A SHORT ANALYSIS OF THE COMPOUND AND SINGLE ELEMENTS OF SCIENCE AS
AGAINST THE OCCULT TEACHINGS. HOW FAR THIS THEORY, AS GENERALLY
ACCEPTED, IS SCIENTIFIC.
In his reply to Dr. Gull’s attack on the theory of Vitality, which is
inseparably connected with the Elements of the Ancients in the Occult
Philosophy, Professor Beale, the great Physiologist, has a few words as
suggestive as they are beautiful:
There is a mystery in life—a mystery which has never been
fathomed, and which appears greater, the more deeply the phenomena
of life are studied and contemplated. In living centres—far more
central than the centres seen by the highest magnifying powers, in
centres of living matter, where the eye cannot penetrate, but
towards which the understanding may tend—proceed changes of the
nature of which the most advanced physicists and chemists fail to
afford us the conception: nor is there the slightest reason to
think that the nature of these changes will ever be ascertained by
physical investigation, inasmuch as they are certainly of an order
or nature totally distinct from that to which any other phenomenon
known to us can be relegated.
This “mystery,” or the origin of the Life Essence, Occultism locates in
the same Centre as the nucleus of _prima materia_ of our Solar System, for
they are one.
As says the Commentary:
_The Sun is the heart of the Solar World [System] and its brain is hidden
behind the [visible] Sun. Thence, sensation is radiated into every nerve‐
centre of the great body, and the waves of the life‐essence flow into each
artery and vein.... The planets are its limbs and pulses._
It has been stated elsewhere(938) that Occult philosophy denies that the
Sun is a globe in combustion, but defines it simply as a world, a glowing
sphere, the real Sun being hidden behind, and the visible Sun being only
its reflection, its shell. The Nasmyth willow leaves, mistaken by Sir John
Herschell for “solar inhabitants,” are the reservoirs of solar vital
energy; “the vital electricity that feeds the whole system; the sun _in
abscondito_ being thus the storehouse of our little Cosmos, self‐
generating its vital fluid, and ever receiving as much as it gives out,”
and the visible Sun only a window cut into the real solar palace and
presence, which, however, shews without distortion the interior work.
Thus, during the manvantaric solar period, or life, there is a regular
circulation of the vital fluid throughout our System, of which the Sun is
the heart—like the circulation of the blood in the human body; the Sun
contracting as rhythmically as the human heart does at every return of it.
Only, instead of performing the round in a second or so, it takes the
solar blood ten of its years to circulate, and a whole year to pass
through its auricle and ventricle before it washes the lungs, and passes
thence back to the great arteries and veins of the System.
This, Science will not deny, since Astronomy knows of the fixed cycle of
eleven years when the number of solar spots increases,(939) the increase
being due to the contraction of the Solar Heart. The Universe, our World
in this case, breathes, just as man and every living creature, plant, and
even mineral does upon the Earth; and as our Globe itself breathes every
twenty‐four hours. The dark region is not due to the “absorption exerted
by the vapours issuing from the bosom of the sun, and interposed between
the observer and the photosphere,” as Father Secchi would have it,(940)
nor are the spots formed “by the matter [heated gaseous matter] itself
which the irruption projects upon the solar disk.” The phenomenon is
similar to the regular and healthy pulsation of the heart, as the life
fluid passes through its hollow muscles. Could the human heart be made
luminous, and the living and throbbing organ made visible, so as to have
it reflected upon a screen, such as is used by lecturers on Astronomy to
show the moon, for instance, then every one would see the sun‐spot
phenomena repeated every second, and that they were due to contraction and
the rushing of the blood.
We read in a work on Geology that it is the dream of Science that:
All the recognized chemical elements will one day be found but
modifications of a single material element.(941)
Occult Philosophy has taught this since the existence of human speech and
language, adding, however, on the principle of the immutable law of
analogy, “as it is above, so it is below,” another of its axioms, that
there is neither Spirit nor Matter, in reality, but only numberless
aspects of the One ever‐hidden Is, or Sat. The homogeneous primordial
Element is simple and single, _only on the terrestrial plane_ of
consciousness and sensation, since Matter, after all, is nothing more than
the sequence of our own states of consciousness, and Spirit an idea of
psychic intuition. Even on the next higher plane, that single element
which is defined on our Earth by current Science, as the ultimate
undecomposable constituent of some kind of Matter, would be pronounced in
the world of a higher spiritual perception to be something very complex
indeed. Our purest water would be found to yield, instead of its two
declared simple elements of oxygen and hydrogen, many other constituents,
undreamed of by our modern terrestrial Chemistry. As in the realm of
Matter, so in the realm of Spirit, the shadow of that which is cognized on
the plane of objectivity exists on that of pure subjectivity. The speck of
the perfectly homogeneous Substance, the sarcode of the Hæckelian Moneron,
is now viewed as the archebiosis of terrestrial existence (Mr. Huxley’s
protoplasm)(942); and Bathybius Hæckelii has to be traced to its pre‐
terrestrial archebiosis. This is first perceived by the Astronomers at its
third stage of evolution, and in the “secondary creation,” so‐called. But
the students of Esoteric Philosophy understand well the secret meaning of
the Stanza:
Brahmâ ... has essentially the _aspect of_ Prakriti, both evolved
and unevolved.... Spirit, O Twice‐born [Initiate], is the leading
_aspect_ of Brahmâ. The next is a two‐fold aspect [of Prakriti and
Purusha] ... both evolved and unevolved; and Time is the
last!(943)
Anu is one of the names of Brahmâ, as distinct from Brahman, and it means
“atom”; anîyâmsam anîyasâm, “the most atomic of the atomic,” the
“immutable and imperishable (achyuta) Purushottama.”
Surely, then, the elements now known to us—be their number whatever it
may—as they are understood and defined at present, are not, nor can they
be, the _primordial_ Elements. Those were formed from “the _curds of the
cold radiant Mother_” and “_the fire‐seed of the hot Father_,” who “are
one,” or, to express it in the plainer language of Modern Science, those
Elements had their genesis in the depths of the primordial Fire‐mist, the
masses of incandescent vapour of the irresolvable nebulæ; for, as
Professor Newcomb shows,(944) resolvable nebulæ do not constitute a class
of proper nebulæ. More than half of those, he thinks, which were at first
mistaken for nebulæ, are what he calls “starry clusters.”
The elements now known have arrived at their state of permanency in this
Fourth Round and Fifth Race. They have a short period of rest before they
are propelled once more on their upward spiritual evolution, when the
“living fire of Orcus” will dissociate the most irresolvable, and scatter
them again into the primordial One.
Meanwhile the Occultist goes further, as has been shown in the
Commentaries on the Seven Stanzas. Hence he can hardly hope for any help
or recognition from Science, which will reject both his “anîyâmsam
anîyasâm,” the absolutely spiritual Atom, and his Mânasaputras or Mind‐
born Men. In resolving the “single material element” into one absolute
irresolvable Element, Spirit, or Root‐Matter, thus placing it at once
outside the reach and province of Physical Philosophy—he has, of course
but little in common with the orthodox men of Science. He maintains that
Spirit and Matter are two Facets of the unknowable Unity, their apparently
contrasted aspects depending, (_a_) on the various degrees of
differentiation of Matter, and (_b_) on the grades of consciousness
attained by man himself. This is, however, Metaphysics, and has little to
do with Physics—however great in its own terrestrial limitation that
physical Philosophy may now be.
Nevertheless, once that Science admits, if not the actual existence, at
any rate, the possibility of the existence, of a Universe with its
numberless forms, conditions, and aspects built out of a “single
Substance,”(945) it has to go further. Unless it also admits the
possibility of One Element, or the One Life of the Occultists, it will
have to hang up that “single Substance,” especially if limited to only the
solar nebulæ, in mid air, like the coffin of Mahomet, though minus the
attractive magnet that sustained that coffin. Fortunately for the
speculative Physicists, if we are unable to state with any degree of
precision what the nebular theory does imply, we have, thanks to Professor
Winchell, and several dissident Astronomers, been able to learn what it
does not imply.
Unfortunately, this is far from clearing even the most simple of the
problems that have vexed, and do still vex, the men of learning in their
search after truth. We have to proceed with our enquiries, starting with
the earliest hypotheses of Modern Science, if we would discover _where_
and _why_ it sins. Perchance it may be found that Stallo is right, after
all, and that the blunders, contradictions and fallacies made by the most
eminent men of learning are simply due to their abnormal attitude. They
are, and want to remain Materialistic _quand même_, and yet “the general
principles of the atomo‐mechanical theory—the basis of modern Physics—are
substantially identical with the cardinal doctrines of ontological
Metaphysics.” Thus, “the fundamental errors of ontology become apparent in
proportion to the advance of physical science.”(946) Science is
honeycombed with metaphysical conceptions, but the Scientists will not
admit the charge, and fight desperately to put atomo‐mechanical masks on
purely incorporeal and spiritual laws in Nature, on our plane—refusing to
admit their substantiality even on other planes, the bare existence of
which they reject _à priori_.
It is easy to show, however, how Scientists, wedded to their materialistic
views, have, ever since the days of Newton, endeavoured to put false masks
on fact and truth. But their task is becoming every year more difficult;
and every year also, Chemistry, beyond all the other sciences, approaches
nearer and nearer the realm of the Occult in Nature. It is assimilating
the very truths taught by the Occult Sciences for ages, but hitherto
bitterly derided. “Matter is eternal,” says the Esoteric Doctrine. But the
Matter the Occultists conceive of in its _laya_, or _zero_ state, is not
the matter of Modern Science, not even in its most rarefied gaseous state.
Mr. Crookes’ “radiant matter” would appear Matter of the grossest kind in
the realm of the beginnings, as it becomes pure Spirit before it returns
back even to its first point of differentiation. Therefore, when the Adept
or Alchemist adds that, though Matter is eternal, for it is Pradhâna, yet
Atoms are born at every new Manvantara, or reconstruction of the universe,
it is no such contradiction as a Materialist, who believes in nothing
beyond the Atom, might think. There is a difference between _manifested_
and _unmanifested_ Matter, between Pradhâna, the beginningless and endless
cause, and Prakriti, or the manifested effect. Says the Shloka:
That which is the unevolved cause is emphatically called by the
most eminent sages, Pradhâna, original base, which is subtile
Prakriti, _viz._, that which is eternal and which at once is, and
is not, a mere process.(947)
That which in modern phraseology is referred to as Spirit and Matter, is
ONE in eternity as the Perpetual Cause, and it is neither Spirit nor
Matter, but IT—rendered in Sanskrit by TAD, “that”—all that is, was, or
will be, all that the imagination of man is capable of conceiving. Even
the exoteric Pantheism of Hindûism renders it as no monotheistic
Philosophy ever did, for in superb phraseology its Cosmogony begins with
the well‐known words:
There was neither day nor night, neither heaven nor earth, neither
darkness nor light. And there was not aught else apprehensible by
the senses or by the mental faculties. There was then, however,
one Brahma, essentially Prakriti [Nature] and Spirit. For the two
aspects of Vishnu which are other than his supreme essential
aspect are Prakriti and Spirit, O Brâhman. _When_ these two other
_aspects_ of his no longer subsist, but are dissolved, _then_ that
_aspect_ whence form and the rest, _i.e._, _creation_, proceed
_anew_, is denominated time, O twice‐born.
It is that which is dissolved, or the illusionary _dual_ aspect of That,
the essence of which is eternally One, that we call Eternal Matter, or
Substance, formless, sexless, inconceivable, even to our sixth sense or
mind,(948) in which, therefore, we refuse to see that which Monotheists
call a personal, anthropomorphic God.
How are these two propositions—that “Matter is eternal,” and that “the
Atom is periodical, and not eternal”—viewed by exact Modern Science? The
materialistic Physicist will criticize and laugh them to scorn. The
liberal and progressive man of Science, however, the true and earnest
scientific searcher after truth, such as the eminent Chemist, Mr. Crookes,
will corroborate the probability of the two statements. For hardly had the
echo of his lecture on the “Genesis of the Elements” died away—the lecture
which, delivered by him before the Chemical Section of the British
Association, at the Birmingham meeting in 1887, so startled every
evolutionist who heard or read it—than there came another in March, 1888.
Once more the President of the Chemical Society brought before the world
of Science and the public the fruits of some new discoveries in the realm
of Atoms, and these discoveries justified the Occult Teachings in every
way. They are more startling even than the statements made by him in the
first lecture, and well deserve the attention of every Occultist,
Theosophist, and Metaphysician. This is what he says in his “Elements and
_Meta_‐Elements,” thus justifying Stallo’s charges and prevision, with the
fearlessness of a scientific mind which loves Science for truth’s sake,
regardless of any consequences to his own glory and reputation. We quote
his own words:
Permit me, gentlemen, now to draw your attention for a short time
to a subject which concerns the fundamental principles of
chemistry, a subject which may lead us to admit the possible
existence of bodies which, though neither compounds nor mixtures,
are not elements in the strictest sense of the word—bodies which I
venture to call “meta‐elements.” To explain my meaning it is
necessary for me to revert to our conception of an element. What
is the criterion of an element? Where are we to draw the line
between distinct existence and identity? No one doubts that
oxygen, sodium, chlorine, sulphur are separate elements; and when
we come to such groups as chlorine, bromine, iodine, etc., we
still feel no doubt, although were degrees of “elementicity”
admissible—and to that we may ultimately have to come—it might be
allowed that chlorine approximates much more closely to bromine
than to oxygen, sodium, or sulphur. Again, nickel and cobalt are
near to each other, very near, though no one questions their claim
to rank as distinct elements. Still I cannot help asking what
would have been the prevalent opinion among chemists had the
respective solutions of these bodies and their compounds presented
identical colours, instead of colours which, approximately
speaking, are mutually complementary. Would their distinct nature
have even now been recognized? When we pass further and come to
the so‐called rare earths the ground is less secure under our
feet. Perhaps we may admit scandium, ytterbium, and others of the
like sort to elemental rank; but what are we to say in the case of
praseo‐ and neo‐dymium, between which there may be said to exist
no well‐marked chemical difference, their chief claim to separate
individuality being slight differences in basicity and
crystallizing powers, though their physical distinctions, as shown
by spectrum observations, are very strongly marked? Even here we
may imagine the disposition of the majority of chemists would
incline toward the side of leniency, so that they would admit
these two bodies within the charmed circle. Whether in so doing
they would be able to appeal to any broad principle is an open
question. If we admit these candidates how in justice are we to
exclude the series of elemental bodies or meta‐elements made known
to us by Krüss and Nilson? Here the spectral differences are well
marked, while my own researches on didymium show also a slight
difference in basicity between some at least of these doubtful
bodies. In the same category must be included the numerous
separate “elements”—commonly so‐called—have been and are being
split up. Where then are we to draw the line? The different
groupings shade off so imperceptibly the one into the other that
it is impossible to erect a definite boundary between any two
adjacent bodies and to say that the body on this side of the line
is an element, while the one on the other side is non‐elementary,
or merely something which simulates or approximates to an element.
Wherever an apparently reasonable line might be drawn it would no
doubt be easy at once to assign most bodies to their proper side,
as in all cases of classification the real difficulty comes in
when the border‐line is approached. Slight chemical differences,
of course, are admitted, and, up to a certain point, so are well‐
marked physical differences. What are we to say, however, when the
only chemical difference is an almost imperceptible tendency for
the one body—of a couple or of a group—to precipitate before the
other? Again, there are cases where the chemical differences reach
the vanishing point, although well‐marked physical differences
still remain. Here we stumble on a new difficulty: in such
obscurities what is chemical and what is physical? Are we not
entitled to call a slight tendency of a nascent amorphous
precipitate to fall down in advance of another a “physical
difference”? And may we not call coloured reactions depending on
the amount of some particular acid present and varying, according
to the concentration of the solution and to the solvent employed,
“chemical differences”? I do not see how we can deny elementary
character to a body which differs from another by well‐marked
colour, or spectrum‐reactions, while we accord it to another body
whose only claim is a very minute difference in basic powers.
Having once opened the door wide enough to admit some spectrum
differences, we have to inquire how minute a difference qualifies
the candidate to pass? I will give instances from my own
experience of some of these doubtful candidates.
Here the great Chemist gives several cases of the very extraordinary
behaviour of molecules and earths, apparently the same, but which yet,
when examined very closely, were found to exhibit differences which,
however minute, still show that none of them are simple bodies, and that
the 60 or 70 elements accepted in chemistry can no longer cover the
ground. Their name, apparently, is legion, but as the so‐called “periodic
theory” stands in the way of an unlimited multiplication of elements, Mr.
Crookes is obliged to find some means of reconciling the new discovery
with the old theory. “That theory,” he says:
Has received such abundant verification that we cannot lightly
accept any interpretation of phenomena which fails to be in
accordance with it. But if we suppose the elements reïnforced by a
vast number of bodies slightly differing from each other in their
properties, and forming, if I may use the expression, aggregations
of nebulæ where we formerly saw, or believed we saw, separate
stars, the periodic arrangement can no longer be definitely
grasped. No longer, that is, if we retain our usual conception of
an element. Let us, then, modify this conception. For “element”
read “elementary group”—such elementary groups taking the place of
the old elements in the periodic scheme—and the difficulty falls
away. In defining an element, let us take not an external
boundary, but an internal type. Let us say, _e.g._, the smallest
ponderable quantity of yttrium is an assemblage of ultimate atoms
almost infinitely more like each other than they are to the atoms
of any other approximating element. It does not necessarily follow
that the atoms shall all be absolutely alike among themselves. The
atomic weight which we ascribed to yttrium, therefore, merely
represents a mean value around which the actual weights of the
individual atoms of the “element” range within certain limits. But
if my conjecture is tenable, could we separate atom from atom, we
should find them varying within narrow limits on each side of the
mean. The very process of fractionation implies the existence of
such differences in certain bodies.
Thus fact and truth have once more forced the hand of “exact” Science, and
compelled it to enlarge its views and change its terms, which, masking the
multitude, reduced them to one body—like the Septenary Elohim and their
hosts transformed by the materialistic religionists into one Jehovah.
Replace the chemical terms “molecule,” “atom,” “particle,” etc., by the
words “Hosts,” “Monads,” “Devas,” etc., and one might think the genesis of
Gods, the primeval evolution of manvantaric _intelligent_ Forces, was
being described. But the learned lecturer adds to his descriptive remarks
something still more suggestive; whether consciously or unconsciously, who
knoweth? For he says:
Until lately such bodies passed muster as elements. They had
definite properties, chemical and physical; they had recognized
atomic weights. If we take a pure dilute solution of such a body,
yttrium for instance, and if we add to it an excess of strong
ammonia, we obtain a precipitate which appears perfectly
homogeneous. But if instead we add very dilute ammonia in quantity
sufficient only to precipitate one‐half of the base present, we
obtain no immediate precipitate. If we stir up the whole
thoroughly so as to insure a uniform mixture of the solution and
the ammonia, and set the vessel aside for an hour, carefully
excluding dust, we may still find the liquid clear and bright,
without any vestige of turbidity. After three or four hours,
however, an opalescence will declare itself, and the next morning
a precipitate will have appeared. Now let us ask ourselves, What
can be the meaning of this phenomenon? The quantity of precipitant
added was insufficient to throw down more than half the yttria
present, therefore a process akin to selection has been going on
for several hours. The precipitation has _evidently not been
effected at random_, those molecules of the base being decomposed
which happened to come in contact with a corresponding molecule of
ammonia, for we have taken care that the liquids should be
uniformly mixed, so that one molecule of the original salt would
not be more exposed to decomposition than any other. If, further,
we consider the time which elapses before the appearance of a
precipitate, we _cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that the
action which has been going on for the first few hours is of a
selective character_. The problem is not why a precipitate is
produced, but what determines or directs some atoms to fall down
and others to remain in solution. Out of the multitude of atoms
present, _what power is it that directs each atom to choose the
proper path? We may picture to ourselves some directive force
passing the atoms one by one in review, selecting one for
precipitation and another for solution till all have been
adjusted._
The italics in the above passage are ours. Well may a man of Science ask
himself: What power is it that directs each Atom? and what is the meaning
of its character being _selective_? Theists would solve the question by
answering “God”; and would thereby solve nothing philosophically.
Occultism answers on its own Pantheistic grounds, and teaches the student
about Gods, Monads, and Atoms. The learned lecturer sees in it that which
is his chief concern: the finger‐posts and the traces of a path which may
lead to the discovery, and the full and complete demonstration, of an
homogeneous element in Nature. He remarks:
In order that such a selection can be effected there evidently
must be some slight differences between which it is possible to
select, and this difference almost certainly must be one of
basicity, so slight as to be imperceptible by any test at present
known, but susceptible of being nursed and encouraged to a point
when the difference can be appreciated by ordinary tests.
Occultism, which knows of the existence and presence in Nature of the One
Eternal Element, at the first differentiation of which the roots of the
Tree of Life are periodically struck, needs no scientific proofs. It says:
Ancient Wisdom has solved the problem ages ago. Aye; earnest, as well as
mocking reader, Science is slowly but surely approaching our domains of
the Occult. It is forced by its own discoveries to adopt _nolens volens_
our phraseology and symbols. Chemical Science is now compelled, by the
very force of things, to accept even our illustration of the evolution of
the Gods and Atoms, so suggestively and undeniably figured in the Caduceus
of Mercury, the God of Wisdom, and in the allegorical language of the
Archaic Sages. Says a Commentary in the Esoteric Doctrine:
_The trunk of the_ ASVATTHA (the tree of Life and Being, the ROD of the
Caduceus) _grows from and descends at every Beginning_ (every new
Manvantara) _from the two dark wings of the Swan_ (HANSA) _of Life. The
two Serpents, the ever‐living and its illusion_ (Spirit and matter) _whose
two heads grow from the one head between the wings, descend along the
trunks interlaced in close embrace. The two tails join on earth_ (the
manifested Universe) _into one, and this is the great illusion, O Lanoo!_
Every one knows what the Caduceus is, modified considerably by the Greeks.
The original symbol—with the triple head of the serpent—became altered
into a rod with a knob, and the two lower heads were separated, thus
disfiguring somewhat the original meaning. Yet it is as good an
illustration as can be for our purpose, this laya rod, entwined by two
serpents. Verily the wonderful powers of the magic Caduceus were sung by
all the ancient poets, with a very good reason for those who understood
the secret meaning.
Now what says the learned President of the Chemical Society of Great
Britain, in that same lecture, which has any reference to, or bearing
upon, our above‐mentioned doctrine? Very little; only this—and nothing
more:
In the Birmingham address already referred to I asked my audience
to picture the action of two forces on the original protyle—one
being time, accompanied by a lowering of temperature; the other,
swinging to and fro like a mighty pendulum, having periodic cycles
of ebb and swell, rest and activity, being intimately connected
with the imponderable matter, essence, or source of energy we call
electricity. Now, a simile like this effects its object if it
fixes in the mind the particular fact it is intended to emphasize,
but it must not be expected necessarily to run parallel with all
the facts. Besides the lowering of temperature with the periodic
ebb and flow of electricity, positive or negative, requisite to
confer on the newly‐born elements their particular atomicity, it
is evident that a third factor must be taken into account. Nature
does not act on a flat plane; she demands space for her cosmogenic
operations, and if we introduce space as the third factor, all
appears clear. Instead of a pendulum, which, though to a certain
extent a good illustration, is impossible as a fact, let us seek
some more satisfactory way of representing what I conceive may
have taken place. Let us suppose the zigzag diagram not drawn upon
a plane, but projected in space of three dimensions. What figure
can we best select to meet all the conditions involved? Many of
the facts can be well explained by supposing the projection in
space of Professor Emerson Reynolds’ zigzag curve to be a spiral.
This figure is, however, inadmissible, inasmuch as the curve has
to pass through a point neutral as to electricity and chemical
energy twice in each cycle. We must, therefore, adopt some other
figure. A figure of eight (8), or lemniscate, will foreshorten
into a zigzag just as well as a spiral, and it fulfils every
condition of the problem.
A lemniscate for the evolution downward, from Spirit into Matter; another
form of a spiral, perhaps, in its reinvolutionary path onward, from Matter
into Spirit; and the necessary gradual and final reabsorption into the
_laya_ state, that which Science calls, in her own way, “the point neutral
as to electricity,” or the _zero_ point. Such are the Occult facts and
statement. They may be left with the greatest security and confidence to
Science, to be justified some day. Let us hear some more, however, about
this primordial genetic type of the symbolical Caduceus.
Such a figure will result from three very simple simultaneous
motions. First, a simple oscillation backwards and forwards
(suppose east and west); secondly, a simple oscillation at right
angles to the former (suppose north and south) of half the
periodic time—_i.e._, twice as fast; and thirdly, a motion at
right angles to these two (suppose downwards), which, in its
simplest form, would be with unvarying velocity. If we project
this figure in space we find on examination that the points of the
curves, where chlorine, bromine, and iodine are formed, come close
under each other; so also will sulphur, selenium, and tellurium;
again, phosphorus, arsenic, and antimony; and in like manner other
series of analogous bodies. It may be asked whether this scheme
explains how and why the elements appear in this order? Let us
imagine a cyclical translation in space, each evolution witnessing
the genesis of the group of elements which I previously
represented as produced during one complete vibration of the
pendulum. Let us suppose that one cycle has thus been completed,
the centre of the unknown creative force in its mighty journey
through space having scattered along its track the primitive
atoms—the seeds, if I may use the expression—which presently are
to coalesce and develop into the groupings now known as lithium,
beryllium, boron, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, sodium,
magnesium, aluminium, silicon, phosphorus, sulphur, and chlorine.
What is most probably the form of track now pursued? Were it
strictly confined to the same plane of temperature and time, the
next elementary groupings to appear would again have been those of
lithium, and the original cycle would have been eternally
repeated, producing again and again the same 14 elements. The
conditions, however, are not quite the same. Space and electricity
are as at first, but temperature has altered, and thus, instead of
the atoms of lithium being supplemented with atoms in all respects
analogous with themselves, the atomic groupings which come into
being when the second cycle commences form, not lithium, but its
lineal descendant, potassium. Suppose, therefore, the _vis
generatrix_ travelling to and fro in cycles along a lemniscate
path, as above suggested, while simultaneously temperature is
declining and time is flowing on—variations which I have
endeavoured to represent by the downward sink—each coil of the
lemniscate track crosses the same vertical line at lower and lower
points. Projected in space, the curve shows a central line neutral
as far as electricity is concerned, and neutral in chemical
properties—positive electricity on the north, negative on the
south. Dominant atomicities are governed by the distance east and
west from the neutral centre line, monatomic elements being one
remove from it, diatomic two removes, and so on. In every
successive coil the same law holds good.
And, as if to prove the postulate of Occult Science and Hindû philosophy,
that, at the hour of the Pralaya, the two aspects of the Unknowable Deity,
“the Swan in darkness,” Prakriti and Purusha, Nature or Matter in all its
forms and Spirit, no longer subsist but are absolutely dissolved, we learn
the conclusive scientific opinion of the great English Chemist, who caps
his proofs by saying:
We have now traced the formation of the chemical elements from
knots and voids in a primitive, formless fluid. We have shown the
possibility, nay, the probability that the atoms are not eternal
in existence, but share with all other created beings the
attributes of decay and death.
Occultism says _amen_ to this, as the scientific “possibility” and
“probability” are for it facts, demonstrated beyond the necessity for
further proof, or for any extraneous physical evidence. Nevertheless, it
repeats with as much assurance as ever: “MATTER IS ETERNAL, becoming
atomic (its aspect) only periodically.” This is as sure as that the other
proposition, which is almost unanimously accepted by Astronomers and
Physicists—namely, that the wear and tear of the body of the Universe is
steadily going on, and that it will finally lead to the extinction of the
Solar Fires and the destruction of the Universe—is quite erroneous on the
lines traced by men of Science. There will be, as there ever were in time
and eternity, periodical dissolutions of the manifested Universe, such as
a partial Pralaya after every Day of Brahmâ; and a Universal Pralaya—the
Mahâ‐Pralaya—only after the lapse of every Age of Brahmâ. But the
scientific causes for such dissolution, as brought forward by exact
Science, have nothing to do with the true causes. However that may be,
Occultism is once more justified by Science, for Mr. Crookes said:
We have shown, from arguments drawn from the chemical laboratory,
that in matter which has responded to every test of an element,
there are minute shades of difference which may admit of
selection. We have seen that the time‐honoured distinction between
elements and compounds no longer keeps pace with the developments
of chemical science, but must be modified to include a vast array
of intermediate bodies—“meta‐elements.” We have shown how the
objections of Clerk‐Maxwell, weighty as they are, may be met; and
finally, we have adduced reasons for believing that primitive
matter was formed by the act of a generative force, throwing off
at intervals of time atoms endowed with varying quantities of
primitive forms of energy. If we may hazard any conjectures as to
the source of energy embodied in a chemical atom, we may, I think,
premise that the heat radiations propagated outwards through the
ether from the ponderable matter of the universe, by some process
of nature not yet known to us, are transformed at the confines of
the universe into the primary—the essential—motions of chemical
atoms, which, the instant they are formed, gravitate inwards, and
thus restore to the universe the energy which otherwise would be
lost to it through radiant heat. If this conjecture be well
founded, Sir William Thomson’s startling prediction of the final
decrepitude of the universe through the dissipation of its energy
falls to the ground. In this fashion, gentlemen, it seems to me
that the question of the elements may be provisionally treated.
Our slender knowledge of these first mysteries is extending
steadily, surely, though slowly.
By a strange and curious coincidence even our Septenary doctrine seems to
force the hand of Science. If we understand rightly, Chemistry speaks of
fourteen groupings of primitive atoms—lithium, beryllium, boron, carbon,
nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, sodium, magnesium, aluminium, silicon,
phosphorus, sulphur and chlorine; and Mr. Crookes, speaking of the
“dominant atomicities,” enumerates seven groups of these, for he says:
As the mighty focus of creative energy goes round, we see it in
successive cycles sowing in one tract of space seeds of lithium,
potassium, rubidium, and cæsium; in another tract, chlorine,
bromine, and iodine; in a third, sodium, copper, silver, and gold;
in a fourth, sulphur, selenium, and tellurium; in a fifth,
beryllium, calcium, strontium, and barium; in a sixth, magnesium,
zinc, cadmium, and mercury; in a seventh, phosphorus, arsenic,
antimony, and bismuth [which makes seven groupings on the one
hand. And after showing] ... in other tracts the other
elements—namely, aluminium, gallium, indium, and thallium;
silicon, germanium, and tin; carbon, titanium, and zirconium ...
[he adds] while a natural position near the neutral axis is found
for the three groups of elements relegated by Professor Mendeleeff
to a sort of Hospital for Incurables—his eighth family.
It might be interesting to compare these seven, and the eighth family of
“incurables,” with the allegories concerning the seven primitive sons of
“Mother, Infinite Space,” or Aditi, and the eighth son rejected by her.
Many a strange coincidence may thus be found between “those intermediate
links ... named meta‐elements” or elementoids, and those whom Occult
Science names their Noumenoi, the intelligent Minds and Rulers of those
groupings of Monads and Atoms. But this would lead us too far. Let us be
content with finding the confession of the fact that:
This deviation from absolute homogeneity should mark the
constitution of these molecules or aggregations of matter which we
designate elements and will perhaps be clearer if we return in
imagination to the earliest dawn of our material universe, and,
face to face with the Great Secret, try to consider the processes
of elemental evolution.
Thus finally Science, in the person of its highest representatives, in
order to make itself clearer to the profane, adopts the phraseology of
such old Adepts as Roger Bacon, and returns to the “protyle.” All this is
hopeful and suggestive of the “signs of the times.”
Indeed these “signs” are many and multiply daily; but none are more
important than those just quoted. For now the chasm between the Occult
“superstitious and unscientific” teachings and those of “exact” Science is
completely bridged, and one, at least, of the few eminent Chemists of the
day is in the realm of the infinite possibilities of Occultism. Every new
step he will take will bring him nearer and nearer to that mysterious
Centre, from which radiate the innumerable paths that lead down Spirit
into Matter, and which transform the Gods and the living Monads into man
and sentient Nature.
But we have something more to say on this subject in the following
Section.