology than this: the head of a bull within a circle, a straight
horizontal line, a circle or sphere, then another one with three dots in
it, a triangle, then the Svastika (or Jaina cross); after these come an
equilateral triangle within a circle, seven small bulls’ heads standing in
three rows, one over the other; a black round dot (an opening), and then
seven lines, meaning Chaos or Water (feminine).
Anyone acquainted with the symbolical and numerical value of the Hebrew
letters will see at a glance that this glyph and the letters of “B’rasith’
raalaim” are identical in meaning. “Beth” is “abode” or “region;” “Resh,”
a “circle” or “head;” “Aleph,” “bull” (the symbol of generative or
creative power(382)); “Shin,” a “tooth” (300 exoterically—a trident or
_three in one_ in its Occult meaning); “Jodh,” the perfect unity or
“one”(383); “Tau,” the “root” or “foundation” (the same as the cross with
the Egyptians and Âryans): again, “Beth,” “Resh,” and “Aleph.” Then
“Aleph,” or seven bulls for the seven Alaim; an ox‐goad, “Lamedh,” active
procreation; “He,” the “opening” or “matrix;” “Yodh,” the organ of
procreation; and “Mem,” “water” or “chaos,” the female Power near the male
that precedes it.
The most satisfactory and scientific exoteric rendering of the opening
sentence of _Genesis_—on which was hung in blind faith the whole Christian
religion, synthesized by its fundamental dogmas—is undeniably the one
given in the Appendix to _The Source of Measures_ by Mr. Ralston Skinner.
He gives, and we must admit in the ablest, clearest, and most scientific
way, the numerical reading of this first sentence and chapter in
_Genesis_. By the means of number 31, or the word “El” (1 for “Aleph” and
30 for “Lamedh”), and other numerical _Bible_ symbols, compared with the
measures used in the great pyramid of Egypt, he shows the perfect identity
between its measurements—inches, cubits, and plan—and the numerical values
of the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve, and the Patriarchs. In short, the
author shows that the pyramid contains in itself architecturally the whole
of _Genesis_, and discloses the astronomical, and even the physiological,
secrets in its symbols and glyphs; yet he will not admit, it would seem,
the psycho‐cosmical and spiritual mysteries involved in these. Nor does
the author apparently see that the root of all this has to be sought in
the archaic legends and the Pantheon of India.(384) Failing this, whither
does his great and admirable labour lead him? Not further than to find out
that Adam, the earth, and Moses or Jehovah “are the same”—or to the a‐b‐c
of comparative Occult Symbology—and that the days in _Genesis_ being
“circles” “displayed by the Hebrews as squares,” the result of the sixth‐
day’s labour culminates in the fructifying principle. Thus the _Bible_ is
made to yield Phallicism, and that alone.
Nor—read in this light, and as its Hebrew texts are interpreted by Western
scholars—can it ever yield anything higher or more sublime than such
phallic elements, the root and the corner‐stone of its dead‐letter
meaning. Anthropomorphism and Revelation dig the impassable chasm between
the material world and the ultimate spiritual truths. That creation is not
thus described in the Esoteric Doctrine is easily shown. The Roman
Catholics give a reading far more approaching the true Esoteric meaning
than that of the Protestant. For several of their saints and doctors admit
that the formation of heaven and earth, of the celestial bodies, etc.,
belongs to the work of the “Seven Angels of the Presence.” St. Denys calls
the “Builders” “the coöperators of God,” and St. Augustine goes even
farther, and credits the Angels with the possession of the divine thought,
the prototype, as he says, of everything created.(385) And, finally, St.
Thomas Aquinas has a long dissertation upon this topic, calling God the
primary, and the Angels the secondary, cause of all visible effects. In
this, with some dogmatic differences of form, the “Angelic Doctor”
approaches very nearly the Gnostic ideas. Basilides speaks of the lowest
order of Angels as the Builders of our material world, and Saturnilus
held, as did the Sabæans, that the Seven Angels who preside over the
planets are the real creators of the world; the Kabalist‐monk, Trithemius,
in his _De Secundis Deis_, taught the same.
The eternal _Kosmos_, the Macrocosm, is divided in the Secret Doctrine,
like man, the Microcosm, into three Principles and four Vehicles,(386)
which in their collectivity are the seven Principles. In the Chaldæan or
Jewish _Kabalah_, the Kosmos is divided into seven worlds: the Original,
the Intelligible, the Celestial, the Elementary, the Lesser (Astral), the
Infernal (Kâma‐loka or Hades), and the Temporal (of man). In the Chaldæan
system it is in the Intelligible World, the second, that appear the “Seven
Angels of the Presence,” or the Sephiroth (the three higher ones being, in
fact, one, and also the sum total of all). They are also the “Builders” of
the Eastern Doctrine: and it is only in the third, the celestial world,
that the seven planets and our solar system are built by the seven
Planetary Angels, the planets becoming their visible bodies. Hence—as
correctly stated—if the universe as a whole is formed out of the Eternal
_One_ Substance or Essence, it is not that everlasting Essence, the
Absolute Deity, that builds it into shape; this is done by the first Rays,
the Angels or Dhyân Chohans, that emanate from the One Element, which
becoming periodically Light and Darkness, remains eternally, in its Root‐
Principle, the one unknown yet existing Reality.
A learned Western Kabalist, Mr. S. L. MacGregor Mathers, whose reasoning
and conclusions will be the more above suspicion since he is untrained in
Eastern Philosophy and unacquainted with its Secret Teachings, writes on
the first verse of _Genesis_ in an unpublished essay:
_Berashith Bara_ Elohim—“In the beginning the Elohim created!” Who
are these Elohim of _Genesis_?
_Va‐Yivra Elohim Ath Ha‐Adam Be‐Tzalmo, Be‐Tzelem Elohim Bara
Otho, Zakhar Vingebah Bara Otham_—“And the Elohim created the Adam
in Their own Image, in the Image of the Elohim created They them,
Male and Female created They them!” Who are they, the Elohim? The
ordinary English translation of the _Bible_ renders the word
Elohim by “God:” it translates a _plural_ noun by a _singular_
one. The only excuse brought forward for this is the somewhat lame
one that the word is certainly plural, but is not to be used in a
plural sense: that it is “a plural denoting excellence.” But this
is only an assumption whose value may be justly gauged by
_Genesis_ i. 26, translated in the orthodox Biblical version thus:
“And God [Elohim] said, ‘Let us make man in our own image, after
our likeness.’ ” Here is a distinct admission of the fact that
“Elohim” is _not_ a “plural of excellence,” but a plural noun
denoting more than one being.(387)
What, then, is the proper translation of “Elohim,” and to whom is
it referable? “Elohim” is not only a plural, but a _feminine
plural_! And yet the translators of the _Bible_ have rendered it
by a _masculine singular_! Elohim is the plural of the feminine
noun El‐h, for the final letter, ‐h, marks the gender. It,
however, instead of forming the plural in ‐oth, takes the usual
termination of the masculine plural, which is ‐im.
Although in the great majority of cases the nouns of both genders
take the terminations appropriated to them respectively, there are
yet many masculines which form the plural in ‐oth, as well as
feminine which form it in ‐im while some nouns of each gender take
alternately both. It must be observed, however, that the
termination of the plural does not affect its gender, which
remains the same as in the singular....
To find the real meaning of the symbolism involved in this word
Elohim we must go to that key of Jewish Esoteric Doctrine, the
little‐known and less‐understood _Kabalah_. There we shall find
that this word represents two united masculine and feminine
Potencies, co‐equal and co‐eternal, conjoined in everlasting union
for the maintenance of the Universe—the great Father and Mother of
Nature, into whom the Eternal One conforms himself before the
Universe can subsist. For the teaching of the _Kabalah_ is that
before the Deity conformed himself thus—_i.e._ as male and
female—the Worlds of the Universe could not subsist; or in the
words of _Genesis_, that “the earth was formless and void.” Thus,
then, is the conformation of the Elohim, the end of the Formless
and the Void and the Darkness, for only after that conformation
can the _Ruach Elohim_—the “Spirit of the Elohim”—vibrate upon the
countenance of the Waters. But this is a very small part of the
information which the Initiate can derive from the _Kabalah_
concerning this word _Elohim_.
Attention must here be called to the confusion—if not worse—which reigns
in the Western interpretations of the _Kabalah_. The Eternal _One_ is said
to conform himself into two: the Great Father and Mother of Nature. To
begin with, it is a horribly anthropomorphic conception to apply terms
implying sexual distinction to the earliest and first differentiations of
the One. And it is even more erroneous to identify these first
differentiations—the Purusha and Prakriti of Indian Philosophy—with the
Elohim, the creative powers here spoken of; and to ascribe to these (to
our intellects) unimaginable abstractions, the formation and construction
of this visible world, full of pain, sin, and sorrow. In truth, the
“creation by the Elohim” spoken of here is but a much later “creation,”
and the Elohim far from being supreme, or even exalted powers in Nature,
are only lower Angels. This was the teaching of the Gnostics, the most
philosophical of all the early Christian Churches. They taught that the
imperfections of the world were due to the imperfection of its Architects
or Builders—the imperfect, and therefore inferior, Angels. The Hebrew
Elohim correspond to the Prajâpati of the Hindus, and it is shown
elsewhere from the Esoteric interpretation of the Purânas that the
Prajâpati were the fashioners of man’s material and astral form _only_:
that they could not give him intelligence or reason, and therefore in
symbolical language they “failed to create man.” But, not to repeat what
the reader can find elsewhere in this work, his attention needs only to be
called to the fact that “creation” in this passage is not the Primary
Creation, and that the Elohim are not “_God_,” nor even the higher
Planetary Spirits, but the Architects of this visible physical planet and
of man’s material body, or encasement.
A fundamental doctrine of the _Kabalah_ is that the gradual
development of the Deity from negative to positive Existence is
symbolized by the gradual development of the Ten Numbers of the
denary scale of numeration, from the Zero, through the Unity, into
the Plurality. This is the doctrine of the Sephiroth, or
Emanations.
For the inward and concealed Negative Form concentrates a centre
which is the primal Unity. But the Unity is one and indivisible:
it can neither be increased by multiplication nor decreased by
division, for 1 × 1 = 1, and no more; and 1 ÷ 1 = 1, and no less.
And it is this changelessness of the Unity, or Monad, which makes
it a fitting type of the One and Changeless Deity. It answers thus
to the Christian idea of God the Father, for as the Unity is the
parent of the other numbers, so is the Deity the Father of All.
The philosophical Eastern mind would never fall into the error which the
_connotation_ of these words implies. With them the “One and
Changeless”—Parabrahman—the Absolute All and One, cannot be conceived as
standing in any _relation_ to things finite and conditioned, and hence
they would never use such terms as these, which in their very essence
imply such a relation. Do they, then, absolutely sever man from God? On
the contrary. They feel a closer union than the Western mind has done in
calling God the “Father of All,” for they know that in his immortal
essence man _is_ himself the Changeless, Secondless One.
But we have just said that the Unity is one and changeless by
either multiplication or division; how then is two, the Duad,
formed? By reflection. For, unlike Zero, the Unity is partly
definable—that is, in its positive aspect; and the definition
creates an Eikon or Eidolon of itself which, together with itself,
forms a Duad; and thus the number two is to a certain extent
analogous to the Christian idea of the Son as the Second Person.
And as the Monad vibrates, and recoils into the Darkness of the
Primary Thought, so is the Duad left as its vice‐gerent and
representative, and thus co‐equal with the Positive Duad is the
Triune Idea, the number three, co‐equal and co‐eternal with the
Duad in the bosom of the Unity, yet, as it were, proceeding
therefrom in the numerical conception of its sequence.
This explanation would seem to imply that Mr. Mathers is aware that this
“creation” is not the truly divine or primary one, since the Monad—the
first manifestation on _our_ plane of objectivity—“recoils into the
Darkness of the Primal Thought,” _i.e._, into the subjectivity of the
first divine Creation.
And this, again, also partly answers to the Christian idea of the
Holy Ghost, and of the whole three forming a Trinity in unity.
This also explains the fact in geometry of the three right lines
being the smallest number which will make a plane rectilineal
figure, while two can never enclose a space, being powerless and
without effect till completed by the number Three. These three
first numbers of the decimal scale the Qabalists call by the names
of Kether, the Crown, Chokmah, Wisdom, and Binah, Understanding;
and they furthermore associate with them these divine names: with
the Unity, Eheich, “I exist;” with the Duad, Yah; and with the
Triad, Elohim; they especially also call the Duad, Abba—the
Father, and the Triad, Aima—the Mother, whose eternal conjunction
is symbolized in the word Elohim.
But what especially strikes the student of the _Kabalah_ is the
malicious persistency with which the translators of the _Bible_
have jealously crowded out of sight and suppressed every reference
to the feminine form of the Deity. They have, as we have just
seen, translated the feminine plural “Elohim,” by the masculine
singular, “God.” But they have done more than this: they have
carefully hidden the fact that the word Ruach—the “Spirit”—is
feminine, and that consequently the Holy Ghost of the _New
Testament_ is a feminine Potency. How many Christians are
cognizant of the fact that in the account of the Incarnation in
_Luke_ (i. 35) _two_ divine Potencies are mentioned?
“The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest
shall overshadow thee.” The Holy Ghost (the feminine Potency)
descends, and the Power of the Highest (the masculine Potency) is
united therewith. “Therefore also that holy thing which shall be
born of thee shall be called the Son of God”—of the Elohim namely,
seeing that these two Potencies descend.
In the _Sepher Yetzirah_, or _Book of Formation_, we read:
“One is She the Ruach Elohim Chüm—(Spirit of the Living
Elohim).... Voice, Spirit, and Word; and this is She, the Spirit
of the Holy One.” Here again we see the intimate connection which
exists between the Holy Spirit and the Elohim. Furthermore,
farther on in this same _Book of Formation_—which, is, be it
remembered, one of the oldest of the Kabalistical Books, and whose
authorship is ascribed to Abraham the Patriarch—we shall find the
idea of a Feminine Trinity in the first place, from whom a
masculine Trinity proceeds; or, as it is said in the text: “Three
Mothers whence proceed three Fathers.” And yet this double Triad
forms, as it were, but one complete Trinity. Again it is worthy of
note that the Second and Third Sephiroth (Wisdom and
Understanding) are both distinguished by feminine names, Chokmah
and Binah, notwithstanding that to the former more particularly
the masculine idea, and to the latter the feminine, are
attributed, under the titles of Abba and Aima (or Father and
Mother). This Aima (the Great Mother) is magnificently symbolized
in the twelfth chapter of the _Apocalypse_, which is undoubtedly
one of the most Kabalistical books in the _Bible_. In fact,
without the Kabalistical keys its meaning is utterly
unintelligible.
Now, in the Hebrew, as in the Greek, alphabet, there are no
distinct numeral characters, and consequently each letter has a
certain numerical value attached to it. From this circumstance
results the important fact that every Hebrew word constitutes a
number, and every number a word. This is referred to in the
_Revelations_ (xiii. 18) in mentioning the “number of the beast”!
In the _Kabalah_ words of equal numerical values are supposed to
have a certain explanatory connection with each other. This forms
the science of Gematria, which is the first division of the
Literal _Kabalah_. Furthermore, each letter of the Hebrew alphabet
had for the Initiates of the _Kabalah_ a certain hieroglyphical
value and meaning which, rightly applied, gave to each word the
value of a mystical sentence; and this again was variable
according to the relative positions of the letters with regard to
each other. From these various Kabalistical points of view let us
now examine this word Elohim.
First then we can divide the word into the two words, which
signify “The Feminine Divinity of the Waters;” compare with the
Greek Aphrodite. “sprung from the foam of the sea.” Again it is
divisible into the “Mighty One, Star of the Sea,” or “the Mighty
One breathing forth the Spirit upon the Waters.” Also by
combination of the letters we get “the Silent Power of Iah.” And
again, “My God, the Former of the Universe,” for _Mah_ is a secret
Kabalistical name applied to the idea of Formation. Also we obtain
“Who is my God.” Furthermore “the Mother in Iah.”
The total number is 1 + 30 + 5 + 10 + 40 = 86 = “Violent heat,” or
“the Power of Fire.” If we add together the three middle letters
we obtain 45, and the first and last letters yield 41, making thus
“the Mother of Formation.” Lastly, we shall find the two divine
names “El” and “Yah,” together with the letter _m_, which
signifies “Water,” for Mem, the name of this letter, means
“water.”
If we divide it into its component letters and take them as
hieroglyphical signs we shall have:
“Will perfected through Sacrifice progressing through successive
Transformation by Inspiration.”
The last few paragraphs of the above, in which the word “Elohim” is
Kabalistically analyzed, show conclusively enough that the Elohim are not
one, nor two, nor even a trinity, but a Host—the army of the creative
powers.
The Christian Church, in making of Jehovah—one of these very Elohim—the
one Supreme God, has introduced hopeless confusion into the celestial
hierarchy, in spite of the volumes written by Thomas Aquinas and his
school on the subject. The only explanation to be found in all their
treatises on the nature and essence of the numberless classes of celestial
beings mentioned in the _Bible_—Archangels, Thrones, Seraphim, Cherubim,
Messengers, etc.—is that “The angelic host is God’s militia.” They are
“Gods _the creatures_,” while he is “God _the Creator_;” but of their true
functions—of their actual place in the economy of Nature—not one word is
said. They are
More brilliant than the flames, more rapid than the wind, and they
live in love and harmony, mutually enlightening each other,
feeding on bread and a mystic beverage—the communion wine and
water?—surrounding as with a _river of fire_ the throne of the
Lamb, and veiling their faces with their wings. This throne of
love and glory they leave only to carry to the stars, the earth,
the kingdoms and all the sons of God, their brothers and pupils,
in short, to all creatures _like themselves_ the divine
influence.... As to their number, it is that of the great army of
Heaven (Sabaoth), more numerous than the stars.... Theology shows
us these rational luminaries, each constituting a species, and
containing in their natures such or another position of Nature:
covering immense space, though of a determined area;
residing—incorporeal though they are—within circumscribed limits;
... more rapid than light or thunderbolt, disposing of all the
elements of Nature, providing at will inexplicable mirages
[illusions?], objective and subjective in turn, speaking to men a
language at one time articulate, at another purely spiritual.(388)
We learn farther on in the same work that it is these Angels and their
hosts who are referred to in the sentence of verse I, chapter ii, of
_Genesis_: “Igitur perfecti sunt cœli et terra et omnis ornatus eorum:”
and that the Vulgate has peremptorily substituted for the Hebrew word
“tsaba” (“host”) that of “ornament;” Munck shows the mistake of
substitution and the derivation of the compound title, “Tsabaoth‐Elohim,”
from “tsaba.” Moreover, Cornelius à Lapide, “the master of all Biblical
commentators,” says de Mirville, shows us that such was the real meaning.
Those Angels are stars.
All this, however, teaches us very little as to the true functions of this
celestial army, and nothing at all as to its place in evolution and its
relation to the earth we live on. For an answer to the question, “Who are
the true Creators?” we must go to the Esoteric Doctrine, since there only
can the key be found which will render intelligible the Theogonies of the
various world‐religions.
There we find that the real creator of the Kosmos, as of all visible
Nature—if not of all the invisible hosts of Spirits not yet drawn into the
“Cycle of Necessity,” or evolution—is “the Lord—the Gods,” or the “Working
Host,” the “Army” collectively taken, the “One in many.”
The One is infinite and unconditioned. It cannot create, for It can have
no relation to the finite and conditioned. If everything we see, from the
glorious suns and planets down to the blades of grass and the specks of
dust, had been created by the Absolute Perfection and were the direct work
of even the _First_ Energy that proceeded from It,(389) then every such
thing would have been perfect, eternal, and unconditioned, like its
author. The millions upon millions of imperfect works found in Nature
testify loudly that they are the products of finite, conditioned
beings—though the latter were and are Dhyân Chohans, Archangels, or what
ever else they may be named. In short, these imperfect works are the
unfinished production of evolution, under the guidance of the imperfect
Gods. The _Zohar_ gives us this assurance as well as the Secret Doctrine.
It speaks of the auxiliaries of the “Ancient of Days,” the “Sacred Aged,”
and calls them Auphanim, or the living Wheels of the celestial orbs, who
participate in the work of the creation of the Universe.
Thus it is not the “Principle,” One and Unconditioned, nor even Its
reflection, that creates, but only the “Seven Gods” who fashion the
Universe out of the eternal Matter, vivified into objective life by the
reflection into it of the One Reality.
The Creator is they—“God the Host”—called in the Secret Doctrine the Dhyân
Chohans; with the Hindus the Prajâpatis; with the Western Kabalists the
Sephiroth; and with the Buddhist the Devas—impersonal because blind
forces. They are the Amshaspends with the Zoroastrians, and while with the
Christian Mystic the “Creator” is the “Gods of the God,” with the dogmatic
Churchman he is the “God of the Gods,” the “Lord of lords,” etc.
“Jehovah” is only the God who is greater than all Gods in the eyes of
Israel.
I know, that the Lord [of Israel] is great and that our Lord is
above all gods.(390)
And again:
For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the
heavens.(391)
The Egyptian Neteroo, translated by Champollion “_the other Gods_” are the
Elohim of the Biblical writers, behind which stands concealed the One God,
considered in the diversity of his powers.(392) This One is not
Parabrahman, but the Unmanifested Logos, the Demiurgos, the real Creator
or Fashioner, that follows him, standing for the Demiurgi collectively
taken. Further on the great Egyptologist adds:
We see Egypt concealing and hiding, so to say, _the_ God of Gods
behind the _agents_ she surrounds him with; she gives the
precedence to her great gods before the one and sole Deity, so
that the attributes of that God become their property. Those great
Gods proclaim themselves uncreate.... Neith is “_that which is_,”
as Jehovah;(393) Thoth is self‐created(394) without having been
begotten, etc. Judaism annihilating these potencies before the
grandeur of its God, they cease to be simply Powers, like Philo’s
Archangels, like the Sephiroth of the _Kabalah_, like the Ogdoades
of the Gnostics—they merge together and become transformed into
God himself.(395)
Jehovah is thus, as the _Kabalah_ teaches, at best but the “Heavenly Man,”
Adam Kadmon, used by the self‐created Spirit, the Logos, as a chariot, a
vehicle in His descent towards manifestation in the phenomenal world.
Such are the teachings of the Archaic Wisdom, nor can they be repudiated
even by the orthodox Christian, if he be sincere and open‐minded in the
study of his own Scripture. For if he reads St. Paul’s _Epistles_
carefully he will find that the Secret Doctrine and the _Kabalah_ are
fully admitted by the “Apostle of the Gentiles.” The Gnosis which he
appears to condemn is no less for him than for Plato “the supreme
knowledge of the truth and of the One Being;”(396) for what St. Paul
condemns is not the true, but only the false, Gnosis and its abuses:
otherwise how could he use the language of a Platonist _pur sang_? The
Ideas, types (Archai), of the Greek Philosopher; the Intelligences of
Pythagoras; the Æons or Emanations of the Pantheist; the Logos or Word,
Chief of these Intelligences; the Sophia or Wisdom; the Demiurgos, the
Builder of the world under the direction of the Father, the Unmanifested
Logos, from which He emanates; Ain‐Suph, the Unknown of the Infinite; the
angelic Periods; the _Seven_ Spirits who are the representatives of the
_Seven_ of all the older cosmogonies—are all to be found in his writings,
recognized by the Church as canonical and divinely inspired. Therein, too,
may be recognized the Depths of Ahriman, Rector of this our World, the
“God of this World;” the Pleroma of the Intelligences; the Archontes of
the air; the Principalities, the Kabalistic Metatron; and they can easily
be identified again in the Roman Catholic writers when read in the
original Greek and Latin texts, English translations giving but a very
poor idea of the real contents of these.