diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-27 17:49:32 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-27 17:49:32 -0800 |
| commit | de756c818f3c105e9092c721b94a9f2faf0a653c (patch) | |
| tree | 298bb38fe8492365c4a822c38599e3838684926b /old/60852-0.txt | |
| parent | 3151a989af288e6198ce982cd4475a41b8a6410a (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/60852-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/60852-0.txt | 31305 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 31305 deletions
diff --git a/old/60852-0.txt b/old/60852-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index e992ad6..0000000 --- a/old/60852-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,31305 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Lucifer, by Various - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll -have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using -this ebook. - - - -Title: Lucifer - A Theosophical Magazine - -Author: Various - -Editor: Various - -Release Date: December 5, 2019 [EBook #60852] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LUCIFER *** - - - - -Produced by KD Weeks and the Online Distributed Proofreading -Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from -images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.) - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note: - -This text is a compilation of the six numbers of the first Volume of -LUCIFER, spanning September 1887 through February 1888. - -This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects. -Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. Certain -headings were printed in a blackletter font, indicated with a ‘=’ -delimiter. - -Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are -referenced. They have been resequenced for uniqueness across the text. - -Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please -see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding -the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation. - - LUCIFER - =A Theosophical Magazine,= - - DESIGNED TO “BRING TO LIGHT THE HIDDEN THINGS OF DARKNESS.” - - EDITED BY - - H. P. BLAVATSKY AND MABEL COLLINS. - -THE LIGHT-BEARER IS THE MORNING STAR OR LUCIFER, AND “LUCIFER IS NO - PROFANE OR SATANIC TITLE. IT IS THE LATIN LUCIFERUS. THE - LIGHT-BRINGER, THE MORNING STAR, EQUIVALENT TO THE GREEK φωσφορος ... - THE NAME OF THE PURE PALE HERALD OF DAYLIGHT.”—YONGE. - - - - - _VOLUME I._ - - SEPTEMBER 1887-FEBRUARY 1888. - - -------------- - - =London=: - - GEORGE REDWAY, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN. - - - - - KELLY & CO., PRINTERS - 1 & 3, GATE STREET, LINCOLNS INN FIELDS, LONDON, W.C. - AND MIDDLE MILL, KINGSTON-ON-THAMES. - - - - - CONTENTS. - - Astrological Notes 158, 512 - - Auto-Hypnotic Rhapsody, An 472 - - Birth of Light, The 52 - - Blood Covenanting 216 - - Blossom and the Fruit, The. The True 23, 123, 193, 258, - Story of a Magician 347, 443 - - Brotherhood 212 - - Buddhism, The Four Noble Truths of 49 - - Christian Dogma, Esotericism of the 368 - - Christmas Eve, A Remarkable 274 - - Correspondence 76, 136, 228, 311, - 412, 502 - - Emerson and Occultism 252 - - Evil, The Origin of 109 - - Fear 298 - - Freedom 185 - - Ghost’s Revenge, A 63, 102 - - God Speaks for Law and Order 292 - - Gospels, The Esoteric Character of the 173, 299, 490 - - Hand, The “Square” in the 181 - - Hauntings, A Theory of 486 - - Healing, The Spirit of 267 - - Hylo-Idealism and “The Adversary” 507 - - Infant Genius 296 - - Interlaced Triangles, The Relation of 481 - Colour to the - - Invisible World, The 186 - - Lady of Light, The 81 - - Lama, The Last of a Good 51 - - Law of Life, A: Karma 39, 97 - - Let Every Man Prove His Own Work 161 - - “Light on the Path,” Comments on 8, 90, 170, 379 - - Literary Jottings 71, 329 - - Love with an Object 391 - - “LUCIFER” To the Archbishop of 340 - Canterbury Greeting, 241; To the Readers - of - - Luniolatry 440 - - Morning Star, To the 339 - - Mystery of all Time, The 46 - - Mystic Thought, The 192 - - Paradox, The Great 120 - - Planet, History of a 15 - - Quest, The Great 288, 375 - - Reviews 143, 232, 395, 497 - - Science of Life, The 203 - - Signs of the Times, The 83 - - Soldier’s Daughter, The 432 - - Some Words on Daily Life 344 - - Theosophical and Mystic Publications 77, 156, 335 - - Theosophist, A True (Count Tolstoi) 55 - - Theosophy, Thoughts on, 134; and 282 - Socialism - - Three Desires, The 476 - Twilight Visions 365, 461 - - Unpopular Philosopher, From the 80, 160, 238 - Note-Book of an - - What is Truth? 425 - - What’s in a Name? Why is the Magazine 1 - called “LUCIFER”? - - White Monk, The 384, 466 - - 1888 337 - - LUCIFER - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - VOL. I. LONDON, SEPTEMBER 15TH, 1887. NO. 1. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - WHAT’S IN A NAME? - WHY THE MAGAZINE IS CALLED “LUCIFER.” - - -What’s in a name? Very often there is more in it than the profane is -prepared to understand, or the learned mystic to explain. It is an -invisible, secret, but very potential influence that every name carries -about with it and “leaveth wherever it goeth.” Carlyle thought that -“there is much, nay, almost all, in names.” “Could I unfold the -influence of names, which are the most important of all clothings, I -were a second great Trismegistus,” he writes. - -The name or title of a magazine started with a definite object, is, -therefore, all important; for it is, indeed, the invisible seedgrain, -which will either grow “to be an all-over-shadowing tree” on the fruits -of which must depend the nature of the results brought about by the said -object, or the tree will wither and die. These considerations show that -the name of the present magazine—rather equivocal to orthodox Christian -ears—is due to no careless selection, but arose in consequence of much -thinking over its fitness, and was adopted as the best symbol to express -that object and the results in view. - -Now, the first and most important, if not the sole object of the -magazine, is expressed in the line from the 1st Epistle to the -Corinthians, on its title page. It is to bring light to “the hidden -things of darkness,” (iv. 5); to show in their true aspect and their -original real meaning things and names, men and their doings and -customs; it is finally to fight prejudice, hypocrisy and shams in every -nation, in every class of Society, as in every department of life. The -task is a laborious one but it is neither impracticable nor useless, if -even as an experiment. - -Thus, for an attempt of such nature, no better title could ever be found -than the one chosen. “Lucifer,” is the pale morning-star, the precursor -of the full blaze of the noon-day sun—the “Eosphoros” of the Greeks. It -shines timidly at dawn to gather forces and dazzle the eye after sunset -as its own brother ‘Hesperos’—the radiant evening star, or the planet -Venus. No fitter symbol exists for the proposed work—that of throwing a -ray of truth on everything hidden by the darkness of prejudice, by -social or religious misconceptions; especially by that idiotic routine -in life, which, once that a certain action, a thing, a name, has been -branded by slanderous inventions, however unjust, makes _respectable_ -people, so called, turn away shiveringly, refusing to even look at it -from any other aspect than the one sanctioned by public opinion. Such an -endeavour then, to force the weak-hearted to look truth straight in the -face, is helped most efficaciously by a title belonging to the category -of branded names. - -Piously inclined readers may argue that “Lucifer” is accepted by all the -churches as one of the many names of the Devil. According to Milton’s -superb fiction, Lucifer is _Satan_, the “rebellious” angel, the enemy of -God and man. If one analyzes his rebellion, however, it will be found of -no worse nature than an assertion of free-will and independent thought, -as if Lucifer had been born in the XIXth century. This epithet of -“rebellious,” is a theological calumny, on a par with that other slander -of God by the Predestinarians, one that makes of deity an “Almighty” -fiend worse than the “rebellious” Spirit himself; “an omnipotent Devil -desiring to be ‘complimented’ as all merciful when he is exerting the -most fiendish cruelty,” as put by J. Cotter Morison. Both the -foreordaining and predestining fiend-God, and his subordinate agent are -of human invention; they are two of the most morally repulsive and -horrible theological dogmas that the nightmares of light-hating monks -have ever evolved out of their unclean fancies. - -They date from the Mediæval age, the period of mental obscuration, -during which most of the present prejudices and superstitions have been -forcibly inoculated on the human mind, so as to have become nearly -ineradicable in some cases, one of which is the present prejudice now -under discussion. - -So deeply rooted, indeed, is this preconception and aversion to the name -of Lucifer—meaning no worse than “light-bringer” (from _lux_, _lucis_, -“light,” and _ferre_ “to bring”)[1]—even among the educated classes, -that by adopting it for the title of their magazine the editors have the -prospect of a long strife with public prejudice before them. So absurd -and ridiculous is that prejudice, indeed, that no one has seemed to ever -ask himself the question, how came Satan to be called a _light-bringer_, -unless the silvery rays of the morning-star can in any way be made -suggestive of the glare of the infernal flames. It is simply, as -Henderson showed, “one of those gross perversions of sacred writ which -so extensively obtain, and which are to be traced to a proneness to seek -for more in a given passage than it really contains—a disposition to be -influenced by sound rather than sense, and an implicit faith in received -interpretation”—which is not quite one of the weaknesses of our present -age. Nevertheless, the prejudice is there, to the shame of our century. - ------ - -Footnote 1: - - “It was Gregory the Great who was the first to apply this passage of - Isaiah, “How art thou fallen from Heaven, Lucifer, son of the - morning,” etc., to Satan, and ever since the bold metaphor of the - prophet, which referred, after all, but to an Assyrian king inimical - to the Israelites, has been applied to the Devil.” - ------ - -This cannot be helped. The two editors would hold themselves as -recreants in their own sight, as traitors to the very spirit of the -proposed work, were they to yield and cry craven before the danger. If -one would fight prejudice, and brush off the ugly cobwebs of -superstition and materialism alike from the noblest ideals of our -forefathers, one has to prepare for opposition. “The crown of the -reformer and the innovator is a crown of thorns” indeed. If one would -rescue Truth in all her chaste nudity from the almost bottomless well, -into which she has been hurled by cant and hypocritical propriety, one -should not hesitate to descend into the dark, gaping pit of that well. -No matter how badly the blind bats—the dwellers in darkness, and the -haters of light—may treat in their gloomy abode the intruder, unless one -is the first to show the spirit and courage he preaches to others, he -must be justly held as a hypocrite and a seceder from his own -principles. - -Hardly had the title been agreed upon, when the first premonitions of -what was in store for us, in the matter of the opposition to be -encountered owing to the title chosen, appeared on our horizon. One of -the editors received and recorded some spicy objections. The scenes that -follow are sketches from nature. - - I. - - _A Well-known Novelist._ Tell me about your new magazine. What class - do you propose to appeal to? - - _Editor._ No class in particular: we intend to appeal to the public. - - _Novelist._ I am very glad of that. For once I shall be one of the - public, for I don’t understand your subject in the least, and I want - to. But you must remember that if your public is to understand you, it - must necessarily be a very small one. People talk about occultism - nowadays as they talk about many other things, without the least idea - of what it means. We are so ignorant and—so prejudiced. - - _Editor._ Exactly. That is what calls the new magazine into existence. - We propose to educate you, and to tear the mask from every prejudice. - - _Novelist._ That really is good news to me, for I want to be educated. - What is your magazine to be called? - - _Editor._ Lucifer. - - _Novelist._ What! Are you going to educate us in vice? We know enough - about that. Fallen angels are plentiful. You may find popularity, for - soiled doves are in fashion just now, while the white-winged angels - are voted a bore, because they are not so amusing. But I doubt your - being able to teach us much. - - II. - - _A Man of the World_ (_in a careful undertone, for the scene is a - dinner-party_). I hear you are going to start a magazine, all about - occultism. Do you know, I’m very glad. I don’t say anything about such - matters as a rule, but some queer things have happened in my life - which can’t be explained in any ordinary manner. I hope you will go in - for explanations. - - _Editor._ We shall try, certainly. My impression is, that when - occultism is in any measure apprehended, its laws are accepted by - everyone as the only intelligible explanation of life. - - _A M. W._ Just so, I want to know all about it, for ’pon my honour, - life’s a mystery. There are plenty of other people as curious as - myself. This is an age which is afflicted with the Yankee disease of - ‘wanting to know.’ I’ll get you lots of subscribers. What’s the - magazine called? - - _Editor._ Lucifer—and (_warned by former experience_) don’t - misunderstand the name. It is typical of the divine spirit which - sacrificed itself for humanity—it was Milton’s doing that it ever - became associated with the devil. We are sworn enemies to popular - prejudices, and it is quite appropriate that we should attack such a - prejudice as this—Lucifer, you know, is the Morning Star—the - Lightbearer,... - - _A M. W._ (_interrupting_). Oh, I know all that—at least I don’t know, - but I take it for granted you’ve got some good reason for taking such - a title. But your first object is to have readers; you want the public - to buy your magazine, I suppose. That’s in the programme, isn’t it? - - _Editor._ Most decidedly. - - _A M. W._ Well, listen to the advice of a man who knows his way about - town. Don’t mark your magazine with the wrong colour at starting. It’s - quite evident, when one stays an instant to think of its derivation - and meaning, that Lucifer is an excellent word. But the public don’t - stay to think of derivations and meanings; and the first impression is - the most important. Nobody will buy the magazine if you call it - Lucifer. - - III. - - _A Fashionable Lady Interested in Occultism._ I want to hear some more - about the new magazine, for I have interested a great many people in - it, even with the little you have told me. But I find it difficult to - express its actual purpose. What is it? - - _Editor._ To try and give a little light to those that want it. - - _A F. L._ Well, that’s a simple way of putting it, and will be very - useful to me. What is the magazine to be called? - - _Editor._ Lucifer. - - _A F. L._ (_After a pause_) You can’t mean it. - - _Editor._ Why not? - - _A F. L._ The associations are so dreadful! What can be the object of - calling it that? It sounds like some unfortunate sort of joke, made - against it by its enemies. - - _Editor._ Oh, but Lucifer, you know, means Light-bearer; it is typical - of the Divine Spirit—— - - _A F. L._ Never mind all that—I want to do your magazine good and make - it known, and you can’t expect me to enter into explanations of that - sort every time I mention the title? Impossible! Life is too short and - too busy. Besides, it would produce such a bad effect; people would - think me priggish, and then I couldn’t talk at all, for I couldn’t - bear them to think that. Don’t call it Lucifer—please don’t. Nobody - knows what the word is typical of; what it means now is the devil, - nothing more or less. - - _Editor._ But then that is quite a mistake, and one of the first - prejudices we propose to do battle with. Lucifer is the pale, pure - herald of dawn—— - - _Lady_ (_interrupting_). I thought you were going to do something more - interesting and more important than to whitewash mythological - characters. We shall all have to go to school again, or read up Dr. - Smith’s Classical Dictionary. And what is the use of it when it is - done? I thought you were going to tell us things about our own lives - and how to make them better. I suppose Milton wrote about Lucifer, - didn’t he?—but nobody reads Milton now. Do let us have a modern title - with some human meaning in it. - - IV. - - _A Journalist_ (_thoughtfully, while rolling his cigarette_). Yes, it - is a good idea, this magazine of yours. We shall all laugh at it, as a - matter of course: and we shall cut it up in the papers. But we shall - all read it, because secretly everybody hungers after the mysterious. - What are you going to call it? - - _Editor._ Lucifer. - - _Journalist_ (_striking a light_). Why not _The Fusee_? Quite as good - a title and not so pretentious. - -The “Novelist,” the “Man of the World,” the “Fashionable Lady,” and the -“Journalist,” should be the first to receive a little instruction. A -glimpse into the real and primitive character of Lucifer can do them no -harm and may, perchance, cure them of a bit of ridiculous prejudice. -They ought to study their Homer and Hesiod’s Theogony if they would do -justice to Lucifer, “_Eosphoros and Hesperos_,” the Morning and the -Evening beautiful star. If there are more useful things to do in this -life than “to whitewash mythological characters,” to slander and blacken -them is, at least, as useless, and shows, moreover, a narrow-mindedness -which can do honour to no one. - -To object to the title of LUCIFER, only because its “associations are so -dreadful,” is pardonable—if it can be pardonable in any case—only in an -ignorant American missionary of some dissenting sect, in one whose -natural laziness and lack of education led him to prefer ploughing the -minds of heathens, as ignorant as he is himself, to the more profitable, -but rather more arduous, process of ploughing the fields of his own -father’s farm. In the English clergy, however, who receive all a more or -less classical education, and are, therefore, supposed to be acquainted -with the _ins_ and _outs_ of theological sophistry and casuistry, this -kind of opposition is absolutely unpardonable. It not only smacks of -hypocrisy and deceit, but places them directly on a lower moral level -than him they call the apostate angel. By endeavouring to show the -theological Lucifer, fallen through the idea that - - “To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell; - Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven,” - -they are virtually putting into practice the supposed crime they would -fain accuse him of. They prefer reigning over the spirit of the masses -by means of a pernicious dark LIE, productive of many an evil, than -serve heaven by serving TRUTH. Such practices are worthy only of the -Jesuits. - -But their sacred writ is the first to contradict their interpretations -and the association of Lucifer, the Morning Star, with Satan. Chapter -XXII. of _Revelation_, verse 16th, says: “I, Jesus ... am the root ... -and the bright and _Morning Star_” (ὀρθρινὸς “early rising”): hence -Eosphoros, or the Latin Lucifer. The opprobrium attached to this name is -of such a very late date, that the Roman Church found itself forced to -screen the theological slander behind a two-sided interpretation—as -usual. Christ, we are told, is the “Morning Star,” the _divine_ Lucifer; -and Satan the _usurpator_ of the _Verbum_, the “infernal Lucifer.”[2] -“The great Archangel Michael, the conqueror of Satan, is identical in -paganism[3] with Mercury-Mithra, to whom, after defending the Sun -(symbolical of God) from the attacks of Venus-Lucifer, was given the -possession of this planet, _et datus est ei locus Luciferi_. And since -the Archangel Michael is the ‘Angel of the Face,’ and ‘the Vicar of the -_Verbum_’ he is now considered in the Roman Church as the regent of that -planet Venus which ‘the vanquished fiend had usurped.’” _Angelus faciei -Dei sedem superbi humilis obtinuit_, says Cornelius à Lapide (in Vol. -VI. p. 229). - ------ - -Footnote 2: - - Mirville’s Memoirs to the Academy of France, Vol. IV., quoting - Cardinal Ventura. - -Footnote 3: - - Which paganism has passed long milleniums, it would seem, in _copying - beforehand_ Christian dogmas to come. - ------ - -This gives the reason why one of the early Popes was called Lucifer, as -Yonge and ecclesiastical records prove. It thus follows that the title -chosen for our magazine is as much associated with divine and pious -ideas as with the supposed rebellion of the hero of Milton’s “Paradise -Lost.” By choosing it, _we throw the first ray of light and truth_ on a -ridiculous prejudice which ought to have no room made for it in this our -“age of facts and discovery.” We work for true Religion and Science, in -the interest of fact as against fiction and prejudice. It is our duty, -as it is that of physical Science—professedly its mission—to throw light -on facts in Nature hitherto surrounded by the darkness of ignorance. And -since ignorance is justly regarded as the chief promoter of -superstition, that work is, therefore, a noble and beneficent work. But -natural Sciences are only one aspect of SCIENCE and TRUTH. Psychological -and moral Sciences, or theosophy, the knowledge of divine truth, -wheresoever found, are still more important in human affairs, and real -Science should not be limited simply to the physical aspect of life and -nature. Science is an abstract of every fact, a comprehension of every -truth within the scope of human research and intelligence. -“Shakespeare’s deep and accurate science in mental philosophy” -(Coleridge), has proved more beneficent to the true philosopher in the -study of the human heart—therefore, in the promotion of truth—than the -more accurate, but certainly less deep, science of any Fellow of the -Royal Institution. - -Those readers, however, who do not find themselves convinced that the -Church had no right to throw a slur upon a beautiful star, and that it -did so through a mere necessity of accounting for one of its numerous -loans from Paganism with all its poetical conceptions of the truths in -Nature, are asked to read our article “The History of a Planet.” -Perhaps, after its perusal, they will see how far Dupuis was justified -in asserting that “all the theologies have their origin in astronomy.” -With the modern Orientalists every myth is _solar_. This is one more -prejudice, and a preconception in favour of materialism and physical -science. It will be one of our duties to combat it with much of the -rest. - - - - - -------------- - - - - -Occultism is not magic, though magic is one of its tools. - -Occultism is not the acquirement of powers, whether psychic or -intellectual, though both are its servants. Neither is occultism the -pursuit of happiness, as men understand the word; for the first step is -sacrifice, the second, renunciation. - - - - - -------------- - - - - -Life is built up by the sacrifice of the individual to the whole. Each -cell in the living body must sacrifice itself to the perfection of the -whole; when it is otherwise, disease and death enforce the lesson. - - - - - -------------- - - - - -Occultism is the science of life, the art of living. - - COMMENTS ON “LIGHT ON THE PATH.” - - BY THE AUTHOR. - - “Before the eyes can see they must be incapable of tears.” - - -It should be very clearly remembered by all readers of this volume that -it is a book which may appear to have some little philosophy in it, but -very little sense, to those who believe it to be written in ordinary -English. To the many, who read in this manner it will be—not caviare so -much as olives strong of their salt. Be warned and read but a little in -this way. - -There is another way of reading, which is, indeed, the only one of any -use with many authors. It is reading, not between the lines but within -the words. In fact, it is deciphering a profound cipher. All alchemical -works are written in the cipher of which I speak; it has been used by -the great philosophers and poets of all time. It is used systematically -by the adepts in life and knowledge, who, seemingly giving out their -deepest wisdom, hide in the very words which frame it its actual -mystery. They cannot do more. There is a law of nature which insists -that a man shall read these mysteries for himself. By no other method -can he obtain them. A man who desires to live must eat his food himself: -this is the simple law of nature—which applies also to the higher life. -A man who would live and act in it cannot be fed like a babe with a -spoon; he must eat for himself. - -I propose to put into new and sometimes plainer language parts of “Light -on the Path”; but whether this effort of mine will really be any -interpretation I cannot say. To a deaf and dumb man, a truth is made no -more intelligible if, in order to make it so, some misguided linguist -translates the words in which it is couched into every living or dead -language, and shouts these different phrases in his ear. But for those -who are not deaf and dumb one language is generally easier than the -rest; and it is to such as these I address myself. - -The very first aphorisms of “Light on the Path,” included under Number -I. have, I know well, remained sealed as to their inner meaning to many -who have otherwise followed the purpose of the book. - -There are four proven and certain truths with regard to the entrance to -occultism. The Gates of Gold bar that threshold; yet there are some who -pass those gates and discover the sublime and illimitable beyond. In the -far spaces of Time all will pass those gates. But I am one who wish that -Time, the great deluder, were not so over-masterful. To those who know -and love him I have no word to say; but to the others—and there are not -so very few as some may fancy—to whom the passage of Time is as the -stroke of a sledge-hammer, and the sense of Space like the bars of an -iron cage, I will translate and re-translate until they understand -fully. - -The four truths written on the first page of “Light on the Path,” refer -to the trial initiation of the would-be occultist. Until he has passed -it, he cannot even reach to the latch of the gate which admits to -knowledge. Knowledge is man’s greatest inheritance; why, then, should he -not attempt to reach it by every possible road? The laboratory is not -the only ground for experiment; _science_, we must remember, is derived -from _sciens_, present participle of _scire_, “to know,”—its origin is -similar to that of the word “discern,” “to ken.” Science does not -therefore deal only with matter, no, not even its subtlest and obscurest -forms. Such an idea is born merely of the idle spirit of the age. -Science is a word which covers all forms of knowledge. It is exceedingly -interesting to hear what chemists discover, and to see them finding -their way through the densities of matter to its finer forms; but there -are other kinds of knowledge than this, and it is not every one who -restricts his (strictly scientific) desire for knowledge to experiments -which are capable of being tested by the physical senses. - -Everyone who is not a dullard, or a man stupefied by some predominant -vice, has guessed, or even perhaps discovered with some certainty, that -there are subtle senses lying within the physical senses. There is -nothing at all extraordinary in this; if we took the trouble to call -Nature into the witness box we should find that everything which is -perceptible to the ordinary sight, has something even more important -than itself hidden within it; the microscope has opened a world to us, -but within those encasements which the microscope reveals, lies a -mystery which no machinery can probe. - -The whole world is animated and lit, down to its most material shapes, -by a world within it. This inner world is called Astral by some people, -and it is as good a word as any other, though it merely means starry; -but the stars, as Locke pointed out, are luminous bodies which give -light of themselves. This quality is characteristic of the life which -lies within matter; for those who see it, need no lamp to see it by. The -word star, moreover, is derived from the Anglo-Saxon “stir-an,” to -steer, to stir, to move, and undeniably it is the inner life which is -master of the outer, just as a man’s brain guides the movements of his -lips. So that although Astral is no very excellent word in itself, I am -content to use it for my present purpose. - -The whole of “Light on the Path” is written in an astral cipher and can -therefore only be deciphered by one who reads astrally. And its teaching -is chiefly directed towards the cultivation and development of the -astral life. Until the first step has been taken in this development, -the swift knowledge, which is called intuition with certainty, is -impossible to man. And this positive and certain intuition is the only -form of knowledge which enables a man to work rapidly or reach his true -and high estate, within the limit of his conscious effort. To obtain -knowledge by experiment is too tedious a method for those who aspire to -accomplish real work; he who gets it by certain intuition, lays hands on -its various forms with supreme rapidity, by fierce effort of will; as a -determined workman grasps his tools, indifferent to their weight or any -other difficulty which may stand in his way. He does not stay for each -to be tested—he uses such as he sees are fittest. - -All the rules contained in “Light on the Path,” are written for all -disciples, but only for disciples—those who “take knowledge.” To none -else but the student in this school are its laws of any use or interest. - -To all who are interested seriously in Occultism, I say first—take -knowledge. To him who hath shall be given. It is useless to wait for it. -The womb of Time will close before you, and in later days you will -remain unborn, without power. I therefore say to those who have any -hunger or thirst for knowledge, attend to these rules. - -They are none of my handicraft or invention. They are merely the -phrasing of laws in super-nature, the putting into words truths as -absolute in their own sphere, as those laws which govern the conduct of -the earth and its atmosphere. - -The senses spoken of in these four statements are the astral, or inner -senses. - -No man desires to see that light which illumines the spaceless soul -until pain and sorrow and despair have driven him away from the life of -ordinary humanity. First he wears out pleasure; then he wears out -pain—till, at last, his eyes become incapable of tears. - -This is a truism, although I know perfectly well that it will meet with -a vehement denial from many who are in sympathy with thoughts which -spring from the inner life. _To see_ with the astral sense of sight is a -form of activity which it is difficult for us to understand immediately. -The scientist knows very well what a miracle is achieved by each child -that is born into the world, when it first conquers its eye-sight and -compels it to obey its brain. An equal miracle is performed with each -sense certainly, but this ordering of sight is perhaps the most -stupendous effort. Yet the child does it almost unconsciously, by force -of the powerful heredity of habit. No one now is aware that he has ever -done it at all; just as we cannot recollect the individual movements -which enabled us to walk up a hill a year ago. This arises from the fact -that we move and live and have our being in matter. Our knowledge of it -has become intuitive. - -With our astral life it is very much otherwise. For long ages past, man -has paid very little attention to it—so little, that he has practically -lost the use of his senses. It is true, that in every civilization the -star arises, and man confesses, with more or less of folly and -confusion, that he knows himself to be. But most often he denies it, and -in being a materialist becomes that strange thing, a being which cannot -see its own light, a thing of life which will not live, an astral animal -which has eyes, and ears, and speech, and power, yet will use none of -these gifts. This is the case, and the habit of ignorance has become so -confirmed, that now none will see with the inner vision till agony has -made the physical eyes not only unseeing, but without tears—the moisture -of life. To be incapable of tears is to have faced and conquered the -simple human nature, and to have attained an equilibrium which cannot be -shaken by personal emotions. It does not imply any hardness of heart, or -any indifference. It does not imply the exhaustion of sorrow, when the -suffering soul seems powerless to suffer acutely any longer; it does not -mean the deadness of old age, when emotion is becoming dull because the -strings which vibrate to it are wearing out. None of these conditions -are fit for a disciple, and if any one of them exist in him, it must be -overcome before the path can be entered upon. Hardness of heart belongs -to the selfish man, the egotist, to whom the gate is for ever closed. -Indifference belongs to the fool and the false philosopher; those whose -lukewarmness makes them mere puppets, not strong enough to face the -realities of existence. When pain or sorrow has worn out the keenness of -suffering, the result is a lethargy not unlike that which accompanies -old age, as it is usually experienced by men and women. Such a condition -makes the entrance to the path impossible, because the first step is one -of difficulty and needs a strong man, full of psychic and physical -vigour, to attempt it. - -It is a truth, that, as Edgar Allan Poe said, the eyes are the windows -for the soul, the windows of that haunted palace in which it dwells. -This is the very nearest interpretation into ordinary language of the -meaning of the text. If grief, dismay, disappointment or pleasure, can -shake the soul so that it loses its fixed hold on the calm spirit which -inspires it, and the moisture of life breaks forth, drowning knowledge -in sensation, then all is blurred, the windows are darkened, the light -is useless. This is as literal a fact as that if a man, at the edge of a -precipice, loses his nerve through some sudden emotion he will certainly -fall. The poise of the body, the balance, must be preserved, not only in -dangerous places, but even on the level ground, and with all the -assistance Nature gives us by the law of gravitation. So it is with the -soul, it is the link between the outer body and the starry spirit -beyond; the divine spark dwells in the still place where no convulsion -of Nature can shake the air; this is so always. But the soul may lose -its hold on that, its knowledge of it, even though these two are part of -one whole; and it is by emotion, by sensation, that this hold is loosed. -To suffer either pleasure or pain, causes a vivid vibration which is, to -the consciousness of man, life. Now this sensibility does not lessen -when the disciple enters upon his training; it increases. It is the -first test of his strength; he must suffer, must enjoy or endure, more -keenly than other men, while yet he has taken on him a duty which does -not exist for other men, that of not allowing his suffering to shake him -from his fixed purpose. He has, in fact, at the first step to take -himself steadily in hand and put the bit into his own mouth; no one else -can do it for him. - -The first four aphorisms of “Light on the Path,” refer entirely to -astral development. This development must be accomplished to a certain -extent—that is to say it must be fully entered upon—before the remainder -of the book is really intelligible except to the intellect; in fact, -before it can be read as a practical, not a metaphysical treatise. - -In one of the great mystic Brotherhoods, there are four ceremonies, that -take place early in the year, which practically illustrate and elucidate -these aphorisms. They are ceremonies in which only novices take part, -for they are simply services of the threshold. But it will show how -serious a thing it is to become a disciple, when it is understood that -these are all ceremonies of sacrifice. The first one is this of which I -have been speaking. The keenest enjoyment, the bitterest pain, the -anguish of loss and despair, are brought to bear on the trembling soul, -which has not yet found light in the darkness, which is helpless as a -blind man is, and until these shocks can be endured without loss of -equilibrium the astral senses must remain sealed. This is the merciful -law. The “medium,” or “spiritualist,” who rushes into the psychic world -without preparation, is a law-breaker, a breaker of the laws of -super-nature. Those who break Nature’s laws lose their physical health; -those who break the laws of the inner life, lose their psychic health. -“Mediums” become mad, suicides, miserable creatures devoid of moral -sense; and often end as unbelievers, doubters even of that which their -own eyes have seen. The disciple is compelled to become his own master -before he adventures on this perilous path, and attempts to face those -beings who live and work in the astral world, and whom we call masters, -because of their great knowledge and their ability to control not only -themselves but the forces around them. - -The condition of the soul when it lives for the life of sensation as -distinguished from that of knowledge, is vibratory or oscillating, as -distinguished from fixed. That is the nearest literal representation of -the fact; but it is only literal to the intellect, not to the intuition. -For this part of man’s consciousness a different vocabulary is needed. -The idea of “fixed” might perhaps be transposed into that of “at home.” -In sensation no permanent home can be found, because change is the law -of this vibratory existence. That fact is the first one which must be -learned by the disciple. It is useless to pause and weep for a scene in -a kaleidoscope which has passed. - -It is a very well-known fact, one with which Bulwer Lytton dealt with -great power, that an intolerable sadness is the very first experience of -the neophyte in Occultism. A sense of blankness falls upon him which -makes the world a waste, and life a vain exertion. This follows his -first serious contemplation of the abstract. In gazing, or even in -attempting to gaze, on the ineffable mystery of his own higher nature, -he himself causes the initial trial to fall on him. The oscillation -between pleasure and pain ceases for—perhaps an instant of time; but -that is enough to have cut him loose from his fast moorings in the world -of sensation. He has experienced, however briefly, the greater life; and -he goes on with ordinary existence weighted by a sense of unreality, of -blank, of horrid negation. This was the nightmare which visited Bulwer -Lytton’s neophyte in “Zanoni”; and even Zanoni himself, who had learned -great truths, and been entrusted with great powers, had not actually -passed the threshold where fear and hope, despair and joy seem at one -moment absolute realities, at the next mere forms of fancy. - -This initial trial is often brought on us by life itself. For life is -after all, the great teacher. We return to study it, after we have -acquired power over it, just as the master in chemistry learns more in -the laboratory than his pupil does. There are persons so near the door -of knowledge that life itself prepares them for it, and no individual -hand has to invoke the hideous guardian of the entrance. These must -naturally be keen and powerful organizations, capable of the most vivid -pleasure; then pain comes and fills its great duty. The most intense -forms of suffering fall on such a nature, till at last it arouses from -its stupor of consciousness, and by the force of its internal vitality -steps over the threshold into a place of peace. Then the vibration of -life loses its power of tyranny. The sensitive nature must suffer still; -but the soul has freed itself and stands aloof, guiding the life towards -its greatness. Those who are the subjects of Time, and go slowly through -all his spaces, live on through a long-drawn series of sensations, and -suffer a constant mingling of pleasure and of pain. They do not dare to -take the snake of self in a steady grasp and conquer it, so becoming -divine; but prefer to go on fretting through divers experiences, -suffering blows from the opposing forces. - -When one of these subjects of Time decides to enter on the path of -Occultism, it is this which is his first task. If life has not taught it -to him, if he is not strong enough to teach himself, and if he has power -enough to demand the help of a master, then this fearful trial, depicted -in Zanoni, is put upon him. The oscillation in which he lives, is for an -instant stilled; and he has to survive the shock of facing what seems to -him at first sight as the abyss of nothingness. Not till he has learned -to dwell in this abyss, and has found its peace, is it possible for his -eyes to have become incapable of tears. - -The difficulty of writing intelligibly on these subjects is so great -that I beg of those who have found any interest in this article, and are -yet left with perplexities and doubts, to address me in the -correspondence column of this magazine. I ask this because thoughtful -questions are as great an assistance to the general reader as the -answers to them. - - Δ - - (_To be continued_.) - - - - - -------------- - - - - -Harmony is the law of life, discord its shadow, whence springs -suffering, the teacher, the awakener of consciousness. - - - - - -------------- - -Through joy and sorrow, pain and pleasure, the soul comes to a knowledge -of itself; then begins the task of learning the laws of life, that the -discords may be resolved, and the harmony be restored. - - ------------------ - -The eyes of wisdom are like the ocean depths; there is neither joy nor -sorrow in them; therefore the soul of the occultist must become stronger -than joy, and greater than sorrow. - - THE HISTORY OF A PLANET. - - -No star, among the countless myriads that twinkle over the sidereal -fields of the night sky, shines so dazzlingly as the planet Venus—not -even Sirius-Sothis, the dog-star, beloved by Isis. Venus is the queen -among our planets, the crown jewel of our solar system. She is the -inspirer of the poet, the guardian and companion of the lonely shepherd, -the lovely morning and the evening star. For, - - “Stars teach as well as shine.” - -although their secrets are still untold and unrevealed to the majority -of men, including astronomers. They are “a beauty and a mystery,” -verily. But “where there is a mystery, it is generally supposed that -there must also be evil,” says Byron. Evil, therefore, was detected by -evilly-disposed human fancy, even in those bright luminous eyes peeping -at our wicked world through the veil of ether. Thus there came to exist -slandered stars and planets as well as slandered men and women. Too -often are the reputation and fortune of one man or party sacrificed for -the benefit of another man or party. As on earth below, so in the -heavens above, and Venus, the sister planet of our Earth,[4] was -sacrificed to the ambition of our little globe to show the latter the -“chosen” planet of the Lord. She became the scapegoat, the _Azaziel_ of -the starry dome, for the sins of the Earth, or rather for those of a -certain class in the human family—the clergy—who slandered the bright -orb, in order to prove what their ambition suggested to them as the best -means to reach power, and exercise it unswervingly over the -superstitious and ignorant masses. - ------ - -Footnote 4: - - “Venus is a second Earth,” says Reynaud, in _Terre et Ciel_ (p. 74), - “so much so that were there any communication possible between the two - planets, their inhabitants might take their respective earths for the - two hemispheres of the same world.... They seem on the sky, _like two - sisters_. Similar in conformation, these two worlds are also similar - in the character assigned to them in the Universe.” - ------ - -This took place during the middle ages. And now the sin lies black at -the door of Christians and their scientific inspirers, though the error -was successfully raised to the lofty position of a religious dogma, as -many other fictions and inventions have been. - -Indeed, the whole sidereal world, planets and their regents—the ancient -gods of poetical paganism—the sun, the moon, the elements, and the -entire host of incalculable worlds—those at least which happened to be -known to the Church Fathers—shared in the same fate. They have all been -slandered, all bedevilled by the insatiable desire of proving one little -system of theology—built on and constructed out of old pagan -materials—the only right and holy one, and all those which preceded or -followed it utterly wrong. Sun and stars, the very air itself, we are -asked to believe, became pure and “redeemed” from original sin and the -Satanic element of heathenism, only after the year I, A.D. Scholastics -and scholiasts, the spirit of whom “spurned laborious investigation and -slow induction,” had shown, to the satisfaction of infallible Church, -the whole Kosmos in the power of Satan—a poor compliment to God—before -the year of the Nativity; and Christians had to believe or be condemned. -Never have subtle sophistry and casuistry shown themselves so plainly in -their true light, however, as in the questions of the ex-Satanism and -later redemption of various heavenly bodies. Poor beautiful Venus got -worsted in that war of so-called divine proofs to a greater degree than -any of her sidereal colleagues. While the history of the other six -planets, and their gradual transformation from Greco-Aryan gods into -Semitic devils, and finally into “divine attributes of the _seven eyes_ -of the Lord,” is known but to the educated, that of Venus-Lucifer has -become a household story among even the most illiterate in Roman -Catholic countries. - -This story shall now be told for the benefit of those who may have -neglected their astral mythology. - -Venus, characterised by Pythagoras as the _sol alter_, a second Sun, on -account of her magnificent radiance—equalled by none other—was the first -to draw the attention of ancient Theogonists. Before it began to be -called Venus, it was known in _pre_-Hesiodic theogony as Eosphoros (or -Phosphoros) and Hesperos, the children of the dawn and twilight. In -Hesiod, moreover, the planet is decomposed into two divine beings, two -brothers—Eosphoros (the _Lucifer_ of the Latins) the morning, and -Hesperos, the evening star. They are the children of Astrœos and Eos, -the starry heaven and the dawn, as also of Kephalos and Eos (_Theog:_ -381, _Hyg: Poet: Astron_: 11, 42). Preller, quoted by Decharme, shows -Phaeton identical with Phosphoros or Lucifer (_Griech: Mythol_: 1. 365). -And on the authority of Hesiod he also makes Phaeton the son of the -latter two divinities—Kephalos and Eos. - -Now Phaeton or Phosphoros, the “luminous morning orb,” is carried away -in his early youth by Aphrodite (Venus) who makes of him the night -guardian of her sanctuary (_Theog:_ 987-991). He is the “beautiful -morning star” (_Vide_ St. John’s _Revelation_ XXII. 16) loved for its -radiant light by the Goddess of the Dawn, Aurora, who, while gradually -eclipsing the light of her beloved, thus seeming to carry off the star, -makes it reappear on the evening horizon where it watches the gates of -heaven. In early morning, Phosphoros “issuing from the waters of the -Ocean, raises in heaven his sacred head to announce the approach of -divine light.” (_Iliad_, XXIII. 226; _Odyss:_ XIII. 93; Virg: _Æneid_, -VIII. 589; _Mythol: de la Grèce Antique_. 247). He holds a torch in his -hand and flies through space as he precedes the car of Aurora. In the -evening he becomes Hesperos, “the most splendid of the stars that shine -on the celestial vault” (_Iliad_, XXII. 317). He is the father of the -Hesperides, the guardians of the golden apples together with the Dragon; -the beautiful genius of the flowing golden curls, sung and glorified in -all the ancient _epithalami_ (the bridal songs of the early Christians -as of the pagan Greeks); he, who at the fall of the night, leads the -nuptial _cortège_ and delivers the bride into the arms of the -bridegroom. (_Carmen Nuptiale._ See _Mythol: de la Grèce Antique_. -Decharme.) - -So far, there seems to be no possible _rapprochement_, no analogy to be -discovered between this poetical personification of a star, a purely -astronomical myth, and the _Satanism_ of Christian theology. True, the -close connection between the planet as Hesperos, the evening star, and -the Greek Garden of Eden with its Dragon and the golden apples may, with -a certain stretch of imagination, suggest some painful comparisons with -the third chapter of Genesis. But this is insufficient to justify the -building of a theological wall of defence against paganism made up of -slander and misrepresentations. - -But of all the Greek _euhemerisations_, Lucifer-Eosphoros is, perhaps, -the most complicated. The planet has become with the Latins, Venus, or -Aphrodite-_Anadyomene_, the foam-born Goddess, the “Divine Mother,” and -one with the Phœnician Astarte, or the Jewish Astaroth. They were all -called “The Morning Star,” and the Virgins of the Sea, or _Mar_ (whence -Mary), the great Deep, titles now given by the Roman Church to their -Virgin Mary. They were all connected with the moon and the crescent, -with the Dragon and the planet Venus, as the mother of Christ has been -made connected with all these attributes. If the Phœnician mariners -carried, fixed on the prow of their ships, the image of the goddess -Astarte (or Aphrodite, Venus Erycina) and looked upon the evening and -the morning star as _their_ guiding star, “the eye of their Goddess -mother,” so do the Roman Catholic sailors the same to this day. They fix -a Madonna on the prows of their vessels, and the blessed Virgin Mary is -called the “Virgin of the Sea.” The accepted patroness of Christian -sailors, their star, “_Stella Del Mar_,” etc., she stands on the -crescent moon. Like the old pagan Goddesses, she is the “Queen of -Heaven,” and the “Morning Star” just as they were. - -Whether this can explain anything, is left to the reader’s sagacity. -Meanwhile, Lucifer-Venus has nought to do with darkness, and everything -with light. When called _Lucifer_, it is the “light bringer,” the first -radiant beam which destroys the lethal darkness of night. When named -Venus, the planet-star becomes the symbol of dawn, the chaste Aurora. -Professor Max Müller rightly conjectures that Aphrodite, born of the -sea, is a personification of the Dawn of Day, and the most lovely of all -the sights in Nature (“Science of Language”) for, before her -naturalisation by the Greeks, Aphrodite was Nature personified, the life -and light of the Pagan world, as proven in the beautiful invocation to -Venus by Lucretius, quoted by Decharme. She is _divine_ Nature in her -entirety, _Aditi-Prakriti_ before she becomes Lakshmi. She is that -Nature before whose majestic and fair face, “the winds fly away, the -quieted sky pours torrents of light, and the sea-waves smile,” -(Lucretius). When referred to as the Syrian goddess Astarte, the -Astaroth of Hieropolis, the radiant planet was personified as a majestic -woman, holding in one outstretched hand a torch, in the other, a crooked -staff in the form of a cross. (_Vide_ Lucian’s _De Dea Syriê_, and -Cicero’s _De Nat: Deorum_, 3 c.23). Finally, the planet is represented -astronomically, as a globe _poised above the cross_—a symbol no devil -would like to associate with—while the planet Earth is a globe with a -cross _over it_. - -But then, these crosses are not the symbols of Christianity, but the -Egyptian _crux ansata_, the attribute of Isis (who is Venus, and -Aphrodite, Nature, also) ♀ or ♀ the planet; the fact that the Earth has -the _crux ansata_ reversed, ♁ having a great occult significance upon -which there is no necessity of entering at present. - -Now what says the Church and how does it explain the “dreadful -association.” The Church believes in the devil, of course, and could not -afford to lose him. “_The Devil is the chief pillar of the Church_” -confesses unblushingly an advocate[5] of the _Ecclesia Militans_. “All -the Alexandrian Gnostics speak to us of the fall of the Æons and their -Pleroma, and all attribute that fall _to the desire to know_,” writes -another volunteer in the same army, slandering the Gnostics as usual and -identifying _the desire to know_ or occultism, magic, with Satanism.[6] -And then, forthwith, he quotes from Schlegel’s _Philosophie de -l’Histoire_ to show that the seven rectors (planets) of Pymander, -“commissioned by God to contain the phenomenal world in their seven -circles, lost in love with their own beauty,[7] came to admire -themselves with such intensity that owing to this proud self-adulation -they finally _fell_.” - ------ - -Footnote 5: - - Thus saith Des Mousseaux. “Mœurs et Pratiques des Demons.” p. X.—and - he is corroborated in this by Cardinal de Ventura. The Devil, he says, - “is one of the great personages _whose life is closely allied to that - of the Church_; and without him ... the fall of man could not have - taken place. If it were not for him (the Devil), the Saviour, the - Redeemer, the Crucified would be but the most ridiculous of - supernumeraries and the Cross an insult to good sense.” And if so, - then we should feel thankful to the poor Devil. - -Footnote 6: - - De Mirville. “No Devil, no Christ,” he exclaims. - -Footnote 7: - - This is only another version of Narcissus, the Greek victim of his own - fair looks. - ------ - -Perversity having thus found its way amongst the angels, the most -beautiful creature of God “revolted against its Maker.” That creature is -in theological fancy Venus-Lucifer, or rather the informing Spirit or -Regent of that planet. This teaching is based on the following -speculation. The three principal heroes of the great sidereal -catastrophe mentioned in _Revelation_ are, according to the testimony of -the Church fathers—“the Verbum, Lucifer his usurper (see editorial) and -the grand Archangel who conquered him,” and whose “palaces” (the -“houses” astrology calls them) are in the Sun, Venus-Lucifer and -Mercury. This is quite evident, since the position of these orbs in the -Solar system correspond in their hierarchical order to that of the -“heroes” in Chapter xii of _Revelation_ “their names and destinies (?) -being closely connected in the theological (exoteric) system with these -three great metaphysical names.” (De Mirville’s _Memoir_ to the Academy -of France, on the rapping Spirits and the Demons). - -The outcome of this was, that theological legend made of Venus-Lucifer -the sphere and domain of the fallen Archangel, or Satan before his -apostacy. Called upon to reconcile this statement with that other fact, -that the metaphor of “the morning star,” is applied to both Jesus, and -his Virgin mother, and that the planet Venus-Lucifer is included, -moreover, among the “stars” of the seven planetary spirits worshipped by -the Roman Catholics[8] under new names, the defenders of the Latin -dogmas and beliefs answer as follows:— - -“Lucifer, the jealous neighbour of the Sun (Christ) said to himself in -his great pride: ‘I will rise as high as he!’ He was thwarted in his -design by Mercury, though the brightness of the latter (who is St. -Michael) was as much lost in the blazing fires of the great Solar orb as -his own was, and though, like Lucifer, Mercury is only the assessor, and -the guard of honour to the Sun.”—(_Ibid._) - ------ - -Footnote 8: - - The famous temple dedicated to the Seven Angels at Rome, and built by - Michael-Angelo in 1561, is still there, now called the “Church of St - Mary of the Angels.” In the old Roman Missals printed in 1563—one or - two of which may still be seen in Palazzo Barberini—one may find the - religious service (_officio_) of the seven angels, and their _old_ and - occult names. That the “angels” are the pagan Rectors, under different - names—the Jewish having replaced the Greek and Latin names—of the - seven planets is proven by what Pope Pius V. said in his Bull to the - Spanish Clergy, permitting and encouraging the worship of the said - seven spirits of the stars. “One cannot exalt too much these _seven - rectors_ of the world, _figured by the seven planets_, as it is - consoling to our century to witness by the grace of God the cult of - these _seven ardent lights_, and of these _seven stars_ reassuming all - its lustre in the Christian republic.” (_Les Sept Esprits et - l’Histoire de leur Culte_; De Mirville’s 2nd memoir addressed to the - Academy. Vol. II. p. 358.) - ------ - -Guards of “dishonour” now rather, if the teachings of _theological_ -Christianity were true. But here comes in the cloven foot of the Jesuit. -The ardent defender of Roman Catholic Demonolatry and of the worship of -the seven planetary spirits, at the same time, pretends great wonder at -the coincidences between old Pagan and Christian _legends_, between the -fable about Mercury and Venus, and the _historical truths_ told of St. -Michael—the “angel of the face,”—the terrestrial double, or _ferouer_ of -Christ. He points them out saying: “like Mercury, the archangel Michael, -is the _friend_ of the Sun, his Mitra, perhaps, for Michael is a -_psychopompic_ genius, one who leads the separated souls to their -appointed abodes, and like Mitra, he is the _well-known adversary of the -demons_.” This is demonstrated by the book of the _Nabatheans_ recently -discovered (by Chwolson), in which the Zoroastrian Mitra is called the -“_grand enemy of the planet Venus_.”[9] (_ibid_ p. 160.) - ------ - -Footnote 9: - - Herodotus showing the identity of Mitra and Venus, the sentence in the - _Nabathean Agriculture_ is evidently misunderstood. - ------ - -There is something in this. A candid confession, for once, of perfect -identity of celestial personages and of _borrowing_ from every pagan -source. It _is_ curious, if unblushing. While in the oldest Mazdean -allegories, Mitra conquers the planet Venus, in Christian tradition -Michael defeats Lucifer, and both receive, as war spoils, the planet of -the vanquished deity. - -“Mitra,” says Dollinger, “possessed, in days of old, the star of -Mercury, placed between the sun and the moon, but he was given the -planet of the conquered, and ever since his victory he is identified -with Venus.” (_“Judaisme and Paganisme,” Vol. II., p. 109. French -transl._) - -“In the Christian tradition,” adds the learned Marquis, “St. Michael _is -apportioned in Heaven the throne and the palace of the foe he has -vanquished_. Moreover, like Mercury, during the palmy days of paganism, -which made sacred to this _demon_-god all the promontories of the earth, -_the Archangel is the patron of the same in our religion_.” This means, -if it does mean anything, that _now_, at any rate, Lucifer-Venus is a -_sacred_ planet, and no synonym of Satan, since St. Michael has become -his legal heir? - -The above remarks conclude with this cool reflection: - -“It is evident that paganism has _utilised beforehand_, and most -marvellously, all the features and characteristics of the _prince of the -face of the Lord_ (Michael) in applying them to that _Mercury_, to the -Egyptian _Hermes Anubis_, and the _Hermes Christos_ of the Gnostics. -Each of these was represented as the first among the divine councillors, -and the god nearest to the sun, _quis ut Deus_.” - -Which title, with all its attributes, became that of Michael. The good -Fathers, the Master Masons of the temple of _Church_ Christianity, knew -indeed how to utilize pagan material for their new dogmas. - -The fact is, that it is sufficient to examine certain Egyptian -_cartouches_, pointed out by Rossellini (_Egypte_, Vol. I., p. 289), to -find Mercury (the double of Sirius in our solar system) as Sothis, -preceded by the words “_sole_” and “_solis custode, sostegnon dei -dominanti, e forte grande dei vigilanti_,” “watchman of the sun, -sustainer of dominions, and the strongest of all the vigilants.” All -these titles and attributes are now those of the Archangel Michael, who -has inherited them from the _demons_ of paganism. - -Moreover, travellers in Rome may testify to the wonderful presence in -the statue of Mitra, at the Vatican, of the best known Christian -symbols. Mystics boast of it. They find “in his lion’s head, and the -eagle’s wings, those of the courageous Seraph, the master of space -(Michael); in his caduceus, the spear, in the two serpents coiled round -the body, the struggle of the good and bad principles, and especially in -the two keys which the said Mitra holds, like St. Peter, the keys with -which this Seraph-patron of the latter opens and shuts the gates of -Heaven, _astra cludit et recludit_.” (_Mem_: p. 162.) - -To sum up, the aforesaid shows that the theological romance of Lucifer -was built upon the various myths and allegories of the pagan world, and -that it is no _revealed_ dogma, but simply one invented to uphold -superstition. Mercury being one of the Sun’s _assessors_, or the -_cynocephali_ of the Egyptians and _the watch-dogs of the Sun_, -literally, the other was _Eosphoros_, the most brilliant of the planets, -“_qui mane oriebaris_,” the early rising, or the Greek ὀρθρινὸς. It was -identical with the _Amoon-ra_, the light-bearer of Egypt, and called by -all nations “the _second born_ of light” (the first being Mercury), the -beginning of his (the Sun’s) ways of wisdom, the Archangel Michael being -also referred to as the _principium viarum Domini_. - -Thus a purely astronomical personification, built upon an occult meaning -which no one has hitherto seemed to unriddle outside the Eastern wisdom, -has now become a dogma, part and parcel of Christian revelation. A -clumsy transference of characters is unequal to the task of making -thinking people accept in one and the same trinitarian group, the “Word” -or Jesus, God and Michael (with the Virgin occasionally to complete it) -on the one hand, and Mitra, Satan and Apollo-Abbadon on the other: the -whole at the whim and pleasure of Roman Catholic Scholiasts. If Mercury -and Venus (Lucifer) are (astronomically in their revolution around the -Sun) the symbols of God the Father, the Son, and of their Vicar, -Michael, the “Dragon-Conqueror,” in Christian legend, why should they -when called Apollo-_Abaddon_, the “King of the Abyss,” Lucifer, Satan, -or Venus—become forthwith devils and demons? If we are told that the -“conqueror,” or “Mercury-Sun,” or again St. Michael of the _Revelation_, -was given the spoils of the conquered angel, namely, his planet, why -should opprobrium be any longer attached to a constellation so purified? -Lucifer is now the “Angel of the Face of the Lord,”[10] because “that -face is mirrored in it.” We think rather, because the Sun is reflecting -his beams in Mercury seven times more than it does on our Earth, and -twice more in Lucifer-Venus: the Christian symbol proving again its -astronomical origin. But whether from the astronomical, mystical or -symbological aspect, Lucifer is as good as any other planet. To advance -as a proof of its demoniacal character, and identity with Satan, the -configuration of Venus, which gives to the crescent of this planet the -appearance of a cut-off horn is rank nonsense. But to connect this with -the horns of “The Mystic Dragon” in _Revelation_—“one of which was -broken”[11]—as the two French Demonologists, the Marquis de Mirville and -the Chevalier des Mousseaux, the champions of the Church militant, would -have their readers believe in the second half of our present century—is -simply an insult to the public. - ------ - -Footnote 10: - - “Both in Biblical and pagan theologies,” says de Mirville, “the Sun - has its god, its defender, and its sacrilegious usurper, in other - words, its Ormuzd, its planet Mercury (Mitra), and its Lucifer, Venus - (or Ahriman), taken away from its ancient master, and now given to its - conqueror.” (p. 164.) Therefore, Lucifer-Venus is quite _holy_ now. - -Footnote 11: - - In Revelation there is no “horn broken,” but it is simply said in - Chapter XIII., 3. that John saw “one of his heads, as it were, wounded - to death.” John knew naught in his generation of “a horned” devil. - ------ - -Besides which, the Devil had no horns before the fourth century of the -Christian era. It is a purely Patristic invention arising from their -desire to connect the god Pan, and the pagan Fauns and Satyrs, with -their Satanic legend. The demons of Heathendom were as hornless and as -tailless as the Archangel Michael himself in the imaginations of his -worshippers. The “horns” were, in pagan symbolism, an emblem of divine -power and creation, and of fertility in nature. Hence the ram’s horns of -Ammon, of Bacchus, and of Moses on ancient medals, and the cow’s horns -of Isis and Diana, etc., etc., and of the Lord God of the Prophets of -Israel himself. For Habakkuk gives the evidence that this symbolism was -accepted by the “chosen people” as much as by the Gentiles. In Chapter -III. that prophet speaks of the “Holy One from Mount Paran,” of the Lord -God who “comes from Teman, and _whose brightness was as the light_,” and -who had “_horns_ coming out of his hand.” - -When one reads, moreover, the Hebrew text of Isaiah, and finds that no -Lucifer is mentioned at all in Chapter XIV., v. 12, but simply הֵילֵל, -_Hillel_, “a _bright_ star,” one can hardly refrain from wondering that -_educated_ people should be still ignorant enough at the close of our -century to associate a radiant planet—or anything else in nature for the -matter of that—with the DEVIL![12] - - H. P. B. - ------ - -Footnote 12: - - The literal words used, and their translation, are: “_Aïk Naphelta - Mi-Shamayim Hillel Ben-Shachar Negdangta La-Aretz Cholesch El-Goüm_,” - or, “How art thou fallen from the heavens, Hillel, Son of the Morning, - how art thou cast down unto the earth, thou who didst cast down the - nations.” Here the word, translated “Lucifer,” is הילל, Hillel, and - its meaning is “shining brightly or gloriously.” It is very true also, - that by a pun to which Hebrew words lend themselves so easily, the - verb _hillel_ may be made to mean “to howl,” hence, by an easy - derivation, hillel may be constructed into “howler,” or a devil, a - creature, however, one hears rarely, if ever, “howling.” In his - Lexicon, Art. הל, Parkhurst says: “The Syriac translation of this - passage renders it אילל ‘howl’; and even Jerome observes that it - literally means ‘to howl.’” Michaelis translates it, ‘Howl, Son of the - Morning.’ But at this rate, Hillel, the great Jewish sage and - reformer, might also be called a “howler,” and connected with the - devil! - ------ - - - - - =THE BLOSSOM AND THE FRUIT=: - - _A TALE OF LOVE AND MAGIC_. - - --------------------- - - BY MABEL COLLINS, - - Author of “THE PRETTIEST WOMAN IN WARSAW,” &c., &c., And Scribe of “THE - IDYLL OF THE WHITE LOTUS,” and “THROUGH THE GATES OF GOLD.” - - --------------------- - - Only— - One facet of the stone, - One ray of the star, - One petal of the flower of life, - But the one that stands outermost and faces us, who are men and women. - -_This strange story has come to me from a far country and was brought to -me in a mysterious manner; I claim only to be the scribe and the editor. -In this capacity, however, it is I who am answerable to the public and -the critics. I therefore ask in advance, one favour only of the reader; -that he will accept (while reading this story) the theory of the -reincarnation of souls as a living fact._ - - _M. C._ - - INTRODUCTION. - - Containing two sad lives on earth, - And two sweet times of sleep in Heaven. - - A LIFETIME. - -Overhead the boughs of the trees intermingle, hiding the deep blue sky -and mellowing the fierce heat of the sun. The boughs are so covered with -white blossoms that it is like a canopy of clustered snow-flakes, tinged -here and there with a soft pink. It is a natural orchard, a spot -favoured by the wild apricot. And among the trees, wandering from shine -to shade, flitting to and fro, is a solitary figure. It is that of a -young woman, a savage, one of a wild and fierce tribe dwelling in the -fastnesses of an inaccessible virgin forest. She is dark but beautiful. -Her blue-black hair hangs far down over her naked body; its masses -shield the warm, quivering, nervous brown skin from the direct rays of -the sun. She wears neither clothing nor any ornament. Her eyes are dark, -fierce and tender: her mouth soft and natural as the lips of an opening -flower. She is absolutely perfect in her simple savage beauty and in the -natural majesty of her womanhood, virgin in herself and virgin in the -quality of her race, which is untaught, undegraded. But in her sublimely -natural face is the dawn of a great tragedy. Her soul, her thought, is -struggling to awake. She has done a deed that seemed to her quite -simple, quite natural; yet now it is done a dim perplexity is rising -within her obscure mind. Wandering to and fro beneath the rich masses of -blossom-laden boughs, she for the first time endeavours to question -herself. Finding no answer within she goes again to look on that which -she has done. - -A form lies motionless upon the ground within the thickest shade of the -rich fruit trees. A young man, one of her own tribe, beautiful like -herself, and with strength and vigour written in every line of his form. -But he is dead. He was her lover, and she found his love sweet, yet with -one wild treacherous movement of her strong supple arm she had killed -him. The blood flowed from his forehead where the sharp stone had made -the death wound. The life blood ebbed away from his strong young form; a -moment since his lips still trembled, now they were still. Why had she -in this moment of fierce passion taken that beautiful life? She loved -him as well as her untaught heart knew how to love; but he, exulting in -his greater strength, tried to snatch her love before it was ripe. It -was but a blossom, like the white flowers overhead: he would have taken -it with strong hands as though it were a fruit ripe and ready. And then -in a sudden flame of wondrous new emotion the woman became aware that -the man was her enemy, that he desired to be her tyrant. Until now she -had thought him as herself, a thing to love as she loved herself, with a -blind unthinking trust. And she acted passionately upon the guidance of -this thing—feeling—which until now she had never known. He, unaccustomed -to any treachery or anger, suspected no strange act from her, and thus, -unsuspicious, unwarned, he was at her mercy. And now he lay dead at her -feet. And still the fierce sun shone through the green leaves and -silvern blossoms and gleamed upon her black hair and tender brown skin. -She was beautiful as the morning when it rose over the tree tops of that -world-old forest. But there is a new wonder in her dark eyes; a question -that was not there until this strange and potent hour came to her. What -ages must pass over her dull spirit ere it can utter the question; ere -it can listen and hear the answer? - -The savage woman, nameless, unknown save of her tribe, who regard her as -indifferently as any creature of the woods, has none to help her or stay -in its commencement the great roll of the wave of energy she has -started. Blindly she lives out her own emotions. She is dissatisfied, -uneasy, conscious of some error. When she leaves the orchard of wild -fruit trees and wanders back to the clearer part of the forest beneath -the great trees, where her tribe dwells, when she returns among them her -lips are dumb, her voice is silent. None ever heard that he, the one she -loved, had died by her hand, for she knew not how to frame or tell this -story. It was a mystery to her, this thing which had happened. Yet it -made her sad, and her great eyes wore a dumb look of longing. But she -was very beautiful and soon another young and sturdy lover was always at -her side. He did not please her; there was not the glow in his eyes that -had gladdened her in those of the dead one whom she had loved. And yet -she shrunk not from him nor did she raise her arm in anger, but held it -fast at her side lest her passion should break loose unawares. For she -felt that she had brought a want, a despair upon herself by her former -deed; and now she determined that she would act differently. Blindly she -tried to learn the lesson that had come upon her. Blindly she let -herself be the agent of her own will. For now she became the willing -slave and serf of one whom she did not love, and whose passion for her -was full of tyranny. Yet she did not, she dared not, resist this -tyranny; not because she feared him, but because she feared herself. She -had the feeling that one might have who had come in contact with a new -and hitherto unknown natural force. She feared lest resistance or -independence should bring upon her a greater wonder, a greater sadness -and loss than that which she had already brought upon herself. - -And so she submitted to that which in her first youth would no more have -been endured by her than the bit by the wild horse. - -The apricot blossom has fallen and fruit has followed it; the leaves -have fallen and the trees are bare. The sky is grey and wild above, the -ground dank and soft with fallen leaves below. The aspect of the place -is changed, but it is the same; the face and form of the woman have -changed; but she is the same. She is alone again in the wild orchard, -finding her way by instinct to the spot where her first lover died. She -has found it. What is there? Some white bones that lie together; a -skeleton. The woman’s eyes fasten and feed on the sight and grow large -and terrible. Horror at last is struck into her soul. This is all that -is left of her young love, who died by her hand—white bones that lie in -ghastly order! And the long hot days and sultry nights of her life have -been given to a tyrant who has reaped no gladness and no satisfaction -from her submission; for he has not learned yet even the difference -between woman and woman. All alike are mere creatures like the wild -things; creatures to hunt and to conquer. Dumbly in her dark heart -strange questionings arise. She turns from this graveyard of her -unquestioning time and goes back to her slavery. Through the years of -her life she waits and wonders, looking blankly at the life around her. -Will no answer come to her soul? - - --- - - AFTER SLEEP, AWAKENING. - -Splendid was the veil that shielded her from that other soul, the soul -she knew and of which she showed her recognition by swift and sudden -love. But the veil separated them; a veil heavy with gold and shining -with stars of silver. And as she gazed upon these stars, with delighted -admiration of their brilliance, they grew larger and larger, till at -length they blended together, and the veil became one shining sheen -gorgeous with golden broideries. Then it became easier to see through -the veil, or rather it seemed easier to these lovers. For before the -veil had made the shape appear dim; now it appeared glorious and ideally -beautiful and strong. Then the woman put out her hand, hoping to obtain -the pressure of another hand through the shining gossamer. And at the -same instant he too put out his hand, for in this moment their souls -communicated, and they understood each other. Their hands touched; the -veil was broken; the moment of joy was ended and again the struggle -began. - - --- - - A LIFETIME. - -Sitting, singing, on the steps of an old palace, her feet paddling in -the water of a broad canal, was a child who was becoming more than a -child; a creature on the threshold of life, of awakening sensation. A -girl, with ruddy gold hair, and innocent blue eyes, that had in their -vivid depths the strange startled look of a wild creature. She was as -simple and isolated in her happiness as any animal of the woods or -hills—the sunshine, the sweet air with the faint savour of salt in it, -her own pure clear girlish voice, and the gay songs of the people that -she sang—these were pleasure enough and to spare for her. - -But the space of unconscious happiness or unhappiness which heralds the -real events of a life was already at an end. The great wave which she -had set in motion was increasing in volume ceaselessly; how long before -it shall reach the shore and break upon that far off coast? None can -know, save those whose eyesight is more than man’s. None can tell; and -she is ignorant, unknowing. But though she knows nothing of it, she is -within the sweep of the wave, and is powerless to arrest it until her -soul shall awake. - -“My blossom, my beautiful wild flower,” said a voice close beside her. A -young boatman had brought his small vessel so gently to the steps she -had not noticed his approach. He leaned over his boat towards her, and -touched her bare white feet with his hand. - -“Come away with me, Wild Blossom,” he said. “Leave that wretched home -you cling to. What is there to keep you there now your mother is dead? -Your father is like a savage, and makes you live like a savage too. Come -away with me, and we will live among people who will love you and find -you beautiful as I do. Will you come? How often have I asked you, Wild -Blossom, and you have never answered. Will you answer now?” - -“Yes,” said the girl, looking up with grave, serious eyes, that had -beneath their beauty a melancholy meaning, a sad question. - -The man saw this strange look and interpreted it as clearly as he could. - -“Trust me,” he said, “I am not a savage like your father. When you are -my little wife I will care for you far more dearly than myself. You will -be my soul, my guide, my star. And I will shield you as my soul is -shielded within my body, follow you as my guide, look up to you as to a -star in the blue heavens. Surely you can trust my love, Wild Blossom.” - -He had not answered the doubt in her heart, for he had not guessed what -it was, nor could she have told him. For she had not yet learned to know -what it was, nor to know of it more than that it troubled her. But she -put it aside and silenced it now, for the moment had come to do so. Not -till she had learned her lesson much more fully could the question ever -be expressed even to her own soul, and before this could be, the -question must be silenced many times. - -“Yes,” she said, “I will come.” - -She held out her hand to him as if to seal the compact. He interpreted -the gesture by his own desire, and taking her hand in his drew her -towards him. She yielded and stepped into the boat. And then he quickly -pushed away from the steps, and, dipping his oars in the water, soon had -gone far away down the canal. Blossom looking earnestly back, watched -the old palace disappear. In some of its old rooms and on its sunny -steps her child-life had been spent. Now she knew that was at an end. -She understood that all was changed henceforth, though she could not -guess into what she was going, and she waited for her future with a -strange confidence in the companion she had accepted. This puzzled her -dimly. Yet how should she lack confidence, having known him long ago and -thrown away his love and his life beneath the wild apricot trees, having -seen afterwards the steadfastness of his love when her soul stood beside -his in soul life? - -A long way they went in the little boat. They left the canals and went -out upon the open sea, and still the boatman rowed unwearyingly, his -eyes all the while upon the beautiful wild blossom he had plucked and -carried away with him to be his own, his dear and adored possession. Far -away along the coast lay a small village of fishermen’s cots. It was to -this that the young man guided his boat, for it was here he dwelled. - -At the door of his cot stood his old mother, a quaint old woman with -wrinkled, rosy face, wearing a rough fishwife’s dress and coarse shawl; -her brown hand shaded her eyes as she watched her son’s boat -approaching. Presently a smile came on her mouth. “He’s gotten the -blossom he’s talked of so often in his sleep. Will he be happy now, the -good lad?” - -He was truly a good lad; for his mother knew him well, and the more she -knew him the deeper grew her love. She would do anything for his -happiness. And now she took to her arms the child, the Blossom, and -cherished her for his sake. Before many days had passed the fishing -village made a _fête_ day for the wedding of its strongest boatman. And -the women’s eyes filled with tears when they looked at the sad, tender, -questioning face of the beautiful Wild Blossom. - -She had given her love without hesitation, in complete confidence. She -had given more; herself, her life, her very soul. The surrender was now -complete. - -And now, when all seemed done and all accomplished, her question began -to be answered. Dimly she knew that, spite of the husband at whose feet -she bowed, spite of the babes she carried in her arms till their tiny -feet were strong enough to carry them down over the shore to the marge -of the blue waters, spite of the cottage home she garnished and cleansed -and loved so dearly, spite of all, her heart was hungry and empty. What -could it mean, that though she had all she had none? Blossom was grown a -woman now, and there were some lines of care and of pain on her -forehead. Yet, still, she was beautiful and still she bore her -child-name of Blossom; but the beauty of her face grew sadder and more -strange as the years went by, the years that bring ease and satisfaction -to the stagnant soul. Wild Blossom’s soul was eager and anxious; she -could not still the mysterious voices of her heart, and these told her -(though perhaps she did not always understand their speech) that her -husband was not in reality her king; that he heard no sound from that -inner region in which she chiefly existed. For him contentment existed -in the outward life that he lived, in sheer physical pleasure, in the -excitement of hard work, and the dangers of the sea, in the beauty of -his wife, the mirth of his happy children. He asked no more. But Wild -Blossom’s eyes had the prophetic light in them. She saw that all this -peace must pass, this pleasure end; she recognised that these things did -not, could not, absolutely satisfy the spirit; her soul seemed to -tremble within her as she began to feel the first dawn of the terrible -answer to her sad questioning. - - --- - - A deeper dream of rest; - A stronger waking. - -Many a long year later, a solitary woman dwelled in that fisherman’s -cottage on the shore of the blue sea. She was old and bowed with age and -trouble. But still her eyes were brighter than any girl’s in the -village, and held in them the mysterious beauty of the soul; still her -hair, once golden, now grey, waved about her forehead. The people loved -her and were kind to her, for she was always gentle and full of generous -thought. But they never understood her, for they were long ages behind -her in her growth. She was ready now for the great central test of -personal existence; the experience of life in civilization. When the old -fishwife lay dead within her cottage, and the people came to grieve -beside her body, they little guessed that she was going on to a great -and glorious future; a future full of daring and of danger. When her -eyes closed in death, her inner eyes opened on a sight that filled her -with absolute joy. She was in a garden of fruit trees, and the blossom -of the trees was at its full. When her eyes fell on this white maze of -flowers and drank in its beauty, she remembered the name she had borne -on earth and dimly understood its meaning. The blossoms hid from her the -sky and all else until a soft pressure on her hand drew her eyes -downwards; and then she saw beside her that one whom she had loved -through the ages, and who, side by side with her, was experiencing the -profound mystery, and learning the strange lesson of incarnation in the -world where sex is the first great teacher. And with each phase of -existence that they passed through, these two forged stronger and -stronger links that held them together and compelled them again and -again to meet, so that together they were destined to pass through the -vital hour; the hour when the life is shaped for greater ends or for -vain deeds. - -Here within this sheltered place, where blossoms filled the air with -sweetness and beauty, it seemed to them, that they had attained to the -full of pleasure. They rested in perfect satisfaction, drinking deep -draughts of the joy of living. To them existence seemed a final and -splendid fact in itself; existence as they then had it. The moment in -which they lived was sufficient, they desired none other, nor any other -place, nor any other beauty, than those they had. None knows and none -can tell what time or age was passed in this deep contentment and -fulfilment of pleasure. At last Wild Blossom’s soul woke from its sleep, -satiated; the hunger returned to gnaw at her heart; the longing to know -reasserted itself. Holding tight the hand she held in hers, she sprang -from the soft couch on which she lay. Then, for the first time, she -noticed that the ground was so soft and pleasant, because there, where -she had lain, had drifted great heaps of the fallen fruit blossoms. The -ground was all white with them, though some had begun to lose their -delicate beauty, to curl and wrinkle and turn dark. Then she looked -overhead and saw that the trees had, with the loss of the delicate -petals, lost their first fairness, the splendour of the spring. Now they -were covered with small, hard, green fruit, scarce formed, unbeautiful -to the eye, hard to the touch, acid to the taste. With a shudder of -regret for the sweet spring time that was gone, Wild Blossom hurried -away from the trees, still holding fast that other hand in hers. She was -going to face new, strange experiences, perhaps terrible dangers: her -task was the easier for that tried companionship, for the nearness of -that other who was climbing the same steep ladder of life. - - END OF INTRODUCTION. - - CHAPTER I. - -In a masked ball there is an element of adventure that appeals to the -daring of both sexes, to the bright and witty spirits. Hilary Estanol -was just such an one as the hero of a bright revel should be. A -beautiful boy, with a lovely face, and eyes that had in them a deep -sadness. In repose his face was almost womanish in its softness; but a -chill brilliance was in his smile, a certain slight cynicism coloured -all his speech. Yet Hilary had no reason to be a cynic, and he was not -one who adopted anything from fashion or affectation. The spring of this -uncalled-for coldness and indifference lay in himself. - -To-night he was the centre of attraction in Madame Estanol’s -drawing-rooms. This _bal masqué_ was to celebrate his coming of age, and -Hilary had never looked so womanish as when he stood among his friends -receiving their congratulations and admiring their gifts. He wore the -dress of a troubadour, and it was one which became him well, not only in -its picturesqueness as a costume, but in the requirements of the -character. He had the faculty of the improvisatore, his voice was rich -and soft, his musical and poetic gifts swift and versatile. Hilary was -adored by his friends, but disliked, indeed almost hated, by his one -near relation, his mother. She was standing near him now, talking to a -group who had gathered round her. She was one of the cleverest women of -the day, and, still beautiful and full of a charming pride, held a court -of her own. Her dislike for Hilary was founded on her estimate of his -character. To one of her intimate friends she had said, not long before -this night, “Hilary will disgrace his name and family before there is -one grey thread in his dark hair. He has the qualities that bring -despair and ensure remorse. God will surely forgive me that I say this -of my son; but I see it before me, an abyss into which he will drag me -with him; and I wait for it every day.” - -A guest, just arrived, approached Madame Estanol with a smile, and after -greeting her affectionately, said, in a whisper, “I have brought a -friend with me. Welcome her in her character as a fortune-teller. She is -very witty, and will amuse us presently, if you like.” - -She moved aside a little, and Madame Estanol saw standing behind her a -stooping figure, an old haggard crone, with palsied head, and hand that -trembled as it grasped her stick. - -“Ah, Countess! it is impossible to recognise your friend under this -disguise,” said Madame Estanol. “Will you not tell me who she is?” - -“I am pledged to say nothing but that she is a fortune-teller,” said the -Countess Bairoun. “Her name she herself will reveal only to one person; -and that person must be born under the star that favoured her own -birth.” - -The fortune-teller turned her bent head towards Madame Estanol, and -fixed a pair of brilliant and fascinating eyes on hers. Immediately -Madame Estanol became aware of a strong charm that drew her towards this -mysterious person. She advanced and held out her hand to assist the old -woman in moving across the room. - -“Come with me,” she said, “I should like to introduce you to my son. He -is the hero of this scene to-night, for the ball is held in honour of -his coming of age.” - -They went together through the maskers that were now beginning to throng -the large drawing-rooms, and everyone turned to look at the strange -figure of the tottering old crone. Hilary Estanol was leaning against -the high carved oak mantel frame of the inner drawing-room, surrounded -by a laughing group of his intimate friends. He held his mask in his -hand, and as he stood there smiling, his dark curls falling on his -forehead, his mother thought, as she approached him, “My boy grows -handsomer every hour of his gay young life.” When Hilary saw his -mother’s strange companion he advanced a step, as if to welcome her, but -Madame Estanol checked him with a smile. “I cannot introduce our visitor -to you,” she said, “for I do not know her name. She will tell it to but -one person, who must have been born under the same star as herself. -Meantime, we are to greet her in her character as the fortune-teller.” - -This announcement was welcomed by a murmur of amusement and interest. - -“Then will our kind visitor perhaps exercise her craft for us?” asked -Hilary, gazing with curiosity at the trembling head and grey locks -before him. The old woman turned her head sideways, and gave him a look -from those strange brilliant eyes. He, too, like his mother, felt the -charm from them. But he felt more. Something suddenly wakened within -him; a rush of inexplicable emotions roused him into amazement; he put -his hand to his forehead; he was bewildered, almost faint. - -There was a small drawing-room which opened out of the room they were -in. It was so tiny that it held but a table covered with flowers, a low -couch and an easy-chair. The laughing group that surrounded Hilary went -eagerly to convert this room into the sanctum of the prophetess. They -lowered and softened the shaded light; drew close the blinds and shut -the doors, locking all but one. Here was placed a guardian who was to -admit grudgingly and one by one those who were fortunate enough to speak -alone with the sybil, for she would only see certain of the guests whom -she selected herself from the throng, describing their appearance and -dress to the guardian of her improvised temple. These were all ladies of -great position. They entered laughing and half defiant. They came out, -some pale, some red, some trembling, some in tears. “Who can she be?” -they whispered in terrified tones to one another, and in that terror -showed how she had penetrated their hearts and touched on their secret -thoughts. - -At last the guardian of the door said that Hilary himself was to enter. - -When Hilary went in, the young man, as he closed the door on the fortune -teller and her new guest, turned with a laugh to the group behind him. - -“Already she has startled him,” he said, “I heard him utter almost a cry -as he entered.” - -“Could you see in?” asked one, “perhaps she has taken off her disguise -for her host!” - -“No, I saw nothing,” he answered. “Can none of you who have been in -guess who she is?” - -“No,” answered a girl who had come out from the ordeal with white and -trembling lips. “It is impossible to guess. She knows everything.” - -It was as they had supposed. She had taken off her disguise for her -host. The staff, the large cloak, the wig and cap lay on the ground. -With the swift use of a cosmetiqued kerchief she had removed from her -fair skin the dark complexion of the ancient sybil. When Hilary entered -she had completed this rapid toilette and sat leaning back in a low -chair. She was dressed in a rich evening costume; she held a mask in her -hand ready for use. But now her face was uncovered; her strange and -brilliant eyes were fixed on Hilary; her beautiful mouth wore a half -smile of amusement at his surprise. It was more than surprise that he -experienced. Again that rush of inexplicable emotion overpowered him. He -felt like one intoxicated. He regarded her very earnestly for a few -moments. - -“Surely,” he said, “we have met before!” - -“We were born under the same star,” she answered in a voice that -thrilled him. Until now he had not heard her speak. The sense of some -strong link or association that united them, was made doubly strong by -the sound of that voice, rich, strong and soft. Suddenly he recognised -the meaning of his emotion. He no longer struggled against it, he no -longer was bewildered by it. - -He approached her and sat down upon the couch at her side. He regarded -her with wonder and adoration, but no longer with awe or surprise. For -he understood that the event which he had imagined would never come was -already here—he was in love. - -“You said you would disclose your name to the one who was born under the -same star as yourself.” - -“Do you not know me?” she said with a slight look of surprise. She -fancied everyone knew her at least by sight. - -“I do not,” he answered, “though indeed I am perplexed to think I can -ever have lived without knowing you.” - -Flattery produced no effect upon her, she lived in an atmosphere of it. - -“I am the Princess Fleta,” she answered. Hilary started and coloured a -little at the words, and could ill control his emotion. The Princess -Fleta held a position in the society of the country, which can only -belong to one who stands next to a throne that rules an important -nation. She was a personage among crowned heads, one to whom an emperor -might, without stooping, offer his love; and Hilary, the child of an -officer of the Austrian army, and of a poor daughter of a decayed -aristocratic family, Hilary had in the swift stirring of love at first -sight, told his own heart that he loved her! It could never be unsaid, -and he knew it. He had whispered the words within himself, the whisper -would find a hundred echoes. He must always love her. - -The Princess turned her wonderful eyes on him and smiled. - -“I have done my work for to-night,” she said. “I have amused some of the -people, now I should like to dance.” - -Hilary was sufficient of a courtier not to be deaf to this command, -though his whole soul was in his eyes and all his thoughts fixed on her -beauty. He rose and offered her his arm, she put on her mask and they -left the room. When Hilary appeared among the crowd that hung round the -door of the fortune teller’s sanctum, accompanied by a slender, graceful -woman, whose face was hidden save for the great dark eyes, there was an -irrepressible murmur of excitement and wonder. “Who can she be?” was -repeated again a hundred times. But no one guessed. None dreamed this -could be the Princess Fleta herself; for there were but few houses she -would visit at, and no one imagined that there could be any inducement -to bring her to Madame Estanol’s. The mystery of her presence she -explained to Hilary while they danced together. - -“I am a student of magic,” she said, “and I have already learned some -useful secrets. I can read the hearts of the courtiers who surround me, -and I know where to look for true friends. Last night I dreamed of the -friend I should find here. Do you care for these mystic occupations?” - -“I know nothing of them,” said Hilary. - -“Let me teach you then,” said the Princess, with a light laugh. “You -will be a good pupil, that I know. Perhaps I may make a disciple of you! -and there are not many with whom that is possible.” - -“And why?” asked Hilary. “Surely it is a fascinating study to those who -can believe in the secrets.” - -“Scepticism is not the great difficulty,” answered the Princess, “but -fear. Terror turns the crowd back from the threshold. Only a few dare -cross it.” - -“And you are one of the few,” said Hilary, gazing on her with eyes of -burning admiration. - -“I have never felt fear,” she answered. - -“And would it be impossible to make you feel it, I wonder,” said Hilary. - -“Do you desire to try?” she answered, with a smile at his daring speech. -It did not sound so full of impertinence as it looks, for Hilary’s eyes -and face were all alight with love and admiration, and his voice -trembled with passion. - -“You can make the attempt if you choose,” she said, glancing at him with -those strange eyes of hers. “Terrify me if you can.” - -“Not here, in my own house, it would not be hospitable.” - -“Come and see me, then, some day when you think it will amuse you. Try -and frighten me. I will show you my laboratory, where I produce essences -and incenses to please the gnomes and ghouls.” - -Hilary accepted this invitation with a flush of pleasure. - -“Take me to the Countess,” she said at last. “I am going home. But I -want her first to introduce me to your mother.” - -The Countess was delighted that the Princess had made up her mind to -this. She hardly thought Madame Estanol would be pleased to discover -that the great lady had been masquerading in her drawing-room, and had -not cared to throw off her disguise even for her hostess. And the -Countess valued the friendship of Madame Estanol; so she was glad the -wilful Princess had decided to treat her with politeness. - -Madame Estanol could scarcely conceal her surprise at learning what the -dignity was which had been hidden under the disguise of the old -fortune-teller. The Princess did not remove her mask, and, with a laugh, -she warned Madame Estanol that some of her guests would not be pleased -to discover who the sybil was who had read their hearts so shrewdly. - -When she had gone, Hilary’s heart and spirits had gone with her. It -seemed as if he hardly cared to speak; his laughter had died away -altogether. His thoughts, his very self, followed the fascinating -personality that had bewitched him. - -Madame Estanol saw his abstraction, his flushed eager look, and the new -softness of his eyes. But she said no word. She feared the Princess, who -was well known to be full of caprice and wilfulness. She feared lest -Hilary should be mad enough to yield to the charm of the girl’s beauty -and confident manner; the charm of power, peculiar, or rather, possible -only to one in a royal place. But she would say no word; knowing Hilary -well, she knew that any attempt to influence him against it would only -intensify his new passion. - - CHAPTER II. - -Two days later Hilary nerved himself to pay the visit to the Princess. -He thought she could not consider it to be too soon, for it seemed to -him two months since he had seen her. - -She lived in a garden-house some two or three miles away in the country. -Her father’s palace in the city never pleased her; she only came there -when festivities or ceremonials made her presence necessary. In the -country, with her chaperone and her maids, she was free to do as she -chose. For they were one and all afraid of her, and held her -“laboratory” in the profoundest respect. None of them would have entered -that room except to avoid some dreadful doom. - -Hilary was taken to the Princess in the garden, where she was walking to -and fro in an avenue of trees which were covered with sweet scented -blossoms. She welcomed Hilary with a charming manner, and the hour he -spent with her here in the sunshine was one of the wildest intoxication. -They began openly to play the pretty game of love. Now that no eyes were -on them the Princess let him forget that she belonged to a different -rank from his own. When she was tired of walking, “Come,” she said, “and -I will shew you my laboratory. No one in this house ever enters it. If -you should say in the city that you have been in that room you will be -besieged with questions. Be careful to say nothing.” - -“I would die sooner,” exclaimed Hilary, to whom the idea of talking -about the Princess and her secrets seemed like sacrilege. - -The room was without windows, perfectly dark but for a softened light -shed by a lamp in the centre of the high ceiling. The walls were painted -black and on them were drawn strange figures and shapes in red. These -had evidently not been painted by any artisan hand; though bold in -touch, they were irregular in workmanship. Beside a great vessel which -stood upon the ground, was a chair, and in this chair a figure upon -which Hilary’s attention immediately became fastened. - -He saw at once that it was not human, that it was not a lay figure, that -it was not a statue. It resembled most a lay figure, but there was -something strange about it which does not exist in the mere form on -which draperies are hung. And its detail was elaborated; the skin was -tinted, the eyes darkened correctly, the hair appeared to be human. -Hilary remained at the doorway unable to advance because of the -fascination this form exercised upon him. - -The Princess looked back from where she stood in the centre of the room -beneath the light; she saw the direction of his gaze and laughed. - -“You need not fear it,” she said. - -“Is it a lay figure?” asked Hilary, trying to speak easily, for he -remembered that she despised those who knew fear. - -“Yes,” she answered, “it is my lay figure.” - -There was something that puzzled Hilary in her tone. - -“Are you an artist?” he asked. - -“Yes,” she answered, “in life—in human nature. I do not work with a -pencil or a brush; I use an agent that cannot be seen yet can be felt.” - -“What do you mean?” asked Hilary. - -She turned on him a strange look, that was at first distrustful, and -then grew soft and tender. - -“I will not tell you yet,” she said. - -Hilary roused himself to answer her lightly. - -“Have I to pass through some ordeal before you tell me?” he asked. - -“Yes,” she answered gaily, “and already an ordeal faces you. Dare you -advance into the room or no?” - -Hilary made a great effort to break the spell that was on him. He went -hastily across the room to where she stood. Then he realised that he had -actually passed through an ordeal. He had resisted some force, the -nature of which he knew not, and he had come out the victor. Realising -this brought to him another conviction. - -“Princess,” he said, “there is some one else in this room besides you -and me. We are not alone.” - -He spoke so suddenly, and from so great a sense of startled surprise, -that he did not pause to think whether his question were a wise one or -not. The Princess laughed as she looked at him. - -“You are very sensitive,” she said. “Certainly we were born under the -same star, for we are susceptible to the same influences. No, we are not -alone. I have servants here whom no eyes have seen but mine. Would you -like to see them? Do not say yes hastily. It means a long and tedious -apprenticeship, obtaining mastery over these servants. But unless you -conquer them you cannot often see me; for if you are much near to me -they will hate you, and their hate is greater than your power to resist -it.” - -She spoke seriously now, and Hilary felt a strange sensation as he -looked at this beautiful girl standing beneath the lamp light. He -experienced a sudden dread of her as of someone stronger than himself; -and also an impassioned desire to serve her, to be her slave, to give -his life to her utterly. Perhaps she read the love in his eyes, for she -turned away and moved towards the figure in the chair. - -“I know this distresses you,” she said. “You shall see it no longer.” -She opened a large screen which was formed of some gold coloured -material covered with shapes outlined in black. She arranged this so -that the figure was altogether hidden from view and also the great -vessel which stood beside it. - -“Now,” she said, “you will breathe more freely. And I am going to shew -you something. We did not come out of the sunshine for no purpose. And -we must be quick, for my good aunt will be terrified when she finds I -have brought you in here. I believe she will hardly expect to see you -alive again.” - -She opened a gold vessel, which stood upon a cabinet, while she spoke, -and the air immediately became full of a strong sweet perfume. Hilary -put his hand to his forehead. Was it possible that he could be so -immediately affected, or was it his imagination that the red shapes and -figures which were on the black wall moved and ordered and arranged -themselves? Yet, so it was; to his eyes the forms mingled and again -broke up and re-mingled. A word was formed and then another. It was -unconsciously imprinted on Hilary’s memory before it changed and -vanished; he noticed only the mysterious occurrence which was happening -before his eyes. Suddenly he became aware that a sentence had been -completed; that words had been written there which he would never have -dared to utter; that on the wall before him had appeared in letters as -of fire the secret of his heart. He staggered back and drew his eyes -with difficulty from the wall to fix them in amazement and fear upon the -Princess. Her face was flushed, her eyes were bright and tender. - -“Did you see it?” he asked in a trembling voice. - -For a moment she hesitated then she answered, “Yes, I saw it.” - -There was a brief silence. Hilary looked again at the wall, expecting to -see the thought in his mind written there. But the shapes were returning -to their original appearance, and the perfume was dying out of the air. - -“Come,” said the Princess suddenly, “we have been here long enough. My -aunt will be distressed. Let us go to her.” - -She led the way from the room, and Hilary followed her. In another -moment they were in a large drawing-room, flooded with sunshine and -fragrant with flowers; the Princess’ aunt was busied with silks which -she had entangled while at her embroidery; the Princess was on her knees -beside her, holding a skein of yellow silk upon her hands. Hilary stood -a moment utterly bewildered. Had he been dreaming? Was that black room -and its terrible atmosphere a phantasy? - -He had stayed long enough, and he now took his leave reluctantly. The -Princess, who would have no ceremony at the Garden House, rose from her -knees and said she would open the gate for him. Hilary flushed with -pleasure at this mark of kindness. - -The gate she took him to was a narrow one that stood in a thick-set -hedge of flowering shrubs. When he had passed through he looked back, -and saw the Princess leaning on the gate, framed in gorgeous blossoms. -She smiled and held out her hand to him. The richness of her presence -intoxicated him, and he lost all sense of the apparently impassable gulf -between them. - -“You read the words,” he said, “and you give me your hand in mine?” - -“I read the words,” she answered, in a soft voice that thrilled him, -“and I give you my hand in yours. Good-bye!” - -She had touched his hand for an instant, and now she was gone. Hilary -turned to walk through the flowering hedges to the city. But his heart, -his thought, his soul remained behind. She had read the words, and she -was not angry. She knew of his love for her and she was not angry. She -had read his heart and had not taken offence. What might he not hope -for? - -Then came another thought. She had read the words. Then that black room -was no phantasy, but a fact as actual as the sunshine. What were the -powers of this strange creature that he loved? He knew not; but he knew -that he loved her. - - * * * * * * * * - -An overpowering desire carried him daily on that road between the -flowery hedges to the Garden House. Only sometimes had he the courage to -enter. Most often he lingered at that narrow gate, embosomed in flowers -and looked longingly over it. The first time that he entered after this -visit, in which his secret was written before his eyes, he found the -Princess standing within the gate. She held out her hand to him saying -simply, “I knew you were coming. I have prepared something, and I have -persuaded my aunt that no terrible thing will happen if you are in my -laboratory for a little while. So come with me.” - -It was brilliantly lit, this black walled room she called her -laboratory. The great vessel stood in the midst of the floor beneath the -lamp, and from it rose flame and smoke. A strong and vivid perfume -filled the air, and the upper part of the high room was clouded with -grey blue smoke, that shone in the light like silver. - -In the chair beside it sat a figure: it was that of a beautiful woman. A -strange mixture of emotions overpowered Hilary. At the first glance he -felt that this figure was the same he had seen the other day; at the -second he recognised his mother. He rushed forward to her and became -aware that she was lifeless; then he turned passionately upon the -Princess with anger and horror in his face. - -“What have you done? What have you done?” he cried. - -“Nothing,” she said, with a smile. “I have done no harm. Do you not see -that is only an image? My lay figure, as I told you.” - -He gave a long look at the inanimate shape that was so perfect a -representation of his mother, and then he turned upon the Princess a -look of more intense horror than before. - -“What are you doing?” he asked, in a low voice. - -“No harm!” she answered lightly. “Your mother hates and fears me. I -cannot endure that. I am making her love me. I am making her desire your -presence here with me.” - -For a while they stood in silence by the side of the vessel and its -flaming contents; then suddenly Hilary cried out: “I cannot bear it! Put -an end to this terrible spell!” - -“Yes,” said the Princess, “I will, but not to its results.” - -She drew the screen before the seated figure, and threw something into -the vessel that instantly quenched the flame. - -Then she led Hilary from the room, and they walked up and down beneath -the trees, talking of things as lovers talk—things that interested -themselves but none other. - -When Hilary returned home his mother rose from her couch and held out -her hand to him. She drew him to sit beside her. - -“Hilary,” she said, “something tells me you have been with the Princess -Fleta. It is well, and I am glad. She is a good friend for you; ask her -if I shall come to see her.” - -Hilary rose without replying. The dew stood on his brow. For the first -time he was conscious of actual fear, and the fear he felt was of the -woman he loved. - - (_To be continued._) - - A LAW OF LIFE: KARMA. - -There is nothing more common to those who know anything about Theosophy -than to be asked:—What is Karma? Karma is a Sanskrit word which has to -be used by those who discuss the idea it conveys, simply because there -is no English word to correspond to it. That is very easy to answer. -Then comes the question:—What is the idea which it conveys? Than this -there is nothing more difficult to answer, and the reason why this is -the case is not far to seek. Let it once be granted that the -constitution of man is complex and complicated, and that the soul has -existed for ages that seem like an eternity, and existed, moreover, in a -garb of flesh which has been changed thousands of times in the course of -those ages. Let this be granted, and, in addition, that no action is -without its effect in the physical, moral, and spiritual worlds, then, -it will be seen, that the answer to the question: “What is Karma,” is -very difficult, if not well-nigh impossible. Still, some endeavour may -be made to give a general idea, though the details of any individual -case can hardly be calculated. - -Granting the principle of reincarnation, Karma is the _working_ of the -great law which governs those incarnations; but, taken in its wider -sense, Karma may be defined as a manifestation of the One, Universal, -Divine Principle in the phenomenal world. Thus, it may be further -defined as “the great law of Harmony” which governs the Universe. - -But it may be replied that Harmony is not the great law of Nature, but, -on the contrary, lack of harmony and discord. And what proof is there -that Harmony is the law? - -When such proof is required, the answer is at once made:—Too short a -view of life and the universe has been taken. The man who denies the -existence of harmony in the universe has transgressed the law and is -experiencing the punishment. He does this unconsciously to himself, -because the law of harmony forms an unconscious impulse to its -re-adjustment when it has been broken. No better illustration can be -given than in the definition of a fugue, which is:—“A musical -composition in contrapuntal style, in which a subject is proposed by one -part, and then responded to by the others according to certain rules.” -Again, in musical chords, the composing notes, if taken by twos and -threes, will be found in discord, but, when taken altogether, produce a -harmony. Harmony is then the just adaptation of things to each other, -and the universe, the personal element of man being eliminated, is -essentially an evidence of harmony; otherwise it could not exist, for it -would fall to pieces and no longer be a universe. To those who find only -discord around them, the note to Rule 5, in the second part of “Light on -the Path,” may convey a meaning. No other words can express it better. -One reason for the apparent disharmony may be given. The desires of man -are, as a rule, devoted to the gain of what may be called his -personality. While such is the case in any man, to the exclusion of -other interests, that man cannot dive deep into his own heart and -perceive the real underlying harmony. He is incapable of understanding -or even of perceiving it, because his attention is solely devoted to -that which produces discord. Naturally, then, to him all things seem out -of joint, the reign of discord is ever present, and he cries out -perpetually against the injustice of the world he lives in. But if he -will but turn his attention from his personality to the greater span of -his life, and endeavour first to see evidence of harmony in those around -him and then in himself, he will find that harmony; and his way will be -made plain to him. - -Granting, then, that it is the Great Law of Harmony or Karma which -governs the Universe, and which is the Divine principle under one aspect -manifested in Nature, then it is easy to understand that any action in -violation of Nature’s laws will produce a deviation from the straight -line of harmony; consequently the law of harmony will produce an -adjusting effect. Now, who is to produce that effect? Nature, or the man -who committed the action? Both, or rather, the latter under the -influence of the former. The latter most certainly, unless man is to be -regarded simply as a blind puppet. It is possible to compare the -situation to that of a man whose progress is contingent upon an exact -balance being preserved on a pair of scales in front of him. If his -actions disturb the balance of those scales and add weight to one side -or the other, it is necessary immediately to add a counter-balancing -weight on the opposite side and so restore the balance or harmony. (Of -course this is a physical illustration, and can hardly be carried very -far on the moral plane.) That is to say that the one Divine principle is -divided by man’s actions into two opposing forces of good and evil, and -man’s progress depends on the exertion of his will to preserve harmony -and prevent deviation to one side or the other. Evil only exists in -contradistinction to good, and the preservation of such harmony as we -have and the advance towards Universal Harmony—the abstract divinity—is -what all right-minded persons theoretically aspire to. - -It has been thought that, in consequence of the attention paid to the -classics in education, the word Nemesis would replace Karma with -advantage. So perhaps it might have done, had the earliest traditions of -Greek mythology been preserved. But the fatal tendency towards -anthropomorphism set in very strongly even in the palmy days of Greece, -and in consequence Nemesis only pourtrayed the personification of a -human passion. Originally the balancing power, independent of Zeus and -all the Olympian gods, who carried out her decrees, Nemesis became -simply the avenging deity; so much was this the case that in a general -sense she might have been called the tutelary deity of those envious of -their neighbour’s happiness. Between these points Nemesis appears as the -personification of the moral reverence for law, of the natural fear of -committing a wrong action, and hence the personification of conscience. -It was after this period that Nemesis was said to direct human affairs, -with a view to restore the balance between happiness and unhappiness. -But, in earlier times, the idea of Nemesis was divided into those of -_Nemesis_ and _Adrasteia_ (or what Orientalists would call good and evil -Karma), for even then the idea of evil was beginning to be attached to -Nemesis. - -But Nemesis was closely linked to both the _Moirae_ (Fates) and the -_Eumenides_ (Furies), who were all the children of Zeus and Night. The -_Moirae_ appear generally as divinities of fate in a strict sense, and -act independently at the helm of necessity. They direct fate, and watch -that the fate assigned to every being _by eternal laws_ shall take its -course (_Aesch_: _Prometheus Vinctus_, 511-515). Zeus, as well as gods -and men, submits to them. They assign their proper functions to the -Erinnyes who inflict the punishment, and are sometimes called their -sisters (_Aesch_: _Eumen_: 335, 962; _Prometheus_ 516, 696, 895). These -latter were always considered to be more ancient than the Olympian gods, -and were therefore not under the rule of Zeus, though they honoured and -esteemed him. The crimes which they especially punished were (1), -violation of the respect due to old age; (2), perjury; (3), murder; (4), -violation of the law of hospitality; (5), improper conduct towards -suppliants; and the punishment was inflicted not only after death but -during life. (It is somewhat curious that these “crimes” are also those -actions which entail the heaviest Karma.) No prayers, sacrifices, or -tears could move them or protect the object of their persecution. When -they feared that he would escape, they called in _Dikè_ to their -assistance, with whom they were closely connected, as justice was said -to be their only object. - -Now when the meaning of all these “minor” Greek deities is considered, -and further, if it is considered in connection with the definition of -Karma, it will be seen that all are so many personifications of the main -divisions of the law of ancient Nemesis or Karma. But the one word -cannot, in popular estimation, replace the other; for, as said above, -Nemesis has lost its original meaning, and is almost invariably -associated with the idea of vengeance. Karma, however, has never lost -its essential connection with the law of Harmony, though even in this -case there is some tendency to confine it to the law of cause and -effects, and to consider what is called evil Karma solely in relation to -human life. This is almost inevitable, while the human personality takes -the foremost place in the consideration of each man, and his own -welfare, in time and eternity, is the goal of his endeavours. As said -above, while this is the case man cannot regard the great laws of the -Universe, nor recognise himself as part of it, and thus his life is -confined to the world of effects, and can never enter that of causes. -Thus it is ignorance of the law of Harmony that leads him to struggle in -vain, in this world, for the apparent advantage of surpassing his -neighbour, and—worse—to instinctively carry the struggle beyond death, -and attempt to advance in favour in the so-called heavenly kingdom. - -This is the result of the pernicious doctrine of reward and punishment -after death, in heaven or in hell. Nothing could have been found more -calculated to circumscribe the view of life as a whole, and concentrate -man’s attention on temporary matters. It is inevitable that man should -regard his soul as something fashioned after his struggling personality, -and very similar to it; and this view of his personality was not -calculated to agree with the loftiness of the ideas about the soul. From -this point of view he either rejected the idea of soul as altogether -worthless, or else he transferred his interest to the soul’s welfare in -Heaven—in either case concentrating his attention on what is inevitably -transient. It is as though a man lost sight of the fact of respiration -in its component parts of inspiration and expiration; that is to say, -that one respiration is taken as the whole, and the millions of other -respirations in the course of a human life are lost sight of and -forgotten. Thus the man who adapts his life to the ordinary views, with -regard to life on earth and life in Heaven, fixes his thoughts and -aspirations on what is transient, and desires to intensify that. No -truer words were ever spoken than by Christ when he said:—“What shall it -profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul.” It is a -loss which man will inevitably experience if he pursues this purblind -course of endeavour, for he will lose sight of his _real_ soul -altogether, and he—as _he_, that is—will never regain it. He follows a -flickering Will-o’-the-Wisp, and finds his way only into a treacherous -marsh; the result being that the whole of that incarnation is wasted, -and a stumbling block, perhaps, placed in the way of the next. This -danger is, as said, due to neglect or ignorance of the idea of Karma, -and to the purblind view consequently taken of the great scope of human -life. - -In the _Theosophist_, of July, 1887, Mr. Subba Row deals with the -doctrine of Karma as contained in the Bhagavadgita. His lecture contains -one of the clearest elucidations of the metaphysical side of the -question which it is possible to put in language, so far as the Kosmic -aspect of Karma is concerned. In it, and the previous lectures, Mr. -Subba Row dealt with three main bases or vehicles[13] (states of matter) -through which the light of the spirit is reflected into the phenomenal -world. These vehicles, when traced to their origin, lead to _prakriti_, -or matter; as opposed to _purusha_, or spirit. - ------ - -Footnote 13: - - Sanskrit Upadhi. - ------ - - “So Krishna says that all Karma is traceable to Upadhi, and hence to - _Prakriti_. _Karma_ itself depends upon conscious existence. Conscious - existence entirely depends upon the constitution of man’s mind.... - _Upadhi_ is the cause of individual existence. Existence itself, I - mean living existence, is, however, traceable to this light (of the - Logos). All conscious existence is traceable to it, and, furthermore, - when spiritual intelligence is developed, it directly springs from - it.... Now it is through the action of this _Karma_ that individual - existence makes its appearance. On account of this _Karmae_ individual - existence is maintained, and it is on account of _Karma_ that man - suffers all the pains and sorrows of earthly existence. Birth, life, - and death, and all the innumerable ills to which human nature is - subject, are endured by mankind owing to this _Karma_.... Thus - _Karma_, being the inevitable result of _Prakriti_, and _Prakriti_ - continuing to exist as long as you are a human being, it is useless to - try to get rid of _Karma_.... When you renounce this desire (desire to - do Karma other than from a sense of duty), _Karma_ will become weaker - and weaker in its ability to affect you, till at last you arrive at a - condition in which you are not affected by _Karma_ at all, and that - condition is the condition of _Mukti_.”[14] - ------ - -Footnote 14: - - Liberation or Nirvana. - ------ - - “Those philosophers who want to reject all _Karma_ pretend to renounce - it altogether. But that is an impossible task. No man, so long as he - is a human being, can ever give up _Karma_ altogether. He is at least - bound to do that which the bare existence of his physical body - requires, unless, indeed, he means to die of starvation, or otherwise - put an untimely end to his life.” - - “Supposing you do give up _Karma_—that is abstain from it in action, - how can you keep control over your own minds? It is useless to abstain - from an act, and yet be constantly thinking of it. If you come to the - resolution that you ought to give up _Karma_, you must necessarily - conclude that you ought not even to think about these things. That - being so, let us see in what a condition you will then place - yourselves. As almost all our mental states have some connection with - the phenomenal world, and are somehow or other connected with _Karma_ - in its various phases, it is difficult to understand how it is - possible for a man to give up all _Karma_, unless he can annihilate - his mind, or get into an eternal state of _Sushupti_ (_dreamless_ - slumber). Moreover, if you have to give up all _Karma_, you have to - give up good _Karma_ as well as bad, for _Karma_, in its widest sense, - is not confined to bad actions. If all the people in the world give up - _Karma_, how is the world to exist? Is it not likely that an end will - then be put to all good impulses, to all patriotic and philanthropic - deeds, that all the good people, who have been and are exerting - themselves in doing unselfish deeds for the good of their fellow men, - will be prevented from working? If you call upon everybody to give up - _Karma_, you will simply create a number of lazy drones, and prevent - good people from benefiting their fellow beings.” - - “And furthermore, it may be argued that this is not a rule of - universal applicability. How few are there in the world who can give - up their whole _Karma_, and reduce themselves to a condition of - eternal inactivity. And if you ask these people to follow this course, - they may, instead of giving up _Karma_, simply become lazy, idle - persons, who have not really given up anything. What is the meaning of - the expression, to give up _Karma_? Krishna says that in abstaining - from doing a thing there may be the effects of active _Karma_, and in - active _Karma_ there may be no real Karmic results. If you kill a man, - it is murder, and you are held responsible for it; but suppose you - refuse to feed your old parents and they die in consequence of your - neglect, do you mean to say that you are not responsible for that - _Karma_? You may talk in the most metaphysical manner you please, you - cannot get rid of _Karma_ altogether.” - - “Taking all these circumstances into consideration, and admitting the - many mischievous consequences that will follow as the result of - recommending every human being to give up _Karma_, Krishna adds all - that is to be found in the teaching that makes the Logos the means of - salvation, and recommends man—if he would seek to obtain immortality—a - method by following which he is sure to reach it, and not one that may - end in his having to go through another incarnation, or being absorbed - into another spiritual being whose existence is not immortal.” - - “The recommendation to practice and obtain self-mastery, Krishna - accepts. But he would add to it more effectual means of obtaining the - desired end—means sufficient in themselves to enable you to reach that - end. He points out that this practise of self-mastery is not only - useful for training in one birth, but is likely to leave permanent - impulses on a man’s soul which come to his rescue in future - incarnations.”... - - “Krishna, in recommending his own method, combines all that is good in - the five systems, and adds thereto all those necessary means of - obtaining salvation that follow as inferences from the existence of - the _Logos_, and its real relationship to man and to all the - principles that operate in the cosmos. His is certainly more - comprehensive than any of the theories from which these various - schools of philosophy have started, and it is this theory that he is - trying, in the second six chapters of the Bhagavadgita,to inculcate.” - -In the above quoted lecture Karma was considered in its Kosmic and -universal aspect, but no attempt was made to consider it in its -individual aspect as applied to the various great sections of Being on -this planet. The first approach to this is seen in the animal kingdom. -Doubtless, the mineral and vegetable kingdoms are under the law of -Harmony with Nature; it could not possibly be otherwise for they are -closer to what is known as nature and much less individualised. But -there is so little individualisation in these kingdoms that it is hardly -possible to consider them in relation to the law of harmony, or to that -of Cause and Effect on the plane of objectivity. But to anyone who has -thought about the question it is plain that the animal kingdom, in its -individuals, does come at least under the law of cause and effect. This -may practically be called the working of Karma on the physical plane and -by some has been called the law of Compensation, this being a term -expressive of mechanical and physical energy. The word Karma had better -be retained to express the working of the law of harmony on that plane -where moral responsibility begins, and where “the law of compensation -can be modified by will and reason,” and where therefore personal merit -and demerit exists. To quote from an article in the Theosophist on the -Karma of animals:— - - “A piece of iron is attracted to a magnet without having any desire in - the matter. If it is exposed to air and water, it may become rusty and - cannot prevent it. A plant or a tree may be straight or crooked on - account of circumstances over which it has no control. An animal - usually follows the instincts of its nature without any merit or - demerit for so doing, a child or an idiot may smilingly kick over a - lamp which may set a whole city on fire; the cause will have its - effect, but the child or the idiot cannot be held responsible for it, - because they have not sufficient intelligence to fully control their - actions or to judge about the consequences. A person can only be held - responsible according to his ability to perceive justice and to - distinguish between good and evil. The power to discriminate properly - is an attribute of the human mind, and the higher that mind is - developed the more it becomes responsible for the effects it produces. - A cat may kill a mouse or an ox gore a man; and to hold them morally - responsible for it would be an act of injustice, cruelty and - stupidity. Whether or not a dog may have sufficient reason to incur - any moral responsibility is a matter of opinion, and no emphatic - affirmation or denial will decide the case: but it is reasonable to - suppose that a dog, though he may have sufficient reason to know what - is good or bad for himself or for those to whom he is attached, has no - moral responsibility.” - -Thus, though animals may be under the law of compensation, and under the -law of harmony or Karma, they _are not_ under the law of compensation, -or the law of harmony or Karma in the same way as it applies to human -beings. With humanity, a fresh element has been introduced—the -intellectual, reasoning, and discriminating power. Consequently, while -the universal law of harmony or Karma governs the whole Universe, the -law of Harmony should be applied to the Universe as a whole, and its -manifestations, the laws of Karma and Compensation, should be applied to -man and animal respectively. - -It is more possible, perhaps, to consider the question in relation to -the various grades of humanity so far as we can conceive of it and them. -It would be better to commence with the highest and proceed downwards. - -All Theosophists, and many who are not, have heard of Mahatmas, and many -have speculated very wrongly about them. In this magazine, and in this -article, it may be possible to write about them without disrespect, -_because_ only through these speculations is it possible to understand -the law of harmony and its relation to man as Karma, and to divinity as -harmony. The word Karma as limited above does not apply to the Mahatma. - - “Gazing only upon the eternal the Mahatma feels neither good nor ill, - nor does either good or ill come to him. Personally, he cannot either - suffer or rejoice, and is incapable of emotion, because he is - indifferent to circumstances. But as he developes, his sympathies - increase, until at last his sympathies enter into all beings, and with - them he rejoices and suffers until they also pass beyond the sense of - joy or pain.” - - “They do not have good or evil Karma. The glory and good fortune and - happiness, these go to the good men who look for temporary joys. Karma - produces pleasure or pain by the ordering of circumstances. The - Mahatma does not feel pleasure and pain, and is not affected by - circumstances, therefore he is Karmaless. The law of cause and effect - is only called Karma when it concerns temporary and changing - circumstances. The acts of the Mahatma generate spiritual energy which - goes to create the power that shall be his when he is no longer man, - and consequently form an eternal factor in his future; thus, the - Mahatma, being without personal desire, is outside the operation of - the law of Karma.” - -In his real condition he is in harmony with Nature, and its agent, and -hence outside Karma. His physical body is however still within its -limits of action. But to him this is a very small matter. - - ARCHIBALD KEIGHTLEY, M.B. - - (_To be continued._) - - - - - THE MYSTERY OF ALL TIME. - -The inner light which guides men to greatness, and makes them noble, -is a mystery through all time and must remain so while Time lasts -for us; but there come moments, even in the midst of ordinary life, -when Time has no hold upon us, and then all the circumstance of -outward existence falls away, and we find ourselves face to face -with the mystery beyond. In great trouble, in great joy, in keen -excitement, in serious illness, these moments come. Afterwards they -seem very wonderful, looking back upon them. - -What is this mystery, and why is it so veiled, are the burning -questions for anyone who has begun to realise its existence. Trouble -most often rouses men to the consciousness of it, and forces them to -ask these questions when those, whom one has loved better than -oneself, are taken away into the formless abyss of the unknown by -death, or are changed, by the experiences of life, till they are no -longer recognisable as the same; then comes the wild hunger for -knowledge. Why is it so? What is it, that surrounds us with a great -dim cloud into which all loved things plunge in time and are lost to -us, obliterated, utterly taken from us? It is this which makes life -so unbearable to the emotional natures, and which developes -selfishness in narrow hearts. If there is no certainty and no -permanence in life, then it seems to the Egotist, that there is no -reasonable course but to attend to one’s own affairs, and be content -with the happiness of the first person singular. There are many -persons sufficiently generous in temperament to wish others were -happy also, and who, if they saw any way to do it, would gladly -redress some of the existing ills—the misery of the poor, the social -evil, the sufferings of the diseased, the sorrow of those made -desolate by death—these things the sentimental philanthropist -shudders to think of. He does not act because he can do so little. -Shall he take one miserable child and give it comfort when millions -will be enduring the same fate when that one is dead? The inexorable -cruelty of life continues on its giant course, and those who are -born rich and healthy live in pleasant places, afraid to think of -the horrors life holds within it. Loss, despair, unutterable pain, -comes at last, and the one who has hitherto been fortunate is on a -level with those to whom misery has been familiarised by a lifetime -of experience. For trouble bites hardest when it springs on a new -victim. Of course, there are profoundly selfish natures which do not -suffer in this sense, which look only for personal comfort and are -content with the small horizon visible to one person’s sight; for -these, there is but little trouble in the world, there is none of -the passionate pain which exists in sensitive and poetic natures. -The born artist is aware of pain as soon as he is aware of pleasure; -he recognises sadness as a part of human life before it has touched -on his own. He has an innate consciousness of the mystery of the -ages, that thing stirring within man’s soul and which enables him to -outlive pain and become great, which leads him on the road to the -divine life. This gives him enthusiasm, a superb heroism indifferent -to calamity; if he is a poet he will write his heart out, even for a -generation that has no eyes or ears for him; if he desires to help -others personally, he is capable of giving his very life to save one -wretched child from out a million of miserable ones. For it is not -his puny personal effort in the world that he considers—not his -little show of labour done; what he is conscious of is the -over-mastering desire to work with the beneficent forces of -super-nature, to become one with the divine mystery, and when he can -forget time and circumstances, he is face to face with that mystery. -Many have fancied they must reach it by death; but none have come -back to tell us that this is so. We have no proof that man is not as -blind beyond the grave as he is on this side of it. Has he entered -the eternal thought? If not, the mystery is a mystery still. - -To one who is entering occultism in earnest, all the trouble of the -world seems suddenly apparent. There is a point of experience when -father and mother, wife and child, become indistinguishable, and -when they seem no more familiar or friendly than a company of -strangers. The one dearest of all may be close at hand and -unchanged, and yet is as far as if death had come between. Then all -distinction between pleasure and pain, love and hate, have vanished. -A melancholy, keener than that felt by a man in his first fierce -experience of grief, overshadows the soul. It is the pain of the -struggle to break the shell in which man has prisoned himself. Once -broken then there is no more pain; all ties are severed, all -personal demands are silenced for ever. The man has forced himself -to face the great mystery, which is now a mystery no longer, for he -has become part of it. It is essentially the mystery of the ages, -and these have no longer any meaning for him to whom time and space -and all other limitations are but passing experiences. It has become -to him a reality, profound, indeed, because it is bottomless, wide, -indeed, because it is limitless. He has touched on the greatness of -life, which is sublime in its impartiality and effortless -generosity. He is friend and lover to all those living beings that -come within his consciousness, not to the one or two chosen ones -only—which is indeed only an enlarged selfishness. While a man -retains his humanity, it is certain that one or two chosen ones will -give him more pleasure by contact, than all the rest of the beings -in the Universe and all the heavenly host; but he has to remember -and recognise what this preference is. It is not a selfish thing -which has to be crushed out, if the love is the love that gives; -freedom from attachments is not a meritorious condition in itself. -The freedom needed is not from those who cling to you, but from -those to whom you cling. The familiar phrase of the lover “I cannot -live without you” must be words which cannot be uttered, to the -occultist. If he has but one anchor, the great tides will sweep him -away into nothingness. But the natural preference which must exist -in every man for a few persons is one form of the lessons of Life. -By contact with these other souls he has other channels by which to -penetrate to the great mystery. For every soul touches it, even the -darkest. Solitude is a great teacher, but society is even greater. -It is so hard to find and take the highest part of those we love, -that in the very difficulty of the search there is a serious -education. We realise when making that effort, far more clearly what -it is that creates the mystery in which we live, and makes us so -ignorant. It is the swaying, vibrating, never-resting desires of the -animal soul in man. The life of this part of man’s nature is so -vigorous and strongly developed from the ages during which he has -dwelt in it, that it is almost impossible to still it so as to -obtain contact with the noble spirit. This constant and confusing -life, this ceaseless occupation with the trifles of the hour, this -readiness in surface emotion, this quickness to be pleased, amused -or distressed, is what baffles our sight and dulls our inner senses. -Till we can use these the mystery remains in its Sphinx-like -silence. - - - - - ------------------ - - - - -When the unit thinks only of itself, the whole, which is built of -units perishes, and the unit itself is destroyed. - - - ------------------ - - -So it is throughout nature on every plane of life. This, therefore, -is the first lesson to be learnt. - - - ------------------ - - -What the _true_ occultist seeks, is not knowledge, or growth, or -happiness, or power, for himself; but having become _conscious_ that -the harmony of which he forms part is broken on the outer plane, he -seeks the means to resolve that discord into a higher harmony. - -This harmony is Theosophy—Divine or Universal Wisdom—the root whence -have sprung all “religions,” that is all; “bonds which unite men -together,” which is the true meaning of the word religion. - -Therefore, Theosophy is not _a_ “religion,” but religion itself, the -very “binding of men together” in one Universal Brotherhood. - - - - - THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS OF BUDDHISM. - - -When a man immersed in the darkness of modern civilization awakens, -however slightly, to the hollowness of his every-day life, he -becomes sensible of a feeling of despair, for he is mentally brought -face to face with what appears to him to be a meaningless yet cruel -destiny. Now to any one so circumstanced, no truer source of -consolation and encouragement can be offered than that which is to -be found in a proper consideration of the “Four Noble Truths” of -Buddhism. But to give this proper consideration to the Truths, or -indeed to promote even a preliminary enquiry into their nature is by -no means an easy task, because the fundamental ideas which they -embody have scarcely any vitality in the present generation; nay -more, they involve for the most part a complete inversion of maxims -commonly accepted as axiomatic in current thought. - -It is, however, in the hopes of doing something towards the -elucidation of the matter, that the present exposition is attempted. - -The first Noble Truth relates to human suffering. It proclaims that -the conscious, separated, life of individual existence necessarily -implies pain, sorrow and misery; that so long as a man feels that he -is possessed of an _isolated self_, or so long as he regards himself -and his fellow men as _detached personalities_, having antagonistic -or even independent interests, so long must he suffer and be subject -to trouble, grief and disappointment. - -This first Noble Truth gives utterance to one aspect of an -inexorable law of universal application, a law from whose operations -no man can, or has, or ever will escape, until he has learnt and in -the fullest sense realized the four Noble Truths. - -The first Truth may also be thus expressed: individual existence -necessitates and involves change of state, whether manifested as -birth growth, decay or death, and all changes of state are -accompanied by pain in one form or another on some plane of being; -while those who seem in their own eyes to have escaped from pain, or -those who imagine that others escape from it, are alike deluded, for -all men are overtaken by it soon or late. - -The second Noble Truth deals with the cause of pain, and partially -explains its meaning. According to this Truth, it is the desire or -thirst for the continuance of individual life, with its various -sensations and experiences, that constitutes the true basis of all -suffering, whatever the outward form it may assume, and to whatever -plane of consciousness it may belong. This thirst for life, called -in the Sanscrit language Tanha, gives rise in the mind of man to a -delusive belief in the _permanence_ and _reality_ of that separate -personality, which, according to Buddhism, is no more than an -ephemeral mode of individual existence; it further leads him to -suppose that the numerous mental states which in their aggregate -make up the personality, are, in themselves _real_; and hence grows -that rooted belief in the absolute reality of the manifold objects -of sense, and that longing for their possession, that insatiable -longing for the enhancement and for the multiplication of the -experiences associated with these objects. - -The second Truth, like the first, presents an aspect of the -universal law already referred to. - -This law, the Sanscrit name for which is Karma, is the governing and -controlling power, ordering all individual existence, and by virtue -of which Tanha operates. - -The third Noble Truth announces the fact that, as the individual man -grows strong in spiritual knowledge and charity, so Tanha is -gradually dissolved, and there is for him a consequent cessation of -sorrow and of pain. The individuality becoming proportionately freed -from the bondage of Karma, Tanha is indeed a quite necessary adjunct -of man’s incipient growth, for it represents the _creative_ power -which forces the individuality through the earlier stages of its -development, yet, while performing this most useful function, being -in fact indispensable to the lower nature of man, Tanha, at the same -time, forges those Karmic fetters from which the spiritual self -struggles desperately to get free. - -As the man’s spiritual nature is evolved, the unconscious creative -energy, in form of Tanha, is gradually replaced by the newly -developed powers of the higher self, the _will_ becomes more and -more completely associated with the spirit, while the man himself, -endowed with true Faith, true Hope, and true Love, becomes a -conscious co-worker with the Universal or Macrocosmic Will, the -“Great Builder.” - -The fourth Noble Truth assures us that there is a way by which all -men may, if they only choose, rapidly accomplish this displacement -of Tanha by true Love; this way is called the Noble Eight-fold Path -leading to enlightenment. - -Thus:—1. Right fundamental Belief, _i.e._, the right basis mentally -and spiritually upon which to establish true knowledge. 2. Right -Intention, _i.e._, goodwill towards all that lives, singleness of -purpose, correctness and purity of motive. 3. Right Speech, _i.e._, -the use of becoming language, kindly temperate, fair and profitable; -patient yet vigorous; thoughtful, courageous, honest and -discriminating. 4. Right Behaviour _i.e._, active philanthropy. 5. -Right means of Livelihood, _i.e._, honest and useful employment of -one’s time, paying adequate attention to one’s own material needs -and helping others to do the same, yet without care for the morrow. -6. Right Endeavour, _i.e._, putting one’s heart in one’s work. 7. -Right Loneliness, _i.e._, self-contained and harmonious within. 8. -Right Meditation. This is the Sanskrit _Yoga_ and signifies union -with the divine by practising the contemplation of the reality of -being. It is the result of a sustained effort to concentrate the -mind upon the universal, eternal and immutable law of life; the -first stage of such concentration takes the form of an impartial -review or survey of all one’s thoughts, actions, desires, sensations -and experiences from a thoroughly impersonal standpoint. This -Eightfold Path has four stages representing different degrees -of advancement towards Buddhahood or the state of perfect -enlightenment. The true Buddha or Tathâgata is one who has attained -final emancipation from individual existence, whose purified spirit -is freed from the last vestige of Tanha, one upon whom Karma has no -more hold, for he has reached Para Nirvana, the _Eternal_, the -Absolute Being. - - ST. GEORGE LANE-FOX. - - - ------------------ - - THE LAST OF A GOOD LAMA.—Whatever may be said against godless - Buddhism, its influence, wherever it penetrates, is most - beneficent. One finds the Spirit of “Lord Buddha ... most pitiful, - the Teacher of Nirvâna and the Law,” ennobling even the least - philosophical of the dissenting sects of his religion—the Lamäism - of the nomadic Kalmucks. The Caspian Steppes witnessed, only a few - months ago, the solemn cremation and burial of a Mongolian saint, - whose ashes were watered by as many Christian as Lamaic tears. The - high priest to the Russian Calmucks of the Volga died December - 26th, 1886, near Vétlyanka, once the seat of the most terrible - epidemics. The Ghelungs had chosen the day of ceremony in - accordance with their sacred books; the hour was fixed - astrologically, and at noon on January 4th, 1887, the imposing - ceremony took place. More than 80,000 people assembling from all - the neighbouring Cossack _stanitzas_ and Calmuck _ooloosses_, - formed a procession surrounding the pillar of cremation. The - corpse having been fixed in an iron arm-chair, used on such - ceremonies, was introduced into the hollow pillar, the flames - being fed with supplies of fresh butter. During the whole burning, - the crowd never ceased weeping and lamenting, the Russians being - most violent in their expressions of sorrow, and with reason. For - long years the defunct Lama had been a kind father to all the poor - in the country, whether Christian or Lamaist. Whole villages of - proletarians had been fed, clothed, and their poll-taxes paid out - of his own private income. His property in pasture lands, cattle, - and tithes was very large, yet the Lama was ever in want of money. - With his death, the poor wretches, who could hardly keep soul in - their bodies, have no prospect but starvation. Thus the tears of - the Christians were as abundant, if not quite as unselfish, as - those of the poor Pagans. Only the year before, the good Lama - received 4,000 roubles from a Calmuck _oolooss_ (camp) and gave - the whole to rebuild a burned down Russian village, and thus saved - hundreds from death by hunger. He was never known during his long - life to refuse any man, woman, or child, in need, whether Pagan or - Christian, depriving himself of every comfort to help his poorer - fellow-creatures. Thus died the last of the Lamas of the priestly - hierarchy sent to the Astrakhan Calmucks from beyond the “Snowy - Range” some sixty years ago. A shameful story is told of how a - travelling Christian pilgrim imposed on the good Lama. The Lama - had entrusted him with 30,000 roubles to be placed in the - neighbouring town; but the Christian pilgrim disappeared, and the - money with him. - - - - - THE BIRTH OF LIGHT. - - _Translated from Eliphas Levis “Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie.”_ - - -The “Lucifer” of the Kabalists is not a proscribed and fallen angel, -but the spirit which illuminates and regenerates by fire; he is to -the angels of peace what the comet is to the peaceful constellations -of spring-time. - -The fixed star is beautiful, radiant and calm; she drinks in the -aromas of Heaven, and looks lovingly on her sisters; clad in her -dazzling garments, and her brow adorned with diamonds, she smiles as -she sings her morning and her evening hymn; she enjoys an eternal -repose which nothing can disturb, and solemnly she treads the path -assigned to her among the sentinels of light. - -But the wandering comet, all bloodstained, and her tresses unloosed, -rushes on from the depths of the sky; she dashes across the track of -the peaceful spheres like a chariot of war breaking the ranks of a -procession of vestals; she dares to breast the burning sword of the -guardians of the sun, and, like a lost spouse who seeks the partner -visioned in her lonely night watches, she forces her way even into -the tabernacle of the King of Day. - -Then she rushes out, breathing forth the fires which consume herself -and leaving in her train one long conflagration; the stars pale -before her approach, the herded constellations, which browse upon -the starry flowers in the vast meadows of the sky, seem to flee from -her terrible breath. The grand council of the stars is called, and -universal consternation reigns. At last the fairest of the fixed -stars is charged to speak in the name of the heavenly concourse, and -to propose a truce with the errant messenger. - -“My sister,” she says, “why troublest thou the harmony of these -spheres? What harm have we done thee, and why, instead of wandering -at hazard, dost thou not, like us, take up thy settled rank in the -Court of the Sun? Why dost thou not join with us in chanting the -evening hymn, attired, like us, in a robe of white clasped above the -breast by one pure diamond? Why dost thou allow thy tresses, -dripping with the sweat of fire, to float across the vapours of the -night? If thou wouldst but take thy due place among the daughters of -Heaven, how far more lovely thy mien! Thy face no more would be -burnt up by the fatigue of thy unheard-of journeys; thy eyes would -shine forth clear, and thy features smile with the tints of lily and -of rose, like those of thy happy sisters; all the stars would -recognise in thee a friend, and far from fearing thy transit, they -would rejoice at thy approach. For thou wouldst be united to us by -the indissoluble ties of universal harmony, and thy peaceable -existence would be but one voice the more in the anthem of Infinite -Love.” - -But the comet replies: - -“Deem not, my sister, that I could stray at chance and disturb the -harmony of the spheres. God has traced for me my path, as thine for -thee, and if my course appears to thee uncertain and erratic, it is -because thy rays cannot reach so far as to embrace the outlines of -the great ellipse which has been given me for my career. My burning -tresses are the banner of God; I am the messenger of the Suns, and I -bathe me in their fires that I may distribute them on my path to -those young worlds which have not yet sufficient heat, and to the -declining stars that shiver in their solitude. If I court fatigue in -my long journeyings, if my beauty is less mild than thine, if my -attire less virginal, I am no less than thee a worthy daughter of -the sky. Leave in my hands the awful secret of my destiny, leave to -me the horror which encompasses me, and slander me not if thou canst -not understand me. None the less, shall I fulfil my appointed task. -Happy the stars that take their rest and shine like young queens in -the stately concourse of the Universe; for me, I am cast out, a -wanderer, and claim the Infinite as my only fatherland. They accuse -me of setting on fire the planets which I warm, and of terrifying -the stars which I illume. I am reproached with disturbing the -harmony of the worlds, because I do not revolve round their own -fixed points, and because I bind them one to the other, setting my -face alone toward the only centre of all the Suns. So rest assured, -thou fairest star, I will not deprive thee of one ray of thy so -peaceful light; the rather, I will squander on thee my warmth and my -own life. Who knows, but I may vanish from the sky when I have -consumed myself? My lot will still have been a noble one! For know -that in the Temple of God the fires that burn are not all one. Ye -are the light of the golden torches, but I, the flame of sacrifice. -Let each accomplish her own destiny!” - -Her words scarce uttered, the comet shakes her tresses loose, covers -herself with her burning shield, and plunges once more into infinite -space, where she appears to vanish for evermore. - -It is thus that Lucifer appears and disappears in the allegories of -the Bible. - -One day, so says the book of Job, the sons of God had assembled in -the presence of their Lord, and among them came Lucifer. - -To him the Lord said: “Whence comest thou?” - -And he replied: - -“I have journeyed round the world and travelled throughout it.” - -This is how a Gnostic gospel, re-discovered in the East by a learned -traveller, explains, in treating of the symbolical Lucifer, the -genesis of Light. - -“Truth which is conscious of itself is living Thought. Truth is the -Thought which is contained within itself; and formulated Thought is -Speech. When the Eternal Thought sought for a _form_ it said: ‘Let -there be Light.’ Therefore this Thought that speaks is the _Word_, -and this Word says: ‘Let there be Light, because the word itself is -the light of the _spirit_.’” - -The uncreated light, which is the divine Word, sends forth its -rays because it wishes to be manifest, and when it says, “Let -there be light,” it commands the eyes to open; it creates the -_Intelligences_. - -And, when God said: “Let there be light,” Intelligence was made and -light appeared. - -Then, the Intelligence which God had breathed forth, like a planet -detached from the Sun, took the form of a splendid Angel and the -heavens saluted him with the name of Lucifer. - -Intelligence awoke and it fathomed its own depths as it heard this -apostrophe of the divine Word, “Let there be Light.” It felt itself -to be free, for God had commanded it so to be, and it answered, -raising its head and spreading its wings, “I will not be Slavery.” - -“Wilt thou be then Sorrow?” said the uncreated voice. - -“I will be Liberty,” answered the Light. - -“Pride will seduce thee,” replied the supreme voice, “and thou wilt -give birth to Death.” - -“I must needs combat with Death to conquer Life,” said once again -the light created. - -God then unloosed from his bosom the thread of splendour which held -back the superb spirit, and as he watched him dive into the night, -cutting in it a path of glory, he loved the child of his thought, -and smiling with a smile ineffable, he murmured to himself: “How -fair a thing was this Light!” - -And Sorrow was the condition imposed upon the free being. If the -chief of the angels had not dared confront the depths of night, the -travail of God had not been complete, and the created light could -not have separated itself from the light unrevealed. - -Perhaps Lucifer, in plunging into the night, drew with him a shower -of Stars and Suns _by the attraction of his glory_? * * * * * * * - - A TRUE THEOSOPHIST. - -A very large majority of people have no idea whatever about -Theosophy, and regard Theosophists as more or less crazy members of -a new sect. They naturally deny any superiority to one new sect -among so many, and aver that, as a considerable number of sects have -been “tried in the balances and found wanting,” this one is no -better than its predecessors. Theosophists—the real ones—can only -reply that they are unsectarian and superior to none. They believe -that they have found a good road to the discovery of truth, and wish -to share their discovery—if it can be so called—with others. - -The very assumption of superiority would be a contradiction in terms -to the name itself. But, while giving this emphatic denial with -reference to the name “Theosophist,” no attempt is made to assert -that all members of the Theosophical Society are also Theosophists. -True indeed, that when they enter that society, they subscribe to -rules and declare their objects to be such that, were they to carry -them out thoroughly, no other name than Theosophists would be -applicable. Nor does the name imply that, in the studies which -Theosophists make their own, it is necessary that the sole and best -place should be given to studies of Oriental philosophy. That again -would be a contradiction, for it has most emphatically been stated -that “there are those who are ignorant of the Eastern wisdom” who -are nearer to divine wisdom, than some who have devoted their entire -lives to Oriental studies. It is again the old story that, “the -letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” - -Still while holding to the assertion that the study of Oriental -wisdom is only one road out of many, it is necessary to remember the -analogy which philology may here present to “religion.” Just as -philology traces all languages to a common root—the Sanskrit or -rather pre-Sanskrit—so the religions of the world can also be traced -to a common root and birth place, identical with the cradle and -birth place of the human race, which ethnology locates on the high -plateaux of Central Asia. Therefore it is, that the study of -Oriental philosophy has something to be urged in its especial -favour, because that philosophy has its home nearer to the source of -the wisdom religion than any other. - -Still more must it be borne in mind, that members of the -Theosophical Society are not necessarily Theosophists, for a very -considerable number are attracted merely by the name and through -curiosity. They either do not understand what they profess, or if -they do, they do not practise it. But this is no attempt to run -counter to the proverb, that the tree is known by its fruit, -although there is some amount of injustice in it. All that is -asserted is that, if this argument is used against a Society with -aims and aspirations such as the Theosophical Society has, it can be -used with even more terrible effect against _all_ religions whether -Christian, Mohammedan, Buddhist, etc. The real reason why this has -come to pass, lies in a few words—the cultivation of the individual; -and, as a later result of this, in anthropomorphism. It is only -those individuals who can “grasp their whole individuality firmly,” -and by the force of their “awakened spiritual will, reach out to the -life beyond individuality”—it is only they, who can shake themselves -loose from the curse which has gradually spread over the whole -world. It is in consequence of this growth of individualism that the -“blessings of civilization” have become the curse of mankind, and -every religion, originally altruistic, has become inverted, and the -reign of anti-Christ and hypocrisy has superseded that of Christ and -truth. No sweeping accusation is made against the whole world in -this statement. A dim and misty veil has been thrown over the face -of Truth, and it is as though we saw everything outside the -principal focus of a lens, and consequently, under full faith that -we see the real image, perceive the inverted image. In the time of -Elizabeth, for instance, men learnt to cultivate the individual -within the circle of the race, and to attempt to unite in patriotism -for the benefit of that race or empire. But it is a vain attempt, -and the dissociating effects of this culture will soon be evident in -the impossibility of the attempt. Originally the attempt was to -cultivate the individual, but only with a view to the increase of -that race and with that object as paramount. That is to say, that an -English soldier would cultivate himself to the uttermost in order -that the world should see what English soldiers were. But the time -came when the egoistic element appeared in overwhelming force, and -the cultivation was devoted to the sole aim of making this or that -man stronger than any man of his own race, or any other. - -And now another aim has been substituted for the paramount one of -patriotism. Mammon has superseded the latter, and the strength of -the individual is cultivated and devoted to withstanding the -pressure of life, and to getting a start in the great race to -worship at the feet of the demon of cupidity. But again, while -devoting their own lives and worse—the lives of their neighbours—to -this worship, they yet professed to be Christians or members of -other religions. They tried to worship two gods—Mammon on six days -of the week and the other divinity on Sunday, or any day set apart -for his service. But still, in most cases, it was not the divine -instinct of search for the divine in their hearts, but a fear of -wrath to come. It really was a pharisaical idea of “hedging,” to use -a term of racing slang, with reference to the race of life. The end -of it was that Mammon received the real worship of their hearts, and -the other god only lip-service. Thus in the end hypocrisy became -almost as paramount as Mammon. Time still passed on, and man almost -lost sight of any idea of an offended and avenging deity, and any -germ of spirituality was very nearly dead from want of cultivation. -The material needs held him in complete sway, and the spread of -physical science helped him mightily. Losing sight of all the -subtler side of nature, he immersed himself in gross matter, and -utilitarianism was the watchword and rallying cry. In all this -change the age of mechanical inventions took no small part. Man can -hardly be blamed as an individual nor as a whole. It is part of the -great law of evolution, and the working out of the law of the -survival of the fittest. - -It may be asked what this has to do with the subject of the article; -but in justification it is averred that a picture is most clearly -seen by its contrast. - -Perhaps the best definition of a Theosophist, is that given by the -Alchemist, Thomas Vaughan: - -“A Theosophist is one who gives you a theory of the works of God, -which has not a revelation, but an inspiration of his own for -basis.” - -“A man once abandoning the old pathway of routine and entering on -the solitary pathway of independent thought—Godward—he is a -Theosophist, an original thinker, a seeker after the Eternal Truth, -with an inspiration of his own to solve the Eternal problems.” - -Such a one as this is the subject of the article. Count Tolstoi, the -Russian novelist, is a true Theosophist, and his words and actions -in contradiction and illustration of the foregoing, are taken from -an interview with him by Mr. George Kennan (_Century_, June 1887). -The interview first describes the surroundings amidst which Count -Tolstoi lives, and gives also a description of the Count’s -appearance. - -Apparently the first thing which impressed Mr. Kennan was the sight -of “a wealthy Russian noble, and the greatest of living novelists, -shaking hands upon terms of perfect equality with a poor, ragged, -and not over clean droshky driver,” who had been engaged in the -streets. - -Then follows a description of the rooms, the furniture &c., which -was observed during the time that Mr. Kennan’s host had retired—not, -indeed, to change his coat, but to put one on after a morning’s -labour in the fields. Mr. Kennan, it seems, had journeyed through -Siberia, and had there promised several of the exiles to visit Count -Tolstoi on his return, and to tell him of their condition. In the -course of conversation on these matters, Mr. Kennan asked Count -Tolstoi whether he did not think that resistance to such oppression -as the exiles had experienced was justifiable? - - “That depends,” he replied, “upon what you mean by resistance; if - you mean persuasion, argument, protest, I answer yes; if you mean - violence—no. I do not believe that violent resistance to evil is - ever justifiable under any circumstances.” - - He then set forth clearly, eloquently, and with more feeling than - he had yet shown, the views with regard to man’s duty as a member - of society which are contained in his book entitled “My Religion,” - and which are further explained and illustrated in a number of his - recently published tracts for the people. He laid particular - stress upon the doctrine of non-resistance to evil, which, he - said, is in accordance with both the teachings of Christ and the - results of human experience. He declared that violence, as a means - of redressing wrongs, is not only futile, but an aggravation of - the original evil, since it is the nature of violence to multiply - and reproduce itself in all directions. “The Revolutionists,” he - said, “whom you have seen in Siberia, undertook to resist evil by - violence, and what has been the result? Bitterness, and misery, - and hatred, and bloodshed! The evils against which they took up - arms still exist, and to them has been added a mass of previously - non-existent human suffering. It is not in that way that the - kingdom of God is to be realised on earth.” - - For a long time I did not suggest any difficulties or raise any - objections.... It is one thing to ask a man in a general way - whether he would use violence to resist evil, and quite another - thing to ask him specifically whether he would knock down a - burglar who was about to cut the throat of his mother. Many men - would say _yes_ to the first question who would hesitate at the - second. Count Tolstoi, however, was consistent. I related to him - many cases of cruelty, brutality, and oppression which had come to - my knowledge in Siberia, and at the end of every recital I said to - him, “Count Tolstoi, if you had been there and had witnessed that - transaction, would you not have interfered with violence?” He - invariably answered “No.” I asked him the direct question whether - he would kill a highwayman who was about to murder an innocent - traveller, provided there were no other way to save the - traveller’s life. He replied, “If I should see a bear about to - kill a peasant in the forest, I would sink an axe in the bear’s - head; but I would not kill a man who was about to do the same - thing.” There finally came into my mind a case which, although - really not worse than many that I had already presented to him, - would, I thought, appeal with peculiar force to a brave, - sensitive, chivalrous man. - -This was a case of most brutal treatment of a young girl who was -exiled to Siberia. At a certain town on her journey the governor -ordered that she was to put on the clothing of an ordinary convict. -This she declined to do on the ground that administrative exiles had -the right to wear their own clothing. Furthermore the clothing -supplied to convicts is not always new, and it is quite possible -that it is of the filthiest description and full of vermin. She -argued that she would have been compelled to change at Moscow had it -been necessary, and again declined. The local governor persisted and -ordered that force should be used to effect the change. Accordingly, -in the presence of nine or ten men, the change of clothing was -effected—she was stripped naked, forcibly reclothed, and left -bleeding and exhausted after ineffectual resistance. - - “Now,” I said, “suppose all this had occurred in your presence; - suppose that this bleeding, defenceless, half-naked girl had - appealed to you for protection, and had thrown herself into your - arms; suppose that it had been your daughter, would you still have - refused to interfere by an act of violence?” - - He was silent. Finally, ignoring my direct question as to what he - personally would have done in such a case, Count Tolstoi said, - “Even under such circumstances violence would not be justifiable. - Let us analyse that situation carefully. I will grant, for the - sake of argument, that the local governor who ordered the act of - violence was an ignorant man, a cruel man, a brutal man—what you - will; but he probably had an idea that he was doing his duty; he - probably believed that he was enforcing a law of the Government to - which he owed obedience and service. You suddenly appear and set - yourself up as a judge in the case; you assume that he is not - doing his duty—that he is committing an act of unjustifiable - violence—and then, with strange inconsistency, you proceed to - aggravate and complicate the evil by yourself committing another - act of unjustifiable violence. One wrong added to another wrong - does not make a right; it merely extends the area of wrong. - Furthermore, your resistance, in order to be effective—in order to - accomplish anything—must be directed against the soldiers who are - committing the assault. But those soldiers are not free agents; - they are subject to military discipline and are acting under - orders which they dare not disobey. To prevent the execution of - the orders you must kill or maim two or three of the soldiers—that - is, kill or wound the only parties to the transaction who are - certainly innocent, who are manifestly acting without malice and - without evil intention. Is that just? Is it rational? But go a - step further: suppose that you do kill or wound two or three of - the soldiers; you may or may not thus succeed in preventing the - completion of the act against which your violence is a protest; - but one thing you certainly will do, and that is, extend the area - of enmity, injustice, and misery. Every one of the soldiers whom - you kill or maim has a family, and upon every such family you - bring grief and suffering which would not have come to it but for - your act. In the hearts of perhaps a score of people you rouse the - anti-Christian and anti-social emotions of hatred and revenge, and - thus sow broadcast the seeds of further violence and strife. At - the time when you interposed there was only one centre of evil and - suffering. By your violent interference you have created - half-a-dozen such centres. It does not seem to me, Mr. Kennan, - that that is the way to bring about the reign of peace and - good-will on earth.” - -Mr. Kennan had a manuscript written by one of those prisoners who -took part in the desperate “hunger-strike” of 1884, with which he -had been entrusted to hand on to Count Tolstoi. He read two or three -pages of it, and then, alluding to the Nihilists, condemned their -methods most heartily. Mr. Kennan appeared rather to sympathise with -their motives. Count Tolstoi appears only to do so partially, and, -while he earnestly desires a revolution, declines to have anything -to do with one brought about by violence. Mr. Kennan objected that -violence might close the mouth of the peaceable revolutionist and -prevent his teaching and thoughts from ever becoming public. - - “But do you not see,” replied the Count, “that if you claim and - exercise the right to resist by an act of violence what you regard - as evil, every other man will insist upon his right to resist in - the same way what he regards as evil, and the world will continue - to be filled with violence? It is your duty to show that there is - a better way.” - - “But,” I objected, “you cannot show anything if somebody smites - you on the mouth every time you open it to speak the truth.” - - “You can at least refrain from striking back,” replied the Count; - “you can show by your peaceable behaviour that you are not - governed by the barbarous law of retaliation, and your adversary - will not continue to strike a man who neither resists nor tries to - defend himself. It is by those who have suffered, not by those who - have inflicted suffering, that the world has been advanced.” - - I said it seemed to me that the advancement of the world had been - promoted not a little by the protests—and often the violent and - bloody protests—of its inhabitants against wrong and outrage, and - that all history goes to show that a people which tamely submits - to oppression never acquires either liberty or happiness. - - “The whole history of the world,” replied the Count, “is a history - of violence, and you can of course cite violence in support of - violence; but do you not see that there is in human society an - endless variety of opinions as to what constitutes wrong and - oppression, and that if you once concede the right of any man to - resort to violence to resist what he regards as wrong, he being - the judge, you authorise every other man to enforce his opinions - in the same way, and you have a universal reign of violence?” - -Count Tolstoi considers it necessary to labour for and help the poor -by whom he is surrounded; but he is keenly alive to the danger of -pauperising them. In doing this he runs counter to the ideas of -organised society and the existing traits of human character. He -declines to regard these as sacred and immutable, and is doing what -he can to change them. - - “Count Tolstoi then related with great fulness of detail the - history of his change of attitude toward the teaching of Christ, - and the steps by which he was brought to see that that teaching, - rightly understood, furnishes a reasonable solution of some of the - darkest problems of human life. He based upon it not only his - opposition to resistance as a means of overcoming evil, but his - hostility to courts of justice, established churches, class - distinctions, private property, and all civil and ecclesiastical - organisation in existing forms. His frequent references to the New - Testament, and his insistence on the precepts of Christ as - furnishing the only rule for the right government of human - conduct, might lead one to regard Count Tolstoi as a devout and - orthodox Christian, but, judged by a doctrinal standard, he is - very far from being so. He rejects the whole doctrinal framework - of the Christian scheme of redemption, including original sin, - atonement, the triune personality of God, and the divinity of - Christ, and has very little faith in the immortality of the soul. - His religion is a religion of this world, and it is based almost - wholly upon terrestrial considerations. If he refers frequently to - the teachings of Christ, and accepts Christ’s precepts as the - rules which should govern human conduct, it is not because he - believes that Christ was God, but because he regards those - precepts as a formal embodiment of the highest and noblest - philosophy of life, and as a revelation, in a certain sense, of - the Divine will and character. He insists, however, that Christ’s - precepts shall be understood—and that they were intended to be - understood—literally and in their most obvious sense. He will not - recognise nor tolerate any softening or modification of a hard - commandment by subtle and plausible interpretation. If Christ - said, ‘Resist not evil,’ he meant resist not evil. He did not mean - resist not evil if you can help it, nor resist not evil unless it - is unbearable; he meant resist not at all. How unflinchingly Count - Tolstoi faces the logical results of his system of belief I have - tried to show.” - -Count Tolstoi’s views as to his own action and practice have been -recently published in an authorised interview which appeared in a -Russian journal. He said: - - “People say to me, ‘Well, Lef Nikolaivitch, as far as preaching - goes, you preach; but how about your practice?’ The question is a - perfectly natural one; it is always put to me, and it always shuts - my mouth. ‘You preach,’ it is said, ‘but how do you live?’ I can - only reply that I do not preach—passionately as I desire to do so. - I might preach through my actions, but my actions are bad. That - which I say is not preaching; it is only an attempt to find out - the meaning and the significance of life. People often say to me, - ‘If you think that there is no reasonable life outside the - teachings of Christ, and if you love a reasonable life, why do you - not fulfill the Christian precepts?’ I am guilty and blameworthy - and contemptible because I do not fulfill them; but at the same - time I say—not in justification, but in explanation, of my - inconsistency—Compare my previous life with the life I am now - living, and you will see that I am trying to fulfill. I have not, - it is true, fulfilled one eighty-thousandth part, and I am to - blame for it; but it is not because I do not wish to fulfill all, - but because I am unable. Teach me how to extricate myself from the - meshes of temptation in which I am entangled—help me—and I will - fulfill all. I wish and hope to do it even without help. Condemn - me if you choose—I do that myself—but condemn me, and not the path - which I am following, and which I point out to those who ask me - where, in my opinion, the path is. If I know the road home, and if - I go along it drunk, and staggering from side to side, does that - prove that the road is not the right one? If it is not the right - one, show me another. If I stagger and wander, come to my help, - and support and guide me in the right path. Do not yourselves - confuse and mislead me, and then rejoice over it and cry, ‘Look at - him! He says he is going home, and he is floundering into the - swamp!’ You are not evil spirits from the swamp; you are also - human beings, and you also are going home. You know that I am - alone—you know that I cannot wish or intend to go into the - swamp—then help me! My heart is breaking with despair because we - have all lost the road; and while I struggle with all my strength - to find it and keep in it, you, instead of pitying me when I go - astray, cry triumphantly, ‘See! He is in the swamp with us!’” - -In this report of Count Tolstoi, it is impossible not to recognise -the generous, just, and sympathetic man—the true Theosophist. He may -be mistaken, but he is endeavouring to carry out the precepts of -Christ. Not indeed, doctrinal Christianity, but to put in practice -the actual precepts of the Master he follows. He does this as far as -he can; and even with this little (as he says) he is accused of -quixotism, and is obliged to stay his hand in order to keep up the -example he affords. Why is this. For fear of interested relatives -and the lunatic asylum. Here we have a man endeavouring to carry out -“under an inspiration of his own,” the precepts laid down by the -last of the world’s great teachers. What is the result of his -endeavours? That he is in danger of the same fate that the author of -“Modern Christianity a civilized Heathenism,” threatened Christ -with, were he to return in the XIXth century—the lunatic asylum. -Nothing is so intolerable to modern minds as an example of what they -(unconsciously to themselves) recognise as that which they ought to -follow, but do not. Therefore it has to be put out of sight. Since -madness has been defined as a mental state which is in contradiction -to the average mental state, it is evident that all religious -reformers ought to be put away in a lunatic asylum. - -It is quite possible to recognise what an extraordinary effect Count -Tolstoi’s principle of non-resistance to evil would have. Still it -is a strictly Christian one. Christ went further, and ordained that -the other cheek should be offered to the man who smites. It might be -argued that this would result in a tacit acquiescence in evil. But -if it be so, the whole of the Count’s life is a contradiction to -this, and a standing protest against the existence of those who -create, or rather perpetuate, this evil. Every reform, this -included, is a protest against doing at Rome what Romans do, or the -_laisser aller_, which is the indolent curse of human progress. -Count Tolstoi desires to see the reign of Christ on Earth, and in -this accords well with the Theosophists who desire “Universal -Brotherhood.” But neither of these can be effected save by the -cultivation of the inner and spiritual man, so that it shall shine -through and form the guide to the outer and physical man. But -unfortunately the welfare of the latter is taken as the standard at -present and humanity, without the spiritual man as a guide, is left -to flounder in the ditch into which it has fallen. - -Those who desire to follow Count Tolstoi, or to become real working -Theosophists, may find something to think about in comparing his -words with his actions. He endeavours to “go about doing good,” and -to help his fellow men on the hard path of life. When it is followed -it will be found that to run counter to the spirit of the age, and -instead of the indolent _laisser aller_, to work not for self, but -for humanity at large, is the hardest task ever set to men. Mankind -as a rule does not want an example or to be worked for; both are -rude awakenings from the lotus-eating state they desire to be left -in. “Let us alone,” is their cry, and they resist with violence any -attempt to rouse them. - -But those who desire a greater unity than that which any race or -nation can afford—the unity of the human race—the Universal -Brotherhood—cannot leave them alone. There is a power which impels -Count Tolstoi to protest against the reign of violence, and he truly -replies, that the readiest means of continuing this reign is to meet -violence by violence. Therefore he, by his writings, and his words -and life, endeavours to place before men the noblest philosophy of -life that he recognises, in answer to the appeal which is silently -uttered from the hearts of many men and women in the world. - -It is a cry of despair at the ignorance which surrounds them and to -which the Theosophical Society, _according to its avowed aims_, is -an answer. It is best described in the words of Tennyson— - - An infant crying in the night, - And with no language but a cry. - - A. I. R. - - - - - A GHOST’S REVENGE - - -Early in the year 187—, the singular and distressing attacks of -mental depression from which Sir Selwyn Fox had long been a -sufferer, increased in frequency. - -His son Gaston (twenty-four years of age, of medicine by calling and -letters by choice), whose devotion to his father was intense, urged -him to go to London and procure that skilled medical advice which -was not to be had in the neighbourhood of the baronet’s country -seat, in Northumberland. But Sir Selwyn was inflexible in his -determination to see no doctor. Affectionate as his manner always -was with Gaston, he even showed impatience when pressed on this -point; and Gaston, forced to abandon it, fell back on his own skill -in an endeavour to assign some tangible cause for his father’s -malady. But in this he was hopelessly baffled. - -Nothing in Sir Selwyn’s present state, no circumstance of his past -history which was known to Gaston (who had rarely been apart from -him since boyhood), excused or explained in any degree the -melancholy which clouded his existence. His great fortune placed him -beyond suspicion or suggestion of pecuniary embarrassment. All the -surroundings of his home were well calculated to administer to the -refined pleasures of a man widely known as an amateur of books and -art. No entanglement of the affections could be supposed seriously -to trouble the peace of one who had passed his meridian, and who, -moreover, cherished still the memory of the wife he had long lost. -He had friendships which, while they attested his worth, would have -been sufficient in themselves to endear most men to life. Yet for -months he had worn the air of a man to whom life was fast becoming -an unendurable burden. - -His own skill and experience failing to open to Gaston any method of -coping with a disease whose hidden source and origin he could not -divine, he was on the point of writing to a leading London physician -of his acquaintance, when a circumstance occurred which saved him -from the necessity of this step. - -Sir Selwyn was alone in his room one evening when Gaston, who was -reading in a room immediately beneath, heard sounds overhead which -at once sent him upstairs to learn the cause. He had fancied that -his father was speaking in a tone of troubled remonstrance to some -unwelcome visitor, though he felt persuaded that no one, unless a -servant of the house, could be with him at that hour. Hastening to -his father’s room, his footsteps were arrested on the threshold by -the spectacle which the half-opened door revealed to him. Sir Selwyn -sat motionless and rigid in his chair; his face was colourless, and -all the features stiff, while the eyes, dilated and staring, seemed, -though they were fixed on space, to hold within their vision some -object not perceptible to Gaston. This was the more remarkable that -Gaston stood directly in his father’s line of sight, though it was -certain that Sir Selwyn neither looked at him nor saw him. In a -word, it was the gaze of a man who sees, or believes that he sees, -an apparition. - -Gaston took a step forward; the sound fell on the baronet’s ear and -broke the spell which held him. - -His first look was one of inexpressible shame, succeeded immediately -by one of indescribable relief. If detection were painful, as it -clearly was, it appeared as though the pain were almost lost in the -necessity now forced upon him of disclosing the secret of his -misery. Gaston was at his father’s side in a moment. - -“What is it, father?” he cried. “What is it? You have seen -something. Tell me what it is.” - -Sir Selwyn, in whose expression exhaustion and pain were mingled, -fixed his eyes for a while on his son’s face before he replied: - -“If I should tell you, Gaston, you would not believe it. I do not -believe it myself. And yet I see it, and know that it is there.” - -“I shall believe whatever you tell me, father,” answered Gaston. - -“Gaston,” began the baronet, “you are a doctor, and have read, read -widely in all branches of science. Tell me, do you believe that we -who are in the body may see and know a spirit from the dead?” - -“You believe, father, that you have seen such a spirit?” - -“The whole force of my reason cannot persuade me otherwise,” -answered his father. “All the powers of my mind compel me to deny -it, and yet the thing is there before my eyes.” - -The baronet had by this time regained his usual calm of manner, and -his voice was resolute and quiet. - -“Is it here now, father?” asked Gaston. - -“Yes,” answered Sir Selwyn. - -“Where, father? Point to me the place where it stands.” - -“It stands now at my elbow, side by side with you.” - -Gaston started involuntarily, the baronet’s tone bespoke such -absolute conviction. He moved a step, and placed himself immediately -at his father’s elbow. - -“Do you see it now, father?” he asked. - -“No, for you have taken its place. Yes! I see it again. It is on -this side now, exactly opposite to you.” - -There was in all this so little of the tone and manner of the mere -spectre-ridden visionary, that Gaston could not but be impressed, -and his alarm for his father’s state increased proportionately. - -He began to question him in the direct matter-of-fact style of a -doctor with his patient, inquiring into the particular nature of the -vision, how often and in what circumstances it presented itself, -whether his father were able to connect it with any event of his -life, or whether it seemed to be causeless, a mere fabric of the -imagination. - -His object in this was to bring his father to exert his reason upon -the matter, that so, if possible, he might end by convincing himself -that he was haunted merely by some spectre of the brain. He was, -however, only partially successful, and for this reason, that his -father, while denying—and with perfect honesty of convincement—the -reality of his vision, remained nevertheless persuaded that his -bodily eye beheld it. - -“I cannot well remember,” went on Sir Selwyn, “how many years it is -since this spectre first began to haunt me. In the beginning I -thought little of it; my health was more robust then than it has -been in late years, and leading a more active life at that time than -I am able to do at present, I had greater strength, both of mind and -body, to assist me in banishing it from my thoughts and presence. -Indeed, I could then at any time rid myself of the vision by a mere -exertion of will; but I can do so no longer. It torments me now as -it pleases. I am powerless against it.” - -“Does the form resemble that of anyone whom you have ever known?” -asked Gaston. - -“Yes,” replied Sir Selwyn, after a moment’s pause. - -“And the person whose spirit you believe this to be is now dead, -father?” - -“Dead many years,” answered Sir Selwyn. - -“And what is there in the vision that troubles you so greatly, -father?” asked his son. - -“Its presence is tormenting,” replied Sir Selwyn, “because I feel -that there is evil in it; it is malignant, and seems continually to -threaten me.” - -“Is it here still, father?” - -“No, since we have been speaking it has vanished. I shall see it no -more to-night; but it will return to-morrow, and in the end it will -kill me.” - -“No, father, no,” said Gaston affectionately, but gravely. “Let me -entreat you not to give way. You see how this vision, whatever it -may be, vanishes when you begin to reason upon it. The mere fact of -our having discussed it together will enable you to combat it more -resolutely. Do this, and the same power will revive by which you -dispelled the vision when first it troubled you.” - -Indeed, the closing words of Sir Selwyn’s confession, -notwithstanding the quiet assurance with which they were spoken, had -practically convinced his son that the case was one of -hallucination. They continued talking on the subject until, at the -baronet’s usual hour of retiring, they separated for the night, when -Gaston was so far satisfied that his arguments appeared at last to -have given his father a somewhat increased measure of -self-confidence. - -At breakfast the next day, Sir Selwyn assured his son that he had -slept well, and both in speech and look he was more cheerful than -Gaston had seen him during a considerable period. It seemed, in -short, as though the effect of their conversation the previous night -had already begun to bear out the son’s prediction; nor, at the end -of a week, did this good effect appear to have been in any degree -dissipated. “I have not seen it once,” said Sir Selwyn, in answer to -a question from Gaston. Another week passed, and a third, and the -baronet declared that there had been no recurrence of the visions. -He became very reticent upon the subject, and it was evident that he -now shrank from any allusion to it. Gaston, on his side, was only -too willing to avoid its mention. - -It was at this time that Sir Selwyn received a letter from an old -friend of his college days, now holding a high place in the Indian -Government, reminding him of a long-promised visit, and begging him -to fulfil his word without further delay. - -A better invitation, thought Gaston, could not have arrived at a -more opportune moment. Their pleasant English home had become -charged for the baronet with associations which were wholly painful; -a new scene and fresher interests would assist to push to completion -the recovery which could not but be long delayed in his present -situation. Sir Selwyn himself was of the same mind, and decided at -once to accept his friend’s invitation. - -Then arose in Gaston’s mind the question whether, in the -circumstances, it were well or advisable that his father should make -the journey alone. He thought it not advisable at all, and without -plainly telling this to his father, begged that he might accompany -him. But Sir Selwyn showed a strong reluctance to accede to this -request, which was the more marked that father and son had never yet -been separated on any tour of pleasure. Gaston continued to press -his point, until he perceived, or thought that he perceived, what -was his father’s reason for wishing to take this journey alone. - -The thing which Sir Selwyn had striven for years to hide from his -son he had just been forced to reveal to him. It was the sorrowful -secret of his life, a secret which, to the baronet, had something of -shame in it, and the revelation had been beyond measure painful to -him. If, in one sense, the confession which had been wrung from him -had brought father and son more closely together, it had, in another -sense, placed a certain something between them of which the presence -of Gaston was a constant reminder. With Gaston at his father’s side, -the secret too was there. When Gaston’s delicate intuition had -realised this for him, his entreaties to accompany his father were -at an end. It was decided that Sir Selwyn should go to India alone, -and in a fortnight from the receipt of his friend’s invitation he -was on his way. - -Gaston was desolate at home, and at the end of ten days or so he -went to Paris, intending to stay a week there and return to England; -but the weather was pleasant, and from Paris he began to wander, in -leasurely fashion, southwards; and before he had quite made up his -mind as to where he wanted to go, he found himself in Rome. Rome was -chilly, and he had lighted on a bad hotel, so he remained but a few -days, and went on to Naples. He would wait to see Rome, he said, -until his father was with him. - -After a fortnight in Naples, he was on the point of returning home, -when he received a cable message from his father, forwarded with -letters from England. Sir Selwyn had reached India safely and in -good health, and thought it probable that his stay would be of -somewhat longer duration than his arrangements on leaving England -had contemplated. - -The prospect of five or six solitary months in the castle in -Northumberland had no relish for Gaston, so he resolved to extend -his tour by an excursion to Sicily. Accordingly, he took steamer one -evening from Naples to Palermo: the beautiful old city where the -traces yet linger of Saracen and Norman; with the tideless sea in -front, and the purple hills behind, and between the hills and the -sea the little lovely plain of the Shell of Gold. Naples is -beautiful, but brutal; a paradise peopled by savages: an Oriental -languor softens the life of Palermo, as it tinges with melancholy -the national songs; and the rural element which enters so largely -into the character of the whole Sicilian people makes them something -of Arcadians in a modern Arcady. - -Gaston felt the charm of the place in an hour; the sense of want of -companionship which had gone with him in his listless wanderings in -Italy, here deserted him; he plucked ripe oranges in the garden of -the hotel, and they became his lotos fruit, for he resolved that his -wanderings should end in Palermo. He would remain here until his -father returned from India. - -But it chanced that there were few foreign visitors in Palermo that -season, and within a week of Gaston’s arrival the hotel at which he -stayed was emptied of all its guests, except himself and an old -German baron, and the baron waited only for a steamer to take him to -Malta, on his way to Egypt. An empty hotel in a foreign land is as -cheerful an abode as a catacomb, and Gaston cast about for a change -of quarters. - -Strolling one day in a slumbrous corner of the town, where cypress -trees stood sentinels at rusty iron gates, and the air smelled of -lemon groves and roses, he was struck by the aspect of a tenantless -and apparently deserted villa, walled within a garden, which, -untended as it was, retained a certain monastic trimness. A -weather-stained board over the iron gate, which was of fine -workmanship, announced that the villa was to let. Gaston tried the -gate, but it was locked. A broad-hatted priest who was passing at -the moment, observing Gaston’s interest in the villa, stopped, took -a pinch of snuff, and said that if the signor desired to have -particulars of the place, he might obtain them from such a person in -a street close at hand, which he indicated. Gaston thanked the -father for his courtesy, and went to inquire if he could see the -villa, with a view to hiring it for a short time. - -At dinner that evening, the baron said that he expected to sail for -Malta on the following day, and expressed his regret at leaving -Gaston alone in the hotel. Gaston replied that he should be sorry to -lose the companionship of the baron, but that he also was about to -leave the hotel, and had taken a villa for the remainder of his stay -in Palermo. He described the villa, and the baron, who spoke English -well, exclaimed with a laugh: - -“So! Is that the place? The Villa Torcello then has found a tenant -at last!” - -“Has it been long without one?” - -“Nearly thirty years.” - -“And what is the reason?” - -“How! Did they not tell you? The Villa Torcello is the famous -haunted house. Yes, I assure you, a real ghost! Are you not -delighted? You may be able to make a story about it, you know, you -who write novels.” - -“And whose is the ghost?” inquired Gaston, whose associations with -this subject were by no means pleasant. - -“They ought to have told you about it,” answered the baron. “Some -people do not like ghosts. I do not like them myself, though to be -sure I have never seen a ghost. The house, as you know, is called -the Villa Torcello, but that was not its original name. Years ago it -was called the Villa Verga, after its first owner, Signor Udalrico -Verga, a young Sicilian of good family, who was well known and very -popular in Palermo. He lived there all alone, and was much visited -by a priest, a very handsome young man, a little older than himself, -with whom he was on terms of great affection. One morning, thirty -years ago—I believe it was in this very month—the gardener of the -Signor Verga found his master lying dead in the garden, with a -bullet-hole in the temple. There seemed no reason in the world why -he should have killed himself, and as no weapon was found near the -body, or in any part of the garden, it was concluded that he had -been murdered. Suspicion fell on the priest, though for no cause -except that he had been more intimate with the Signor Verga than -anybody else. They were never known to have had a quarrel, and as -for evidence, not a scrap could be produced against the priest, who, -they say, showed the deepest grief for his friend. Indeed he died, -in great distress of mind, six months afterwards. Some people, who -would always regard him as the murderer, said that remorse for his -crime killed him; but though I have heard this story many times -since I first visited Palermo, I could never see that there was any -reason whatever to suspect the priest.” - -“And the murder was never brought home to anyone?” - -“It has remained a mystery from that day to this,” replied the -baron. “A year or two after the death of Verga, his brother went to -live in the Villa, changing its name to that of a property of his -own in Calabria, the name which it still bears. But he could not -stay in it, for he said that he saw the spirit of his brother -walking in the garden in the evenings, on the path where the body -was found. Since he left it, the house has never been occupied. As -to the ghost, many stories are told, but the favourite one is that -it haunts the place seeking someone to avenge the murder. That is a -strange notion, don’t you think, Herr Fox?” - -The baron added no more to the story, and as he was busy with his -letters during the rest of the evening, Gaston only saw him again to -bid him good-bye on the following morning. - -A day or two afterwards, Gaston settled himself in the Villa -Torcello. His coming there created a momentary flutter of excitement -in the quarter where the villa was situated; but this was not known -to Gaston, who had neither friends nor acquaintances in the town. - -He wrote to tell his father of his new residence, and to ask him -whether he had visited Palermo in the tour he had made in Italy a -few years before Gaston’s birth. One morning, the post from England -brought him some flattering notices of a book he had published -shortly before leaving, which made him think that it was time to set -to work upon a new story. But the idea he was seeking did not come -to him, and the indolent charm of his surroundings favoured no -severe exertion of the intellect. - -He walked in the town until it grew familiar to him; its avenues, -and terraces by the sea, its deep shadowy gardens, its groves of -orange trees and lemon; its narrow streets and the multiplied -variety of the houses, with their odd and glaring contrasts of -colour; its churches, where the religion of the west seems out of -harmony with the architectural and decorative fashions of the east. - -Sometimes he hired a carriage and drove out into the country, and -these excursions were usually prolonged throughout the day. On one -such occasion, he was returning late in the afternoon, and the -vetturino was guiding his horses in lazy fashion in and out amongst -a straggling file of mule-carts laden with wine, in a narrow lane on -the outskirts of the town. - -“What place is this?” called out Gaston presently, pointing to an -old, discoloured building of considerable extent, which lay on the -left of the road. - -“_Il Convento de’ Cappuccini, signor_,” replied the driver, and -(never rejecting a chance to rest) pulled up his horses, adding: -“The signor no see Il Convento? _Ma, è molto curioso, signor_ (but -it’s a queer place).” - -Gaston got down from the carriage, and at that moment a sandalled -and brown-robed monk appeared at the entrance to the monastery. - -“_Ecco il padre, signor!_” (There’s the father), said the driver, -pointing to the Capucin, who bowed to Gaston with a courteous -indication of readiness to receive him. - -Gaston went across, and was presently following the monk through an -outer chamber of the monastery, empty and cold, with bare walls and -a dark stone floor. - -The monk stopped at a heavy wooden door, and taking a key from his -girdle, turned to Gaston and said, in a mixture of Italian and -broken English, which is here translated: - -“The signor probably wishes to see our subterranean chambers. Many -foreigners come here to see them. It is a very curious sight; we -keep here the bodies of the wealthy Palermitans, whose relatives and -friends assemble every year, on the Feast of All Souls, to visit -them.” - -While he was speaking he unlocked the door, which led into a vaulted -passage with a flight of stairs beyond. A faint, sickly smell -pervaded the corridor, which became stronger and more offensive as -they began to descend the steps. - -They went down to a dusky place, around which Gaston’s eyes wandered -for a few moments with no certain gaze, until they grew accustomed -to the dimness. The daylight, such feeble daylight as filtered into -that dismal magazine of mummies, was fading fast. - -The monk took a bit of candle from a ledge and lighted it; at once a -strange and weird effect was produced. - -Thousands of corpses, and skeletons, and horrible hooded figures -which were of neither state, seemed in some manner to be awakened, -seemed to rouse themselves, and take cognisance of Gaston and his -guide. - - TIGHE HOPKINS. - - (_To be concluded in our next._) - - ------------------ - -NOTE.—The Editors regret that they are unable to publish, as -announced, the translation of the “Death of Ivan Ilyitch,” by Count -Tolstoi, a complete translation having just been issued by Messrs. -Vizetelly. - - - - - =LITERARY JOTTINGS= - - -“BUDDHISM IN CHRISTENDOM, OR JESUS THE ESSENE,” by Arthur Lillie, -etc.—A queer and rather thickish volume, of a presumably scientific -character, by an amateur Orientalist. Contents:—Familiar theories, -built on two sacred and time-honoured names, which the author -enshrines between garlands of modern gossip and libels on his -critics, past and present. A true literary sarcophagus inhuming the -decayed bodies of very old, if occasionally correct, theories -jumbled up together with exploded speculations. - -The volume—title and symbology—is pregnant with the atmosphere of -the sacred poetry attached to the names of Gautama the Buddha, and -“Jesus the Essene.” To find it sprinkled with the heavy drops of -personal spite, is like gazing at an unclean fly fallen into the -communion-wine of a chalice. One can but wonder and ask oneself, -what shall be the next move in literature? Is it a new “Sacred Book -of the East,” in which one will find the evidence by Policeman -Endacott against Miss Cass welcomed and accepted as an historical -fact? Or shall it be the Pentecostal tongues of fire examined in the -light of the latest improved kerosene lamp? - -But a well-informed chronicler at our elbow reports that the author -of _Buddhism in Christendom, or Jesus the Essene_, is a strong -medium who sits daily for spiritual development? This would account -for the wonderfully mixed character of the contents of the volume -referred to. It must be so, since it reads just as such a joint -production would. It is a curious mixture of “spirit” inspiration, -passages bodily taken from the reports of the Society “for -_Spookical_ Research,” as that misguided body was dubbed—for once -wittily—by the _Saturday Review_, and various other little -defamatory trifles besides. The “spirit guides” are proverbially -revengeful and not always wise in their generation. A former work by -the same medium having been three or four years ago somewhat -painfully mangled by a real Sanskrit and Buddhist scholar in India, -the “Spirit Angel” falls foul now of his critics. The wandering -Spook tries to run amuck among them, without even perceiving the -poor, good soul, that he only blots and disfigures with the -corrosive venom of his spite the two noble and sacred characters -whom his medium-author undertakes to interpret before ever he has -learned to understand them.... - -This places “Lucifer” under the disagreeable necessity of reviewing -the pretentious work at length in one of its future numbers. As the -same mistakes and blunders occur in “Buddhism in Christendom” as in -“Buddha and Early Buddhism,” the magazine must make it its duty, if -not altogether its pleasure, to check the volume of 1883 by that of -1887. - - --- - -It is rumoured that “A CATECHISM ON EVERY-DAY LIFE,” by a -Theosophical writer, is ready for press. Let us hope it will contain -no special theology or dogmas, but only wise advice for practical -life, in its application to the ordinary events in the existence of -every theosophist. The time has come when the veil of illusion is to -be pulled aside entirely, not merely playfully, as hitherto done. -For if mere members of the theosophical body have nothing to risk, -except, perhaps, an occasional friendly stare and laugh at those -who, without any special necessity, as believed, pollute the -immaculate whiteness of their respectable society skirts by joining -an unpopular movement, real theosophists ought to look truth and -fact right in the face. To become a true theosophist—_i.e._ one -thoroughly imbued with altruistic feelings, with a willingness to -forget self, and readiness to help his neighbour to carry the burden -of life—is to become instantaneously transformed into a public -target. It is to make oneself a ready thing for heavy “Mrs. Grundy” -to sit upon: to become the object of ridicule, slander, and -vilification, which will not stop even before an occasional criminal -charge. For some theosophists, every move in the _true theosophical -direction_, is a forlorn-hope enterprise. All this notwithstanding, -the ranks of the “unpopular” society are steadily, if slowly -increasing. - -For what does slander and ridicule really matter? When have fools -ever been slandered, or rich and influential men and women -ostracised, however black and soiled in their hearts, or in their -secret lives? Who ever heard of a Reformer’s or an orator’s course -of life running smooth? Who of them escaped from being pelted with -dirt by his enemies? - -Gautama Buddha, the great Hindu Reformer, was charged by the -Brahmins with being a demon, whose form was taken by Vishnu, to -encourage men to despise the Vedas, deny the gods, and thus effect -their own destruction. - - “Say we not well thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?” said the - Pharisees to Jesus. “He deceiveth the people.... Stone him to - death!” - - “He who surpasses or subdues mankind, - Must look down on the hate of those below,” - -says the great English poet. The latter is echoed in prose by the -king of French poets. Writes Victor Hugo: - - “You have your enemies; but who has not? Guizot has enemies, - Thiers has enemies, Lamartine has enemies. Have I not been myself - fighting for twenty years? Have I not been for twenty years past - reviled, betrayed, sold, rended, hooted, taunted, insulted, - calumniated? Have not my books been parodied, and my deeds - travestied? I also am beset and spied upon, I also have traps laid - for me, and I have even been made to fall into them. But what is - all that to me? I disdain it. It is one of the most difficult yet - necessary things in life to learn to disdain. Disdain protects and - crushes. It is a breast plate and a club. You have enemies? Why, - it is the story of every man who has done a great deed, created a - new idea. It is the cloud which thunders around everything which - shines. Do not trouble yourself about it. Do not give your enemies - the satisfaction of thinking that they cause you any feeling, be - disdainful.” (_Choses Vues._) - - ------- - - “THE LATEST ROMANCE OF SCIENCE,” Summarized by a Frenchman. - -If the Atomo-mechanical Theory of the Universe has caused -considerable embarrassment to our materialists, and brought some of -their much beloved scientific speculations to grief (see “Concepts -of Modern Physics,” by Stallo), the layman must not be ungrateful to -the great men for other boons received at their hands. Through the -indefatigable labours of the most famous biologists and -anthropologists of the day, the mystery which has hitherto -enshrouded the origin of man is no more. It has vanished into thin -air; thanks to the activity of the _officina_ (workshop, in Queen’s -English), in Haeckel’s brain, or, as a Hylo-Idealist would say, in -the _vesiculo neurine of his hemispherical ganglia_[15]—the origin -of mankind has to be sought in _that_ scientific region, and nowhere -else. - ------ - -Footnote 15: - - Dr. Lewins, the Hylo-Idealist, in his appendices to “What is - Religion?” by C. N.—“On the Brain Theory of Mind and Matter, the - Creed of Physics, Physic and Philosophy.” W. Stewart & Co. - ------ - -Religiously read by the “Animalists” in its English translation in -Protestant and Monarchical England, the “Pedigree of Man” is now -welcomed with shouts of joy in Roman Catholic Republican France. A -summary has just been compiled of it by a French _savant_, who -rejoices in the name of Topinard. The summary on that “question of -questions” (as Mr. Huxley calls it), is more interesting in reality -than the “Pedigree of Man” itself. It is so deliciously fantastic -and original, that one comes almost to regret that our numerous and -frolicsome ancestors in the Zoological Gardens of Europe and America -seem to show no intention of getting up a subscription list among -themselves, for the raising of a lasting monument to the great -Haeckel. Thus, ingratitude in man must surely be a phenomenon of -_atavism_; another suggestive point being thus gained toward further -proof of man’s descent from the ingrate and heartless, as well as -tailless, pithecoid baboon. - -Saith the learned Topinard:— - - “At the commencement of what geologists call the _Laurentian - period_ of the Earth, and the fortuitous union of certain elements - of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen, under conditions which - _probably_ only took place at that epoch, the first albuminoid - clots were formed. From them, and by spontaneous generation,[16] - the first cellules or cleavage masses took their origin. These - cellules were then sub-divided and multiplied, arranging - themselves in the form of organs, and after a series of - transformations, fixed by Mr. Haeckel at nine in number, - originated certain vertebrata of the genus _Amphioxus - lanceolatus_. The division into sexes was marked out, the spinal - marrow and _chorda dorsalis_ became visible. At the tenth stage - the brain and skull made their appearance, as in the lamprey; at - the eleventh, the limbs and jaws were developed ... the earth was - then only in the _Silurian_ period. At the sixteenth, the - adaptation to terrestrial life ceased. At the seventeenth, which - corresponds to the _Jurassic_ phase of the history of the globe, - the genealogy of man is raised to the kangaroo among the - marsupials. At the eighteenth, he becomes a lemurian; the - _Tertiary period_ commences. At the nineteenth, he becomes - Catarrhinian, that is to say, an ape with a tail, a Pithecian. At - the twentieth he becomes an anthropoid, continuing so throughout - the whole of the _Miocene period_. At the twenty-first he becomes - a man-ape, he does not possess language, nor in consequence the - corresponding brain. Lastly, at the twenty-second, man comes forth - ... in his inferior types.” - ------ - -Footnote 16: - - Mark well: when a theosophist or an occultist speaks of - “spontaneous generation,” because for him there exists no - inorganic matter in Kosmos—he is forthwith set down as an - _ignoramus_. To prove the descent of man from the animal, however, - even spontaneous generation from dead or inorganic matter, becomes - an axiomatic and scientific fact. - ------ - -Happy, privileged man! Hapless evolution-forsaken baboon! We are not -told by science the secret why, while man has had plenty of time to -become, say a Plato, a Newton, a Napoleon, or _even_ a Haeckel, his -poor ancestor should have been arrested in his growth and -development. For, as far as is known, the rump of the cynocephalus -seems as blue and as callous to-day, as it was during the reign of -Psammetichus or Cheops; the macacus must have made as ugly faces at -Pliny 18 centuries back, as he does now at a Darwinian. We may be -told that in the enormous period of time that must have elapsed -since the beginning of evolution, 2,000, or even 10,000, years mean -very little. But then, one does not find even the Moneron any better -off for the millions of years that have rolled away. Yet, between -the gelatinous and thoughtful hermit of the briny deep and man, -there must have elapsed quite sufficient time for some trifling -transformation. That primordial protoplasmic creature, however, -seems to fare no better at the hands of evolution, which has -well-nigh forgotten it. - -By this time, one would suppose that this ancestor of ours of stage -_one_, ought to have reached, to say the least, a higher -development: to have become, for instance, the amphibian “sozura” of -the “fourteenth stage,” so minutely and scientifically described by -Mr. Haeckel, and of which De Quatrefages so wickedly says in “The -Human Species” (p. 108), that “it (the sozura) is _equally unknown -to science_.” But we see quite the reverse. This tender-bodied -little one, has remained but a moneron to this very hour: so much -so, that Mr. Huxley, fishing him out from the abysmal ocean depths, -took pity upon him, and gave him a father. He baptized our archaic -ancestor, and named him _Bathybius Haeckelii_.... - -But all these are mysteries that will, no doubt, be easily explained -to the full satisfaction—of science, by any biologist of Haeckel’s -brain power. As all know, no acrobatic feats, from the top of one -tree to another top, by the swiftest of chimpanzees, can ever -approach, let alone equal, the rapid evolutions of fancy in his -cerebral “officina,” whenever Haeckel is called upon to explain the -inexplicable.... - -There is one trifle, however, which seems to have the best of even -his capacity for getting out of a scientific dilemma, and this is -_the eighteenth stage_ of his genealogy, in the “Pedigree of Man.” -Man’s evolution from the Monera, _alias_ Bathybius _Haeckelii_, up -to tailed and then tailless man, passes through the marsupials, the -kangaroo, sarrigue, etc. Thus he writes:— - -“_Eighteenth stage._ Prosimiæ allied to the Loris (Stenops) and -Makis (Lemur), without marsupial bones, but _with placenta_.” -(“_Pedig. of Man._” p. 77.) - -Now it may be perhaps interesting to the profane and the innocent to -learn that no such “prosimiæ,” with placenta, exists in nature. That -it is, in short, another creation of the famous German Evolutionist, -and a child of his own brain. For De Quatrefages has pointed out -several years ago, that: - - “The anatomical investigations of MM. Alphonse Milne, Edwards and - Grandidier ... place it beyond all doubt that the prosimiæ of - Haeckel have _no decidua and a diffuse placenta_. They are - _indeciduata_. Far from _any possibility of their being the - ancestors of the apes_, according to the principles laid down by - Haeckel himself, they cannot even be regarded as the ancestors of - the zonoplacential mammals ... and ought to be connected with the - pachydermata, the edentata and the cetacea.” (p. 110.) - -But, as that great French _savant_ shows, “Haeckel, without the -least hesitation, adds his _prosimiæ_,” to the other groups in the -“Pedigree of Man,” and “attributes to them ... a discoidal -placenta.” Must the world of the too credulous innocents again -accept on faith these two creatures unknown to Science or man, only -because “the proof of their existence arises _from the necessity of -an intermediate type_?” This necessity, however being one only for -the greater success of their inventor, Haeckel, that Simian Homer -must not bear us ill will, if we do not hesitate to call his -“genealogy” of man a romance of Science of the wildest type. - -One thing is very suggestive in this speculation. The discovery of -the absence of the needed placenta in the so-called _prosimiæ_ now -dates several years back. Haeckel knows of it, of course. So does -Mr. Ed. B. Aveling, D.Sc., his translator. Why is the error allowed -to remain uncorrected, and even unnoticed, in the English -translation of the “Pedigree of Man,” of 1887? Do the “members of -the International Library of Science and Free-thought,” fear to lose -some of Haeckel’s admirers were these to learn the truth? - -Nevertheless Haeckel’s scientific “Pedigree of Man,” ought to awake -and stir up to action the spirit of private enterprise. What a -charming _Féerie_ could be made of it on the stage of a theatre! A -_corps de ballet_, composed of antediluvian reptiles and giant -lizards, gradually, and stage by stage, metamorphosing themselves -into kangaroos, lemurs, tailless apes and anthropoid baboons, and -finally into a chorus of German biologists! - -Such a _Féerie_ would leave “Black Crook,” and “Alice in -Wonder-Land,” nowhere. An intelligent manager, alive to his -interests, would make his fortune were he but to follow the happy -thought. - -_Nota bene_:—The suggestion is copyright. - - --- - -THE BOOK OF LIFE, by Sidhartha (also) Vonisa; his discoveries from - “6215 to 6240, Anno Mundi.” - -A cross between an _octavo_ and _duodecimo_. - -This volume, we see, is highly appreciated by the clergy, by whom, -at this gloomy day of infidelity, even small favours seem to be -thankfully received. The author (profane name unknown) hints, when -he does not state plainly, that he is a reincarnation of Gautama -Buddha, or Siddartha, as also of a few other no meaner historical -personages. The work is a clever steering between the sandbanks of -science and theology. Enough is given in careful agreement with the -former to make it ignore the more abundant concessions to the gods -of the latter—_e.g._, Biblical chronology. The age of the world is -allowed 6240 years from Adam, “seven hundred years after the brown -and black races had been created” (p. 53 “Chronology”); the date of -the earth’s incrustation and globe being left to the imagination of -the reader. A chronological table of the principal historical events -of the world is published on pages 53-56. Among them the birth of -Moses is placed 1572 B.C. The Vedas are shown compiled in India, and -the poems of Homer in Greece, “about 1200 B.C.” Siddartha or Gautama -established Buddhism in India “from 808 to 726,” B.C. we are told. -Last, but not least, of the world epochs and _divine_ signs of the -time, comes the for ever memorable event of March 31st, 1885—namely, -the “Book of Life, Vonisa, was completely written,” and it closes -the list. The reader is notified, moreover, at the line beginning -with A.D. 6240, that the year 1884 C.E. (Christian Era) is the -“beginning of Messianic age and close of Christian age,” which might -account for the appearance and publication in the year following of -the original volume now under review. - -The new Messiah declares that “although much of the work consists of -discoveries which are original with the author, yet the reader will -find in the Analytic Index a few hundred out of the many references -which might be given to eminent authorities which were consulted in -its preparation.” Among these, it seems, one has to include some -theosophic writings, as it is stated in the “Book of Life” that— - - (_a._) “Seven great forces were concerned in these vast movements - of early creation.” - - (_b._) “Seven Ages of the Earth.” - - (_c._) “Vayomer Elohim” translated “according to the laws of the - Hebrew language,” means that “seven forces were used as three-fold - factors,” and - - (_d._) “That the first human beings were incarnated spirits” (pp. - 26-27). - -The above four declarations have the approval of theosophy. Whether -the sentence that follows, namely, that “the work of incarnation (of -the _spirits_) took place according to law,” and is “the clearest -hypothesis _which science has to offer concerning the origin of -man_,” will meet with the same approval from Messrs. Huxley, -Haeckel, and Fiske, of the “Atomo-mechanical Theory,” is very -doubtful. - -Nor is it so sure that the Ethnological department in the -Anglo-Indian Bureau of Statistics is quite prepared to alter its -census returns in accordance with Siddartha’s declaration, on page -29,that— - -“One branch of the brown race was the Dravidian, _which still holds -its place in Northern India_.” (?!) - - --- - -A new book, bearing the title of SPIRIT REVEALED, is nearly ready -for press. It is described as an extraordinary work. Its author is -Wm. C. Eldon Serjeant, F.T.S., a writer of articles on the “Coming -Reformation,” “Sparks from the World of Fire,” &c., &c. The work -claims to “explain the Nature of the Deity, and to discuss His -manifestations on every plane of existence, and to show forth the -form of Christ, whose second coming is expected by Christians, and -to proclaim the advent of the Messiah according to the belief of the -Jews.” “Many subjects, involving questions of considerable obscurity -in reference to the Deity, to the Scriptures, to men, to animals, -and to things generally, are comprehensively treated and explained -in accordance with the Word of the Spirit declared at various times -through the sons of men.” - - --- - -PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY FOR PSYCHICAL RESEARCH: - -These reports coming out _ad libitum_, without any definite date, -cannot be regarded as periodical. Depending for their circulation -chiefly on the consummation of what the learned editors offer as -_bonâ fide_ psychic and spiritualistic _exposés_—which the public -accepts as most kind advertisements of the people so attacked—this -publication occupies a position entirely _sui generis_. The -“Proceedings” offer to the public a very useful _manual_, something -between a text and a guidebook, with practical instructions in -diplomatic policy in the domain of the Psychic, in the form of -scientific letters and private detective information. Sensitives -discern in the “Proceedings” (by _telepathic impact_) the -Machiavelian spirit of aristocratic Bismarck, seasoned with an aura -strongly impregnated with the plebeian perfumes of honest -_mouchards_ on duty, but then they are, perhaps, prejudiced. On the -other hand, some Russian spiritualistically inclined members of the -S.P.R. have been heard to say, that the “Proceedings” reminded them -of those of the happily defunct Third Section of the St. Petersburg -Police. Thus, the tutelary “guides” of the learned association of -the British Psychists, may one day turn out to be the departed -spirits of Russian _gendarmes_ after all? - -Occasionally when the hunting grounds of this erudite body have -afforded a specially successful chase—after mares’ nests—a -_Supplement_ is added to the “Proceedings,” the magnitude of the -added volume being in inverse ratio to the illumination of its -contents, which are generally offered as a premium to materialism. - -Hence, the “Proceedings” may be better described as the fluctuating -and occasional records of a society bent upon giving the lie to its -own name. For “Psychical” research is surely a misnomer, besides -being a delusion and a snare for the unwary. LUCIFER would suggest -as a truer title, “Society for Hylo-_Pseumatical_ Research.” This -would give the S.P.R. the benefit of an open connection with Dr. -Lewins’ unparalleled “Hylo-Idealism”[17]—while it would enable it to -sail under its _true_ colours. - -Whether LUCIFER’S advice be accepted or not, the profound philosophy -of the phenomenon baptized “telepathy” and telepathic impact can -only be studied scientifically, in our spasmodic contemporary. This -new Greek stranger is the crowning work of the Psychic Fathers of -our century. It is their “first” and “only” offspring, and is a -_genuine_ discovery as far as its Hellenic name goes. For, bereft of -its Greek appellation, it becomes like America. The genius who -_discovered_ the phenomenon, is like Columbus on whom the Northmen, -and even the Chinamen, had stolen a march centuries before. This -phenomenon can only seem _new_ when thus disguised under a name -solemn and scientific—because incomprehensible to the average -profane. Its plain description in English—as transference of thought -or sensation from a distance—could never hope to have the same ring -of classical learning in it. - -Nevertheless, the “Proceedings” with the two additional gigantic -volumes of the psychic “Leviathan,” called “Phantasms of the -Living,” are strongly recommended to invalids. They are priceless in -cases of obstinate _insomnia_, as the best soporific known. -_Directions_: The reader must be careful not to light a match in too -close proximity to the said works. - - “THE ADVERSARY.” - ------ - -Footnote 17: - - ύλη “_matter_ as opposed to mind”; therefore _Material-Idealism_—a - contradiction in terms exactly parallel to the name “Psychic” and - the very “anti-psychic” work of the Society referred to. _Pseuma_ - should replace _Psyche_, as it seeks for _frauds_ and not - _soul-action_. - ------ - - ------------------ - -The following books have been received and will be noticed in early -numbers of LUCIFER:— - -THE HISTORY OF THE ROSICRUCIANS, by Arthur E. Waite, and THE -QUABALAH UNVEILED, by S.L. Mac-Gregor Mathers, from Mr. Redway; -EARTH’S EARLIEST AGES, by G. H. Pember, from Messrs. Hodder and -Stoughton: THE MYSTERY OF THE AGES, by the Countess of Caithness, -from Mr. C. L. H. Wallace; AN ADVENTURE AMONG THE ROSICRUCIANS, by -Dr. F. Hartmann, from the Occult Publishing Company, Boston; and -NINETEENTH CENTURY COMMON SENSE, from the T. B. Lippincott Company, -Boston, U.S.A. - - - - - =CORRESPONDENCE= - - INTERESTING TO ASTROLOGERS. - ASTROLOGICAL NOTES—No. 1. - - _To the Editor of_ LUCIFER. - -We are told that, before judging a horary figure, we must ascertain -if it is radical, and to decide this point several rules have been -given. The first is with regard to the number of degrees on the cusp -of the ascendant. Lilly says a figure is rarely radical if the first -two or last three degrees of a sign ascend. Morrison fixes the limit -at the first or second and last two degrees. Pearse gives the limit -as the first and last five degrees, and Raphael as the first and -last three. - -All the laws of nature are harmonious and rational; but in the rule -of the first two authorities, this harmony seems absent. Why should -the limit be 1 or 2 degrees at the beginning of the sign and 2 or 3 -at the end? - -Again, as an exception to the above rule, Lilly says that a figure -may be radical even when 27° or more ascend, if the number -corresponds to his age; and when 1° or 2° ascend, if the querent be -very young, and his appearance agrees with the quality of the signs -ascending. And here again there is the same want of harmony. Why -should the age of the querent have to correspond accurately in one -case and only approximately in the other? Furthermore, no -astrologers seem to have given a logical explanation of these rules. - -On reflecting on this problem I reasoned thus. In ♍ 29° 59´ 59´´ ♃ -is absolutely without dignity; in ♐ 0° 0´ 1´´ he is in his house -triplicity, and terms, a threefold dignity. Is it conceivable that -this great change of power should be so sudden, as to be -accomplished in less than 2 seconds of space? Analogy shows that it -is probably otherwise, and that as the planets and cusps of houses -have orbs of influence, _so also have the signs_. - -If this be true, it supplies the key to the above problem. If only -the first or last few degrees of a sign ascend, then the cusp of the -ascendant is within the orbs of the adjacent signs, and the house is -not ruled solely by the planet which is its proper lord, but also -partly by the planet ruling the adjacent sign; and this must hold -good under all circumstances, even when the number of the degrees -ascending agree with the age of the querent, or the ascending sign -and planets therein describe him. - -Furthermore, if this be admitted, it also follows, as a logical -conclusion, that if the first and last few degrees of a sign are on -the cusp of any house, no conclusion can be drawn with certainty -from the aspects of the lord of that house. - -The exact limits of the orbs of the signs must be decided by -experience; I am induced to fix the limits at 2° 30´ and 27° 30´. - - NEMO. - - -------------- - - _To the Editor of_ LUCIFER. - -The belief in the power and efficacy of talismans and amulets was, -at one period of the world’s history, universal. Even during the -XVth century, the latest among the innumerable revivals of -civilisation, the majority of learned and cultured men had a -profound conviction of their reality. But such ideas are now scouted -by popular opinion, because the philosophy underlying them is not -understood. LUCIFER, therefore, would certainly confer a boon on -many by throwing light on the following points:— - -(1). Wherein does the power of a talisman lie? (2). How far does its -efficacy depend on the signs traced upon it, and how far on the -power and knowledge of the maker? (3). Granting that will-power and -knowledge are the main factors in imparting to the talisman its -power, how does that power remain attached to it after the death of -the man who made it. - - β - - =THEOSOPHICAL - AND MYSTIC PUBLICATIONS= - - -The Theosophist, a magazine of Oriental Philosophy, Art, Literature, -and Occultism. Conducted by H. P. Blavatsky, and H. S. Olcott, -Permanent President of the T. S. Vol. VIII., Nos. 94 and 95, July -and August, 1887. Madras, India. In London, George Redway, 15, York -Street, Covent Garden. - -This journal is the oldest of the periodicals of the Theosophical -Society, and has a distinct feature of its own: a number of Hindoo, -Buddhist, and Parsi contributors among the most learned of British -India. No journal is thus more reliable in the occasional -information given in it upon the sacred tenets and scriptures of the -East, since it is derived first hand, and comes from native -scholars, well versed in their respective cults. From time to time -_The Theosophist_ has respectfully corrected mistakes—sins of -omission and commission—by Western Orientalists, and will continue -to perform its proposed task by issuing admirable articles. - -As a marked instance of this, the four “Lectures on the Bhagavid -Gita,” by a native scholar, Mr. T. Subba Rao, may be cited. Begun in -the February number, they are now concluded in the July issue. No -better, abler, or more complete exposition on that most -philosophical, as the least understood, of the sacred books of the -East, has ever been given in any work, past or present. In the June -and July numbers, the “Ha-Khoshe-Cah, a Vision of the Infinite,” by -Dr. Henry Pratt, a erudite Kabalist in England, is published. - -Some very interesting articles on the “Norse Mythology,” by the -learned Swedish scholar, Mr. C. H. A. Bjerregard (the Astor Library, -New York), may also be found in the last numbers. - -_The Theosophist_ is the journal of the Theosophical Society _par -excellence_; the Minutes and records of the Society’s work, being -given monthly in its “Supplements.” - -No evil wisher of the said Society, rushing into publicity with -denunciations, and occasionally libellous attacks upon that body, -ought—if he is a fair-minded and _honest_ opponent, of course—to -publish anything without first making himself well acquainted with -the contents of _The Theosophist_, and especially with the -_Supplements_ attached to that journal. - -This advice is given in all kindness to our traducers—the learned as -the ignorant—for their direct benefit, though at an evident -disadvantage to theosophy. For, as so many of our critics have been -lately making fools of themselves, in their alleged _exposés_ of our -doctrines, it is to the advantage of our Society to let them go on -undisturbed, and thus turn the laugh on the enemy. Two graphic -instances may be cited. In “Buddhism in Christendom; or, Jesus the -Essene,” by an impolite dabbler in Orientalism, the septenary -doctrine of the Occultists is disfigured out of recognition, and is -met by the unanimous hearty laugh of those who know something of the -subject. Its unlucky author has evidently never opened a serious -theosophical work, unless, indeed, the doctrine is too much above -his head. As a refreshing contrast one finds, in “Earth and Its -Earliest Ages,” by G. H. Pember, an author, who has most -conscientiously studied and understood the fundamental doctrines of -Theosophy. - -Thus, notwithstanding his attempt to connect it with the coming -Antichrist, and show its numerous writers pledged to the work of -Satan, “the Prince of the Powers of the Air,”[18] the volume -published by that learned and fair-minded gentleman is a true pearl -in the _anti_-Theosophical literature. The correct enunciation of -knowledge of the tenets he disapproves, as a sincere orthodox -Christian, is remarkable; and his language, dignified, polite, and -entirely free from any personality can but call forth as courteous a -reply from those he arraigns. He has evidently read, and, what is -more, _understood_, what he found in the _Theosophist_, and other -mystic volumes. It shall, therefore, be the pleasure and duty of -LUCIFER, who bears no malice for the personal attack, to review this -interesting volume in its October issue, hoping to see as kind a -notice of “Earth and Its Earliest Ages” in the _Theosophist_ of -Madras. - ------ - -Footnote 18: - - Spiritualists, mystics, and metaphysical Orientalists need not - feel jealous, as they are made to share the same fate, and are - raised to the same dignity with the Theosophists. The writers of - “The Perfect Way,” Mrs. Dr. Kingsford and Mr. E. Maitland, stand - arm-in-arm with the humble writer of “Isis Unveiled” before the - throne of Satan. Mr. Ed. Arnold, of “The Light of Asia,” and the - late Mr. Kenealy, of the “Book of God.” are seen radiating in the - same lethal light of brimstone and sulphur. Mr. C. C. Massey is - shown stuck deep in Antichristian Metaphysics; our kind Lady - Caithness is pointed out in the coils of the “Great Beast” of - Romanism, and charged with “Goddess worship:” and even—ye Powers - of mystical Perception!—Mr. Arthur Lillie’s Buddhist Monotheism is - taken _au grand serieux_! - ------ - - --- - -The Path; “a magazine devoted to the Brotherhood of Humanity, -Theosophy in America, and the study of Occult Science, Philosophy, -and Aryan Literature.” Edited by William Q. Judge. Price ten -shillings per annum. New York, U. S. A. P. O. Box, 2659, etc. George -Redway, 15 York Street, Covent Garden, London. - -A most excellent and theosophical monthly, full of philosophical -literature by several well-known mystics and writers. The best -publication of its kind in the United States, and one that ever -fulfils what it promises, giving more food for thought than many of -the larger periodicals. Its August number is very interesting and -fully up to its usual mark. - -Jasper Niemann continues his excellent reflections in “Letters on -the True.” Mr. E. D. Walker, in an article upon “The Poetry of -Reincarnation in Western Literature,” cites the verses of -Wordsworth, Tennyson, Dean Alford, Addison, H. Vaughan, Browning, -etc., in proof of the fact that these poets were tinctured, if not -imbued, with the philosophy of reincarnation. B. N. Acle continues -_Notes on the Astral Light_, from Eliphas Levi. He cites the -startling and lurid enunciation of that epigrammatical occultist, -who says that “He who dies without forgiving his enemy, hurls -himself into Eternity armed with a dagger, and devotes himself to -the horror of eternal murder.” “_The Symbolism of the Equilateral -Triangle_,” by Miss Lydia Bell, shows how much wisdom can be -extracted from a little symbol when you know how to look for it -there. - -S. B. makes some very pertinent remarks upon _Theosophical Fiction_, -the growth of which is one sign of the times. “A true picture of -life, either real or potential, which is found in a work of fiction, -makes such reading one of the best sources of learning.” Thanks to -the education which it is receiving from the more solid literature -of theosophy, the public is becoming more critical, and has already -formed a “standard of probability” for marvellous phenomena, which -acts as a healthy check upon outside writers of fiction, who are -therefore no longer able to trust entirely “to their imagination for -their acts, and to their memory for their fancies.” Novel readers -now like their supernatural not to be _unnaturally_ supernatural, -even if they do have to take it in minute doses, disguised in their -favourite draught of love, murder and small talk. _The Higher -Carelessness_ (No. 7 of _Thoughts in Solitude_), by “Pilgrim,” is -full of deep and beautiful reflections. This writer, like “American -Mystic” whose article on the puzzling question, “_Am I my Brothers -Keeper_,” comes next, has advanced some way upon the path of -knowledge, and the thoughts of both of them have a special interest -for contemplative and self-examining readers. “American Mystic,” -by-the-bye, gives a new and striking turn to a phrase too often -misunderstood. “Resist not evil” he quotes and explains that -resistance, fierce and personal, to evil befalling oneself, is what -is meant. _Christianity—Theosophy_, by Mr. Wm. H. Kembal, seeks to -show that the fundamental aim of both, namely the Brotherhood of -Humanity, is the same, and that they can and ought to unite their -forces. - -_Julius_, in _Tea Table Talk_, is as crisp, weird, and -slyly-sentimental as ever. - - --- - -Le Lotus: “Revue des Hautes Etudes Théosophiques. Tendant à -favorises le rapprochement entre l’Orient et l’Occident.” Sous -l’inspiration de H. P. Blavatsky (nominally; but edited, in reality, -by our able brother, F. K. Gaboriau, F.T.S.). Georges Carré, 112 -Boulevard St. Germain, Paris. Subscription 15 fr. per annum. - -An excellent monthly, presenting yet another aspect of theosophy; -inspired by the desire to benefit the struggling masses of humanity, -and to diffuse the true spirit of solidarity among men. The August -number, besides translations of selected articles from the -_Theosophist_, of special interest to its French readers, contains a -capital article on “Freemasons and Theosophists,” the continuation -of a series of studies on “Initiation,” and a discussion of the -much-vexed question whether the “Will to Live” spoken of in the -“Elixir of Life” is selfish or not. In the last few pages, the -serious character of the journal is relieved by those brilliant -sparkles of French wit to which that language lends itself so -admirably. - -Brief notes on books, articles in the press, pamphlets, &c., give -ample scope for caustic raillery, as well as appreciative comment, -and the editor ought to be specially congratulated on this -department of his review. - - --- - -L’Aurore: Revue mensuelle sous la direction de Lady Caithness, -Duchesse de Pomar. George Carré, 112 Boulevard St. Germain, Paris. -Subscription, 15fr. per annum. - -The Mystic and Catholic Journal of Aristocratic France, somewhat -tinged with humanitarianism, and showing the influence of the higher -phases of modern spiritualism. The subject of reincarnation is its -principal feature, and a mystical romance, _Amour Immortel_, gives -its various phases. _L’Aurore_ is admirably conducted. Its articles -are always in good taste, and perfectly adapted to the special -public it appeals to. - - --- - -The Occult Word: A monthly journal in the interest of Theosophy. -Mrs. J. W. Cables, 40, Ambrose Street, Rochester, N. Y., U.S.A. -Subscription, 1 dollar per annum. - -Brought out more in the style of a newspaper, this journal is -another proof of the vitality of the Theosophic movement. It is more -Christian in its tone and phraseology, and shows less traces of the -influence of Eastern thought, than the publications already -mentioned. Some thoughts in it are remarkably good, and its tendency -most excellent. A most worthy little periodical. - - --- - -The Occultist: A monthly journal of Psychological and Mystical -Research. Edited by Mr. J. Thomas, F.T.S. London agent, E. W. Allen, -4 Ave Maria Lane, E.C. Subscription, 1 shilling per annum. - -As its price indicates, a tiny and unambitious publication of four -pages, but one that contains, from time to time, thoughtful and -suggestive articles. Its existence testifies to the devotion of its -proprietor and editor to the cause of truth. - - --- - -The Sphinx: “A monthly journal, devoted to the historical and -experimental proof of the supersensuous conception of the world on a -monistic basis.” Edited by Hübbe Schleiden, Dr. J. U. Th. Griebens -Verlag, Leipzig; and George Redway, London. Subscription, 12s. 6d. -per annum. - -As its title page implies, a learned and philosophical journal, -doing its work with true German thoroughness and permeated with a -real spirit of earnest investigation. It appeals, mainly, to -thinkers and students—a numerous class in Germany, but somewhat -sparsely represented in England. Dr. Carl Du Prel, the leader of the -new school of transcendental philosophy in that country, is its -leading contributor. But it contains from time to time articles of -great interest to students of occultism. - - --- - -TRANSACTIONS OF THE “LONDON LODGE” OF THE T. S., NOS. 12 AND 13.—Two -able and interesting papers by Mr. A. P. Sinnett; the first on -“Buddha’s Teaching,” the second on “The Relations of the Lower and -Higher Self.” Dealing with Buddhism, Mr. Sinnett exposes several of -the current misconceptions regarding Buddhist doctrines. Notably -among these stand the utterly false ideas, current in the West, that -Buddha recognised no conscious existence for the individual after -death, and that Nervana is synonymous with annihilation. Mr. Sinnett -draws a happy comparison between these misconceptions and the -strange blindness shown by European scholars in accepting the -allegorical legend that Buddha’s death was occasioned by eating -roast _boar_, as a literal fact. - -In his second paper, Mr. Sinnett follows up a line of thought -originated by him in an earlier number of the “Transactions.” He -explains his views with clearness, and adds considerably to the -details of the outline sketched in his previous paper. But, as -LUCIFER hopes shortly to deal with this subject at length, it is -unnecessary to enter into a detailed examination of Mr. Sinnett’s -views at present. - - --- - -The Esoteric: “A Magazine of Advance and Practical Esoteric -Thought.” Boston, U.S.A. Subscription 6s. per annum. - -Principal feature—the identification of each issue with one of the -signs of the Zodiac, which are held to be “important and real -divisions of time or states of man’s life.” Contents—eighteen short -articles, occupying 62 pages, the substance of which has been mainly -gleaned from various mystic authors, and harmonizes well with some -Theosophical teachings. - - - - - =FROM THE NOTE BOOK OF AN UNPOPULAR PHILOSOPHER= - - THE ESOTERIC VALUE OF CERTAIN WORDS AND DEEDS IN SOCIAL LIFE. - - -A definition of _Public Opinion_. The gathering of a few fogies -positively electrified by fanaticism and force of habit, who act on -the many noodles negatively electrified by indifference. The -acceptation of uncharitable views on “suggestion” by “telepathic -impact” (what ever that may mean). The work of unconscious -psychology. - -_Sympathetic grief._—The expression thereof in Society, for one’s -sorrow, is like a solemn funeral procession, in which the row of -mourning coaches is long, indeed, but the carriages of which are all -empty. - -_Mutual exchange of compliments._—Expressions of delight and other -acting in cultured society are the fig-leaves of the civilised Adams -and Eves. These “aprons” to conceal truth are fabricated incessantly -in social Edens, and their name is—_politeness_. - -_Keeping the Sabbath._—Throwing public contumely on, and parading -one’s superiority over Christ, “one greater than the temple” and -Sabbath, who stood for his disciples’ rights to “break” the Sabbath, -for the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for Sabbath (Matt. -xii. and Mark ii., etc.). - -_Attending Divine Service._—Breaking the express commandment of -Jesus. Becoming “as the hypocrites are,” who love to pray in -Synagogue and Temples, “that they may be seen of men.” (Matt.vi.) - -_Taking the Oath, on the Bible._—A Christian law, devised and -adopted to perpetuate and carry out the unequivocal commandment of -the Founder of Christianity, “Swear not at all, neither by heaven -nor by the earth” (Matt. v.). As the heaven and the earth are -supposed to have been created _only_ by God, a book written by _men_ -thus received the prerogative over the former. - -_Unpopularity._—We hate but those whom we envy or fear. Hatred is a -concealed and forced homage rendered to the person hated; a tacit -admission of the superiority of the unpopular character. - -The true value of _back-biting and slander_. A proof of the fast -coming triumph of the victim chosen. The bite of the fly when the -creature feels its end approaching. - - _A Few Illustrations to the Point from Schopenhauer._ - -Socrates was repeatedly vilified and thrashed by the opponents of -his philosophy, and was as repeatedly urged by his friends to have -his honour avenged in the tribunals of Athens. Kicked by a rude -citizen, in the presence of his followers, one of these expressed -surprise for his not resenting the insult, to which the Sage -replied: - -“Shall I then feel offended, and ask the magistrate to avenge me, if -I also happen to be kicked by an ass?” - -To another remark whether a certain man had abused and called him -names, he quietly answered: - -“No; for none of the epithets he used can possibly apply to me.” -(From Plato’s “Georgics”) - -The famous cynic, Cratus, having received from the musician -Nicodromus a blow which caused his face to swell, coolly fixed a -tablet upon his brow, inscribed with the two words, “_Nicodromus -facit_.” The flute player hardly escaped with his life from the -hands of the populace, which viewed Cratus as a household god. - -Seneca, in his work “_De Constanta Sapientis_,” treats most -elaborately of insults in words and deeds, or _contumelia_, and then -declares that no Sage ever pays the smallest attention to such -things.—“Well, yes!” the reader will exclaim, “but these men were -all of them _Sages_!”—“And you, are you then only _fools_? Agreed!” - - LUCIFER - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - VOL. I. LONDON, OCTOBER 15TH, 1887. NO. 2. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - THE LADY OF LIGHT. - - (_Written for_ LUCIFER.) - - Star of the Day and the Night! - Star of the Dark that is dying; - Star of the Dawn that is nighing, - Lucifer, Lady of Light![19] - - * * - - Still with the purest in white, - Still art thou Queen of the Seven; - Thou hast not fallen from Heaven - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - How large in thy lustre, how bright - The beauty of promise thou wearest! - The message of Morning thou bearest, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - Aid us in putting to flight - The Shadows that darken about us, - Illumine within, as without, us, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - Shine through the thick of our fight; - Open the eyes of the sleeping; - Dry up the tears of the weeping, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - Purge with thy pureness our sight, - Thou light of the lost ones who love us, - Thou lamp of the Leader above us, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - Shine with transfiguring might, - Till earth shall reflect back as human - Thy Likeness, Celestial Woman, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - With the flame of thy radiance smite - The clouds that are veiling the vision - Of Woman’s millennial mission, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - * * - - Shine in the Depth and the Height, - And show us the treasuries olden - Of wisdom, the hidden, the golden, - Lucifer, Lady of Light! - - GERALD MASSEY. - ------ - -Footnote 19: - - The reader well versed in symbology and theogony is, of course, - aware that every god and goddess of the ancient pantheons is - androgynous in his or her genealogy. Thus our Lucifer, the - “Morning Star,” being identical with Venus, is, therefore, the - same as the Chaldean Istar, or the Jewish Astoreth, to whom the - Hebrews offered cakes and buns, addressing her as the Lady of - Light and the Queen of Heaven. She is the “great star,” - _Wormwood_, whom the misanthropical St. John sees falling down to - the earth in _Revelation_ (Chapter viii.), as her great rival is - _Aima_, the fruitful mother, or the third Sephiroth Binah (IHVH - ALHIM, or the female Jah-hovah), the “woman with child,” in - Chapter xii. of the same. - ------ - - - - - THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES. - - -It is intensely interesting to follow season after season the rapid -evolution and change of public thought in the direction of the -mystical. The educated mind is most undeniably attempting to free -itself from the heavy fetters of materialism. The ugly caterpillar -is writhing in the agonies of death, under the powerful efforts of -the psychic butterfly to escape from its science-built prison, and -every day brings some new glad tidings of one or more such mental -births to light. - -As the New York “Path” truly remarks in its September issue, when -“Theosophical and kindred topics ... are made the texts for novels,” -and, we may add, scientific essays and _brochures_, “the implication -is that interest in them has become diffused through all social -ranks.” That kind of literature is “paradoxically proof that -Occultism has passed beyond the region of careless amusement and -entered that of serious enquiry.” The reader has but to throw a -retrospective glance at the publications of the last few years to -find that such topics as Mysticism, Magic, Sorcery, Spiritualism, -Theosophy, Mesmerism, or, as it is now called, Hypnotism, all the -various branches in short of the _Occult_ side of nature, are -becoming predominant in every kind of literature. They visibly -increase in proportion to the efforts made to discredit the -movements in the cause of truth, and strangle enquiry—whether on the -field of theosophy or spiritualism—by trying to besmear their most -prominent heralds, pioneers and defenders, with tar and feathers. - -The key-note for mystic and theosophic literature was Marion -Crawford’s “Mr. Isaacs.” It was followed by his “Zoroaster.” Then -followed “The Romance of Two Worlds,” by Marie Corelli; R. Louis -Stephenson’s “Mr. Hyde and Dr. Jekyll;” “The Fallen Idol,” by -Anstey; “King Solomon’s Mines” and the thrice famous “She,” by Rider -Haggard; “Affinities” and “The Brother of the Shadow,” by Mrs. -Campbell Praed; Edmund Downey’s “House of Tears,” and many others -less noticeable. And now there comes a fresh outburst in Florence -Marryat’s “Daughter of the Tropics,” and F. C. Philips’ “Strange -Adventures of Lucy Smith.” It is unnecessary to mention in detail -the literature produced by avowed theosophists and occultists, some -of whose works are very remarkable, while others are positively -scientific, such as S. L. Macgregor Mathers’ “Kabbalah Unveiled,” -and Dr. F. Hartmann’s “Paracelsus,” “Magic, White and Black,” &c. We -have also to note the fact that theosophy has now crossed the -Channel, and is making its way into French literature. “La France” -publishes a strange romance by Ch. Chincholle, pregnant with -theosophy, occultism and mesmerism, and called “_La Grande -Pretresse_,” while _La Revue politique et litteraire_ (19 Feb. 1887, -_et seq._) contained over the signature of Th. Bentzon, a novel -called _Emancipée_, wherein esoteric doctrines and adepts are -mentioned in conjunction with the names of well-known theosophists. -A sign of the times! - -Literature—especially in countries free from government -censorship—is the public heart and pulse. Besides the glaring fact -that were there no demand there would be no supply, current -literature is produced only to please, and is therefore evidently -the mirror which faithfully reflects the state of the public mind. -True, Conservative editors, and their submissive correspondents and -reporters, still go on slashing occasionally in print the fair faces -of mystic spiritualism and theosophy, and some of them are still -found, from time to time, indulging in a _brutal_ personal attack. -But they do no harm on the whole, except perhaps to their own -editorial reputations, as such editors can never be suspected of an -exuberance of culture and good taste after certain ungentlemanly -personal attacks. They do good on the contrary. For, while the -theosophists and spiritualists so attacked, may view the -Billingsgate poured upon them in a true Socratean spirit, and -console themselves with the knowledge that none of the epithets used -can possibly apply to them, on the other hand, _too much_ abuse and -vilification generally ends by awakening the public sympathy for the -victim, in the right-minded and the impartial, at any rate. - -In England people seem to like fair play on the whole. It is not -_bashi-boozook_-like actions, the doughty deeds of those who -delight in mutilating the slain and the wounded, that can find -sympathy for any great length of time with the public. If—as -maintained by our lay enemies and repeated by some _naïf_ and too -sanguine missionary organs—Spiritualism and Theosophy are “dead as -a door-nail” (_sic_, _vide_ American Christian periodicals),—aye, -“dead and buried,” why, in such case, good Christian fathers, not -leave the dead at rest till “Judgment Day”? And if they are not, -then editors—the profane as well as the clerical—why should you -still fear? Do not show yourselves such cowards if you have the -truth on your side. _Magna est veritas et prevalebit_, and “murder -will out,” as it always has, sooner or later. Open your columns to -_free_ and fearless discussion, and do as the theosophical -periodicals have ever done, and as LUCIFER is now preparing to do. -The “bright Son of the morning” fears no light. He courts it, and -is prepared to publish any inimical contributions (couched, of -course, in decent language), however much at variance with his -theosophical views. He is determined to give a fair hearing in any -and every case, to both contending parties and allow things and -thoughts to be judged on their respective merits. For why, or what -should one dread when fact and truth are one’s only aim? _Du choc -des opinions jaillit la verité_ was said by a French philosopher. -If Theosophy and Spiritualism are no better than “gigantic frauds -and will-o’-the-wisps of the age” why such _expensive_ crusades -against both? And if they are not, why should Agnostics and -searchers after truth in general, help bigoted and narrow-minded -materialists, sectarians and dogmatists to hide our light under a -bushel by mere brutal force and usurped authority? It is easy to -surprise the good faith of the fair-minded. Still easier to -discredit that, which by its intrinsic strangeness, is already -unpopular and could hardly be credited in its palmiest days. “We -welcome no supposition so eagerly as one which accords with and -intensifies our own prejudices” says, in “Don Jesualdo,” a popular -author. Therefore, _facts_ become often cunningly concocted -“frauds;” and self-evident, glaring lies are accepted as gospel -truths at the first breeze of Don Basilio’s _Calumnia_, by those -to whose hard-crusted pre-conceptions such slander is like -heavenly dew. - -But, beloved enemies, “the light of Lucifer” may, after all, dispel -some of the surrounding darkness. The mighty roaring voice of -denunciation, so welcome to those whose little spites and hates and -mental stagnation in the grasp of the social respectability it -panders to, may yet be silenced by the voice of truth—“the still -small voice”—whose destiny it ever was to first preach in the -desert. That cold and artificial light which still seems to shine so -dazzlingly over the alleged iniquities of professional mediums and -the supposed sins of commission and omission of _non-professional_ -experimentalists, of free and independent theosophists, may yet be -extinguished at the height of all its glory. For it is not quite the -perpetual lamp of the alchemist philosopher. Still less is it that -“light which never shone on sea or land,” that ray of divine -intuition, the spark which glimmers latent in the spiritual, -never-erring perceptions of man and woman, and which is now -awakening—for its time is at hand. A few years more, and the -Aladdin’s lamp, which called forth the ministering genius thereof, -who, making three salutes to the public, proceeded forthwith to -devour mediums and theosophists, like a juggler who swallows swords -at a village fair, will get out of order. Its light, over which the -anti-theosophists are crowing victory to this day, shall get dim. -And then, perhaps, it will be discovered that what was claimed as a -direct ray from the source of eternal truth was no better than a -penny rush-light, in whose deceitful smoke and soot people got -hypnotized, and saw everything upside down. It will be found that -the hideous monsters of fraud and imposture had no existence outside -the murky and dizzied brains of the Aladdins on their journey of -discovery. And that, finally, the good people who listened to them, -had been all the time seeing sights and hearing things under -unconscious and mutual _suggestion_. - -This is a scientific explanation, and requires no black magicians or -_dugpas_ at work; for “suggestion” as now practised by the sorcerers -of science is—_dugpaship_ itself, _pur sang_. No Eastern “adept of -the _left_ hand” can do more mischief by his infernal art than a -grave hypnotiser of the Faculty of Medicine, a disciple of Charcot, -or of any other scientific _light_ of the first magnitude. In Paris, -as in St. Petersburg, crimes have been committed under “suggestion.” -Divorces have occurred, and husbands have nearly killed their wives -and their supposed co-respondents, owing to tricks played on -innocent and respectable women, who have thus had their fair name -and all their future life blasted for ever. A son, under such -influence, broke open the desk of an avaricious father, who caught -him in the act, and nearly shot him in a fit of rage. One of the -keys of Occultism is in the hands of science—cold, heartless, -materialistic, and crassly ignorant of the other truly psychic side -of the phenomenon: hence, powerless to draw a line of demarcation -between the physiological and the purely spiritual effects of the -disease inoculated, and unable to prevent future results and -consequences of which it has no knowledge, and over which it has, -therefore, no control. - -We find in the “Lotus” of September, 1887, the following:— - - A French paper, the _Paris_, for August 12th, contains a long and - excellent article by G. Montorgueil, entitled, _The Accursed - Sciences_, from which we extract the following passage, since we - are, unfortunately, unable to quote the whole:— - - “Some months ago, already, in I forget what case, the question of - ‘suggestion’ was raised and taken account of by the judges. We - shall certainly see people in the dock accused of occult - malpractices. But how will the prosecution go to work? What - arguments will it bring to bear? The crime by ‘suggestion’ is the - ideal of a crime without proof. In such a case the gravest charges - will never be more than presumptions, and fugitive presumptions. - On what fragile scaffolding of suspicions will the charge rest? No - examination, but a moral one, will be possible. We shall have to - resign ourselves to hearing the Solicitor-general say to the - accused: ‘Accused, it appears from a perquisition made into your - brain, etc.’ - - Ah, the poor jurymen! it is they who are to be pitied. Taking - their task to heart, they already have the greatest difficulty in - separating the true from the false, even in rough and ready cases, - the facts of which are obvious, all the details of which are - tangible and the responsibilities clear. And we are going to ask - them on their soul and conscience to decide questions of black - magic! Verily their reason will not hold out through the - fortnight; it will give way before that and sink into thaumaturgy. - - We move fast. The strange trials for sorcery will blossom anew; - somnabules who were merely grotesque will appear in a tragic - light; the coffee grounds, which so far only risked the police - court, will hear their sentence at the assizes. The evil eye will - figure among criminal offences. These last years of the XIXth - century will have seen us step from progress to progress, till we - reach at last this judicial enormity: a second Laubardemont - prosecuting another Urbain Grandier.” - -Serious, scientific, and political papers are full of earnest -discussions on the subject. A St. Petersburg “Daily” has a long -_feuilleton_ on the “Bearing of _Hypnotic Suggestions_ upon Criminal -Law.” “Cases of Hypnotism with criminal motives have of late begun -to increase in an ever progressing ratio,” it tells its readers. And -it is not the only newspaper, nor is Russia the only country where -the same tale is told. Careful investigations and researches have -been made by distinguished lawyers and medical authorities. Data -have been assiduously collected and have revealed that the curious -phenomenon,—which sceptics have hitherto derided, and young people -have included among their evening _petits jeux innocents_,—is a new -and terrible danger to state and society. - -Two facts have now become patent to law and science:— - - (I.) _That, in the perceptions of the hypnotised subject, the - visionary representations called forth by “suggestion,” become - real existing actualities, the subject being, for the moment, - the automatic executor of the will of the hypnotiser; and_— - - (II.) _That the great majority of persons experimented upon, is - subject to hypnotic suggestion._ - -Thus Liébeault found only _sixty_ subjects intractable out of the -_seven hundred_ he experimented upon; and Bernheim, out of 1,014 -subjects, failed with only _twenty-six_. The field for the -natural-born _jadoo-wala_ (sorcery-mongers), is vast indeed! Evil -has acquired a play-ground on which it may now exercise its sway -upon many a generation of unconscious victims. For crimes undreamt -of in the waking state, and felonies of the blackest dye, are now -invited and encouraged by the new “accursed science.” The real -perpetrators of these deeds of darkness may now remain for ever -hidden from the vengeance of human justice. The hand which executes -the criminal suggestion is only that of an irresponsible automaton, -whose memory preserves no trace of it, and who, moreover, is a -witness who can easily be disposed of by compulsory suicide—again -under “suggestion.” What better means than these could be offered to -the fiends of lust and revenge, to those dark Powers—called human -passions—ever on the look out to break the universal commandment: -“Thou shalt not steal, nor murder, nor lust after thy neighbour’s -wife?” Liébeault _suggested_ to a young girl that she should poison -herself with prussic acid, and she swallowed the supposed drug -without one moment’s hesitation; Dr. Liégois _suggested_ to a young -woman that she owed him 5,000 francs, and the subject forthwith -signed a cheque for the amount Bernheim _suggested_ to another -hysterical girl a long and complicated vision with regard to a -criminal case. Two days after, although the hypnotiser had not -exercised any new pressure upon her in the interim, she repeated -distinctly the whole suggested story to a lawyer sent to her for the -purpose. Had her evidence been seriously accepted, it would have -brought the accused to the guillotine. - -These cases present two dark and terrible aspects. From the moral -stand point, such processes and _suggestions_ leave an indelible -stain upon the purity of the subject’s nature. Even the innocent -mind of a ten year old child can thus be innoculated with vice, the -poison-germ of which will develop in his subsequent life. - -On the judicial aspect it is needless to enter in great detail. -Suffice to say that it is this characteristic feature of the -hypnotic state—the absolute surrender of will and self-consciousness -to the hypnotiser—which possesses such importance, from its bearing -upon crime, in the eyes of legal authorities. For if the hypnotiser -has the subject entirely at his beck and call, so that he can cause -him to commit any crime, acting, so to say, invisibly within him, -then what are not the terrible “judicial mistakes” to be expected? -What wonder then, that the jurisprudence of one country after the -other has taken alarm, and is devising, one after the other, -measures for repressing the exercise of hypnotism! In Denmark it has -just been forbidden. Scientists have experimented upon sensitives -with so much success that a hypnotised victim has been jeered and -hooted through the streets on his way to commit a crime, which he -would have completed unconsciously, had not the victim been warned -beforehand by the hypnotiser. - -In Brussels a recent and sad case is well-known to all. A young girl -of good family was seduced while in a hypnotised state by a man who -had first subjected her to his influence at a social gathering. She -only realised her condition a few months later, when her relatives, -who divined the criminal, forced her seducer to make the only -possible reparation—that of marrying his victim. - -The French Academy has just been debating the question:—how far a -hypnotised subject, from a mere victim, can become a regular tool of -crime. Of course, no jurist or legislator can remain indifferent to -this question; and it was averred that the crimes committed under -_suggestion_ are so unprecedented that some of them can hardly be -brought within the scope of the law. Hence the prudent legal -prohibition, just adopted in France, which enacts that no person, -save those legally qualified to exercise the medical profession, -shall hypnotise any other person. Even the physician who enjoys such -legal right is permitted to hypnotise a person only in the presence -of another qualified medical man, and with the written permission of -the subject. Public _séances_ of hypnotism are forbidden, and they -are strictly confined to medical _cliniques_ and laboratories. Those -who break this law are liable to a heavy fine and imprisonment. - -But the keynote has been struck, and many are the ways in which this -_black art_ may be used—laws notwithstanding. That it will be so -used, the vile passions inherent in human nature are sufficient -guarantee. - -Many and strange will be the romances yet enacted; for truth is -often stranger than fiction, and what is thought fiction is still -more often truth. - -No wonder then that occult literature is growing with every day. -Occultism and sorcery are in the air, with no true philosophical -knowledge to guide the experimenters and thus check evil results. -“Works of _fiction_,” the various novels and romances are called. -“Fiction” in the arrangement of their characters and the adventures -of their heroes and heroines—admitted. Not so, as to the _facts_ -presented. These are _no fictions_, but true _presentiments_ of what -lies in the bosom of the future, and much of which is already -born—nay corroborated by _scientific_ experiments. Sign of the -times! Close of a psychic cycle! The time for phenomena with, or -through mediums, whether professional or otherwise, is gone by. It -was the early season of the blossoming, of the era mentioned even in -the Bible;[20] the tree of Occultism is now preparing for -“fruiting,” and the Spirit of the Occult is awakening in the blood -of the new generations. If the old men only “dream dreams,” the -young ones see already visions,[21] and—record them in novels and -works of fiction. Woe to the ignorant and the unprepared, and those -who listen to the syrens of materialistic science! For indeed, -indeed, many will be the unconscious crimes committed, and many will -be the victims who will innocently suffer death by hanging and -decapitation at the hands of the righteous judges and the _too -innocent_ jurymen, both alike ignorant of the fiendish power of -“SUGGESTION.” - ------ - -Footnote 20: - - “It shall come to pass that I will pour out my Spirit upon all - flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men - shall dream dreams; your young men shall see visions” (Joel ii. - 28). - -Footnote 21: - - It is curious to note that Mr. Louis Stevenson, one of the most - powerful of our imaginative writers, stated recently to a reporter - that he is in the habit of constructing the plots of his tales in - _dreams_, and among others that of Dr. Jekyll. “I dreamed,” he - continued, “the story of ‘Olalla’ ... and I have at the present - moment two unwritten stories which I have likewise dreamed.... - Even when fast asleep I know that it is I who am inventing.”... - But who knows whether the idea of “invention” is not also “a - dream”! - ------ - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - - - SELF-KNOWLEDGE. - -The first necessity for obtaining self-knowledge is to become -profoundly conscious of ignorance; to feel with every fibre of the -heart that one is _ceaselessly_ self-deceived. - -The second requisite is the still deeper conviction that such -knowledge—such intuitive and certain knowledge—can be obtained by -effort. - -The third and most important is an indomitable determination to -obtain and face that knowledge. - -Self-knowledge of this kind is unattainable by what men usually call -“self-analysis.” It is not reached by reasoning or any brain -process; for it is the awakening to consciousness of the Divine -nature of man. - -To obtain this knowledge is a greater achievement than to command -the elements or to know the future. - - COMMENTS ON “LIGHT ON THE PATH.” - - BY THE AUTHOR; (_continued_). - - “Before the ear can hear, it must have lost its sensitiveness.” - - -The first four rules of Light on the Path are, undoubtedly, curious -though the statement may seem, the most important in the whole book, -save one only. Why they are so important is that they contain the -vital law, the very creative essence of the astral man. And it is -only in the astral (or self-illuminated) consciousness that the -rules which follow them have any living meaning. Once attain to the -use of the astral senses and it becomes a matter of course that one -commences to use them; and the later rules are but guidance in their -use. When I speak like this I mean, naturally, that the first four -rules are the ones which are of importance and interest to those who -read them in print upon a page. When they are engraved on the man’s -heart and on his life, unmistakably then the other rules become not -merely interesting, or extraordinary, metaphysical statements, but -actual facts in life which have to be grasped and experienced. - -The four rules stand written in the great chamber of every actual -lodge of a living Brotherhood. Whether the man is about to sell his -soul to the devil, like Faust; whether he is to be worsted in the -battle, like Hamlet; or whether he is to pass on within the -precincts; in any case these words are for him. The man can choose -between virtue and vice, but not until he is a man; a babe or a wild -animal cannot so choose. Thus with the disciple, he must first -become a disciple before he can even see the paths to choose -between. This effort of creating himself as a disciple, the -re-birth, he must do for himself without any teacher. Until the four -rules are learned no teacher can be of any use to him; and that is -why “the Masters” are referred to in the way they are. No real -masters, whether adepts in power, in love, or in blackness, can -affect a man till these four rules are passed. - -Tears, as I have said, may be called the moisture of life. The soul -must have laid aside the emotions of humanity, must have secured a -balance which cannot be shaken by misfortune, before its eyes can -open upon the super-human world. - -The voice of the Masters is always in the world; but only those hear -it whose ears are no longer receptive of the sounds which affect the -personal life. Laughter no longer lightens the heart, anger may no -longer enrage it, tender words bring it no balm. For that within, to -which the ears are as an outer gateway, is an unshaken place of -peace in itself which no person can disturb. - -As the eyes are the windows of the soul, so are the ears its -gateways or doors. Through them comes knowledge of the confusion of -the world. The great ones who have conquered life, who have become -more than disciples, stand at peace and undisturbed amid the -vibration and kaleidoscopic movement of humanity. They hold within -themselves a certain knowledge, as well as a perfect peace; and thus -they are not roused or excited by the partial and erroneous -fragments of information which are brought to their ears by the -changing voices of those around them. When I speak of knowledge, I -mean intuitive knowledge. This certain information can never be -obtained by hard work, or by experiment; for these methods are only -applicable to matter, and matter is in itself a perfectly uncertain -substance, continually affected by change. The most absolute and -universal laws of natural and physical life, as understood by the -scientist, will pass away when the life of this universe has passed -away, and only its soul is left in the silence. What then will be -the value of the knowledge of its laws acquired by industry and -observation? I pray that no reader or critic will imagine that by -what I have said I intend to depreciate or disparage acquired -knowledge, or the work of scientists. On the contrary, I hold that -scientific men are the pioneers of modern thought. The days of -literature and of art, when poets and sculptors saw the divine -light, and put it into their own great language—these days lie -buried in the long past with the ante-Phidian sculptors and the -pre-Homeric poets. The mysteries no longer rule the world of thought -and beauty; human life is the governing power, not that which lies -beyond it. But the scientific workers are progressing, not so much -by their own will as by sheer force of circumstances, towards the -far line which divides things interpretable from things -uninterpretable. Every fresh discovery drives them a step onward. -Therefore do I very highly esteem the knowledge obtained by work and -experiment. - -But intuitive knowledge is an entirely different thing. It is not -acquired in any way, but is, so to speak, a faculty of the soul; not -the animal soul, that which becomes a ghost after death, when lust -or liking or the memory of ill-deeds holds it to the neighbourhood -of human beings, but the divine soul which animates all the external -forms of the individualised being. - -This is, of course, a faculty which indwells in that soul, which is -inherent. The would-be disciple has to arouse himself to the -consciousness of it by a fierce and resolute and indomitable effort -of will. I use the word indomitable for a special reason. Only he -who is untameable, who cannot be dominated, who knows he has to play -the lord over men, over facts, over all things save his own -divinity, can arouse this faculty. “With faith all things are -possible.” The sceptical laugh at faith and pride themselves on its -absence from their own minds. The truth is that faith is a great -engine, an enormous power, which in fact can accomplish all things. -For it is the covenant or engagement between man’s divine part and -his lesser self. - -The use of this engine is quite necessary in order to obtain -intuitive knowledge; for unless a man believes such knowledge exists -within himself how can he claim and use it? - -Without it he is more helpless than any drift-wood or wreckage on -the great tides of the ocean. They are cast hither and thither -indeed; so may a man be by the chances of fortune. But such -adventures are purely external and of very small account. A slave -may be dragged through the streets in chains, and yet retain the -quiet soul of a philosopher, as was well seen in the person of -Epictetus. A man may have every worldly prize in his possession, and -stand absolute master of his personal fate, to all appearance, and -yet he knows no peace, no certainty, because he is shaken within -himself by every tide of thought that he touches on. And these -changing tides do not merely sweep the man bodily hither and thither -like driftwood on the water; that would be nothing. They enter into -the gateways of his soul, and wash over that soul and make it blind -and blank and void of all permanent intelligence, so that passing -impressions affect it. - -To make my meaning plainer I will use an illustration. Take an -author at his writing, a painter at his canvas, a composer listening -to the melodies that dawn upon his glad imagination; let any one of -these workers pass his daily hours by a wide window looking on a -busy street. The power of the animating life blinds sight and -hearing alike, and the great traffic of the city goes by like -nothing but a passing pageant. But a man whose mind is empty, whose -day is objectless, sitting at that same window, notes the passers-by -and remembers the faces that chance to please or interest him. So it -is with the mind in its relation to eternal truth. If it no longer -transmits its fluctuations, its partial knowledge, its unreliable -information to the soul, then in the inner place of peace already -found when the first rule has been learned—in that inner place there -leaps into flame the light of actual knowledge. Then the ears begin -to hear. Very dimly, very faintly at first. And, indeed, so faint -and tender are these first indications of the commencement of true -actual life, that they are sometimes pushed aside as mere fancies, -mere imaginings. - -But before these are capable of becoming more than mere imaginings, -the abyss of nothingness has to be faced in another form. The utter -silence which can only come by closing the ears to all transitory -sounds comes as a more appalling horror than even the formless -emptiness of space. Our only mental conception of blank space is, I -think, when reduced to its barest element of thought, that of black -darkness. This is a great physical terror to most persons, and when -regarded as an eternal and unchangeable fact, must mean to the mind -the idea of annihilation rather than anything else. But it is the -obliteration of one sense only; and the sound of a voice may come -and bring comfort even in the profoundest darkness. The disciple, -having found his way into this blackness, which is the fearful -abyss, must then so shut the gates of his soul that no comforter can -enter there nor any enemy. And it is in making this second effort -that the fact of pain and pleasure being but one sensation becomes -recognisable by those who have before been unable to perceive it. -For when the solitude of silence is reached the soul hungers so -fiercely and passionately for some sensation on which to rest, that -a painful one would be as keenly welcomed as a pleasant one. When -this consciousness is reached the courageous man by seizing and -retaining it, may destroy the “sensitiveness” at once. When the ear -no longer discriminates between that which is pleasant or that which -is painful, it will no longer be affected by the voices of others. -And then it is safe and possible to open the doors of the soul. - -“Sight” is the first effort, and the easiest, because it is -accomplished partly by an intellectual effort. The intellect can -conquer the heart, as is well known in ordinary life. Therefore, -this preliminary step still lies within the dominion of matter. But -the second step allows of no such assistance, nor of any material -aid whatever. Of course, I mean by material aid the action of the -brain, or emotions, or human soul. In compelling the ears to listen -only to the eternal silence, the being we call man becomes something -which is no longer man. A very superficial survey of the thousand -and one influences which are brought to bear on us by others will -show that this must be so. A disciple will fulfil all the duties of -his manhood; but he will fulfil them according to his own sense of -right, and not according to that of any person or body of persons. -This is a very evident result of following the creed of knowledge -instead of any of the blind creeds. - -To obtain the pure silence necessary for the disciple, the heart and -emotions, the brain and its intellectualisms, have to be put aside. -Both are but mechanisms, which will perish with the span of man’s -life. It is the essence beyond, that which is the motive power, and -makes man live, that is now compelled to rouse itself and act. Now -is the greatest hour of danger. In the first trial men go mad with -fear; of this first trial Bulwer Lytton wrote. No novelist has -followed to the second trial, though some of the poets have. Its -subtlety and great danger lies in the fact that in the measure of a -man’s strength is the measure of his chance of passing beyond it or -coping with it at all. If he has power enough to awaken that -unaccustomed part of himself, the supreme essence, then has he power -to lift the gates of gold, then is he the true alchemist, in -possession of the elixir of life. - -It is at this point of experience that the occultist becomes -separated from all other men and enters on to a life which is his -own; on to the path of individual accomplishment instead of mere -obedience to the genii which rule our earth. This raising of himself -into an individual power does in reality identify him with the -nobler forces of life and make him one with them. For they stand -beyond the powers of this earth and the laws of this universe. Here -lies man’s only hope of success in the great effort; to leap right -away from his present standpoint to his next and at once become an -intrinsic part of the divine power as he has been an intrinsic part -of the intellectual power, of the great nature to which he belongs. -He stands always in advance of himself, if such a contradiction can -be understood. It is the men who adhere to this position, who -believe in their innate power of progress, and that of the whole -race, who are the elders brothers, the pioneers. Each man has to -accomplish the great leap for himself and without aid; yet it is -something of a staff to lean on to know that others have gone on -that road. It is possible that they have been lost in the abyss; no -matter, they have had the courage to enter it. Why I say that it is -possible they have been lost in the abyss is because of this fact, -that one who has passed through is unrecognizable until the other -and altogether new condition is attained by both. It is unnecessary -to enter upon the subject of what that condition is at present. I -only say this, that in the early state in which man is entering upon -the silence he loses knowledge of his friends, of his lovers, of all -who have been near and dear to him; and also loses sight of his -teachers and of those who have preceded him on his way. I explain -this because scarce one passes through without bitter complaint. -Could but the mind grasp beforehand that the silence must be -complete, surely this complaint need not arise as a hindrance on the -path. Your teacher, or your predecessor may hold your hand in his, -and give you the utmost sympathy the human heart is capable of. But -when the silence and the darkness comes, you lose all knowledge of -him; you are alone and he cannot help you, not because his power is -gone, but because you have invoked your great enemy. - -By your great enemy, I mean yourself. If you have the power to face -your own soul in the darkness and silence, you will have conquered -the physical or animal self which dwells in sensation only. - -This statement, I feel, will appear involved; but in reality it is -quite simple. Man, when he has reached his fruition, and -civilization is at its height, stands between two fires. Could he -but claim his great inheritance, the encumbrance of the mere animal -life would fall away from him without difficulty. But he does not do -this, and so the races of men flower and then droop and die and -decay off the face of the earth, however splendid the bloom may have -been. And it is left to the individual to make this great effort; to -refuse to be terrified by his greater nature, to refuse to be drawn -back by his lesser or more material self. Every individual who -accomplishes this is a redeemer of the race. He may not blazon forth -his deeds, he may dwell in secret and silence; but it is a fact that -he forms a link between man and his divine part; between the known -and the unknown; between the stir of the market-place and the -stillness of the snow-capped Himalayas. He has not to go about among -men in order to form this link; in the astral he _is_ that link, and -this fact makes him a being of another order from the rest of -mankind. Even so early on the road towards knowledge, when he has -but taken the second step, he finds his footing more certain, and -becomes conscious that he is a recognised part of a whole. - -This is one of the contradictions in life which occur so -constantly that they afford fuel to the fiction writer. The -occultist finds them become much more marked as he endeavours to -live the life he has chosen. As he retreats within himself and -becomes self-dependent, he finds himself more definitely becoming -part of a great tide of definite thought and feeling. When he has -learned the first lesson, conquered the hunger of the heart, and -refused to live on the love of others, he finds himself more -capable of inspiring love. As he flings life away it comes to him -in a new form and with a new meaning. The world has always been a -place with many contradictions in it, to the man; when he becomes -a disciple he finds life is describable as a series of paradoxes. -This is a fact in nature, and the reason for it is intelligible -enough. Man’s soul “dwells like a star apart,” even that of the -vilest among us; while his consciousness is under the law of -vibratory and sensuous life. This alone is enough to cause those -complications of character which are the material for the -novelist; every man is a mystery, to friend and enemy alike, and -to himself. His motives are often undiscoverable, and he cannot -probe to them or know why he does this or that. The disciple’s -effort is that of awaking consciousness in this starry part of -himself, where his power and divinity lie sleeping. As this -consciousness becomes awakened, the contradictions in the man -himself become more marked than ever; and so do the paradoxes -which he lives through. For, of course man creates his own life; -and “adventures are to the adventurous” is one of those wise -proverbs which are drawn from actual fact, and cover the whole -area of human experience. - -Pressure on the divine part of man re-acts upon the animal part. As -the silent soul awakes it makes the ordinary life of the man more -purposeful, more vital, more real, and responsible. To keep to the -two instances already mentioned, the occultist who has withdrawn -into his own citadel has found his strength; immediately he becomes -aware of the demands of duty upon him. He does not obtain his -strength by his own right, but because he is a part of the whole; -and as soon as he is safe from the vibration of life and can stand -unshaken, the outer world cries out to him to come and labour in it. -So with the heart. When it no longer wishes to take, it is called -upon to give abundantly. - -“Light on the Path” has been called a book of paradoxes, and very -justly; what else could it be, when it deals with the actual -personal experience of the disciple? - -To have acquired the astral senses of sight and hearing; or in other -words to have attained perception and opened the doors of the soul, -are gigantic tasks and may take the sacrifice of many successive -incarnations. And yet, when the will has reached its strength, the -whole miracle may be worked in a second of time. Then is the -disciple the servant of Time no longer. - -These two first steps are negative; that is to say they imply -retreat from a present condition of things rather than advance -towards another. The two next are active, implying the advance into -another state of being.[22] - - Δ - - (_To be continued._) - ------ - -Footnote 22: - - The correspondence with reference to these “Comments” will be - found in the Correspondence columns. - ------ - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - WILL AND DESIRE. - -WILL is the exclusive possession of man on this our plane of -consciousness. It divides him from the brute in whom instinctive -desire only is active. - -DESIRE, in its widest application, is the one creative force in the -Universe. In this sense it is indistinguishable from Will; but we -men never know desire under this form while we remain only men. -Therefore Will and Desire are here considered as opposed. - -Thus Will is the offspring of the Divine, the God in man; Desire the -motive power of the animal life. - -Most men live in and by desire, mistaking it for will. But he who -would achieve must separate will from desire, and make his will the -ruler; for desire is unstable and ever changing, while will is -steady and constant. - -Both will and desire are absolute _creators_, forming the man -himself and his surroundings. But will creates intelligently—desire -blindly and unconsciously. The man, therefore, makes himself in the -image of his desires, unless he creates himself in the likeness of -the Divine, through his will, the child of the light. - -His task is twofold: to awaken the will, to strengthen it by use and -conquest, to make it absolute ruler within his body; and, parallel -with this, to purify desire. - -Knowledge and will are the tools for the accomplishment of this -purification. - - A LAW OF LIFE: KARMA. - - (_Continued._) - -In illustration of the Mahatmic condition, it may be well to quote -some extracts from “Five Years of Theosophy,” on pp. 215, _et seq._ - -“The principal object of the Yogi is to realise the oneness of -existence, and the practice of morality is the most powerful means -to that end. The principal obstacle to this realization is the -inborn habit of man of always placing himself at the centre of the -Universe. Whatever a man might act, think, or feel, the -irrepressible personality is sure to be the central figure. This, as -will appear on reflection, is that which prevents every individual -from filling his proper sphere in existence, where he only is in -place, and no other individual is. The realization of this harmony -is the practical objective aspect of the ‘Grand Problem.’.... It -availeth nothing to intellectually grasp the notion of your being -everything ... if it is not realized in daily life. To confuse ‘meum -and tuum’ in the vulgar sense is but to destroy the harmony of -existence by a false assertion of ‘I,’ and is as foolish as the -attempt to nourish the legs at the expense of the arms. You cannot -be one with Nature, unless all your acts, thoughts, and feelings, -synchronize with the onward march of Nature. What is meant by a -Brahmajnani being beyond the reach of Karma, can be realised only by -a man who has found out his exact position in harmony with the one -Life in Nature; that man can see how a Brahmajnani can act only in -unison with Nature, and never in discord with it.” - -“To use the phraseology of old occult writers, the Brahmajnani is a -real co-worker with Nature.... Many have fallen into the error of -supposing that a human being can escape the operation of the law of -Karma by adopting a condition of masterly inactivity, entirely -losing sight of the fact that even a rigid abstinence from physical -acts does not produce inactivity on the higher astral and spiritual -planes.... Such a supposition is nothing short of a delusion.... -There is a tendency in every department of Nature for an act to -repeat itself. The Karma acquired in the last preceding birth is -always trying to forge fresh links in the chain, and thereby lead to -continued material existence. This tendency can only be counteracted -by unselfishly performing all the duties pertaining to the sphere in -which a person is born. Such a course can alone produce purification -of the mind, without which the capacity of perceiving spiritual -truths can never be acquired.” - -Such a moral standard as this may be considered as the main working -factor in the existence of a Mahatma. He exists by, through, and in -harmony, and, as Mahatma, is harmony itself. It is impossible to -carry these speculations further, for beyond the fact that these -considerations are in analogy with the great law of nature, ordinary -human intelligence can gain nothing from them. The Mahatma is a -Mahatma, and only those who have reached that supreme condition can -describe it, and even then it is doubtful whether words would -express it. The word Mahatma has been used with some hesitation, as -it might possibly require an article of great length to give the -least idea of what it means. But some idea of the true position of -these exalted beings (known in India and Tibet by this name) may be -gathered from the foregoing pages if any conception of the -connection of humanity with the law of Karma, and also of liberated -humanity with the law of harmony, can be obtained. - -In the preceding pages especial reference has been made to the fact -that the Mahatma, as such, has no Karma, but it is by no means -intended to convey the idea that all who enter Occultism, and even -those who have progressed a very long way on the Path of Life, are -Mahatmas. Nay, more! There are many of them who are very holy, and -even exalted, beings, but who are still subject to the law of Karma, -as applied to ordinary humanity. But they have acquired self-mastery -to an extraordinary degree, and their whole attention is “fixed on -the eternal.” Thus, so far as they are concerned, they generate no -new Karma in the restricted sense, but only progress towards -Universal Harmony. - -To put it shortly, they exhaust their old Karma of past lives, and -devote themselves to the production of Harmony. - -It is important to bear this in mind when the attention is turned to -the Karmic condition of ordinary humanity. For we are at once -brought face to face with the old and much disputed question between -free-will and predestination. - -At this point, therefore, it will be necessary to enter, at some -length, on this question, because it has been supposed that the idea -of Karma is identical, or nearly so, with that of predestination. -Consequently, it will be necessary to attempt a definition of what -Free-will and Will are. Will, to the ordinary man, is known -according to his experience as the power to do or not to do an -action. So far, he is perfectly right, but, as usual, man limits the -action of his will to the physical plane, and takes no account of -even the mental plane. Even if he does not commit an action, he -cannot help thinking about it, because he has desired to do it—even -if he has repressed that desire. Nothing is more common than to hear -anyone say, “I can’t help my likes and dislikes,” or, in other -words, their attractions and repulsions, desires and the reverse. -Consequently, until a man can control his desires, those desires -control his will, and, consequently, predestination appears to rule -the day. Thus we find that it is desire which impels man onward on -his course, and governs that course to a very large extent, and this -is the principle which is at its highest development in mankind as a -rule. Now if it be granted that the human personality—a transient -thing—has been constituted by man’s vanity as the centre of the -Universe, it is plain that the combination of this principle of -desire with the pronounced personality, will only serve to intensify -this personality and bind man fast to it. Man thus constituted is a -prisoner, and, more often than not, is so attached to his prison -that he prefers to flutter his wings against the bars of his cage, -instead of endeavouring to escape. But are there any means of -escape:—it may be asked? Desire binds man fast to his personality, -and intensifies one personality against another. Hence it is -productive of strife and discord, and militates strongly against the -law of universal harmony, or Karma, in this aspect. Thus desire and -Karma would seem to be in complete opposition, and desire cannot be -said to be a consequence of Karma. But really this is a confusion of -terms, for all this only exists in the world of effects and not in -that of causes. Desire is an effect of the accentuated personality, -and in its turn produces that personality. This constitutes the -prison, and the only means of escape from this prison of discord is -the endeavour to produce harmony in its place. Thus, therefore, we -have a definition of will as being not only that which represses a -desire, but also an emanation of the one divine principle, and -proceeding from the divine in man. In one sense, this will, this -harmonizer of the discord, is identical with Karma. As a -consequence, we can see that Karma produces punishment. That -punishment arises from the fact that the assertion of both desire -and will in any man makes him the battle-field of two opposing -forces—the desire to do anything, and thus gratify the desire, and -the will to repress it. Thus man must be a co-worker with nature and -the law of harmony. He has to repress the Typhonic principle of -desire and dissipate its energy. If he does not, it will bind him -more firmly to his “personal centre,” accentuate his punishment, and -hang like a millstone round his neck in the shape of Karmic effects, -which generate fresh tendencies and desires. - -The real function of will is to promote harmony between man and the -great law by repressing desire. Liberation from the _effects_ of -Karma will come to the man who grasps his whole individuality firmly -(not merely his personality), and, by the force of his awakened -_spiritual_ will, recognises this individuality as not himself, but -as a thing to use in passing beyond the life of the individuality. - -Thus the direction of will should be towards realizing one’s -aspirations, and so give man “a glimpse into the eternal;” the lower -consciousness will mirror these aspirations, even unconsciously to -itself, and then itself aspires and is elevated if all is in accord. - -But this is not free-will in the ordinary sense of the term; and it -does not seem possible that such should exist in view of the ideas -of Karmic effects and of reincarnation. It is in these two that lie -all the objections to free-will, because too short a view has been -taken of human life. In the dim vistas of time, and the countless -incarnations which have taken place in them, it will at once be seen -that the individual being has generated innumerable causes, the -effects of which are still to be experienced. Thus it is free-will -that man has, but not in the ordinary sense; it is free-will limited -by countless other free-wills around him—limited too and -circumscribed by his own acts. Man makes himself a prisoner, and -believes himself free. He is right in his belief in a measure, for -in virtue of the will he is free—to aspire and soar into the sublime -heights of his own higher nature. He is a prisoner and predestined -when he confines himself to his personality. Karma is at once his -gaoler and his liberator, and the decision lies in the intensity of -his aspirations, and is therefore in his own hands. Thus from the -personal view predestination is true, but not from that of the -spirit, which is free. From the latter view, and to a reasoning -mind, the Calvinistic doctrine sounds little short of blasphemy. It -is most certainly a contradiction in terms to speak of God as an -all-wise, all-powerful and entirely just God, and then to speak of -predestination as one of his laws, a law which, in face of the above -qualities, and with that of mercy in addition, dooms countless -millions to an eternity of pain and suffering as punishment, and -that too before they are even born. When the apparent injustice of -the lives of men is viewed and argued, it is because men forget what -they have done in previous lives, in which they have violated the -law in a very material direction, which leads them into these -positions and from which they have to escape. - -Thus the aspirations of man constitute that which sets man free, and -which therefore represent his free-will. It is then well to -endeavour to trace these aspirations in man with regard to Karma. -The second section of the third part of “Light on the Path,” speaks -on this point with no uncertain voice. The Occultist must pluck and -eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge, and step on either the good -or the evil path. And to do this knowingly produces great Karmic -results. The mass of men walk waveringly, uncertain as to their -goal, their standard of life is indefinite; the Occultist cannot be -half-hearted, nor can he return when he has passed the threshold. -“The individuality has approached the state of responsibility by -reason of growth; it cannot recede from it.” The one means of escape -from Karma is for the Occultist to live in the Eternal. But below -this—the threshold—many men aspire. On this point, we may quote, -“Five Years of Theosophy,” p. 226. - -“The unintelligent aspiration towards goodness propagates itself and -leads to good lives in the future; the intelligent aspiration -propagates itself in the same way, plus the propagation of -intelligence; and this distinction shows the gulf of difference -which may exist between the growth of a human soul, which merely -drifts along the stream of time, and that of one which is -consciously steered by an intelligent purpose throughout. The human -Ego, which acquires the habit of seeking for knowledge, becomes -invested, life after life, with the qualifications which ensure the -success of such a search, until the final success, achieved at some -critical period of its existence, carries it right up into the -company of those perfected Egos, which are the fully developed -flowers only expected from a few of the thousand seeds.” - -“Now it is clear that a slight impulse in a given direction, even on -the physical plane, does not produce the same effect as a stronger -one; so exactly in this matter of engendering habits which are -required to persist in their operation through a succession of lives -it is quite obvious that the strong impulse of a very ardent -aspiration towards knowledge will be more likely than a weaker one -to triumph over the so-called accidents of nature.” - -These considerations bring us to the question of those habits of -life which are more immediately associated with the pursuit of -occult science. It will be quite plain that the generation within -his own nature of affinities in the direction of spiritual progress -is a matter which has very little to do with the outer circumstances -of a man’s daily life. It cannot be dissociated from what may be -called the outer circumstances of his moral life, for an occult -student, whose moral nature is consciously ignoble, and who combines -the pursuit of knowledge with the practice of wrong, becomes by that -condition of things a student of sorcery rather than of true -Occultism. - -Thus so far traced Karma in one of its aspects is, “the ethical law -of causation.” This law descends in its action below the moral -plane, and is observed as the law of compensation on the physical -plane. Thus the physical, intellectual and emotional planes, are all -affected by Karma. The key to the situation is the mind; and, as we -have seen, the liberation of the mind must be the most difficult -task. If the powers of the mind are concentrated on the attainment -of the highest ideal, Karma has no basis in which to inhere and -consequently the tendency to commit actions from lower motives is -annihilated. Even repentance, from this point of view, is a mistake, -as it necessarily draws the mind back to the actions and motives -repented of. Consequently by the exertion of free will, in the -aspiration to realize the ideal, man becomes his own Saviour; and -the true way to do this is to look neither for reward nor -punishment; to detach the mind from all considerations below that of -the spiritual life, and to live only in the Eternal. - - ARCHIBALD KEIGHTLEY, M.B. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - “The great watch-word of the True is this:—in last analysis all - things are divine.”—(_Jasper Niemand in the “Path”_). - - A GHOST’S REVENGE. - - (_Conclusion._) - -Gaston paused at the entrance to the chamber, and even detected -himself in taking an involuntary step backwards, for the singular -illusion was heightened by the circumstance that many of the figures -which were suspended perpendicularly from the walls, and had fallen -a little forward, looked as though they were trying to let -themselves down. But the monk, nothing concerned, went stolidly on -down the long narrow chamber, which had other chambers, or -corridors, leading out of it in several directions. To speak more -correctly, there was a series of vaults, branching several ways, -some of which were shut off from the rest by open-work screens or -gates of wool. - -The walls on either side were piled high with coffins, the greater -number of which had one of their sides of glass, exposing to view -the hideous shrouded tenants. By whatever art it had been sought to -preserve these bodies from decay, Nature had declared in every -instance that it should not be, and no ghastlier assemblage of -mummified and mouldering corpses could have mocked the grief of the -relatives who should have given their dead to the grave. On the -blackened and distorted faces of some, it was not difficult to read -a look of supplication which the parted and fleshless lips seemed -striving to translate in this way: “Take us away from this dreadful -place and hide us in the decent earth.” - -They lay there, all of them, in their coffins, in wrappings of -linen, silk, and velvet; men, and women, and children, and little -infants; priests, nobles, merchants—a world of dead ones; hundreds -and thousands of them. - -Upon the faces of some, decay seemed working with a kind of -fantastic cruelty: punching a hole in the cheek or forehead; pushing -one eye from its socket, and leaving the other; stripping the skin -from one side of the face, and leaving it like a bit of wrinkled -parchment on the other. - -Some were made to laugh from ear to ear; some had the corners of the -mouth drawn down and the features twisted, as though pain haunted -them in death; others looked defiant, derisive, amazed, indignant. -The majesty of death had fled from all of them, mockery and shame -had come to take its place. The worms were being avenged on these -who should have gone to feed them. Silent and rotting, they had no -part in either world; and shrinking continually within their -coffins, they cried mutely on decay to hasten his work, and give -them the boon of nothingness. - -Above the line of coffins, on both sides of the chamber, hundreds of -clothed and hooded creatures—skeletons in all except the face, which -for the most part retained its covering of dried and tarnished -skin—were suspended from the walls. Each had a ticket pinned to its -dress, bearing the name and the date of death. - -It was these figures on the walls which gave the chamber its most -dreadful aspect. Some were suspended by the neck, like suicides left -there for an example. Others in various gruesome fashions parodied -the attitudes of life. There was a grotesque group composed of three -figures which had tumbled together in such a manner that the two on -either side appeared to whisper into the ears of the third. Some had -the neck awry, the head on one side, in a listening or questioning -attitude; of others the head had sunk forward on the narrow breast. -The jaw of some had dropped, and protruded a row of teeth, with a -savage or jeering air. - -Every variety of grimace and grin was shown on those appalling -faces; and as Gaston passed down the chamber fingers poked at him -from gaping sleeves; he was laughed at, mocked at, scowled at; and -when he looked behind him, all these skeletons were laughing, -mocking, and scowling at one another. Many of the faces were little -else but grinning mouths, and to those whose mouths stood wide open -his imagination gave voices, so that the vaults seemed filled with -the cries and laughter of the dead. - -The monk went steadily on in front of him, waving his candle to and -fro; and as the smell was nauseate and oppressed the nostrils, he -spat occasionally upon the floor. - -His bit of candle burnt itself out before he had taken Gaston -completely round, and he returned to fetch another, leaving Gaston -in a corner of the vault where the light was a mere glimmer. Right -opposite to him in this place was a massive coffin with rich -chasings, whose grisly inmate was wrapped from head to foot in a -mantle of black velvet. Every particle of flesh had melted from the -face, the hair had fallen from the head, the eyeless sockets stared -from the depths of the velvet hood. The skeleton was richly dight -and finely housed; it was Death himself lying in state. - -The monk came up with a fresh candle, and Gaston stooped down and -peered into the coffin. Above the figure’s head was affixed a -miniature on ivory, which represented a young man in the first prime -of life, of a refined and beautiful countenance. In the folds of the -mantle a card had tumbled, and stooping lower, Gaston read on it the -name of Udalrico Verga. There was a small round hole in the skull, -just over the left temple. - -“_Ucciso_, signor!” (Murdered!) said the monk, behind him. - -The Italian word sounded softly in the lips of the monk; but there -was the tell-tale hole in the forehead. - -This then was the hero and the victim of that old tragedy; this was -the end of him! But for his punctured skull, he might have changed -places with any of the least repulsive of his skeleton companions. -But his little bullet-hole marked him out from all of them. -Curiously, the hood had slipped off from the left side of the skull, -and as this was the side next to the spectator, the bullet-hole -compelled attention to itself at once. - -The story of the murder which the baron had told to Gaston, and with -which his thoughts had many times been occupied in the Villa -Torcello, came before him again; and looking at the stark remains of -the victim of that forgotten crime, he felt a sudden and -irresistible longing to know its secret. If he could win it from the -coffin there! But the grim rest within would be disturbed no more. -And the young man pictured there beside the skeleton? Murder had no -meaning for him; he had not come to know it when he was pictured -thus. The face impressed Gaston strangely. He looked at it long, -till he began to fancy that behind its delicate beauty he saw the -tokens of a latent sensuality. But it was a face of singular -sweetness, and if any evil were there, it existed only in the -colourless form of a suggestion. - -And the priest, who had died a suspect? Was _he_ here, and did death -whisper anything against him? No, the monk said; the priest was a -native of Syracuse, and after his death his body had been carried -there. - -Gaston had seen enough; the chamber and its horrid tenants had given -him a sense of physical sickness; and, above all, some curious -malign influence seemed to issue from the coffin of Udalrico Verga, -which was working its way into his brain. - -The words of the Baron came into his mind: “They say the spirit -haunts the place, seeking some one to avenge the murder.” - -Placing a five-franc note in the hand of the monk, he left the -chamber and the monastery at once; and entering the carriage, he was -driven home. - -By morning he had shaken off the morbid effects of his visit to the -Capucins’; but his imagination had become the seat of a vague and -indefinable oppression. This, at length, when analysed, resolved -itself into a certain feeling of injury on account of Udalrico -Verga. The wonderful amiableness, joined to an almost womanly -beauty, of the face he had seen imaged in the coffin, had touched -his sympathies; and now the memory of it began to lay hold on his -affections. For what cause, and by whose hand, had the young -Udalrico died so brutally? - -The tale of the murder stuck in his mind; it possessed him; it would -not be dislodged. And the tale, though begun a whole generation -since, was still unfinished. It told that Verga had been murdered; -but who had murdered him? - -This question uttered itself again and again; it grew importunate. -One evening in particular it became a kind of clamour in his ears; -when, walking by moonlight in the garden of the villa, he was -suddenly conscious that a presence other than his own was with him. -Turning about, he beheld vividly, at a distance from him of twelve -or fifteen paces, the figure of a young and elegant man. The view of -this figure which his eyes took in, and the impression which it made -upon his mind, were so distinct, that, but for a single -circumstance, he would have suspected nothing abnormal in the -appearance. The features were those of Udalrico Verga. - -His reason still urging him to reject the testimony of his sight, -Gaston advanced nearer to the figure. It remained motionless, -outlined distinctly in the moonlight, on the path bordered by a row -of pepper trees where the body of Verga had been found. Again Gaston -went forward; he could now by stretching out his hand almost have -touched the figure; his eyes looked straight into the eyes of the -man whom he knew to have lain for thirty years in his coffin. While -gazing fixedly and with fascination upon this creature from the -grave, which, though he knew it to be bodiless, seemed full real to -him, Gaston felt his senses being subdued; and, before he could -exert will enough to repel an influence which flowed in upon him as -it were waves of blinding light, he was rapt out of himself, and -held for the space of a minute or so in what is best described as a -magnetic sleep or trance. He remained upright and rigid; his brain a -whirl of excitement, with an accompanying painful consciousness; the -body of the emotion being a confused and very indefinite feeling of -fear—whether for himself or for some other person, he did not know. -This feeling becoming slightly more definite, he knew that the fear -he felt was not for himself, but for another; yet who that other -was, he could not tell. It was the same when a voice said plainly in -his ear, that what had been begun must be finished; the voice was -piercing in its clearness, and he knew that it was the voice of one -dear to him; but whose, he could not divine. - -This curious sleep lasted, as I have said, for about a minute; and -when Gaston awoke he was standing precisely as he had been when -seized in the trance. He looked for the apparition; it was not -there. He moved to the path, placed himself on the very spot where, -but a minute before, the form in the likeness of Udalrico Verga had -stood. There was nothing. He looked round him; from this path he -could see over the whole garden; it slept motionless in the -moonlight, and his was the only figure in it. Gaston returned to the -house in a condition of extreme nervous excitement. - -In this condition, and almost before he had reached the room in -which he usually sat, the story of the murder was flashed in upon -his mind; he read it as plainly as if it were traced in English -characters on the wall before him. Fancying himself still under some -abnormous influence, which when it passed away would carry the story -with it, he at once sat down and committed an abstract of it to -paper. - -All that night, the story swam in his brain, and rising early next -morning, he resolved—or rather was impelled—to commence writing it -immediately. He did so, and in the full light of day the wraith of -Udalrico Verga stood beside him, and he plainly saw it, during the -whole time his pen was at work. But the vision had no longer any -weakening or retarding effect upon his brain; rather its effects -were quickening and coercive; and these effects increased, till it -became a certainty to him that from the visible presence of the -spirit of Verga he drew the main strength of his inspiration. The -story grew under his pen to an elaborate romance, upon which, -sustained throughout by an elation of mind that allowed little -repose to the body, he was at work during many weeks. - -In all this time, he never passed beyond the grounds of the villa, -and when, by-and-bye, his face began to show marks of the mental and -bodily stress to which his task subjected him, the peasant people of -the town, who saw him walking in the garden sometimes of an evening, -used to say: - -“There is the English signor who went to live in the Villa Torcello -eleven weeks ago; he used to go out every day, but it is nine weeks -since he passed the gate. He cannot get out any more. He has seen -the ghost of the Signor Verga, and it keeps him there. He grows like -a ghost himself.” - -But the story was finished at length, and Gaston sent the manuscript -to his publishers in London. The ghost of Verga, which had remained -visibly before him during the whole period of composition, vanished -on the day the work was ended, and was never seen by him again. He -went out every day as he had done formerly, and exercise brought -back the colour to his face, and restored the tone of his mind. At -this time he thought no more about the story than that it was a -strange one, which had come to him in a strange manner, and that it -ought to bring him the fame in fiction which he coveted. - -A letter from Sir Selwyn, in which he said that he was on the point -of starting for home, determined Gaston to return thither at once, -that he might have everything in readiness for his father’s coming. - -On the evening before his departure, while sorting a bundle of -papers, he came upon a portion of manuscript of his story which he -remembered having set aside as needing to be re-cast. He took it up -and began to read it. - -The tragedy which formed the climax of the romance, had this -feature, that the man who was murdered had (unconsciously, and by a -singular operation of fate) planned his own death in planning that -of the friend whom he falsely believed to have betrayed him in love. -The chapter upon which Gaston had lighted, was devoted to a minute -analysis of the character of the man whom blind force of -circumstance had driven to an act of murder which his affection for -its victim had rendered abhorrent in the highest degree. - -So remote from the ordinary had been the conditions under which the -story was composed, and so small (it had seemed to Gaston) was the -share of its inspiration which his own brain could claim, that now, -within a few weeks of its composition, he read it almost as the work -of another. - -This exotic notion, that his own was not his own, deepened as he -read further into the chapter, for something was there which -disquieted him. Some shadowy unembodied likeness, and yet no -likeness, but a faint whispering of resemblance; some voiceless hint -that was but the failure of an echo. He turned back, and read again. -It was not there, he had deceived himself. He shut the page, his -mind at ease. - -In a week from this time, he was home again, awaiting the coming of -his father. Sir Selwyn landed in England a month later, and Gaston, -who received him at the vessel’s side, was shocked at his -appearance. Sir Selwyn’s handsome face seemed not so much to have -aged as to have withered; the body, too, was shrunken, and -desiccated, as though the vital fluids were exhausted. The nervous -irritation of manner which had characterised an earlier stage of the -disease, had given way to a species of torpor, in which even speech -seemed an effort. It was the mental and bodily paralysis of -melancholia in its acutest form. - -The journey home was a sad one. What little Sir Selwyn said, told -the story of the renewal of his sufferings, which dated from the day -that he had written to Gaston of his intention to return to England. -“But I am persuaded,” he said in conclusion, “that it draws near the -end.” - -Strangely enough, however, as Gaston thought, and quite contrary to -his expectations, the sight of his beautiful home revived Sir -Selwyn’s spirits. They dined together, and the baronet showed a -brighter face over his wine. He sent for his bailiff, and spent an -hour or more discussing the affairs of his estate. Afterwards, he -walked with Gaston through the gardens and park, and began, for the -first time, to talk of his travels. Then he questioned Gaston about -his Italian tour, and said: - -“What did you do with yourself all those weeks in Palermo? You -mentioned no writing; but I am sure your pen was not idle so long.” - -“No,” said Gaston. “I wrote a famous story there. I did not mean to -tell you of it until it was published. It was to be a surprise, for -this is the book that is to make me famous.” - -“Come, that sounds well!” said Sir Selwyn. “But you are beginning to -be famous already. What could have been better than the reviews of -your last book which you sent me?” - -“Oh, but this one will do twice as much for me!” laughed Gaston. - -“I am glad you feel that. No one could be more delighted than I am -to hear it. Have you dedicated it to me, Gaston?” - -“Otherwise, my dear father, it would be no book of mine.” - -“Thank you, Gaston. You know how dear your fame is to me.” - -In another month, during which Sir Selwyn’s health, with some -fluctuations, had shown, on the whole, a disposition towards -improvement, Gaston’s romance was published. - -On the day on which some copies were forwarded to him from the -publishers, he had gone on business to the neighbouring town, and -did not return until late in the evening. - -Sir Selwyn’s valet, an old and devoted servant who had been with his -master for many years, met him at the door, pale, and terrified. - -“Sir Selwyn has been taken strangely ill, sir,” he said. “We can -none of us tell what is the matter with him. He rang his bell an -hour ago, and when I went upstairs he was looking like a ghost, -sitting up quite stiff in his arm-chair, with one of your new books -in his hand. It seemed like a dead man speaking when he asked how -soon you could return, and said that no doctor was to be sent for. -He would not let me stay with him either, and, indeed, though I’ve -known Sir Selwyn these forty years, I believe I should have been -almost afraid to do so sir, he looked so terrible. I remained close -outside; but there’s not been a sound in his room ever since, sir.” - -Fears which, even in thought, he dared not shape, came like a wave -upon Gaston, as he hurried to his father’s room. - -Death, or his image, sat there, in Sir Selwyn’s chair; or rather, -the baronet’s aspect, as Gaston beheld him, grey and rigid, was like -the phantom Life-in-Death; as though a corpse had been galvanised -for a moment into a ghastly appearance of life. The jaw had begun to -fall and the eyes were large and glassy; but the regular rising and -falling of the breast showed that mechanical life was not yet -extinct. Open on the ground beside Sir Selwyn lay Gaston’s new -romance. - -The spirit had all but taken its departure; but when Gaston bent -over his father and pleaded for recognition, there was a faint -twitching of the brow, and a half-convulsive movement of the whole -body, as though the spirit were trying to force an entrance again; -and Sir Selwyn, by an effort, fixed his eyes on his son’s face. His -voice struggled in his throat, and he said, with a pause between -every word: - -“When I knelt beside him—for I still loved him—he said: ‘You have -killed me, but I will never leave you, and one day I will come back -from the grave and kill _you_’ He has kept his word. This is not -your book, Gaston, _it-is-Udalrico’s_. This is my——” - -The voice stopped. Sir Selwyn was dead. The Ghost of Udalrico Verga -was avenged. - - TIGHE HOPKINS. - - THE ORIGIN OF EVIL. - -The problem of the origin of evil can be philosophically approached -only if the archaic Indian formula is taken as the basis of the -argument. Ancient wisdom alone solves the presence of the universal -fiend in a satisfactory way. It attributes the birth of Kosmos and -the evolution of life to the breaking asunder of primordial, -manifested UNITY, into plurality, or the great illusion of form. -HOMOGENEITY having transformed itself into Heterogeneity, contrasts -have naturally been created: hence sprang what we call EVIL, which -thenceforward reigned supreme in this “Vale of Tears.” - -Materialistic Western philosophy (so mis-named) has not failed to -profit by this grand metaphysical tenet. Even physical Science, with -Chemistry at its head, has turned its attention of late to the first -proposition, and directs its efforts toward proving on irrefutable -data the homogeneity of primordial matter. But now steps in -materialistic Pessimism, a teaching which is neither philosophy nor -science, but only a deluge of meaningless words. Pessimism, in its -latest development, having ceased to be pantheistic, and having -wedded itself to materialism, prepares to make capital out of the -old Indian formula. But the atheistic pessimist soars no higher than -the terrestrial homogeneous plasm of the Darwinists. For him the -_ultima thule_ is earth and matter, and he sees, beyond the _prima -materia_, only an ugly void, an empty nothingness. Some of the -pessimists attempt to poetize their idea after the manner of the -whitened sepulchres, or the Mexican corpses, whose ghastly cheeks -and lips are thickly covered with rouge. The decay of matter pierces -through the mask of seeming life, all efforts to the contrary -notwithstanding. - -Materialism patronises Indian metaphora and imagery now. In a new -work upon the subject by Dr. Mainländer, “Pessimism and Progress,” -one learns that Indian Pantheism and German Pessimism are -_identical_; and that it is the breaking up of homogeneous matter -into heterogeneous material, the transition from uniformity to -multiformity, which resulted in so unhappy a universe. Saith -Pessimism:— - - “This (transition) is precisely the original mistake, the - _primordial sin_, which the whole creation has now to expiate by - heavy suffering; it is just that _sin_, which, having launched - into existence all that lives, plunged it thereby into the abysmal - depths of evil and misery, to escape from which there is but one - means possible, _i.e._, by putting _an end to being itself_.” - -This interpretation of the Eastern formula, attributing to it the -first idea of escaping the misery of life by “putting an end to -being”—whether that being is viewed as applicable to the whole -Kosmos, or only to individual life—is a gross misconception. The -Eastern pantheist, whose philosophy teaches him to discriminate -between Being or ESSE and conditioned existence, would hardly -indulge in so absurd an idea as the postulation of such an -alternative. He knows he can put an end to _form_ alone, not to -_being_—and that only on this plane of terrestrial illusion. True, -he knows that by killing out in himself _Tanha_ (the unsatisfied -desire for existence, or the “_will_ to live”)—he will thus -gradually escape the curse of re-birth and _conditioned_ existence. -But he knows also that he cannot kill or “put an end,” even to his -own little life except as a personality, which after all is but a -change of dress. And believing but in One Reality, which is eternal -_Be-ness_, the “_causeless_ CAUSE” from which he has exiled himself -unto a world of forms, he regards the temporary and progressing -manifestations of it in the state of _Maya_ (change or illusion), as -the greatest evil, truly; but at the same time as a process in -nature, as unavoidable as are the pangs of birth. It is the only -means by which he can pass from limited and conditioned lives of -sorrow into eternal life, or into that absolute “Be-ness,” which is -so graphically expressed in the Sanskrit word _sat_. - -The “Pessimism” of the Hindu or Buddhist Pantheist is metaphysical, -abstruse, and philosophical. The idea that matter and its Protean -manifestations are the source and origin of universal evil and -sorrow is a very old one, though Gautama Buddha was the first to -give to it its definite expression. But the great Indian Reformer -assuredly never meant to make of it a handle for the modern -pessimist to get hold of, or a peg for the materialist to hang his -distorted and pernicious tenets upon! The Sage and Philosopher, who -sacrificed himself for Humanity by _living for it, in order to save -it_, by teaching men to see in the sensuous existence of matter -misery alone, had never in his deep philosophical mind any idea of -offering a premium for suicide; his efforts were to release mankind -from too strong an attachment to life, which is the chief cause of -Selfishness—hence the creator of mutual pain and suffering. In his -personal case, Buddha left us an example of fortitude to follow: in -living, not in running away from life. His doctrine shows evil -immanent, _not in matter_ which is eternal, but in the illusions -created by it: through the changes and transformations of matter -generating life—because these changes are conditioned and such life -is ephemeral. At the same time those evils are shown to be not only -unavoidable, but necessary. For if we would discern good from evil, -light from darkness, and appreciate the former, we can do so only -through the contrasts between the two. While Buddha’s philosophy -points, in its dead-letter meaning, only to the dark side of things -on this illusive plane; its esotericism, the hidden soul of it, -draws the veil aside and reveals to the Arhat all the glories of -LIFE ETERNAL in _all the Homogeneousness of Consciousness and -Being_. Another absurdity, no doubt, in the eyes of materialistic -science and even modern Idealism, yet a _fact_ to the Sage and -esoteric Pantheist. - -Nevertheless, the root idea that evil is born and generated by the -ever increasing complications of the homogeneous material, which -enters into form and differentiates more and more as that form -becomes physically more perfect, has an esoteric side to it which -seems to have never occurred to the modern pessimist. Its -dead-letter aspect, however, became the subject of speculation with -every ancient thinking nation. Even in India the primitive thought, -underlying the formula already cited, has been disfigured by -Sectarianism, and has led to the ritualistic, purely dogmatic -observances of the _Hatha Yogis_, in contradistinction to the -philosophical Vedantic _Raja Yoga_. Pagan and Christian exoteric -speculation, and even mediæval monastic asceticism, have extracted -all they could from the originally noble idea, and made it -subservient to their narrow-minded sectarian views. Their false -conceptions of matter have led the Christians from the earliest day -to identify woman with Evil and matter—notwithstanding the worship -paid by the Roman Catholic Church to the Virgin. - -But the latest application of the misunderstood Indian formula by -the Pessimists in Germany is quite original, and rather unexpected, -as we shall see. To draw any analogy between a highly metaphysical -teaching, and Darwin’s theory of physical evolution would, in -itself, seem rather a hopeless task. The more so as the theory of -natural selection does not preach any conceivable extermination of -_being_, but, on the contrary, a continuous and ever increasing -development of _life_. Nevertheless, German ingenuity has contrived, -by means of scientific paradoxes and much sophistry, to give it a -semblance of philosophical truth. The old Indian tenet itself has -not escaped litigation at the hands of modern pessimism. The happy -discoverer of the theory, that the origin of evil dates from the -protoplasmic _Amœba_, which divided itself for procreation, and thus -lost its immaculate homogeneity, has laid claim to the Aryan archaic -formula in his new volume. While extolling its philosophy and the -depth of ancient conceptions, he declares that it ought to be viewed -“as the most profound truth _precogitated_ and _robbed_ by the -ancient sages from modern thought”!! - -It thus follows that the deeply religious Pantheism of the Hindu and -Buddhist philosopher, and the occasional vagaries of the pessimistic -materialist, are placed on the same level and identified by “modern -thought.” The impassable chasm between the two is ignored. It -matters little, it seems, that the Pantheist, recognising no reality -in the manifested Kosmos, and regarding it as a simple illusion of -his senses, has to view his own existence also as only a bundle of -illusions. When, therefore, he speaks of the means of escaping from -the sufferings of objective life, his view of those sufferings, and -his motive for putting an end to existence are entirely different -from those of the pessimistic materialist. For him, pain as well as -sorrow are illusions, due to attachment to this life, and ignorance. -Therefore he strives after eternal, changeless life, and absolute -consciousness in the state of Nirvana; whereas the European -pessimist, taking the “evils” of life as _realities_, aspires when -he has the time to aspire after anything except those said mundane -_realities_, to annihilation of “being,” as he expresses it. For the -philosopher there is but one real life, _Nirvanic bliss_, which is a -state differing in kind, not in degree only, from that of any of the -planes of consciousness in the manifested universe. The Pessimist -calls “Nirvana” superstition, and explains it as “cessation of -life,” life for him beginning and ending on earth. The former -ignores in his spiritual aspirations even the integral homogeneous -unit, of which the German Pessimist now makes such capital. He knows -of, and believes in only the direct cause of that unit, eternal and -_ever living, because the ONE uncreated_, or rather not evoluted. -Hence all his efforts are directed toward the speediest reunion -possible with, and return to his _pre_-primordial condition, after -his pilgrimage through this illusive series of visionary lives, with -their unreal phantasmagoria of sensuous perceptions. - -Such pantheism can be qualified as “pessimistic” only by a believer -in a personal Providence; by one who contrasts its negation of the -reality of anything “created”—_i.e._ conditioned and limited—with -his own blind and unphilosophical faith. The Oriental mind does not -busy itself with extracting evil from every radical law and -manifestation of life, and multiplying every phenomenal quantity by -the units of very often imaginary evils: the Eastern Pantheist -simply submits to the inevitable, and tries to blot out from his -path in life as many “descents into rebirth” as he can, by avoiding -the creation of new _Karmic_ causes. The Buddhist philosopher knows -that the duration of the series of lives of every human being—unless -he reaches Nirvana “artificially” (“takes the kingdom of God by -violence,” in Kabalistic parlance), is given, allegorically, in the -_forty-nine days_ passed by Gautama the Buddha under the Bo-tree. -And the Hindu sage is aware, in his turn, that he has to light the -_first_, and extinguish the _forty-ninth fire_[23] before he reaches -his final deliverance. Knowing this, both sage and philosopher wait -patiently for the natural hour of deliverance; whereas their unlucky -copyist, the European Pessimist, is ever ready to commit, as to -preach, suicide. Ignorant of the numberless heads of the hydra of -existences he is incapable of feeling the same philosophical scorn -for life as he does for death, and of, thereby, following the wise -example given him by his Oriental brother. - ------ - -Footnote 23: - - This is an esoteric tenet, and the general reader will not make - much out of it. But the Theosophist who has read “Esoteric - Buddhism” may compute the 7 by 7 of the _forty-nine_ “days,” and - the _forty-nine_ “fires,” and understand that the allegory refers - esoterically to the seven human consecutive root-races with their - seven subdivisions. Every monad is born in the first and obtains - deliverance in the last seventh race. Only a “Buddha” is shown - reaching it during the course of one life. - ------ - -Thus, philosophical pantheism is very different from modern -pessimism. The first is based upon the correct understanding of the -mysteries of being; the latter is in reality only one more system of -evil added by unhealthy fancy to the already large sum of real -social evils. In sober truth it is no philosophy, but simply a -systematic slander of life and being; the bilious utterances of a -dyspeptic or an incurable hypochondriac. No parallel can ever be -attempted between the two systems of thought. - -The seeds of evil and sorrow were indeed the earliest result and -consequence of the heterogeneity of the manifested universe. Still -they are but an illusion produced by the law of contrasts, which, as -described, is a fundamental law in nature. Neither good nor evil -would exist were it not for the light they mutually throw on each -other. _Being_, under whatever form, having been observed from the -World’s creation to offer these contrasts, and evil predominating in -the universe owing to _Ego_-ship or selfishness, the rich Oriental -metaphor has pointed to existence as expiating the mistake of -nature; and the human soul (psüche), was henceforth regarded as the -scapegoat and victim of _unconscious_ OVER-SOUL. But it is not to -Pessimism, but to Wisdom that it gave birth. Ignorance alone is the -willing martyr, but knowledge is the master of natural Pessimism. -Gradually, and by the process of heredity or _atavism_, the latter -became innate in man. It is always present in us, howsoever latent -and silent its voice in the beginning. Amid the early joys of -existence, when we are still full of the vital energies of youth, we -are yet apt, each of us, at the first pang of sorrow, after a -failure, or at the sudden appearance of a black cloud, to accuse -_life_ of it; to feel _life_ a burden, and often to curse our being. -This shows pessimism in our blood, but at the same time the presence -of the fruits of ignorance. As mankind multiplies, and with it -suffering—which is the natural result of an increasing number of -units that generate it—sorrow and pain are intensified. We live in -an atmosphere of gloom and despair, but this is because our eyes are -downcast and rivetted to the earth, with all its physical and -grossly material manifestations. If, instead of that, man proceeding -on his life-journey looked—not heavenward, which is but a figure of -speech—but _within himself_ and centred his point of observation on -the _inner_ man, he would soon escape from the coils of the great -serpent of illusion. From the cradle to the grave, his life would -then become supportable and worth living, even in its worst phases. - -Pessimism—that chronic suspicion of lurking evil everywhere—is thus -of a two-fold nature, and brings fruits of two kinds. It is a -natural characteristic in physical man, and becomes a curse only to -the ignorant. It is a boon to the spiritual; inasmuch as it makes -the latter turn into the right path, and brings him to the discovery -of another as fundamental a truth; namely, that all in this world is -only _preparatory_ because transitory. It is like a chink in the -dark prison walls of earth-life, through which breaks in a ray of -light from the eternal home, which, illuminating the _inner_ senses, -whispers to the prisoner in his shell of clay of the origin and the -dual mystery of our being. At the same time, it is a tacit proof of -the presence in man of that _which knows, without being told_, -viz:—that there is another and a better life, once that the curse of -earth-lives is lived through. - -This explanation of the problem and origin of evil being, as already -said, of an entirely metaphysical character, has nothing to do with -physical laws. Belonging as it does altogether to the spiritual part -of man, to dabble with it superficially is, therefore, far more -dangerous than to remain ignorant of it. For, as it lies at the very -root of Gautama Buddha’s ethics, and since it has now fallen into -the hands of the modern Philistines of materialism, to confuse the -two systems of “pessimistic” thought can lead but to mental suicide, -if it does not lead to worse. - -Eastern wisdom teaches that spirit has to pass through the ordeal of -incarnation and life, and be baptised with matter before it can -reach experience and knowledge. After which only it receives the -baptism of soul, or self-consciousness, and may return to its -original condition of a god, _plus_ experience, ending with -omniscience. In other words, it can return to the original state of -the homogeneity of primordial essence only through the addition of -the fruitage of Karma, which alone is able to create an absolute -_conscious_ deity, removed but one degree from the absolute ALL. - -Even according to the letter of the Bible, evil must have existed -before Adam and Eve, who, therefore, are innocent of the slander of -the original sin. For, had there been no evil or sin before them, -there could exist neither tempting Serpent nor a Tree of Knowledge -of _good and evil_ in Eden. The characteristics of that apple-tree -are shown in the verse when the couple had tasted of its fruit: “The -eyes of them both were opened, and _they knew_” many things besides -knowing they were naked. Too much knowledge about things of matter -is thus rightly shown an evil. - -But so it is, and it is our duty to examine and combat the new -pernicious theory. Hitherto, pessimism was kept in the regions of -philosophy and metaphysics, and showed no pretensions to intrude -into the domain of purely physical science, such as Darwinism. The -theory of evolution has become almost universal now, and there is no -school (save the Sunday and missionary schools) where it is not -taught, with more or less modifications from the original programme. -On the other hand, there is no other teaching more abused and taken -advantage of than evolution, especially by the application of its -fundamental laws to the solution of the most compound and abstract -problems of man’s many sided existence. There, where psychology and -even philosophy “fear to tread,” materialistic biology applies its -sledge-hammer of superficial analogies, and prejudged conclusions. -Worse than all, claiming man to be only a higher animal, it -maintains this right as undeniably pertaining to the domain of the -science of evolution. Paradoxes in those “domains” do not rain now, -they pour. As “man is the measure of all things,” therefore is man -measured and analyzed by the animal. One German materialist claims -spiritual and psychic evolution as the lawful property of physiology -and biology; the mysteries of embryology and zoology alone, it is -said, being capable of solving those of consciousness in man and the -origin of his soul.[24] Another finds justification for suicide in -the example of animals, who, when tired of living, put an end to -existence by starvation.[25] - ------ - -Footnote 24: - - Haeckel. - -Footnote 25: - - Leo Bach. - ------ - -Hitherto pessimism, notwithstanding the abundance and brilliancy of -its paradoxes, had a weak point—namely, the absence of any real and -evident basis for it to rest upon. Its followers had no living, -guiding thought to serve them as a beacon and help them to steer -clear of the sandbanks of life—real and imaginary—so profusely sown -by themselves in the shape of denunciations against life and being. -All they could do was to rely upon their representatives, who -occupied their time very ingeniously if not profitably, in tacking -the many and various evils of life to the metaphysical propositions -of great German thinkers, like Schopenhauer and Hartmann, as small -boys tack on coloured tails to the kites of their elders and rejoice -at seeing them launched in the air. But now the programme will be -changed. The Pessimists have found something more solid and -authoritative, if less philosophical, to tack their jeremiads and -dirges to, than the metaphysical _kites_ of Schopenhauer. The day -when they agreed with the views of this philosopher, which pointed -at the Universal WILL as the perpetrator of all the World-evil, is -gone to return no more. Nor will they be any better satisfied with -the hazy “Unconscious” of von Hartmann. They have been seeking -diligently for a more congenial and less metaphysical soil to build -their pessimistic _philosophy_ upon, and they have been rewarded -with success, now that the cause of Universal Suffering has been -discovered by them in the fundamental laws of physical development. -Evil will no longer be allied with the misty and uncertain Phantom -called “WILL,” but with an actual and obvious fact: the Pessimists -will henceforth be towed by the Evolutionists. - -The basic argument of their representative has been given in the -opening sentence of this article. The Universe and all on it -appeared in consequence of the “breaking asunder of UNITY into -_Plurality_.” This rather dim rendering of the Indian formula is not -made to refer, as I have shown, in the mind of the Pessimist, to the -one Unity, to the Vedantin abstraction—Parabrahm: otherwise, I -should not certainly have used the words “breaking up.” Nor does it -concern itself much with Mulaprakriti, or the “Veil” of Parabrahm; -nor even with the first manifested primordial matter, except -inferentially, as follows from Dr. Mainländer’s exposition, but -chiefly with terrestrial _protoplasm_. Spirit or deity is entirely -ignored in this case; evidently because of the necessity for showing -the whole as “the lawful domain of physical Science.” - -In short, the time-honoured formula is claimed to have its basis and -to find its justification in the theory that from “a few, perhaps -one, single form of the very simplest nature” (Darwin), “all the -different animals and plants living to-day, and all the organisms -that have ever lived on the earth,” have gradually developed. It is -this axiom of Science, we are told, which justifies and demonstrates -the Hindu philosophical tenet. What is this axiom? Why, it is this: -Science teaches that the series of transformations through which the -seed is made to pass—the seed that grows into a tree, or becomes an -_ovum_, or that which develops into an animal—consists in every case -in nothing but the passage of the fabric of that seed, from the -homogeneous into the heterogeneous or compound form. This is then -the scientific verity which checks the Indian formula by that of the -Evolutionists, identifies both, and thus exalts ancient wisdom by -recognizing it worthy of modern materialistic thought. - -This philosophical formula is not simply corroborated by the -individual growth and development of isolated species, explains our -Pessimist; but it is demonstrated in general as in detail. It is -shown justified in the evolution and growth of the Universe as well -as in that of our planet. In short, the birth, growth and -development of the whole organic world in its integral totality, are -there to demonstrate ancient wisdom. From the universals down to the -particulars, the organic world is discovered to be subject to the -same law of ever increasing elaboration, of the transition from -unity to plurality as “the fundamental formula of the evolution of -life.” Even the growth of nations, of social life, public -institutions, the development of the languages, arts and sciences, -all this follows inevitably and fatally the all-embracing law of -“the breaking asunder of unity into plurality, and the passage of -the homogeneous into multiformity.” - -But while following Indian wisdom, our author exaggerates this -fundamental law in his own way, and distorts it. He brings this -law to bear even on the historical destinies of mankind. He makes -these destinies subservient to, and a proof of, the correctness of -the Indian conception. He maintains that humanity as an integral -whole, in proportion as it develops and progresses in its -evolution, and separates in its parts—each becoming a distinct and -independent branch of the unit—drifts more and more away from its -original healthy, harmonious unity. The complications of social -establishment, social relations, as those of individuality, all -lead to the weakening of the vital power, the relaxation of the -energy of feeling, and to the destruction of that integral unity, -without which no inner harmony is possible. The absence of that -harmony generates an inner discord which becomes the cause of the -greatest mental misery. Evil has its roots in the very nature of -the evolution of life and its complications. Every one of its -steps forward is at the same time a step taken toward the -dissolution of its energy, and leads to passive apathy. Such is -the inevitable result, he says, of every progressive complication -of life; because evolution or development is a transition from the -homogeneous to the heterogeneous, a scattering of the whole into -the many, etc. etc. This terrible law is universal and applies to -all creation, from the infinitesimally small up to man for, as he -says, it is a fundamental law of nature. - -Now, it is just in this one-sided view of physical nature, which the -German author accepts without one single thought as to its spiritual -and psychic aspect, that his school is doomed to certain failure. It -is not a question whether the said law of differentiation and its -fatal consequences may or may not apply, in certain cases, to the -growth and development of the animal species, and even of man; but -simply, since it is the basis and main support of the whole new -theory of the Pessimistic school, whether it is really a _universal_ -and fundamental law? We want to know whether this basic formula of -evolution embraces the whole process of development and growth in -its entirety; and whether, indeed, it is within the domain of -physical science or not. If it is “nothing else than the transition -from the homogeneous state to the heterogeneous,” as says -Mainländer, then it remains to be proved that the given process -“produces that complicated combination of tissues and organs which -forms and completes the perfect animal and plant.” - -As remarked already by some critics on “Pessimism and Progress,” the -German Pessimist does not doubt it for one moment. His supposed -discovery and teaching “rest wholly on his certitude that -development and the fundamental law of the complicated process of -organization represent but one thing: the transformation of unity -into plurality.” Hence the identification of the process with -dissolution and decay, and the weakening of all the forces and -energies. Mainländer would be right in his analogies were this law -of the differentiation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous to -really represent the fundamental law of the evolution of life. But -the idea is quite erroneous—metaphysically as well as physically. -Evolution does not proceed in a straight line; _no more_ than any -other process in nature, but journeys on _cyclically_, as does all -the rest. The cyclic serpents swallow their tails like the Serpent -of Eternity. And it is in this that the Indian formula, which is a -Secret Doctrine teaching, is indeed corroborated by the natural -Sciences, and especially by biology. - -This is what we read in the “Scientific Letters” by an anonymous -Russian author and critic. - - “In the evolution of isolated individuals, in the evolution of the - organic world, in that of the Universe, as in the growth and - development of our planet—in short wherever any of the processes - of progressive complexity take place, there we find, apart from - the transition from unity to plurality, and homogeneity to - heterogeneity a _converse transformation—the transition from - plurality to unity, from the heterogeneous to the homogeneous_.... - Minute observation of the given process of progressive complexity - has shown, that what takes place in it is not alone the separation - of parts, but also their mutual absorption.... While one portion - of the cells merge into each other and unite into one uniform - whole, forming muscular fibres, muscular tissue, others are - absorbed in the bone and nerve tissues, etc. etc. The same takes - place in the formation of plants....” - -In this case material nature repeats the law that acts in the -evolution of the psychic and the spiritual: both descend but to -re-ascend and merge at the starting-point. _The homogeneous -formative mass or element differentiated in its parts, is gradually -transformed into the heterogeneous; then, merging those parts into a -harmonious whole, it recommences a converse process, or -reinvolution, and returns as gradually into its primitive or -primordial state._ - -Nor does Pessimism find any better support in pure Materialism, as -hitherto the latter has been tinged with a decidedly optimistic -bias. Its leading advocates have, indeed, never hesitated to sneer -at the theological adoration of the “glory of God and all his -works.” Büchner flings a taunt at the pantheist who sees in so “mad -and bad” a world the manifestation of the Absolute. But, on the -whole, the materialists admit a balance of good over evil, perhaps -as a buffer against any “superstitious” tendency to look out and -hope for a better one. Narrow as is their outlook, and limited as is -their spiritual horizon, they yet see no cause to despair of the -drift of things in general. The _pantheistic_ pessimists, however, -have never ceased to urge that a despair of conscious being is the -only legitimate outcome of atheistic negation. This opinion is, of -course, axiomatic, or ought to be so. If “in this life only is there -hope,” the tragedy of life is absolutely without any _raison d’être_ -and a perpetuation of the drama is as foolish as it is futile. - -The fact that the conclusions of pessimism have been at last -assimilated by a certain class of atheistic writers, is a striking -feature of the day, and another sign of the times. It illustrates -the truism that the void created by modern scientific negation -cannot and can never be filled by the cold prospects offered as a -_solatium_ to optimists. The Comtean “enthusiasm of Humanity” is a -poor thing enough with annihilation of the Race to ensue “as the -solar fires die slowly out”—if, indeed, _they do die_ at all—to -please physical science at the computed time. If all present sorrow -and suffering, the fierce struggle for existence and all its -attendant horrors, go for nothing in the long run, if MAN is a mere -ephemeron, the sport of blind forces, why assist in the perpetuation -of the farce. The “ceaseless grind of matter, force and law,” will -but hurry the swarming human millions into eternal oblivion, and -ultimately leave no trace or memory of the past, when things return -to the nebulosity of the fire-mist, whence they emerged. Terrestrial -life is no object in itself. It is overcast with gloom and misery. -It does not seem strange, then, that the Soul-blind negationist -should prefer the pessimism of Schopenhauer to the baseless optimism -of Strauss and his followers, which, in the face of their teachings, -reminds one of the animal spirits of a young donkey, after a good -meal of thistles. - -One thing is, however, clear: the absolute necessity for some -solution, which embraces the facts of existence on an optimistic -basis. Modern Society is permeated with an increasing cynicism and -honeycombed with disgust of life. This is the result of an -utter ignorance of the operations of Karma and the nature of -Soul-evolution. It is from a mistaken allegiance to the dogmas of a -mechanical and largely spurious theory of Evolution, that Pessimism -has risen to such undue importance. Once the basis of the Great Law -is grasped—and what philosophy can furnish better means for such a -grasp and final solution, than the esoteric doctrine of the great -Indian Sages—there remains no possible _locus standi_ for the recent -amendments to the Schopenhauerian system of thought or the -metaphysical subtleties, woven by the “philosopher of the -Unconscious.” The reasonableness of _Conscious_ Existence can be -proved only by the study of the primeval—now esoteric—philosophy. -And it says “there is neither death nor life, for both are -illusions; being (or _be-ness_) is the only reality.” This paradox -was repeated thousands of ages later by one of the greatest -physiologists that ever lived. “Life is Death” said Claude Bernard. -The organism lives because its parts are ever dying. The survival of -the fittest is surely based on this truism. The life of the superior -whole requires the death of the inferior, the death of the parts -depending on and being subservient to it And, as life is death, so -death is life, and the whole great cycle of lives form but ONE -EXISTENCE—_the worst day of which is on our planet_. - -He who KNOWS will make the best of it For there is a dawn for every -being, when once freed from illusion and ignorance by Knowledge; and -he will at last proclaim in truth _and all Consciousness_ to -Mahamaya:— - - “BROKEN THY HOUSE IS, AND THE RIDGE-POLE SPLIT! - DELUSION FASHIONED IT! - SAFE PASS I THENCE—DELIVERANCE TO OBTAIN.”... - - H. P. B. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - “Man will regain his lost Eden on that day when he can look at - every desire in the broad, quiet light of this question:—How can I - give desire such vent as shall conduce to the benefit of other - men?”—(_Jasper Niemand in the “Path”_). - - THE GREAT PARADOX. - -Paradox would seem to be the natural language of occultism. Nay -more, it would seem to penetrate deep into the heart of things, and -thus to be inseparable from any attempt to put into words the truth, -the reality which underlies the outward shows of life. - -And the paradox is one not in words only, but in action, in the very -conduct of life. The paradoxes of occultism must be lived, not -uttered only. Herein lies a great danger, for it is only too easy to -become lost in the intellectual contemplation of the path, and so to -forget that the road can only be known by treading it. - -One startling paradox meets the student at the very outset, and -confronts him in ever new and strange shapes at each turn of the -road. Such an one, perchance, has sought the path desiring a guide, -a rule of right for the conduct of his life. He learns that the -alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end of _life_ is -selflessness; and he feels the truth of the saying that only in the -profound unconsciousness of self-forgetfulness can the truth and -reality of being reveal itself to his eager heart. - -The student learns that this is the one law of occultism, at once -the science and the art of living, the guide to the goal he desires -to attain. He is fired with enthusiasm and enters bravely on the -mountain track. He then finds that his teachers do not encourage his -ardent flights of sentiment; his all-forgetting yearning for the -Infinite—on the outer plane of his actual life and consciousness. At -least, if they do not actually damp his enthusiasm, they set him, as -the first and indispensable task, _to conquer and control his body_. -The student finds that far from being encouraged to live in the -soaring thoughts of his brain, and to fancy he has reached that -ether where is true freedom—to the forgetting of his body, and his -external actions and personality—he is set down to tasks much nearer -earth. All his attention and watchfulness are required on the outer -plane; he must never forget himself, never lose hold over his body, -his mind, his brain. He must even learn to control the expression of -every feature, to check the action of each muscle, to be master of -every slightest involuntary movement. The daily life around and -within him is pointed out as the object of his study and -observation. Instead of forgetting what are usually called the petty -trifles, the little forgetfulnesses, the accidental slips of tongue -or memory, he is forced to become each day more conscious of these -lapses, till at last they seem to poison the air he breathes and -stifle him, till he seems to lose sight and touch of the great world -of freedom towards which he is struggling, till every hour of every -day seems full of the bitter taste of self, and his heart grows sick -with pain and the struggle of despair. And the darkness is rendered -yet deeper by the voice within him, crying ceaselessly, “forget -thyself. Beware, lest thou becomest self-concentrated—and the giant -weed of spiritual selfishness take firm root in thy heart; beware, -beware, beware!” - -The voice stirs his heart to its depths, for he feels that the words -are true. His daily and hourly battle is teaching him that -self-centredness is the root of misery, the cause of pain, and his -soul is full of longing to be free. - -Thus the disciple is torn by doubt. He trusts his teachers, for he -knows that through them speaks the same voice he hears in the -silence of his own heart. But now they utter contradictory words; -the one, the inner voice, bidding him forget himself utterly in the -service of humanity; the other, the spoken word of those from whom -he seeks guidance in his service, bidding him _first_ to conquer his -body, his outer self. And he knows better with every hour how badly -he acquits himself in that battle with the Hydra, and he sees seven -heads grow afresh in place of each one that he has lopped off. - -At first he oscillates between the two, now obeying the one, now the -other. But soon he learns that this is fruitless. For the sense of -freedom and lightness, which comes at first when he leaves his outer -self unwatched, that he may seek the inner air, soon loses its -keenness, and some sudden shock reveals to him that he has slipped -and fallen on the uphill path. Then, in desperation, he flings -himself upon the treacherous snake of self, and strives to choke it -into death; but its ever-moving coils elude his grasp, the insidious -temptations of its glittering scales blind his vision, and again he -becomes involved in the turmoil of the battle, which gains on him -from day to day, and which at last seems to fill the whole world, -and blot out all else beside from his consciousness. He is face to -face with a crushing paradox, the solution of which must be lived -before it can be really understood. - -In his hours of silent meditation the student will find that there -is one space of silence within him where he can find refuge from -thoughts and desires, from the turmoil of the senses and the -delusions of the mind. By sinking his consciousness deep into his -heart he can reach this place—at first only when he is alone in -silence and darkness. But when the need for the silence has grown -great enough, he will turn to seek it even in the midst of the -struggle with self, and he will find it. Only he must not let go of -his outer self, or his body; he must learn to retire into this -citadel when the battle grows fierce, but to do so without losing -sight of the battle; without allowing himself to fancy that by so -doing he has won the victory. That victory is won only when all is -silence without as within the inner citadel. Fighting thus, from -within that silence, the student will find that he has solved the -first great paradox. - -But paradox still follows him. When first he thus succeeds in thus -retreating into himself, he seeks there only for refuge from the -storm in his heart. And as he struggles to control the gusts of -passion and desire, he realises more fully what mighty powers he has -vowed himself to conquer. He still feels himself, apart from the -silence, nearer akin to the forces of the storm. How can his puny -strength cope with these tyrants of animal nature? - -This question is hard to answer in direct words; if, indeed, such an -answer can be given. But analogy may point the way where the -solution may be sought. - -In breathing we take a certain quantity of air into the lungs, and -with this we can imitate in miniature the mighty wind of heaven. We -can produce a feeble semblance of nature: a tempest in a tea-cup, a -gale to blow and even swamp a paper boat. And we can say: “I do -this; it is my breath.” But we cannot blow our breath against a -hurricane, still less hold the trade winds in our lungs. Yet the -powers of heaven are within us; the nature of the intelligences -which guide the world-forces is blended with our own, and could we -realise this and forget our outer selves, the very winds would be -our instruments. - -So it is in life. While a man clings to his outer self—aye, and even -to any one of the forms he assumes when this “mortal coil” is cast -aside—so long is he trying to blow aside a hurricane with the breath -of his lungs. It is useless and idle such an endeavour; for the -great winds of life must, sooner or later, sweep him away. But if he -changes his attitude _in himself_, if he acts on the faith that his -body, his desires, his passions, his brain, are not himself, though -he has charge of them, and is responsible for them; if he tries to -deal with them as parts of nature, then he may hope to become one -with the great tides of being, and reach the peaceful place of safe -self-forgetfulness at last. - - “FAUST.” - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - “Fear is the slave of pain and Rebellion her captive; Endurance - her free companion and Patience her master. And the husband of - Pain is Rapture. But the souls are few in whom that marriage is - consummated.” (L. S. C.). - - - =THE BLOSSOM AND THE FRUIT=: - - _THE TRUE STORY OF A MAGICIAN_.[26] - - (_Continued._) - - --------------------- - - BY MABEL COLLINS, - - Author of “THE PRETTIEST WOMAN IN WARSAW,” &c., &c., - And Scribe of “THE IDYLL OF THE WHITE LOTUS,” and “THROUGH THE GATES - OF GOLD.” - - --------------------- - ------ - -Footnote 26: - - The sub-title, “a tale of love and magic,” having been - simultaneously used by myself, Mr. Joseph Hutton, and another - author, I think it best to change mine for one certainly less - pretty, but equally descriptive. Is not this simultaneous use also - a “sign of the times”? - ------ - - CHAPTER III. - -In a chapel of the great Cathedral in the city there was at certain -hours always a priest who held there his confessional. - -To him went Hilary some days later. In the interim he had not seen -the Princess. His soul had been torn hither and thither, to and fro. -His passion for the beautiful girl held him fast, while his horror -of the magician repelled him from her. He went to the Cathedral in -the afternoon determined that he would reveal all his distress to -the priest. Father Amyot was in his confessional, but some one was -with him, for the curtain was drawn. Hilary knelt down at the small -altar of the chapel there to wait. Presently there was a slight -sound; he turned his head to see if the confessional was now free. -The Princess Fleta stood beside him, her eyes fixed on him; it was -she who at this instant only had risen from her knees in the -confessional. Hilary, amazed and dumb with wonder, could only gaze -upon her. She kept her strange and fascinating eyes fixed on his for -a moment and then turned and with swift, soft steps left the chapel. -Hilary remained kneeling motionless before the altar, his mind -absorbed in what was hardly so much thought as amazement. Fleta was -not then what he thought her. If she were sensitive to religious -impressions she could not be the cold magician which she had -appeared to him to be when he recollected the last scene in the -laboratory. Perhaps after all she used her power generously and for -good. He began to see her in another light. He began to worship her -for her goodness as well as for her strong attractions. His heart -leaped with joy at the thought that her soul was as beautiful as her -body. He rose from his knees and turned instinctively and without -thought to follow her. As he did so he passed Father Amyot, who -seeing that no one else came immediately to the confessional, had -left it and flung himself at full length upon the ground before the -altar. He wore a long robe of coarse white cloth, tied at the waist -with a black cord; a hood of the same cloth covered his shaven head. -He was like a skeleton, perfectly fleshless and emaciated. His face -lay sideways on the stone; he seemed unconscious, so profound was -his abstraction. The eyes were open but had no sight in them. They -were large grey blue eyes, full of a profound melancholy which gave -them an appearance as if tears stood in them. This melancholy -affected Hilary strangely; it touched his heart, made thrill and -vibrate some deeply sensitive cord in his nature. He stood gazing a -moment at the prostrate figure, and then with a profound obeisance -left the chapel. - -The Princess Fleta had her horse waiting for her. She was a constant -and daring rider, and seldom entered the city except on horseback, -to the amazement of the court ladies, who in the city rode in -carriages that they might dress beautifully. But Fleta had no vanity -of this kind. Probably no other girl of her age would have willingly -adopted the hideous dress of the witch and worn it before so many -curious eyes. Her own beauty and her own appearance was a subject of -but the slightest thought to her. She would walk down the -fashionable promenade in her riding habit among the magnificent -toilettes of the Court ladies. This she was doing now while a -servant led her horse up and down. Hilary watched her from a -distance, unable to summon courage to approach her in the midst of -such a throng of personages. But presently Fleta saw him and came -with her swift light step towards him. “Will you walk with me?” she -asked. “There is no one here to be my companion but you.” - -“And why is that?” asked Hilary, as with flushed face and eager -steps he accompanied her. - -“Because there are none that sympathise with me. You alone have -entered my laboratory.” - -“But would not any of these be glad to come if you would admit -them?” - -“Not one would have the courage, except perhaps some few wild -spirits who would dare anything for mere excitement. And they would -not please me.” - -Hilary was silent. Her words showed him very plainly that he pleased -her. But there was a chill in his nature which now asserted itself. -Here in the midst of so many people her hold on him was lessened, -and he doubted her more than ever. Was she merely playing with him -for her own amusement? Her high position gave her this power and he -could not resent it, for even to be her favourite for a day would be -accounted by any man an honour and a thing to boast of. And Hilary -was being signalled out for public honour. He felt the envious -glances of the men whom he met, and immediately a cold veil fell on -his heart. He desired no such envy. To his mind love was a thing -sacred. His scorn of life and doubt of human nature awakened at this -moment of triumph. He did not speak, but the Princess answered his -thought. - -“We will go away from here,” she said. “In the country you are a -creature of passion. Here you become a cynic.” - -“How do you know my heart?” he asked. - -“We were born under the same star,” she answered quietly. - -“That is no sufficient answer,” he replied. “It conveys no meaning -to me, for I know nothing of the mysterious sciences you study.” - -“Come then with me,” she answered, “and I will teach you.” - -She signed to her servant, who brought her horse; she mounted and -rode away with merely a smile to Hilary. She knew that in spite of -the chill that was on him he would hunger for her in her absence and -soon follow. And so he did. The pavements appeared empty though -crowds moved over them; the city seemed lifeless and dull, though it -was one of the gayest in the world. He turned from the streets, and -walking into the country, found himself very soon at the narrow -wicket gate of the Princess Fleta’s Garden House. - -She was wandering up and down the avenue between the trees. Her -dress was white now, and very long and soft, falling in great folds -from her shoulders. As she moved slowly to and fro, the dancing -sunlight playing on her splendid form, it seemed to Hilary that he -saw before him not a mere woman, but a priestess. Her late visit to -the Cathedral recurred to him; if the religious soul was in her, -might she not, indeed, spite of her strange acts, be no magician, -but a priestess? He returned to his former humour and was ready to -worship at her feet. She greeted him with a smile that thrilled him; -her eyes read his very soul, and her smile brought to it an -unutterable joy. She turned and led the way to the house and Hilary -followed her. - -She opened her laboratory door, and immediately Hilary became aware -of the strong odour of some powerful incense. The dim smoke was -still in the room but the flame had all died away in the vessel. By -the side of the vessel lay a prostrate figure. Hilary uttered a cry -of amazement and of horror as he recognised Father Amyot. He turned -such a look of dismay upon the Princess that she answered his -thought in a haughty tone which she had never before used in -addressing him. - -“It is not time yet to ask me the meaning of what you may see here. -Some day, perhaps, when you know more, you may have the right to -question me: but not now. See, I can change this appearance that -distresses you, in a moment.” - -She raised the prostrate figure, and flung off from it the white -robe that resembled Father Amyot’s. Beneath, it was clothed in a -dull red garment such as Hilary had first seen it in. With a few -swift touches of her hand the Princess changed the expression of the -face. Father Amyot was gone, and Hilary saw sitting in the chair -before him that unindividualised form and face which at his visit to -the laboratory had affected him with so much horror. The Princess -saw the repugnance still in his face, and with a laugh opened the -screen with which she had hidden the figure before. - -“Now,” she said, “come and sit beside me on this couch.” - -But before she left the great vessel she threw in more incense and -lit it. Already Hilary was aware that the fumes of that which had -been already burned had affected his brain. The red figures moved -upon the black wall, and he watched them with fascinated eyes. - -They shaped themselves together not, this time, into words, but into -forms. And the wall instead of black became bright and luminous. It -was as though Hilary and Fleta sat alone before an immense stage. -They heard the spoken words and saw the gestures and the movements -of these phantasmal actors as clearly and with as much reality as -though they were creatures of flesh and blood before them. It was a -drama of the passions; the chief actors were Hilary and Fleta -themselves. Hilary almost forgot that the real Fleta was at his -side, so absorbed was he in the action of the phantasmal Fleta. - -He was bewildered, and he could not understand the meaning of what -he saw, clearly though the drama was enacted in front of him. He saw -the orchard full of blossoming trees; he saw the splendid savage -woman. He knew that he himself and this Fleta at his side, were in -some strange way playing a part under this savage guise; but how or -what it was he could not tell. Fleta laughed as she watched his -face. “You do not know who you are,” she cried. “That is a great -loss and makes life much more difficult. But you will know by and -bye if you are willing to learn. Come, let us look at another and a -very different page of life.” - -The stage grew dark and moving shadows passed to and fro upon it, -great shadows that filled Hilary’s soul with dread. At last they -drew back and left a luminous space where Fleta herself was visible. -Fleta, in this same human shape that she wore now, yet strangely -changed. She was much older and yet more beautiful; there was a -wonderful fire in her brilliant eyes. On her head was a crown, and -Hilary saw that she had great powers to use or abuse—it was written -on her face. Then something drew his eyes down and he saw a figure -lying helpless at her feet—why was it so still?—it was alive!—yes, -but it was bound and fettered, bound hand and foot. - -“Are you afraid?” broke out Fleta’s voice with a ring of mocking -laughter in it. “Surely you are not afraid—why should I not reign? -why should you not suffer? You are a cynic; is there anything good -to be expected?” - -“Perhaps not,” said Hilary. “It may be that you are heartless and -false. And yet, as I stand here now, I feel that though you may -betray me by and bye, and take my life and liberty from me, yet I -love your very treachery.” - -Fleta laughed aloud, and Hilary stood silent, confused by the words -he had spoken hastily without pausing to think whether they were fit -to speak or not. Well, it was done now. He had spoken of his love. -She could refuse ever to see him again and he would go into the -outer darkness. - -“No,” she said, “I shall not send you away. Do you not know, Hilary -Estanol, that you are my chosen companion? Otherwise would you be -here with me now? The word love does not alarm me; I have heard it -too often. Only I think it very meaningless. Let us put it aside for -the present. If you let yourself love me you must suffer; and I do -not want you to suffer yet. When pain comes to you the youth will go -from your face; you do not know how to preserve it, and I like your -youth.” - -Hilary made no answer. It was not easy to answer such a speech, and -Hilary was not in the humour for accomplishing any thing difficult. -His brain was confused by the fumes of the incense and by the -strange scenes so mysteriously enacted before his eyes. He scarcely -knew what Fleta this was that stood beside him. And yet he knew he -loved her though he distrusted her! With each moment that he passed -by her side he worshipped her more completely, and the disbelief -interfered less and less with his proud joy in being admitted to her -intimacy. - -“Now,” said Fleta, “I want you to do a new thing. I want you to -exercise your will and compel my servants who have been pleasing us -with phantasies, to show us a phantasy of your own creation. You can -do this very well, if you will. It only needs that you shall not -doubt you can do it. Ah! how quickly does the act follow the -thought!” She uttered the last words with a little cry of amused -pleasure. For the dim shadows had rapidly masked the stage and then -again withdrawn, leaving the figure of Fleta very clearly visible, -beautiful and passionate, her face alight with love, held clasped in -Hilary’s arms, her lips pressed close to his. - -The real Fleta who sat beside him rose now with a shake of her head, -and a laugh which was not all gay. The shadows closed instantly over -the stage, and a moment later the illusion was all destroyed and the -solid wall was there before Hilary’s eyes. He had become so -accustomed to witness the marvellous inside this room that he did -not pause to wonder; he followed Fleta as she crossed to the door, -and tried to attract her attention. - -“Forgive me, my Princess,” he murmured over and over again. - -“Oh, you are forgiven,” she said at last lightly. “You have not -offended, so it is easy for me to forgive. I do not think a man can -help what is in his heart; at all events, no ordinary man can. And -you, Hilary, have consented to be like the rest. Are you content?” - -“No!” he answered, instantly. And as he spoke he understood for the -first time the fever that had stirred him all through his short -bright life. “Content! How should I be? Moreover, is not our star -the star of restlessness and action?” - -For the first time, Fleta turned on him a glance of real tenderness -and emotion. When he said the words “our star,” it seemed as if he -had touched her heart. - -“Ah!” she said, “How sorely I long for a companion!” - -Then she turned from him very abruptly, and almost before he knew -she had moved she had opened the door, and was standing outside -waiting for him. “Come!” she said impatiently. He followed her -immediately, for he had no choice but to do so; yet he was -disappointed. He was more deeply disappointed when he found that she -led the way with swift steps into the room where her aunt sat. -Arrived there, Fleta threw herself into a chair, took up a great -golden fan and began to fan herself, while she talked about the -gossip of the Court. The change was so sudden that for some moments -Hilary could not follow her. He stood bewildered, till the aunt -pushed a low chair towards him; and he felt then that the old lady -was not surprised at his manner, but only sorry for him. And then -suddenly the cynic re-asserted itself in his heart. A thought that -bit like flame suddenly started into life. Had the bewildered -emotion that had been, as he knew, visible on his face, been seen on -others before; was Fleta not only playing with him, but playing with -him as she had played with many another lover? The thought was more -hateful than any he had ever suffered from; it wounded his vanity, -which was more tender and delicate than his heart. - -Fleta gave him no opportunity of anything but talk such as seemed in -her stately presence too trivial to be endured, and so at last he -rose and went his way. Fleta did not accompany him to the gate this -time. She left him to go alone, and he felt as if she had withdrawn -her favour in some degree; and yet perhaps that was foolish, he told -himself, for after all, both he and she had said too much to-day. - -Fleta was betrothed. She had been betrothed at her christening. -Before long her marriage would take place; and then that crown seen -in the vision would be placed on her head. Had it needed the vision -to bring that fact to his mind, asked Hilary of himself? If so, -’twas time, he bitterly added, for Fleta was not a woman who was -likely to give up a crown for the sake of love! His heart rose -fiercely within him as he thought of all this. Why had she tempted -him to speak of love? For surely he never would have dared to so -address her had she not tempted him; so he thought. - -If he could have seen Fleta now! As soon as he left the room she had -risen and slowly moved back to her laboratory. Entered there, she -drew away a curtain which concealed a large mirror let deep into the -wall. She did this resolutely, yet as if reluctantly. Immediately -her gaze became fixed on the glass. She saw Hilary’s figure within -it moving on his way towards the city. She read his thoughts and his -heart. At last she dropped the curtain with a heavy sigh, and let -her arms fall at her side with a gesture that seemed to mean -despair; certainly it meant deep dejection. And presently some great -tears dropped upon the floor at her feet - -None, since Fleta was born, had seen her shed tears. - - CHAPTER IV. - -Father Amyot on the next morning sent a message to Hilary praying -him to come and see him. This Hilary did at once, and in much -perplexity as to what the reason of such a summons could be. He went -straight to the Cathedral, for there he knew the ascetic priest -passed all his time. He found him, as he expected, prostrate before -the altar, and almost in the same attitude he had seen him in -yesterday. Horribly too it reminded him of the attitude of that -figure lying on the floor of Fleta’s laboratory when he had entered -it. He had to touch Father Amyot to attract his attention; then at -once the priest rose and led the way out of the Cathedral into the -cloisters, which joined it to the monastery close at hand. He went -on, without speaking, his head drooped. Hilary could but follow. At -last they reached a bare cell in which was no furniture but a -crucifix and a perpetual lamp burning before it, and against the -wall a bench. - -Here Father Amyot sat down, and he motioned with his hand to Hilary -to sit beside him. - -Then he fell into a profound reverie; and Hilary watching him, -wondered much what was in his mind. Was Fleta even now working her -spells upon him and moulding his thoughts according to her will? - -It almost seemed like it, for her name was the first word he uttered -“The Princess Fleta,” he commenced, “is about to go upon a long and -dangerous journey.” - -Hilary started and turned his face away, for he knew that he had -turned pale. Was she really going to leave the city! How unexpected! -how terrible! - -“In a very short time,” went on Father Amyot, “the Princess will be -married and she has a mission which she desires to accomplish before -her wedding, and she says that you can assist her in this. It is for -the fulfilment of this mission that she is undertaking the journey I -speak of; supposing you should agree to help her you would have to -accompany her.” - -Hilary made no answer. He had no answer ready. His breath was taken -away and he could not recover it all in an instant. The whole thing -seemed incredible; he felt it to be impossible; and yet a conviction -was already falling on him that it would take place. - -“Of course,” resumed Father Amyot, seeing that Hilary was not -disposed to speak, “you will want to know your errand, you will want -to know why you are going on this journey. This it will be -impossible for you to know. The Princess does not choose to inform -any one of what her errand is.” - -“Not even the person whom she says can help her?” exclaimed Hilary -in amazement - -“Not even you.” - -“Well,” said Hilary rising with a gesture of indignation, “let her -find some one else to go blindly in her wake. I am not the man.” - -So saying he walked across the cell to the doorway, forgetting even -to say good-bye to Father Amyot. - -But the priest’s voice arrested him. - -“You would travel alone, save for one attendant.” - -Hilary turned and faced the priest in amazement. - -“Oh, impossible!” he exclaimed, “——yet it is true.” - -To Hilary the cynic, the thing suddenly assumed an intelligible -form. Fleta wanted to take a journey in which she would prefer a -companion because of its danger; yet she could not give her -confidence to any one. She proposed to herself to use his love for -her; she offered him her society as a bribe to take care of her, to -ask no questions and tell no tales. The idea did not please him. - -“I have heard of princesses risking anything, relying on the power -of their position; I have heard that the royal caprice is not to be -measured by the reason of other men and women. Perhaps it is so. But -Fleta! I thought her different even from her own family.” - -These were the first thoughts that came into his mind. His ready -conclusion was that Fleta was willing that he should be her lover if -he would be her servant also. But immediately afterwards came the -fair vision of Fleta herself in her white robes, and with the face -of a priestess. Her purpose was inscrutable, like herself. He -confessed this as he stood there, surging doubts in his mind. And -then suddenly a fragrance came across his sense—a strong perfume, -that he associated with Fleta’s dress—and next a breath of incense. -His brain grew dizzy; he staggered back and leaned against the wall. -He no longer appeared to himself to be in Father Amyot’s cell—he was -in Fleta’s laboratory, and her hand touched his face, her breath was -on his brow. Ah, what madness of joy to be with her! To travel with -her, to be her associate and companion to pass all the hours of the -day by her side. Suddenly he roused himself, and, starting forward, -approached Father Amyot. - -“I will go,” he said. - -“It will cost you dear,” said the priest. “Think again before you -decide.” - -“It is useless to think,” cried Hilary. “Why should I think? I -feel—and to feel is to live.” - -Father Amyot seemed not to hear his words. He was apparently already -buried in prayer. Evidently he had said all that he intended to say; -and Hilary, after a glance at him, turned and left the cell. He knew -the priest’s moods too well to speak again, when once that deep -cloud of profound abstraction had descended on his face. - -He went away, passing back as he had come, through the Cathedral. At -the high altar he paused an instant, and then knelt and murmured a -prayer. It was one he had learned, and he scarce attached any -meaning to the familiar words. But it comforted him to feel that he -had prayed, be it never so meaningless a prayer. For Hilary had been -reared in all the habits of the devout Catholic. - -Then he went out and took his way towards the Garden House, walking -with long strides. He was determined to know the truth, and that at -once. Amid all the brilliant men who crowded her father’s Court was -he indeed the only one who could touch her heart? An hour ago he -would have laughed at any one who had told him he had touched it; -yet now he believed he had. And what intoxication that belief was! -For the first time he began to feel the absolute infatuation of -love. And looking back it seemed to him that an hour ago he had not -loved Fleta—that he had never loved her till this minute. - -He found her standing at the gate, among the flowers. She was -dressed in white, and some crimson roses were fastened at her neck. -Her face was like a child’s, full of gaiety and gladness. Hilary’s -heart bounded with the delight it gave him to see her like this. She -opened the gate for him, and together they walked towards the house. - -“I have been to see Father Amyot,” said Hilary. “He sent for me this -morning.” - -“Yes,” answered Fleta, quietly. “He had a message to you from me. -Are you willing to undertake a tiresome task for one you know so -little?” - -“My Princess,” murmured Hilary, bending his head as he spoke. - -“But not your Queen,” said Fleta, with a laugh full of the glorious -insolence only possible to one who had the royal blood in her veins, -and knew that a crown was waiting for her. - -“Yes, my Queen,” said Hilary. - -“If you call me that,” said Fleta, quickly, and in a different tone, -“you recognise a royalty not recognised by courtiers.” - -“Yes,” replied Hilary simply. - -“The royalty of power,” added Fleta, significantly, and with a -penetrating look into his eyes. - -“Call it what you will,” answered Hilary, “you are my Queen. From -this hour I give allegiance.” - -“Be it so,” said Fleta, with a light girlish laugh, “Be ready then, -tomorrow at noon. I will tell you where to meet me. I will send a -message in the morning.” - -Suddenly a recollection crossed Hilary’s mind which had hitherto -been blotted out from it. “My mother,” he said. - -“Oh,” said Fleta, “I have been to see Madame Estanol. My father goes -into the country to-day and she believes you go with him. She is -glad you should join the Court.” - -“Strange,” said Hilary, unthinkingly, “for she has always set her -face against it.” Then the smile on Fleta’s face made him think his -words foolish. - -“It is as my Queen orders. Seemingly, men and women obey her even in -their inmost hearts.” - -“No,” said Fleta, with a sigh, “that is just what they do not! It is -that power which I have yet to obtain. They obey me, yes, but -against the dictates of their inmost hearts. If you really loved me, -we could obtain that power; but you are like the others. You do not -love me with your inmost heart!” - -“I do not!” exclaimed Hilary, in amazement, stunned by her words. - -“No,” she answered, mournfully, “you do not. If you really loved me -you would not calculate chances and risks, you would not consider -whether I am profligate or virtuous, whether I am my father’s -daughter or a child of the stars! I tell you, Hilary Estanol, if you -were capable of loving me truly, you might find your way to the gods -with me and even sit among them. But it is not so with you. You -vacillate even in your love. You cannot give yourself utterly. That -means grief to you, for you cannot find perfect pleasure in a thing -which you take doubtingly and give but by halves. Still you shall -travel with me; and you shall be my companion and friend. There is -none other to whom I would give this chance. How do you think you -will reward me? Oh, I know too well. Go now, but be ready when I -send for you.” - -So saying she turned and went into the house, leaving him in the -garden. For a few moments he stood there embarrassed, not knowing -which way to turn or what to do. But he was not annoyed or -disturbed, as his vanity might have led him to be at another time, -by such cavalier treatment. He was aghast, horrified. Was this the -girl he loved! this tyrant, this proud spirit, this strange woman, -who before he had wooed her reproached him with not loving her -enough! Within him lurked a conventional spirit, strong under all -circumstances, even those of the most profound emotion, and Fleta’s -whole conduct shocked and distressed that spirit so that it groaned, -and more, upbraided him with his mad love. But the fierce growth of -that love could not be checked. He might suffer because it lived, -but he was not strong enough to kill it. - -He turned and walked away from the house and slowly returned to the -city. He was ashamed and disheartened. His love seemed to disgrace -him. He had entertained lofty ideas which now were discarded for -ever. For he knew that to-morrow he would start upon a long journey, -the end of which was to him unknown, by the side of a girl whom he -could never marry, yet of whom he was the avowed lover. Well, be it -so. Hilary began to look at these things from a fatalistic point of -view; his weakness led him to shrug his shoulders and say that his -fate was stronger than himself. So he went home gloomily yet with a -burning and feverish heart. He immediately set to work making ready -for his departure for an indefinite period. His mother he found was -prepared for this, as Fleta had told him; and more—seemed to regard -Fleta as a kind of gentle goddess who had brought good fortune into -his path. - -“I have always resisted the idea of your hanging about the Court,” -she said, “but it is different if indeed the King wishes to have you -with him. That must lead to your obtaining some honourable post. -What I dreaded was your becoming a mere useless idler. And I am glad -you are going into the country, dear, for you are looking very pale -and quite ill.” - -Hilary assented tacitly and without comment to the deceit with which -Fleta had paved the way for him. - - (_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - “Spirituality is not what we understand by the words ‘virtue’ or - ‘goodness.’ It is the power of perceiving formless, spiritual - essences.”—(_Jasper Niemand in the “Path.”_) - - “The discovery and right use of the true essence of Being—this is - the whole secret of life.”—(_Jasper Niemand in the “Path.”_) - - ------------------ - - DESIRE MADE PURE. - -When desire is for the purely abstract—when it has lost all trace or -tinge of “self”—then it has become pure. - -The first step towards this purity is to kill out the desire for the -things of matter, since these _can_ only be enjoyed by the separated -personality. - -The second is to cease from desiring for oneself even such -abstractions as power, knowledge, love, happiness, or fame; for they -are but selfishness after all. - -Life itself teaches these lessons; for all such objects of desire -are found Dead Sea fruit in the moment of attainment. This much we -learn from experience. Intuitive perception seizes on the _positive_ -truth that satisfaction is attainable only in the infinite; the will -makes that conviction an actual fact of consciousness, till at last -all desire is centred on the Eternal. - - THOUGHTS ON THEOSOPHY. - -“The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life,” this is the -keynote of all true reform. Theosophy is the vehicle of the spirit -that gives life, consequently nothing _dogmatic_ can be truly -_theosophical_. - -It is incorrect, therefore, to describe a _mere_ unearthing of dead -letter dogmas as “Theosophic work.” - -When a word, phrase, or symbol, having been once used for the -purpose of suggesting an idea _new_ to the mind or minds being -operated on, is insisted upon irrespective of the said idea, it -becomes a dead letter dogma and loses its vitalising power, and -serves rather as an obstruction to, than as vehicle of the spirit; -but, alas, this insistance upon the letter is too often carried on -under the honoured name of “Theosophy.” - -A man cannot acquire an idea _new to him_ unless it _grows_ in his -mind. - -The mere familiarity with the _sound_ of a word, or a phrase, or the -mere familiarity with the _appearance_ of a symbol, does not, of -_necessity_, involve the possession of the idea properly associated -with the said word, phrase or symbol. To insist, therefore, on the -contrary cannot be theosophical; but would be better described as -_un_theosophical. - -It would certainly be theosophical work to point out kindly and -temperately how certain words, phrases and symbols appear to have -been misunderstood or misapplied, how various claims and professions -may be excessive or confused as a consequence of ignorance or -vanity, or both. But it is quite another thing to condemn a man or a -body of men _outright_, for certain errors in judgment or action; -even though they were the result of vanity, greed or hypocrisy; -indeed such wholesale condemnation would, on the contrary, be -untheosophical. - -The one eternal, immutable law of life alone can judge and condemn a -man absolutely. “Vengeance is _mine_, saith the Lord.” - -Were I asked how I would dare attempt “to dethrone the gods, -overthrow the temple, destroy the law which feeds the priests and -props the realm; I should answer as the Buddha is made to answer in -the _Light of Asia_: ‘What thou bidst me keep is form which passes -while the free truth stands; get thee to thy darkness.’” - -“What good gift hath my brother but it comes from search and strife -(inward) and loving sacrifice.” - - * - * * - - =Correspondence= - - --- - - ARE THE TEACHINGS ASCRIBED TO JESUS CONTRADICTORY? - -There are none so blind as those who won’t see, excepting those who -can’t! - -In _Light_, for September 10th, there is a letter from Dr. Wyld, who -writes as follows: “In the last number of _Light_ there is a -quotation from the _Spiritual Reformer_ in which the writer shows -the absurdity of the idea that Jesus was not an historic being. But -while thanking the writer for this contribution, I would take the -strongest objection to his assertion that many of Christ’s teachings -are contradictory and mistaken. This is an assertion occasionally -made by Spiritualists, and whenever I have met with it I have asked -for evidence of the assertion, but hitherto I have received none.” - -But that might surely have been easily supplied. Here, for example, -are a few very direct contradictions in the speaker’s own words. -Every one knows how secret were the teachings in their nature; how -secretly they were conveyed in private places apart; how secretly -his secrets were to be kept; and yet in presence of the High Priest -Jesus makes the astounding declaration: “_I have spoken openly to -the world; I always taught in synagogues; and in secret spake I -nothing._”—John xviii. 20. - -Jesus, in keeping with the mythical character, is made to claim -equality and identity with the Father. He says (John x. 30), “_I and -my Father are one_;” but in the same book (John xiv. 28), he says, -“_The Father is greater than I_”—(Cf. Matthew xxiv. 36.) Again, he -claims superiority over his Father. “_The Father judgeth no man, but -hath committed all judgment to the Son. As I hear I judge_” (John v. -22, 30). And then in the same gospel he says, “_I judge no man_,” -(John viii. 15.) “_If any man hear my words and believe not, I judge -him not; for I came not to judge the world_,” (John xii. 47). Again, -“_I am one that bear witness of myself. Though I bear witness of -myself, yet my record is true_,” (John viii. 14, 18); which is -contradicted by (John v. 31) “_If I bear witness of myself, my -witness is not true_.” He says (John v. 33, 34) that “_John bare -witness unto the truth, but I receive not testimony from man_,” and -then tells the disciples, who are supposed to have been men, that -“_they also shall bear witness_” to or of him (John xv. 27). Again -he says, “_Let your light so shine before men that they may see your -good works_,” (Matthew v. 16). But “_Take heed that ye do not your -alms before men to be seen of them_.” (Matthew vi. 1). - -“_Resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right -cheek, turn to him the other also_,” (Matthew v. 39); for “_all that -take the sword, shall perish with the sword_,” (Matthew xxvi. 52). -Nevertheless, “_He that hath no sword let him sell his garment and -buy one_,” (Luke xxii. 36). “_I came not to send Peace but a -Sword_,” (Matthew x. 34). “_Be not afraid of them that kill the -body_,” (Luke xii. 4). Nevertheless “_Jesus would not walk in Jewry -because the Jews sought to kill him_,” (John vii. 1). - -I merely ask, for the sake of information, are these statements -contradictory or are they not? - -I will but offer one or two specimens of the more serious and -fundamental contradictions in the _olla podrida_ of teaching -assigned to Jesus. The teaching of the alleged founder of -Christianity in the Gospel according to Matthew (ch. xix. 12), is -that of the Saboi, the self-mutilators, who are still extant as the -Russian Skoptsi[27] and who emasculate themselves to save their -spermatic souls, as Origen is reputed to have done. Jesus is made to -say, “_There are Eunuchs which made themselves Eunuchs for the -Kingdom of Heaven’s sake_. He that is able to receive it, let him -receive it.” And then in the opening verses of the very next -chapter, the same teacher says, “_Suffer little children and forbid -them not, to come unto me; for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven_.” -But those who became Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake could -not be suffering the little children to come unto him or to them. -They would be forbidding them to come at all. If the Kingdom of -Heaven be _such_ as the children of Eunuchs it must be non-extant. -As Hood’s deaf shopman said of the crackers going off, there were so -many reports he did not know _which_ to believe. - ------ - -Footnote 27: - - Of whom there are large colonies along the Black Sea and the coast - of Imeretia and Poti. - ------ - -And where is the sense of talking so much nonsense about the “Golden -Rule” or the Divine humanity on behalf of one who carried on the -blindest warfare against human nature itself? Who declared that “_If -any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and -children, and brothers and sisters, and his own life also, he cannot -be my disciple_” (Luke xiv. 26). And who promised that every -follower of his who “_left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, -or children, for the Kingdom of God’s sake should receive manifold -more in the present and in the world to come life everlasting_.” -Well may the grateful Musselman cry in his adorations, “_Thank God_ -OUR _Father has no Son!_” - -But, I do not charge these contradictory sayings and teachings to -any personal character. The collectors are but making use of the -_Kurios_, the Lord of the pre-Christian Mythos, the mystical Christ -of the Gnostics, as a puppet to represent them and their divers -doctrines. They make the human image of a God of Love to be the -preacher of everlasting punishment, and the bearer of a fan with -which he fans the fires of hell; a false foreteller of that which -never came to pass, and the forerunner of a fulfilment which did not -follow. In short, they make this Marionette Messiah dance to any -particular tune they play. - -Jesus is posed as the original revealer of a father in Heaven, -whereas the doctrine of the Divine Fatherhood was taught in three -different Egyptian Cults during some four thousand years previously. - -Dr. Wyld implies that I deny the existence of a personal Jesus. That -is the misrepresentation of ignorance. But the sole historical Jesus -acknowledged by me is the only one who was ever known to the Jews, -to Celsus, to Epiphanius, as the descendant of JOSEPH Pandira, he, -who according to Irenæus, lived to be over fifty years of age. - -This, I admit, was not the kind of Jesus whom the Christians find in -the Gospels and honour as a God. - -The Gospel histories do not contain the biography of Ben-Pandira, -the son of Joseph. Nor was it intended that they should. Their Jesus -is the mythical Christ, the Horus of 12 years, and the adult Horus -of 30 years; the Lord of the age, Æon or Cycle, who came and went, -and was to come again for those who possessed the Gnosis. - -Another writer in _Light_, a week earlier, could not understand how -any one can deny the personal existence of the “Historical Christ!” - -The _Historical Christ_! You might as well demand our belief in the -historical Chronos—Time, in person—or the historical Ghost, in man -or out of him. If the writer knew anything of the pre-Christian -Spiritualism—anything of the true nature or even the meaning of the -name—he would perceive the Historic Impossibility of the personal -Christ. An “Historical Christ” is as much a nonentity as the -historical Mrs. Harris. But, _cui bono?_ I have no hope in these -matters of any orthodox Christian Spiritualists. They have to learn -the primary lesson, at last, that Historic Christianity was not -founded on our facts _until it had buried them_! That it was the -negation of Gnosticism, the antithesis of phenomenal Spiritualism. -That it substituted faith for facts; a physical resurrection for a -spiritual continuity, and a corporeal Christ for the trans-corporeal -man. - -The Christian Revelation leaves no room for modern Spiritualism, and -they are logically, truly Christians who reject it! It recognises no -other rising again except at the last day, and then only for the few -who believed in Jesus (John vi. 40). The Christians have no other -world but one at the end of this; no other spirits extant excepting -their physical Christ and the devil. - -People who will see nothing contradictory in direct opposites, no -difference betwixt black and white, but rather the necessary duality -of antiphonal truth, who can accept a misinterpretation of mythology -for the Word of God, are of little account as witnesses for -Spiritualism. They who tell a story about the whale swallowing Jonah -are not likely to be credited when they come with another that looks -very like Jonah swallowing the whale. Professed believers in the -literal truth of the Gospel fables are of necessity “_Suspects_” as -witnesses for abnormal and extraordinary facts. - -Pointing to his antagonist on the platform, O’Connel once enquired -of his audience, “Can ye believe a single word that a gentleman says -who wears a waistcoat of _that_ colour?” It was yellow, and they -couldn’t. - -What is the use of taking your “Bible oath” that this thing is true, -if the Book you are sworn upon is a magazine of falsehoods already -exploded or just going off? - -Moreover, the Christian Priesthood has been preaching through all -these centuries that the dead do _not_ return; and the living have -believed them. - -Dr. Sprenger has calculated that nine million persons have been put -to death as Witches, Wizards, or Mediums, since 1484, when Pope -Innocent VIII. issued his Bull against Spiritualism and all its -practices, which were considered to be the works of the devil. - -Besides, if the Christian scheme of damnation be true, as assigned -to the teaching of Jesus, no humane person should want to know that -there is any hereafter. - -Spiritualism can make no headway where it has to draw after it this -dead weight of a tail. - -Christian Spiritualism also ostentatiously proclaims that it has -nothing in the world to do with “Woman’s Rights,” “Vaccination,” or -any such merely human interests. It would seek to create an interest -in another life, whilst ignoring the vital interests of this. But -that is to sign its own death-warrant and to seal its own speedy -doom. This is to repeat the mistake and follow the failure of the -Christian system of saving souls for another life whilst allowing -them to be damned in this. At the same time, it would drag -Spiritualism into the bankrupt business of Historic Christianity and -bind up a third testament to save the other two, as a sort of -Trinity in Unity. But as a system of thought, of religion, or morals -and a mode of interpreting nature, Historic Christianity is moribund -and cannot be saved, or resuscitated by transfusion of new blood -into it; not if you bled Spiritualism to death in trying to give it -a little new life. They try in vain to make our phenomena guarantee -the miracles of mythology as spiritual realities. They try in vain -to tether the other world in this and make it draw for the -fraudulent old faith. They keep on jumping up and down to persuade -themselves and others that they are free. But it is only a question -of length of chain, for those who are still fettered fast at foot -upon the ancient standing-ground. - -I have not answered the writer in the paper quoted by _Light_, and -approved by Dr. Wyld, for the reason that his acquaintance with my -data was too limited to make discussion profitable or useful. Those -data are already presented in accessible books and pamphlets, and -there is no need for me to repeat them in reply to him. Those who -undertake to write on so perplexing a subject ought to be able to -illuminate it and enlighten their opponents. The problems are not to -be solved by any amount of personal simplicity. I am always ready to -meet any competent and well-informed defender of the faith upon the -platform or in the press. I should prefer it to be a bishop, who is -also an Egyptologist. But beggars are not allowed to be choosers. I -am prepared at any time to demonstrate the entirely mythical and -mystical origin of the Christ, and the non-spiritual, non-historical -beginnings of the vast complex called Christianity. - - GERALD MASSEY. - - [Any “Bishop Egyptologist,” or even Assyriologist, of whom we have - heard there are not a few in England, is cordially invited to - defend his position in the pages of LUCIFER. The “Son of the - Morning” is the _Light-Bearer_, and welcomes light from every - quarter of the globe.—ED.] - - ------------------ - - [NOTE.—As _Lucifer_ cannot concur in the exclusively _exoteric_ - view, taken by Mr. Massey, of this allegorical, though none the - less philosophical, scripture, the next number will contain an - article dealing with the _esoteric_ meaning of the New - Testament.—ED.] - - TO THE AUTHOR OF “LIGHT ON THE PATH.” - -There is a sentence in your “Comments” which has haunted me with a -sense of irritation: “To obtain knowledge by experiment is too -tedious a method for those who aspire to do real work,” &c. Have we -any knowledge, of whatever sort, that has been of use in the world, -which has been obtained otherwise than experimentally? By patient -and persistent toil of sifting and testing, we have obtained the -little knowledge that is of service to us. Is there such a thing as -“certain intuition”? Has intuitive knowledge, if such there be, been -accepted as positive knowledge until it has been submitted to the -test of experiment? Would it be right that it should be? Your -illustration of the “determined workman” brings the question down -(as I think the question should be brought) to the plane of -practice. Is there any workman who can know his tools until he has -tried them? Is not the history of knowledge the history of -intuitions put to the test of practice? Intuitions, or what we call -such, seem to me quite as apt and likely to deceive us as anything -in the world; we only know them for good when we have tried them. - - INTERROGATOR. - - --- - -It seems to me there is some confusion in this letter between -obtaining knowledge by experiment, and testing it by experiment. -Edison knew that his discoveries were only things to look for, and -he tested his knowledge by experiment. The actual work of great -inventors is the bringing of intuitive knowledge on to the plane of -practice by applying the test of experiment. But all inventors are -seers; and some of them having died without being able to put into -practice the powers which they knew existed in Nature were -considered madmen. Later on, other men are more fortunate, and -re-discover the laughed-at knowledge. This is an old and familiar -story, but we need constantly to be reminded of it. How often have -great musicians or great artists been regarded as “infant prodigies” -in their childhood? They have intuitive knowledge of that power of -which they are chosen interpreters, and experiment is only necessary -in order to find out how to give that which they know to others. - -Intuitive knowledge in reference to the subjects with which I have -been dealing must indeed be tested by experiment; and it is the -whole purpose of “Light on the Path” itself, and the “Comments” to -urge men to test their knowledge in this way. But the vital -difference between this and material forms of knowledge is that for -all occult purposes a man must obtain his own knowledge before he -can use it. There are many subjects of time content to linger on -through æons of slow development, and pass the threshold of eternity -at last by sheer force of the great wheel of life with which they -move; possibly during their interminable noviciate, they may obtain -knowledge by experiment and with well-tested tools. Not so the -pioneer, the one who claims his divine inheritance now. He must work -as the great artists, the great inventors have done; obtain -knowledge by intuition, and have such sublime faith in his own -knowledge that his life is readily devoted to testing it. - -But for this purpose the testing has to be actually done in the -astral life. In a new world, where the use of the senses is a pain, -how can the workman stay to test his tools? The old proverb about -the good workman who never quarrels with them, however bad they are, -though of course had he the choice he would use the best, applies -here. - -As to whether intuitive knowledge exists or no, I can only ask how -came philosophies, metaphysics, mathematics into existence? All -these represent a portion of abstract truth. - -Before I received this letter the “Comments” for this month were -written, in which, as it happens, I have spoken a great deal about -intuitive knowledge. Therefore, I will now only quote the definition -of a philosopher from Plato, which is given near the end of Book -V.,— - -“I mean by philosopher, the man who is devoted to the acquisition of -knowledge, real knowledge, and not merely inquisitive. The more our -citizens approach this temperament, the better the state will be. -True knowledge in its perfection and its entirety, man cannot -attain. But he can attain to a kind of knowledge of realities, if he -has any knowledge at all, because he cannot know nonentities. Hence -his knowledge is half-way between real knowledge and ignorance, and -we must call it opinion.” - - NOTE.—Several questions which have been received are held over to - be answered next month. - - ------------------ - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -In the interesting and lucid article on “Karma” in your number of -September 15th, everything seems to hinge on the theory of -re-incarnation. “Very well,” says the author of that paper, “let -us take the principle of re-incarnation for granted.” But is not -this a rather unphilosophical way of handling a subject of such -gravity? Take this or that principle for granted, and you may go -about to prove anything under the sun. It is the old weakness of -begging the question. Is it not this taking for granted what -cannot be proved, and is not attempted to be proved, that has led -astray speculators—both scientific and religious—everywhere and in -every age, and is it not upon similar assumptions that the whole -monstrous fabric of theology rests? Of course, in every kind of -speculation one is compelled to set out with an assumption of some -sort; but then the first thing the reader demands is, that the -grounds shall be shown upon which the assumption rests; the -assumption, whatever it be, must be made good before one can be -asked to accept that which is to be raised upon it. And here comes -in my question: What is the warrant or sanction for the principle -of re-incarnation? What is the principle grounded upon? Do we -undergo re-incarnation, and how do you know it? - -Having set out with the assumption, the author does not return to it -again, and at the end of the article I am as uninstructed as at the -outset respecting the pivotal principle upon which all that follows -seems to turn. - - INTERROGATOR. - - ------------------ - -The author of “Karma” will go into this question fully in a paper -devoted entirely to the subject of re-incarnation. The two subjects -are inextricably interwoven, but it was decided that to treat the -two at the same time would produce too great a confusion, and offer -too wide an area of speculation for the mind to grapple with. -Therefore this course was adopted of taking the principle of -re-incarnation for granted. It is possible that the second paper -should have come first, but the two theories stand side by side, not -one before the other, so that the question of precedence was a -difficult one. But it is necessary, in view of this blending of the -ideas, that the reader shall have the complete presentation of both -before him, and then draw his conclusions. Therefore indulgence is -asked until the papers dealing with each subject are completed. As -many readers may have felt the same difficulty as our correspondent, -we are glad to insert this letter and reply.—ED. - - Reviews. - -=THE KABBALAH UNVEILED.= - - TRANSLATED BY S. L. MACGREGOR MATHERS.[28] - ------ - -Footnote 28: - - George Redway, 15, York Street, Covent Garden. - ------ - -The author of this welcome volume has supplied the present -generation of students of theosophy and occultism with a text-book -which has been long wanted and waited for. The “Zohar” is the great -storehouse of the ancient Hebrew theosophy, supplemented by the -philosophical doctrines of the mediæval Jewish Rabbis. It consists -of several distinct yet allied tracts, each discussing some special -branch of the subject; each tract again consists of several -portions, a kernel of most ancient dogma, to which are added -comments and explanations, in some cases by several hands and at -very different epochs. There is sufficient proof that these kernels -of dogma are remnants of one of the oldest systems of philosophy -that have come down to us, and they show also intrinsic evidence -that they are associated at least with the return from the -Babylonish captivity. On the other hand, it is pretty certain that -the Zohar, in its present form, was put together and first printed -about 1558, at Mantua, and a little later in other editions at -Cremona and Lublin. This Mantuan edition was a revision of the -collection of tracts collected and edited in MS. form by Moses de -Leon, of Guadalaxara, in Spain, about 1300; even the most hostile -views of the antiquity of the Zohar grant this much, and although -direct historical evidence is not forthcoming of the several steps -in the course of transmission of these doctrines from ante-Roman -times, yet, as aforesaid, the internal evidence is ample to show the -essential origination of the specially Hebrew ideas found in the -Zohar from Rabbis, more or less tinged with a Babylonish cast, who -must have flourished antecedent to the building of the second -Temple. The tradition of the mediæval Rabbis definitely assigned the -authorship to Rabbi Schimeon ben Jochai, who lived in the reign of -the Roman Emperor Titus, A.D. 70-80; and it is the claim of -authorship made on his behalf that the modern critic is so fond of -contesting. - -The “Zohar,” or “Splendour,” or “Book of Illumination,” and the -“Sepher Yetzirah” are almost the only extant books of the Kabbalah, -Qbalah or Cabbala. The “Kabbalah Denudata” of Knorr von Rosenroth, -is a Latin version of the former, with commentaries by himself and -by certain learned Rabbis. No French and no German translation of -the Zohar has ever been published, nor until the present time has -any English version been printed. Eliphaz Levi has, however, -paraphrased a few chapters of the “Book of Concealed Mystery,” and -these have been printed in the _Theosophist_. - -Some parts of the Zohar are written in pure Hebrew, but a large -portion is in Aramaic Chaldee, and there are passages in other -dialects; this variation of language adds immensely to the -difficulties of an accurate translation. - -Knorr von Rosenroth was a most able and compendious Hebrew savant, -and his translation of much of the Zohar into Latin is a work of -established reputation, and has been, indeed, almost the only means -by which the students of our era have been able to consult Hebraic -philosophy. The present revival of theosophical studies by the -English speaking races has created a demand for the Kabbalah in an -English dress, and hence the appearance of the present work is well -timed, and will form an epoch in the history of occultism; and much -good fruit will no doubt be borne by a more intimate acquaintance -with Jewish lore, which will tinge the present tendency to supremacy -of the Sanscrit and Hermetic forms of mysticism. There is much -reason to suppose that an attentive study of each of these forms of -knowledge may lead one to the Hidden Wisdom; but a skilful analogy, -and an investigation into the three forms of dogma on parallel lines -will give a breadth of grasp and a cosmopolitan view of the matter -which should lead to a happy solution of the great problems of life -in a speedy and satisfactory manner. The Kabbalah may, in concise -terms, be said to teach the ancient Rabbinical doctrines of the -nature and attributes of the Divinity, the cosmogony of our -universe, the creation of angels and the human soul, the destiny of -angels and men, the dogma of equilibrium, and the transcendental -symbolism of the Hebrew letters and numerals. - -Mr. Mathers, who is a most patient and persevering student, if not -professor, of mystic lore, is at the same time a first-rate -classical scholar, and a skilful interpreter of the Hebrew tongue, -and his translation from the Latin, varied and improved by his own -study of the original Chaldee, has produced an English version of -the Kabbalah Denudata which is eloquent in its construction, true to -its text, and lucid in its abstruseness. For the matter is abstruse, -much of it, and some is practically incomprehensible to the -beginner, to the world in general for certain, and perhaps to every -one at the first glance. But it will be certainly perceived that -those very portions which seem most extravagant at a first reading -are just the passages from which later a light will arise and lead -one on to a firm grasp of the subject. To take up this volume and -read at odd moments is a useless and hopeless task; no progress will -be made, at any rate at first, except by thoroughly abstracting -one’s individuality from the things of common life; disappointment -can only accompany superficial reading. - -Great credit is due to the enterprise of Mr. Redway in publishing -this volume, for which no very extensive sale could have been -anticipated; that he has already distributed a considerable number -is matter for congratulation to himself and to the public. It is -hoped that his success will induce him to publish other volumes of -antique lore, of which many yet remain more or less completely -ignored by the present generation. - -The “Siphra Dtzenioutha,” the “Idra Rabba,” and the “Idra Zuta,” -included in this volume are doubtless three of the most valuable of -the tracts of the Zohar, yet there are others of equal interest. The -“Book of the Revolutions of Souls” is a most curious and mysterious -work, and the “Asch Metzareph” is a treatise on the relations -between Theosophy and the oldest alchemical ideas which are known to -exist; it is a work on the Asiatic plane, on the lowest of the four -kabbalistic worlds of Emanation. - -Beyond the limits of the Zohar proper, the “Sepher Yetzirah,” is a -treatise which for interest and instruction cannot be surpassed. - -Mr. Mathers supplies us with an introduction to the Qabalah, which -stamps him as a master of the science, and although he refers us on -some pages to Ginsburg (a recognised authority), yet his remarks and -explanation are more deep and thorough than those published in -Ginsburg’s little English pamphlet, and are more discursive and -complete. My remarks on the difficulty of our subject hardly render -it necessary for me to insist on the absolute necessity of a -painstaking study of this introduction, which will supply in a great -measure the want of a _de novo_ education in Hebrew, and Hebrew -modes of thought and expression. - -Mr. Mathers justly insists on the literal rendering of the Hebrew -title by the spelling Qabalah, which is no doubt correct, but lays -him open to a charge of pedantry, which perhaps does not much affect -him, since it would only come from superficial and possibly scoffing -critics. The use of the letter Q without its usual English companion -the u is sanctioned and advised, in this connection, by the learned -Max Müller and other Orientalists of repute. To avoid the printing -of Hebrew letters, the publisher has adopted a scheme of printing -Hebrew words in English capital letters (in addition to the mode of -pronunciation), after a method given by the author in tabular form. -To the Hebrew scholar this gives an idea of barbarism, which is -painful to the eye and sadly mars the volume, whilst it only saves -the student the task of learning an alphabet of 22 letters. I differ -from the author in representing the Hebrew Teth by T, while -depicting the Tau by TH., the reverse would have been a closer -imitation of the sounds. The Introduction includes a learned -excursus upon the idea of “Negative Existence,” in which -considerable light is thrown on that difficult subject; skilful -definitions are added concerning the AIN, the AIN SOPH, and AIN SOPH -AUR, answering in English to Negativity, The Limitless, and -Limitless Light, the first essences of Deity. Several pages are -devoted to a clear description of the Ten Sephiroth, the Numerical -Conceptions of Godhead, and their explanatory titles; the Four -Worlds of Emanation, and the component elements of a Human Soul; the -Mysteries of the Hexagram as a type of Macroprosopus, the Most Holy -Ancient One, or God the Father—and the succeeding mystery of -Microprosopus, the Lesser Countenance, typified in the Pentagram and -corresponding to the Christian Personality of the “Son of God,” are -all explained at length. The series of references to the IHVH the -Tetragrammaton, the Concealed Name of unknown pronunciation, form a -valuable dissertation. The book is supplied with nine well executed -diagrams, explanatory of the Sephiroth, the sacred names, essences -of the soul, and a very perfect and complete scheme of the Sephiroth -in the four worlds of emanation associated with the Vision of -Ezekiel. Mr. Mathers desires to call special attention to the -differentiation of the Deity in the Emanations, into the female type -in addition to masculine characteristics: note the idealism of the -Superior HE, Binah, the Mother, and the Inferior HE, Malkuth, the -Bride of Microprosopus, the Kingdom of God (the Son of God and his -Bride the Church), note that Genesis i. 26, says “let _Us_ make man -in our image,” “male and female created he them;” the “_us_” is -“Elohim,” a noun in the plural. - -The “Siphra Dtzenioutha,” or “Book of Concealed Mystery,” is the -most difficult of comprehension. Mr. Mathers adds a running -commentary of his own, which proves to be very valuable. It consists -of five chapters; in the first are found references to the Mystical -Equilibrium, the worlds of unbalanced force characterised as the -Edomite kings, the Vast Countenance, Theli the Dragon, the powers of -IHVH, and the essence of the female power—the Mother. The second -chapter mentions the Beard of Truth, and passes on to define -Microprosopus. The third chapter treats of the Beard of -Microprosopus in an allegorical manner, and of the formation of the -Supernal Man. An annotation follows concerning Prayer, and a curious -note on the word AMEN! as composed of IHVH, and ADNI Adonai or Lord. -Chapter IV. treats of the male and female essences, and has a -curious note on the Hebrew letter Hé, speaking of it as female, and -composed of D, Daleth, and I, Jod—a great mystery worthy of study. -Chapter V. speaks of the Supernal Eden, the Heavens, the Earth, the -Waters, the Giants-Nephilim in the earth, wars of the kings, the -tree of knowledge of good and evil, the serpent, and the houses of -judgment; so that this treatise is no less discursive than abstruse. - -The “Idra Rabba,” or “Greater Holy Assembly,” consisted of ten -Rabbis, of whom Rabbi Schimeon was chief, and the book contains -their several speeches and comments upon the doctrines laid down by -Rabbi Schimeon, on a similar plan to the conversations narrated in -the Book of Job. Twenty-five chapters are occupied with an allegory -of the several parts of Macroprosopus, the type of God the Father; -the twenty-sixth concerns the Edomite kings, the vanished creations; -Chapters XXVII. to XLII. are an allegorical description of -Microprosopus, the Son Deity, the V or Vau of the Tetragrammaton; -Chapter XLIII. concerns the Judgments; XLIV., the Supernal Man; and -XLV. is a Conclusion, in narrative form, of the passing away of -three of the ten Rabbis, and the acknowledgment of R. Schimeon as -chief of them all. - -Very much of this descriptive volume referring to Deity is not only -abstruse, but is, to the modern European, verbiage run wild; yet in -this characteristic it is truly Oriental and Hebrew; some passages -remind me very much of the “Song of Solomon,” there are the same -exuberant and flowery outbursts of poetic imagery. - -The “Idra Zuta,” or “Lesser Holy Assembly,” is a similar treatise, -explanatory of the Holy powers of the Deity, ascribing honour and -power to Macroprosopus, Microprosopus, AIMA the God Mother, and the -Bride of God; with instructive allusions to the Prior Worlds of the -so-called Edomite Kings, and the sexual aspects of Godhead. The work -concludes with a narrative of the death of R. Schimeon and his -burial, the whole “Idra” being his last dying declaration of -doctrine. - -It is noteworthy that the words of the “Smaragdime Tablet of -Hermes”—“that which is below is like that which is above” occur in -paragraph 388 of the Idra Rabba, and are thus introduced, “We have -learned through Barietha, the tradition given forth _without_ the -Holy City.” I note also that the Mischna is mentioned in the Idra -Zuta. Want of space compels me to omit all extracts from this -volume, which is a matter of regret, as many passages are very -eloquently written. - -A flaw in this book is the construction of the Index, which should -have contained sub-headings, as well as main headings. Of what value -is the entry “Microprosopus,” followed by eleven lines each of -fourteen page-numbers? A score of references, sub-divided between -his characteristics, his relationships, and his titles would have -been of more practical use. With this exception, and when the -abomination of Hebrew in English letters has been tolerated, we must -acknowledge the production of a most valuable theosophical and -philosophical storehouse of ancient Hebrew doctrine, on which Mr. -MacGregor Mathers may be heartily congratulated. - - W. WYNN WESTCOTT, M.B. - - ------------------ - - - -“AN ADVENTURE AMONG THE ROSICRUCIANS.” - - BY A STUDENT OF OCCULTISM.[29] - ------ - -Footnote 29: - - Copyrighted by Franz Hartmann, Boston Occult Publishing Co., 1887. - ------ - -A strange and original little story, charmingly fantastic, but full -of poetic feeling and, what is more, of deep philosophical and -occult truths, for those who can perceive the ground-work it is -built upon. A fresh Eclogue of Virgil in its first part, descriptive -of Alpine scenery in the Tyrol, where the author “dreamt” his -adventure, with “shining glaciers glistening like vast mirrors in -the light of the rising sun,” deep ravines with rushing streams -dancing between the cliffs, blue lakes slumbering among the meadows, -and daisy-sprinkled valleys resting in the shadow of old pine -forests. - -Gradually as the hero of the “Adventure” ascended higher and higher, -he began losing the sense of the world of the real, to pass -unconsciously into the land of waking dreams. - - “In these solitudes there is nothing to remind one of the - existence of man, except occasionally the sawed-off trunk of a - tree, showing the destructive influence of human activity. In some - old, rotten, and hollow trunks rain-water has collected, sparkling - in the sun like little mirrors, such as may be used by - water-nymphs, and around their edges mushrooms are growing, which - our imagination transforms into chairs, tables, and baldachinos - for elves and fairies.... No sound could now be heard, except - occasionally the note of a titmouse and the cry of a hawk who rose - in long-drawn spiral motion high up into the air....” - -Throwing himself upon the moss, he begins watching the play of the -water until it becomes “alive with forms of the most singular -shape,” with super-mundane beings dancing in the spray, “shaking -their heads in the sunshine and throwing off showers of liquid -silver from their waving locks.”... - - “Their laughter sounded like that of the Falls of _Minnehaha_, and - from the crevices of the rocks peeped the ugly faces of gnomes and - kobolds, watching slyly the fairies.” - -Then the dreamer asks himself a variety of questions of the most -perplexing nature, except, perhaps, to the materialist, who cuts -every psychological problem as Alexander cleft the Gordian knot.... - -“What is the reason that we imagine such things?” he inquires. - - “Why do we endow ‘dead’ things with human consciousness and with - sensation?... Is our consciousness merely a product of the organic - activity of our physical body, or is it a function of the - universal life ... within the body? Is our personal consciousness - dependent for its existence on the existence of the physical body, - and does it die with it; or is there a spiritual consciousness, - belonging to a higher, immortal, and invisible self of man, - temporarily connected with the organism, but which may exist - independently of the latter? If such is the case, if our physical - organism is merely an instrument through which our consciousness - acts, then this instrument is _not_ our real self. If this is - true, then our real self is there where our consciousness exists, - and may exist independently of the latter.... Can there be any - _dead_ matter in the Universe? Is not even a stone held together - by the ‘cohesion’ of its particles, and attracted to the earth by - ‘gravitation’? But what else is this ‘cohesion’ and ‘gravitation’ - but _energy_, and what is ‘energy’ but the _soul_, an interior - principle called _force_, which produces an outward manifestation - called _matter_?... All things possess life, all things possess - soul, and there may be soul-beings ... invisible to our physical - senses, but which may be perceived by our soul.” (p. 19.) - -The arch-druid of modern Hylo-Idealism, Dr. Lewins, failing to -appear to rudely shake our philosopher out of his unscientific -thoughts, a dwarf appears in his stead. The creature, however, does -not warn the dreamer, as that _too_-learned _Idealist_ would. He -does not tell him that he transcends “the limits of the anatomy of -his conscious Ego,” since “_psychosis_ is now diagnosed by -_medico-psychological symptomatology as vesiculo-neurosis in -activity_,”[30] and—as quoth the raven—“merely this, and nothing -more.” But being a _cretin_, he laughingly invites him to his -“Master.” - ------ - -Footnote 30: - - “What is Religion: A Vindication of Free Thought.” By C. N., - annotated by Robert Lewins, M. D. See his Appendices, p. 35, _et - seq._ - ------ - -The hero follows, and finds he is brought to a “theosophical -monastery,” in a hidden valley of the most gorgeous description. -Therein he meets, to his surprise, with adepts of both sexes; for, -as he learns later:— - - “What has intelligence to do with the sex of the body? Where the - sexual instincts end, there ends the influence of the sex.” - -Meanwhile, he is brought into the presence of a male adept of -majestic appearance, who welcomes and informs him that he is among -“The Brothers of the Golden and Rosy Cross.” He is invited to remain -with them for some time, and see how they live. His permanent -residence with them is, however, objected to. The reasons given for -it are as follow:— - - “There are still too many of the lower and animal elements - adhering to your constitution.... They could not resist long the - destructive influence of the pure and spiritual air of this place; - and, as you have not yet a sufficient amount of truly spiritual - elements in your organism to render it firm and strong, you would, - by remaining here, soon become weak and waste away, like a person - in consumption; you would become miserable instead of being happy, - and you would die.” - -Then follows a philosophical conversation on WILL, in which the -latter, in individual man, is said to become the stronger if it only -uses the universal Will-Power in Nature, _itself remaining passive -in the_ LAW. This sentence has to be well understood, lest it should -lead the reader into the error of accepting pure _mediumistic -passivity_ as the best thing for spiritual and occult development. A -phenomenon is produced on a passing cloud, into which apparent life -is infused by the Master’s hand, stretched towards it; this is again -explained by showing that LIFE is universal and identical with WILL. -Other phenomena still more wonderful follow; and they are all -explained as being produced through natural laws, in which science -will not believe. The thoughts of the student are read and answered -as though his mind were an opened book. A lovely garden, full of -exotic plants and luxurious palm-trees, into which he is taken, -striking him as something unnatural in the Tyrolean Alps; so much -luxury, moreover, seeming to him to disagree with the ascetic views -just expressed by the adept, he is told forthwith, in answer to his -unexpressed thoughts, that the garden had been erected to make his -visit an agreeable one; and that it was an _illusion_. “All these -trees and plants ... require no gardeners, ... they cost us nothing -but an effort of our imagination”—he learns. - -“Surely,” he said, “this rose cannot be an illusion ... or an effect -of my imagination?” - -“No,” answered the adept ... “but it is a product of the imagination -of Nature, whose processes can be guided by the will of the adept. -The whole world ... is nothing else but a world of the imagination -of the _Universal Mind_, which is the _Creator_ of forms....” - -To exemplify the teaching, a Magnolia Tree in full blossom sixty -feet high, standing at a distance, is made to look less and less -dense. The green foliage fades into gray, becomes “more and more -shadowy and transparent,” until “it seemed to be merely the ghost of -a tree, and finally disappeared entirely from view.” - - “Thus” continued the adept, “you see that tree stood in the sphere - of my mind as it stood in yours. We are all living within the - sphere of each other’s mind.... The Adept creates his own images; - the ordinary mortal lives in the products of the imagination of - others, or the imagination of nature. We live in the paradise of - our own soul ... but the spheres of our souls are not narrow. They - have expanded far beyond the limits of the visible bodies, and - will continue to expand until they become one with the universal - Soul....” - - “The power of the imagination is yet too little known to mankind, - else they would better beware of what they think. If a man thinks - a good or an evil thought, that thought calls into existence a - corresponding form or power ... which may assume density and - become living ... and live long after the physical body of the man - who created it has died. It will accompany his soul after death, - because _the creations are attracted to their creator_.” (p. 83.) - -Scattered hither and thither, through this little volume are pearls -of wisdom. For that which is rendered in the shape of dialogue and -monologue is the fruit gathered by the author during a long research -in old forgotten and mouldy, MSS. of the Rosicrucians, or mediæval -alchemists, and in the worm-eaten _infoglios_ of unrecognized, yet -great adepts of every age. - -Thus when the author approaches the subject of theosophical retreats -or communities—a dream cherished by many a theosophist—he is -answered by the “Adept” that “the _true ascetic is he who lives in -the world, surrounded by its temptations_; he in whose soul the -animal elements are still active, craving for, the gratification of -their desires and possessing the means for such gratification, but -_who by the superior power of his will conquers his animal self_. -Having attained that state he may retire from the world.... He -expects no future reward in heaven; for what could heaven offer him -except happiness which he already possesses? He desires no other -good, but to create good for the world.”... Saith the Adept. - - “If you could establish theosophical monasteries, where - intellectual and spiritual development would go hand-in-hand, - where a new science could be taught, based upon a true knowledge - of the fundamental laws of the universe, and when, at the same - time man would be taught how to obtain a mastery over himself, you - would confer the greatest possible benefit upon the world. Such a - convent would afford immense advantage for the advancement of - intellectual research.... These convents would become centres of - intelligence....” - -Then, reading the student’s thoughts: - - “You mistake,” he added; “it is not the want of money which - prevents us to execute the idea. It is the impossibility to find - the proper kind of people to inhabit the convent after it is - established. Indeed, we would be poor Alchemists if we could not - produce gold in any desirable quantity ... but gold is a curse to - mankind, and we do not wish to increase the curse.... Distribute - gold among men, and you will only create craving for more; give - them gold, and you will transform them into devils. No, it is not - gold that we need; it is men who thirst after wisdom. _There are - thousands who desire knowledge, but few who desire wisdom...._ - Even many of your would-be Occultists ... have taken up their - investigations merely for the purpose of gratifying idle - curiosity, while others desire to pry into the secrets of nature, - to obtain knowledge which they desire to employ for the attainment - of selfish ends. Give us men or women who desire nothing else but - the truth, and we will take care of their needs....” - -And then having given a startlingly true picture of modern -civilisation, and explained the occult side of certain things -pertaining to knowledge, the Adept led on the student to his -laboratory, where he left him for a few minutes alone. Then another -adept, looking like a monk, joined him, and drew his attention to -some powders, by the fumigations of which the Elementals, or -“Spirits of Nature” could be made to appear. This provoked the -student’s curiosity. Sure of his invulnerability in the matter of -tests and temptations, he begged to be allowed to see these -creatures.... - -Suddenly the room looked dim, and the walls of the laboratory -disappeared. He felt he was in the water, light as a feather, -dancing on the waves, with the full moon pouring torrents of light -upon the ocean, and the beautiful Isle of Ceylon appearing in the -distance. The melodious sound of female voices made him espy near to -where he was three beautiful female beings. The Queen of the -Undines, the most lovely of the three—for these were the longed-for -Elementals—entices the unwary student to her submarine palace. He -follows her, and, forgetting theosophical convents, Adepts and -Occultism, succumbs to the temptation.... - - * * * * * * * * * * - -Was it but a dream? It would so appear. For he awakes on the mossy -plot where he had lain to rest in the morning, and from whence he -had followed the dwarf. But how comes it that he finds in his -button-hole the exotic lily given to him by the adept lady, and in -his pocket the piece of gold transmuted in his presence by the -“Master”? He rushes home, and finds on the table of his hotel-room a -promised work on “The Secret Symbols of the Rosicrucians,” and on -its fly-leaf a few words in pencil. They ran thus:— - -“_Friend, I regret ... I cannot invite you to visit us again for the -present. He who desires to remain in the peaceful valley must know -how to resist all sensual attractions, even those of the Water -Queen. Study ... bring the circle into the square, mortify the -metals.... When you have succeeded we shall meet again.... I shall -be with you when you need me._” - -The work ends with the quotation from Paul’s Second Epistle to the -Corinthians, where the man caught up into Paradise (whether in the -body or out of the body ... God knoweth) “_heard unspeakable words, -which it is not lawful for a man to utter_....” - -The “adventure” is more than worth perusal. - - ------------------ - - TABULA BEMBINA SIVE MENSA ISIACA. THE ISIAC TABLET OF CARDINAL - BEMBO. ITS HISTORY AND OCCULT SIGNIFICANCE. - - BY W. WYNN WESTCOTT, M.B. BATH. R. H. FRYAR, 1887. - -This work is a monograph of 20 foolscap folio pages, on the -celebrated Isiac Tablet. It is well and clearly printed in -good-sized type on good paper, and has for frontispiece a -well-executed photogravure of the Tablet itself, from a drawing made -by the author some years previously. It is written in the clear -style which distinguishes Dr. Westcott’s writings, and in all -quotations chapter and verse are scrupulously given. Three centuries -ago this Tablet greatly exercised the minds of the learned, and -continued to do so till the researches of modern Egyptologists began -to throw some doubt upon its authenticity as a reliable specimen of -ancient Egyptian art; since which time the interest in it has -gradually declined. Undoubtedly occult, as its meaning and symbolism -alike are, we feel that this monograph will be of service to all -lovers and students of the mystical ideas of ancient Egypt. The -first thing which strikes the eye of even the most careless observer -is the careful and systematic arrangement of the figures and emblems -in triads, or groups of three, which system of classification -prevailed in the religious symbolism of the Egyptians. The Tablet, -again, is divided by transverse horizontal lines into three -principal portions, Upper, Lower, and Middle, the latter being -sub-divided by vertical lines into three parts, the centre of which -is occupied by a throned female figure, flanked on each side by a -triad, of which the central figure in each instance is seated. Thus -the Upper and Lower portions of the Tablet give each a Dodecad -sub-divided into Triads, while the central portion forms a Heptad. -This at once corresponds to the symbolism of the ספר יצירה, _Sepher -Yetzirah_, Chapter VI., § 3. “The Triad, the Unity which standeth -one and alone, the Heptad divided into Three as opposed to Three and -the Centre Mediating between them, the Twelve which stand in war ... -the Unity above the Triad, the Triad above the Heptad, the Heptad -above the Dodecad and they are all bound together each with each.” - -Commencing with a description of the Tablet, Dr. Westcott gives as -much as is known of its history, quoting from Kircher, Keysler, -Murray, and others. It appears that it was first discovered in Rome, -at a spot where a Temple of Isis had once stood. After the sack of -Rome by the Constable De Bourbon, it fell into the hands of a smith, -who sold it to Cardinal Bembo for a large sum. At his death it came -into the possession of the Dukes of Mantua, at the taking of which -city in 1630, it passed into the hands of Cardinal Pava. It is now -in the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities at Turin. The dimensions are 4 -ft. 2 in., by 2 ft. 5½ in. Thus its experiences during the last few -centuries have been rather stormy. - -After mentioning Æneas De Vico and Pignorius, Dr. Westcott gives us -an extensive digest of the views of Athanasius Kircher, from whose -plate in the “Œdipus Ægyptiacus” the photogravure at the -commencement is taken. Kircher undoubtedly more nearly grasped the -esoteric design of the tablet than any one except Eliphas Levi, and -his attempted explanation marks him alike as a profound scholar and -an advanced mystic, notwithstanding the great disadvantages with -which he had to contend in the utter ignorance of Egyptology as it -is now understood, which prevailed at the date at which he wrote. - -Quotations and notes from Montfauçon, Shuckford, Warburton, -Jablonski, Caylus, Banier, Mackenzie, Kenealy, and Winckelman follow -the excerpts from Kircher, and we then come to the views of modern -Egyptologists on the subject, notably those of Professor Le Page -Renouf as expressed to Dr Westcott in person. The reasons they -assign for doubting the authenticity of the Tablet are briefly -these:—that they consider the execution of the work stamps it as a -Roman production; that the hieroglyphics will not read so as to make -sense; that the running pattern with the masks would never have been -employed by an Egyptian; and that some of the best known Egyptian -deities are conspicuous by their absence. In answer to these attacks -Dr. Westcott wisely remarks that “it is a gross absurdity to suppose -that any man capable of designing such a tablet, over which immense -energy, research, and knowledge must have been expended, to say -nothing of the skill displayed in its execution, should have wasted -his abilities in perpetrating a gigantic hoax; for that is, I -suppose, what some modern writers mean who call it a ‘forgery’; but -a _forgery_ is a _deceitful imitation_. How it can be called an -imitation considering that its special character is that of being -different to any other Stelé or Tablet known is not clear; and how -it can be a deceit is also incomprehensible, since it bears no name -or date purporting to refer it to a definite author or period.” - -On page 16 Dr. Westcott observes that the Four Genii of the Dead are -conspicuous by their absence, but he seems to overlook their -representation in figure 41 of the Limbus, where the sepulchral -vases beneath the couch have, as usual, the heads of the Genii of -the Dead. - -A quotation, together with a plate from Levi’s “Histoire de la -Magie,” follows this, together with a disquisition on the Taro, -which has so much exercised occult students of late. Altogether the -book is an extremely interesting production, and Dr. Westcott puts -forward his own views on the subject with much clearness. - - ------------------ - - EARTH’S EARLIEST AGES - AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH MODERN SPIRITUALISM AND THEOSOPHY. - - BY G. H. PEMBER, M.A. (Hodder & Stoughton). - -To meet with a book like this in the last quarter of the nineteenth -century is like meeting a Pterodactyl strolling along the Row in the -height of the season. But more careful perusal, while augmenting the -reader’s wonder, mingles with it a certain respect for the writer’s -courage and unflinching logic. - -Granting his fundamental premiss—the verbal inspiration of the -Bible—and accepting his first principle of interpretation, his -argument is at least consistent, and is weakened by no half-hearted -pandering to the facts of experience or the discoveries of science. - -To quote Mr. Pember’s primary canon, he assumes— - - I. “That the first chapter of Genesis, equally with those which - follow it, is, in its primary meaning, neither vision nor - allegory, but plain history, and must, therefore, be accepted as a - literal statement of facts.” - -On this basis he gives an interpretation of Genesis, the main idea -of which is the interposition of “The Interval” between the creation -and the “Six Days” described in the text. During this period the -earth was wholly given over to Satan and his host, and the “Six -Days” creation was, according to Mr. Pember, the restoration and -reformation of the world from this chaos of confusion. - -But space forbids to follow the author into details, since one-half -of his volume is devoted to the subject indicated in its sub-title, -and this portion is of greater interest to readers of LUCIFER. - -As an accurate and thorough student of the work of those he -condemns, Mr. Pember stands unrivalled. He has both read and -understood a very large part of the literature of Theosophy and -Spiritualism. His quotations are fair and well chosen, his comments -strictly moderate in tone and entirely free from any personal -animus. And these traits are the more surprising since the author -has certainly got the “Powers of the Air” very much on the brain. It -is hardly even a rhetorical expression to say that it is his firm -and unshakeable conviction, that all persons who do not hold the -same views of Biblical criticism and Scriptural exegesis as Mr. -Pember, are, to the extent of their difference from him, serving the -Powers of Evil, the Personal Devil, the Antichrist, whose coming he -expects in the very near future. - -On this point only Mr. Pember does not seem to have the courage of -his opinions; perhaps he does not see, or seeing does not realise, -the inevitable conclusion to which his arguments point. But then he -may, after all, take refuge in the famous _credo quia absurdum_. - -The author, moreover, is sure to meet with scant sympathy even from -the materialists to whom he is most nearly allied in thought. For he -accepts, _en bloc_, the phenomena and wonders of spiritualism as of -occultism, and never attempts even to question their reality. -Meanwhile, he believes in the resurrection of the _physical body_ -after death, in a physical kingdom of Christ upon earth, and so on. -Indeed, his views are the most remarkable compound of pure -materialism and wholesale acceptance of the psychic and so-called -supernatural that have ever appeared in print. - -To sum up, a few passages may be quoted to give an idea of the -spirit of Mr. Pember’s treatment of this part of the subject, which -at the same time will be the most telling criticism of his book to -the minds of those who have grasped the ideas of which he speaks. - - “... the existence, in all times of the world’s history, of - persons with abnormal faculties, initiates of the great mysteries - and depositors of the secrets of antiquity, has been affirmed by a - testimony far too universal and persistent to admit of denial.... - He who would be an adept must conform to the teaching of those - demons, predicted leaders of the last apostasy, who forbid to - marry, and command to abstain from meat.” - - “We have never met with a single reported instance of a spirit - entering the lower spheres with the glad tidings, “Believe on the - Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” On the contrary, among - Spiritualists, as with Theosophists and Buddhists, sin can be - expiated only by personal suffering.... “Sin,” shrieks the - familiar of “M. A. Oxon,” “is remediable by repentance and - atonement and reparation personally wrought out in pain and shame, - not by coward cries for mercy, and by feigned assent to statements - which ought to create a shudder.” - -Mr. Pember, therefore, believes in vicarious atonement in its -crudest form? He teaches that “repentance and faith” save man _from -the consequences_ of his actions! - -After describing the “Perfect Way” as “an ecclesiastical compound of -Heathenism” (_with a capital H_), the author proceeds to expound the -doctrine of reincarnation as therein set forth. Nothing can be -fairer or more correct than this exposition, at the conclusion of -which we read: - - “Jews, Christians, Buddhists and Mahommedans ... will become able - to unite in a universal belief that sin is expiated by - transmigrations and in the worship of ‘the Great Goddess’. The - conception of a second league of Babel has been formed in the - minds of Theosophists.” - -And even then, would not such a league be better than the sectarian -wars, the religious persecutions, the tests and disabilities which -still disfigure _Christendom_ in the name of religion? - -Further on the author refers to the occult axiom that “whereas God -is I AM, or positive being, the Devil is NOT, and remarks: - - “There is little doubt that the culminations of the Mysteries was - the worship of Satan himself... It would appear, then, that from - remote ages, probably from the time when the Nephilim [the fallen - angels of Satan’s Host] were upon earth, there has existed a - league with the Prince of Darkness, a Society of men consciously - on the side of Satan, and against the Most High. - - “The spells by which spirits may be summoned from the unseen are - now known to all; and those unearthly forms which in past times - were projected from the void only in the labyrinths, caverns, and - subterranean chambers of the initiated, are now manifesting - themselves in many a private drawing-room and parlour. Men have - become enamoured of demons, and ere long will receive the Prince - of the Demons as their God.” - -Theosophy, says Mr. Pember, will become the creed of the -intellectual and the educated, while Spiritualism influences the -masses of mankind. And he traces the influences of Theosophy and -Buddhism in “Broad-Churchism, Universalism, Comtism, Secularism, and -Quietism.” Nay, even under the Temperance movement he spies the -lurking serpent of esoteric teaching and guidance, and he cites -letters from Christian friends complaining that these and other -philanthropic movements are being swamped, and their periodicals -occupied by Theosophists, who work on Buddhist principles. - -In his concluding chapter, the author sums up a truly formidable -array of evidences to prove that “the advocates of modern thought -array themselves against every principle of the early revelations of -the Divine Will,” apparently since they deny and repudiate the -following “cosmic or universal laws”:— - -I. The law of the Sabbath. - -II. The headship of the man over the woman. - -III. The institution of marriage [_i.e._, they practise _celibacy_]. - -IV. The law of substitution, that life must atone for life, and that - without shedding of blood there is no remission, as taught in - type by animal sacrifices. Latter-day philosophers affect the - utmost horror of such a salvation, and will have none of Christ. - -V. The command to use the flesh of animals as food. - -VI. The decree that “whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his - blood be shed.” - -VII. The direction to multiply and replenish the earth. - -The charge of disobedience to such laws as these every mystic will -joyfully admit, with the cry, “Happy will it be for all things -living when such laws shall no longer be obeyed by any living -creature.” - -These laws, the disobedience to which Mr. Pember so much regrets in -the later schools, date from the dark past when man had to form his -physical existence and root it upon the earth. If they are some of -the early revelations of the “Divine Will,” that is no reason why -they should rule mankind when its condition is changed and it is -emerging from the darkness of Materialism, and losing, from its -natural growth towards that Divine will, the desire for physical -existence. The Mosaic laws were made by the Jehovah, the God of -anger and cruelty. In spite of the strange inconsistency by which -the followers of Jesus Christ, the teacher of a gentle and sublime -faith, read in their churches these Mosaic laws, yet they are empty -words from a past of bloodshed to the humane or religious man. The -occultist professes even more than religion—he dares to avow himself -a follower of the light, an aspirant towards knowledge, and one who -is determined to live the noblest life knowledge can indicate. What -to him are the laws of murder, of the shedding of blood, of marriage -and giving in marriage? It is not his aim to help people the earth, -for he desires to lift himself and others above the craving for -earth-life. He commits no murder, for all men are his brethren, and -he no longer recognises the brutal law of the criminal, by which, -when blood is shed, blood must be again shed to wash it away. He can -have no interest either in the straightforward laws of the past, or -the complicated modern law of the present—which permits of many -things the Jews would have been ashamed of. The only law he -recognises is that of charity and justice. - -There is a charming page in the _Introduction_, a ring of genuine -sorrow for the failure of certain missionaries in their cowardly -attack upon the theosophical leaders, as refreshing as it is -ludicrous. The Jeremiad runs in this wise:— - - “It would seem that the attack of the Madras Christian College - upon Madame Blavatsky has by no means checked the movement in - which she has been so conspicuous an actor, and, apparently, the - failure is nowhere more manifest than in Madras itself. It was - confidently predicted that the High Priestess of Theosophy and - Buddhism would not dare to show her face again in that city. - Nevertheless she did so, and ... received a warm welcome, not - merely from the members of the Theosophical societies, but also - from the members of the various colleges and from many other - persons. She was conducted in procession from the shore to the - Pancheappa Hall, and was there presented by the students with an - address of sympathy and admiration, to which, among other - signatures, were appended those of more than three hundred members - of the very Christian College whose professors had assailed her.” - -And he adds, “Satan is now setting in motion intellectual forces -which will be more than a match for the missionaries, if they -persist in carrying on the warfare in the old way.” - -Too much praise cannot be rendered to Mr. Pember for his fairness -and impersonality. He writes as becomes a scholar and a gentleman, -and though one may smile at his intellectual blindness and stand -amazed at the mental capacity which can digest the views which he -maintains, one cannot but respect his earnestness, his thoroughness, -and his mastery of the subject. - - B. K. - - ------------------ - - ISAURE AND OTHER POEMS. - - BY W. STEWART ROSS. - -The poem which gives its name to this volume of ringing verse is, as -may easily be conjectured, the lament of a poet over his love torn -from him by inexorable death. - -A true instinct has taught the author that it is such hours of agony -as this, such piercing of the heart, such fierce and burning -torture, which reveal to the noble soul capable of intense suffering -the inner truths and realities of life. - -To quote: - - “I stand on the cis-mortal, - And I gaze with ’wildered eye, - To the mists of the trans-mortal, - And the signs called Live and Die. - . . . . . . . - Let me dream in this cis-mortal, - And the noblest dream I can. - . . . . . . . - Let me dream far from the formulæ, - And I may dream more nigh - To the sable shore of mystery, - And the signs of Live and Die.” - -Some passages in this opening poem are instinct with the breath of -mysticism, and rouse a keen desire that Mr. Stewart Ross had become -acquainted, in that period of his life when this book was written, -with the wider and grander view of life as a whole, of its purpose -and meaning, of its laws and its realities, which occultism affords -to a mind capable of grasping them. - -Surely the man who could write: - - “For death and life are really one.” - -And again: - - “For the mystic Part is gathered - Unto the mystic Whole. - And the vague lines of non-Being - Are scribbled o’er thy soul.” - -must have the power to sense the keener air of the subtle life and -grasp its glorious promise. - -What pilgrim of the path has not felt: - - “Hard-paced the iron years have gone - Over my head since then; - I’ve haunted in a waking dream - The paths of living men; - But of this world my kingdom’s not, - Like him of Galilee, - For I grasp hands they cannot feel, - See forms they cannot see.” - -In “Leonore: A Lay of Dipsomania,” one of the most terrible sides of -human life is depicted with a vividness which tortures the reader, -and flings a gloom on the inexorable sweep of life, fitly in keeping -with the vision pictured in “A Nightmare.” A mystic, struggling with -the negations of modern science, battling to assert the intuitive -knowledge of his true self against its captious intellectualisms, -speaks through this picture of desolation and decay, protesting -against the disappearance of all that is great and valuable in life -under the waves of oblivion. - -But no man in whom the spark of true poetic inspiration burns can -ever in the depths of his own heart accept the lifeless, empty, -unreal phantom which materialism offers as the aim, the purpose, the -fulfilment of life. We hope, therefore, that Mr. Stewart Ross will -some day give us a volume of poetry in which his true power and -insight will find expression, and which will enroll his name on the -list of those who have given new life to men. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - - -One cannot fill a vacuum from within itself.—L.S.C. - -Many a man will follow a misleader.—L.S.C. - -It is not necessary for truth to put on boxing-gloves.—L.S.C. - -You cannot build a temple of truth by hammering dead stones. Its -foundations must precipitate themselves like crystals from the -solution of life.—L.S.C. - -When a certain point is reached pain becomes its own anodyne.—L.S.C. - -Some pluck the fruits of the tree (of knowledge) to crown themselves -therewith, instead of plucking them to eat.—L.S.C. - - - - - =THEOSOPHICAL= - =AND MYSTIC PUBLICATIONS= - - -THE THEOSOPHIST; a magazine of Oriental Philosophy, Art, Literature, -and Occultism, conducted by H. P. Blavatsky, and H. S. Olcott, -Permanent President of the T. S. Vol. VIII., 1887. Madras, India. In -London, George Redway, 15, York Street, Covent Garden. - -The September number contains several articles of great interest. -For lovers of the wonderful, as for the more scientifically inclined -students of the laws of psycho-physics, the account given by -Sreenath Chatterjee, of a self-levitating lama who stayed for some -days in his house, is both interesting and instructive. It is -endorsed by Colonel Olcott and another independent witness, and -bears evident marks of genuine and careful observation. Curious and -wonderful as such feats are, however, they have little to do with -Theosophy. - -To many readers such articles as Mr. Khandalwala’s “The -Bhagavat-Gita and the Microcosmic Principles” will be far more -attractive. The questions propounded in this paper have a very -important bearing upon a question which has recently been a good -deal under discussion, and it is to be hoped that it will elicit -from Mr. Subba Row the further explanation of his views which is so -much needed. - -Visconde Figanière continues his “Esoteric Studies” with some -abstruse but very interesting calculations as to the composition of -the alchemical elements during various cycles. A page of moral -maxims from the Mahabharata and a thoughtful paper on the “Kabbalah -and the Microcosm” contribute to make this number full of valuable -matter. - - --- - -THE PATH; “a magazine devoted to the Brotherhood of Humanity, -Theosophy in America, and the Study of Occult Science, Philosophy, -and Aryan Literature.” Edited by W. Q. Judge, New York, P. O. Box -2,659, and in London from George Redway. - -In the September issue, the opening paper is the fourth of “Jasper -Niemand’s” admirable “Letters on the True.” Its subject is the -“Mind” (_Manas_) or Heart in its relation to the Soul. Both analysis -and synthesis are employed by the writer, with the intuition of a -true mystic, and many suggestive gleams of light are thrown on an -exceedingly difficult subject in the course of a few pages. - -The idea of re-incarnation is traced by Mr. Walker in the writings -of various poets: Mr. Johnston contributes an interesting paper on -“Gospels and Upanishads,” and “Rameses” gives us a charming allegory -under the archaic title of “Papyrus,” and the number concludes with -“Tea-Table Talk,” which is, as usual, quaint, yet instructive. -Finally, thanks are due to Mr. Judge for the kind and cordial -welcome he has extended to LUCIFER; the first number of which has, -it is to be hoped, fulfilled the flattering expectations he -expresses. - - --- - -LE LOTUS: “Revue des Hautes Etudes Théosophiques. Tendant à -favoriser le rapprochement entre l’Orient et l’Occident.” Sous -l’inspiration de H. P. Blavatsky (nominally, but edited in reality, -by our able brother, F. K. Gaborian, F. T. S.). Georges Carré, 112 -Boulevard St. Germain, Paris. - -This journal—the French Theosophist—contains in its September number -an article by Madame Blavatsky on “Misconceptions,” in which various -doctrines and ideas erroneously connected with Theosophy are dealt -with. M. Barlet continues his series of articles on “Initiation,” -and the reprint of the Abbé de Villars’ clever and humorous “Comte -de Gabalis,” is continued. Some verses by Amaravella, and several -pages of sparkling “Notes,” conclude the table of contents. - -LUCIFER owes thanks also to the _Lotus_ for inserting an admirably -translated extract from its prospectus. - - --- - -L’AURORE: Revue mensuelle sous la direction de Lady Caithness, -Duchesse de Pomar, Georges Carré, 112 Boulevard St. Germain, Paris. - -The articles in the September number are neither so numerous nor so -varied as those of the other Theosophical periodicals already -referred to. Lady Caithness advocates, in the current issue, the -theory that the English nation is descended from the lost ten tribes -of Israel. As the very existence of these ten tribes is more than -questionable, students must judge for themselves of the weight of -the arguments advanced; the subject being too extensive even for -comment here. - - --- - -THE SPHINX: “A monthly journal devoted to proving historically and -experimentally the supersensuous conception of the world on a -monistic basis.” Edited by Hübbe Schleiden. Dr. J. U. Th. Griebens -Verlag, Leipzig. - -The October number is a full and highly instructive one. Dr. Carl -du Prel’s handling of the “Demon of Socrates” contrasts -brilliantly with the lame and obscure treatment which the same -subject received a while ago at the hands of a body, which -professes to investigate matters pertaining to the soul and its -activity. Herr Niemann’s proof of the existence of an esoteric or -secret teaching in the Platonic dialogues is able and convincing; -Mr. Finch contributes a most interesting article on his -observations among the “Faith-Healers” in America, and Herr Carl -zu Leiningen pursues his able exposition of the Kabbalistic -doctrine of Souls. - - --- - -Three new works on mystic subjects are shortly to appear from the -pen of Dr. Franz Hartmann, whose valuable book on Paracelsus is -certainly in the hands of many of our readers. - -Of these the first, and probably the most important, is entitled: -“THE SECRET SYMBOLS OF THE ROSICRUCIANS,” and is to be published in -Boston, U.S.A., by the Occult Publishing Company. It will contain -numerous plates coloured by hand, giving accurate transcriptions of -symbols and figures which have hitherto lain buried in rare, and in -some cases, unattainable manuscripts. The value of the work as a -text-book for students will be much enhanced by the copious -vocabulary which Dr. Hartmann promises shall accompany it. - -The other two will probably be issued by Mr. Redway; the one being -called: “IN THE PRONAOS OF THE TEMPLE OF THE R.C.,” and the other: -“THE LIFE OF JEHOSHUA, THE ADEPT OF NAZARETH: AN OCCULT STUDY.” - -This is an attempt to dispel the mists which for many centuries have -been gathering around the person of the supposed founder of -Christianity, and which have prevented mankind from obtaining a -clear view of the “Redeemer.” It claims to give an approximately -correct account of his life, his initiation into the Egyptian -mysteries and of his ignominious death caused by an infuriated mob, -excited by the Pharisees of the temple, who were bound to destroy -his mortal form, because he had taught the religion of universal -fraternal love and freedom of thought in opposition to priestcraft -and superstition. - -While the book deals to a certain extent with the external life of -Jehoshua, as far as its details have become known by historical -researches into sources not generally known, it especially deals -with his inner life—_i.e._ his method of thought. - -The author says: “If we wish to give a correct picture of the -character of a person, we must try to describe his thoughts as well -as his acts, for the thought-life of a man constitutes his real -life, while his outward life is merely a pictorial representation, a -shadow of the actions that are taking place upon the interior stage -of his mind.” - -“To describe this inner life, a dramatical representation of the -processes going on in the soul of man will be better adapted to -bring it to our understanding, than a merely verbal description of -character. This maxim seems to have influenced those who wrote the -accounts contained in the bible, and who describe interior processes -in allegorical pictures of events, which may or may not have taken -place on the outward plane. I have adhered to this plan in -describing the thought-life of Jehoshua Ben-Pandira, but I have -attempted to shape the allegories contained in this book in such a -manner that the intelligent reader may easily perceive their true -meaning, for I have made the forms sufficiently transparent, so that -the truths which they are intended to represent may be easily seen -through the external shell.” - -“Nevertheless, these descriptions are not mere fancies, but they are -based upon historical facts, and upon information received from -sources whose nature will be plain to every occultist. The events -described have all actually taken place; but whether they have -wholly or in part taken place on the external or internal plane, -each intelligent reader is left to decide for himself.” - - =CORRESPONDENCE= - - INTERESTING TO ASTROLOGERS. - - ASTROLOGICAL NOTES—No. 2. - - _To the Editor of_ LUCIFER. - -The ancients assigned to the planets certain signs and degrees, in -which they were essentially dignified, being there more powerful for -good, and less powerful for evil; these were called their House, -Exaltation, Triplicity, Term, and Face. Opposite to the first two -were the places where they were essentially debilitated, being there -less powerful for good and more powerful for evil; these were called -their Detriment and Fall. Whether the latter three dignities have -three corresponding debilities has not been stated. - -To the seven known planets, the ancients apportioned the twelve -zodiacal signs as their respective houses or chief dignity, thus: ☉ -ruled ♌, and ☽ ruled ♋, both by day and night; while the remaining -ten signs were divided between the remaining five planets, each -planet ruling two signs, one by day and the other by night. But when -♅ and ♆ were discovered, the question arose where to place them. - -A. J. Pearce, the present editor of _Zadkiel’s Almanac_, has -suggested that, as they were more remote from ☉ than was ♄, they -should have the same houses and exaltations as ♄. Raphael dethrones -♄ from ♒, and proclaims that ♅ reigns in his stead. Both these -suggestions involve serious difficulties, nor do they settle the -question once and for all with regard to any planets which may yet -be discovered. It seems unlikely that planets of such diverse -natures as ♄, ♅, and ♆ (not to mention any still more distant -planets) should all bear equal rule in the same two signs, and to -depose ♄ from his throne, pre-supposes a grave error on the part of -the ancients, whose teaching on this point has been handed down with -complete unanimity from the dim past: necessitating, also, a further -process of dethronement, and a further ignoring of the teachings of -antiquity, as further planetary discoveries are made. - -The first Raphael (the late R. C. Smith) rejected the ancient -nocturnal and diurnal division of the Houses and Triplicities, in -which he is followed by his successor. It appears to me that it is -here that the error, with its consequent difficulties, first arose; -and that by observing this distinction, ♅ and ♆ easily find their -homes, with room to spare for their yet undiscovered brethren. - -It is obvious that Astrology can never become an even approximately -perfect science, unless we are able in our calculations to take -fully into account the influence of ♅ and ♆. With this end in view, -I have been endeavouring, in my leisure moments, to solve the -problem. To a certain extent I have been successful; and though I -have not yet been able to substantiate all my conclusions as fully -as I could wish, yet I deem it is the best interests of the Science -to make them now public, that their truth or falsity may be as -speedily as possible established by the investigations of -astrologers generally. - -My conclusions are the following: that the ancient Diurnal and -Nocturnal divisions are quite correct, so that if a figure is drawn -for any time between sunrise and sunset, the planets which rule by -day the signs on the cusps of the houses of the significators must -be chiefly, and sometimes exclusively, considered; and _vice versâ_. - -The Houses of the new planets are, I believe, these: - -♒, which is the day-house of ♄, is the night-house of ♅. - -♊, which is the day-house of ☿, is the night-house of ♆. - -♍, which is the night-house of ☿, is the day-house of ♅. - -♓, which is the night-house of ♃, is the day-house of ♆. - -The first two I have verified by horary figures drawn for the time -of an event; the latter two I consider as highly probable, but have -not yet been able to thoroughly substantiate them. - -There is an old tradition (_Esoteric Science in Human History_, p. -180) that there are 12 principal planets in our solar system; this -leaves 4 more to be discovered. It will be seen at a glance that -these 4 will fill up the vacant signs, two planets ruling each sign, -one by night and the other by day. The only alteration which will -then have to be made will be to consider ☉ to rule ♌ by day only, -and ☽ to rule ♋ by night only; this, however, will be only in -accordance with nature: moreover, the fact that the ancients -assigned only one house each to ☉ and ☽, and two to each of the -other planets, denotes some essential astrological difference -between them. - -With regard to the other essential dignities, Raphael considers ♏ to -be the exaltation of ♅; I am inclined to believe ♒ to be the -exaltation of ♆. In the Triplicities there is a curious want of -harmony; each, according to the ancients, being ruled by two -planets, one by day and the other by night, except the watery -triplicity, which is ruled by ♂ only. There seems to be no reason -for this discrepancy, except the all-powerful one that there was no -other known planet to share his dominion. I have ascertained that ♆ -has strong dignity in ♏, and conclude that he rules the watery -triplicity, probably by night. Furthermore, I believe ♅ rules the -airy triplicity. As for the Terms and Faces of the planets, they -also, like the Planetary Hours, require re-arrangement so as to -bring in ♅ and ♆ but in what way this is to be done, I have not yet -been able to discover. - -I will take this opportunity of saying, in reply to inquiries, that -the best books for beginners are Raphael’s _Horary Astrology_ for -that branch of the Science; A. J. Pearce’s _Science of the Stars_ -for Mundane and Atmospheric Astrology; A. J. Pearce’s _Text Book of -Astrology_ for Nativities, to be worked out by Primary Directions; -and Raphael’s _Guide to Astrology_ for the same, worked out by -Secondary Directions excited by Transits. Raphael’s works are -published by Foulsham and Co., 4, Pilgrim Street, E.C.; and Pearce’s -works may be procured from the author, 54, East Hill, Wandsworth, -S.W. - - NEMO. - - - - - ------------------ - - - - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -For the purpose of correcting any prejudicial suspicion or erroneous -misrepresentation of myself, arising from the insertion of the note -at the end of the “Bath Occult Reprint Edition” of the “Divine -Pymander” or as associated with the Society of the “H. B. of L.,” -known to me only through the names of Peter Davidson and T. H. -Burgoyne, alias D’Alton, Dalton, &c., and whose secretary is -announced to be “A convicted felon, and the supposed adept to be a -Hindu of questionable antecedents,” I wish it to be understood I -have now no confidence, sympathy, or connection therewith, direct or -indirect, since or even prior to the date hereof, viz., May, 1886. - - Yours truly, - ROBT. H. FRYAR. - -8, Northumberland Place, Bath. - - =FROM THE NOTE BOOK OF AN UNPOPULAR PHILOSOPHER= - -THE ESOTERIC VALUE OF CERTAIN WORDS AND DEEDS IN SOCIAL LIFE. - -_To Show Anger._—No “_cultured_” man or woman will ever show anger -in Society. To check and restrain every sign of annoyance shows good -manners, certainly, but also considerable achievement in hypocrisy -and dissimulation. There is an occult side to this rule of good -breeding expressed in an Eastern proverb: “Trust not the face which -never shows signs of anger, nor the dog that never barks.” -Cold-blooded animals are the most venomous. - -_Non-resistance to Evil._—To brag of it is to invite all evil-doers -to sit upon you. To practice it openly is to lead people into the -temptation of regarding you as a coward. Not to resist the evil you -have never created nor merited, to eschew it yourself, and help -others quietly to get out of its way, is the only wise course open -to the lover of wisdom. - -“_Love Thy Neighbour._”—When a parson has preached upon this -subject, his pious congregation accepts it as tacit permission to -slander and vilify their friends and acquaintances in neighbouring -pews. - -_International Brotherhood._—When a Mussulman and a Christian swear -mutual friendship, and pledge themselves to be brothers, their two -formulas differ somewhat. The Moslem says: “Thy mother shall be my -mother, my father thy father, my sister thy hand maid, and thou -shalt be my brother.” To which the Christian answers: “Thy mother -and sister shall be my hand-maidens, thy wife shall be my wife, and -my wife shall be thy dear sister.”—_Amen._ - -_Brave as a Lion._—The highest compliment—in appearance—paid to -one’s courage; a comparison with a bad-smelling wild-beast—in -reality. The recognition, also, of the superiority of animal over -human bravery, considered as a virtue. - -_A Sheep._—A weak, silly fellow, figuratively, an insulting, -contemptuous epithet among laymen; but one quite flattering among -churchmen, who apply it to “the people of God” and the members of -their congregations, comparing them to _sheep_ under the guidance of -the lamb. - -_The Code of Honour._—In France—to seduce a wife and kill her -husband. There, offended honour can feel satisfied only with blood; -here, a wound inflicted upon the offender’s pocket suffices. - -_The Duel as a Point of Honour._—The duel being an institution of -Christendom and civilization, neither the old Spartans, nor yet the -Greeks or Romans knew of it, as they were only uncivilized -heathens.—(_See Schopenhauer._) - -_Forgive and Forget._—“We should freely forgive, but forget rarely,” -says Colton. “I will not be revenged, and this I owe to my enemy; -but I will _remember_, and this I owe to myself.” This is real -practical wisdom. It stands between the ferocious “Eye for eye, and -tooth for tooth” of the Mosaic Law, and the command to turn the left -cheek to the enemy when he has smitten you on the right. Is not the -latter a direct encouraging of sin? - -_Practical Wisdom._—On the tree of silence hangs the fruit of peace. -The secret thou wouldst not tell to thine enemy, tell it not to thy -friend.—(_Arabic._) - -_Civilised Life._—Crowded, noisy and full of vital power, is modern -Society to the eye of matter; but there is no more still and silent, -empty and dreary desert than that same Society to the spiritual eye -of the Seer. Its right hand freely and lavishly bestows ephemeral -but costly pleasures, while the left grasps greedily the leavings -and often grudges the necessities of show. All our social life is -the result and consequence of that unseen, yet ever present autocrat -and despot, called _Selfishness_ and _Egotism_. The strongest will -becomes impotent before the voice and authority of _Self_. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - LUCIFER - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - VOL. 1. LONDON, NOVEMBER 15TH, 1887. NO. 3. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - “LET EVERY MAN PROVE HIS OWN WORK.” - -Such is the title of a letter received by the Editors of LUCIFER. It -is of so serious a nature that it seems well to make it the subject -of this month’s editorial. Considering the truths uttered in its few -lines, its importance and the bearing it has upon the much obscured -subject of Theosophy, and its visible agent or vehicle—the Society -of that name—the letter is certainly worthy of the most considerate -answer. - - “_Fiat justitia, ruat cœlum!_” - -Justice will be done to both sides in the dispute; namely, -Theosophists and the members of the Theosophical Society[31] on the -one hand, and the followers of the _Divine Word_ (or Christos), and -the so-called Christians, on the other. - ------ - -Footnote 31: - - Not all the members of the Theosophical Society are Theosophists; - nor are the members of the so-called Christian Churches all - Christians, by any means. True Theosophists, as true Christians, - are very, _very_ few; and there are practical Theosophists in the - fold of Christianity, as there are practical Christians in the - Theosophical Society, outside all ritualistic Christianity. “Not - every one that saith unto me ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the Kingdom - of Heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father.” (Matthew, - vii. 21.) “Believe not in Me, but in the truths I utter.” - (Buddha’s _Aphorisms_.) - ------ - -We reproduce the letter: - - “_To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - - “What a grand chance is now open in this country, to the exponents - of a noble and advanced religion (if such this Theosophy be[32]) - for proving its strength, righteousness and verity to the Western - world, by throwing a penetrating and illuminating ray of its - declared light upon the terribly harrowing and perplexing - practical problems of our age. - - “Surely one of the purest and least self-incrusted duties of man, - is to alleviate the sufferings of his fellow man? - - “From what I read, and from what I daily come into immediate - contact with, I can hardly think it would be possible to over-rate - in contemplation, the intense privation and agonizing suffering - that is—aye, say it—_at this moment_ being endured by a vast - proportion of our brothers and sisters, arising in a large measure - from their not absolutely having the means for procuring the _bare - necessaries of existence_? - - “Surely a high and Heaven-born religion—a religion professing to - receive its advanced knowledge and Light from ‘those more learned - in the Science of Life,’ should be able to tell us something of - how to deal with such life, in its primitive condition of helpless - submission to the surrounding circumstances of—civilization! - - “If one of our main duties is that of exercising disinterested - love towards the Brotherhood, surely ‘those more learned’ ones, - whether in the flesh, or out of it, can and will, if appealed to - by their votaries, aid them in discovering ways and means for such - an end, and in organising some great fraternal scheme for dealing - _rightly_ with questions which are so appalling in their - complexity, and which must and do press with such irresistible - force upon all those who are earnest in their endeavours to carry - out the will of Christ in a Christian Land? - - “L. F. FF. - - “October 25, 1887.” - ------ - -Footnote 32: - - “This” Theosophy is not a religion, but rather _the_ RELIGION—if - one. So far, we prefer to call it a philosophy; one, moreover, - which contains every religion, as it is the essence and the - foundation of all. Rule III. of the Theos. Body says: “The Society - represents no particular religious creed, is entirely - _unsectarian_, and includes professors of all faiths.” - ------ - -This honest-spoken and sincere letter contains two statements; an -implied accusation against “Theosophy” (_i.e._ the Society of that -name), and a virtual admission that Christianity—or, again, rather -its ritualistic and dogmatic religions—deserve the same and even a -sterner rebuke. For if “Theosophy,” represented by its professors, -merits on external appearance the reproach that so far it has failed -to transfer divine wisdom from the region of the metaphysical into -that of practical work, “Christianity,” that is, merely professing -Christians, churchmen and laymen lie under a like accusation, -evidently. “Theosophy” has, certainly, failed to discover -_infallible_ ways and means of bringing all its votaries to exercise -“disinterested love” in their Brotherhood; it has not yet been able -to relieve suffering in mankind at large; but neither has -Christianity. And not even the writer of the above letter, nor any -one else, can show sufficient excuse for the Christians in this -respect. Thus the admission that “those who are earnest in their -endeavour to carry out the will of Christ in a Christian land” _need -the help of_ “‘those more learned,’ whether (pagan adepts) in flesh, -or (spirits?) out of it” is very suggestive, for it contains the -defence and the _raison d’être_ of the Theosophical Society. Tacit -though it is, once that it comes from the pen of a sincere -Christian, one who longs to learn some practical means to relieve -the sufferings of the starving multitudes—this admission becomes the -greatest and most complete justification for the existence of the -Theosophical Brotherhood; a full confession of the absolute -necessity for such a body independent of, and untrammelled by, any -enchaining dogmas, and it points out at the same time the signal -failure of Christianity to accomplish the desired results. - -Truly said Coleridge that “good works may exist _without_ saving (?) -principles, therefore cannot contain in themselves the principles of -salvation; but saving principles never did, never can exist without -good works.” Theosophists admit the definition, and disagree with -the Christians only as to the nature of these “saving principles.” -The Church (or churches) maintain that the only saving principle is -belief in Jesus, or the carnalized Christ of the soul-killing dogma; -theosophy, undogmatic and unsectarian, answers, it is not so. The -only _saving_ principle dwells in man himself, and has never dwelt -outside of his immortal divine self; _i.e._ it is the true Christos, -as it is the true Buddha, the divine inward light which proceeds -from the eternal unmanifesting unknown ALL. And this light _can only -be made known by its works_—_faith_ in it having to remain ever -blind in all, save in the man himself who feels that light within -his soul. - -Therefore, the tacit admission of the author of the above letter -covers another point of great importance. The writer seems to have -felt that which many, among those who strive to help the suffering, -have felt and expressed. The creeds of the churches fail to supply -the _intellectual_ light, and the true wisdom which are needed to -make the practical philanthropy carried out, by the true and earnest -followers of Christ, a _reality_. The “practical” people either go -on “doing good” unintelligently, and thus often do harm instead; or, -appalled by the awful problem before them, and failing to find in -their “churches” any clue, or a hope of solution, they retire from -the battlefield and let themselves be drifted blindly by the current -in which they happen to be born. - -Of late it has become the fashion for friends, as well as for foes, -to reproach the Theosophical Society with doing no practical work, -but losing itself in the clouds of metaphysics. Metaphysicians, we -are told, by those who like to repeat stale arguments, have been -learning their lesson for the last few thousand years; and it is now -high time that they should begin to do some practical work. Agreed; -but considering that the Christian churches count nearly nineteen -centuries of existence, and that the Theosophical Society and -Brotherhood is a body hardly twelve years old; considering again -that the Christian churches roll in fabulous wealth, and number -their adherents by hundreds of millions, whereas the Theosophical -Brotherhood is but a few thousand strong, and that it has no fund, -or funds, at its disposal, but that 98 per cent. of its members are -as poor and as uninfluential as the aristocracy of the Christian -church is rich and powerful; taking all this into consideration, -there would be much to say if the theosophists would only choose to -press the matter upon the public notice. Meanwhile, as the bitterest -critics of the “leaders” of the Theosophical Society are by no means -only outsiders, but as there are members of that society who always -find a pretext to be dissatisfied, we ask: Can works of charity that -will be known among men be accomplished without money? Certainly -not. And yet, notwithstanding all this, none of its (European) -members, except a few devoted officers in charge of societies, will -do _practical_ work; but some of them, those especially who have -never lifted a finger to relieve suffering, and help their outside, -poorer brothers, are those who talk the most loudly, and are the -bitterest in their denunciations of the _unspirituality_ and the -unfitness of the “leaders of theosophy.” By this they remove -themselves into the outer ring of critics, like those spectators at -the play who laugh at an actor passably representing Hamlet, while -they themselves could not walk on to the stage with a letter on a -salver. While in India, comparatively poor theosophists have opened -gratuitous dispensaries for the sick, hospitals, schools, and -everything they could think of, asking no returns from the poor, as -the missionaries do, no abandonment of one’s forefathers’ religion, -as a heavy price for favours received, have the English -theosophists, as a rule, done a single thing for those suffering -multitudes, whose pitiful cry rings throughout the whole Heavens as -a protest against the actual state of things in Christendom? - -We take this opportunity of saying, in reply to others as much as to -our correspondent, that, up till now, the energies of the Society -have been chiefly occupied in organising, extending, and solidifying -the Society itself, which work has taxed its time, energies, and -resources to such an extent as to leave it far less powerful for -practical charity than we would have wished. But, even so, compared -with the influence and the funds at the disposal of the Society, its -work in practical charity, if less widely known, will certainly bear -favourable comparison with that of professing Christians, with their -enormous resources in money, workers, and opportunities of all -kinds. It must not be forgotten that practical charity is not one of -the _declared_ objects of the Society. It goes without saying, and -needs no “declaration,” that every member of the Society must be -practically philanthropic if he be a theosophist at all; and our -declared work is, in reality, more important and more efficacious -than work in the every-day plane which bears more evident and -immediate fruit, for the direct effect of an appreciation of -theosophy is to make those charitable who were not so before. -Theosophy creates the charity which afterwards, and of its own -accord, makes itself manifest in works. - -Theosophy is correctly—though in this particular case, it is rather -ironically—termed “a High, Heaven-born Religion.” It is argued that -since it professes to receive its advanced knowledge and light from -“those more learned in the Science of Life,” the latter ought and -_must_, if appealed to by their votaries (the theosophists), aid -them in discovering ways and means, in organising some great -fraternal scheme,” etc. - -The scheme was planned, and the rules and laws to guide such a -practical brotherhood, have been given by those “more learned in the -Science of (practical, daily, _altruistic_) life;” aye, verily “more -learned” in it than any other men since the days of Gautama Buddha -and the Gnostic Essenes. The “scheme” dates back to the year when -the Theosophical Society was founded. Let anyone read its wise and -noble laws embodied to this day in the Statutes of the Fraternity, -and judge for himself whether, if carried out rigorously and applied -to practical life, the “scheme” would not have proved the most -beneficent to mankind in general, and especially to our poorer -brethren, of “the starving multitudes.” Theosophy teaches the spirit -of “non-separateness,” the evanescence and illusion of human creeds -and dogma, hence, inculcates _universal love and charity for all -mankind “without distinction of race, colour, caste or creed;”_ is -it not therefore the fittest to alleviate the sufferings of mankind? -No true theosophist would refuse admission into a hospital, or any -charitable establishment, to any man, woman or child, under the -pretext that he is _not_ a theosophist, as a Roman Catholic would -when dealing with a Protestant, and _vice versa_. No true -theosophist of the original rules would fail to put into practice -the parable of the “Good Samaritan,” or proffer help only to entice -the unwary who, he hopes, will become a pervert from his god and the -gods of his forefathers. None would slander his brother, none let a -needy man go unhelped, none offer fine talk instead of practical -love and charity. - -Is it then the fault of Theosophy, any more than it is the fault of -the Christ-teachings, if the majority of the members of the -Theosophical Society, often changing their philosophical and -religious views upon entering our Body, have yet remained -practically the same as they were when professing _lip_ -Christianity? Our laws and rules are the same as given to us from -the beginning; it is the general members of the Society who have -allowed them to become virtually _obsolete_. Those few who are ever -ready to sacrifice their time and labour to work for the poor, and -who do, unrecognised and unthanked for it, good work wherever they -can, are often too poor themselves to put their larger schemes of -charity into objective practical form, however willing they may be. - -“The fault I find with the Theosophical Society,” said one of the -most eminent surgeons in London to one of the editors, quite -recently, “is that I cannot discover that any of its members really -lead the Christ-life.” This seemed a very serious accusation from a -man who is not only in the front rank of his profession, and valued -for his kindly nature, by his patients, and by society, and -well-known as a quiet doer of many good deeds. The only possible -answer to be made was that the Christ-life is undeniably the ideal -of every one worthy in any sense of the name of a Theosophist, and -that if it is not lived it is because there are none strong enough -to carry it out. Only a few days later the same complaint was put in -a more graphic form by a celebrated lady-artist. - -“You Theosophists don’t do enough good for me,” she said pithily. -And in her case also there is the right to speak, given by the fact -that she leads two lives—one, a butterfly existence in society, and -the other a serious one, which makes little noise, but has much -purpose. Those who regard life as a great vocation, like the two -critics of the Theosophical movement whom we have just quoted, have -a right to demand of such a movement more than mere words. They -themselves endeavour very quietly to lead the “Christ-life,” and -they cannot understand a number of people uniting in the effort -towards this life without practical results being apparent. Another -critic of the same character who has the best possible right to -criticise, being a thoroughly practical philanthropist and -charitable to the last degree, has said of the Theosophists that -their much talking and writing seems to resolve itself into mere -intellectual luxury, productive of no direct good to the world. - -The point of difference between the Theosophists (when we use this -term we mean, not members of the Society, but people who are really -using the organization as a method of learning more of the true -wisdom-religion which exists as a vital and eternal fact behind all -such efforts) and the practical philanthropists, religious or -secular, is a very serious one, and the answer, that probably none -of them are strong enough yet to lead the “Christ-life,” is only a -portion of the truth. The situation can be put very plainly, in so -many words. The religious philanthropist holds a position of his -own, which cannot in any way concern or affect the Theosophist. He -does not do good merely for the sake of doing good, but also as a -means towards his own salvation. This is the outcome of the selfish -and personal side of man’s nature, which has so coloured and -affected a grand religion that its devotees are little better than -the idol-worshippers who ask their deity of clay to bring them luck -in business, and the payment of debts. The religious philanthropist -who hopes to gain salvation by good works has simply, to quote a -well-worn yet ever fresh witticism, exchanged worldliness for -other-worldliness. - -The secular philanthropist is really at heart a socialist, and -nothing else; he hopes to make men happy and good by bettering their -physical position. No serious student of human nature can believe in -this theory for a moment. There is no doubt that it is a very -agreeable one, because if it is accepted there is immediate, -straightforward work to undertake. “The poor ye have always with -you.” The causation which produced human nature itself produced -poverty, misery, pain, degradation, at the same time that it -produced wealth, and comfort, and joy and glory. Lifelong -philanthropists, who have started on their work with a joyous -youthful conviction that it is possible to “do good,” have, though -never relaxing the habit of charity, confessed to the present writer -that, as a matter of fact, misery cannot be relieved. It is a vital -element in human nature, and is as necessary to some lives as -pleasure is to others. - -It is a strange thing to observe how practical philanthropists will -eventually, after long and bitter experience, arrive at a conclusion -which, to an occultist, is from the first a working hypothesis. This -is, that misery is not only endurable, but agreeable to many who -endure it. A noble woman, whose life has been given to the rescue of -the lowest class of wretched girls, those who seem to be driven to -vice by want, said, only a few days since, that with many of these -outcasts it is not possible to raise them to any apparently happier -lot. And this she distinctly stated (and she can speak with -authority, having spent her life literally among them, and studied -them thoroughly), is not so much from any love of vice, but from -love of that very state which the wealthy classes call misery. They -prefer the savage life of a bare-foot, half-clad creature, with no -roof at night and no food by day, to any comforts which can be -offered them. By comforts, we do not mean the workhouse or the -reformatory, but the comforts of a quiet home; and we can give -chapter and verse, so to speak, to show that this is the case, not -merely with the children of outcasts, who might be supposed to have -a savage heredity, but with the children of gentle, cultivated, and -Christian people. - -Our great towns hide in their slums thousands of beings whose -history would form an inexplicable enigma, a perfectly baffling -moral picture, could they be written out clearly, so as to be -intelligible. But they are only known to the devoted workers among -the outcast classes, to whom they become a sad and terrible puzzle, -not to be solved, and therefore, better not discussed. Those who -have no clue to the science of life are compelled to dismiss such -difficulties in this manner, otherwise they would fall, crushed -beneath the thought of them. The social question as it is called, -the great deep waters of misery, the deadly apathy of those who have -power and possessions—these things are hardly to be faced by a -generous soul who has not reached to the great idea of evolution, -and who has not guessed at the marvellous mystery of human -development. - -The Theosophist is placed in a different position from any of these -persons, because he has heard of the vast scope of life with which -all mystic and occult writers and teachers deal, and he has been -brought very near to the great mystery. Indeed, none, though they -may have enrolled themselves as Fellows of the Society, can be -called in any serious sense Theosophists, until they have begun to -consciously taste in their own persons, this same mystery; which is, -indeed, a law inexorable, by which man lifts himself by degrees from -the state of a beast to the glory of a God. The rapidity with which -this is done is different with every living soul; and the wretches -who hug the primitive task-master, _misery_, choose to go slowly -through a tread-mill course which may give them innumerable lives of -physical sensation—whether pleasant or painful, well-beloved because -tangible to the very lowest senses. The Theosophist who desires to -enter upon occultism takes some of Nature’s privileges into his own -hands by that very wish, and soon discovers that experiences come to -him with double-quick rapidity. His business is then to recognise -that he is under a—to him—new and swifter law of development, and to -snatch at the lessons that come to him. - -But, in recognising this, he also makes another discovery. He sees -that it takes a very wise man to do good works without danger of -doing incalculable harm. A highly developed adept in life may grasp -the nettle, and by his great intuitive powers, know whom to relieve -from pain and whom to leave in the mire that is their best teacher. -The poor and wretched themselves will tell anyone who is able to win -their confidence what disastrous mistakes are made by those who come -from a different class and endeavour to help them. Kindness and -gentle treatment will sometimes bring out the worst qualities of a -man or woman who has led a fairly presentable life when kept down by -pain and despair. May the Master of Mercy forgive us for saying such -words of any human creatures, all of whom are a part of ourselves, -according to the law of human brotherhood which no disowning of it -can destroy. But the words are true. None of us know the darkness -which lurks in the depths of our own natures until some strange and -unfamiliar experience rouses the whole being into action. So with -these others who seem more miserable than ourselves. - -As soon as he begins to understand what a friend and teacher pain -can be, the Theosophist stands appalled before the mysterious -problem of human life, and though he may long to do good works, -equally dreads to do them wrongly until he has himself acquired -greater power and knowledge. The ignorant doing of good works may be -vitally injurious, as all but those who are blind in their love of -benevolence are compelled to acknowledge. In this sense the answer -made as to lack of Christ-like lives among Theosophists, that there -are probably none strong enough to live such, is perfectly correct -and covers the whole question. For it is not the spirit of -self-sacrifice, or of devotion, or of desire to help that is -lacking, but the strength to acquire knowledge and power and -intuition, so that the deeds done shall really be worthy of the -“Buddha-Christ” spirit. Therefore it is that Theosophists cannot -pose as a body of philanthropists, though secretly they may -adventure on the path of good works. They profess to be a body of -learners merely, pledged to help each other and all the rest of -humanity, so far as in them lies, to a better understanding of the -mystery of life, and to a better knowledge of the peace which lies -beyond it. - -But as it is an inexorable law, that the ground must be tilled if -the harvest is to be reaped, so Theosophists are obliged to work in -the world unceasingly, and very often in doing this to make serious -mistakes, as do all workers who are not embodied Redeemers. Their -efforts may not come under the title of good works, and they may be -condemned as a school of idle talkers, yet they are an outcome and -fruition of this particular moment of time, when the ideas which -they hold are greeted by the crowd with interest; and therefore -their work is good, as the lotus-flower is good when it opens in the -mid-day sun. - -None know more keenly and definitely than they that good works are -necessary; only these cannot be rightly accomplished without -knowledge. Schemes for Universal Brotherhood, and the redemption of -mankind, might be given out plentifully by the great adepts of life, -and would be mere dead-letter utterances while individuals remain -ignorant, and unable to grasp the great meaning of their teachers. -To Theosophists we say, let us carry out the rules given us for our -society before we ask for any further schemes or laws. To the public -and our critics we say, try to understand the value of good works -before you demand them of others, or enter upon them rashly -yourselves. Yet it is an absolute fact that without good works the -spirit of brotherhood would die in the world; and this can never be. -Therefore is the double activity of learning and doing most -necessary; we have to do good, and we have to do it _rightly_, with -knowledge. - - * * * * * * * * - -It is well known that the first rule of the society is to carry out -the object of forming the nucleus of a universal brotherhood. The -practical working of this rule was explained by those who laid it -down, to the following effect:— - -“HE WHO DOES NOT PRACTISE ALTRUISM; HE WHO IS NOT PREPARED TO SHARE -HIS LAST MORSEL WITH A WEAKER OR POORER THAN HIMSELF; HE WHO -NEGLECTS TO HELP HIS BROTHER MAN, OF WHATEVER RACE, NATION, OR -CREED, WHENEVER AND WHEREVER HE MEETS SUFFERING, AND WHO TURNS A -DEAF EAR TO THE CRY OF HUMAN MISERY; HE WHO HEARS AN INNOCENT PERSON -SLANDERED, WHETHER A BROTHER THEOSOPHIST OR NOT, AND DOES NOT -UNDERTAKE HIS DEFENCE AS HE WOULD UNDERTAKE HIS OWN—IS NO -THEOSOPHIST.” - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - - - THE DEMAND OF THE NEOPHYTE. - - [Continuation of COMMENTS ON LIGHT ON THE PATH: By the Author.] - -“Before the voice can speak in the presence of the Masters.” - -Speech is the power of communication; the moment of entrance into -active life is marked by its attainment. - -And now, before I go any further, let me explain a little the way in -which the rules written down in “Light on the Path” are arranged. -The first seven of those which are numbered are sub-divisions of the -two first unnumbered rules, those with which I have dealt in the two -preceding papers. The numbered rules were simply an effort of mine -to make the unnumbered ones more intelligible. “Eight” to “fifteen” -of these numbered rules belong to this unnumbered rule which is now -my text. - -As I have said, these rules are written for all disciples, but for -none else; they are not of interest to any other persons. Therefore -I trust no one else will trouble to read these papers any further. -The first two rules, which include the whole of that part of the -effort which necessitates the use of the surgeon’s knife, I will -enlarge upon further if I am asked to do so. But the disciple is -expected to deal with the snake, his lower self, unaided; to -suppress his human passions and emotions by the force of his own -will. He can only demand assistance of a master when this is -accomplished, or at all events, partially so. Otherwise the gates -and windows of his soul are blurred, and blinded, and darkened, and -no knowledge can come to him. I am not, in these papers, purposing -to tell a man how to deal with his own soul; I am simply giving, to -the disciple, knowledge. That I am not writing, even now, so that -all who run may read, is owing to the fact that super-nature -prevents this by its own immutable laws. - -The four rules which I have written down for those in the West who -wish to study them, are as I have said, written in the ante-chamber -of every living Brotherhood; I may add more, in the ante-chamber of -every living or dead Brotherhood, or Order yet to be formed. When I -speak of a Brotherhood or an Order, I do not mean an arbitrary -constitution made by scholiasts and intellectualists; I mean an -actual fact in supernature, a stage of development towards the -absolute God or Good. During this development the disciple -encounters harmony, pure knowledge, pure truth, in different -degrees, and, as he enters these degrees, he finds himself becoming -part of what might be roughly described as a layer of human -consciousness. He encounters his equals, men of his own self-less -character, and with them his association becomes permanent and -indissoluble, because founded on a vital likeness of nature. To them -he becomes pledged by such vows as need no utterance or framework in -ordinary words. This is one aspect of what I mean by a Brotherhood. - -If the first rules are conquered the disciple finds himself standing -at the threshold. Then if his will is sufficiently resolute his -power of speech comes; a two-fold power. For, as he advances now, he -finds himself entering into a state of blossoming, where every bud -that opens throws out its several rays or petals. If he is to -exercise his new gift, he must use it in its two-fold character. He -finds in himself the power to speak in the presence of the masters; -in other words, he has the right to demand contact with the divinest -element of that state of consciousness into which he has entered. -But he finds himself compelled, by the nature of his position, to -act in two ways at the same time. He cannot send his voice up to the -heights where sit the gods till he has penetrated to the deep places -where their light shines not at all. He has come within the grip of -an iron law. If he demands to become a neophyte, he at once becomes -a servant. Yet his service is sublime, if only from the character of -those who share it. For the masters are also servants; they serve -and claim their reward afterwards. Part of their service is to let -their knowledge touch him; his first act of service is to give some -of that knowledge to those who are not yet fit to stand where he -stands. This is no arbitrary decision, made by any master or teacher -or any such person, however divine. It is a law of that life which -the disciple has entered upon. - -Therefore was it written in the inner doorway of the lodges of the -old Egyptian Brotherhood, “The labourer is worthy of his hire.” - -“Ask and ye shall have,” sounds like something too easy and simple -to be credible. But the disciple cannot “ask” in the mystic sense in -which the word is used in this scripture until he has attained the -power of helping others. - -Why is this? Has the statement too dogmatic a sound? - -Is it too dogmatic to say that a man must have foothold before he -can spring? The position is the same. If help is given, if work is -done, then there is an actual claim—not what we call a personal -claim of payment, but the claim of co-nature. The divine give, they -demand that you also shall give before you can be of their kin. - -This law is discovered as soon as the disciple endeavours to speak. -For speech is a gift which comes only to the disciple of power and -knowledge. The spiritualist enters the psychic-astral world, but he -does not find there any certain speech, unless he at once claims it -and continues to do so. If he is interested in “phenomena,” or the -mere circumstance and accident of astral life, then he enters no -direct ray of thought or purpose, he merely exists and amuses -himself in the astral life as he has existed and amused himself in -the physical life. Certainly there are one or two simple lessons -which the psychic-astral can teach him, just as there are simple -lessons which material and intellectual life teach him. And these -lessons have to be learned; the man who proposes to enter upon the -life of the disciple without having learned the early and simple -lessons must always suffer from his ignorance. They are vital, and -have to be studied in a vital manner; experienced through and -through, over and over again, so that each part of the nature has -been penetrated by them. - -To return. In claiming the power of speech, as it is called, the -Neophyte cries out to the Great One who stands foremost in the ray -of knowledge on which he has entered, to give him guidance. When he -does this, his voice is hurled back by the power he has approached, -and echoes down to the deep recesses of human ignorance. In some -confused and blurred manner the news that there is knowledge and a -beneficent power which teaches is carried to as many men as will -listen to it. No disciple can cross the threshold without -communicating this news, and placing it on record in some fashion or -other. - -He stands horror-struck at the imperfect and unprepared manner in -which he has done this; and then comes the desire to do it well, and -with the desire thus to help others comes the power. For it is a -pure desire, this which comes upon him; he can gain no credit, no -glory, no personal reward by fulfilling it. And therefore he obtains -the power to fulfil it. - -The history of the whole past, so far as we can trace it, shows very -plainly that there is neither credit, glory, or reward to be gained -by this first task which is given to the Neophyte. Mystics have -always been sneered at, and seers disbelieved; those who have had -the added power of intellect have left for posterity their written -record, which to most men appears unmeaning and visionary, even when -the authors have the advantage of speaking from a far-off past. The -disciple who undertakes the task, secretly hoping for fame or -success, to appear as a teacher and apostle before the world, fails -even before his task is attempted, and his hidden hypocrisy poisons -his own soul, and the souls of those he touches. He is secretly -worshipping himself, and this idolatrous practice must bring its own -reward. - -The disciple who has the power of entrance, and is strong enough to -pass each barrier, will, when the divine message comes to his -spirit, forget himself utterly in the new consciousness which falls -on him. If this lofty contact can really rouse him, he becomes as -one of the divine in his desire to give rather than to take, in his -wish to help rather than be helped, in his resolution to feed the -hungry rather than take manna from Heaven himself. His nature is -transformed, and the selfishness which prompts men’s actions in -ordinary life suddenly deserts him. - - (_To be continued._) - - - - - THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS. - - “.... Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the - sign _of thy presence_, and _of the consummation of the age_?”[33] - asked the Disciples of the MASTER, on the Mount of Olives. - ------ - -Footnote 33: - - St. Matthew xxiv., 3, _et seq._ The sentences italicised are those - which stand corrected in the New Testament after the recent - revision in 1881 of the version of _1611_; which version is full - of errors, voluntary and involuntary. The word “presence,” for - “coming,” and “the consummation of the age,” now standing for “the - end of the world,” have altered, of late, the whole meaning, even - for the most sincere Christians, if we exempt the Adventists. - ------ - -The reply given by the “Man of Sorrow,” the _Chréstos_, on his -trial, but also on his way to triumph, as _Christos_, or Christ,[34] -is prophetic, and very suggestive. It is a warning indeed. The -answer must be quoted in full. Jesus ... said unto them:— - - “Take heed that _no man_ lead you astray. For many shall come in - my name saying, I am the Christ; and shall lead many astray. And - ye shall hear of wars ... but the end is not yet. _For nation - shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there - shall be famines and earthquakes in divers places._ But all these - things are the beginning of travail.... Many false prophets shall - arise, and shall lead many, astray ... then shall the end come ... - when ye see the abomination of desolation which was spoken through - Daniel.... Then if any man shall say unto you, _Lo, here is the - Christ_, or There; believe him not.... If they shall say unto you, - Behold, he is in the wilderness, go not forth; behold, he is in - the inner chambers, believe them not. For as the lightning cometh - forth from the East, and is seen even in the West, so shall be the - _presence_ of the Son of Man,” etc., etc. - ------ - -Footnote 34: - - He who will not ponder over and master the great difference - between the meaning of the two Greek words—χρηστος and χριστος - must remain blind for ever to the true esoteric meaning of the - Gospels; that is to say, to the living Spirit entombed in the - sterile dead-letter of the texts, the very Dead Sea fruit of - _lip_-Christianity. - ------ - -Two things become evident _to all_ in the above passages, now that -their false rendering is corrected in the revision text: (_a_) “the -coming of Christ,” means _the presence of_ CHRISTOS in a regenerated -world, and not at all the actual coming in body of “Christ” Jesus; -(_b_) this Christ is to be sought neither in the wilderness nor “in -the inner chambers,” nor in the sanctuary of any temple or church -built by man; for Christ—the true esoteric SAVIOUR—_is no man_, but -the DIVINE PRINCIPLE in every human being. He who strives to -resurrect the Spirit _crucified in him by his own terrestrial -passions_, and buried deep in the “sepulchre” of his sinful flesh; -he who has the strength to roll back _the stone of matter_ from the -door of his own _inner_ sanctuary, he _has the risen Christ in -him_.[35] The “Son of Man” is no child of the bond-woman—_flesh_, -but verily of the free-woman—_Spirit_,[36] the child of man’s own -deeds, and the fruit of his own spiritual labour. - ------ - -Footnote 35: - - For ye are the temple (“sanctuary” in the _revised_ N. T.) of the - living God. (II. Cor. vi., 16.) - -Footnote 36: - - Spirit, or the Holy Ghost, was feminine with the Jews, as with - most ancient peoples, and it was so with the early Christians. - _Sophia_ of the Gnostics, and the third Sephiroth _Binah_ - (the _female_ Jehovah of the Kabalists), are feminine - principles—“Divine Spirit,” or _Ruach_. “_Achath Ruach Elohim - Chiim._” “One is _She_, the Spirit of the Elohim of Life,” is said - in “Sepher Yezirah.” - ------ - -On the other hand, at no time since the Christian era, have the -precursor signs described in _Matthew_ applied so graphically and -forcibly to any epoch as they do to our own times. When has nation -arisen against nation more than at this time? When have -“famines”—another name for destitute pauperism, and the famished -multitudes of the proletariat—been more cruel, earthquakes more -frequent, or covered such an area simultaneously, as for the last -few years? Millenarians and Adventists of robust faith, may go on -saying that “the coming of (the carnalised) Christ” is near at hand, -and prepare themselves for “the end of the world.” Theosophists—at -any rate, some of them—who understand the hidden meaning of the -universally-expected Avatars, Messiahs, Sosioshes and Christs—know -that it is no “end of the world,” but “the consummation of the age,” -_i.e._, the close of a cycle, which is now fast approaching.[37] If -our readers have forgotten the concluding passages of the article, -“The Signs of the Times,” in LUCIFER for October last, let them read -them over, and they will plainly see the meaning of this particular -cycle. - ------ - -Footnote 37: - - There are several remarkable cycles that come to a close at the - end of this century. First, the 5,000 years of the Kaliyug cycle; - again the Messianic cycle of the Samaritan (also Kabalistic) Jews - of the man connected with _Pisces_ (Ichthys or “Fish-man” _Dag_). - It is a cycle, historic and not very long, but very occult, - lasting about 2,155 solar years, but having a true significance - only when computed by lunar months. It occurred 2410 and 255 B.C., - or when the equinox entered into the sign of the _Ram_, and again - into that of _Pisces_. When it enters, in a few years, the sign of - _Aquarius_, psychologists will have some extra work to do, and the - psychic idiosyncrasies of humanity will enter on a great change. - ------ - -Many and many a time the warning about the “false Christs” and -prophets who shall lead people astray has been interpreted by -charitable Christians, the worshippers of the dead-letter of their -scripture, as applying to mystics generally, and Theosophists most -especially. The recent work by Mr. Pember, “Earth’s Earliest -Ages,” is a proof of it. Nevertheless, it seems very evident that -the words in Matthew’s Gospel and others can hardly apply to -Theosophists. For these were never found saying that Christ is -“Here” or “There,” in wilderness or city, and least of all in the -“inner chamber” behind the altar of any modern church. Whether -Heathen or Christian by birth, they refuse to materialise and thus -degrade that which is the purest and grandest ideal—the symbol of -symbols—namely, the immortal Divine Spirit in man, whether it be -called Horus, Krishna, Buddha, or Christ. None of them has ever -yet said: “I am the Christ”; for those born in the West feel -themselves, so far, only _Chréstians_,[38] however much they may -strive to become _Christians_ in Spirit. It is to those, who in -their great conceit and pride refuse to win the right of such -appellation by first leading the life of _Chrestos_;[39] to those -who haughtily proclaim themselves _Christians_ (the glorified, the -anointed) by sole virtue of baptism when but a few days old—that -the above-quoted words of Jesus apply most forcibly. Can the -prophetic insight of him who uttered this remarkable warning be -doubted by any one who sees the numerous “false prophets” and -pseudo-apostles (_of Christ_), now roaming over the world? These -have split the one divine Truth into fragments, and broken, in the -camp of the Protestants alone, the rock of the Eternal Verity into -three hundred and fifty odd pieces, which now represent the bulk -of their Dissenting sects. Accepting the number in round figures -as 350, and admitting, for argument’s sake, that, at least, one of -these may have the approximate truth, still 349 _must be -necessarily false_.[40] Each of these claims to have Christ -exclusively in its “inner chamber,” and denies him to all others, -while, in truth, the great majority of their respective followers -daily put Christ to death on the cruciform tree of matter—the -“tree of infamy” of the old Romans—indeed! - ------ - -Footnote 38: - - The earliest Christian author, Justin Martyr, calls, in his first - Apology, his co-religionists _Chrestians_, χρηστιανοι—not - Christians. - -Footnote 39: - - “Clemens Alexandrinus, in the second century, founds a serious - argument on this paranomasia (lib. iii., cap. xvii., p. 53 _et - circa_), that all who believed in _Chrest_ (_i.e._, “a good man”) - both are, and are called Chrestians, that is, good men,” - (Strommata, lib. ii. “Higgins’ _Anacalypsis_.”) And Lactantius - (lib. iv., cap. vii.) says that it is only through _ignorance_ - that people call themselves Christians, instead of Chrestians: - “_qui proper ignorantium errorem cum immutata litera Chrestum - solent dicere_.” - -Footnote 40: - - In England alone, there are over 239 various sects. (See - Whitaker’s Almanac.) In 1883, there were 186 denominations only, - and now they steadily increase with every year, an additional 53 - sects having sprung up in only four years! - ------ - -The worship of the dead-letter in the Bible is but one more form of -_idolatry_, nothing better. A fundamental dogma of faith cannot -exist under a double-faced Janus form. “Justification” _by Christ_ -cannot be achieved at one’s choice and fancy, _either_ by “faith” or -by “works” and James, therefore (ii., 25), contradicting Paul (Heb. -xi., 31), and _vice versa_,[41] one of them must be wrong. Hence, -the Bible is _not_ the “Word of God” but contains at best the words -of fallible men and _imperfect_ teachers. Yet read _esoterically_, -it does contain, if not the _whole_ truth, still, “_nothing but the -truth_,” under whatever allegorical garb. Only: _Quot homines tot -sententiæ_. - ------ - -Footnote 41: - - It is but fair to St. Paul to remark that this contradiction is - surely due to later tampering with his Epistles. Paul was a - Gnostic himself, _i.e._, A “Son of Wisdom,” and an Initiate into - the true _mysteries of Christos_, though he may have thundered (or - was made to appear to do so) against some Gnostic sects, of which, - in his day, there were many. But his Christos was not Jesus of - Nazareth, nor any living man, as shown so ably in Mr. Gerald - Massey’s lecture, “Paul, the Gnostic Opponent of Peter.” He was an - Initiate, a true “Master-Builder” or adept, as described in “Isis - Unveiled,” Vol II., pp. 90-91. - ------ - -The “Christ principle,” the awakened and glorified Spirit of Truth, -being universal and eternal, the true _Christos_ cannot be -monopolized by any one person, even though that person has chosen to -arrogate to himself the title of the “Vicar of Christ,” or of the -“Head” of that or another State-religion. The spirits of “Chrest” -and “Christ” cannot be confined to any creed or sect, only because -that sect chooses to exalt itself above the heads of all other -religions or sects. The name has been used in a manner so intolerant -and dogmatic, especially in our day, that Christianity is now the -religion of arrogance _par excellence_, a stepping-stone for -ambition, a sinecure for wealth, sham and power; a convenient screen -for hypocrisy. The noble epithet of old, the one that made Justin -Martyr say that “_from the mere name_, which is imputed to us as a -crime, _we are the most excellent_,”[42] is now degraded. The -missionary prides himself with the so-called _conversion_ of a -heathen, who makes of Christianity ever a _profession_, but rarely a -religion, a source of income from the missionary fund, and a -pretext, since the blood of Jesus has washed them all by -anticipation, for every petty crime, from drunkenness and lying up -to theft. That same missionary, however, would not hesitate to -publicly condemn the greatest saint to eternal perdition and hell -fires if that holy man has only neglected to pass through the -fruitless and meaningless form of baptism by water with -accompaniment of _lip_ prayers and vain ritualism. - ------ - -Footnote 42: - - ὁσοντε ὲκ τοῦ κατηγορουμένου ἡμῶν ὀνομάτος χρησότατοι ὑπάρχομεν - (_First Apology_). - ------ - -We say “lip prayer” and “vain ritualism” knowingly. Few Christians -among the laymen are aware even of the true meaning of the word -_Christ_; and those of the clergy who happen to know it (for they -are brought up in the idea that to study such subjects is _sinful_) -keep the information secret from their parishioners. They demand -blind, implicit faith, and _forbid inquiry as the one unpardonable -sin_, though nothing of that which leads to the knowledge of the -truth can be aught else than holy. For what is “Divine Wisdom,” or -_Gnosis_, but the essential reality behind the evanescent -appearances of objects in nature—the very soul of the manifested -LOGOS? Why should men who strive to accomplish union with the one -eternal and absolute Deity shudder at the idea of prying into its -mysteries—however awful? Why, above all, should they use names and -words the very meaning of which is a sealed mystery to them—a mere -sound? Is it because an unscrupulous, power-seeking Establishment -called a Church has cried “wolf” at every such attempt, and, -denouncing it as “blasphemous,” has ever tried to kill the spirit of -inquiry? But Theosophy, the “divine Wisdom,” has never heeded that -cry, and has the courage of its opinions. The world of sceptics and -fanatics may call it, one—an empty “_ism_”—the other “Satanism”: -they can never crush it. Theosophists have been called Atheists, -haters of Christianity, the enemies of God and the gods. They are -none of these. Therefore, they have agreed this day to publish a -clear statement of their ideas, and a profession of their faith—with -regard to monotheism and Christianity, at any rate—and to place it -before the impartial reader to judge them and their detractors on -the merits of their respective faiths. No truth-loving mind would -object to such honest and sincere dealing, nor will it be dazzled by -any amount of new light thrown upon the subject, howsoever much -startled otherwise. On the contrary, such minds will thank LUCIFER, -perhaps, while those of whom it was said “_qui vult decipi -decipiatur_”—let them be deceived by all means! - -The editors of this magazine propose to give a series of essays upon -the hidden meaning or esotericism of the “New Testament.” No more -than any other scripture of the great world-religions can the Bible -be excluded from that class of allegorical and symbolical writings -which have been, from the pre-historic ages, the receptacle of the -secret teachings of the Mysteries of Initiation, under a more or -less veiled form. The primitive writers of the _Logia_ (now the -Gospels) knew certainly _the_ truth, and the _whole_ truth; but -their successors had, as certainly, only dogma and form, which lead -to hierarchical power at heart, rather than the spirit of the -so-called Christ’s teachings. Hence the gradual perversion. As -Higgins truly said, in the Christologia of St. Paul and Justin -Martyr, we have the esoteric religion of the Vatican, a refined -Gnosticism for the cardinals, a more gross one for the people. It is -the latter, only still more materialized and disfigured, which has -reached us in our age. - -The idea of writing this series was suggested to us by a certain -letter published in our October issue, under the heading of “Are the -Teachings ascribed to Jesus contradictory?” Nevertheless, this is no -attempt to contradict or weaken, in any one instance, that which is -said by Mr. Gerald Massey in his criticism. The contradictions -pointed out by the learned lecturer and author are too patent to be -explained away by any “Preacher” or Bible champion; for what he has -said—only in more terse and vigorous language—is what was said of -the descendant of Joseph Pandira (or Panthera) in “Isis Unveiled” -(vol. ii., p. 201), from the Talmudic _Sepher Toldos Jeshu_. His -belief with regard to the spurious character of Bible and New -Testament, _as now edited_, is therefore, also the belief of the -present writer. In view of the recent revision of the Bible, and its -many thousands of mistakes, mistranslations, and interpolations -(some confessed to, and others withheld), it would ill become an -opponent to take any one to task for refusing to believe in the -authorised texts. - -But the editors would object to one short sentence in the criticism -under notice. Mr. Gerald Massey writes:— - -“What is the use of taking your ‘Bible oath’ that the thing is true, -if the book you are sworn upon is a magazine of falsehoods already -exploded, or just going off?” - -Surely it is not a symbologist of Mr. G. Massey’s powers and -learning who would call the “Book of the Dead,” or the Vedas, or any -other ancient Scripture, “a magazine of falsehoods.”[43] Why not -regard in the same light as all the others, the Old, and, _in a -still greater measure_, the _New_ Testament? - ------ - -Footnote 43: - - The extraordinary amount of information collated by that able - Egyptologist shows that he has thoroughly mastered the secret of - the production of the _New Testament_. Mr. Massey knows the - difference between the spiritual, divine and purely metaphysical - Christos, and the made-up “lay figure” of the carnalized Jesus. He - knows also that the Christian canon, especially the _Gospels_, - _Acts_ and _Epistles_, are made up of fragments of gnostic wisdom, - the ground-work of which is _pre-Christian_ and built on the - MYSTERIES of Initiation. It is the mode of theological - presentation and the interpolated passages—such as in Mark xvi. - from verse 9 to the end—which make of the Gospels a “magazine of - (_wicked_) falsehoods,” and throw a slur on CHRISTOS. But the - Occultist who discerns between the two currents (the true gnostic - and the _pseudo_ Christian) knows that the passages free from - theological tampering belong to archaic wisdom, and so does Mr. - Gerald Massey, though his views differ from ours. - ------ - -All of these are “magazines of falsehoods,” if accepted in the -exoteric dead-letter interpretations of their ancient, and -especially their modern, theological glossarists. Each of these -records has served in its turn as a means for securing power and of -supporting the ambitious policy of an unscrupulous priesthood. All -have promoted superstition, all made of their gods bloodthirsty and -ever-damning Molochs and fiends, as all have made nations to serve -the latter more than the God of Truth. But while cunningly-devised -dogmas and intentional misinterpretations by scholiasts are beyond -any doubt, “falsehoods already exploded,” the texts themselves are -mines of universal truths. But for the world of the profane and -sinners, at any rate—they were and still are like the mysterious -characters traced by “the fingers of a man’s hand” on the wall of -the Palace of Belshazzar: _they need a Daniel to read and understand -them_. - -Nevertheless, TRUTH has not allowed herself to remain without -witnesses. There are, besides great Initiates into scriptural -symbology, a number of quiet students of the mysteries of archaic -esotericism, of scholars proficient in Hebrew and other dead -tongues, who have devoted their lives to unriddle the speeches of -the Sphinx of the world-religions. And these students, though none -of them has yet mastered all the “seven keys” that open the great -problem, have discovered enough to be able to say: There _was_ a -universal mystery-language, in which all the World Scriptures were -written, from _Vedas_ to “Revelation,” from the “Book of the Dead” -to the _Acts_. One of the keys, at any rate—the numerical and -geometrical key[44] to the Mystery Speech is now rescued; an ancient -language, truly, which up to this time remained hidden, but the -evidences of which abundantly exist, as may be proven by undeniable -mathematical demonstrations. If, indeed, the Bible is forced on the -acceptance of the world in its dead-letter meaning, in the face of -the modern discoveries by Orientalists and the efforts of -independent students and kabalists, it is easy to prophesy that even -the present new generations of Europe and America will repudiate it, -as all the materialists and logicians have done. For, the more one -studies ancient religious texts, the more one finds that the -ground-work of the New Testament is the same as the ground-work of -the Vedas, of the Egyptian theogony, and the Mazdean allegories. The -atonements by blood—blood-covenants and blood-transferences from -gods to men, and by men, as sacrifices to the gods—are the first -key-note struck in every cosmogony and theogony; soul, life and -blood were synonymous words in every language, pre-eminently with -the Jews; and that blood-giving was life-giving. “Many a legend -among (geographically) alien nations ascribes soul and consciousness -in newly-created mankind to the blood of the god-creators. Berosus -records a Chaldean legend ascribing the creation of a new race of -mankind to the admixture of dust with the blood that flowed from the -severed head of the god Belus. “On this account it is that men are -rational and partake of divine knowledge,” explains Berosus.[45] And -Lenormant has shown (_Beginnings of History_, p. 52, note) that “the -Orphics ... said that the _immaterial part of man, his soul_ (his -life) sprang from the blood of Dionysius Zagreus, whom ... Titans -tore to pieces.” Blood “revivifies the dead”—_i.e._, interpreted -metaphysically, it gives _conscious_ life and a soul to the man of -matter or clay—such as the modern materialist is now. The mystic -meaning of the injunction, “Verily I say unto you, except _ye eat -the flesh_ of the Son of man and _drink his blood_, ye have not life -in yourselves,” &c., can never be understood or appreciated at its -true _occult_ value, except by those who hold some of the _seven -keys_, and yet care little for St Peter.[46] These words, whether -said by Jesus of Nazareth, or Jeshua Ben-Panthera, are the words of -an INITIATE. They have to be interpreted with the help of _three_ -keys—one opening the _psychic_ door, the second that of physiology, -and the third that which unlocks the mystery of terrestrial being, -by unveiling the inseparable blending of theogony with anthropology. -It is for revealing a few of these truths, with the _sole view of -saving intellectual mankind from the insanities of materialism and -pessimism_, that mystics have often been denounced as the servants -of Antichrist, even by those Christians who are most worthy, -sincerely pious and respectable men. - ------ - -Footnote 44: - - “The key to the recovery of the language, so far as the writer’s - efforts have been concerned, was found in the use, strange to say, - of the discovered integral ratio in numbers of diameter to - circumference of a circle,” by a geometrician. “This ratio is - 6,561 for diameter and 20,612 for circumference.” (Cabalistic - MSS.) In one of the future numbers of “LUCIFER” more details will - be given, with the permission of the discoverer.—Ed. - -Footnote 45: - - Cory’s _Anc. Frag._, p. 59, f. So do Sanchoniaton and Hesiod, who - both ascribe the _vivifying_ of mankind to the spilt blood of the - gods. But blood and _soul_ are one (_nephesh_), and the blood of - the gods means here the informing soul. - -Footnote 46: - - The existence of these _seven_ keys is virtually admitted, - owing to deep research in the Egyptological lore, by Mr. G. - Massey again. While opposing the teachings of “Esoteric - Buddhism”—unfortunately misunderstood by him in almost every - respect—in his Lecture on “The Seven Souls of Man,” he writes - (p. 21):— - - “This system of thought, this mode of representation, this - septenary of powers, in various aspects, had been established in - Egypt, at least, seven thousand years ago, as we learn from - certain allusions to Atum (the god ‘in whom the fatherhood was - individualised as the _begetter of an eternal soul_,’ the - _seventh_ principle of the Theosophists,) found in the - inscriptions lately discovered at Sakkarah. I say in various - aspects, _because the gnosis of the Mysteries was, at least, - sevenfold in its nature_—it was Elemental, Biological, Elementary - (human), Stellar, Lunar, Solar and Spiritual—and _nothing short of - a grasp of the whole system can possibly enable us to discriminate - the various parts, distinguish one from the other, and determinate - the which and the what, as we try to follow the symbolical Seven - through their several phases of character_.” - ------ - -The first key that one has to use to unravel the dark secrets -involved in the mystic name of Christ, is the key which unlocked the -door to the ancient mysteries of the primitive Aryans, Sabeans and -Egyptians. The Gnosis supplanted by the Christian scheme was -universal. It was the echo of the primordial wisdom-religion which -had once been the heirloom of the whole of mankind; and, therefore, -one may truly say that, in its purely metaphysical aspect, the -Spirit of Christ (the divine _logos_) was present in humanity from -the beginning of it. The author of the Clementine Homilies is right; -the mystery of Christos—now supposed to have been taught by Jesus of -Nazareth—“was identical” with that which _from the first_ had been -communicated “_to those who were worthy_,” as quoted in another -lecture.[47] We may learn from the Gospel _according_ to Luke, that -the “worthy” were those who had been initiated into the mysteries of -the Gnosis, and who were “accounted worthy” to attain that -“resurrection from the dead” _in this life_ ... “those who knew that -they could die no more, being equal to the angels as sons of God and -sons of the Resurrection.” In other words, they were the great -adepts _of whatever religion_; and the words apply to all those who, -without being Initiates, strive and succeed, through personal -efforts to _live the life_ and to attain the naturally ensuing -spiritual illumination in blending their personality—the (“Son”) -with (the “Father,”) their individual divine Spirit, _the God -within_ them. This “resurrection” can never be monopolized by the -Christians, but is the spiritual birth-right of every human being -endowed with soul and spirit, whatever his religion may be. Such -individual is a _Christ-man_. On the other hand, those who choose to -ignore the Christ (principle) within themselves, must die -_unregenerate heathens_—baptism, sacraments, lip-prayers, and belief -in dogmas notwithstanding. - -In order to follow this explanation, the reader must bear in mind -the real archaic meaning of the paronomasia involved in the two -terms _Chréstos_ and _Christos_. The former means certainly more -than merely “a good,” an “excellent man,” while the latter was never -applied to any one living man, but to every Initiate at the moment -of _his second birth and resurrection_.[48] He who finds Christos -within himself and recognises the latter as his only “way,” becomes -a follower and an _Apostle of Christ_, though he may have never been -baptised, nor even have met a “Christian,” still less call himself -one. - - H. P. B. - - (_To be continued._) - ------ - -Footnote 47: - - “Gnostic and Historic Christianity.” - -Footnote 48: - - “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man _be born again_ he - cannot see the Kingdom of God.” (John iii. 4.) Here the birth - _from above_, the spiritual birth, is meant, achieved at the - supreme and last initiation. - ------ - - - - - THE “SQUARE” IN THE HAND. - - -I am unable to say where or when the events related in the following -pages took place. Neither can I give any details concerning the -personal circumstances of the narrator. All I know is that she was a -young woman of French nationality, and that the “uncle” of whom she -speaks—her senior by some thirty years—was more distinguished as a -philosopher than as an enthusiast. Whether the conspiracy against -the reigning authorities in which our heroine and her friends were -implicated, happened to be of any historical importance or not, is -also more than I can say. As my object in reproducing the narrative -is merely to illustrate the curious operation through natural -channels of laws, which are usually regarded as “occult,” and the -activity of which on the material plane has given rise to the common -notion of “miracle,” I do not propose to trouble the reader or -myself with any preamble of merely local interest. So, without more -introduction, I leave the diary of the writer to recount the -adventure set down therein by her own hand. - - . . . . . . . . - -“I was concerned in a very prominent way in a political struggle for -liberty and the people’s rights. My part in this struggle was, -indeed, the leading one, but my uncle had been drawn into it at my -instance, and was implicated in a secondary manner only. The -government sought our arrest, and, for a time, we evaded all -attempts to take us, but at last we were surprised and driven under -escort in a private carriage to a military station, where we were to -be detained for examination. With us was arrested a man popularly -known as ‘Fou,’ a poor weakling whom I much pitied. When we arrived -at the station which was our destination, ‘Fou’ gave some trouble to -the officials. I think he fainted, but at all events his conveyance -from the carriage to the _caserne_ needed the conjoined efforts of -our escort, and some commotion was caused by his appearance among -the crowd assembled to see us. Clearly the crowd was sympathetic -with us and hostile to the military. I particularly noticed one -woman who pressed forward as ‘Fou’ was being carried into the -station, and who loudly called on all present to note his feeble -condition and the barbarity of arresting a witless creature such as -he. At that moment my uncle laid his hand on my arm and whispered: -‘Now is our time; the guards are all occupied with ‘Fou;’ we are -left alone for a minute; let us jump out of the carriage and run!’ -As he said this he opened the carriage door on the side opposite to -the _caserne_ and alighted in the street. I instantly followed, and -the people favouring us, we pressed through them and fled at the top -of our speed down the road. As we ran I espied a pathway winding up -a hill-side away from the town, and cried: ‘Let us go up there; let -us get away from the streets!’ My uncle answered: ‘No, no; they -would see us there immediately at that height, the path is too -conspicuous. Our best safety is to lose ourselves in the town. We -may throw them off our track by winding in and out of the streets.’ -Just then a little child, playing in the road, got in our way, and -nearly threw us down as we ran. We had to pause a moment to recover -ourselves. ‘That child may have cost us our lives,’ whispered my -uncle breathlessly. A second afterwards we reached the bottom of the -street which branched off right and left. I hesitated a moment; then -we both turned to the right. As we did so—in the twinkling of an -eye—we found ourselves in the midst of a group of soldiers coming -round the corner. I ran straight into the arms of one of them, who -the same instant knew me and seized me by throat and waist with a -grip of iron. This was a horrible moment! The iron grasp was sudden -and solid as the grip of a vice; the man’s arm held my waist like a -bar of steel. ‘I arrest you!’ he cried, and the soldiers immediately -closed round us. At once I realised the hopelessness of the -situation; the utter futility of resistance. ‘_Vous n’avez pas -besoin de me tenir ainsi_,’ I said to the officer; ‘_j’irai -tranquillement_.’ He loosened his hold and we were then marched off -to another military station, in a different part of the town from -that whence we had escaped. The man who had arrested me was a -sergeant or some officer in petty command. He took me alone with him -into the guard-room, and placed before me on a wooden table some -papers which he told me to fill in and sign. Then he sat down -opposite to me and I looked through the papers. They were forms, -with blanks left for descriptions specifying the name, occupation, -age, address and so forth of arrested persons. I signed these, and -pushing them across the table to the man, asked him what was to be -done with us. ‘You will be shot,’ he replied, quickly and -decisively. ‘Both of us?’ I asked. ‘Both,’ he replied. ‘But,’ said -I, ‘my companion has done nothing to deserve death. He was drawn -into this struggle entirely by me. Consider, too, his advanced age. -His hair is white; he stoops, and, had it not been for the -difficulty with which he moves his limbs, both of us would probably -be at this moment in a place of safety. What can you gain by -shooting an old man such as he?’ The officer was silent. He neither -favoured nor discouraged me by his manner. While I sat awaiting his -reply, I glanced at the hand with which I had just signed the -papers, and a sudden idea flashed into my mind. ‘At least,’ I said, -‘grant me one request. If my uncle _must_ die, _let me die first_.’ -Now I made this request for the following reason. In my right hand, -the line of life broke abruptly halfway in its length; indicating a -sudden and violent death. But the point at which it broke was -terminated by a perfectly marked _square_, extraordinarily clear-cut -and distinct. Such a square, occurring at the end of a broken line -means _rescue_, _salvation_. I had long been aware of this strange -figuration in my hand, and had often wondered what it presaged. But -now, as once more I looked at it, it came upon me with sudden -conviction that in some way I was destined to be delivered from -death at the last moment, and I thought that if this be so it would -be horrible should my uncle have been killed first. If _I_ were to -be saved I should certainly save him also, for my pardon would -involve the pardon of both, or my rescue the rescue of both. -Therefore it was important to provide for his safety until after my -fate was decided. The officer seemed to take this last request into -more serious consideration than the first. He said shortly: ‘I may -be able to manage that for you,’ and then at once rose and took up -the papers I had signed. ‘When are we to be shot?’ I asked him. -‘To-morrow morning,’ he replied, as promptly as before. Then he went -out, turning the key of the guard-room upon me. - - . . . . . . . . - -“The dawn of the next day broke darkly. It was a terribly stormy -day; great black lurid thunderclouds lay piled along the horizon, -and came up slowly and awfully against the wind. I looked upon them -with terror; they seemed so near the earth, and so like living, -watching things. They hung out of the sky, extending long ghostly -arms downwards, and their gloom and density seemed supernatural. The -soldiers took us out, our hands bound behind us, into a quadrangle -at the back of their barracks. The scene is sharply impressed on my -mind. A palisade of two sides of a square, made of wooden planks, -ran round the quadrangle. Behind this palisade, and pressed up close -against it was a mob of men and women—the people of the town—come to -see the execution. But their faces were sympathetic; an unmistakable -look of mingled grief and rage, not unmixed with desperation—for -they were a down-trodden folk—shone in the hundreds of eyes turned -towards us. I was the only woman among the condemned. My uncle was -there, and poor ‘Fou,’ looking bewildered, and one or two other -prisoners. On the third and fourth sides of the quadrangle was a -high wall, and in a certain place was a niche partly enclosing the -trunk of a tree, cut off at the top. An iron ring was driven into -the trunk midway, evidently for the purpose of securing condemned -persons for execution. I guessed it would be used for that now. In -the centre of the square piece of ground stood a file of soldiers, -armed with carbines, and an officer with a drawn sabre. The palisade -was guarded by a row of soldiers somewhat sparsely distributed, -certainly not more than a dozen in all. A Catholic priest in black -cassock walked beside me, and as we were conducted into the -enclosure, he turned to me and offered religious consolation. I -declined his ministrations, but asked him anxiously if he knew which -of us was to die first. ‘_You_,’ he replied; ‘the officer in charge -of you said you wished it, and he has been able to accede to your -request.’ Even then I felt a singular joy at hearing this, though I -had no longer any expectation of release. Death was, I thought, far -too near at hand for that. Just then a soldier approached us, and -led me, bare-headed, to the tree trunk, where he placed me with my -back against it, and made fast my hands behind me with a rope to the -iron ring. No bandage was put over my eyes. I stood thus, facing the -file of soldiers in the middle of the quadrangle, and noticed that -the officer with the drawn sabre placed himself at the extremity of -the line, composed of six men. In that supreme moment I also noticed -that their uniform was bright with steel accoutrements. Their -helmets were of steel and their carbines, as they raised them and -pointed them at me, ready cocked, glittered in a fitful gleam of -sunlight with the same burnished metal. There was an instant’s -stillness and hush while the men took aim; then I saw the officer -raise his bared sabre as the signal to fire. It flashed in the air; -then, with a suddenness impossible to convey, the whole quadrangle -blazed with an awful light—a light so vivid, so intense, so -blinding, so indescribable that everything was blotted out and -devoured by it. It crossed my brain with instantaneous conviction -that this amazing glare was the physical effect of being shot, and -that the bullets had pierced my brain or heart, and caused this -frightful sense of all-pervading flame. Vaguely I remembered having -read or having been told that such was the result produced on the -nervous system of a victim to death from fire-arms. ‘It is over,’ I -said, ‘that was the bullets.’ But presently there forced itself on -my dazed senses a sound—a confusion of sounds—darkness succeeding -the white flash—then steadying itself into gloomy daylight; a -tumult; a heap of stricken, tumbled men lying stone-still before me; -a fearful horror upon every living face; and then ... it all burst -on me with distinct conviction. The storm which had been gathering -all the morning had culminated in its blackest and most electric -point immediately over-head. The file of soldiers appointed to shoot -me stood exactly under it. Sparkling with bright steel on head and -breast and carbines, they stood shoulder to shoulder, a complete -lightning conductor, and at the end of the chain they formed, their -officer, at the critical moment, raised his shining, naked blade -towards the sky. Instantaneously heaven opened, and the lightning -fell, attracted by the burnished steel. From blade to carbine, from -helmet to breastplate it ran, smiting every man dead as he stood. -They fell like a row of nine-pins, blackened in face and hand in an -instant—in the twinkling of an eye. _Dead._ The electric flame -licked the life out of seven men in that second; not one moved a -muscle or a finger again. Then followed a wild scene. The crowd, -stupefied for a minute by the thunderbolt and the horror of the -devastation it had wrought, recovered sense, and with a mighty shout -hurled itself against the palisade, burst it, leapt over it and -swarmed into the quadrangle, easily overpowering the unnerved -guards. I was surrounded, eager hands unbound mine, arms were thrown -about me; the people roared, and wept, and triumphed, and fell about -me on their knees praising Heaven. I think rain fell, my face was -wet with drops, and my hair—but I knew no more, for I swooned and -lay unconscious in the arms of the crowd. My rescue had indeed come, -and from the very Heavens!” - - ANNA KINGSFORD, M.D. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - FREEDOM. - - Know, striving soul, on truth intent, - That not with words by mortal sent— - Faint shimmerings of earthly light— - Shall ever-living truth be taught, - Or light to gild the path be bought, - That leads us upward from the night. - - But govern mind with ordered will, - Subduing this with knowledge still, - Fanning the spark within that glows, - The essence of that power divine, - The pledge to man from mystic time, - The light from thrones above that flows. - - Then may the spirit, bathed in light, - Soar upward from the realms of night, - No more a fettered earth-bound thing, - But freed from clay, and doubt, and slime, - Triumphant over death and time! - To the eternal ever cling! - - P. H. D. - - THE INVISIBLE WORLD. - -In many of the tasks of life the first step costs the great effort, -and the investigation of truth in the higher regions of Nature -justifies the familiar maxim. The first step for the modern inquirer -is that which carries his consciousness across the threshold of -matter into the invisible world. Never mind for the moment whether -occult progress be attempted by a direct onslaught on the defences -of the invisible world, or by purely internal combats with the -desires of the lower self. The unseen must first become a reality -for anyone who seriously desires to enter into relations with it, -whether he sets his will to work to vanquish his own frailties, or -the forces of Nature on the astral plane. An internal struggle with -material desire undertaken for a spiritual purpose, just as much as -the other kind of contest, is a recognition of the superior realm; -and it is not a struggle of the kind we are contemplating at all, if -it is merely undertaken for a worldly purpose, as thrifty habits may -be cultivated, for instance, at the bidding of the grossest material -selfishness. But though a recognition of the invisible world must in -this way have been forced, at an early stage of his inquiry, on the -mind of everyone who becomes an earnest explorer of Nature’s higher -laws, its invisibility is a terrible barrier in the way of the -progress that would otherwise be made by the throngs of intelligent -materialists who people civilised countries at this epoch of our -history. From the point of view of conventional thinkers—of those -alike who sacrifice their Sunday mornings to provide for the -contingency that there may be something in religion after all, and -of those who are frankly incredulous of any Nature lying beyond the -reach of instrumental research—a tremendous revolution in all their -views of life is accomplished if they are somehow brought face to -face with the reality of super-material phenomena, if they ever -discover the invisible world and come to know it, or any part of it, -as an unequivocal fact. - -Long experienced explorers of the unseen often forget how profoundly -clouded the whole region seems from the shore of materialistic -thought. Indeed, from the shore of other systems where habits of -metaphysical speculation would lead men to repudiate the charge of -materialism, the unseen appears to be equally impenetrable to all -human faculties. It is as though we lived beside an ocean always -shrouded from view by a belt of mist. A few persons are in the -constant habit of pushing out beyond in boats, but these, when they -come back, are told, “Nonsense! there is no ocean; you have been -dreaming!” For the vast majority, the mist is an infinite void. Only -by a minority have the few who have passed through it, been even -encountered. Will anyone who knows his generation pretend to say -that even among ordinary religious people the next world is a -certain fact in Nature, like the next street? How many are there who -do more than rest on the hypothesis that there may be somewhere a -heaven to “go to” when the dreadful moment comes at which mortal man -must perforce bid adieu to the warm precincts of the cheerful day. -“God forbid!” a bishop is said to have piously remarked when warned, -during danger at sea, that he would be in Heaven that night. The -next world of commonplace orthodoxy is but too often regarded as a -desperate resource for ruined men, whose fortune of life has been -wrung from them to the last drop. For those who are bankrupt of -breath, “let us trust” (as a frequent phrase expresses the idea) -that some compensation may be provided by Providence hereafter, -though it does all remain so hopelessly obscure. - -“Ah, if you could only show me that there really is a life beyond -this—a perpetuation of this real individual Me after I am what my -friends will call dead—you would be giving me a blessing that no -words could over-estimate.” That is a passionate cry from many -hearts to those who talk of other lives for the soul—of spiritual -rewards, or the fruit of Karma in future states of existence. - -It is a cry which few people indeed, even among those who have been -in contact with the invisible world, are in a position to satisfy. -Most of us are obliged to reply: “This satisfaction can only be -acquired by a resolute effort; it is impossible for us to bring you -proof of what we know, to save you trouble. If you would know -whether Africa exists, we cannot bring you Africa to prove it; we -can only give you directions how to get there if you are willing to -undertake the journey.” “But why,” we might ask, “cannot you believe -the testimony of those who have had proof of the sort you require.” -The answer always is in effect: “_C’est le premier pas qui coute_. -It would be worth worlds to know, but to believe without personal -knowledge—that would be an act of faith. I might as easily believe -at once in the Roman Catholic Church.” - -There is a great difference, really, between the surrender of that -reason claimed by ecclesiastical tyranny and the faith required to -enable a seeker after truth to gain personal cognisance of the -invisible world. The priest and the occultist both claim faith from -the neophyte; but the first bids him develop this by strangling his -reason, the second by satisfying it. Sensible faith is that which -recognises the logic of facts appealing to human intelligence. It is -stupid to believe that which you have no reason for believing; it is -no less stupid to disbelieve that which there is reason to believe. -The majority of modern men and women, indeed—fed exclusively on the -husks of knowledge—are too profoundly ignorant of the records -accumulated by those who have penetrated the unseen to be called -stupid for undervaluing them. But on one or the other horn of the -dilemma they must take their place. They are unconscious of the -existence of the records left, or of the work done by students of -occultism in its various phases; or they must be held responsible -for defects of understanding. Does anyone say: “What are the records -you refer to?” The answer would be analogous to one that might be -given to a person brought up in American backwoods, on modern -practicalities exclusively, and who in mature life should hear -someone refer to classical literature as important. “What book do -you want me to read?” he might ask. What would an accomplished -University devotee of Greek poetry _think_ in reply, even if he -tried to disguise his answer in polite terms? - -Any fairly considerable acquaintance with the literature of occult -research—including in that broad designation records of any -supermaterial phenomena—will put any man in a position in which he -must either believe in the existence of the invisible world, or -discover that he is an irrational being, whose “convictions” are -merely acts of submission to the decrees of the multitude. And -then, for most of those who perceive that they must believe, or -who find that they cannot continue to disbelieve, some personal -contact with some phases of the invisible world will probably -follow in the sequence of events; because, once _believing_—once -saturated with a complete conviction that there are other planes -of Nature—these will present themselves to the mind as so -interesting, that it becomes worth while to take trouble in order -to get the gratification of beholding their phenomena in some way -or other; and then success will sooner or later be attained. While -people merely think “there _may be_ an invisible world, let us try -if we can find it out,” they are easily baffled by failure. They -draw one or two covers “blank” and retire from the effort -declaring “there is nothing to be discovered; it is all a -delusion.” The man who has read and assimilated what he has read -is, as we have said above, saturated with a conviction on the -subject. His state of mind remains unaffected by personal failure; -and still impelled by the fascination of the idea, he will try -again and again till he succeeds. When anyone says, “I _wish_ I -could see something out of the common way, but I never have any -luck in such things,” the answer is: “Then you certainly do not -wish _much_.” Probably such people do not wish enough to take the -trouble merely to study. What they wish is that conclusive -phenomena demonstrating the existence of the invisible world -should always be on view at some London theatre, where inquirers -might go without liability to disappointment, when other -engagements permitted. - -And yet, though it is so easy to blame and ridicule that attitude of -mind, no one who has the influence of the higher occultism in his -heart, and at the same time a capacity for sympathising with the -best attributes of modern culture, can be otherwise than -indefatigably anxious to waken up the present generation more fully -to an appreciation of the sublime knowledge accessible to those who -get across the outer barriers and come to realise the existence of -the world beyond, once for all. Occultists will often fail to -understand the situation aright. There are some who would do nothing -but draw from their own knowledge of the invisible world a store of -moral maxims, and serve these out to their brethren, fearing to -suggest further inquiries lest danger should be incurred, for, of -course, people are put in danger the higher they climb, falls being -then more disastrous. But maxims to have any value must be in -circuit with knowledge. “Be good!” is a sound maxim. “Be good -children!” is often an efficient exhortation, but it will not -survive the period when the persons addressed say “Why?” And all the -educated world is saying “Why?” now in regard to injunctions which -rest upon incredible assertions. Why is Society so tolerant of some -misdoing which the Church has always specially condemned, though it -lies outside the catalogue of offences like robbery and murder, -proscribed by common convenience? Because maxims which merely rest -upon religion have no longer any binding force; in other words, -because religion is the science, or the sum total of the sciences of -the invisible world, and men now claim to have cut and dried maxims -overhauled on principles to which this age of science has accustomed -them. It is quite possible to get this done. The fact that this _is_ -a scientific age is a declaration, in other words, that a time has -come for putting a scientific complexion on religious thought; in -other words again, for beginning to lead the public, in flocks, -where hitherto rare pioneers only have penetrated in secret—across -the threshold unto the limitless realms of the invisible world. By -flocks we need not be supposed to mean crude masses of humanity -selected on no system, but large numbers compared to the rare -explorers of former times, considerable groups of the most -intelligent and advanced minds of the age. A man of the present day, -who has obtained the beautiful culture of modern civilisation, who -may be an accomplished classic, a finely-trained man of science, a -poet, an artist, and yet a person so ignorant or stupid (as to -certain facets of his mind) as not to know anything about the -invisible world, is a creature who provokes in the more enlightened -observer a feeling analogous to that with which one might look at a -lady of fashion, beautiful in the face, but whose winning draperies -you know to hide ugly deformities or repulsive disease. Or treating -the subject more abstractedly, this lovely culture of modern -civilisation is like the soulless statue—the Galatea without life. -Surely it is time that the gods informed the marble with the breath -of the spirit; and have they not shown themselves ready to do this -if the sculptor does but appeal to them? - -The man who penetrates, or gets into relations of some sort or other -with the invisible world, will not necessarily be illuminated at -once with a flood of exhilarating knowledge. The new realm may open -out before the explorer in many different ways; and there is much -going astray amidst its innumerable mazes for new comers, as a rule. -But to discuss these perils in detail would be to attempt an essay -on all branches of occultism. For the present we are arguing merely -that to make no journeys there at all is to give up progress, to -move no longer with the onward stream of evolution, to fall out of -the line of march. - -It is deplorable that men of intelligence, in the present day, -should neglect to pick up the threads which might guide them to -some knowledge of the invisible world, for two reasons, or rather, -the reasons why this is deplorable may be divided into two great -classes, those which have reference to knowledge, as such, and -those which have reference to the spiritual interests of mankind. -To people who appreciate spiritual interests, nothing else is -relatively worth a thought; but for men of modern civilisation at -large knowledge is worth everything for its own sake; it is the -end they are pursuing, and this being so, it is astounding that -they neglect the most subtle, fascinating and intricate phenomena -of all nature, those which have to do with supermaterial planes of -existence and natural force. And from that point of view, any -passage across the threshold of the invisible world will do as -well as any other. The tables that move without hands, the pencils -that write without fingers, are surely linked with mysteries of -Nature not yet understood, and, therefore, worth examination. -Investigations concerning them bring one face to face with the -forces of the invisible world. - -Are we told that science cannot grasp these phenomena to investigate -them? The statement is not true. They cannot be grasped at any time -by anybody, but no more can the depths of stellar space be fathomed -by whoever chooses whenever it suits his leisure. Great telescopes -are scarce; nights perfectly fitted for observation must be waited -for with patience. But when they come, the men who have got the -telescopes take observations and make reports, and their records are -studied by other astronomers, and used as the foundation of -theories, as the raw material of current knowledge. If similar -methods were adopted with even the crudest spiritualistic, not to -speak of scientific, research in occult mystery, the world at large -would not be blundering about as it is, with absurd denials of facts -known to thousands. Clairvoyance again, by flights of perception -through the invisible world, bridges gulfs that are materially -impassable. But what does modern culture know of it? As a scientific -fact, it is enormously more certain than the existence, for example, -of the satellites of Mars; but who disputes the latter fact? They -have been seen, those satellites, if they are not seen easily or -often, and therefore their existence has been established. But five -newspapers out of six in the present day—barometers of prevailing -belief—would profess to disbelieve in clairvoyance if the subject -had to be mentioned; to _disbelieve_ in that which is an elementary -truth having to do with the most easily accessible region of -supermaterial knowledge! - -To gain touch with this is _not_ to be put at once in possession of -that certainty concerning the survival after death of the real “Me” -in each case, which is the great point to be established for most -European doubters, but it is the first step. Students of the laws -which govern existence in the higher realms of Nature can gain no -hearing from those to whom that great point remains unsatisfied. -Once the higher realm is felt to be a reality, the possibility of -gaining a knowledge of the laws which prevail there presents itself -to the mind with an altogether new significance. And finally, closer -attention shows that this knowledge certainly has been gained; that -the path leading to spiritual wisdom is defined; that with some of -the powers which reign in the invisible world we may enter into more -or less definite relations beforehand here; that of all practical -pursuits which men of clear heads and resolute purpose can set -themselves to, during the space of incarnate earthly life, -immeasurably the most practical, in so far as it has to do with -objects which dwarf all others in their importance, are those which -have to do with the culture and development of that Higher Self -within them which has its natural home in the invisible world, and -is but a passing guest in the midst of material occupations. To use -and apply the knowledge of supermaterial laws which occult studies -disclose is a life’s task, but of that for the moment we need not -speak. It is with the heedless and frivolous generation at large -that we are concerned in this appeal—with those who waste great -gifts of intelligence and splendid energies and courage and -indomitable industry on transitory pursuits, on money-making (in -excess), on discovery and research that merely subserve passing -material wants, on the struggle for flattering distinctions which -cast a meteoric gleam on the brief journey to personal oblivion, on -the “solid realities” of the visible world, which, like the ice -drops of a hailstorm, are as hard as bullets one minute and -dissolved in new forms the next. It is all for want of taking the -first step that they are squandering their lives. Their immediate -predecessors _knew_ no more than they perhaps of the hidden -mysteries, but they were less critical of the distorted shape in -which pious tradition told them of the future and of the powers -above. The heirs of modern thought have grown in knowledge of -molecules and of the transmutation of energy but as they look back -upon the beliefs which contented their forefathers, they perceive -that their fuller science of the physical plane has entirely shut -out the wide, vague prospect that used to gleam on the earlier -horizon. - -Rational human creatures cannot afford to leave that prospect in a -permanent eclipse. The neglect of all facts concerned with the -durabilities of existence; the concentration of effort and interest -on the hastily dissolving view of its physically manifested phases, -is the crying folly of the period. To spring at once into complete -conscious spiritual relationship with the higher planes of Nature is -not an easy achievement. The great Realities lie within a domain -which makes no direct appeal to the five senses of the earthly body, -and the only way of approaching their comprehension is to press on -through the darkness, beyond which other men before us declare that -they have reached illuminated altitudes. - -But meanwhile, the torpor of the educated world at large in regard -to the promptings which ought now to stir its activity in this -direction is little less than idiotic. Idiotic relatively, that is -to say, to spiritual culture. There are men of illustrious fame in -the various provinces of intellectual culture, who are behaving -relatively to their own higher potentialities, as the luckless -victim of a shallow skull may behave towards the teachings of -science and art. But there is always one thing to be remembered -about them; they are curable. Their cure can be undertaken with sure -certainty of success at any moment, but for each sufferer from that -inner cataract which shuts out from his consciousness the prospect -of the invisible world, there is only one surgeon who can -successfully perform the necessary operation—the man himself. What -we can do who have accomplished the feat for ourselves, is to -encourage others—not to _go_, but to come and do likewise. - - A. P. SINNETT. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - THE MYSTIC THOUGHT. - - When will come rest? Is it alone the silent grave - That can bring true peace to the restless soul - That striving, yearns to reach some distant goal, - Toss’d like a boat on the crest of a mighty wave? - Is there oblivion in the cold, dark tomb - To dull the heart and kill the abject fear - Which loads the sense, when unknown dangers loom - From regions that our sense perceives not here? - When from the soul goes forth the mystic thought - That we have higher purpose than we know, - And each must reap the fruit he cares to sow, - Or learn the duties he himself has taught: - Can this be killed?—no, surely!—but that lamp can save - That burns within us here—and burns beyond the grave. - - P. H. DALBIAC. - - - =THE BLOSSOM AND THE FRUIT=: - - _THE TRUE STORY OF A MAGICIAN_. - - (_Continued._) - - --------------------- - - BY MABEL COLLINS, - - Author of “THE PRETTIEST WOMAN IN WARSAW,” &c., &c., - And Scribe of “THE IDYLL OF THE WHITE LOTUS,” and “THROUGH THE GATES - OF GOLD.” - - --------------------- - - CHAPTER V. - -Adventure is said to be sweet to the young; if it was so to Hilary, -he must soon have found abundant pleasure in the possession of -enough sweets. For the next few days scarcely an hour passed without -an event large enough in his eyes to be an adventure. - -He was ready at the hour Fleta had named; and had provided against -all probable contingencies by taking with him the smallest possible -amount of luggage. For aught he knew they might have to climb -mountains in the course of this journey. And moreover he knew -Fleta’s unprincess-like distaste for superfluities; he would not -have been surprised to see her start in her riding habit and take no -luggage at all. The difficulty he dreaded was his mother’s surprise -at this scant provision of his. But good luck—or was it something -else?—took her away. She was summoned to visit a sick friend at a -little distance out of the city, and said good-bye to Hilary before -her departure. So Hilary made his preparations without being -troubled by criticism. - -At noon a lad presented himself at the door of the Estanol’s house, -with a note which he said he was to give into Hilary’s own hand. -Hilary immediately went to him and took it, as he guessed it was -from Fleta. A single line!—and no signature!— - -“I am waiting for you outside the north gate.” - -Hilary took his valise in his hand, afraid to hire a carriage lest -it should not please her that he brought any eyes to note their -meeting. He walked out of the city by the quietest side streets he -could select, hoping not to meet any of his friends. He met no one -he knew, and with a sigh of relief passed out through the gate and -walked on to the broad country road beyond it. Drawn up under some -trees was a handsome travelling carriage, with four horses and -postilions. Hilary was surprised. He had not expected so much -luxury. When he reached the carriage he was even more surprised. -Fleta was hardly dressed as for a journey; she wore a much richer -robe than usual, and her head and shoulders were covered with -beautiful black lace. She leaned back in a corner of the roomy -carriage, with a voluptuous dreamy expression on her face which was -new to Hilary. Opposite her sat Father Amyot. Hilary could not but -regard the priest with amazement. Was the town to lose its favourite -confessor? How then could all the gossips in it be prevented from -hearing of the Princess Fleta’s journey? But Hilary resolved not to -harass himself with conjecture. He entered the carriage and Fleta -motioned to him to seat himself at her side. - -At her side! Yes, that was his place. And Father Amyot, the father -confessor, beloved and almost worshipped by the people, in whose -breast reposed the secrets and the sorrows of the city; Father -Amyot, who was the model of piety to all who knew him, sat opposite -in the carriage. Did he watch the lovers? Seemingly not. His eyes -were lowered and his gaze was apparently fixed on his clasped hands. -He sat there like a statue. Once or twice when Hilary glanced at his -face, he fancied he must be there unwillingly. Was it so? Was he -Fleta’s tool and servant held by her domineering temper to do her -bidding? Surely not. Father Amyot was too well known as a man of -power for the idea to be credible. Hilary checked himself for the -hundredth time in these hopeless speculations and determined to -enjoy the moment he was in possession of and not trouble about the -next one till it came; nor yet endeavour to read others’ hearts. And -so this young philosopher went open eyed, as he believed, to his -destruction. - -The carriage rolled away at a great speed; it was drawn by four -beautiful Russian horses, and the postilions were Fleta’s own, and -accustomed to her likings. She was a most daring and intrepid rider -and nothing pleased her in the way of motion except great speed. She -was a lover of animals and her horses were the finest kept in the -city. It was strange to Hilary to try and realise her singular -independence of position, as to-day he felt impelled to. For himself -he was still to a great extent in leading strings; he had made no -position for himself, nor even planned any career; he was dependent -on his mother’s fortune, and consequently, to a certain extent, -could act only according to her approval. He was still so young that -all this seemed natural enough. But Fleta was younger than himself, -though it was difficult always to remember it, so dominant was her -temper. A glance at her fresh face still so soft in its outlines as -to have something childish about it when her expression permitted; -at her figure, so slender in spite of its stateliness, recalled the -fact that the Princess was indeed only a girl. Did the man who was -about to marry her suppose that his young Queen was a creature -unformed, fresh from the schoolroom, altogether malleable to his -hand? - -During the whole of the afternoon they drove on with scarcely a -pause, and with very little conversation to pass the time. Yet for -Hilary it flew with swift wings. The mere sensation of his novel -position was enough for him as yet. To be beside Fleta and to watch -her mysterious face for so long together satisfied for the moment -his longing soul. Fleta herself seemed buried in profound thought. -She sat silent, her eyes on the country they passed through, but her -mind, as far as Hilary could judge, wandering in some remote region. -As for Father Amyot, his regard remained fixed upon a small crucifix -which he held hidden within his clasped hands, and now and then his -lips moved in prayer, while, on that austere face, no expression -seemed to have room but that of adoration or contemplation of the -divine. - -At sundown they stopped at a very small way-side inn. Hilary could -not believe they were going to stay here, for it looked little more -than a place where men drink and horses are fed. Yet so it was. The -carriage was driven round to the side of the small house, the horses -taken out of it, and Fleta led the way in at a side door, followed -by her two companions. - -Within they found a motherly, plain and kindly woman, who evidently -knew Fleta well; Hilary learned afterwards that this landlady had -been a kitchen maid in the royal household. And now he saw strange -things indeed. For this inn was in reality nothing but a drinking -shop for the drivers who passed along the road. It had no parlour, -nor any accommodation for travellers of a better sort. And Fleta -knew this, as was evident at once. She drew a hard chair forward, -close to the great fire which flamed up the wide open chimney, and -sat down seemingly quite at her ease. - -“We must have some supper,” she said to the landlady. “Get us what -you can. Can you find room for these gentlemen to-night?” - -The landlady came near to Fleta and spoke in a low voice; the -Princess laughed. - -“There are no bedrooms in this house, it seems,” she said, aloud, -“in fact, it is not an hotel. Shall we drive on or shall we sit here -through the night?” - -“The horses are tired,” said Father Amyot, speaking for the first -time since they had left the city. - -“True,” said Fleta, absently—for already she appeared to be thinking -of something else. “I suppose, then, we must stay here.” - -Hilary had never passed, nor ever contemplated passing, a night in -such rough fashion. He was fond of comfort, or rather of luxury. But -what could he do when his Princess, the greatest lady in the land, -set him the example. Any protest would have appeared effeminate, and -his pride held him silent. Still, when after a very indifferent -supper, they all returned to the hard wooden chairs beside the fire, -Hilary for the moment very sincerely wished himself at home in his -own comfortable rooms. As he wished this, suddenly he became aware -that Fleta’s dark eyes had turned upon him, and he would not look -up, for he believed she had read his thought. He wished he could -have hidden it from her, for he had no mind to be held as more -effeminate than herself. - -There was a sort of second kitchen even rougher and more cheerless -than the one in which they sat; and there the postilions and other -men, the ordinary customers of the house, were crowded together, -drinking and talking and singing. Their presence was horrid to -Hilary, who was conscious of refined susceptibilities, but Fleta -seemed quite indifferent to the noise they made and the odour of -their coarse tobacco; or rather it might be that she was unaware of -anything outside her own thoughts. She sat, her chin on her hand, -looking into the fire; and so graceful and perfect was her attitude -that she had the air of being a masterpiece of art placed amid the -commonest surroundings. She looked more lovely than ever from the -contrast, but yet the incongruity was painful to Hilary. - -The silence in the room in which they sat became the more marked -from contrast with the increasing noise in the crowded room without. -At last, however, the hour came for the house to be closed and the -landlady politely showed her customers the door; all except those -who were travellers on the road. These, including the postilions, -gathered into the chimney corner and became quiet, at last falling -sound asleep. To Hilary it seemed now that he was living through a -painful dream, and he longed for the awakening—willing to awake, -even if that meant that he would be at home and away from Fleta. - -At last sleep came to him, and his head drooped forward; he sat -there, upright in the wooden chair, fast asleep. When he awoke it -was with a sense of pain in every limb, from the posture which he -had maintained; and he could scarcely refrain from crying out when -he attempted to move. But he instantly remembered that if the others -were sleeping he must not wake them. Then he quickly looked round. -Father Amyot sat near, looking just as he had looked since they -entered the house; he might have been a statue. Fleta’s chair was -empty. - -Hilary roused himself, sat up and stared at her empty place; then -looked all round the kitchen. An idea occurred to him; possibly the -landlady had found some resting place for the young Princess. A -sense of oppression came over him; the kitchen seemed stifling. He -rose with difficulty and stretched himself, then found his way out -into the air. It was a glorious morning; the sun had just risen, the -world seemed like a beautiful woman seen in her sleep. How sharp the -sweet fresh air was! Hilary drew a deep breath of it. The country in -which this lonely little inn stood was exceedingly lovely, and at -this moment it wore its most fascinating appearance. A sense of -great delight came upon Hilary; the uneasiness of the past night was -at an end, and he was glad now and full of youth and strength. He -turned and walked away from the house, soon leaving the road and -plunging into the dewy grass. There was a stream in the valley, and -here he determined to bathe. He soon reached it, and in another -moment had hastily undressed, and was plunged in the ice-cold water. -An intoxicating sense of vigour came over him as he experienced the -keen contact. Never had he felt so full of life as now! It was not -possible to remain long in the water, it was so intensely cold; he -sprang out again and stood for a moment on the bank in the brilliant -morning sunshine, looking like a magnificent figure carved by the -god of the day, his flesh gleaming in the light. Slowly he began at -last to put on his dress, feeling as if in some way this meant a -partial return and submission to civilization. Something of the -savage which lay deep hidden in him had been roused and touched. A -fire burned that hitherto he had never felt, and which made him long -for pure freedom and uncriticised life. And this was Hilary Estanol! -It seemed incredible that a draught of fresh morning air, a plunge -into ice-cold water beneath the open sky, should have been enough to -unloose the savage in him, which was held fast beneath his -conventional and languid self, as it is in all of us, and all those -whom we meet in ordinary life. He moved hastily, striding on as -though he were hurrying to some end, but it was merely a new -pleasure in motion. There was a grove of old yew trees near the -stream; a grove which with the superstitious was held to be sacred. -That it should be revered was no wonder, so stately were the ancient -trees, so deep the shadow they cast. Hilary went towards this grove, -attracted by its splendid appearance; as he approached its margin a -dim sense of familiarity came over him. Never had he left the city -by this road, yet it seemed to him that he had entered the grove of -yews by the early morning light already many a time. We are all -accustomed to meet with this curious sensation; Hilary laughed at it -and put it away. What if he had visited this spot in a dream? Now it -was broad daylight, and he felt himself young and a giant. He -plunged into the deep shadow, pleased by the contrast it made to the -brilliant light without. - -Suddenly his heart leaped within him and his brain reeled. For there -before him, stood Fleta; and the brilliant Princess looked like a -spirit of the night, so pale and grave and proud was her face and so -much a part did she seem of the deep shadow of the wood. - -“Is it you?” she said with a smile, a smile of mystery and deep -unfathomable knowledge. - -“Yes it is!” he answered, and felt, as he spoke, that he said -something in those words which he did not himself understand. They -stood side by side for a moment in silence; and then Hilary -remembered himself to be alone with this woman, alone with her in -the midst of the world. They were separated by the hour from other -men and women, for the world still lay asleep; they were separated -by the deep shadow of the wood from all moving life that answered to -the sun. They were alone—and overwhelmed by this sudden sense of -solitude Hilary spoke out his soul. - -“Princess,” he said, “I am ready to be your blind servant, your dumb -slave, speaking and seeing only when you tell me. You know well why -I am willing to be the tool in your hands. It is because I love you. -But you must pay a price for your tool if you would have it! I -cannot only worship at your feet. Fleta, you must give yourself to -me, absolutely, utterly. Marry that man to whom you are betrothed if -you desire to be a queen, but to me you must give your love, -yourself. Ah! Fleta, you cannot refuse me!” - -Fleta stood still a long moment, her eyes upon his face. - -“No,” she said, “I cannot refuse you.” - -And to Hilary, for an instant of horror, it seemed to him that in -her eyes was a glance of ineffable scorn. Yet there was love in the -smile on her lips and in the touch of her hand as she laid it in -his. - -“The bond is made,” she said, “all that you can take of me is yours. -And I will pay you for your love with my love. Only do not forget -that you and I are different—that we are after all, two persons—that -we cannot love in exactly the same way. Do not forget this!” - -Hilary knew not what to answer. As she spoke the last words he -recognised his princess, he saw the queen before him. What did she -mean? Well, he was so unhappy that his love had gone from him to a -lady of royal birth. It could not be undone, this folly. He must be -content to take that part which a subject may take in the life of a -queen, even though he be her lover. The thought brought a pang, a -swift stab to his heart and a sigh burst from his lips. Fleta put -her hand on his arm. - -“Do not be sad so soon,” she said, “let us wait for trouble. Come, -let us go out into the sunshine.” - -They went out, hand in hand; they wandered down beside the stream -and looked into the gleaming waters. - - CHAPTER VI. - -That day the journey began early, and was very protracted. Twice -during it they halted at little inns to rest the horses and to -obtain what food they could. By the evening they had entered upon -the most deserted region of the great forest which was one of the -prides of the country. The King’s hunting seat, where he now was, -stood in a part of this forest, but in quite another region, a long -distance from this wild place where Hilary and his companions now -were. Hilary had never been within the forest, as few from the city -ever penetrated it except as part of the King’s retinue, and then -they only saw such tracts of it as were preserved and in order. Of -this wilder region practically little was known, and the spirit of -adventure within Hilary made him rejoice to find that their journey -led them through this unpopulated district. His curiosity as to -their destination was not now very acute, for the experiences of the -passing moments were all sufficient. It is true that he was -conscious of the great gulf fixed between himself and Fleta. He knew -her to be his superior in every respect. He knew not only that he -must always be separated from her by their difference in station but -that he was more vitally separated from her by their difference in -thought—and that even now. But he was made happy by a look of love -that plunged deep from her eyes into his own now and again, and he -was thrilled to the heart when her hand touched his with a light and -delicate pressure that he alone could understand. Ah! that secret -understanding which separates lovers from all the rest of the world. -How sweet it is! How strange it is, too, for they are overpowered by -a mutual sense of sympathy which appears to be a supreme -intelligence, giving each the power to look into the other’s heart. -Dear moments are they when this is realised, when all life outside -the sacred circle in which the two dwell is obscure and dim, while -that within is rich, and strong, and sweet. Hilary lived supremely -content only in the consciousness of being near this woman whom he -loved; for now that he had actually asked her love, and been granted -it, nothing else existed for him save that sweet fact. He was -indifferent to the hardships, and, indeed, probable dangers, of the -journey they were upon, which might have made a more intrepid spirit -uneasy; for now he was content to suffer, or even to die, if all -conditions were shared with Fleta. All her life could not be shared -with him, but all his could be shared with her. When a man reaches -this point, and is content to face such a state of things between -himself and the woman he loves, he may be reckoned as being in love -indeed. - -Quite late at night it was when this day’s journey ended, and the -splendid horses were really tired out. But a certain point evidently -had to be reached, and the postilions pushed on. Fleta at last -seemed to grow a little anxious, and several times rose in the -carriage to look on ahead; once or twice she inquired of the -postilions if they were certain of their way. They answered yes; -though how that could be was to Hilary a mystery, for they had been -for a long while travelling over mere grass tracts, of which there -were many, to his eyes undistinguishable one from the other. But the -postilions either had landmarks which he could not detect, or else -knew their way very well. At last they stopped; and in the dim light -Hilary saw that there was a gate at the side of the track, a gate -wide enough to drive through, but of the very simplest construction. -It might have defended merely a spot where young trees were planted, -or some kind of preserving done; and it was set in a fence of the -same character, almost entirely hidden by thick growth of wild -shrubs. The Princess Fleta produced from her dress a whistle on -which she sounded a clear ringing note, and then everybody sat still -and waited. It seemed to Hilary that it was quite a long while that -they waited; perhaps it was not really long, but the night was so -still, the silence so profound, the feeling of expectancy so strong. -He was, for the first time since they started, really very curious -as to what would happen next. What did happen at last was this. -There was a sound of laughter and footsteps, and presently two -figures appeared at the gate; one that of a tall man, the other that -of a young, slight girl. The gate was unlocked and thrown wide open, -and a moment later the young girl was in the carriage, embracing -Fleta with the greatest enthusiasm and delight. Hilary hardly knew -how everything happened, but presently the whole party was standing -together inside the gate, the carriage had driven in and was out of -sight. Then the tall man shut and locked the gate, after which he -turned back, and walked on ahead with the young girl at his side, -while Hilary followed with Fleta. The moon had risen now, and Hilary -could see her beautiful face plainly, wearing on it an unusually gay -and happy expression; her lips seemed to smile at her own thoughts. -The sweet gladness in her face made Hilary’s heart spring with joy. -It could not be rejoining her friends that made her so glad, for -they had gone on and left her alone with him. - -“Fleta—my princess—no, my Fleta,” he said, “are you happy to be with -me? I think you are!” - -“Yes, I am happy to be with you—but I am not Fleta.” - -“Not Fleta!” echoed Hilary, in utter incredulity. - -He stopped, and catching his companion’s hand, looked into her face. -She glanced up, and her eyes were full of shy coquetry and ready -gaiety. - -“I might be her twin sister, might I not, if I am not Fleta herself? -Ah! no, Fleta’s fate is to live in a court—mine to live in a forest -Live!—no, it is not life!” - -What was it in that voice that made his heart grow hot with passion? -Fiercely he exclaimed to himself that it _was_, it _must_, be -Fleta’s voice. No other woman could speak in such tones—no other -woman’s words give him such a sense of maddening joy. - -“Oh! yes,” he said, “it is life—when one loves, one lives anywhere.” - -“Yes, perhaps, when one loves!” was the answer. - -“You told me this morning that you loved me, Fleta!” cried Hilary in -despair. - -“Ah! but I am not Fleta,” was the mocking answer. It sounded like -mockery indeed as she spoke. And yet the voice was Fleta’s. There -was no doubt of that. He looked, he listened, he watched. The voice, -the face, the glorious eyes, were Fleta’s. It was Fleta who was -beside him, say she what she might. - -They had been following the others all this while, and had now -reached a clearing in the wood, where was a garden full of sweet -flowers, as Hilary could tell at once by the rich scents that came -to him on the night air. - -“I am glad we have reached the house,” said his companion, “for I am -very tired and hungry. Are not you? I wonder what we shall have for -supper. You know this is an enchanted place which we call the palace -of surprises. We never know what will happen next. That is why one -can enjoy a holiday here as one can enjoy it no where else. At home -there is a frightful monotony about the eating and drinking -Everything is perfect, of course, but it is always the same. Now -here one is fed like a Russian one day, and a Hungarian the next. -There is a perpetual novelty about the menus, and yet they are -always good. Is not that extraordinary. And oh! the wines, great -heavens! what a cellar our sainted father keeps. I can only bless, -with all my heart, the long dead founders of his order, who -instituted such a system.” - -Hilary had regarded his companion with increasing amazement during -this speech. Certainly it was unlike Fleta. Was she acting for his -benefit? But at the words “sainted father” another idea thrust that -one out of his head. What had become of Father Amyot? He had not -seen him leave the carriage, or approach the house. - -“Oh, your holy companion has gone to his brethren,” said the girl, -with a laugh. “They have a place of their own where they torture -themselves and mortify the flesh. But they entertain us well, and -that is what I care for. We will have a dance to-night. Oh! Hilary, -the music here! It is better than that of any band in the world!” - -“If you are not, Fleta, how do you know my name?” - -“Simple creature! What a question! Why, Fleta has told me all about -you. Did you never hear that the princess had a foster-sister, and -that none could ever tell which was which, so like were we—and are -we! Did you never hear that Fleta’s mother was blonde, and dull, and -plain, and that Fleta is like none of her own family? Oh, Hilary, -you, fresh from the city, you know nothing!” - -A sudden remembrance crossed Hilary’s mind. - -“I _have_ heard,” he said, “that no one could tell where Fleta had -drawn her beauty from. But I believe you draw it from your own -beautiful soul!” - -“Ah, you still think me Fleta? I have had some happy hours in the -city before now when Fleta has let me play at being a princess. Ah, -but the men all thought the princess in a strange, charming, -delightful humour on these days. And when next they saw her, that -humour was gone, and they were afraid to speak to her. Come in. I am -starving!” - -They had entered a wide, low doorway, and stood now within the great -hall. What a strange hall it was! The floor was covered with the -skins of animals, many of them very handsome skins; and great jars -held flowering plants, the scent from which made the air rich and -heavy. A wood fire burned on the wide hearth, and before it, still -in the dress she had travelled in, stood—Fleta. - -Yes, Fleta. - -The girl who stood at Hilary’s side laughed and clapped her hands as -he uttered a cry of amazement, even of horror. - -“This is some of your magic, Fleta!” he exclaimed involuntarily. - -The Princess turned at his words. She was looking singularly grave -and stern; her glance gave Hilary a sense of almost fear. - -“No,” she answered in a low, quiet voice that had a tone, as Hilary -fancied, of pain, “it is not magic. It is all very natural. This is -Adine, my little sister; so like me that I do not know her from -myself.” - -She drew Adine to her with a gesture which had a protecting -tenderness in it. This was the Princess who spoke, queen-like in her -kindness. Hilary stood, unable to speak, unable to think, unable to -understand. Before him stood two girls—each Fleta. Only by the -difference of expression could he detect any difference between -them. One threw him back the most coquettish and charming glance, as -she went towards her grave sister. He could feel keenly how vitally -different the two were. Yet they stood side by side, and though -Fleta said “my little sister” there was no outward difference -between them. Adine was as tall, as beautiful—and the same in -everything! - -“Do not be startled,” said Fleta quietly, “you will soon grow used -to the likeness.” - -“Though I doubt,” added Adine, with a wicked glance from her -brilliant eyes, “whether you will ever tell us apart except when we -are not together.” - -“Come,” said Fleta, “let us go and wash the travel stains off. It is -just supper time.” - -Fleta talked of travel stains, but as Hilary looked at her queenly -beauty, he thought she seemed as fresh as though she had but from -this moment come from the hands of her maid. However, the two went -away arm in arm, Adine turning at the door to have one last glance -of amusement at Hilary’s utterly perplexed face. He was left alone, -and he remained standing where he was, without power of thought or -motion. - -Presently some one came and touched him on the shoulder; this was -necessary in order to attract his attention. It was the tall man who -had come to the gate to meet them. He was very handsome, and with -the most cheerful and good-natured expression; his blue eyes were -full of laughter. - -“Come,” he said, “come and see your room. I am master of the -ceremonies here; apply to me for anything you want—even information! -I may, or may not give it, according to the decision of the powers -that be. Call me Mark. I have a much longer name, in fact, -half-a-dozen much longer ones, and a few titles to boot; but they -would not interest you, and in the midst of a forest where nobody -has any dignity, a name of one syllable is by far the best.” While -he talked on like this, apparently indifferent as to whether Hilary -listened or no, he led the way out of the hall and down a wide, -carpeted corridor. He opened the last door in this, and ushered -Hilary in. - -(_To be continued._) - - THE SCIENCE OF LIFE. - -What is Life? Hundreds of the most philosophical minds, scores of -learned well-skilled physicians, have asked themselves the question, -but to little purpose. The veil thrown over primordial Kosmos and -the mysterious beginnings of life upon it, has never been withdrawn -to the satisfaction of earnest, honest science. The more the men of -official learning try to penetrate through its dark folds, the more -intense becomes that darkness, and the less they see, for they are -like the treasure-hunter, who went across the wide seas to look for -that which lay buried in his own garden. - -What is then this Science? Is it biology, or the study of life in -its general aspect? No. Is it physiology, or the science of organic -function? Neither; for the former leaves the problem as much the -riddle of the Sphinx as ever; and the latter is the science of death -far more than that of life. Physiology is based upon the study of -the different organic functions and the organs necessary to the -manifestations of life, but that which science calls living matter, -is, in sober truth, _dead matter_. Every molecule of the living -organs contains the germ of death in itself, and begins dying as -soon as born, in order that its successor-molecule should live only -to die in its turn. An organ, a natural part of every living being, -is but the medium for some special function in life, and is a -combination of such molecules. The vital organ, the _whole_, puts -the mask of life on, and thus conceals the constant decay and death -of its parts. Thus, neither biology nor physiology are the science, -nor even branches of the _Science of Life_, but only that of the -_appearances_ of life. While true philosophy stands Œdipus-like -before the Sphinx of life, hardly daring to utter the paradox -contained in the answer to the riddle propounded, materialistic -science, as arrogant as ever, never doubting its own wisdom for one -moment, biologises itself and many others into the belief that it -has solved the awful problem of existence. In truth, however, has it -even so much as approached its threshold? It is not, surely, by -attempting to deceive itself and the unwary in saying that life is -but the result of molecular complexity, that it can ever hope to -promote the truth. Is vital force, indeed, only a “phantom,” as -Du-Bois Reymond calls it? For his taunt that “life,” as something -independent, is but the _asylum ignorantiæ_ of those who seek refuge -in abstractions, when direct explanation is impossible, applies with -far more force and justice to those materialists who would blind -people to the reality of facts, by substituting bombast and -jaw-breaking words in their place. Have any of the five divisions of -the functions of life, so pretentiously named—Archebiosis, -Biocrosis, Biodiæresis, Biocænosis and Bioparodosis[49], ever helped -a Huxley or a Hæckel to probe more fully the mystery of the -generations of the humblest ant—let alone of man? Most certainly -not. For life, and everything pertaining to it, belongs to the -lawful domain of the _metaphysician_ and psychologist, and physical -science has no claim upon it. “That which hath been, is that which -shall be; and that which hath been is named already—and it is known -that it is MAN”—is the answer to the riddle of the Sphinx. But “man” -here, does not refer to _physical_ man—not in its esoteric meaning, -at any rate. Scalpels and microscopes may solve the mystery of the -material parts of _the shell of man_: they can never cut a window -into his soul to open the smallest vista on any of the wider -horizons of being. - ------ - -Footnote 49: - - Or Life-origination, Life-fusion, Life-division, Life-renewal and - Life-transmission. - ------ - -It is those thinkers alone, who, following the Delphic injunction, -have cognized life in their _inner_ selves, those who have studied -it thoroughly in themselves, before attempting to trace and analyze -its reflection in their outer shells, who are the only ones rewarded -with some measure of success. Like the fire-philosophers of the -Middle Ages, they have skipped over the _appearances_ of light and -fire in the world of effects, and centred their whole attention upon -the producing arcane agencies. Thence, tracing these to the one -abstract cause, they have attempted to fathom the MYSTERY, each as -far as his intellectual capacities permitted him. Thus they have -ascertained that (1) the _seemingly_ living mechanism called -physical man, is but the fuel, the material, upon which life feeds, -in order to manifest itself; and (2) that thereby the inner man -receives as his wage and reward the possibility of accumulating -additional experiences of the terrestrial illusions called lives. - -One of such philosophers is now undeniably the great Russian -novelist and reformer, Count Lef N. Tolstoi. How near his views are -to the esoteric and philosophical teachings of higher Theosophy, -will be found on the perusal of a few fragments from a lecture -delivered by him at Moscow before the local Psychological Society. - -Discussing the problem of life, the Count asks his audience to -admit, for the sake of argument, _an impossibility_. Says the -lecturer:— - -Let us grant for a moment that all that which modern science longs -to learn of life, it has learnt, and now knows; that the problem has -become as clear as day; that it is clear how organic matter has, by -simple adaptation, come to be originated from inorganic material; -that it is as clear how natural forces may be transformed into -feelings, will, thought, and that finally, all this is known, not -only to the city student, but to every village schoolboy, as well. - -I am aware, then, that such and such thoughts and feelings originate -from such and such motions. Well, and what then? Can I, or cannot I, -produce and guide such motions, in order to excite within my brain -corresponding thoughts? The question—what are the thoughts and -feelings I ought to generate in myself and others, remains still, -not only unsolved, but even untouched. - -Yet it is precisely this question which is the _one_ fundamental -question of the central idea of life. - -Science has chosen as its object a few manifestations that accompany -life; and _mistaking_[50] the part for the whole, called these -manifestations the integral total of life....” - ------ - -Footnote 50: - - “Mistaking” is an erroneous term to use. The men of science know - but too well that what they teach concerning life is a - materialistic fiction contradicted at every step by logic and - fact. In this particular question science is abused, and made to - serve personal hobbies and a determined policy of crushing in - humanity every spiritual aspiration and thought. “_Pretending_ to - mistake” would be more correct.—H. P. B. - ------ - -The question inseparable from the idea of life is not _whence_ life, -but _how one should live_ that life: and it is only by first -starting with this question that one can hope to approach some -solution in the problem of existence. - -The answer to the query “How are we to live?” appears so simple to -man that he esteems it hardly worth his while to touch upon it. - -... One must live the best way one can—that’s all. This seems at -first sight very simple and well known to all, but it is by far -neither as simple nor as well known as one may imagine.... - -The idea of life appears to man in the beginning as a most simple -and self-evident business. First of all, it seems to him that life -is in himself, in his own body. No sooner, however, does one -commence his search after that life, in any one given spot of the -said body, than one meets with difficulties. Life is not in the -hair, nor in the nails; neither is it in the foot nor the arm, which -may both be amputated; it is not in the blood, it is not in the -heart, and it is not in the brain. It is everywhere and it is -nowhere. It comes to this: life cannot be found in any of its -dwelling-places. Then man begins to look for life in Time; and that, -too, appears at first a very easy matter.... Yet again, no sooner -has he started on his chase than he perceives that here also the -business is more complicated than he had thought. Now, I have -_lived_ fifty-eight years, so says my baptismal church record. But I -know that out of these fifty-eight years I slept over twenty. How -then? have I lived all these years, or have I not? Deduct the months -of my gestation, and those I passed in the arms of my nurse, and -shall we call this life, also? Again, out of the remaining -thirty-eight years, I know that a good half of that time I slept -while moving about; and thus, I could no more say in this case, -whether I lived during that time or not. I may have lived a little, -and vegetated a little. Here again, one finds that in time, as in -the body, life is everywhere, yet nowhere. And now the question -naturally arises, whence, then, that life which I can trace to -nowhere? Now—will I learn.... But it so happens that in this -direction also, what seemed to me so easy at first, now seems -impossible. I must have been searching for something else, not for -my life, assuredly. Therefore, once we have to go in search of the -whereabouts of life—if search we have to—then it should be neither -in space nor in time, neither as cause nor effect, but as a -something which I cognize within myself as quite independent from -Space, time and causality. - -That which remains to do now is to study _self_. But how do I -cognize life in myself? - -This is how I cognize it. I know, to begin with, that I live; and -that I live wishing for myself everything that is good, wishing this -since I can remember myself, to this day, and from morn till night. -All that lives outside of myself is important in my eyes, but only -in so far as it co-operates with the creation of that which is -productive of _my_ welfare. The Universe is important in my sight -only because it can give _me_, pleasure. - -Meanwhile, something else is bound up with this knowledge in me of -my existence. Inseparable from the life I feel, is another cognition -allied to it; namely, that besides myself, I am surrounded with a -whole world of living creatures, possessed, as I am myself, of the -same instinctive realization of their exclusive lives; that all -these creatures live for their own objects, which objects are -foreign to me; that those creatures do not know, nor do they care to -know, anything of my pretensions to an exclusive life, and that all -these creatures, in order to achieve success in their objects, are -ready to annihilate me at any moment. But this is not all. While -watching the destruction of creatures similar in all to myself, I -also know that for me too, for that precious ME in whom alone life -is represented, a very speedy and inevitable destruction is lying in -wait. - -It is as if there were two “I’s” in man; it is as if they could -never live in peace together; it is as if they were eternally -struggling, and ever trying to expel each other. - -One “I” says, “I alone am living as one should live, all the rest -only seems to live. Therefore, the whole _raison d’être_ for the -universe is in that _I_ may be made comfortable.” - -The other “I” replies, “The universe is not for thee at all, but for -its own aims and purposes, and it cares little to know whether thou -art happy or unhappy.” - -Life becomes a dreadful thing after this! - -One “I” says, “I only want the gratification of all my wants and -desires, and that is why I need the universe.” - -The other “I” replies, “All animal life lives only for the -gratification of its wants and desires. It is the wants and desires -of animals alone that are gratified at the expense and detriment of -other animals; hence the ceaseless struggle between the animal -species. Thou art an animal, and therefore thou hast to struggle. -Yet, however successful in thy struggle, the rest of the struggling -creatures must sooner or later crush thee.” - -Still worse! life becomes still more dreadful.... - -But the most terrible of all, that which includes in itself the -whole of the foregoing, is that:— - -One “I” says, “I want to live, to live for ever.” - -And that the other “I” replies, “Thou shalt surely, perhaps in a few -minutes, die; as also shall die all those thou lovest, for thou and -they are destroying with every motion your lives, and thus -approaching ever nearer suffering, death, all that which thou so -hatest, and which thou fearest above anything else.” - -This is the worst of all.... - -To change this condition is impossible.... One can avoid moving, -sleeping, eating, even breathing, but one cannot escape from -thinking. One thinks, and that thought, _my_ thought, is poisoning -every step in my life, as a personality. - -No sooner has man commenced a conscious life than that consciousness -repeats to him incessantly without respite, over and over the same -thing again. “To live such life as you feel and see in your past, -the life lived by animals and many men too, lived in _that_ way, -which made you become what you are now—is no longer possible. Were -you to attempt doing so, you could never escape thereby the struggle -with all the world of creatures which live as you do—for their -personal objects; and then those creatures will inevitably destroy -you.”... - -To change this situation is impossible. There remains but one thing -to do, and that is always done by him who, beginning to live, -transfers his objects in life outside of himself, and aims to reach -them.... But, however far he places them outside his personality, as -his mind gets clearer, none of these objects will satisfy him. - -Bismarck, having united Germany, and now ruling Europe—if his reason -has only thrown any light upon the results of his activity—must -perceive, as much as his own cook does who prepares a dinner that -will be devoured in an hour’s time, the same unsolved contradiction -between the vanity and foolishness of all he has done, and the -eternity and reasonableness of that which exists for ever. If they -only think of it, each will see as clearly as the other; _firstly_, -that the preservation of the integrity of Prince Bismarck’s dinner, -as well as that of powerful Germany, is solely due: the preservation -of the former—to the police, and the preservation of the latter—to -the army; and that, so long only as both keep a good watch. Because -there are famished people who would willingly eat the dinner, and -nations which would fain be as powerful as Germany. Secondly, that -neither Prince Bismarck’s dinner, nor the might of the German -Empire, coincide with the aims and purposes of universal life, but -that they are in flagrant contradiction with them. And thirdly, that -as he who cooked the dinner, so also the might of Germany, will both -very soon die, and that so shall perish, and as soon, both the -dinner and Germany. That which shall survive alone is the Universe, -which will never give one thought to either dinner or Germany, least -of all to those who have cooked them. - -As the intellectual condition of man increases, he comes to the idea -that no happiness connected with his personality is an achievement, -but only a necessity. Personality is only that incipient state from -which begins life, and the ultimate limit of life.... - -Where, then, does life begin, and where does it end, I may be asked? -Where ends the night, and where does day commence? Where, on the -shore, ends the domain of the sea, and where does the domain of land -begin? - -There is day and there is night; there is land and there is sea; -there is life and there is _no_ life. - -Our life, ever since we became conscious of it, is a pendulum-like -motion between two limits. - -One limit is, an absolute unconcern for the life of the infinite -Universe an energy directed only toward the gratification of one’s -own personality. - -The other limit is a complete renunciation of that personality, the -greatest concern with the life of the infinite Universe, in full -accord with it, the transfer of all our desires and good will from -one’s self, to that infinite Universe and all the creatures outside -of us.[51] - -The nearer to the first limit, the less life and bliss, the closer -to the second, the more life and bliss. Therefore, man is ever -moving from one end to the other; _i.e._ he lives. THIS MOTION IS -LIFE ITSELF. - -And when I speak of life, know that the idea of it is indissolubly -connected in my conceptions with that of _conscious_ life. No other -life is known to me except conscious life, nor can it be known to -anyone else. - -We call life, the life of animals, organic life. But this is no life -at all, only a certain state or condition of life manifesting to us. - -But what is this consciousness or mind, the exigencies of which -exclude personality and transfer the energy of man outside of him -and into that state which is conceived by us as the blissful state -of love? - -What is conscious mind? Whatsoever we may be defining, we have to -define it with our conscious mind. Therefore, with what shall we -define mind?... - -If we have to define all with our mind, it follows that conscious -mind cannot be defined. Yet all of us, we not only know it, but it -is the only thing which is given to us to know undeniably.... - -It is the same law as the law of life, of everything organic, animal -or vegetable, with that one difference that we _see_ the -consummation of an intelligent law in the life of a plant. But the -law of conscious mind, to which we are subjected as the tree, is -subjected to its law, we _see_ it not, but fulfil it.... - ------ - -Footnote 51: - - This is what the Theosophists call “living _the_ life”—in a - nut-shell.—H. P. B. - ------ - -We have settled that life is that which is not our life. It is -herein that lies hidden the root of error. Instead of studying that -life of which we are conscious within ourselves, absolutely and -exclusively—since we can know of nothing else—in order to study it, -we observe that which is devoid of the most important factor and -faculty of our life, namely, intelligent consciousness. By so doing, -we act as a man who attempts to study an object by its shadow or -reflection does. - -If we know that substantial particles are subjected during their -transformations to the activity of the organism; we know it not -because we have observed or studied it, but simply because we -possess a certain familiar organism united to us, namely the -organism of our animal, which is but too well known to us as the -material of our life; _i.e._ that upon which we are called to work -and to rule by subjecting it to the law of reason.... No sooner has -man lost faith in life, no sooner has he transferred that life into -that which is no life, than he becomes wretched, and sees death.... -A man who conceives life such as he finds it in his consciousness, -knows neither misery, nor death: for all the good in life for him is -in the subjection of his animal to the law of reason, to do which is -not only in his power, but takes place unavoidably in him. The death -of particles in the animal being, we know. The death of animals and -of man, as an animal, we know; but we know nought about the death of -conscious mind, nor can we know anything of it, _just because that -conscious mind is the very life itself_. And _Life can never be -Death_.... - -The animal lives an existence of bliss, neither seeing nor knowing -death, and dies without cognizing it. Why then should man have -received the gift of seeing and knowing it, and why should death be -so terrible to him that it actually tortures his soul, often forcing -him to kill himself out of sheer fear of death? Why should it be so? -Because the man who sees death is a sick man, one who has broken the -law of his life, and lives no longer a conscious existence. He has -become an animal himself, an animal which also has broken the law of -life. - -The life of man is an aspiration to bliss, and that which he aspires -to is given to him. The light lit in the soul of man is bliss and -life, and that light can never be darkness, as there exists—verily -there exists for man—only this solitary light which burns within his -soul. - - ------------------ - -We have translated this rather lengthy fragment from the Report of -Count Tolstoi’s superb lecture, because it reads like the echo of -the finest teachings of the universal ethics of true theosophy. His -definition of life in its abstract sense, and of the life every -earnest theosophist ought to follow, each according to, and in the -measure of, his _natural_ capacities—is the summary and the Alpha -and the Omega of practical psychic, if not spiritual life. There are -sentences in the lecture which, to the average theosophist will seem -too hazy, and perhaps incomplete. Not one will he find, however, -which could be objected to by the most exacting, practical -occultist. It may be called a treatise on the Alchemy of Soul. For -that “solitary” light in man, which burns for ever, and can never be -darkness in its intrinsic nature, though the “animal” outside us may -remains blind to it—is that “Light” upon which the Neo Platonists of -the Alexandrian school, and after them the Rosecroix and especially -the Alchemists, have written volumes, though to the present day -their true meaning is a dark mystery to most men. - -True, Count Tolstoi is neither an Alexandrian nor a modern -theosophist; still less is he a Rosecroix or an Alchemist. But that -which the latter have concealed under the peculiar phraseology of -the Fire-philosophers, purposely confusing cosmic transmutations -with Spiritual Alchemy, all that is transferred by the great Russian -thinker from the realm of the metaphysical unto the field of -practical life. That which Schelling would define as a realisation -of the identity of subject and object in the man’s inner Ego, that -which unites and blends the latter with the universal Soul—which is -but the identity of subject and object on a higher plane, or the -unknown Deity—all that Count Tolstoi has blended together without -quitting the terrestrial plane. He is one of those few _elect_ who -begin with intuition and end with _quasi_-omniscience. It is the -transmutations of the baser metals—the _animal mass_—into gold and -silver, or the philosopher’s stone, the development and -manifestation of man’s higher, SELF which the Count has achieved. -The _alcahest_ of the inferior Alchemist is the _All-geist_, the -all-pervading Divine Spirit of the higher Initiate; for Alchemy was, -and is, as very few know to this day, as much a spiritual philosophy -as it is a physical science. He who knows nought of one, will never -know much of the other. Aristotle told it in so many words to his -pupil, Alexander: “It is not a stone,” he said, of the philosopher’s -stone. “_It is in every man and in every place_, and at all seasons, -and is called the _end_ of all philosophers,” as the _Vedanta_ is -_the end_ of all philosophies. - -To wind up this essay _on the Science of Life_, a few words may be -said of the eternal riddle propounded to mortals by the Sphinx. To -fail to solve the problem contained in it, was to be doomed to sure -death, as the Sphinx of life devoured the unintuitional, who would -live only in their “animal.” He who lives for Self, and only for -_Self_, will surely die, as the higher “I” tells the lower “animal” -in the Lecture. The riddle has seven keys to it, and the Count opens -the mystery with one of the highest. For, as the author on “Hermetic -Philosophy” beautifully expressed it: “The real mystery most -familiar and, at the same time, most unfamiliar to every man, _into -which he must be initiated or perish as an atheist, is himself_. For -him is the elixir of life, to quaff which, before the discovery of -the philosopher’s stone, is to drink the beverage of death, while it -confers on the adept and the _epopt_, the true immortality. He may -know truth as it really is—_Aletheia_, the breath of God, or Life, -the conscious mind in man.” - -This is “the Alcahest which dissolves all things,” and Count Tolstoi -has well understood the riddle. - - H. P. B. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - SIN AGAINST LIFE. - -A newspaper paragraph lately declared that a certain American lady -of great wealth, residing in London, had conceived the strange -desire to possess a cloak made of the soft warm down on the breasts -of birds of Paradise. Five hundred breasts, it was said, were -required for this purpose, and two skilful marksmen, the story went -on to aver, had been sent to New Guinea to shoot the poor little -victims whose wholesale slaughter must be accomplished to gratify -this savage whim. We rejoice to observe that the whole statement has -been flatly contradicted by the _World_, apparently on the best -possible authority; but, however little the lady concerned may -deserve the reproach which the authors of the calumny endeavoured to -evoke against her, the feeling it may have excited is worth analysis -in a world where, if bird of Paradise cloaks are rare, most women -who dress luxuriously adorn themselves in one way or another at the -expense of the feathered kingdom. The principle involved in a bonnet -which is decorated with the plumage of a single bird, slaughtered -for its sake, is the same as that which would be more grotesquely -manifest in a garment that would require the slaughter of five -hundred. Too many rich people in this greedy age forget that the -grandest privilege of those who possess the means is that they have -the power of alleviating suffering. Too many, again, forget that the -sympathies of those who rule the animate world should extend beyond -the limits of their own kind; and thus we have the painful spectacle -of human “sport” associated in civilised countries still, with -pursuits which should no longer afford pleasure to men who have -emerged from the primitive life of hunters and fishers. But how is -it possible, let us consider, to stoop lowest from the proud estate -of humanity in search of ignoble gratification? It is bad to kill -any sentient creature for the sake of the savage pleasures of the -chase. It is bad, perhaps worse, to cause their destruction for the -sake of coldly profiting by their slaughter, and it is bad to -squander money in this hard world of want and wide-spread privation -on costly personal indulgence. But the acme of all that is -reprehensible in these various departments of ill-doing is surely -reached when women—who should, by virtue of their sex, be helping to -soften the ferocities of life—contrive to collect the cream of evil -from each of these varieties, and to sin against a whole catalogue -of human duties by cruel acquiescence in an unworthy fashion. - - BROTHERHOOD. - -The Theosophical Society has always placed in the forefront of its -programme, as its first and most important object, the formation of -the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood, without distinction of race, -creed, caste or sex. It would doubtless be incorrect to say that -this object of the Society has been entirely overlooked in the West, -but it is to be feared that not a few members of the Society have -accepted it as an amiable formula, to which no objection could be -raised, and have turned their attention almost exclusively to the -two remaining objects. And yet, without some attempt to understand -the true meaning of this Universal Brotherhood, it is idle to expect -that any great services can be rendered to the cause of Theosophy. -It may be useful to see whether any explanation can be given of the -reason for the neglect of this first object, and whether such light -may be thrown on its meaning, as may render the idea a living -reality to many who now but faintly grasp its significance. - -In the first place it may be said, that in many enlightened Western -minds, there was already a familiarity with the idea thus -enunciated. Christianity has always taught the “theoretical” -equality in the sight of God, of all true believers, and politically -the dogma of “equal rights” is practically beyond the reach of -attack. The abolition of slavery, the extension of representative -government, the spread of education, and perhaps also, in some -degree, the influence of the scientific as opposed to the religious -theories of the origin and destiny of man, have all combined to -render this idea by no means difficult of apprehension, at least -intellectually. Further its acceptance in this sense has not -necessarily entailed any different view of the duties and -responsibilities of life. In the East it cannot be said that this is -the case. In India, the stringency of caste regulations causes class -distinctions to assume a very definite form, while religious -hatreds, if not more bitter than with us, enter more directly into -the life of the people, and interpose stronger barriers between man -and man than in Europe or America. Hence an Indian theosophist must, -before he can accept the first object, even in its outward form, -modify to some extent his intellectual conception of the relations -in which he stands to the rest of mankind, and he will in his life -give practical proof of the change. In his case the acceptance of -the outward form can only follow on the appreciation of the inner -meaning; that which results is that his theosophy is firmly founded -on the principle of the Universal Brotherhood. - -On the other hand, in the West, a familiarity with the external side -seems, in many cases, to have prevented any attempt to go below the -surface, and to have caused men to be satisfied with vague -philanthropic sentimentality, effecting nothing, and leading -nowhere. - -What then is this Universal Brotherhood, which is the main spring of -Theosophy? and what are its results? - -_Socialism_ as preached in this 19th century it certainly is not. -Indeed, there would be little difficulty in shewing that modern -materialistic Socialism is directly at variance with all the -teachings of theosophy. Socialism advocates a direct interference -with the results of the law of _Karma_, and would attempt to alter -the dénouement of the parable of the talents, by giving to the man -who hid his talent in a napkin, a portion of the ten talents -acquired by the labour of his more industrious fellow. - -Neither is it true that in practical benevolence is the whole idea -of universal brotherhood exemplified, though doubtless that -unselfish and unceasing work for the good of mankind, which is true -philanthropy must of necessity be one result of it. The -philanthropist may be, and no doubt often is, a true theosophist in -all but name, though there is still much of what may be called -unintelligent benevolence, the result of a mere emotional impulse; -and again there is much that is the result of very decided and very -narrow sectarian views, to which it would be absolutely impossible -to apply the epithet universal. The devotion and self-sacrifice -shown in many individual instances by Christian missionaries of -various denominations, may be taken as fairly exemplifying -philanthropy both of the unintelligent and the narrow type. They are -prepared to make any sacrifice for what they believe to be the -ultimate good of humanity, and in that sense are practising what -some others only preach, namely true unselfishness, but they are -often hampered by an intellectual inability to view both sides of -the question, and fail thereby to acquire that understanding of, and -sympathy with the difficulties and the wants of those whom they are -endeavouring to aid, which are necessary preliminaries to any work -of lasting usefulness. In a word, they too often fail to realise -that unity in mankind which truly underlies all individualism. But -having said so much, it must be added that an understanding of the -real meaning of “Brotherhood” must entail active benevolence, that -is to say work for others in some form or other, upon every one who -does not wilfully thrust aside the obligation. - -Where then are we to look for the explanation, and how are we to -understand the spirit which must animate all true theosophists, if -they are to realise and follow out the first rule of the Society? -Not surely on the physical plane. Not by an attempt to force on the -intellect as a fact to be accepted, or more truly a pill to be -swallowed, a belief in similarities, equalities or identities, which -have no existence. Only a realisation of what truly constitutes man -can help us to form a conception of what brotherhood means. - -Man is a complex organism as he exists on our earth to-day. He is -partly transitory, partly eternal; in one sense the creature of -circumstances, in another the creator of his own environment. But -the true man, the underlying individuality is a reflection of the -Divine. We are able to discern physical beauty, even when clad in -rags. Is it impossible that we should also recognise the beauty of -the soul, though it be for a time veiled beneath a gross material -body? The physical body is indeed nothing but the garment of the -ego, the true man; that momentarily suited to his needs and his -deserts, the livery of his servitude, which must be worn, in ever -changing forms, till the moment of his final emancipation. It is -then beyond the physical, beyond the intellectual man, that we must -look for that fraternity, arising out of unity and equality, which -cannot be found on the purely material plane of existence. The -divine soul of man, in which is posited his true individuality, is -the real man, the immortal ego, which, through the accumulated -experience of many earth lives is marching onward through the ages -to its goal, reunion with the Infinite. What matters then the -outward semblance, which our senses know as man? Our æsthetic -perception may shrink from the rags, the dirt, the ugliness which -belong to the physical environment. Our moral nature may revolt at -association with vice, with low selfish courses of life, but within -and behind all this we must endeavour to realise the continual -presence of the immortal ego, one with us, as with all humanity, as -sharing the divine nature, and ever struggling, as we are -struggling, on the upward path that leads to the realisation of the -Absolute. As Carlyle says in Sartor Resartus. “Mystical, more than -magical, is that communing of Soul with Soul, both looking -heavenward; here properly Soul first speaks with Soul; for only in -looking heavenward, take it in what sense you may, not in looking -earthward does what we can call Union, Mutual Love, Society, begin -to be possible.” - -It may be objected that in some cases it is impossible to recognise -even the glimmerings of those higher aspirations, which are the -tokens of the presence of the soul, the immortal ego. Such cases, -however, must be comparatively rare. Still there are beings—it is -almost impossible to call them human—who have so persistently -concentrated all their efforts on the gratification of their lower -consciousness, as to sever the frail link which binds them to their -higher selves. Then the true man is no longer present in the human -form, and brotherhood becomes an impossibility. But we may in truth -almost ignore the existence of this type of mankind, for even when -an intellectual materialism seems to be the sole ruling principle, -we dare not deny the presence of that capacity for higher things -which must exist in all who can still truly be called men. - -Surely then it is in this view of our relations to our fellow men, -that we shall find that guiding influence which may enable us to -rise above the sordid considerations of our ordinary earthly -existence. It is no sectarian belief that is here advanced; it is -the essence of the teaching of Jesus, as it was of Gautama; nor is -it a mere formula, to be accepted as an article of faith, and then -laid on the shelf. Once understood, it must influence all who have -sufficient strength of purpose to fight their own lower selfish -personalities, and must lead them to the practical realisation of -their aspirations towards true unselfishness and active benevolence. - -But there lurks a danger even in the use of the word unselfishness. -It has been the text of sermons from every pulpit in Christendom for -centuries, and with what small results? No doubt the duty nearest at -hand must not be neglected, and it is the duty of every one to do -what he can to render those about him happier. But many stop there -and consider that all their work consists in the practice of -self-abnegation in their own small circle. Does not the broader view -of human life here set forth suggest a new sphere of usefulness, and -therefore of duty? It is for every man to determine what he can do -for the good of humanity; all are not equally gifted, but all can do -something. Some theosophists appear to be satisfied with -intellectual study, or the development of their own spiritual -nature, and neither of these two courses is to be neglected; but -something more must be done. “It is more blessed to give than to -receive,” and the acquirement of knowledge brings with it the -obligation of spreading it. This is work from which none need -shrink, and all who truly desire to work for Theosophy, which is in -the highest sense “the religion of humanity,” will find the work -ready to their hand, and be able to assist in bringing the Light “to -them that sit in darkness.” - - T. B. H. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - PYTHAGORIC SENTENCES OF DEMOPHILUS. - -Esteem that to be eminently good, which, when communicated to -another, will be increased to yourself. - -Be persuaded that those things are not your riches which you do not -possess in the penetralia of the reasoning power. - -As many passions of the soul, so many fierce and savage despots. - -No one is free who has not obtained the empire of himself. - - BLOOD-COVENANTING.[52] - ------ - -Footnote 52: - - “The Blood-Covenant, a Primitive Rite, and its bearings on - Scripture.” By H. Clay Trumbull, D.D. London: Redway. - ------ - - -Particular attention has been recently directed to this subject of -_Blood-Covenant_ by the experiences of explorers in Africa, who -appear to have discovered in that Dark Land some of the primitive -facts the gory ghost of which has long haunted our European mind in -the Eschatological phase. - -Stanley, an especial sufferer from the practice, denounces the -blood-brotherhood as a _beastly cannibalistic ceremony_. “For the -fiftieth time my poor arm was scarified and my blood shed for the -cause of civilization.” As the writer of this book observes: “The -blood of a fair proportion of all the first families of equatorial -Africa now courses in Stanley’s veins; and if ever there was an -American citizen who could pre-eminently appropriate to himself the -national motto ‘_E pluribus unum_,’ Stanley is the man.” - -In his book, Dr. Trumbull has collected a mass of data from a wide -range of sources to illustrate what he terms the “_Primitive rite of -covenanting by the inter-transfusion of blood_.” - -Dr. Trumbull is anxious to make the efficacy of the rite depend upon -the recognition of a vivifying virtue in the blood itself, as the -essence of life. But such recognition appears to have been remote -enough from the Primitive thought. The Aborigines were not Jews or -Christians. They gave of their life without always thinking of the -exact equivalent or superior value received. They gave it as the -witness to the troth they plighted and the covenant which they -intended to keep. His theory of interpretation is that there was a -dominating and universal conviction that the “blood is the life; -that blood-transfer is soul-transfer, and that blood-sharing, human -or _divine_-human, secures an inter-union of natures; and that a -union of the human nature with the divine is the highest ultimate -attainment reached out after by the most primitive, as well as the -most enlightened, mind of humanity.” - -His collection of facts may serve a most useful purpose as -eye-openers to other people (and for other facts to follow), just as -they appear to have been to himself. The book is interesting, if not -profound; and nothing that follows in this article is intended to -decry it, or to prevent the readers of LUCIFER from looking into it -if they do not feel too great a “scunner” at sight of the -gilded-gory illustration on the cover. But the work is written by -one who talks to us out of a window of Noah’s Ark, and who still -seems to think the Hebrew Bible is the rim of the universe. We value -and recommend the book solely for its facts, not for its theories, -nor for its bibliolatry. - -In all studies of this kind which make use of the word “Primitive,” -it is the fundamental facts that we first need; and next a -first-hand acquaintanceship with all the facts, so that we may do -our own thinking for ourselves and strike our light within by which -we can read the facts without, as the primary and essential -procedure in the endeavour to attain the truth. - -Also the facts may be genuine and honestly presented, yet the -interpretation may be according to an inadequate or a “bogus” -theory. The truth is that no bibliolator can be trusted to interpret -the past of our race now being unveiled by evolution. He is born and -begotten with the blinkers on. His mode of interpretation is to get -behind us, to lay the hands upon our eyes in front, and ask us to -listen whilst he gives us his views of the past! But the -non-evolutionist cannot interpret the past from lack of a true -standpoint with regard to the beginnings or rather the processes of -becoming. He can begin anywhere and at any time short of the -starting-point. There is nothing for it but to break away, and turn -round to see for ourselves whether the traditionary vision of the -Blinkerists be true or false. The facts alone are the final -determinatives of the Truth. But we must have the whole of them and -not a few, whether judiciously or Jesuitically selected to support a -Christian theory. Whereas, the object and aim of this work, the bias -of the writer, and the trend of his arguments, are all on the line -of showing or suggesting that the blood-covenant was the result of -some innate instinct or divine revelation which prefigured and -foreshadowed, and may be taken to indicate and authorize, the -Christian scheme of atonement, and the remission of sin by the -shedding of innocent blood. The writer asserts that this primitive -symbolism was “_made a reality in Jesus Christ_” in whom “_God was -to give of his blood in the blood of his Son for the revivifying of -the sons of Abraham in the Blood of the Eternal Covenant_.” But it -can be demonstrated that the covenant by blood did not commence -where Dr. Trumbull begins—with a religious yearning God-ward for the -establishing of a brotherhood between the human nature and the -Divine. The root-idea was not that of an “inter-union of the -spiritual natures by the inter-commingling of blood for the sake of -an inter-communion with deity.” That, at least, was by no means the -“_primitive_ rite,” which the blood-covenant is here called. The -many forms of the blood-covenant can only be unified at the root, -_i.e._, in the beginning, not at the end. They are not to be -understood apart from the primitive language of signs, as in Tattoo, -the very primitive biology of the early observers, and the most -primitive sociology of the Totemic times. - -Time was, and may be still, when the blood-covenant would often -serve as the one protection against being killed and eaten. Even the -cannibals will not partake of their own Totemic brothers. Also the -covenant was extended to certain animals which were made of kin and -held to be sacred as brothers of the blood. - -The Blood-covenant takes many forms besides that of the -blood-brotherhood, which are not to be explained by this writer’s -theory of exchange. - -When the blood of an African woman accidentally spurted into the eye -of Dr. Livingstone, she claimed him for her blood relation, without -there being any exchange of blood for blood. - -Dr. Trumbull claims the Egyptians as witnesses to the truth of his -interpretation. But so far from their highest conception of “a union -with the Divine nature” being an inter-flowing and interfusion of -blood, the soul of blood was the very lowest, that is the first, in -a series of seven souls! - -Their highest type of the soul was the sun that vivified for ever -called Atmu, the Father Soul.[53] The bases of natural fact which -lie at the foundation of the Blood-covenant, preceded any and all -such ideas as those postulated by the writer as being extant from -the first, such as “a longing for oneness of life with God;” an -“out-reaching after inter-union and inter-communion with God.” There -was no conception of a one God extant in the category of human -consciousness when the rites of a blood-covenant were first founded. -There could be no atonement where there was no sense of sin or a -breaking of the law. All through, the writer is apt to confuse the -past with the present, and eager to read the present into the -past.[54] - ------ - -Footnote 53: - - The Theosophists are reminded that the “seven souls” are what we - call the “seven principles” in man. “Blood” is the _principle_ of - the Body, the lowest in our septenary, as the highest is “Atma,” - which may well be symbolized by the Sun; Atma being the light and - life in man, as the physical sun is the light and life of our - solar system.—ED. - -Footnote 54: - - The arcane doctrine teaches that the “blood” rites are as old as - the Third-Root race, being established in their final form by the - Fourth Parent race in commemoration of the separation of - androgynous mankind, their forefathers, into males and females. - Mr. G. Massey is a strict scholar, who holds only to that which is - made evident to him, and ignores the Occultistic division of - mankind into Races, and the fact that we are in our Fifth-Root - race, and would, of course, refuse to carry mankind back into - _pre_-Tertiary times. Yet his researches and the fruit of his - life-labour, corroborate, by their numberless new facts revealed - by him, most wonderfully, the teachings of the “Secret Doctrines.” - (ED.) - ------ - -The real roots of matters like these are to be found only in certain -facts of nature which were self-revealing, and not in the sphere of -concepts and causation! And it is only when we can reach the natural -genesis of primitive customs and fetishtic beliefs, and trace their -lines of descent, that we can understand and interpret their meaning -in the latest symbolical and superstitious phase of religious rites. -Nothing can be more fatally false than to interpret the physics of -the past by means of modern metaphysic, with the view of proving -that certain extant doctrines of delusion are the lineal descendants -of an original Divine revelation, which has been bound up in two -Testaments for the favoured few. - -The blood-covenant is undoubtedly a primitive rite; but the author -of this work does not penetrate to its most primitive or significant -phases. These are not to be read by the light of Hebrew revelation, -but by the light of nature if at all. Many primitive customs and -rites survived amongst the Semites, but they themselves were not -amongst the aboriginal races of the world. We have to get far beyond -their stage to understand the meaning of the myths, legends, rites, -and customs, that were preserved by them as sacred survivals from -the remoter past. The symbolical and superstitious phases of custom -cannot be directly explained on the spot where we may first meet -with them in going back. In becoming symbolical they had already -passed out of their primary phase, and only indirectly represent the -natural genesis of the truly primitive rite. I have spent the best -part of my life in tracking these rites and customs to their natural -origin, and in expounding the typology and symbols by which the -earliest meaning was expressed. - -What then was the root-origin of a blood-covenant? The primary -perceptions of primitive or archaic men included the observation -that they came from the mother, and first found themselves at her -breast. - -Next they saw that the child was fleshed by the mother, and formed -from her blood, the flow of which was arrested to be solidified, and -take form in their own persons. Thus the red amulet which was worn -by the Egyptian dead, was representative of the blood of Isis, who -came from herself, and made her own child without the fatherhood, -when men could only derive their blood and descent from the mother. -This amulet was put on by her, says Plutarch, when she found herself -_enceinte_ with Horus, her child, who was derived from the mother -alone, or was traced solely to the blood of Isis. Primitive men -could perceive that the children of one mother were of the same -blood. This, the first form of a blood-brotherhood, was the first to -be recognised as the natural fact. Uterine brothers were -blood-brothers. The next stage of the brotherhood was Totemic; and -the mode of extending the brotherhood to the children of several -mothers implies, as it necessitated, some form of symbolic rite -which represented them as brothers, or as typically becoming of the -one blood. Here we can track the very first step in sociology which -was made when the typical blood-brotherhood of the Totem was formed -in imitation of the natural brotherhood of the mother-blood. The -modes and forms of the Covenant can be identified by the Totemic -mysteries, some of which yet survive in the crudest condition. The -brotherhood was entered at the time of puberty; that is, at the time -of re-birth, when the boy was re-born as a man, and the child of the -mother attained the soul of the fatherhood, and was permitted to -join the ranks of the begetters. The mystery is one with that of -Horus, child of the mother alone, who comes to receive the soul of -the father in _Tattu_, the region of establishing the son as the -father, which is still extant in the mysteries, and the symbolism of -_Tattoo_. - -This re-birth was enacted in various ways by typically re-entering -the womb. One of these was by burial in the earth, the tomb or place -of re-birth being the image of the maternal birth-place all the -world over. Thus when the Norsemen or other races prepared a hole -under the turf, and buried their cut and bleeding arms to let the -blood flow, and commingle in one as the token of a covenant, they -were returning typically to the condition of uterine twins, and the -act of burial for the purpose of a re-birth was a symbolical mode of -establishing the social brotherhood upon the original grounds of the -natural brotherhood of blood. Thus the blood-covenant did not -originate in the set transfusion or inter-fusion of blood. In the -Totemic mysteries the pubescent lad was admitted by the shedding of -his blood, with or without any interchange. The blood itself was the -symbol of brotherhood, and the shedding of it was the seal of a -covenant. - -Nor was this merely because flesh was formed of blood, or the first -men were made of the mystical red soil, as with the _aarea_ of the -Tahitians, or the red earth of the Adamic man. Most of these -primitive rites, the Blood-Covenant included, had their -starting-point from the period of puberty. It was at this time the -lads who were not brothers uterine were made brothers of the Totem -at what was termed the festival of young-man-making. The proper -period for circumcision, or cutting and sealing, as still practised -by the oldest aborigines, is the time of puberty, the natural coming -of age. It is then they enter the Totemic Brotherhood. Now in -Egyptian, the word _khet_ or _khut_ = cut, means to cut and to seal. -_Khetem_ is to enclose, bind, seal, and is applied to sealing. The -same root passes into Assyrian and Hebrew as _Khatan_, _Katam_ or -_Chatan_, with the same meaning. In Arabic, _Khatana_ is to -circumcise. Cutting and sealing are identical as the mode of -entering into a Blood-Covenant. Circumcision was _one_ form of the -sealing, but there were various kinds of cuts employed, and -different parts of the body were scarified and tattooed. In the -primary phase, then, the blood-brotherhood was established by the -shedding of blood; the register was written in blood, and instead of -the covenant being witnessed by the seal of red wax, it was stamped -in blood. - -The reason for phallic localization is to be sought in the fact that -the young men not only entered the Brotherhood by the baptism of -blood, they were also received into the higher ranks of the fathers, -and sworn in to live an orderly, legal and cleanly life, henceforth, -as the pro-creators and loyal preservers of the race. - -But this was not the only clue directly derived from nature. There -is another reason why blood should have become the sacred sign of a -covenant. Amongst many primitive races blood, or the colour red, is -the symbol of _Tapu_, the sign of sanctity. The bones of the dead -were covered with red ochre as a means of protection by the most -widely scattered races in the world. The stamp of a red hand on the -building, or a crimson daub upon the gravestone will render them -sacred. The Kaffirs will wash their bodies with blood as a -protection against being wounded in battle. The colour of -robin-redbreast still renders him _tapu_ or sacred to English -children. - -Blood having become a sign of that which is true and sacred, on -account of the Covenant, it is then made the symbol of all that is -sacred. It can be used for the purpose of anointing the living or -the dead, can be the seal of the marriage or other ceremonies and -rites of covenanting. It is the primæval token of _tapu_. - -As I have elsewhere shown, blood was sworn by as the type of that -which was true, the primary one of the typical Two Truths of Egypt. -It was so in all the mysteries, and is so to-day, including the -mysteries of Masonry. I have suggested the derivation of the masonic -name from the Egyptian _Sen_ = son, for blood and brotherhood. The -working Mason in Egyptian is the _makh_ (_makht_) by name. _Makh_ -means to work, inlay by rule and measure. We see that _makh_ -modifies into _mâ_ for measure, and for that which is just and true. - -_Mâ-sen_ = Mason, would denote the true brotherhood; and as _sen_ is -also blood, the true brotherhood as the blood-brotherhood would be -the masons in the mystical or occult sense. Red is the colour of -_Mâ_ or Truth personified, and _sen_ is blood. Blood is sworn by -because it is the colour of truth, or the true colour. Now in old -English the word _seng_ means both “blood” and “true.” Here, then, -we find the origin of the oath, which constitutes the supreme -expression in the vocabulary of our English roughs, when they use -the oath of the blood-covenant, and swear by the word “bloody!” When -they wax emphatic, everything they say becomes “bloody true.” This -is the exact equivalent of “seng it is” for “it is true.” According -to the primitive mysteries, this mode of swearing, or establishing -the covenant, was sacred whilst kept piously secret, and it becomes -impious when made public or profane. Such mysteries were very simply -natural at first, and it was this primitive simplicity and nearness -to nature which demanded the veil to protect them from the gaze of -the later consciousness. Time was when the English felon would carry -a red handkerchief with him to the scaffold, and hold it in his hand -as a signal that he had betrayed no secrets, but died “bloody true,” -or true blood. - -These customs were symbolical, but there is a hint of the -blood-covenant beyond them—a hint received direct from Nature -herself—call it revelation if you please. In the first rude ethics -we find that the time for the sexes to come together was recognised -by the intimation of nature, made in her own sign-language at the -period of feminine pubescence. Nature gave the hint, and a covenant -was established. Henceforth, the child that could not enter that -covenant would be protected from brutal assault, and was allowed, or -rather compelled, to run about unclothed in token of her exemption. -It is here in the swearing-in and covenanting of the sexes at the -time of pubescence that we discover another real and most secret, -_i.e._, sacred root of the rite. - -The self-revelation made by nature to primitive man was very -primitive in its kind. She not only demonstrated that the blood was -the life, or that the life passed away with the letting out of the -blood, but in another domain, which our author has not entered, she -showed that blood was, and how it was, the future life. Blood was -the primary witness to the future life which the child received from -the mother. It was the token of the time when the female could -become the bearer of that future life which took flesh and form in -her blood. - -The blood-covenanting of the primitive races is still a part of the -most elaborate system of making presents, which are the express -witnesses of proffered troth and intended fealty. The most precious -or sacred things are parted from in proof. The best is given on -either side. And in the offering of blood, they were giving their -very life, that in which the best attains supremacy. But these -primitive rites can never be truly read except by those who are -deeply grounded in the fact, and well acquainted with the evidence, -that sign-language was primordial, that gestures preceded verbal -speech, and acting was an earlier mode of representing than talking. -Primitive men could only _do_ that which we can _say_. In Egyptian -that which is _said_ is _done_. And in these primitive customs and -religious rites we see the early races of men performing in -pantomime the early drama of dumb or inarticulate humanity. And it -seems as if this primitive language could produce an impression and -reach a reality that are unapproachable by means of words. The -significance of the teaching went all the deeper when it was incised -in the flesh and branded into the blood. For example, what a -terrific glimpse of reality is revealed by the fact that the -Malagasy make their sign of a blood-covenant by an incision in the -skin that covers the bosom, and this opening with its utterance of -blood is called _ambavfo_, the “mouth of the heart.” Thus the -covenant is made in the blood, which is the very life, uttering -itself with the mouth of the heart. In Egyptian the covenant, the -oath, and the life, have the same name of _Ankhu_; and the greatest -oath was to swear by the life or the blood of the Pharaoh. The -primitive mode was to slash the flesh and let the hot blood spout -and speak for itself with the “mouth of the heart,” the utterance of -the living letter and red seal of the wound, as true witness. - -No verbal covenant or written record of the modern races has ever -had the full force and effect of these modes of covenanting amongst -the primitive people of the past. The moderns do not keep their word -with anything like the inviolable sanctity of the aborigines; when -once they are sworn to fealty, the covenant is almost never broken. -Few things in poetry are more pathetic than the story related of -Tolo, a chief of the Shastika Indians on the Pacific Coast. In the -year 1852 he entered into a tribal treaty with Colonel McKee and was -desirous of making a covenant for life in some way that could not -possibly be violated. Instead of exchanging blood he proposed a -transfer of their own two personal names. Henceforth he was to be -known as McKee, and the Colonel as Tolo. But the treaty was -discarded, the covenant was not kept by the American Government. In -reply, the Indian cast off the title of McKee and refused to resume -his own tarnished and degraded name of Tolo! He considered that his -very identity was lost by this mode of losing his good name! I doubt -whether 1,800 years of Christianity have evolved in the later races -of men a consciousness of truth, probity, and loyalty, so quick and -profound as that! - -The writer of this book remains stone-blind to its own teachings -with regard to the doctrine of survivals, and of the past persisting -as a pattern for the present. - -To quote his own words, he rejoices in the “_blessed benefits of the -covenant of blood_,” and is still a fervent supporter of the great -delusion inculcated by the gospel of ruddy gore. - -The doctrine is fundamentally the same whether the Greek murderer -was cleansed from his guilt by the filthy purification of pig’s -blood or the modern sinner is supposed to be washed white in the -Blood of the Lamb. - -As I had already written in my “Natural Genesis,” “the religious -ritual of the moderns is crowded like a kitchen-midden with the -refuse relics of customs that were natural once, and are now clung -to as if they were supernatural in their efficacy because their -origin has been unknown. Indeed, the current masquerade in these -appurtenances of the past is as sorry a sight to the archaic student -as are the straw crowns and faded finery of the kings and queens -whose domain is limited to the lunatic asylum.” Dr. Trumbull -endorses the doctrine that “_Mortals gave the blood of their -first-born sons in sacrifice to the Supreme Being, then the Supreme -Being gave the blood of his first-born male in sacrifice_” for men; -and there you have the covenant of blood in its final form! - -It is true that first-born children were offered in sacrifice just -as the first take of fish was returned to the waters with a lively -sense of future favours from the Typhonian power thus propitiated, -but where is the sense of talking about the thought of an -intercommunion with the divine nature through a blood-union with God -as a concept in the mind of primitive man? It is true the recognized -nature-powers, or devils of physical force, were invoked with blood, -but what was the status of these powers when the beasts of blood -were their representatives on earth, and the blood, which is the -life, was given to the Serpent, for instance, as the likeness of -life itself because it sloughed its own skin and manifested the -enviable power of self-renewal? The profounder and more fundamental -our researches, the more clearly does it become apparent that we -have been victimised by the unsuspected survival of the past in the -present, and that the veriest leavings of primitive man have been -palmed off upon us by the ignorant as sacred mysteries and -revelations guaranteed to be original and divine. Continually we -find that our errors of belief are based upon very simple truths -that have been misunderstood through a misinterpretation of -primitive matters and modes of representation by means of modern -ignorance. The blood-covenant of the aboriginal races has -undoubtedly survived and culminated as Christian in the frightful -formula, “Without blood there is no remission of sin.” Not merely -the blood of beasts or human creatures this time, but the ruddy life -and ichor of a supposed Divine Being, who was made flesh on purpose -to pour out the blood for Almighty vengeance to lap in the person of -a gory ghost of God. One of the seven primal powers in Egypt was -represented by the hawk, because it drank blood. One of the Seven in -Akkad was the vampire. And this type of blood-drinking has been -divinised at last as the Christian God. - -Pindar says: “It is impossible for me to call one of the blessed -gods a cannibal.” But the Christian scheme makes the Only God a -cannibal, who offers the flesh and blood of his own Son and Very -Self as sacrificial food made sacred for his followers. Such a god -is, in two senses, _chimerical_. How natural an accompaniment is the -picture of the Crucified Christ to the Zuni saying, “My Father, this -day shalt thou refresh thyself with blood!” Such a doctrine is but -an awful shadow of the primitive past—the shadow, so to say, of our -old earth in the very far-off past—that remains to eclipse the light -of Heaven to-day, and darken the souls of men in the present through -the survival of savage spiritualism in its final Christian phase, -where the extant doctrines are little more than an ignorant -perversion of the most primitive knowledge. - -It is in this final and not in the primitive phase that we shall -identify the irrationality, the impiety, the disgusting grossness of -Mythology under the surface of theological varnish and veneer. The -only senselessness is in the survival of Myths without their sense. - -Lastly, it is observable that in the genuine rite the -covenant-makers always bled _directly_ and suffered each for -themselves. Later on we find that other victims were substituted by -purchase, by fraud, or by force; hence the blood-covenant by proxy. -Now the Christian scheme is that which culminated in the -blood-covenant and atonement by proxy. “_His offspring for his life -he gave_,” is said of an Akkadian ruler who sacrificed his own son -as an expiatory offering to save himself from the consequences of -his own sin. And this doctrine of the despicable, this type of the -fatherhood, is elevated to the status of divinity by Dr. Trumbull. -To quote his own words, the inspired author of the narrative found -in the Hebrew Genesis shows “Abel lovingly and trustfully reaching -out toward God with _substitute_ blood!” - -And there began for the Historic Christians that vast perversion of -a primitive custom which culminated at last in the Christian -doctrine of vicarious sacrifice, based upon the mythology of the Old -Testament being literalized in the New. Now we have the ludicrous -spectacle of salvation by means of a rite which has lost all the -manhood, all the morality, all the meaning, that was put into it by -the despised races of uncivilized men. - -The eucharistic rite is incredibly primitive when really understood. -The bread and wine of the Christian sacrament still represent the -male spirit and the female source of life. The “Blood of Jesus,” -which was to be “drink indeed,” is identical with the “Blood of -Bacchus,” which preceded historic Christianity, and has been -substituted for the human or animal blood of the earlier mysteries. -Imbibing the blood of the Christ did not originate in any historic -or personal transaction. Also the blood of Christ, or Mithras, or -Horus, employed in drinking the covenant, was preceded by the blood -of Charis. In some of the Gnostic mysteries we have the proof that -the first form of the saving blood was feminine, not masculine at -all. Irenæus presents us with a picture of profound interest from -the anthropological point of view. - -He tells us how Marcus performed the eucharistic rite with the blood -of Charis, instead of the blood of Christ. He handed cups to the -women and bade them consecrate these in his presence. Then, by the -use of magical incantation, “Charis was thought to drop her own -blood into the cup” thus consecrated. (B. I. 13, 2.) - -There is but one known fact in natural phenomena which will fitly -account as _Vera Causa_ for a monthly Sacrament, celebrated every -twenty-eight days, or thirteen times to the year; which fact was -commemorated by the Blood-Covenant of Charis ( _Vide_ “Nat. Gen.” V. -ii. section 12, for proofs). This kind of blood-covenant can be -paralleled in the Yain or Yonian mysteries of India. - -When rightly understood, the eucharist is a survival of the “beastly -cannibalistic ceremony,” whether considered as the blood of Charis -or the blood of Christ, or partaken of as the red Tent wine or the -“bloody wafer” of Rome. - -We welcome Dr. Trumbull’s contribution on the subject, although he -has but “breathed a vein” of it, because these rites and customs -have to be unveiled, and when they are at last exposed in all the -simplicity of naked nature the erroneous ideas read into them, the -delusive inferences drawn from them, the false illusions painted -upon the veil that concealed the truth about them, will be doomed to -pass away. To explain the true is the only effectual mode of -exploding the false. - - GERALD MASSEY. - - =Correspondence.= - - CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESSED TO THE AUTHOR OF “LIGHT ON THE PATH.” - - I. - -“What are the senses called astral, in reality? Are they not really -spiritual, seizing on the inner essence of things and interpreting -it. The ordinary psychic or clairvoyant surely does not use the -astral senses? Yet he sees things which we do not see. It would be -well to explain this.” - - B. K. - -_A._ The senses called astral in the comments on “Light on the Path” -are the senses which perceive the inner essence, certainly; which -are cognisant of the life underlying every form of matter. The -ordinary psychic or clairvoyant only perceives other forms of matter -than those we ordinarily see, and perceives them as a child -perceives the forms in this world at first, without understanding -their meaning. The astral senses carry beyond matter, and enlighten -man with regard to any form of life which especially interests him. -They show the poet painter, and composer the things they express to -other men, who regard these great ones as beings of another -order—beings with the gift of genius. So they are, and the vigour of -that genius carries them on into the inner life where meaning, and -harmony, and the indefinable all-desired are to be perceived. -Wordsworth saw it in nature, he recognised the “spirit in the -woods”—not the wood-nymphs but the divine spirit of peace which -teaches a lesson in life. Richard Jeffries saw it in nature, too, as -perhaps no other man ever has seen it; through the finite visible -world he perceived the infinite invisible one, and before he died he -had begun to know that the visible world does not exist. Turner, -perhaps, is the only parallel. By the invisible world I must repeat -again that I do not mean what the spiritualists call by that name—a -new world of other forms. I mean the formless world. It is the -farthest limit man’s _consciousness_ can reach to; and only the pure -and star-like soul can become even aware of its existence. It is not -man’s divine nature, but the man who enters it with any reverence -for the great miracle of life can only do so by the aid of his -divine nature, whether as a poet, a painter, or an occultist. The -soul which enters it without reverence is unable to endure its -extreme rarity of atmosphere and turns to the psychic-astral in -which to live; such men become madmen and suicides, more or less -pronounced, as men do who refuse to dwell in any form of physical -life but the grossest and simplest. There is some law of life which -impels men onward—call it evolution or developement or what you -will; and a man can no more go downwards without suffering than a -tree can be placed with its branches in the ground, instead of its -roots, without discomfort, and in the end, death. - -I propose to use two phrases which have been suggested to me; the -psychic-astral and the divine-astral. This seems the only way to -make my meaning clear, for the word astral has two meanings, its own -proper derivative one, from the Sanskrit _stri_ to strew light, and -that given it by the use of all occultists. Paracelsus appropriated -the word for all things sidereal, subject to the moon and stars, -part and parcel of this material universe, even though formed as -Dryden says of “purest atoms of the air.” In this sense the -spiritualists and psychics have the right of custom to use it as -they do, to describe their world of finer forms. In this meaning an -astral shape is the form of the human soul, still in possession of -the passions which make it human; and the astral senses perceive not -the subtle and supreme glory which Shelley seized on in Prometheus, -but a region full of shapes and forms differing but little from -those we now wear, and still distinctly material. - -The “astral man” in the “Comments on Light on the Path” should have -been written the divine-astral man, according to this evident -difference of meaning between the present writer and all other -writers on occultism. - - II. - -“Are not the _astral_ senses used by every great poet or inventor -though he does not see clairvoyantly at all? _i.e._ does not see -elementals, astral pictures, forms, &c.” - - FAUST. - -The answer to the former question seems to contain the answer to -this, which is clearly prompted by a conception of the word “astral” -in its divine sense. - - III. - -1. “There is a law of nature which insists that a man shall read -these mysteries for himself. Will all men seeking the occult path -read these mysteries alike, or will each man find the interpretation -peculiarly adapted to his own phrase of development. No two men read -the mysteries contained in the Bhagavat Gita quite alike, each gains -the glimpses of light which he is able to assimilate and no more.” - -_A._ This seems to be rather a statement of a truth than a question -which can be answered in any way other than putting it into -different words, perhaps not so good. - -2. “Is the outer world the reflection of the world within? like a -shadowed reproduction in clumsy form, the inner being reality?” - -_A._ This is what should be. But materialists have brought their -sense of reality into the shadowed life. - -3. “How is the intuition to be developed which enables one to grasp -swift knowledge?” - -_A._ To me no way is known but that of living the life of a -disciple. - -4. “Can the laws in super-nature only act on their own plane, or can -their reflection be brought down intact in their own purity to -govern physical life.” - -_A._ Surely this must be so; yet rarely, for when it is accomplished -the man would be divine, a Buddha! - -5. “To be incapable of tears”—does not that mean that the physical -emotions, being merged into the inner physical, that tears are -impossible as being an outward phase of the physical nature—whereas -the psychical emotions, to use a physical term are vibratory. - -_A._ “The whole of ‘Light on the Path,’ is written in an astral -cipher” is stated at the outset of the “comments;” the word “tears” -does not refer to physical tears in any way. - -It is the only word which will convey any idea whatever of the -moisture of life, that which bursts from the human soul in its -experience of sensation and emotion, and in the passion of its -hunger for them. - -6. “How is one to take the snake of self in a steady grasp and -conquer it?” - - W. - -_A._ This is the great mystery which each man must solve for -himself. - - IV. - - WALLASEY, Oct. 1st - -Referring to the comments on “Light on the Path,” in the first -number of LUCIFER, may I ask whether the full paradox “Before the -eyes can see they must be incapable of tears, and yet no eyes -incapable of tears can see,” _i.e._, see good or God, is not truer -and stronger than its part? - -“Therefore the soul of the occultist must become stronger than joy -and greater than sorrow” I presume means that he must not _seek_ joy -or _fear_ sorrow, not that he may not enjoy nor sorrow? - -The phrase by itself may read “Before the eyes can see they must be -incapable of tears,” tearless, dry, in fact dead! which is obviously -not the author’s intention in “Light on the Path.” - - Yours truly, - A. E. I. - -_A._ Once more I must refer to the preliminary statement in the -comments that “Light on the Path,” is written in an astral cipher, -and that tears do not mean the tears of the physical body, but the -rain drops that come from the passion-life of the human soul. These -being stayed for ever, the astral sight is no longer blinded or -blurred. Divine love and charity then find room, when personal -desire is gone. Joy and sorrow, _for oneself_, then drop naturally -into another place than that which they filled before. - - V. - -(1.) I desire very strongly to obtain conquest over “self;” would my -using the occult means for so doing, which apparently to me lie -without the _ordinary_ experience of Christians, necessitate my -sacrificing any iota of my belief in the _power of Christ_? - -(2.) If I submit myself to the occult conditions under which the -four first rules in “Light on the Path” may be “engraved on my heart -and life;” will these conditions permit me to _pray throughout_ for -the Divine help and strength of the Eternal Christ, who has passed -the portal, opened the “way,” and whom I believe to be the “Master -of Masters,” the “Lord of Angels”? - -(3.) Do the words—“the disciple” ... “must then so shut the gates of -his soul that _no comforter_ can enter there nor any enemy”—mean, -that we are wilfully to exclude ourselves from any desire for the -sympathy, strength, and support of the spirit of One who said “No -man cometh unto the Father but by Me,” and who drank the cup of -agony to the very dregs for love of the Brotherhood? - - L. H. FF. - -_A._ (1.) Not any iota of your belief in the power of the -Christ-spirit would or should be sacrificed; it would rather -increase, for that spirit is the same Divine overshadowing which has -inspired every Redeemer. - -(2.) It matters very little by what name you call the Master of -Masters, so that you do appeal to “_Its_” power throughout. - -(3.) Man can find no comforter save in the Divine Spirit within -himself. Does not the tale of the life of Jesus illustrate this, -looking at it from one point of view? In what dread isolation he -lived and died; His disciples, even those who were most beloved by -Him, could not reach His spirit in its sublime moments, or in the -hours of its keenest suffering. So with every one who raises himself -by effort above the common life of man, in however small a degree. -Solitude becomes a familiar state, for nothing personal, not even a -personal God, can comfort or cheer any longer. - - VI. - -“Is there any chance of self-deception? May one enter the path so -gradually as to be conscious of no radical change, representing a -change of life or stage of progression? How is it with one who has -never experienced a great and lasting sorrow, or an all-absorbing -joy, but who in the midst of both joy and sorrow strives to remember -others, and to feel that he hardly deserves the joy, and that his -sorrow is meagre in the presence of the great all-pain? How is such -a one to enter through the gates? By what sign shall he know them?” - - Y. H. - -_A._ It is difficult for such a one to know anything of what lies -beneath the surface of his nature until it has been probed by the -fiercer experiences of life. But, of course, the theory of -re-incarnation makes it possible that such experiences are left -behind in the past. The entrance to the gates is marked by one -immutable sign; the sense that personal joy or sorrow no longer -exist. The disciple lives for humanity, not for himself; works for -all creatures that suffer instead of knowing that he himself has -pain. - - ------------------ - - “ESOTERIC BUDDHISM.” - -“As the Editors of LUCIFER kindly invite questions concerning -Theosophy and kindred subjects, an honest enquirer into these -matters would welcome an answer to the following difficulty: - -“In his book on ‘Esoteric Buddhism,’ Mr. Sinnett states that souls -or spirits pass the long interval between the one incarnation and -another in a sort of quiescent, and at least half-unconscious, -state, losing enough of their identity to preclude their carrying -any recollection of one incarnation on to the next. In his novel, -“Karma,” Mr. Sinnett represents one character, Mrs. Lakesby, gifted -with more than usual powers, as being very fond, when she has the -chance, of allowing her spirit to escape from the trammels of the -body and meeting the spirits of departed—that is, dead friends—“and -others” on the Astral plane where she holds agreeable converse with -them. - -“How are these two statements reconcilable? - -“October 22nd, 1887. - - N. D.” - -Mr. Sinnett would probably reply that the answer could only be given -fully by reprinting all that he has written in various published -works, on the conditions of existence in Kama-Loca, and Devachan, -and on the higher and lower aspects of _Self_. The normal course of -events will conduct a human being who quits the material body -through Kama-Loca to the Devachanic state, in which Mrs. Lakesby -would not be able to interview him. But while in Kama-Loca she might -at least imagine she did this, and, perhaps not too wisely, indulge -in the practice of so doing. If we remember rightly the Baron, in -“Karma,” who is represented as knowing a good deal more than Mrs. -Lakesby, gifted as she is, throws some discredit upon her view -concerning the Astral plane and its inhabitants. At the best when a -clairvoyant can gain touch with a soul in Kama-Loca, it is the lower -self remaining there, though it has left the body, that she deals -with. And though that lower self may be very recognisable for people -who have known it in the earthly manifestation, it will be _lower_ -than the lower self of earth and not higher because ethereal. That -is to say on earth the living man is more or less under the guidance -of his higher self. But the higher has no longer any business to -transact with the lower self of Kama-Loca, and does not manifest -there at all. - -Finally it must always be remembered that a romance, even though -written by an Occultist, is a romance still, designed to suggest -broad conceptions rather than to expound scientific and doctrinal -details. - - ------------------ - -“Being courteously invited to address any questions bearing on the -matter contained in LUCIFER to the Editors, Madame la Marechale -Canrobert would gladly know:—First, What is the distinction made -(page 11) between _the soul_ and the starry spirit? Is it that soul -which is again alluded to (page 91) as the animal soul, in -opposition to the Divine soul? Second, What are the external forms -of the individualised being spoken of also on page 91?” - -_A._ The human soul, that which is subject to human passions, but -which can also yearn towards the nobility of the Divine soul, is -that which is spoken of on page 11. The starry spirit is the -Divine-astral. The animal soul is that which animates the mere -physical life, the unintelligent existence of the body. The -“external forms” referred to on page 91 are the successive human -shapes which the starry spirit inspires during its long pilgrimage. - - M. C. - - =Reviews.= - - --- - - THE REAL HISTORY OF THE ROSICRUCIANS.[55] - ------ - -Footnote 55: - - A. E. Waite. Published by G. Redway. - ------ - -Mr. Waite’s new book will be welcomed by that large class of readers -who regard occultism, alchemy, and all like studies with antagonism -and suspicion. Secret societies supposed to deal with such subjects -are, from their point of view, better exposed and ridiculed than -treated with respect or taken seriously. The author of the present -volume does not, however, cast disrespect on occult science, nor -does he discuss the Rosicrucians in a spirit of levity or disdain. -He recognises that there may be, and probably is, a grand spiritual -and moral philosophy in the higher aspects of true alchemy, but in -these pages he treats the subject of the society from the -historical, and not at all from the mystical side, and confines -himself to tracing its recorded history, its rise, fall, and _raison -d’etre_. The conscientious study of these records relating to the -Brotherhood has brought Mr. Waite to the conclusion that they do not -support the traditions which up to the present have surrounded the -society with a veil of unknown antiquity and have endowed its -members with a halo of marvellous wisdom. It is these conclusions -that will charm the incredulous, and may probably blind them to the -indications of an undercurrent of belief in the reality of occult -science, _per se_, which the author has evidently not desired to -suppress. To investigate and disentangle the network of facts, -theories, and traditions which must necessarily envelope a society -that up to the commencement of the seventeenth century had not been -heard of by the general public is no easy task, and Mr. Waite may be -congratulated upon the calm and judicial spirit with which he has -treated his subject, as well as upon the moderation with which he -advances his own views. To be able to gather from these open records -how far the members of such a society may have held in their keeping -some of the inner secrets of Nature is of course impossible to -ordinary humanity. The real character and aims of such an -association can be known only to passed Initiates. In his preface -Mr. Waite says: “I claim to have performed my task in a sympathetic -but impartial manner, purged from the bias of any theory, and above -all uncontaminated by the pretension to superior knowledge, which -claimants have never been able to substantiate.” This statement is -fully justified in the pages of the book under review. Its value -does not lie so much in any new presentation of the facts or -theories pertaining to the Rosicrucians, and which are so frequently -distorted by ignorant commentators, as in the compact and systematic -arrangement of some of the principal writings available. He has -brought together not only the leading works of the various writers -known, or supposed to be Rosicrucians, but he has also collected the -criticisms and conjectures on these current at the time of their -appearance in Germany, together with others of a much more recent -date. Consequently the reader has before him almost all the -information of this description he could require, and which he could -not obtain for himself except by the expenditure of time and trouble -that very few are either able or willing to give. - -It is not surprising that Mr. Waite should have satisfied himself -that the Rosicrucians have no sort of claim to the reverence and -admiration in which scholars and mystics have held them up to the -present time. But these conclusions will form only one more of other -proofs to students of esotericism, that the task of writing a true -and real history of a secret occult society from its records, where -such exist, is an impossibility. For even when such societies left -reliable information of their pursuits, aspirations, and beliefs, -the language employed has always been of such a character as to -baffle entirely the ordinary exoteric reader, whether he were -historian, literateur, or scientist. Such literature can be -interesting only to the student on the track of esoteric knowledge, -or to one who has in a great measure acquired the meaning conveyed, -for himself in other ways. This method of giving to the world, as it -were, the proceeds, of life-long research in the realms of unseen -Nature, has been adopted by alchemists, magicians, priests, and -hierophants from all ages. None but those who were sufficiently -steadfast in the cause of truth could read and understand what was -thus written. The numerous and minute directions for the working of -spells and cures, etc., left by Paracelsus, and which are apparently -as straight forward and practicable as the receipts in a modern -cookery book, would turn out probably much less successful in the -hands of an amateur, no matter how highly educated on the physical -plane, than the more delicate dishes taken from such receipts -manipulated by an entirely inexperienced servant. For these -elaborate instructions are given in terms that appeal simply to the -material senses of those who are in search of power rather than of -wisdom, whereas the real effort to produce the result has to take -place on the Astral plane of nature. The spiritual or soul side of -man, must be awakened and utilised, before the Philosopher’s stone, -or the elixir of life, can be discovered. - -The comprehension of the potentialities of the human body, their -nurture and eventual utilisation for purely unselfish ends and -spiritual, _i.e._, real wisdom, is, or ought to be, the work of all -secret occult societies. But to return to Mr. Waite’s book. The -popular notion that this Brotherhood is of great, almost incredible -antiquity, is utterly condemned by him. He fails to find any -documentary evidence to show that it existed before the early part -of the seventeenth century, and argues that the well-known antiquity -of the Rose and Cross in symbolism is no proof of the antiquity of a -society using them “at a period subsequent to the Renaissance.” -Granting that the device of the Rose and Cross, as emblems of a -particular order or brotherhood, does not guarantee its equal -antiquity with them, still it must be admitted that these symbols -bearing as they do a profoundly esoteric interpretation, and being -adopted by a society of a distinctly occult character, is an -argument in support of the theory that the founder or originator of -this order had some reason other than fancy for thus labelling his -fraternity. Elsewhere he says, “I have shown indisputably that there -was no novelty in the Rosicrucian pretensions, and no originality in -their views. They appear before us as Lutheran disciples of -Paracelsus.” - -The author here seems to be not entirely logical in his deductions. -When he states that he has not met in his search with either -letters, records, or papers that mention or suggest the existence of -such a society before the seventeenth century, he is of course, as a -historian, safely ensconced from attack. In this capacity as an -impartial seeker after facts, it is outside the area of his work in -the absence of data to theorise on probabilities. When, however, in -dealing with the manifestoes of the seventeenth century, he finds -therein evidence that shows him the Brotherhood had no back history -or ancestry, his conclusions are open to criticism. The very fact of -the want of originality and novelty in the views, aims and -aspirations set forth in the “Fama,” and “Confessio” surely gives -strength to the theory that holds to the antiquity of the society, -rather than to its being the outcome of a spontaneous effort. All -true students of mysticism have good reason to believe, even when -they do not absolutely know, that the various schools of occultism -considered from their highest or most spiritual and abstract -teaching, lead to the same goal. They may be called by different -names, and their methods in minor details may not be the same, but -the wisdom _au fond_ is identical. Therefore when Mr. Waite casts -discredit upon the Rosicrucians for not advertising novelties in -their manifesto, in the mystical line of thought, he reminds us of a -man who in making up his mind on the value of a violin, decides that -it cannot be of great age, because it emits only the same set of -sounds that such musical instruments have been accustomed to give -forth from time immemorial. - -As far as can be ascertained by studying the state of thought and -society at the period when the Rosicrucians were first heard of in -Europe, this particular order manifested itself as an antidote to -the general tendency towards the material side of alchemy, which -honey-combed the educated classes of Germany. Wonder-seekers then, -as now, did not apprehend that ethics, both social and spiritual, -are the fundamental basis of real wisdom, consequently the great cry -was for power, no matter of what description, for the accumulation -of wealth. The craving for arcane knowledge, so widely diffused, and -which alchemists were truly known to possess, had gradually -degenerated into a purely selfish desire for the secret of -transmuting metals. To supply this eager demand charlatans of every -description rushed to the front professing to teach all who joined -their standards, _i.e._, who could pay the necessary fee, how to -turn common metal into pure gold. The craze for this power was so -universal, the motive of it so unspiritual, that in order to stem -the tide of the folly, and to checkmate the impostors who were -bringing discredit on the _Sacred Art_, the “Fama” was issued by a -body of people who took as their symbols the Rose and Cross. From -this point of view the Rosicrucians historically come before the -world in the light of a group of Reformers. - -Different people interpret in different ways the two manifestoes—the -“Fama” and “Confessio.” Mr. Waite appears to place great importance -on the adherence to Christian dogmas observable in the wording of -these papers. But in taking the documents literally, he seems to -overlook the necessity that all writers were under, in those -troubled times, of pandering to the narrow and prejudiced minds of -the leaders of the so called Christian Church, by apparently -adhering to the Ritual. Naturally, the author of the “Fama” worded -it in such a manner as to avoid persecution or suspicion of heresy. -Those to whom it was really addressed would not be misled by its -tone of orthodoxy, and the general public and the church would pass -it by as harmless. Moreover, as Mr. Waite remarks further on, “the -philosophical and scientific opinions and pretentions of the -Rosicrucian Society have more claim on our notice” than their -theology. Speaking again of the school of thought current at the -time this organization was floated, and which he tells us the -Rosicrucians followed, he says.... “Mystics in an age of scientific -and religious materialism, they were connected by an unbroken chain -with the theurgists of the first Christian centuries, they were -alchemists in the spiritual sense, and the professors of a Divine -Magic. Their disciples, the Rosicrucians, followed closely in their -footsteps, and the claims of the “Fama” and “Confessio” must be -reviewed in the light of the great elder claims of alchemy and -magic.” In spite of this, Mr. Waite judges the Society, it would -appear, by what he admits to be the minor and less important side of -its object, for he speaks of it eventually, as a body of -“pre-eminently learned men and a Christian Sect.” We will not stop -to consider the probability or possibility of a body of -“pre-eminently learned men,” being at the same time a “Christian -Sect.” - -Having thus deprived the Rosicrucians of the dignity, reverence and -romance, that cling round great antiquity; having saddled them with -the tenets and dogmas of conventional mediæval christianity, Mr. -Waite next proceeds to demolish their emblems, or at all events, to -deny that they attached any esoteric interpretation to them. He says -... “The whole question of the Crucified Rose, in its connection -with the Society is one of pure conjecture, that no Rosicrucian -manifestoes, and no acknowledged Brother have ever given any -explanation concerning it, and that no presumption is afforded by -the fact of its adoption, for the antiquity of the Society, or for -its connection with Universal Symbolism.” Allowing for the necessity -in writing a history of a mystical society of taking the documents -as they stand, Mr. Waite rather ignores the fact that the evidence -for the statement above is of a negative character. That in their -manifestoes and records there appears no explanation of their -emblems, hardly justifies the conclusion that they were incapable of -giving any. It would indeed have been a new departure in the annals -of Secret Societies if the founders of this particular order had -left behind the explanation of their signs and symbols. The study -and interpretation of symbology forms a most important element in -the education of occult disciples, and therefore to assume that the -projectors of this organisation should be unaware of the mystic -reading of the Rose and Cross, is a hypothesis that no student of -mysticism could accept. - -It is, on the whole, generally assumed by those who have taken any -pains to investigate the evidence, that Johann Valentin Andreas was -the author of the “Fama,” the _Confessio Fraternitatis_, and also of -the “Chymical Marriage” of Christian Rosencreutz, and to that extent -he must be looked upon exoterically as the founder of the -Rosicrucian Society, as first known to history. He was deeply versed -in mystic studies and alchemy, and had besides a widespread -reputation as a scholar and learned man. His “Chymical Marriage,” to -anyone with even a slight acquaintance with alchemical literature, -reveals him as one who had penetrated deeply into some of the -mysteries of nature. Consequently, he must have been well aware that -the Rose and Cross bore a profoundly occult signification. -Considering the man himself, the character of his studies, and his -well known devotion to alchemy and mysticism, it is certainly more -reasonable to suppose that he took those emblems (presuming he had -any choice in the matter) for his society, not as some suggest, -because they happened to form a part of his own armorial bearings, -or that the Rose and Cross on a Heart was used by Martin Luther, but -because he recognised their full value and importance as symbols of -cosmic evolution. - -Mr. Waite seems, on the whole, to agree with the idea that Andreas -was the author of the “Fama” and “Confessio,” and regards the -“Chymical Marriage” as undoubtedly his production. He also allows -that the latter pamphlet can only have been the work of a man deeply -embued with alchemical speculations, a mystic and follower of -Paracelsus. How then can he ask us to believe that the Society -formed under such auspices was _au fond_, nothing but a Christian -sect based on the teachings of Martin Luther! To the public at large -these theories may perhaps appear sufficiently plausible in face of -the wording of those parts of the manifestoes that touch on -theology. To students of esotericism, however, such conclusions will -be absolutely unacceptable, and we can not allow to pass without -comment Mr. Waite’s hypothesis that the Rosicrucian Society, as it -first came before the world, was simply a society for the -propagation of the deteriorated Christianity of the middle ages. No -mystic, whether calling himself Rosicrucian, Cabbalist, Theosophist, -Christian, or Buddhist, would either, intellectually or spiritually, -accept the narrow dogmas and intolerant views of the Christian -church, even when to some extent cleansed of many of its grosser -abuses by the energy of Martin Luther’s Reform. - -The two lines of thought are essentially different. In the case of -the Christian, no matter of what denomination, his thoughts are -bound down and paralysed within the rigid circle drawn by the -materialistic reading of Christ’s birth, life, and death. The true -occultist takes those episodes spiritually or allegorically, finding -their correspondences within himself as well as in the universe. To -say that a human being can at one and the same time be an occultist, -and a sectarian Christian, is as impossible as to speak of a -Christian Jew. A true Christian, _i.e._, one who understood and -followed absolutely the teachings of Jesus, would be also a true -Rosicrucian. Membership of particular churches or societies does not -unfortunately endow the individual immediately with the virtue, -knowledge or power, that is the theoretical goal of his initial -action. Such membership is, or may be a step in the direction of -Divine Wisdom, but one step does not carry him to the summit of the -path. Men do not become either Rosicrucians, Christians, or -Theosophists merely by joining the Societies working under those -particular names. But certain tendencies in their temperaments urge -them into the special Society where the mode of thought seems best -fitted to help them, to realise the magnitude and glory of the -possibilities inherent in their own souls. - -Between the humanity of to-day, and the development of a sixth -sense, which will enable it to perceive what now is imperceptible, -there is but a thin veil of obstructing matter, metaphorically -speaking. This veil is even now being continually pierced by -psychics, first in one direction then in another, letting in through -these tiny openings glimpses of the invisible world around. In a -little while the veil will be worn away entirely, and the humanity -of that future time will doubtless wonder how the humanity of this -age, which we find so enlightened, could have been so unintuitive -and blind to the most important side of their natures. Until the -race however has by soul evolution attained to this sixth sense, -real histories of Mystical Societies can hardly be hoped for. -Members of such Societies, who by study and training have attained -some degree of knowledge _may_ not disclose the secrets, non-members -cannot get at them. The reading-classes of to-day may, after reading -Mr. Waite’s book, think they have learnt something of the body of -people called Rosicrucians, and until now supposed to have some -claim to arcane knowledge. The students of occultism will know that -the vital part of the subject is and must remain ever impregnable, -excepting from its esoteric side. - - ------------------ - - “NINETEENTH CENTURY SENSE.” - -Sense! What is ”sense”? A word meaning either little or much; simple -and clear to the understanding, or various and carrying with it many -connotations. It is one or other according as we measure the depth, -the thoroughness, or the _reality_ of the knowledge acquired. From a -purely physical “sensation” we may trace the word through endless -shades of signification; through “good” sense, “sound” sense, -through the artistic and finer sensibilities, the “moral” sense, -till it loses itself in the vague hint of a dim, unformed -consciousness, pointing the way to the new world of the “inner -senses.” - -All these meanings and more are connoted by the phrase “Nineteenth -Century Sense;” [56] for, by a daring metaphor, the tools which -modern science places at our disposal are considered as “senses,” -and even the faculty and power of analysis is sometimes included -under the word. - ------ - -Footnote 56: - - NINETEENTH CENTURY SENSE: The Paradox of Spiritualism. By John - Darby. J. B. Lippincott, Philadelphia, and 10, Henrietta Street, - Covent Garden, London. - ------ - -Beginning with the simplest, the reader is led on to the most -astounding phenomena of modern spiritualism in the first -thirty-seven pages of this strange work. The author depicts in vivid -language his own experiences, and the triumphs of phenomena produced -by one of his personal friends, in a style which is often quaint and -striking, though at times the writer’s disregard of many of the -accepted rules of composition becomes—to say the least—irritating. -But the matter of his book earns forgiveness for the manner in which -it is formulated. - -After carrying his reader to a pitch of interest and expectation as -to the phenomena he describes, Mr. Darby suddenly plunges him into -the frozen sea of scepticism by stating that all the phenomena -produced under what seemed the strictest test conditions, were -produced by conjuring and legerdemain, and by explaining the -physical causes of some of the visions he has so graphically -described. It will suffice to cite a single instance in -illustration. “The President of the American Branch of the Indian -Society of Theosophists (Professor Coues) ... spent an evening with -me some time back in conversation on the subject of psychical -phenomena. We parted at midnight. At seven o’clock the next morning -I suddenly awoke, beholding the astral of the professor standing at -my bed-side.” - -This vision Mr. Darby explains by reference to the fact of the -persistence of retinal images and the super-excitability of the -nerves and brain. “Astral projections,” he concludes, “are of -precisely similar significance.” We would feel obliged to the -eminent American professor of physiology referred to if he would -give his written opinion on the question thus raised. For -Theosophists have heard of persons whose brains were in complete -repose and fully occupied otherwise who have also seen the astral -form of Professor Coues. How’s this? - -He concludes, nevertheless, that materialistic agnosticism is the -only “creed”? Far from it. This portion of the book is purely -introductory; it forms the five door-steps leading to the Spiritus -Sanctus—the laboratory of the Divine Spirit. - -From this black depth of doubt and confusion, the reader is lifted -suddenly into the clear ether, and his feet are placed on the -“Rosicrucian Way.” - -Whether called “Rosicrucian,” or by whatever other name, the “Way” -is the “Way of Life,” the path which leads to freedom, to wisdom, to -true living. Whole pages might well be quoted; a few aphorisms must -suffice. - - “A thing is to the sense that uses it what to the sense - It seems to be; it is never anything else.” - -Many passages recall “Light on the Path,” though Mr. Darby probably -never saw that book; but life is one, and _true_ occultism is one. - -Speaking of mankind as divided into two classes, _men_ in whom is -the Holy Ghost, the Divine Spirit or the _Logos_, he says: - - “With people self-wise or over-sufficient, with the proud and the - uncharitable, with all who are _without understanding as to the - common good being the only good_, with him who fails to see that - gifts _are in men as almoners only_—with all these the Holy Ghost - is absent, otherwise so lacking in measure as to be incapable of - making itself felt.” - -The italicised passages give the key-note of the true science and -art of living. To quote again: - - “Settled into tranquillity by entirely satisfactory recognition of - noumenon through phenomenon an end is reached where instrument is - prepared and ready for use. Analysis has shown the Rosicrucian - what he is; more than this—what he can become as to his Ego. If - out of his understanding, he puts office [_the service of - others_.—ED.] before self, he learns directly of the God, as the - God comes to live in and to make use of him.” - - “Proving to one’s self that one’s self is God”; and again, “God - ... the One is in all; the All is in one.” - -The next chapter contrasts strangely with the one just quoted -from—strangely, that is, to the outer sense. The one full of deep -philosophy, of questionings of God, the Self, the World, clothed in -the profound and significant paradoxes in which wisdom finds -expression; the other an idyll, a sketch of nature, deeply coloured -by the influence of Walt Whitman, whose _style_, perhaps, has had -too great an influence on Mr. Darby, who has caught its jerky and -unpleasant strings of detached sentences. - -This is Chapter V.; Chapter VI. deals with Matter in its relation to -the Ego, the spirit of the treatment being indicated by the -following conclusion: - - “That there shows itself, out of a process of exclusion, conducted - even only so far as the analysis of matter, a something which is - not matter. The analysis demonstrates the something to be of - individual signification; further, that it is to it what a flute - or other instrument is to harmony.” - -The final words express a purely occult doctrine, which is worked -out at length in the succeeding chapter on the Ego. - -This is the fundamental thought of the book, the last fifty pages of -which describe the author’s individual experiences in nascent -psychic development. - -They are not of a very striking character, but exhibit with -sufficient clearness the early forms of this new growth. -Unfortunately, the author seems to have lacked the desire to pursue -the road thus opened to him, and the final pages of his work are but -a lame and halting conclusion to a remarkable production. - -The book is well adapted for those who stand halting on the verge of -mysticism, while for the student who has advanced further, its pages -may serve as a means for helping others. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - -The Editors of LUCIFER beg to acknowledge the following books, which -will be noticed in future numbers:— - - From Messrs. Ward and Downey: “A Modern Magician,” by Fitzgerald - Molloy. “Twin Souls.” - - From Messrs. David Nutt & Co.: “The Gnostics and their Remains,” - by C. H. King. - - From the Authors: “Natural Genesis,” by Gerald Massey. “Sepher - Yezirah,” by Dr. Wynn Westcott. “Palingenesia,” by “Theosopho and - Ellora.” “Mohammed Benani,” by Ion Perdicaris. “Lays of Romance,” - by W. Stewart Ross. - - From George Redway: “Posthumous Humanity,” translated by Col. H. - S. Olcott. - - ------------------ - -⁂ The Editors regret that the pressure on their space prevents their -noticing in detail the various Theosophical Magazines:—THE -THEOSOPHIST, THE PATH, LE LOTUS, and L’AURORE. A full summary of -their contents for November and December will appear next month. The -same remark applies to a letter on “Karma,” received from Mr. -Beatty, which will be published and fully answered next month. - - =FROM THE NOTE BOOK OF AN UNPOPULAR PHILOSOPHER= - - -I am Sternly Rebuked for some remarks made in the last number. My -reflections with regard to the respective value of Mussulman and -Christian pledges exchanged, as also on the doubtful propriety of -zoological symbolism in the Churches—are pronounced wantonly wicked -and calculated to hurt the tender feelings of Christian readers—if -any. Protestant England—it is solemnly urged—is full of truly good -men and women, of sincere church-goers, who “walk in the ways of the -Lord.” No doubt there are such, and no doubt they do, or try to, -which is a step in advance of those who do not. But then none of the -“righteous” need recognize their faces in the mirror presented by -the “Unpopular Philosopher” only to the _unrighteous_. And again—- - -“THE WAYS OF THE LORD....” The ways of _which_ Lord? Is the jealous -Lord of Moses meant, the God who thundered amidst the lightnings of -Sinai, or the meek “Lord” of the Mount of Olives and Calvary? Is it -the stern God that saith “_vengeance is mine_,” and who must be -“_worshipped in fear_,” or the “man-God” who commanded _to love -one’s neighbours as oneself_, _to forgive one’s enemies_ and _bless -those who revile us_? For the ways of the two Lords are wide apart, -and can never meet. - -No one who has studied the Bible can deny for one single moment that -a large proportion (if _happily_ not all) of modern Christians walk -indeed “in the _ways_ of the Lord”—Number I. This one is the “Lord” -who _had respect unto Abel_, because the meat of his sacrifice smelt -sweet in his nostrils; the “Lord” who commanded the Israelites to -_spoil_ the Egyptians of their jewels of silver and gold;[57] also -to “_kill every male among the little ones_,” as “_every woman ... -but all the women children_ (virgins) _to keep alive for -themselves_” (Numb. XXXI., 17, _et seq._); and to commit other -actions too coarse to be repeated in any respectable publication. - ------ - -Footnote 57: - - And no doubt also the Anglo-Indians to _spoil_ the King of Burmah - of his? - ------ - -Hence the modern warriors who achieve such feats (with the modern -improvement occasionally, of shooting their enemies out of the -mouths of big guns) walk, most undeniably, “in the ways” of the Lord -of the Jews, but _never in the ways_ of Christ. So does the modern -trader who keeps the Sabbath most rigorously, attending Divine -Service thrice on that day, after treating during the whole week his -hired clerks as the brood of Ham “who shall be their (Shem and -Japhet’s) servants.” - -So does, likewise, he who helps himself, David-like, to a -Bath-Sheba, the wife of Uriah, without the least concern whether he -simply robs or kills the Hittite husband. For he has every right to -take for his sampler “a friend of God”—the _God_ of the old -covenant. - -But will either of these pretend they walk in the ways of their Lord -of the _new_ Dispensation? Yet, he who raises his voice in a protest -against the “ways” of the Mosaic God, therefore, in favour of those -preached by the very _antithesis_ of Jehovah—the meek and gentle -“Man of Sorrow”—he is forthwith set up on the pillory and denounced -to public opprobrium as an _anti-Christian_ and an Atheist! This, in -the face of the words: “_Not every one that saith unto me Lord, -Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he that doeth the -will of my Father which is in Heaven.... And every one that heareth -these words of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a -foolish man, which built his house upon the sand.... and great was -the fall thereof!_” - -THE “WILL OF MY FATHER?” Is this “Father” identical with the God of -Mount Sinai and of the Commandments? Then what is the meaning of the -whole Chapter V. of Matthew, of the Sermon on the Mount, in which -every one of these Commandments is virtually criticised and -destroyed by the new amendments? - -“_Ye have heard that it hath been said ‘An eye for an eye, and a -tooth for a tooth’; but I say unto you that you resist not evil_,” -etc. - -Glance at the big centres of our Christian civilisations. Look at -the jails, the court and the prison-houses, the tribunals, and the -police; see the distress, with starvation and prostitution as its -results. Look at the host of the men of law and of judges; and then -see how far the words of Christ, “Love your enemies, bless them that -curse you, Judge not that ye be not judged,” apply to the whole -structure of our modern civilised life, and how far we may be called -_Christians_. - -How well the commandment—“_He that is without sin among you, let him -first cast a stone_”—is now obeyed, may be seen by following day -after day, the law reports for slander, calumny and defamation. -Obedience to the injunction, and warning against the sin of -offending children, “_these little ones_,” of whom is the Kingdom of -Heaven, is found in the brutal treatment of fatherless children on -the streets by the Christian police, of other children by their -parents, and finally, in the merciless flogging of wee bits of -culprits driven to crime by their own parents and starvation. And is -it those who denounce such an anti-Christian spirit in legislation, -the Pharisaical church and society, who shall be branded for -speaking the truth? The magistrate, who has sworn on the -Bible—contrary to Christ’s express injunction—to administer justice; -the pious defaulter, who swears falsely on it, but cannot be -convicted; the sanctimonious millionaire who fattens on the blood -and sweat of the poor; and the aristocratic “Jezebel” who casts mud -from her carriage wheels on her “fallen” sister, on the street, a -_victim perchance, of one of the men of her own high caste_—all -these call themselves Christians. The _anti-Christians_ are those -who dare to look behind that veil of respectability. - -The best answer to such paradoxical denunciation may be found in one -of “Saladin’s” admirable editorials. The reader must turn to _The -Secular Review_ for October 22nd, 1887, and read some pertinent -reflections on “The Bitter Cry of Outcast London,” and the -“Child-thieves” flogging. Well may a “heathen Chinee” or a “mild -Hindu” shudder in horror at the picture in it of that “drawing of -blood” out of the baby-bodies of infant thieves. The process is -executed by a Christian policeman acting under the orders and in the -presence of a righteous Christian magistrate. Has either of the two -ever given a thought during the “child-torture” to the words of -their Christ: “_Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones, it -is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he -were cast into the sea_”? - -Yes, they _are_ walking “in the ways of the God of Israel”! For, as -“_it repented the Lord that he had made man_” so wicked and so -imperfect, that “Lord” drowned and destroyed him “from the face of -the Earth,” without more ado. Verily so, “_both man and beast, and -the creeping thing and the fowls_,” though the latter had neither -sinned, nor were they “wicked.” And why shouldn’t the righteous men -on Earth do likewise? It repents the Christian citizens of pious -LUGDUNUM perchance also, that they create the starving little -wretches, the foundlings abandoned to vice from the day of their -birth? And the truly good Christian men, who would believe -themselves damned to hell-fire were they to miss their Sabbath -Service, forbidden by law to drown _their_ creatures, resort to the -next best thing they can; they “draw blood” from those little ones -whom their “Saviour” and Master took under his special protection. - -May the shadow of “Saladin” never grow less, for the fearless honest -words of truth he writes:— - - “And whose blood was in the veins of these two boys? Whose blood - reddened the twigs of the birch? Peradventure that of the - magistrate himself, or of the chaplain of the prison. For mystical - are the grinding of the wheels of the mill of misery. And God - looks on and tolerates. And I am accounted a heretic, and my - anti-Christian writings are produced against me in a Court of - Justice to prevent my getting justice, because I fail to see in - all this how Christianity “elevates” woman and casts a “halo of - sacred innocence round the tender years of the child.” So be it. I - have flung down my gage of battle, and the force of bigotry may - break me to death; but it shall never bend me to submission. - Unsalaried and ill-supported, I fight as stubbornly as if the - world flung at my feet its gold and laurels and huzzas; for the - weak need a champion and the wronged an avenger. It is necessary - that Sham find an opponent and Hypocrisy a foe: these they will - find in me, be the consequences what they may. - - “SALADIN.” - -This is the epitomized history of the “Unpopular Philosopher”; aye, -the story of all those who, in the words of “Lara,” know that -“Christianity will never save humanity, but humanity may save -Christianity,” _i.e._, the ideal spirit of the Christos-Buddha—of -THEOSOPHY. - - LUCIFER - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - VOL. I. LONDON, DECEMBER 15TH, 1887. NO. 4. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - “LUCIFER” TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, - GREETING! - -MY LORD PRIMATE OF ALL ENGLAND,— - -We make use of an open letter to your Grace as a vehicle to convey -to you, and through you, to the clergy, to their flocks, and to -Christians generally—who regard us as the enemies of Christ—a brief -statement of the position which Theosophy occupies in regard to -Christianity, as we believe that the time for making that statement -has arrived. - -Your Grace is no doubt aware that Theosophy is not a religion, but a -philosophy at once religious and scientific; and that the chief -work, so far, of the Theosophical Society has been to revive in each -religion its own animating spirit, by encouraging and helping -enquiry into the true significance of its doctrines and observances. -Theosophists know that the deeper one penetrates into the meaning of -the dogmas and ceremonies of all religions, the greater becomes -their apparent underlying similarity, until finally a perception of -their fundamental unity is reached. This common ground is no other -than Theosophy—the Secret Doctrine of the ages; which, diluted and -disguised to suit the capacity of the multitude, and the -requirements of the time, has formed the living kernel of all -religions. The Theosophical Society has branches respectively -composed of Buddhists, Hindoos, Mahomedans, Parsees, Christians, and -Freethinkers, who work together as brethren on the common ground of -Theosophy; and it is precisely because Theosophy is not a religion, -nor can for the multitude supply the place of a religion, that the -success of the Society has been so great, not merely as regards its -growing membership and extending influence, but also in respect to -the performance of the work it has undertaken—the revival of -spirituality in religion, and the cultivation of the sentiment of -BROTHERHOOD among men. - -We Theosophists believe that a religion is a natural incident in the -life of man in his present stage of development; and that although, -in rare cases, individuals may be born without the religious -sentiment, a community must have a religion, that is to say, _a -uniting bond_—under penalty of social decay and material -annihilation. We believe that no religious doctrine can be more than -an attempt to picture to our present limited understandings, in the -terms of our terrestrial experiences, great cosmical and spiritual -truths, which in our normal state of consciousness we vaguely -_sense_, rather than actually perceive and comprehend; and a -revelation, if it is to reveal anything, must necessarily conform to -the same earth-bound requirements of the human intellect. In our -estimation, therefore, no religion can be absolutely true, and none -can be absolutely false. A religion is true in proportion as it -supplies the spiritual, moral and intellectual needs of the time, -and helps the development of mankind in these respects. It is false -in proportion as it hinders that development, and offends the -spiritual, moral and intellectual portion of man’s nature. And the -transcendentally spiritual ideas of the ruling powers of the -Universe entertained by an Oriental sage would be as false a -religion for the African savage as the grovelling fetishism of the -latter would be for the sage, although both views must necessarily -be true in degree, for both represent the highest ideas attainable -by the respective individuals of the same cosmico-spiritual facts, -which can never be known in their reality by man while he remains -but man. - -Theosophists, therefore, are respecters of all the religions, and -for the religious ethics of Jesus they have profound admiration. It -could not be otherwise, for these teachings which have come down to -us are the same as those of Theosophy. So far, therefore, as modern -Christianity makes good its claim to be the _practical_ religion -taught by Jesus, Theosophists are with it heart and hand. So far as -it goes contrary to those ethics, pure and simple, Theosophists are -its opponents. Any Christian can, if he will, compare the Sermon on -the Mount with the dogmas of his church, and the spirit that -breathes in it, with the principles that animate this Christian -civilisation and govern his own life; and then he will be able to -judge for himself how far the religion of Jesus enters into his -Christianity, and how far, therefore, he and Theosophists are -agreed. But professing Christians, especially the clergy, shrink -from making this comparison. Like merchants who fear to find -themselves bankrupt, they seem to dread the discovery of a -discrepancy in their accounts which could not be made good by -placing material assets as a set-off to spiritual liabilities. The -comparison between the teachings of Jesus and the doctrines of the -churches has, however, frequently been made—and often with great -learning and critical acumen—both by those who would abolish -Christianity and those who would reform it; and the aggregate result -of these comparisons, as your Grace must be well aware, goes to -prove that in almost every point the doctrines of the churches and -the practices of Christians are _in direct opposition to the -teachings of Jesus_. - -We are accustomed to say to the Buddhist, the Mahomedan, the Hindoo, -or the Parsee: “The road to Theosophy lies, for you, through your -own religion.” We say this because those creeds possess a deeply -philosophical and esoteric meaning, explanatory of the allegories -under which they are presented to the people; but we cannot say the -same thing to Christians. The successors of the Apostles never -recorded the _secret doctrine_ of Jesus—the “mysteries of the -kingdom of Heaven”—which it was given to them (his apostles) alone -to know.[58] These have been suppressed, made away with, destroyed. -What have come down upon the stream of time are the maxims, the -parables, the allegories and the fables which Jesus expressly -intended for the spiritually deaf and blind to be revealed later to -the world, and which modern Christianity either takes all literally, -or interprets according to the fancies of the Fathers of the secular -church. In both cases they are like cut flowers: they are severed -from the plant on which they grew, and from the root whence that -plant drew its life. Were we, therefore, to encourage Christians, as -we do the votaries of other creeds, to study their own religion for -themselves, the consequence would be, not a knowledge of the meaning -of its mysteries, but either the revival of mediæval superstition -and intolerance, accompanied by a formidable outbreak of mere -lip-prayer and preaching—such as resulted in the formation of the -239 Protestant sects of England alone—or else a great increase of -scepticism, for Christianity has no esoteric foundation known to -those who profess it. For even you, my Lord Primate of England, must -be painfully aware that you know absolutely no more of those -“mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven” which Jesus taught his -disciples, than does the humblest and most illiterate member of your -church. - ------ - -Footnote 58: - - S. Mark, iv. 11; Matthew, xiii. 11; Luke, viii. 10. - ------ - -It is easily understood, therefore, that Theosophists have nothing -to say against the policy of the Roman Catholic Church in -forbidding, or of the Protestant churches in discouraging, any such -private enquiry into the meaning of the “Christian” dogmas as would -correspond to the esoteric study of other religions. With their -present ideas and knowledge, professing Christians are not prepared -to undertake a critical examination of their faith, with a promise -of good results. Its inevitable effect would be to paralyze rather -than stimulate their dormant religious sentiments; for biblical -criticism and comparative mythology have proved conclusively—to -those, at least, who have no vested interests, spiritual or -temporal, in the maintenance of orthodoxy—that the Christian -religion, as it now exists, is composed of the husks of Judaism, the -shreds of paganism, and the ill-digested remains of gnosticism and -neo-platonism. This curious conglomerate which gradually formed -itself round the recorded sayings (λογια) of Jesus, has, after the -lapse of ages, now begun to disintegrate, and to crumble away from -the pure and precious gems of Theosophic truth which it has so long -overlain and hidden, but could neither disfigure nor destroy. -Theosophy not only rescues these precious gems from the fate that -threatens the rubbish in which they have been so long embedded, but -saves that rubbish itself from utter condemnation; for it shows that -the result of biblical criticism is far from being the ultimate -analysis of Christianity, as each of the pieces which compose the -curious mosaics of the Churches once belonged to a religion which -had an esoteric meaning. It is only when these pieces are restored -to the places they originally occupied that their hidden -significance can be perceived, and the real meaning of the dogmas of -Christianity understood. To do all this, however, requires a -knowledge of the Secret Doctrine as it exists in the esoteric -foundation of other religions; and this knowledge is not in the -hands of the Clergy, for the Church has hidden, and since lost, the -keys. - -Your Grace will now understand why it is that the Theosophical -Society has taken for one of its three “objects” the study of those -Eastern religions and philosophies, which shed such a flood of light -upon the inner meaning of Christianity; and you will, we hope, also -perceive that in so doing, we are acting not as the enemies, but as -the friends of the religion taught by Jesus—of true Christianity, in -fact. For it is only through the study of those religions and -philosophies that Christians can ever arrive at an understanding of -their own beliefs, or see the hidden meaning of the parables and -allegories which the Nazarene told to the spiritual cripples of -Judea, and by taking which, either as matters of fact or as matters -of fancy, the Churches have brought the teachings themselves into -ridicule and contempt, and Christianity into serious danger of -complete collapse, undermined as it is by historical criticism and -mythological research, besides being broken by the sledge-hammer of -modern science. - -Ought Theosophists themselves, then, to be regarded by Christians -as their enemies, because they believe that orthodox Christianity -is, on the whole, opposed to the religion of Jesus; and because -they have the courage to tell the Churches that they are traitors -to the MASTER they profess to revere and serve? Far from it, -indeed. Theosophists know that the same spirit that animated the -words of Jesus lies latent in the hearts of Christians, as it does -naturally in all men’s hearts. Their fundamental tenet is the -Brotherhood of Man, the ultimate realisation of which is alone -made possible by that which was known long before the days of -Jesus as “the Christ spirit.” This spirit is even now potentially -present in all men, and it will be developed into activity when -human beings are no longer prevented from understanding, -appreciating and sympathising with one another by the barriers of -strife and hatred erected by priests and princes. We know that -Christians in their lives frequently rise above the level of their -Christianity. All Churches contain many noble, self-sacrificing, -and virtuous men and women, eager to do good in their generation -according to their lights and opportunities, and full of -aspirations to higher things than those of earth—followers of -Jesus in spite of their Christianity. For such as these, -Theosophists feel the deepest sympathy; for only a Theosophist, or -else a person of your Grace’s delicate sensibility and great -theological learning, can justly appreciate the tremendous -difficulties with which the tender plant of natural piety has to -contend, as it forces its root into the uncongenial soil of our -Christian civilization, and tries to blossom in the cold and arid -atmosphere of theology. How hard, for instance, must it not be to -“love” such a God as that depicted in a well-known passage by -Herbert Spencer: - - “The cruelty of a Fijian God, who, represented as devouring the - souls of the dead, may be supposed to inflict torture during the - process, is small, compared to the cruelty of a God who condemns - men to tortures which are eternal.... The visiting on Adam’s - descendants through hundreds of generations, of dreadful penalties - for a small transgression which they did not commit, the damning - of all men who do not avail themselves of an alleged mode of - obtaining forgiveness, which most men have never heard of, and the - effecting of reconciliation by sacrificing a son who was perfectly - innocent, to satisfy the assumed necessity for a propitiatory - victim, are modes of action which, ascribed to a human ruler, - would call forth expressions of abhorrence.” - - (“_Religion: a Retrospect and a Prospect._”) - -Your Grace will say, no doubt, that Jesus never taught the worship -of such a god as that. Even so say we Theosophists. Yet that is the -very god whose worship is officially conducted in Canterbury -Cathedral, by you, my Lord Primate of England; and your Grace will -surely agree with us that there must indeed be a divine spark of -religious intuition in the hearts of men, that enables them to -resist so well as they do, the deadly action of such poisonous -theology. - -If your Grace, from your high pinnacle, will cast your eyes around, -you will behold a Christian civilisation in which a frantic and -merciless battle of man against man is not only the distinguishing -feature, but the acknowledged principle. It is an accepted -scientific and economic axiom to-day, that all progress is achieved -through the struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest; -and the fittest to survive in this Christian civilization are not -those who are possessed of the qualities that are recognised by the -morality of every age to be the best—not the generous, the pious, -the noble-hearted, the forgiving, the humble, the truthful, the -honest, and the kind—but those who are strongest in selfishness, in -craft, in hypocrisy, in brute force, in false pretence, in -unscrupulousness, in cruelty, and in avarice. The spiritual and the -altruistic are “the weak,” whom the “laws” that govern the universe -give as food to the egoistic and material—“the strong.” That “might -is right” is the only legitimate conclusion, the last word of the -19th century ethics, for, as the world has become one huge -battlefield, on which “the fittest” descend like vultures to tear -out the eyes and the hearts of those who have fallen in the fight. -Does religion put a stop to the battle? Do the churches drive away -the vultures, or comfort the wounded and the dying? Religion does -not weigh a feather in the _world_ at large to-day, when worldly -advantage and selfish pleasures are put in the other scale; and the -churches are powerless to revivify the religious sentiment among -men, because their ideas, their knowledge, their methods, and their -arguments are those of the Dark Ages. My Lord Primate, your -Christianity is five hundred years behind the times. - -So long as men disputed whether this god or that god was the true -one, or whether the soul went to this place or that one after death, -you, the clergy, understood the question, and had arguments at hand -to influence opinion—by syllogism or torture, as the case might -require; but now it is the existence of any such being as God, at -all, or of any kind of immortal spirit, that is questioned or -denied. Science invents new theories of the Universe which -contemptuously ignore the existence of any god; moralists establish -theories of ethics and social life in which the non-existence of a -future life is taken for granted; in physics, in psychology, in law, -in medicine, the one thing needful in order to entitle any teacher -to a hearing is that no reference whatever should be contained in -his ideas either to a Providence, or to a soul. The world is being -rapidly brought to the conviction that god is a mythical conception, -which has no foundation in fact, or place in Nature; and that the -immortal part of man is the silly dream of ignorant savages, -perpetuated by the lies and tricks of priests, who reap a harvest by -cultivating the fears of men that their mythical God will torture -their imaginary souls to all eternity, in a fabulous Hell. In the -face of all these things the clergy stand in this age dumb and -powerless. The only answer which the Church knew how to make to such -“objections” as these, were _the rack and the faggot_; and she -cannot use that system of logic _now_. - -It is plain that if the God and the soul taught by the churches be -imaginary entities, then the Christian salvation and damnation are -mere delusions of the mind, produced by the hypnotic process of -assertion and suggestion on a magnificent scale, acting cumulatively -on generations of mild “hysteriacs.” What answer have you to such a -theory of the Christian religion, except a repetition of assertions -and suggestions? What ways have you of bringing men back to their -old beliefs but by reviving their old habits? “Build more churches, -say more prayers, establish more missions, and your faith in -damnation and salvation will be revived, and a renewed belief in God -and the soul will be the necessary result.” That is the policy of -the churches, and their only answer to agnosticism and materialism. -But your Grace must know that to meet the attacks of modern science -and criticism with such weapons as assertion and habit, is like -going forth against magazine guns, armed with boomerangs and leather -shields. While, however, the progress of ideas and the increase of -knowledge are undermining the popular theology, every discovery of -science, every new conception of European advanced thought, brings -the 19th century mind nearer to the ideas of the Divine and the -Spiritual, known to all esoteric religions and to Theosophy. - -The Church claims that Christianity is the only true religion, and -this claim involves two distinct propositions, namely, that -Christianity is true religion, and that there is no true religion -except Christianity. It never seems to strike Christians that God -and Spirit could possibly exist in any other form than that under -which they are presented in the doctrines of their church. The -savage calls the missionary an Atheist, because he does not carry an -idol in his trunk; and the missionary, in his turn, calls everyone -an Atheist who does not carry about a fetish in his mind; and -neither savage nor Christian ever seem to suspect that there may be -a higher idea than their own of the great hidden power that governs -the Universe, to which the name of “God” is much more applicable. It -is doubtful whether the churches take more pains to prove -Christianity “true,” or to prove that any other kind of religion is -necessarily “false;” and the evil consequences of this, their -teaching, are terrible. When people discard dogma they fancy that -they have discarded the religious sentiment also, and they conclude -that religion is a superfluity in human life—a rendering to the -clouds of things that belong to earth, a waste of energy which could -be more profitably expended in the struggle for existence. The -materialism of this age is, therefore, the direct consequence of the -Christian doctrine that there is no ruling power in the Universe, -and no immortal Spirit in man except those made known in Christian -dogmas. The Atheist, my Lord Primate, is the bastard son of the -Church. - -But this is not all. The churches have never taught men any other or -higher reason why they should be just and kind and true than the -hope of reward and the fear of punishment, and when they let go -their belief in Divine caprice and Divine injustice the foundations -of their morality are sapped. They have not even natural morality to -consciously fall back upon, for Christianity has taught them to -regard it as worthless on account of the natural depravity of man. -Therefore self-interest becomes the only motive for conduct, and the -fear of being found out, the only deterrent from vice. And so, with -regard to morality as well as to God and the soul, Christianity -pushes men off the path that leads to knowledge, and precipitates -them into the abyss of incredulity, pessimism and vice. The last -place where men would now look for help from the evils and miseries -of life is the Church, because they know that the building of -churches and the repeating of litanies influence neither the powers -of Nature nor the councils of nations; because they instinctively -feel that when the churches accepted the principle of expediency -they lost their power to move the hearts of men, and can now only -act on the external plane, as the supporters of the policeman and -the politician. - -The function of religion is to comfort and encourage humanity in its -life-long struggle with sin and sorrow. This it can do only by -presenting mankind with noble ideals of a happier existence after -death, and of a worthier life on earth, to be won in both cases by -conscious effort. What the world now wants is a Church that will -tell it of Deity, or the immortal principle in man, which will be at -least on a level with the ideas and knowledge of the times. Dogmatic -Christianity is not suited for a world that reasons and thinks, and -only those who can throw themselves into a mediæval state of mind, -can appreciate a Church whose religious (as distinguished from its -social and political) function is to keep God in good humour while -the laity are doing what they believe he does not approve; to pray -for changes of weather; and occasionally, to thank the Almighty for -helping to slaughter the enemy. It is not “medicine men,” but -spiritual guides that the world looks for to-day—a “clergy” that -will give it ideals as suited to the intellect of this century, as -the Christian Heaven and Hell, God and the Devil, were to the ages -of dark ignorance and superstition. Do, or can, the Christian clergy -fulfil this requirement? The misery, the crime, the vice, the -selfishness, the brutality, the lack of self-respect and -self-control, that mark our modern civilization, unite their voices -in one tremendous cry, and answer—NO! - -What is the meaning of the reaction against materialism, the signs -of which fill the air to-day? It means that the world has become -mortally sick of the dogmatism, the arrogance, the self-sufficiency, -and the spiritual blindness of modern science—of that same Modern -Science which men but yesterday hailed as their deliverer from -religious bigotry and Christian superstition, but which, like the -Devil of the monkish legends, requires, as the price of its -services, the sacrifice of man’s immortal soul. And meanwhile, what -are the Churches doing? The Churches are sleeping the sweet sleep of -endowments, of social and political influence, while the world, the -flesh, and the devil, are appropriating their watchwords, -their miracles, their arguments, and their blind faith. The -Spiritualists—oh! Churches of Christ—have stolen the fire from your -altars to illumine their séance rooms; the Salvationists have taken -your sacramental wine, and make themselves spiritually drunk in the -streets; the Infidel has stolen the weapons with which you -vanquished him once, and triumphantly tells you that “What you -advance, has been frequently said before.” Had ever clergy so -splendid an opportunity? The grapes in the vineyard are ripe, -needing only the right labourers to gather them. Were you to give to -the world some proof, on the level of the present intellectual -standard of probability, that Deity—the immortal Spirit in man—have -a real existence as facts in Nature, would not men hail you as their -saviour from pessimism and despair, from the maddening and -brutalizing thought that there is no other destiny for man but an -eternal blank, after a few short years of bitter toil and -sorrow?—aye; as their saviours from the panic-stricken fight for -material enjoyment and worldly advancement, which is the direct -consequence of believing this mortal life to be the be-all and -end-all of existence? - -But the Churches have neither the knowledge nor the faith needed to -save the world, and perhaps your Church, my Lord Primate, least of -all, with the mill-stone of £8,000,000 a year hung round its neck. -In vain you try to lighten the ship by casting overboard the ballast -of doctrines which your forefathers deemed vital to Christianity. -What more can your Church do now, than run before the gale with bare -poles, while the clergy feebly endeavour to putty up the gaping -leaks with the “revised version,” and by their social and political -deadweight try to prevent the ship from capsizing, and its cargo of -dogmas and endowments from going to the bottom? - -Who built Canterbury Cathedral, my Lord Primate? Who invented and -gave life to the great ecclesiastical organisation which makes an -Archbishop of Canterbury possible? Who laid the foundation of the -vast system of religious taxation which gives you £15,000 a year and -a palace? Who instituted the forms and ceremonies, the prayers and -litanies, which, slightly altered and stripped of art and ornament, -make the liturgy of the Church of England? Who wrested from the -people the proud titles of “reverend divine” and “Man of God” which -the clergy of your Church so confidently assume? Who, indeed, but -the Church of Rome! We speak in no spirit of enmity. Theosophy has -seen the rise and fall of many faiths, and will be present at the -birth and death of many more. We know that the lives of religions -are subject to law. Whether you inherited legitimately from the -Church of Rome, or obtained by violence, we leave you to settle with -your enemies and with your conscience; for our mental attitude -towards your Church is determined by its intrinsic worthiness. We -know that if it be unable to fulfil the true spiritual function of a -religion, it will surely be swept away, even though the fault lie -rather in its hereditary tendencies, or in its environments, than in -itself. - -The Church of England, to use a homely simile, is like a train -running by the momentum it acquired before steam was shut off. When -it left the main track, it got upon a siding that leads nowhere. The -train has nearly come to a standstill, and many of the passengers -have left it for other conveyances. Those that remain are for the -most part aware that they have been depending all along upon what -little steam was left in the boiler when the fires of Rome were -withdrawn from under it. They suspect that they may be only playing -at train now; but the engineer keeps blowing his whistle and the -guard goes round to examine the tickets, and the breaksmen rattle -their breaks, and it is not such bad fun after all. For the -carriages are warm and comfortable and the day is cold, and so long -as they are tipped all the company’s servants are very obliging. But -those who know where they want to go, are not so contented. - -For several centuries the Church of England has performed the -difficult feat of blowing hot and cold in two directions at -once—saying to the Roman Catholics “Reason!” and to the Sceptics -“Believe!” It was by adjusting the force of its two-faced blowing, -that it has managed to keep itself so long from falling off the -fence. But now the fence itself is giving way. Disendowment and -disestablishment are in the air. And what does your Church urge in -its own behalf? Its usefulness. It is _useful_ to have a number of -educated, moral, unworldly men, scattered all over the country, who -prevent the world from utterly forgetting the name of religion, and -who act as centres of benevolent work. But the question now is no -longer one of repeating prayers, and giving alms to the poor, as it -was five hundred years ago. The people have come of age, and have -taken their thinking and the direction of their social, private and -even spiritual affairs into their own hands, for they have found out -that their clergy know no more about “things of Heaven” than they do -themselves. - -But the Church of England, it is said, has become so liberal that -all ought to support it. Truly, one can go to an excellent imitation -of the mass, or sit under a virtual Unitarian, and still be within -its fold. This beautiful tolerance, however, only means that the -Church has found it necessary to make itself an open common, where -every one can put up his own booth, and give his special performance -if he will only join in the defence of the endowments. Tolerance and -liberality are contrary to the laws of the existence of any church -that believes in divine damnation, and their appearance in the -Church of England is not a sign of renewed life, but of approaching -disintegration. No less deceptive is the energy evinced by the -Church in the building of churches. If this were a measure of -religion what a pious age this would be! Never was dogma so well -housed before, though human beings may have to sleep by thousands in -the streets, and to literally starve in the shadow of our majestic -cathedrals, built in the name of Him who had not where to lay His -head. But did Jesus tell you, your Grace, that religion lay not in -the hearts of men, but in temples made with hands? You cannot -convert your piety into stone and use it in your lives; and history -shows that petrifaction of the religious sentiment is as deadly a -disease as ossification of the heart. Were churches, however, -multiplied a hundred fold, and were every clergyman to become a -centre of philanthropy, it would only be substituting the work that -the poor require from their fellow men but not from their spiritual -teachers, for that which they ask and cannot obtain. It would but -bring into greater relief the spiritual barrenness of the doctrines -of the Church. - -The time is approaching when the clergy will be called upon to -render an account of their stewardship. Are you prepared, my Lord -Primate, to explain to YOUR MASTER why you have given His children -stones, when they cried to you for bread? You smile in your fancied -security. The servants have kept high carnival so long in the inner -chambers of the Lord’s house, that they think He will surely never -return. But He told you He would come as a thief in the night; and -lo! He is coming already in the hearts of men. He is coming to take -possession of His Father’s kingdom there, where alone His kingdom -is. But you know Him not! Were the Churches themselves not carried -away in the flood of negation and materialism which has engulfed -Society, they would recognise the quickly growing germ of the -Christ-spirit in the hearts of thousands, whom they now brand as -infidels and madmen. They would recognise there the same spirit of -love, of self-sacrifice, of immense pity for the ignorance, the -folly, and the sufferings of the world, which appeared in its purity -in the heart of Jesus, as it had appeared in the hearts of other -Holy Reformers in other ages; and which is the light of all true -religion, and the lamp by which the Theosophists of all times have -endeavoured to guide their steps along the narrow path that leads to -salvation—the path which is trodden by every incarnation of CHRISTOS -or the SPIRIT OF TRUTH. - -And now, my Lord Primate, we have very respectfully laid before you -the principal points of difference and disagreement between -Theosophy and the Christian Churches, and told you of the oneness of -Theosophy and the teachings of Jesus. You have heard our profession -of faith, and learned the grievances and plaints which we lay at the -door of dogmatic Christianity. We, a handful of humble individuals, -possessed of neither riches nor worldly influence, but strong in our -knowledge, have united in the hope of doing the work which you say -that your MASTER has allotted to you, but which is so sadly -neglected by that wealthy and domineering colossus—the Christian -Church. Will you call this presumption, we wonder? Will you, in this -land of free opinion, free speech, and free effort, venture to -accord us no other recognition than the usual _anathema_, which the -Church keeps in store for the reformer? Or may we hope that the -bitter lessons of experience, which that policy has afforded the -Churches in the past, will have altered the hearts and cleared the -understandings of her rulers; and that the coming year, 1888, will -witness the stretching out to us of the hand of Christians in -fellowship and goodwill? This would only be a just recognition that -the comparatively small body called the Theosophical Society is no -pioneer of the Anti-Christ, no brood of the Evil one, but the -practical helper, perchance the saviour, of Christianity, and that -it is only endeavouring to do the work that Jesus, like Buddha, and -the other “sons of God” who preceded him, has commanded all his -followers to undertake, but which the Churches, having become -dogmatic, are entirely unable to accomplish. - -And now, if your Grace can prove that we do injustice to the Church -of which you are the Head, or to popular Theology, we promise to -acknowledge our error publicly. But—“SILENCE GIVES CONSENT.” - - “EMERSON AND OCCULTISM.” - - “’Tis thus at the roaring Loom of Time I ply, - And weave for God the garment thou seest Him by.” - - —_Erd. Geist_, FAUST. - -The sunset, to the boor a mere mass of evening vapours, presaging -rain for his fields or heat for his harvest, expands for the poet, -standing beside him and beholding the self-same firmament, into a -splendid picture, rich in crimson and purple, in golden light and -gleaming colour, mingled in harmonious purity. - -Whence so great a difference? - -The poet has finer eyes; and within the mere material forms -perceives a subtle essence, which flows everywhere through nature, -adding to all it touches a new wealth of joy and power. The poet’s -eyes have opened to a new reality; he no longer values things for -themselves; but in proportion as they contain this quality, they -become dear to him. - -But beyond the poet, there is yet a third rank. The poet, it is -true, rejoices in nature, and perceives its beauty and symbolic -character. But he rests in the beauty of the symbol, and does not -pass to the reality symbolised. Rapt in adoration of the beauty of -the garment, he does not pierce through to Him who wears the -garment. This remains for the philosopher—the sage. Yet the boor has -his place in Nature. He has tilled and subdued the soil, has brought -its latent powers into action; in command of nature, he is far in -advance of the mere nomad savage, for whom nature is a maze of -uncertain and unconquered forces. - -The savage, the boor, the poet; these types have their parallels in -mental life. - -When the crude conceptions of nature, which mark dawning -civilisation, give place to those fair and truer, because more -harmonious, views which bear the name of Science; when the principle -of Continuity, the reign of Universal Law, have displaced the first -notions of Chance and Discord, the work of the physical scientist is -done; he must stand aside, and make way for the philosopher, the -transcendentalist. Modern Science has replaced the crudities of -mediæval theology by the idea of an orderly universe permeated by -Law, binding alike the galaxy and the atom, as the tillage of the -farmer has replaced the nomadism of the savage. - -But within the world of the boor nestles the poet’s world, and -within the world of the physical scientist lies an ethereal, -spiritual universe, with its own powers, its own prophets. The great -trilogy of friends at the beginning of this century, who rose like -three mountain peaks above their contemporaries, Goethe, Carlyle, -and Emerson, were chosen by Destiny as prophets of this nature -within nature. - -Their gleanings have been rich enough to tempt many to enter the -same field, though they have no more exhausted its wealth than Homer -and Shakespeare have exhausted poetry. - -The new world they have explored, is the land of hope of the future, -for which we must leave the impoverished soil of theology, and the -arid deserts of materialism. - -What these three masters taught, Occultism teaches; and we propose -to show them as great natural masters in the mystic knowledge. - -To do this with any completeness in the space at our disposal is -necessarily impossible; for the present, we must content ourselves -with shewing from the writings of one of the masters, Emerson, that -he recognised some of the chief laws announced by Occultism. - -The first truth to be insisted on, concerning this nature within -nature, the spiritual universe, is that it exists for its own ends, -and not as an adjunct to the material world; in other words, the end -of morals is to make archangels rather than good citizens. - -Spirit is the reality; matter, the secondary; or, as Goethe says, -the _Garment_ of God. - -No occultist could insist on the subordinate character of matter -more vehemently than Emerson—he writes: - - “Nature is a mutable cloud, which is always and never the same. - Through the bruteness and toughness of matter, a subtle spirit - bends all things to its own will. The world proceeds from the same - spirit as the body of man. It is a _remoter and inferior - incarnation of God_, a projection of God into the unconscious.” - -The Occultist sees in this world of spirit the home of that true joy -of which all earthly happiness is the shadow, and whispered -intimation. There all ideals find their realization, all highest -hopes their fulfilment; there flow abundant fountains of celestial -bliss, whose least presence makes earthly things radiant. - -Of spirit, Emerson writes: - - “But when following the invisible steps of thought, we come to - enquire, Whence is matter? and where to? Many truths arise to us - out of the recesses of consciousness. We learn that the highest is - present to the soul of man, that the dread universal essence which - is not wisdom, or love, or beauty, or power; but all in one, and - each entirely, is that for which all things exist, and that by - which they are; that spirit creates; that behind nature, - throughout nature spirit is present. As a plant upon the earth, so - a man rests upon the bosom of God; he is nourished by unfailing - fountains, and draws, at his need, inexhaustible power.” - -But to obtain a footing in this world of essential being, is to be -emancipated from the domination of Time and Space, to enter a -universe where they do not exist; for Space and Time are no -realities, but, as Carlyle says, the “deepest of all _illusory -appearances_.” Emancipation from Space and Time; how much more this -implies than is at first sight apparent. The first fruit of this -freedom is a feeling of eternalness, the real basis of the doctrine -of immortality. It is an attainable reality, this sense of -eternalness; let the sceptic and materialist say what they will. - -Of this truth, also, we may bring Emerson as witness. He writes: - - “To truth, justice, love, the attributes of the soul, the idea of - _immutableness_ is essentially associated. In the flowing of love, - in the adoration of humility, there is no question of - continuance.” - -Once recognise the truth that we can gain a footing in a world free -from the tyranny of time, that the soul exists in such a world, and -a new philosophy is at once required. Freedom from Time implies the -eternity of the soul, and the facts of life and death take a new -position and significance. If the soul be eternal, death must be an -illusion, a garment in which Nature wraps some hidden law. - -In the following words of Emerson, on this subject: - - “It is the secret of the world that _all things subsist and do not - die_, but only retire a little from sight, and afterwards return - again. Whatever does not concern us, is concealed from us. As soon - as a person is no longer related to our present well-being, he is - concealed or _dies_, as we say. When the man has exhausted for the - time the nourishment to be drawn from any one person or thing, - that object is withdrawn from his observation, and though still in - his immediate neighbourhood, he does not suspect its presence. - Nothing is dead; men feign themselves dead, and endure mock - funerals and mournful obituaries, and there they stand looking out - of the window, sound and well, in some new disguise. Jesus is not - dead; he is very well alive; nor John, nor Paul, nor Mahomet, nor - Aristotle.” - -we have an accurate exposition of the occult doctrine of -Reincarnation—the progressive discipline of the soul through -many lives—which has been parodied in the popular fable of -metemphsychosis. - -The true occult doctrine does not picture a series of bodies in each -of which the soul makes a temporary sojourn. In this, as in all -else, it begins with spirit and then descends to matter. It depicts -that vital energy which we call a soul, alternately exuding from -itself and re-absorbing into its own nature an environment or -physical encasement, whose character varies with the increasing -stature of the soul. According to the teaching of occultism, the -successive formations of this objective shell—whose purpose is to -provide for the development of the animal nature—alternate with -periods of subjective life, which give expansion to the powers of -the soul. - -As corollary to this doctrine, occultism postulates a second—that -the incidents of each objective environment or physical life—are not -fortuitous and isolated, but that they are bound to all that precede -and follow them, and moreover that “the future is not arbitrarily -formed by any separate acts of the present, but that the whole -future is in unbroken continuity with the present, as the present is -with the past.” - -To the various developments of this law, eastern philosophy has -given the name of Karma; the west has as yet no name for it. But -though unnamed, its leading ideas have not been unperceived by those -western minds which have penetrated into the world of supernature. - -Thus we find Emerson writing: - - “Every secret is told, every crime is punished, every virtue - rewarded, every wrong redressed, in silence and certainty. Crime - and punishment grow on one stem; punishment is a fruit that - unsuspected ripens within the flower of pleasure which concealed - it. You cannot do wrong without suffering wrong. The thief steals - from himself; the swindler swindles himself. Everything in nature, - even motes and feathers, goes by law and not by luck. _What a man - sows, he reaps._” - -The picture of an orderly universe, where matter is the garment of -spirit—spirit visualised—where souls march onward in orderly -procession to boundless perfection; where the life of each permeates -and flows through the life of all; where the wrong of each is turned -to the benefit of all by the firm hand of an invisible and ever -active law, incessantly disciplining and correcting, till the last -dross of self and sin is purged away, and instead of man there -remains God only, working through the powers that were man’s; such -is the conception Occultism holds. - -“I know not,” says Emerson— - - “I know not whether there be, as is alleged, in the upper region - of our atmosphere a permanent westerly current, which carries with - it all atoms which rise to that height, but I see that when souls - reach a certain clearness of perfection, they accept a knowledge - and motive above selfishness. A breath of Will blows eternally - through the universe of souls in the direction of the Right and - Necessary. It is the air which all intellects inhale and exhale, - and it is the wind which blows the world into order and orbit. - - “Let us build altars to the Beautiful Necessity which rudely or - softly educates men to the perception that there are no - contingencies, that Law rules through existence, a Law which is - not intelligent but intelligence, not personal nor impersonal—it - disdains words, and passes understanding; it dissolves persons; it - vivifies nature, yet solicits the pure in heart to draw on its - all, its omnipotence.” - -Discipline always and everywhere throughout the universe; to -discipline, development, all other facts are subordinate; for their -sake, all laws are enunciated, all spiritual facts are insisted on; -all truths which tend not to the melioration of human life—if any -such there be—are worthless. Discipline, development. What -development does Occultism predict for man? Man’s future destiny, in -the view of Occultism, is so stupendous, that we prefer merely to -erect a finger-post pointing out the direction of the path, using -the words of Emerson: - - “The youth puts off the illusions of the child, the man puts off - the ignorance and tumultuous passions of the youth; proceeding - thence, puts off the egotism of manhood, and becomes at last a - public and universal soul. He is rising to greater height, but - also to realities; the outer relations and circumstances dying - out, he is entering deeper into God, God into him, until the last - garment of egotism falls, and he is with God, shares the will and - the immensity of the First Cause.” - -From first to last, Occultism has preached no doctrine more -emphatically than the necessity of dependence on the intuitions, and -the reality of interior illumination. “Seek out the way by making -the profound obeisance of the soul to the dim star that burns -within; within you is the light of the world,” writes the Occultist. - -And this doctrine is repeated again and again in the writings of the -philosopher we have been quoting from. He writes: - - “A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which - flashes across his mind from within, more than the lustre of the - firmament of bards and sages. From within or from behind, a light - shines through us upon things, and makes us aware that we are - nothing, but that the light is all. The consciousness in each man - is a sliding scale, which identifies him now with the First Cause, - and now with the flesh of his body; life above life, in infinite - degrees. There is for each a Best Counsel, which enjoins the fit - word and the fit act for every moment. There is no bar or wall in - the soul where man, the effect, ceases, and God, the cause, - begins. The walls are taken away, we lie open on one side to the - deeps of spiritual nature, to the attributes of God. The simplest - person who, in his integrity, worships God, becomes God; yet for - ever and ever the influx of this better and universal self is new - and unsearchable.” - -The life of one is the life of all. The good of one re-acts on all. -The walls by which selfishness conceives itself enclosed and -isolated, are unreal, have no existence. Spirit is fluid and -all-pervading; its beneficent power flows unchecked from soul to -soul, energising, harmonising, purifying. To resist all discordant -tendencies which check this salutary flow, this all-permeating love, -is to come under the reign of Universal Brotherhood; and to the -honour of Occultism be it said, that Universal Brotherhood is -blazoned highest on its standard. - -“Thus,” writes Emerson— - - —“Are we put in training for a love which knows not sex nor - person, nor partiality, but which seeks virtue and wisdom - everywhere. One day all men will be lovers, and every calamity - will be dissolved in universal sunshine. An acceptance of the - sentiment of love throughout Christendom for a season would bring - the felon and the outcast to our side in tears, with the devotion - of his faculties to our service.” - -But to the axiom “Kill out the sense of separateness” Occultism adds -another, “Yet stand alone.” Before the lesson of life can be learnt, -the soul must in some sort detach itself from its environment, and -view all things impersonally, in solitude and stillness. There is an -oracle in the lonely recess of the soul to which all things must be -brought for trial. Here all laws are tested, all appearances -weighed. - -About this truth always hangs a certain solemnity, and Emerson has -given it a fitting expression in the following words: - - “The soul gives itself alone, original, and pure, to the Lonely, - Original, and Pure, who, on that condition, gladly inhabits, - leads, and speaks through it. Then it is glad, young, and nimble. - Behold, it saith, I am born into the great, the universal mind. I, - the imperfect, adore my own Perfect. I am somehow receptive of the - great soul, and thereby I do overlook the sun and the stars, and - feel them to be the fair accidents and effects which change and - pass. More and more the surges of everlasting nature enter into - me, and I become public and human in my regards and actions. So I - come to live in thoughts, and act with energies, which are - immortal.” - -The last words of this sentence lead us to the occult idea of -_Mahatma-hood_, which conceives a perfected soul as “living in -thoughts, and acting with energies which are immortal.” - -The _Mahatma_ is a soul of higher rank in the realms of life, -conceived to drink in the wealth of spiritual power closer to the -fountain-head, and to distil its essence into the interior of -receptive souls. - -In harmony with this idea, Emerson writes: - - “Truth is the summit of being; justice is the application of it to - affairs. All individual natures stand in a scale, according to the - purity of this element in them. The will of the pure runs down - from them into other natures, as water runs down from a higher - into a lower vessel; this natural force is no more to be withstood - than any other natural force. A healthy soul stands united with - the Just and the True, as the magnet arranges itself with the - pole, so that he stands to all beholders like a transparent object - betwixt them and the sun, and whoso journeys towards the sun, - journeys towards that person.” - -Occultism conceives the outer world and all its accidents to be so -many veils, shrouding the splendour of essential nature, and -tempering the fiery purity of spirit to the imperfect powers of the -understanding soul. This illusory power Occultism considers to be -the “active will of God,” a means to the ends of eternal spirit. - -In the view of Occultism, life is a drama of thinly veiled souls; as -Shakespeare writes: - - “We are such stuff - As dreams are made of, and our little life - Is rounded with a sleep!” - -We shall conclude with two passages from Emerson’s essays, on the -subject of illusions: - - “Do you see that kitten chasing so prettily her own tail? If you - could look with her eyes, you might see her surrounded with - hundreds of figures performing complex dramas, with tragic and - comic issues, long conversations, many characters, many ups and - downs of fate; and meantime it is only puss and her tail. How long - before our masquerade will end its noise of tambourines, laughter, - and shouting, and we shall find it was a solitary performance?” - -We must supplement this rather playful passage with one in a higher -strain: - - “There is no chance, and no anarchy, in the universe. All is - system and gradation. Every god is there sitting in his sphere. - The young mortal enters the hall of the firmament; there is he - alone with them alone, they pouring on him benedictions and gifts, - and beckoning him up to their thrones. On an instant, and - incessantly, fall snowstorms and illusions. He fancies himself in - a vast crowd which sways this way and that, and whose movement and - doings he must obey: he fancies himself poor, orphaned, - insignificant. The mad crowd drives hither and thither, now - furiously commanding this thing to be done, now that. What is he - that he should resist their will, and think or act for himself? - Every moment new changes and new showers of deceptions to baffle - and distract him. And when, by-and-bye, for an instant, the air - clears, and the cloud lifts a little, there are the gods still - sitting around him on their thrones—they alone with him alone.” - - CHARLES JOHNSTON, F.T.S. - - =THE BLOSSOM AND THE FRUIT=: - - _THE TRUE STORY OF A MAGICIAN_. - - (_Continued._) - - --------------------- - - BY MABEL COLLINS, - - Scribe of “THE IDYLL OF THE WHITE LOTUS,” and “THROUGH THE GATES OF - GOLD.” - - [_Some of the readers of_ LUCIFER _have taken great exception to - the love passages between Fleta and Hilary, saying that they are - not up to the standard of Theosophic thought, and are out of place - in the magazine. The author can only beg that time may be given - for the story to develope. None of us that is born dies without - experiencing human passion; it is the base on which an edifice - must rise at last, after many incarnations have purified it; “it - is the blossom which has in it the fruit.” Hilary is still only a - man, he has not yet learned to the full the lesson of human life - and human passion. Fleta promises him all that he can take and - that plainly is only what she can give—the deep love of the - disciple. But she cannot instantly free his eyes from the - illusions caused by his own passionate heart; till he has suffered - and conquered, he cannot recognise her for what she is, the - pledged servant of a great master, of necessity more white-souled - than any nun need be._ - - _Another strange criticism is made, condemning portions of the - story as though expressive of the author’s feelings and - sentiments; whereas they are simply descriptive of the states - through which Hilary is passing. They no more express the author’s - feelings than do those later parts which refer to the ordeals of - Fleta, the accepted disciple, express the author’s feelings. The - two characters of the struggling aspirant and the advanced - disciple, are studies from life. The stumbling-block of human - passion which stands in Hilary’s way, is the same which lost - Zanoni his high estate; in the coming chapters of “The Blossom and - the Fruit,” we shall see Fleta flung back from the high estate she - aims at, by this same stumbling-block, in an idealised and subtle - form. She has not yet learned the bitter truth that the Occultist - must stand absolutely alone, without even companionship of - thought, or sympathy of feeling, at the times of the Initiations - and the trials which precede them._—M. C.] - - --------------------- - - CHAPTER VI.—(_Continued._) - -Hilary found himself in a room which no longer permitted him to -regret his own rooms at home, for it was more luxurious. A great -bath stood ready filled with perfumed water, and he hastened to -bathe himself therein, with a sort of idea that he was perhaps -suffering from hallucinations, some of which he might wash away. His -scanty luggage had been brought into the room, and when the bath was -over Hilary got out a velvet suit which he thought would do well for -evening-dress in this palace of surprises. He was but just ready -when a knock came at his door, and without further ceremony, Mark -opened it and looked in. - -“Come,” he said, “we don’t wait for anybody here. The cook won’t -stand it. He is a very holy father indeed, and nobody dare say him -nay, unless it were the Princess herself. She always does as she -likes. Are you ready?” - -“Quite,” replied Hilary. - -Opening out of the entrance was a great oak door, double, and very -richly carved. This had been shut when Hilary passed through before; -now it stood open, and Mark led the way through it. They entered an -immense room, of which the floor was polished so that it shone like -a mirror. Two figures were standing in the midst of this room, -dressed alike in clouds of white lace; they were the two Fletas, as -to Hilary’s eyes they still seemed. - -His heart was torn as he gazed on them, waiting for a glance of -love, a gleam of love-light, to tell him which was his own, his -Fleta, his princess, the Fleta whom he served. There was none; they -had been talking together very earnestly and both looked sad and a -little weary. - -As Hilary’s eyes wandered from one face to the other his mind grew -confused. And then suddenly a flash of bewitchingly beautiful -laughter came on one of the faces; and immediately he decided that -must be Adine. And yet, had he not seen just such laughter flash -across Fleta’s face? But all this passed in a moment, and no more -time was given him for thought. A table stood at one end of the -hall, set as a king’s table might be; covered with the finest linen, -edged with deep lace, and with gold dishes of fruit upon it; it was -decorated with lovely flowers. Hilary opened his eyes a little even -in the midst of his other much greater perplexities, to see this -luxury here in the midst of the forest. And was it prepared in -honour of Fleta, who ate a crust of dry bread in an ale-house with -perfect cheerfulness, or rather, indifference? Fleta took her place -at the end of the table; at least, one sister did so, and the other -took her place beside Hilary—he could not yet determine which was -which, and his whole soul was absorbed in the attempted solution of -that problem. Mark sat at the other end of the table, evidently -prepared to do such labours of carving as might be necessary. Two -places were set at the other side of the table, but no one came to -fill them. A very elaborate dinner was served, and a very good one; -and Hilary thought he was satisfied now that it was Adine who sat -next him, for she showed herself an unmistakable little gourmand. He -had just come to this conclusion when his attention was distracted -by the great doors being thrown open again for two persons to enter. -Everyone rose, even Fleta, who advanced with a smile to meet these -new comers. Hilary rose also and turned from the table. Two men -stood there; one a man but little older than himself, and of -extremely fine appearance. Little more than a boy, yet he had a -dignity which made him something much more, and Hilary felt -immediately a kind of jealousy, undefined, vague, but still -jealousy. For Fleta had put both her hands into those of this -handsome young man and greeted him with great warmth. At his side -stood a small shrivelled old man, in the same dress that Father -Amyot always wore. This circumstance again made Hilary wonder what -had become of Father Amyot; but he concluded Adine’s account had -been the correct one. - -There was something familiar in the face of the young man, so Hilary -thought; while he was thinking this, Fleta turned and introduced -them to each other. - -He was the young king to whom Fleta was betrothed. - -This is a history of those things which lie behind the scenes, not a -history of that which is known to all the world. We will give this -young King the name of Alan. Let those who like fix upon his kingdom -and assign to him his true name. - -He sat down opposite Hilary; and the old priest took his place -beside him. Hilary returned to his chair, feeling that all strength, -and hope, and power, and life had gone from him. By a fierce and -terrible revulsion of his whole nature and all his recent feelings, -he returned to his cynical estimate of mankind and most of all of -Fleta. She had brought him to this place simply to taunt and harass -him and show him his madness and folly in aspiring to her love in -the face of such a rival. It cut Hilary’s heart like a knife to find -the young King so magnificent a creature. And Fleta, why had she -come here to meet him? Why had she brought her unhappy lover with -her? Hilary tore himself with doubts, and fears, and questions; and -sat silent, not even noticing the plates that were placed before him -and taken away untouched. The others talked and laughed gaily, Alan -being apparently possessed of a hundred things to say. Hilary did -not hear what they were, but it annoyed him to find his rival -speaking so much in that rich, musical voice of his, while he -himself sat dumb, silenced by a bitter pain that tore his heart. - -“You are sad,” said a soft voice at his side, “it is hard, if you -love Fleta, to see her monopolised by some one else. How often have -I had to suffer it? Well, it must be so, I suppose. Why am I sorry -for you. I wonder? For if Alan were not here you would monopolise -Fleta, and have no eyes for anyone else. Ah me!” - -The sigh was very tender, the voice very low and soft; and that -voice was Fleta’s voice, those lovely eyes uplifted to his were -Fleta’s eyes. Yes, it was so! He thought as he looked back. Did he -not know Fleta well enough by now? - -“Ah, you are playing with me,” he exclaimed eagerly, “it is Fleta -now, not Adine! Is it not so? Oh, my love, my love, be honest and -tell me!” - -He spoke like this under cover of the others’ voices, but Fleta -looked round alarmed. - -“Hush!” she said, “take care. Your life would be lost if you -revealed our secret here. After dinner is over, come with me.” - -This appointment made Hilary happy again; his heart leaped up, his -pulses throbbed; all the world changed. He found some fruit was -before him, he began to eat it, and to drink the wine in his glass. -Fleta was watching him. - -“You have just begun to dine!” said Fleta with a soft laugh. “Well, -never mind; you are young and strong. Do you think you could live -through a great many hardships?” - -Hilary made the lover’s answer, which is so evident that it need not -be recorded. He did not know how he said it, but he desired to tell -her that for her he would endure anything. She laughed again. - -“It may be so!” she said thoughtfully; and then he caught her eyes -fixed upon him with a searching glance that for an instant seemed to -turn the blood cold in his veins. His terrible thoughts and doubts -of her returned again the more fiercely for their momentary -repulsion. He emptied his glass, but eat nothing more, and was very -glad when they all rose from the table together, a few moments -later. He followed the figure of the girl who had sat next him since -Alan’s entrance, believing that Fleta had then changed her place. -She went across the great room and led the way into a greenhouse -which opened out of it. A very wonderful greenhouse it was, full of -the strangest plants. They were extremely beautiful, and yet in some -way they inspired in him a great repugnance. They were of many -colours, and the blossoms were variously shaped, but evidently they -were all of one species. - -“These are very precious,” said Fleta, looking at the flowers near -her tenderly. “I obtain a rare and valuable substance from them. You -have seen me use it,” she added, after a moment’s pause. Hilary -longed to leave the greenhouse and sit elsewhere; but that was so -evidently not Fleta’s wish that he could not suggest it. There were -seats here and there among the flowers, and she placed herself upon -one of them, motioning Hilary to sit beside her. - -“Now,” she said, “I am going to tell you a great many things which -you have earned the right to know. To begin with, you are now in a -monastery, belonging to the most rigid of the religious orders.” - -“Are you a Catholic?” asked Hilary suddenly. And then laughed at -himself for such a question. How could Fleta be catalogued like -this? He knew her to be a creature whose thought could not be -limited. - -“No,” she answered simply. “I am not a Catholic. But I belong to -this order. I fear such an answer will be so unintelligible as to be -like an impertinence. Forgive me, Hilary.” - -Ah, what a tone she spoke in, gentle, sweet—the voice of the woman -he loved. Hilary lost all control over himself. He sprang to his -feet and stood before her. - -“I do not want to know your religion,” he exclaimed passionately, “I -do not want to know where we are, or why we are here. I ask you only -this—Are you indeed my love given to me, as you said this -morning?—or is your love given to the king, and are you only -laughing at me. It is enough to make me think so, to bring me here -to meet him! Oh, it is a cruel insult, a cruel mockery! For, Fleta, -you have made me love you with all my heart and soul. My whole life -is yours. Be honest and tell me the truth.” - -“You have a powerful rival,” said Fleta deliberately. “Is he not -handsome, courtly, all that a king should be? And I am pledged to -him. Yes, Hilary, I am pledged to him. Would you have the woman you -love live a lie for your sake, and hourly betray the man she -marries?” - -“I would have her give me her love,” said Hilary despairingly, “at -all costs, at all hazards. Oh, Fleta, do not keep me in agony. You -said this morning that you loved me, that you would give yourself to -me. Are you going to take those words back?” - -“No,” said Fleta, “I am not. For I do love you, Hilary. Did I not -see you first in my sleep? Did I not dream of you? Did I not come to -your house in search of you? Unwomanly, was it not? No one but Fleta -would have done it. And Fleta would only have done it for love. You -do not know what she risked—what she risks now—for you! Oh, Hilary, -if you could guess what I have at stake. Never mind. None can know -my own danger but myself.” - -“Escape from it!” said Hilary in a sort of madness. A passionate -desire to help her came over him and swept all reasonable thoughts -away. “You are so powerful, so free, there is no need for you to -encounter danger. Does it lie in these people, in this strange -place? Come back then to the city, to your home. What is there to -induce you to run risks, you that have all that the world can offer? -Is there anything you need that you cannot have?” - -“Yes,” said Fleta, “there is. I need something which no power of -royalty can give me. I need something which I may have to sacrifice -my life to obtain. Yet I am ready to sacrifice it—oh, how ready! -What is my life to me! What is my life to me! Nothing!” - -She had risen and was impatiently walking to and fro, moving her -hands with a strange eager gesture as she did so; and her eyes were -all aflame. This was the woman he loved. This, who said her life was -nothing to her. Hilary forgot all else that was strange in her words -and manner in the thought of this. Could she then return his -love—no, it was impossible, if she meant these strange and terrible -words that she uttered! - -“Ah, this it is that keeps me back,” she said, before he had time to -speak. Her voice had altered, and her face had grown pale, so pale -that he forgot everything else in watching her. - -“This it is that keeps me from my strength, this longing for it!” -And with a heavy sigh she moved back to her seat and fell into it -with a weariness he had never seen in her before. Her head drooped -on her breast, she fell into profound thought. Presently she spoke -again, disjointedly, and in such words as seemed unintelligible. - -“I have always been too impatient, too eager,” she said sadly, “I -have always tried to take what I longed for without waiting to earn -it. So it was long ago, Hilary, when you and I stood beneath those -blossoming trees, long ages ago. I broke the peace that kept us -strong and simple. I caused the torment of pain and peril to arise -in our lives. We have to live it out—alas, Hilary, we have to live -it out!—and live beyond it. How long will it take us—how long will -it take!” - -There was a despair, an agony in her voice and manner, that were so -new, he was bewildered, he hardly recognised her. Her moods changed -so strangely that he could not follow them, for he had not the key; -he could not read her thought. He sat dumb, looking in her sad drawn -face. - -“My love, my love,” he murmured at last, hardly knowing that he -spoke, hardly knowing what his thought was that he spoke, only full -of longing. “Would that I could help you! Would that I understood -you!” - -“Do you indeed wish to?” asked Fleta, her voice melting into a sort -of tender eagerness. - -“Do you not know it?” exclaimed Hilary. “My soul is burning to meet -yours and to recognise it, to stand with you and help you. Why are -you so far off, so like a star, so removed and unintelligible to me, -who love you so! Oh, help me to change this, to come nearer to you!” - -Fleta rose slowly, her eyes fixed upon his face. - -“Come,” she said. And she held out her hand to him. He put his into -it, and together, hand in hand, they left the conservatory. They did -not enter the great dining hall, where now there was music and -dancing as Hilary could see and hear. They left the house of the -strange flowers by a different doorway, which admitted them to a -long dim corridor. Fleta opened the door by a key that was attached -to a chain hanging from her waist; and she closed it behind her. -Hilary asked no questions, for she seemed buried in thought so -profound that he did not care to rouse her. - -At the end of the corridor was a small and very low doorway. Fleta -stooped and knocked, and without waiting for any answer pushed the -door open. - -“May I come in, Master?” she said. - -“Come, child,” was the answer, in a very gentle voice. - -“I am bringing some one with me.” - -“Come,” was repeated. - -They entered. The room was small, and was dimly lit by a shaded -lamp. Beside the table, on which this stood, sat a man, reading. He -put a large book which he had been holding, on to the table, and -turned towards his visitors. Hilary saw before him the handsomest -man he had ever seen in his life. He was still young, though Hilary -felt himself to be a boy beside him; he rose from his chair and -stood before them very tall and very slight, and yet there was that -in his build which suggested great strength. He looked attentively -at Hilary for a moment, and then turned to Fleta. - -“Leave him here.” Fleta bowed and immediately went out of the room -without another word. Hilary gazed upon her in amazement. Was this -the proud, imperious princess who yielded such instant and ready -obedience? It seemed incredible. But he forgot the extraordinary -sight immediately afterwards in the interest excited by his new -companion, who at once addressed him: - -“The Princess has often spoken to me of you,” he said, “and I know -she has much wished that this moment should arrive. She will be -satisfied if she thinks you appreciate with your inner senses the -step you are about to take if you accord with her wishes. But I -think it right you should know it in every aspect as far as that is -possible. If you really desire to know Fleta, to approach her, to -understand her, you must give up all that men ordinarily value in -the world.” - -“I have it not to surrender,” said Hilary rather bitterly, “my life -is nothing splendid.” - -“No, but you are only at the beginning of it. To you the future is -full of promise. If you desire to be the Princess Fleta’s companion, -your life is no longer your own.” - -“No—it is hers—and it is hers now!” - -“Not so. It is not hers now, nor will it be hers then. Not even your -love does she claim for her own. She has nothing.” - -“I don’t understand,” said Hilary simply. “She is the Princess of -this country; she will soon be the Queen of another. She has all -that the world has to give a woman.” - -“Do you not know the woman you love better than to suppose that she -cares for her position in the world?” demanded this man whom Fleta -called her master. “At a word from me, at any hour, at any time she -will leave her throne and never return to it. That she will do this -certainly some day I know very well; and her sister will take her -place, the world being no wiser than it now is. Fleta looks forward -to this change eagerly.” - -“Well, perhaps,” admitted Hilary. - -“Neither has she your love nor your life as her own. In loving her -you love the Great Order to which she belongs, and she will gladly -give your love to its right owner. She has done this already in -bringing you to me.” - -Hilary started to his feet, stung beyond endurance. - -“This is mere nonsense, mere insult,” he said angrily, “Fleta has -accepted my love with her own lips.” - -“That is so,” was the answer, “and she is betrothed to King Alan.” - -“I know that,” said Hilary in a low voice. - -“And what did you hold Fleta to be then? A mere pleasure seeker, -playing with life like the rest, devoid of honour and principle? Was -this your estimate of the woman you loved? What else indeed could it -be, when you said, let her give her hand to King Alan while you know -her love is yours! And you could love such a woman! Hilary Estanol, -you have been reared in a different school than this. Does not your -own conscience shame you?” - -Hilary stood silent. Every word struck home. He knew not what to -say. He had been wilfully blinding himself; the bandages were rudely -drawn aside. After a long pause he spoke, hesitatingly: - -“The Princess cannot be judged as other women would be; she is -unlike all others.” - -“Not so, if she is what you seem to think her; then she is just like -the rest, one of the common herd.” - -“How can you speak of her in that way?” - -“How can you think of her as you do, dishonouring her by your -thoughts?” - -The two stood opposite each other now, and their eyes met. A strange -light seemed to struggle into Hilary’s soul as these bitter words -rang sharply on his ear. Dishonouring her? Was it possible? He -staggered back and leaned against the wall, still gazing on the -magnificent face before him. - -“Who are you?” he said at last. - -“I am Father Ivan, the superior of the order to which the Princess -Fleta belongs,” was the reply. But another voice spoke when his -ceased, and Hilary saw that Fleta had entered, and was standing -behind him. - -“And he is the master of knowledge, the master in life, the master -in thought, of whom the Princess Fleta is but a poor and impatient -disciple. Master, forgive me! I cannot endure to hear you speak as -if you were a monk, the mere tool of a religion, the mere professor -of a miserable creed.” - -She sank on her knees before Father Ivan, in an attitude strangely -full of humility. The priest bent down and lifted her to her feet. -They stood a moment in silence, side by side, Fleta’s eyes upon his -face devouring his expression with a passionate and adoring -eagerness. How splendid they looked! Suddenly Hilary saw it, and a -wild, fierce, all-devouring flame of jealousy awoke in his heart—a -jealousy such as King Alan, no, nor a hundred King Alans, could not -have roused in him. - -For he saw that this Ivan, who wore a priest’s dress, yet was -evidently no priest, who spoke as if this world had no longer any -meaning for him, yet who was magnificent in his personal presence -and power—he saw that this man was Fleta’s equal. And more, he saw -that Fleta’s whole face melted and softened, and grew strangely -sweet, as she looked on him. Never had Hilary seen it like that. -Never had Hilary dreamed it could look like that. Stumbling like a -blind man he felt for the door, which he knew was near, and escaped -from the room—how he knew not. Hurriedly he went on, through places -he did not see, and at last found himself in the open air. He went -with great strides away through the tall ferns and undergrowth until -he found himself in so quiet a spot that it appeared as if he were -alone in the great forest. Then he flung himself upon the ground and -yielded to an agony of despair which blotted out sky and trees and -everything from his gaze, like a great cloud covering the earth. - -(_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - TWILIGHT. - - I sit alone in the twilight, - Dreaming—but not as of old; - Blind to the flickering fire-light, - Mystic visions my spirit enfold. - - What means this struggle within me, - This new hope of a far-off goal? - This fighting against superstition, - That would fetter my awakening soul? - - Why cannot I pray as I once did, - For self before all the world? - Whence came the flash of lightning - That self from its pedestal hurled? - - But what if I’m struggling blindly, - What if this new hope is vain, - Can I go back to my old faith? - A voice whispers—“Never again.” - - So I will press forward—believing - Hands unseen will guide to the goal, - And tho’ dim yet the light on my pathway, - Nirväna breathes peace to my soul. - - _K. D. K._ - - THE SPIRIT OF HEALING. - -It is somewhat difficult to say what real or theosophical work is -when exactly defined, and, in consequence, it becomes very easy to -speak of an effort as untheosophical—that is not sufficiently -unselfish in motive. The fact is that the word Theosophy has such a -very wide meaning, embracing, as it does, the true spirit of all -creeds and religions, and confining itself to none in particular, -that no work done in the spirit of truth and wisdom is really -untheosophical. Hence, unless the speaker is possessed of more -knowledge than ordinary men concerning the causes which underlie our -actions, the application of the word untheosophical is incorrect. In -fact, if it is once granted that it is possible to work from an -impersonal standpoint in favour of a particular creed or religion, -that work becomes theosophical in character. Thus it is only work -(in the widest sense of the word and on all planes) from the -personal standpoint, and which, therefore, militates against -Universal Brotherhood, which can really be described as -untheosophical. But this by no means presupposes that work which has -outwardly the appearance of theosophical genuineness is not really -selfish. It is, of course, the old story of the wolf in sheep’s -clothing. We do but need one example—the truly-called _profession_ -of Medicine. We constantly hear of the wonderful self-sacrifice of -medical men; of men who die at their posts rather than desert a -possible case in times of epidemic and cholera; of men who suck -tracheotomy tubes with almost certain death by diphtheria staring -them in the face; finally we hear, though but seldom, of the honest, -earnest devotion of a lifetime in places and districts where the -fees are so small that it is barely possible for the doctor to live -on his earnings. These are the heroes of the profession. Their work, -for the most part, consists of an unselfish devotion to the -alleviation of suffering, culminating in a final sacrifice of their -personal selves—for death is nothing less than this. But we must -turn to the less favourable side of the picture—the struggle not for -a living, but for wealth, and work, fired by ambition and the search -for fame. Of course, apart from the personal, selfish element in it, -the ambitious struggle in other professions than those of the Church -or Medicine is of no great or unnatural harm; but in these two cases -it is more than harmful, it is a degrading betrayal of trust. It is -Simonism with a vengeance; yes, kind friends, it approaches very -nearly to the case of Judas, who held the bag, and betrayed his -Master with a kiss. It may be asked why this sweeping denunciation -is made of the two noblest professions; of those two which, -considered from the ethical standpoint, consist of devotion to the -service of man? The reason is not very far to seek. The power which -true healers possess—healers alike of body and soul, is not one -which can be sold for money or bartered for wealth and fame. At -least, if the possibility does exist, it bears a suspicious -resemblance to the old idea of selling one’s soul to the devil in -exchange for power and prosperity. It may be replied to this that -there is no harm in bartering knowledge of drugs, of pathology, -diagnosis of disease, surgical skill, etc.—in short, all the -knowledge acquired by education—for money. I answer No! for it is -material given for material, and nothing more. But these are not the -sole properties of the true healer, and those who do not possess -these other properties I speak of are not healers, and while they -may _profess_ medicine[59] and may be _in_ it, are yet not _of_ it. - ------ - -Footnote 59: - - So medicine is, in the Shakespearian use of the word, and also - from its Greek derivation, not to give drugs, but to cure or heal. - ------ - -As regards the Church and its professors of religion, the case is -even worse; they have no material products of education to barter, -and for the most part are contented with telling their flock to “do -as I bid you, and not as I do.” But among them there are noble -examples of unswerving unselfishness and devotion, although for the -most part those who enter the Church are too young to understand -fully the nature of their high calling. Unfortunately the call in -too many cases is not a call to minister and heal souls, but to make -a living and heal the souls in the process. But again, it may be -asked, what are these wonderful powers which constitute the true -healer, and which are not to be bought or sold? The first one which -occurs naturally to the mind is the power of sympathy. The old joke -in _Punch_ about “the good bedside manner” has a considerable -substratum of truth when divested of its unpleasing folly. The -substratum of that manner is that which is given by sympathy; and -this is one of the first elements which constitute the power of -healing. It gives the power of suffering with the patient and -therefore of understanding what the sufferer is enduring. It is -beyond diagnosis, although it assists it by being much surer—at -least, as to the reality of the suffering. But this power of -sympathy only expresses a part of the meaning of the power to heal. -Sympathy tends to annihilate the personal distinctions between the -healer and the sufferer; it tends to exalt the consciousness of the -healer not only to know the remedy for the disease, but to be -himself the power of cure, and also it is a vast occult power in -virtue of which all the “elder brethren” of the Universal -Brotherhood live their lives; in virtue of which the world’s great -enlighteners have not only lived their lives but _lived their -death_, in order that they might benefit the sufferers who despised -and rejected them. But this power of sympathy and the kindred powers -which constitute the true healer, are really secret powers and -secret remedies. Therefore they are openly tabooed by the medical -profession, although the said professors cannot avoid using them. -But secret remedies are to some degree justly avoided. For it is but -natural to regard secret remedies with suspicion. At best their use -seems like working in the dark and blindly, and, consequently, any -results obtained must be empirical. Again, the medical profession -seems to plume and feather itself upon possessing a slight leaven of -its ideal condition, and, by constituting itself into a kind of -trades’ union, declines as a body to have anything to do with any -remedy of which the composition is not made fully known. This, at -least, is the more charitable view, for, on the other hand, the -doctors know only too well how eagerly the public rushes after any -new “quack” medicine, and seeks to cure itself without calling in -their aid. The doctors reply to this that they will have nothing to -do with a medicine whose composition is a secret, and which is -therefore devoted, to a great extent, to replenishing the purse of -its discoverer, and not to the cure of diseases from a love of man -and a hatred of suffering. This is a very high-sounding idea, and a -noble one, when it is not what the Americans would call only -“high-falutin.” But even when a remedy is made public property, it -is not necessarily _pro bono publico_; in fact, as a rule, it serves -only the good of the dispensing chemist. He sees the prescription -and notes it, the public does not; and, as a rule, the chemist -obtains the drugs cheaply, and compounds them at the same rate as -this medicine was originally sold under the patent of its -discoverer. Still, with all the dislike of the profession for secret -remedies, there is no doubt at all that in the case of the heads of -the profession some of the best results are obtained by the use of -prescriptions, which practically constitute a secret formula. The -especial combination which the particular man has discovered to be -of use is his property, and his only until he writes a book, for the -various chemists who make it up, and the various patients who drink -it, are not to the full aware of its value and use. The difference -between this and quack medicine lies merely in the peculiar names -and large advertisements, but very often these are balanced by the -fame of the particular surgeon or physician. But, in all honour to -physicians and surgeons, who do in many cases have and show a -large-hearted sympathy for suffering, it must be remembered that -many of the greatest and busiest of them give hours of their -valuable time to those who are too poor to pay in any other form -than that of grateful thanks. There are, again, others who disregard -all the rules which govern trades’ union society, and boldly take -their stand upon Christ’s dictum, that “the Sabbath was made for man -and not man for the Sabbath.” In other words, they say that any -medicine which they personally find valuable in the alleviation of -pain and disease must be used even at the risk of themselves being -called “unprofessional.” Again, others will use these so-called -secret remedies, and say nothing about it, preferring to pin their -faith to the wittily termed eleventh commandment, “Thou shalt not be -found out.” At this point it is possible to draw a parallel between -the use of the terms “untheosophical” and “unprofessional.” It would -seem that both are used in very much the same trades’ union sense. -In the case of the word “unprofessional,” it is to be regretted that -it is due very largely to a lack of charity and of the spirit of -enquiry. In the case of the word “untheosophical” it is often used -in consequence of a lack of charity, and further in the spirit of -scandal and gossip. Unless a man or woman is a theosophist pure and -simple, who carries out in their _entirety_, the objects of the -Theosophical Society, the use of the word untheosophical betrays -_them_ to be untheosophical and to fail in carrying out those -objects which they have promised to further to the best of their -power. - -In the light of the foregoing it is now possible to examine the -manner in which Count Mattei’s remedies have been received. The -Count himself is a member of a noble family of Bologna, he has -travelled much, but returned there in 1847, and took part in the -movement which led to the liberation of Italy. In early life he much -wished to study medicine, but was prevented from doing so by his -father’s wish. Still his desire for knowledge was not quenched, and -he attempted to follow the bent of his own mind. He rightly -concluded that the instincts of the lower animals would lead them to -search for herbs and plants which would cure their ailments, and -that careful observation of these instincts might disclose medicines -of the greatest value to human sufferers. Thus he adopted the habit -of taking walks in the company of a number of dogs which were -suffering from various diseases, and carefully watched their -proceedings. Gradually the new pharmacopœia assumed shape, and the -instinct of the dogs showed that particular diseases were met by -particular remedies. These observations were made more than sixty -years ago, and were not forgotten amid the occupations of a busy -life. Indeed, when those occupations became less, Count Mattei -returned with ardour to his earlier studies. He became a deputy in -the Roman Parliament, but retired into private life after finding -that his political views were not those of the men by whom he was -surrounded. After this retirement the Count devoted himself to the -study of medicine, in order that he might fit himself to apply -certain principles which he believed he had discovered to be -valuable for sick and suffering humanity. By his own account and the -testimony of his patients he was not deceived, and the present -remedies which bear his name are the result of twenty-five years’ -unceasing labour and experiment. He rapidly acquired an enormous -practice, and during the early years of it his advice and his -medicines were entirely gratis. But an unfortunate combination of -circumstances, as well as the expense entailed by the preparation of -the remedies, rendered it necessary for the Count to demand some -small remuneration for his services. Then he learned that his bounty -was abused, and that certain doctors, who had asked and obtained the -remedies from him, departed from Bologna and retailed the remedies -at extravagantly exorbitant prices. To such an extent was this -carried that there exist authentic cases where a thaler was demanded -for a single globule, and for the globules (20-30) necessary to give -a bath, 1,000 francs were asked in New York. Some idea of the -extortion may be given when Count Mattei refers to the thaler price -as being 1,350 times the price at Bologna. This would be enough to -justify any amount of secrecy on Count Mattei’s part, more -especially as that secrecy entirely prevents the adulteration of the -medicines which would inevitably follow, were they to become -commercial property. - -We have only too familiar an example in the ranks of the medical -profession. Many of his confrères have been appealed to for the -support of a physician, named Warburg. At this date it seems hardly -possible to believe that this gentleman was the happy discoverer of -Warburg’s Fever Tincture. Perhaps in this country the value of the -compound was not so highly appreciated as in India. But it is -impossible to open any treatise on either surgery or medicine which -is about twenty years old and not find the use of Warburg’s tincture -specially urged in all cases of high fever, and especially in cases -of malarial fever and pyæmia. The compound had an enormous sale, and -yielded a very substantial income to its discoverer, but as soon as -he yielded to the pressure of professional opinion, and consented to -publish his formula so that it might obtain an extended use, he -obtained the reward of such philanthropy. Every chemist now prepares -the prescription and sells it at very nearly the original price, and -what is more, never refunds a fraction of a farthing in the shape of -a royalty to the discoverer. Consequently, we have before us the -edifying spectacle of the learned discoverer compelled to exist on -the charity of his professional confrères. Count Mattei has, at all -events, protected himself against this, for although he states that -in the event of his death he has provided against the loss of his -secret to the world, and intends to leave it carefully as a legacy -to suffering humanity, there is not the slightest doubt that he -alone is the possessor of his own secret. That it is possible to -obtain wealth from using this system is very evident. Certain among -the chief of his followers are in the habit of visiting London at -intervals, and the number of those who consult them is really -wonderful. I am assured by an eye-witness that the crowd is far -beyond that which besieges the door of the most fashionable -physician of the day. When one reads the literature of the subject, -one becomes more and more astonished at its simplicity. All diseases -resolve themselves into three main forms, and constitutions vary -accordingly. There are sanguine and lymphatic constitutions, and the -various combinations of these two; there are also febrile -disturbances and diseases of the liver and spleen. Consequently -there are three chief medicines, which are used in an extraordinary -state of dilution. It is no use, here at least, to discuss the value -of these infinitesimal doses, so that may be left for future -discussion. To a professional mind the most extraordinary claim on -Count Mattei’s part will be that of curing cancer by internal and -external medicines, and wholly without the use of the knife. He -claims positively to cure every case in which the cancer has not -ulcerated, and to cure a large proportion even of those which have -already done so. Even of those which have been neglected, and have -remained long in the ulcerated state, he claims to restore a certain -proportion (though not a large one) to health. Of course, to any man -who has seen the difficulty which attends the early diagnosis of -cancer, these claims are very high-sounding indeed—almost to -absurdity. The difficulties which attend diagnosis, even almost to -the time when the knife _has been_ used, and the tissue submitted to -the microscope, are very great. But in Count Mattei’s second -division there is no such difficulty. It is then possible by certain -indications, as well as by the use of the microscope, to be sure of -the nature of the disease. Here Mattei steps in and claims that, by -the use of one of his medicines, which exerts an _electric_ -influence on cancer, and by one of what he terms his vegetable -electricities, he can restore the sufferer to health. Surely -_conservative_ surgery, if it be worthy of the name, will -investigate such a claim. Of the vegetable electricities there is no -doubt whatever. Cases of neuralgia and sciatica and articular -rheumatic pain have been seen to yield to them as to magic; -consequently, even in the last stages of cancer, when there is no -refuge save the grave left to the sufferer, I have reason to believe -Count Mattei, to some extent, when he claims to enable the said -sufferer to sink gently away in full consciousness, and without the -use of morphia. - -To those who know anything of the occult uses and powers of plants, -the fact that Count Mattei gathers his herbs at particular phases of -the moon, will convey a good deal of meaning. Further, they will -feel an additional assurance as to their value, and will no longer -wonder, on one side at least, that Count Mattei chooses to keep his -secret. It would seem probable to some extent that Count Mattei is -one of the “elder brethren” of the race, although how far he is -consciously so may be a matter for speculation, which could only be -set at rest by Mattei himself and his compeers and superiors. What -is definitely certain is that his system of medicine in its -theories, if not in its practice, is a distinct step in advance in -the healing art. Mattei is one of those pioneers of advance who -spend the greater part of their lives in introducing for public use -a secret of which they have become possessed. Mr. Keeley, of -Philadelphia,[60] appears to be another of those pioneers who are in -advance of their times. But Mr. Keeley, in his work, resembles Friar -Bacon, who blessed (?) the world with gunpowder. No doubt -civilization has been enormously extended by its aid; but however -much use it may have been to man in adapting the face of nature to -his service, it has at any rate subserved the gratification of his -passions. Count Mattei appears to have none of these “defects of his -qualities,” and to have endeavoured to bless the world without -giving to it attendant curses. Still it is always possible that when -his secret shall become known it will draw attention to plants which -have just as destructive and poisonous an influence as the plants -and herbs he uses have of healing power. At all events, at present -his secret is of use to the world, and so far as may be seen he -makes a just and “brotherly” use of it. Has enough been said above -to show that the fact that his medicines are “secret” compounds -should be no barrier to their use? What is still more important is -that true theosophists should recognise that Count Mattei has done -what they endeavour to do, and devoted his life to Real Work. - - A. I. R. - ------ - -Footnote 60: - - The discoverer of the new power now known as the Keeley-motor and - inter-etheric force. - ------ - - ------------------------------------ - - THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY’S CONVENTION OF 1887. - - ------- - -Safely returned from my long tour of ten months, my first duty upon -reaching home is to remind the Branches that the time approaches for -the Annual Meeting of the Convention of the General Council—27th to -30th of December. It appears that the attendance this year will be -much larger than ever before; some thinking that we shall register -between 200 and 300 Delegates: besides the old, there will be some -twenty new Branches entitled to representation and votes. The yearly -extension of our Society is thus steadily augmenting the strength of -the General Council, and the importance of its Annual Convention. As -the Society settles gradually upon its constitutional basis, the -volume of committee and parliamentary work lessens and more time -becomes available for theosophical lectures, the formation of -friendships, and the cultivation of a good mutual understanding as -to the work before us. - -The Adyar Library, to which considerable gifts of old MSS. and books -have been made since last December, is already being put to use. The -Dwaita Catechism was issued at the last Convention, and at this -year’s the Vishistadvaita and Advaita Catechisms will be ready; as -will also a compilation of Buddhistic Morals from the sacred -literature of Ceylon. It is hoped that members of our many Branches -will kindly bring forward as many ancient works upon every -Department of Aryan knowledge as they can procure for this best of -national monuments, the Adyar Library. - -Every effort will be made to promote the comfort of Delegates, as -heretofore. Lectures are being arranged for, but learned Mofussil -members who are willing to read discourses upon special topics -interesting to Delegates, are requested to at once correspond with -the Secretary, and if the MSS. are ready, to send them in for -approval. - - * * * * * * * * * - -In conclusion let me assure our colleagues of all races, creeds and -colors, that a hearty and brotherly welcome awaits them at their -Theosophical home at Adyar. - - Adyar, 17th October, 1887. H. S. OLCOTT, P.T.S. - - - - - A REMARKABLE CHRISTMAS EVE. - - -It was a dark and solitary path, a narrow, hardly perceptible, -footway in a dense forest, hemmed in by two walls of impenetrable -thorns and wild creepers, covering, as with a net-work, the trunks -of the tall, bare, moss-covered trees. The path led through the -woods down to a deep valley in which a few country-houses were -nestled. Night was fast approaching, and the hurricane, that blew -across the country, boded evil to many a traveller, by land and sea. -The wind, which had hitherto been only moaning through the trees, in -low sad tones reminding one of a funereal dirge, was now beginning -to roar with fury, filling the forest as with the howling of a -hundred hungry wolves. Very soon a drizzling, ice-cold rain veiled -the whole forest in a damp shroud of fog. - -One solitary traveller was wearily wending his way along this -deserted path. The hour was late, and the darkening shadows were -creeping on steadily, making the gloom in the thicket still more -depressing. The young man looked worn and tired, as he again and -again brushed aside the entangled briars which impeded his progress -forward. He was well-dressed, and wore a marine officer’s cap. But -his coat was now in rags, torn by the hard, frozen, cruel thorns, -and his hands were bleeding in the struggle he had had with the -briars for a whole long night and a day since he had lost his way in -the huge forest. Panting, he stopped at last; and, as he heaved a -deep sigh, he fell down half-insensible at the foot of an old shaggy -oak. Then, half-opening his weary eyes, he murmured in despair, as -he placed his hand on his heart:—“I wonder how long _this_ will yet -beat.... I feel as if it were gradually stopping.” - -He closed his eyes once more, and very soon the feeble palpitations -he was watching within himself, turned his half-paralysed thought -into a new groove of ideas. Now the hardly audible beatings of his -heart seemed to transform themselves into the ticking of an old -clock quite near to him. He imagined the old Nüremberg timepiece in -his mother’s room. He was dripping wet, chilled to the marrow of his -bones, and was fast losing consciousness. But, forgetting for one -moment his situation, and where he was, he caught himself -soliloquising as was his custom, when alone. - -“This clock,” he thought, “has to be wound up ... else it will stop. -So shall this heart. A man has to eat and drink to renew the fuel -which feeds life, the clock too ... no; the clock is different to -man. Let it rest for a week, for two, three months, even for a -year.... Still, if wound up again, it will tick on as merrily as -ever. But once the supply of the body is stopped—well, what then? -Shall the working power cease for ever, or the ticking of the heart -be resumed as that of the clock? No, no!... You may feed the dead -body of man as much as you please! it shall awaken to life no -more.... A queer problem to solve,—What becomes of that something -which made the body move? The food is not the cause, is it?... No; -the food is only the fuel.... There must be some inward fire ever -burning, as long as it is supplied.... But when the supply of the -fuel ceases? Ah!... that is it ... where does it go?... Does -anything really die?... What form shall _my_ inner fire take?... -Shall it return to _its_ primordial light ... and be no more?... Oh, -how I suffer!... No, no; I must not allow this, _my_ fire, to go -out. No, not before I see once more my loved ones ... my mother and -Alice....” - -Arising with great effort he pursued his way with tottering steps, -feeling his way in the darkness. But instantly a wild gust of wind, -tearing along the narrow pathway, caused the great trees to sway and -rock as if in very agony. Catching in its icy clasp the weakened -form of the young man, the hurricane nearly upset him. Being already -wet through and through with rain and cold, he shivered and groaned -aloud, as he felt a sharp pain penetrating his limbs from the brain -downwards. One more short struggle and he heavily fell on the cold -hard ground. Clasping his hands over his brow, he could only whisper -again: “Mother, I can do no more.... Farewell, mother, for ever! -Alice—fare thee well!”... - -His strength was gone. For over thirty hours he had tasted no food. -He had travelled night and day in the hope of being with his family -on Christmas Eve, that blessed day of joy and peace. Never yet had -he spent a Christmas Eve away from home; but that year had been an -unusually unfortunate one for him. His vessel had been wrecked and -he had lost all. It was only by the greatest of chances that he had -been enabled to find his way back to his country, in time to take -the train that brought him from a large seaport to the small town -some twenty miles’ distance from his home. Once there, he had to -travel that distance by coach. But just as he was preparing to start -on his last journey, he met a poor sailor, a companion of his -shipwreck. With tears in his eyes the man told him that having lost -all, he had no more money left to take him to his wife and children, -who were yet two days’ journey by rail from where he was; and that -thus, he could not be with them to make merry Christmas together. So -the good-hearted young officer, thinking he could easily walk the -short distance that separated him from home, had emptied his purse -into the sailor’s hands and started on his way on foot, hoping to -arrive on that same evening. - -He set out early in the morning and bethought himself of a short cut -through the vast forests of his native place. But on that afternoon -he hurt his foot badly, and being able to move only at a very slow -pace, the night had overtaken him in the forest in which he had -finally lost his way during that terrible night. He had wandered -since the morning during the whole long day, until pain, exhaustion, -and the hurricane had overpowered him. And now, he was lying -helpless on the bare frozen ground, and would surely die before the -dawn. - -How long he lay there he never remembered; but, when he came back to -himself, he thought he could move, and resolved to make a last -supreme effort after the short rest. The wind had suddenly fallen. -He felt warmer and calmer now, as he sat leaning against a tree. Old -habit brought him back to his previous train of thought. - -“Never, mother dear, never,” he addressed her in thought, “never -have I spent a Christmas away from your dear selves.... Never, since -my boyhood, when father died twelve years ago! I made a vow then -that, come what would, I should spend each Christmas Eve at home; -and now, though life seems slowly ebbing out of my body, I want to -keep my promise. They must be waiting for me even now, they, and -Alice, my sweet fair cousin, who tells me she never loved but me! -Reginald and Lionel, my brothers, who are earnestly waiting for me; -my shy pretty May, and little Fanny.... They are all longing to see -me, my dear ones, all expecting their old brother Hugo to return and -decorate their Christmas-tree.... Oh, mother, mother, see you I -must! I will be with you on this Christmas Eve, come what may!” - -This passionate longing appeal seemed to give him a ten-fold -strength. He made a desperate effort to rise from his place, and -found he could do so quite easily. Then, overcome with joy, he flew -rather than walked through the dense black forest. He must have -surely mistaken the distance, as a minute later he found himself in -the brushwood, and saw the well-known valley so familiar to him, and -even discerned in the bright moonlight the home that contained all -his dear ones. He ran still faster, more and more rapidly, and even -forgot in his excitement to wonder whence he had found the power of -using his lame foot so easily.... At last he reached the lawn, and -approached the cosy old house, all wrapped in its snowy winter -garments, and sparkling in moonlight like a palace of King Frost. -From a large bay-window poured out torrents of light, and as he drew -still nearer, trying to see through it, he caught a glimpse of the -loved faces, which he stopped to look at, before knocking at the -door.... - -“Oh, my mother! I see her there,” he exclaimed. “There she is, -seated in her arm-chair, with her knitting by her side, her -beautiful silvery hair as soft and glossy as ever under her -snow-white cap. I see her kind eyes and placid features still -unmarked by the furrows of age.... She looks troubled.... She -listens to the fierce gusts of wind which cause the windows to shake -and rattle. How that wind _does_ try to get into the house, and, -finding itself no welcome guest, hark, how it rolls away.... How -strange!... I _hear_, but I do _not feel_ the wind.... Oh!... -Kneeling at my mother’s feet, there’s Alice. Her arms are clasped -around mother’s knees; her golden curls fall on her back.... -But—but, why are her large violet eyes filled with tears as she -looks with up-turned face into mother’s sad eyes?... Hush! What is -she saying?... I hear it, even through that wall.... - -“‘Don’t be uneasy, mother, dear, Hugo will come back. You know he -told us so in his last letter. He said that after their shipwreck he -was kindly cared for by those who saved the crew. He wrote also that -he had borrowed money for the journey, and that he would be with us -at the latest on Christmas Eve!... Bad roads and the stormy night -will have detained him.... The coach, you say? Well, and though the -coach has long since passed by, he may have taken a carriage. He -will soon be here, mother.’ - -“Ah, dear Alice, I see—she looks at her finger, with its little ruby -ring I placed on it. She puts it to her lips, and I hear her -murmuring my name.... - - * * * * * * * * - -(From Hugo’s diary, where he recorded that night’s experience.) - -... I rushed into the house at that appeal, and, as I now remember, -without knocking at the door, as if I had passed through the stone -walls. I tried to speak, but no sound appeared to reach their ears. -Nor did anyone seem to see or greet me.... I drew Alice by the arm, -but she never turned round, only continued to murmur sweet words of -consolation into my mother’s ear. Good God, what agony! Why do they -not hear, or even see me.... Am I really here? I look round the -room. The old home is just as I had left it nine months since. There -is my father’s picture hanging over the mantel-piece, looking at me -with his kind smile; the old piano open, with my favourite song on -it.... The cat sleeping as usual, on the hearthrug, and purring, as -she stretches out her lazy paws. Albums on the table, my photograph, -with its bright and happy look! How different to my present self! -Here am I, standing in an agony of doubt, before my loved ones, -seeing them, feeling them, touching them ... and yet unseen by them, -unnoticed, as one who is not there.... Not even my shadow on the -wall over their own. But who then, am I?... Why have they grown so -blind to my presence? Why do their hearts and senses remain so -dense? I try again and again. I call them piteously by their names, -but they heed me not. My heart, my love, all is here, but my -physical body seems far away. Yes, it is far, far away, and now I -see it, as it lies cold and lifeless in that forest, where I must -have left it. It is surely for _me_, not for that body, that they -care! And is it because I am no longer clothed with flesh that I -must be as only a breath, an empty naught, to them?... - -Full of despair, I turned away, and passing through the folding -doors, arrived in the adjoining room, where my young brothers and -sisters were busily occupied decorating the Christmas tree. There it -stands, the old friend of my youth. I see it, and even discern its -resinous perfume.... Towering up towards the ceiling, its lower -branches are bending to the ground, laden with golden fruits, with -toys and wax tapers. My brothers and sisters are gathered around it. -But Reginald looks grave. I see him turning to May, and hear him -saying: - -“Are you not anxious about Hugo? I wonder what can have become of -him!” - -“I did not like to tell mother,” May replies with a little shiver, -“but I had a dreadful dream last night. I saw Hugo white and cold. -He looked sorrowfully at me, but when he tried to speak he could -not. His look haunts me still!” she softly sobbed, with tears -rolling down her cheeks. - -But now little Fanny gives a scream of delight. The child has -discovered among the Christmas presents a real pipe, a pipe with -silver bells. - -“Oh, _this_ shall be for Hugo, and then he will have music whenever -he smokes!” exclaims the little one, merrily laughing, and holding -out the toy in the direction where I am standing. - -For a moment I hope she sees me. I try to take the pipe, but my hand -cannot clasp it, and the toy seems to slip away from me as if it -were a shadow.... I try to speak again, but it is of no use ... they -see me not, neither do they hear me!... - -Grieved beyond words, I left them, and returning into the next room, -went up straight to Alice, who was still at mother’s side, murmuring -to her loving words. I spoke again, I entreated, I besought them to -look at me, and my suffering was so great that I felt that death -would be preferable to this! - -Then came a last and supreme effort. Concentrating all my will, I -bent over Alice, and gasped out with my whole soul: - -“If ever you loved me, Alice, know and hear me now!” I exclaimed, as -I pressed my lips to hers. - -She gave a shudder, a start, and then, opening her eyes wider and -wider, she shrieked in terror: - -“Hugo! Hugo! Mother, do you see? Hugo is here!” - -She tried to clasp me in her arms, but her hands met together, and -only joined as if in prayer. - -“Hugo, Hugo, stay, why can I not touch you? Mother, look! look! Here -is Hugo!” - -She was growing wilder and more excited with every moment. - -My mother looked faint and frightened, as she said: - -“Alice, what is the matter, child? What do you see? Hugo is not -here!” - -The children, hearing Alice’s cry, flew into the room, all eager -with expectation. - -“Where is Hugo? Where is he?” they prattled. - -I felt that I was invisible to all but Alice. She was the only one -to see me. Therefore, realizing that the body had to be saved from -its danger in the woods without loss of time, I drew her after -myself with all my will. I slowly moved towards the door, never -taking my look off her eyes. She followed me, as one in a state of -somnambulism. - -My mother looked stunned and bewildered. - -Rising with difficulty from her place, she would have made for the -door also, but sank back into her arm-chair powerless and covered -her face with her hands. - -“Boys, follow Alice,” said May. “Wait ... the carriage is there -ready to go after the doctor’s children. Take it. Call the gardener -and John to go with you. I will stay with mother.” And whispering to -Reginald, she added, “Tell John to take rugs and blankets ... but I -am afraid poor Hugo is dead!” - -She then turned to mother, who had fainted. I would see no more, but -_willing_ Alice to follow me, I left the house. - -She came slowly after me, her face all white, her large eyes full of -a look of terror, but also of resolution in them. On she would have -gone on foot, in the drizzling rain, her golden hair all flying -about her head, had she been allowed to do so by my brothers and -servants. The strange cortege was ushered into the open carriage, -the coachman being ordered to follow her directions. On it went, as -speedily as the horse could go. I found myself floating now before -them, and, to my own amazement, sliding backwards, with my face -turned towards Alice, strongly willing that she should not lose -sight of me. Two hours afterwards, the carriage entered the -brushwood, and they were obliged to alight. - -The night was now very dark and stormy, and notwithstanding the -lanterns, the group made way with great difficulty into the thicket. -The wind had begun to blow and howl with the same fury as when I had -left the wood, and seemed to have caught them all in its chilly -embrace. The boys and servants panted and shivered, but Alice heeded -nothing. What cared _she_ for that! The only thought of my beloved -was I, Hugo.... On, on we went, her tender feet wounded with the -brambles, and the wet sprays of branches brushing against her white -face. On, on she ran, till, with a sudden and loud cry of joy and -terror mixed, she fell down.... - -At the same instant _I_ collapsed, and _fell also on the ground, as -it seemed to me_; and then all became a blank.... As I learned -later, at that moment the boys drew near, and lowering their -lanterns found Alice with her arms clasped around a form, and when -the lanterns were placed close to it they saw before them the body -of their brother Hugo, a corpse! - -“Sure enough he is dead, the poor young master!” cried John, our old -servant, who was close behind. - -“No, no!” Alice answered. “No, he is not dead.... His body is cold, -but his heart still beats. Let us carry him home.... Quick, quick!” - -Lifting up the body gently and placing it in the carriage they -covered it with rugs and shawls, and drove at a furious speed back -to our home. It was near midnight when the carriage stopped at the -gate. - -“Reginald, run on quickly and give the good news to mother!” cried -Alice. “Tell May to have hot bottles and blankets ready, on the sofa -in the drawing-room. It is warm there near the fire.... Tell them -all that Hugo lives, for I _know_ he does,” she went on repeating. - -More lights were brought out, and the servants carried carefully -their burden into the house, where they placed it on the sofa, hot -flannels and restoratives being immediately applied. Noiselessly and -breathlessly went on the work of love around the apparently dead -body, and was at last rewarded. A sigh was heard, a deeper _breath_ -was drawn, and then the eyes slowly opened and _I_ looked round in -vague surprise at all those loved and anxious faces crowding eagerly -around me. - -“Don’t speak yet, Hugo,” whispered Alice anxiously. “Don’t, till you -feel stronger.” - -But I could not control my impatience. - -“How am I here?” I asked. “Ah, I remember. I lost my way in the old -forest.... Ah, yes; I recollect now all.... The cold biting wind, my -lame foot, after I stumbled and fell, knocking my head against a -stone, and all became a blank to me!” - -“Hush, Hugo, hush my boy,” said my mother wiping tears of joy from -her still pale and suffering face. “You will tell us all that -presently.... Now rest.” - -But I could not refrain from speaking, as thoughts crowded into my -head, and recollections came vividly back. “No, no, I am better,” I -went on. “I am strong again, and I must let you know all that I -dreamed. I was here, and I saw you all.... Oh, the torture I -suffered when you knew me not!... Mother, darling, did you not see -me, your son? But she, my Alice, saw and followed me, and it is she -who saved me from death! Ah, yes! I remember now, you found my body, -and then all was darkness again. Kiss me, mother! Kiss me all, let -me feel that I am really with you in body, and am no longer an -invisible shadow.... Mother I kept my promise; I am here on -Christmas Eve! Light the tree, my little Fan, and give me the pipe -with the bells I saw you holding, and heard you say it was for old -brother Hugo.” - -The child ran into the other room and returned with the pipe I had -seen her playing with a few hours before. This was the greatest and -final proof for me, as for my family. The event was no vision then, -no hallucination, but true to its merest details! As my mother often -said afterwards, referring to that wonderful night, it was a weird -and strange experience, but one which had happened to others before, -and will go on happening from time to time. Of late years, when I -had been happily married to my Alice (who will not let me travel far -away without her, any longer) I have dived a good deal into such -psychic mysteries, and I think I can explain my experience. I think -that by privation, cold, and mental agony, I had been thrown into -such abnormal conditions, that my astral body, as it is now -generally called, my “conscious self,” was able to escape from the -physical tenement and take itself to the home I so passionately -desired to reach. All my thoughts, and longings being intensely -directed towards it, I found myself there where I wished to be, in -spirit. Then the agony of mind from the consciousness that I was -invisible to all, added to the fear of death unless I could impress -them with my presence, became finally productive of the supreme -effort of will, the success of which alone could save me. This -joined to Alice’s sensitiveness and her love for me, enabled her to -sense my presence, and even to see my form, whereas others saw -nothing. Man is a wonderful and marvellous enigma; but it is one -which has to, and _will_, be completely unriddled some day, the -scepticism of the age notwithstanding. - -Such is the simple story told to the writer by an old naval officer, -about the most “memorable Christmas Eve” that came within his own -experience. - - CONSTANCE WACHTMEISTER. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - A HALF CONVERT. - - Buddha! my earthly memory is so dimmed - By this poor passing life which travels a hem - Across my soul, and thought I cannot stem - Pours like a flood to wash all traces limned - Of former selves, that I shall ne’er recall - The steps I came, nor know the fleshly tents - In which I sojourned;—yet the fraying rents - Of time-worn garments I have seen, and all - The dust upon my feet, and I the sin - Of tiger and of cobra passions striven - To crush. These were strait gates, and through them driven - My chariot wheels, so prithee set me free - From other births, lest I seek Peter’s key, - O! Sakya Muni, let me trembling in. - - MARY N. GALE. - - - - - THEOSOPHY AND MODERN SOCIALISM. - - BY A SOCIALIST STUDENT OF THEOSOPHY. - - -The writer of the article on “Brotherhood” in your last issue has -given an erroneous impression of Socialism, which, as a student of -Theosophy (I do not know if I can yet call myself a disciple), who -has been, in a large measure, drawn to this great study _through -Socialism_, I may, perhaps, be allowed to correct. Indeed, I should -feel that I was shirking a task clearly indicated to me at the -present moment, were I to leave such errors, so far as all readers -of LUCIFER are concerned, uncorrected. - -“T.B.H.,” the writer of the article in question—an interesting and, -I believe, useful article in many respects—has, I venture to -conjecture, confused the general system or class of systems known as -Socialism, with certain methods of propagating its principles. Let -me commence by quoting the paragraph in his article to which I take -exception. He says (LUCIFER No. 3, p. 213):— - - (1). “Socialism, as preached in this nineteenth century, it - [the Universal Brotherhood, which is the mainspring of - Theosophy.—J.B.B.] certainly is not. (2). Indeed, there would - be little difficulty in showing that modern materialistic - Socialism is directly at variance with all the teachings of - Theosophy. (3). Socialism advocates a direct interference with - the results of the law of _Karma_, and would attempt to alter - the dénouement of the parable of the talents by giving to the - man, who hid his talent in a napkin, a portion of the ten - talents acquired by the labour of his more industrious - fellow.” - -I will first take the three statements contained in this paragraph -separately, and, for convenience’s sake, in inverted order. The -allegation against Socialism contained in the third is the most -specific, and that which, in the eyes of Theosophists, must appear -the most serious. This statement, namely, that “Socialism advocates -a direct interference with the results of the law of Karma, and -would attempt &c.,” constitutes, in fact, the only definite premise -in his argument. Of course, if Socialists do advocate, consciously -or unconsciously, anything of the sort, they advocate a physical and -psychical impossibility, and their movement is fore-doomed to -failure. More than this, if they do so _consciously_, they are -sinning against the light, and are impious as well as childish in -their efforts. Of such, clearly, the Universal Brotherhood is not. - -But neither Socialists nor Socialism, “as preached in this -nineteenth century,” do anything of the kind. By “Materialistic” -Socialism, I presume “T.B.H.” implies (if he has really _studied_ -Socialism at all, which I venture to doubt) so much of it as can be -urged upon purely worldly grounds, such as the better feeding, -housing, &c., of those who do the active work of society, technical -instruction, such general education as fits a man for the domestic -and secular duties of life, and the reorganisation of society with -these objects upon a “co-operative” basis,[61] in which public -salaried officers, elected by their fellows, will take the place of -capitalists and landlords, and in which the production and -distribution of wealth will be more systematically regulated. This -system, of course, takes no account of the law of Karma. - ------ - -Footnote 61: - - Co-operative, that is to say, in the sense that the various - sections and individual members of society shall _willingly_ - co-operate, being fully conscious of their interdependance. - - ST. GEORGE LANE FOX. - ------ - -In a rough sort of way, however, all Socialists recognise the law, -so far as its effects are visible in this world on the physical, -intellectual, and moral planes. The fact that “the evil that men -do,” and classes and nations of men also, “lives after them,” none -are more ready to own and act upon. The action and reaction of -individual _will_ and individual and social _circumstance_, both -upon each other and upon individual and social _conditions_, forms -part of the foundations of Socialism. _Quâ_ Socialists we do not, of -course, take any more account of the law of Karma than do -non-Socialist Christians and Agnostics, but I maintain there is -nothing whatever in Socialism repugnant to a belief in this law. If -anything, it is the other way. All Socialists, whether they call -themselves Collectionists or Anarchists, Christian Socialists,[62] -Communists, or purely economic Socialists, are anxious to give freer -play to human abilities and social impulses, by creating leisure and -educational opportunities for all. We may thus, if it is permitted -to me to speculate while criticising, become the instruments of a -greater equalisation, distribution, and acceleration of Karmic -growth, “good” or “evil,” upon and among individual souls, during -their incarnation on this planet. This would come to pass by the -transferring of a great deal of the responsibility for Karmic -results which now lies with each individual in his personal -capacity, upon the collective entities composed of individuals -acting in public capacities; _e.g._, as nations, provinces, -communes, or trade corporations. - ------ - -Footnote 62: - - Socialists who consider their Christianity to supply them with - sufficient motives for their Socialism. They do not strictly form - a sect either of Socialists or of Christians. - ------ - -It is surely true, even now, to speak of a collective, _e.g._, a -national or municipal Karma, as we do of a national conscience. We -speak of reward or retribution to nations and cities as if they had -distinct personalities—are these mere “figures of speech”? But what -is more important is that Socialists may prepare the way for a -revelation of the noble truths of Theosophy to the multitude; they -may help to raise the intellectual and instinctive moral standard of -the whole community to such an extent that all will, in the next -generation following after the Social Revolution,[63] be amenable to -those truths. In this way Socialism would not, indeed, interfere -with the results of the law of Karma, but would, as the precursor of -Theosophy, be the indirect means of enabling multitudes to rise and -free themselves from its bonds. - ------ - -Footnote 63: - - This word, of course, is employed in the general sense, without - any reference to the physical character which the revolution may - assume. It may be attended with violence, or it may be as peaceful - as, for instance, the religious revolution accomplished by - Constantine in the fourth century. All I am postulating is a more - or less sudden transformation of the existing social order, - effected by one of those impulses with which evolution seems to - complete its periods, and of which Theosophy may some day afford - the explanation. - ------ - -As to the parable of the talents, well, Socialists would be only too -glad to see its moral better enforced in this and other “civilised” -countries. To them it seems impossible that it could be _less_ -enforced or taken to heart than it is now. They see that under the -present system of Society—that vast engine of usury by which whole -classes are held in economic servitude to other classes—many are -encouraged to live in sloth and hide their talents, even if they put -them to no worse uses than that. This could hardly happen under a -_régime_ of economic Socialism (such a _régime_, for instance, as -Laurence Grönlund contemplates in his “Co-operative Commonwealth”); -for these able-bodied or talented citizens who declined to work -would simply be left to starve or sponge upon their relatives. Under -a purely communist _régime_,[64] no doubt there would be a few who -would shirk their proper share in the social work, but at least none -would be brought up from infancy, as now, to “eat the bread of -idleness.” - ------ - -Footnote 64: - - The only kind to which T. B. H.’s remarks are in any way - applicable. - ------ - -Finally on this point, if to advocate such changes as Socialists -advocate, the substitution of social co-operation for competition; -of production with a view to use, for production with view to -profit; of peace between nations, classes, and individuals, for war; -of harmonious organisation to the advantage of all, for _laissez -faire_, and chaos for the advantage (or supposed advantage) of a -few. If I say, to advocate such changes be to advocate interference -with the results of the law of Karma, so is every proposal for the -amelioration of the physical or intellectual welfare of our fellows. -And if participation in this and other movements, which may with -equal justice be called “materialistic,” be prohibited to -Theosophists, they may as well, for all good their Universal -Brotherhood will do to the mass of those at present outside it, stay -at home and content themselves with communing with the select few -who alone will ever be in a position to appreciate them. If, for one -reason or other, they do not care to co-operate with Socialists, let -them, at least, recognise that the latter are preparing their way -for them, doing the dirty (?) and laborious work, without which -Theosophy can never descend from the serene heights in which it now -dwells, to replenish, spiritually, this sadly benighted world. For, -apart from a healthier physical and psychical atmosphere than -“civilised” life engenders in either rich or poor (collective Karmic -effects), a fair amount of leisure and freedom from sordid care are -indispensable in most human beings for the higher development of the -perceptive or gnostic faculties. At present this minimum of -leisure and economic independence is probably unattainable by -nineteen-twentieths of the population. Yet this self-same society, -with its scientific learning and experience, its machinery, and its -business organisation, contains within it all the germs of such a -reconstruction of the physical environment as shall very shortly -place the means of spiritual and psychical regeneration within the -reach of all. - -“T. B. H.’s” second statement is that “Indeed there would be very -little difficulty in showing that modern materialistic Socialism is -directly at variance with all the teachings of Theosophy.” Such an -expression as “materialistic Socialism” is, as I have already -hinted, erroneous. _All_ Socialism is materialistic in the sense -that it concerns itself primarily with the material or physical -conditions of mankind. So do chemistry and mechanics, pure or -applied; so, in ordinary politics, do Liberalism and Conservatism. -_No_ Socialism is materialistic in the sense that it is based upon -any materialistic, as distinct from spiritualistic or pantheistic -conceptions of the universe. It has hardly any more to do with such -questions than have cotton-spinning or boot-making. I do not, -however, pretend to mistake “T. B. H’s” meaning. Taking Socialism in -its essentially economic aspect (which I admit is the foremost for -the present, and must remain so until it has been disposed of), he -asserts that “there would be very little difficulty in proving &c.” -This is a mere general charge against it, although, I think, a less -plausible, and therefore—from the point of view of harmony between -Socialists and Theosophists—a less serious one, than the particular -charge which follows it, and with which I have already endeavoured -to deal. For my own enlightenment, I should be glad to have some -samples, taken at random, of his skill in showing this variance; but -I doubt if such a demonstration could effect any good. Meanwhile it -is impossible to _answer_ the charge on account of its vague, albeit -sweeping and all-comprehensive character. “All the teachings of -Theosophy” are quite too much for a student like myself to attempt -to compare with Economic Socialism, as a system; nor do I think one -with ten times the learning and discernment that I can claim, would -readily attempt it. I merely record, therefore, my sincere -conviction that on this general point “T. B. H.” is also mistaken, -and that it is not Socialism, economic, or otherwise, which he has -really been scrutinising and balancing, but the sayings or doings of -some particular “Socialist,” whom he has seen or read of. - -Individual Socialists have, of course, many faults which cannot -fairly be charged to the social and economic tenets they profess. -Thus one besetting fault of militant advocates of the cause is the -use of violent language against individual capitalists, police -officials and landlords. It, is so easy, even for men of a calibre -superior to the average, to be drawn on from righteous indignation -at a corrupt system, to abuse of the creatures and instruments -thereof—or even, on occasion, to personal violence against them. -Every good cause has its Peters, no less than its Judases. Socialism -unfortunately has a rich crop of the former. Another still worse -fault on the part of certain agitators, but one which might easily -be predicted from the character of the struggle and the condition of -the classes who must form the backbone of the Socialist Party, is -the frequent appeal to lower motives, such as revenge and love of -luxury. - -But such faults, although by all human prevision necessary -incidents in the movement, are by no means inherent in Socialism. -Even the purely “materialistic” socialism of Karl Marx, to which -“T. B. H.” seems (although I think not with any clear picture of -it in his mind) to refer, aims simply at securing the decencies -and ordinary comforts of life to all, as a recompense for more -evenly distributed social labour. The very conditions of life -under a co-operative commonwealth such as Hyndman, Grönlund, and -other followers of the late Karl Marx’s economic ideal, have in -view—above all the obligation (virtual, at any rate) under which -every able-bodied member of the community would find himself or -herself, to do a few hours of useful work of one kind or another -every day, and the elimination of the commercial and speculative -element, with the wretched insecurity and dangerous temptations -which it involves,—would preclude inordinate luxury. A healthy -simplicity of life would become, first, “fashionable,” then -usual.[65] Communism, of course, goes further than economic -socialism, as it implies not only the claim of the individual upon -the community for the means of _labour_ and the enjoyment of its -fruits or their equivalent, but his claim for _subsistence_, -irrespective of the amount and social value of the labour which he -is able to perform. It would abolish, therefore, not only -individual property in the means of production, but in the -products themselves. The practicability of Communism, the motto of -which is, “From each according to his abilities, to each according -to his needs,” obviously depends upon the prevalence of more -generous motives, of a higher sense of duty both to work and to -give—a more perfect development, in fact, of the sense of human -solidarity. It is for this very reason more commendable than mere -economic socialism, as an ideal, to the attention of Theosophists; -although its application, on the national or universal scale, -cannot yet be said to have entered “the sphere of practical -politics.” - ------ - -Footnote 65: - - I do not, of course, mean to predict that “sin” (or its - Theosophical equivalent) would die out. It is, after all, a - relative matter to the capacities and potentialities of the - individual and his surroundings. Under Socialism, sensuality, - social or plutocratic pride, and other sins fostered by the - present order, would simply give way to ambition (to obtain - popular distinction, _e.g._, as an artist or inventor) and perhaps - to magic and other at present unfashionable vices. - ------ - -Communism, which may be either Collectivist or Anarchist, leads me -to add a few words about Anarchism. I refer, of course, to the -social ideal philosophically denoted by this name, and not to the -means advocated by some of its supporters for putting an end to the -present society. Anarchism involves Communism, as well as extreme -decentralisation; more than this, it involves the abolition of all -permanent machinery of law and order, such as “the State” is -supposed to provide, and the abolition of physical force as a method -of suasion, even for criminals and lunatics. As a protest against -political domination of all kinds, and an antidote to the excessive -centralisation advocated by some state-Socialists, Anarchism may be -of some use, but it is obviously further even than Communism (of the -Collectivist variety) from becoming a school of “practical” -politics. It could only become so after society at large, all the -world over, had grown sufficiently homogeneous and _solidaire_ for -its members to co-operate spontaneously and automatically for all -necessary purposes, grouping themselves into large or small -organizations (limbs and organs) as required, and forming a complete -_body-social_, or Mesocosm, if I may be allowed to coin a word for -the purpose. - -The erroneous conceptions of Socialism which I believe “T. B. H.” to -have formed, do not necessarily invalidate the first statement in -the paragraph of his article upon which I have been commenting, to -wit, that the Universal Brotherhood which he has in view (and which, -I understand from him, forms the first part of the programme of the -Theosophical Society) is not “Socialism as preached in this 19th -century,”—or at any other time, past or future, for that matter. -Still, I am inclined to hope that a more intimate study of Socialism -will lead him to see that, whether identical or not, they are at any -rate not antagonistic. My own belief is that Theosophy and -“materialistic” Socialism will be found to be working along -different planes in the same direction. - -Any Universal Brotherhood of Theosophists must be based upon -Socialist principles, _inter alia_: its foundations may extend -further and deeper than those of Socialism, but cannot be less -extensive. Greed and War (political or industrial) Social Caste and -Privilege, Political Domination of Man over Man, are as out of place -in a true Brotherhood as wolves in a flock of sheep. Yet the -exclusion of these anti-social demons and the enthronement in their -place of Universal Love and Peace, if effected by such a -Brotherhood, would simply leave Socialists nothing to do but to -organize the material framework of their co-operative commonwealths. -To preach economic or “materialistic” Socialism to a world already -converted to the highest and completest form of Socialism, would be -to advocate the plating of gold with tin or copper. - -Modern Socialism, if the noble aspirations of some of its apostles -may be taken as an earnest of its future, is already developing -(incidentally, of course, to its main economic and ethical -doctrines) strong æsthetic and spiritual tendencies. No reader of -William Morris or Edward Carpenter, to speak of English Socialists -only, will fail to notice this. At present the mass of Socialists -content themselves with basing their social and economic faith upon -the ethical principles of Justice, Freedom and Brotherhood. But the -highest, because most mystical of these principles, that of -Brotherhood, or better, Human Solidarity—the ancient conception of -“Charity”—forms the unconscious link between modern Socialism on the -one hand, and Esoteric Buddhism, Esoteric Christianity, and -Theosophy generally, on the other. I say _unconscious_ link, but I -mean to imply that it may soon be rendered conscious and visible. As -the various “orthodox” varieties, first of Christianity, then of -Mohammedanism, perish with the destruction or collapse of the Social -systems that have grown up along with them, this simple religion of -Human Solidarity will take possession of the deserted shrines of -Christ and Allah, and will begin to seek out its own fount of -inspiration. Then will be the time for the Universal Brotherhood of -Theosophists to step into the breach. - - J. BRAILSFORD BRIGHT (_M.A. Oxon._). - - - THE GREAT QUEST. - - “In many mortal forms I rashly sought - The shadow of that idol of my thought.” - —_Shelley._ - - “Après l’amour éteint si je vécus encore - C’est pour la vérité, soif aussi qui dévore!” - —_Lamartine._ - -The loss of youth and love is the perpetual wail of the poets. A -never-changing spring-time of life, where the sweet dreams of youth -would be realised in the fruition of reciprocal love, such would be -a heaven to them, and such _is_ a heaven while it lasts. If we add -to this the refined æsthetic taste that can delicately balance and -appreciate to a nicety every joy of the senses, and the -highly-developed intellect which can roam at will over the -accumulated store of past ages of culture, what would there be left -for poets to dream of? With heart, senses and mind worthily -employed, and with the well-balanced nature that knows moderation -alone can give continued bliss, could not man rest satisfied at -last? What more could he desire? - -It is useless to deny that life has very sweet gifts to give, though -the number is limited of those who are capable of receiving them in -their fulness. But even while these gifts are being enjoyed, it is -felt that the horizon is bounded. With what questioning -uncertainty—albeit with fascination—does youth open its eyes upon -the glamour of the dazzling world! The love of the Springtide, even -in fruition, is continually building fairy bowers in the future—it -never for long rests content in the present, while to the intellect -the bounded scope of utmost learning is a still more definite goad -towards a knowledge that shall transcend all past experience. - -And even were man content to continue to drink of the one cup of -bliss, he is never allowed to do so. The lessons of life, the great -teacher, are continually being altered, and the tempest of the heart -takes the place of the calm that was never expected to end. - -If, then, we must look in vain to find permanent bliss in any of -these things—if, beyond the highest intellectual culture of an -intellectual age there gleams the vision of a higher knowledge—if -behind the artistic refinement of this, as of all past flowers of -civilization, the fount of all sweetness lies hid—if even the -heart-binding communion of earthly love is but a faint reflex of the -deep peace realized by him who has torn aside the veil that hides -the Eternal, surely all man’s energies should be devoted to the -quest which will yield him such results. - -The whole philosophy of life may be summed up in the Four great -Truths that Buddha taught, and no more convincing description of -them can be read than that given in the lovely lines of the eighth -book of the “Light of Asia.” - -He who has once been deeply imbued with these great truths—who has -realised the transitory nature of all earthly bliss, and the pains -and sorrows that more than counterbalance the joys of life—will -never in his truest moments desire to be again blessed, either in -the present or in any future incarnation, with an uniformly happy -life, for there is no such soporific for the soul as the feeling of -satisfaction, as there is no such powerful goad as the feeling of -dissatisfaction. He is bound to pass through periods of joy, but -they will be looked forward to with fear and doubting, for then it -is that the sense-world again fastens its fangs on the soul, to be -followed by the pain of another struggle for freedom. - -When first setting out on the great quest, it seems as if many -lifetimes would fail to appease the dominant passion of the soul, -but nature works quickly in the hottest climates, and from the very -intensity of the desire may spring the strength and will to conquer -it. Though it is probably the same key-note that is struck -throughout, the dominant desire will appear to take a different tone -through the ascending scale of life. It is a speculation, but one -which would seem to receive endorsement from the analogies of -nature; for as the human embryo in its antenatal development, -exhibits in rapid succession, but with longer pauses as it -approaches the period of birth, the characteristics of the lower -races of animal life from which man has evolved, so does the human -soul realise in its passage through life the dominant desires and -attractions which have affected it through countless past -incarnations. The lower desires which in past lives may have been -more or less completely conquered, will be experienced in rapid -succession and left behind without much difficulty, till the great -struggle of the life is reached, from which man must come out more -or less victorious if he is to continue the progress at all. - -If right intention were the only thing needed, if it were a -guarantee against being led astray, or if straying did not -necessitate retardation on the road, there would be no such supreme -necessity that belief should be in accordance with facts; but even -in worldly affairs we see every day that purity of intention is no -guard against the failures that come from lack of knowledge. In the -great spiritual science therefore, which deals with the problem of -life as a whole—not the mere fragment which this earthly existence -represents—it will be seen how vitally necessary it is that facts -should be conceived correctly. - -To us whose eyes are blinded to the heights above, by the mists of -our own desires, the only rays of light which can illumine the -darkness of our journey on the great quest, are the words (whether -or not in the form of recognised revelation) left by the masters who -have preceded us on the road, and the counsel of our comrades who -are bound for the same goal. But words are capable of many -interpretations, and the opinions of our comrades are coloured by -their own personality—the ultimate touch-stone of truth must -therefore be looked for in the disciple’s own breast. - -Having stated the necessity for correct belief, let us now consider -the question of the great achievement—the annihilation of Karma—the -attainment of Nirvana. It must be acknowledged as a logical -proposition that Karma can never annihilate Karma, _i.e._, that no -thoughts words, or acts of the man in his present state of -consciousness, can, ever free him from the circle of re-births. This -view would seem to necessitate some power external to the man to -free him—a power which has touch of him, and which would have to be -allied to him. - -Now the teachings which have been put before the world in “Light on -the Path” state the other side of the question. “Each man is to -himself absolutely the _way_, the _truth_, and the _life_.” And -again, “For within you is the light of the world, the only light -that can be shed on the Path. If you are unable to perceive it -within you, it is useless to look for it elsewhere.” It would seem -that the solution of this great paradox must be sought for in the -constitution of man, as described in theosophic writings. Indeed, it -is the scientific statement of deep spiritual truths which gives to -the Theosophic teachings their remarkable value, and which seems -likely to carry conviction of their truth to the Western peoples, -who have for too long been accustomed to the mere emotional -sentimentality of the orthodox religions, and to the pessimistic -negation of science. - -The higher principles, as they have been called, in the constitution -of man, particularly the divine Atma, through which he is allied to -the all-pervading Deity, must ever remain deep mysteries. But at -least they are cognisable by the intellect, as providing logical -stepping-stones for spanning the great gulf between Humanity and -Divinity,—the Power—the correct cognition of which provides the very -link between both systems of thought—which is at the same time -external to man, and has touch of him by its own divine light which -enlightens him, and which is also the very man himself—his highest -and truest Self. - -For most of us it is the “God hidden in the Sanctuary,” of whose -very existence we are unaware, is known under the name of Iswara or -the Logos—the primal ray from the Great Unknown. It is the Chrestos -of the Christians, but, save, perhaps, to a few mystics in the Roman -or Greek churches, it has been degraded past recognition by their -materialistic anthropomorphism. A help to its better understanding -may be obtained by a reference to Sanscrit philosophy, which -describes man’s nature as consisting of the three _gunas_ or -qualities—Satwa, goodness, Rajas, passion and Tamas, darkness, or -delusion—and the nature of most men is made up almost entirely of -the two last named—while the Logos is pure Satwa. - -The vexed question, therefore, as to whether man is freed by his own -dominant will, or by the power of the Logos, will be seen to be very -much a distinction without a difference. For the attainment of final -liberation the God within and the God without must co-operate. - -Desire being, as Buddha taught, the great obstacle in the way, its -conquest by the dominant will is the thing that has to be done, but -the Divine will cannot arise in its power, till the conviction of -the Supreme desirability of attaining the eternal condition is -rendered permanent; and it is this that necessitates the goad which -the Logos is continually applying by its light on the soul. - -We are now face to face with a very difficult problem—it is, in fact -the gulf which separates the Occultist from the Religionist, and it -is here that it is so necessary to get hold of the correct idea. - - “Strong limbs may dare the rugged road which storms, - Soaring and perilous, the mountain’s breast; - The weak must wind from slower ledge to ledge, - With many a place of rest.” - -The short cut to perfection referred to in the first two lines has -been called in Theosophic writings “the perilous ladder which leads -to the path of life.” To have faced the fearful abyss of darkness of -the first trial, without starting back in terror at the apparent -annihilation which the casting aside of the sense-life implies, and -out of the still more awful silence of the second trial; to have had -the strength to evoke the greater Self—the God that has hitherto -been hidden in the sanctuary—such is the language used with -reference to the very first—nay, the preliminary—steps on this path, -while the further steps are represented by the ascending scale of -the occult Hierarchy, where the neophyte or chela, through a series -of trials and initiations, may attain the highest Adeptship, and the -man may gradually leave behind him his human desires and -limitations, and realise instead the attributes of Deity. - - PILGRIM. - -(_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - “_GOD SPEAKS FOR LAW AND ORDER._” - - INTRODUCTION. - -The readers of the curious article which follows are requested to -remember that the writers of signed papers in LUCIFER, and not the -editors, are responsible for their contents. Captain Serjeant’s -views excite much interest among a large number of earnest people, -who use Biblical forms and phraseology to picture to themselves the -hidden things of nature and of spirit—things which we, the editors, -and also the large majority of Theosophists, believe to be more -clearly conveyed under the symbolism of the ancient Wisdom-Religion -of the East, and better expressed in its terminology. The article is -an attempt to explain the significance of a very curious cloud -formation observed by many persons in Scotland, on the 16th of -September last, a sketch of which appeared in the _St. Stephens -Review_ on the 24th of the same month. In the centre of the sketch -appears a side view of the British Lion rampant, with his paw on the -head of a bearded man, who bears a considerable likeness to Mr. -Parnell; to the right of the Lion is an excellent likeness of Her -Majesty, crowned, as in the Jubilee coinage, and smiling very -naturally; and to the left of the picture is an Irish harp. The -appearance, by the testimony of many witnesses, must have been -remarkably perfect and striking. Cloud-forms of a similar kind have -been recorded many times in history, and they are usually connected -in the public mind with some important political event. The Cross of -Constantine will, no doubt, recur to the readers’ mind, but the -sword and reversed crescent, which everyone saw in the sky when the -Turks were driven out of Vienna, may be less generally known; as -also the reversed thistles, with the outline of a Scotchman, armed -with claymore and targe, and falling backward, which was observed in -the clouds by the King and Court at Windsor on the night before the -battle of Culloden. - -The question of what interpretation is to be put upon remarkable -cloud appearances, is of little interest to anyone who believes that -such phenomena are merely accidental arrangements of the watery -vapours of the atmosphere driven by currents of air. Apart, however, -from the obvious consideration that this way of regarding the -phenomenon only raises the further question of what causes the -currents of air to run in these particular ways, it may be safely -said that the chances are millions of millions of millions to one, -against the appearance in the clouds of any such perfect and -complete picture of well-known persons and emblems, as were seen in -Scotland on the 16th of September. Of course it may be argued, on -the other hand, that the clouds are for ever forming and re-forming -in millions of millions of millions different ways, and that the -mathematical chances are that one of these ways will occasionally -represent an earth scene. But even if the infinite number of -continual permutations and transformations of cloud substance be -held to account for the occasional appearance of some graphic -picture of human things, it does not in any way explain why these -rare pictures, when they do occur, should be perfect and appropriate -symbols; neither does it account for their appearance at the -particular moment when the extraordinary events, to which they are -appropriate, are occurring, or about to occur. - -The phenomenon of vapours and fumes taking the shape of persons and -things, is one of the oldest and best accredited facts in magic, and -these cloud appearances, if they be viewed as having any -significance, are merely instances of a similar action on a large -scale produced by some conscious or unconscious force in nature. - -If it be allowed, however, that the occasional assumption by vapours -of the shapes and likenesses of terrestrial things is not a -“fortuitous concourse of atoms,” but occurs in accordance with some -obscure law of Nature that in itself is the result of the mutual -interaction and interdependence of everything in the Universe, the -important question still remains—whether these appearances, when -they do occur, are “intended” as warnings or omens? Should the lion, -the harp, her Majesty, and Mr. Parnell, of the Scottish -cloud-picture, be taken as having any more significance in the -affairs of the nation, or of the world at large, than chemical -phenomena can be supposed to presage disturbances or rejoicings in -the world of nature? To answer this question would involve -considerations which only an advanced Occultist would be able to -comprehend; so we shall merely say, that although there are natural -symbols which carry in them a definite meaning for those who can -read that secret language, still symbols are generally significant -in proportion as people themselves put a significance into them. - -A triangle or a cube is nothing but a triangle or a cube to a yokel, -but to an Occultist they contain the philosophy of the Universe. -Even so, Captain Serjeant, “the New Dispensationist,” and -Theosophist, can put the meaning he likes into this or any other -symbolical representation. We do not quite agree with either his -methods or his results in the case before us, but the conclusions he -draws are the same that are now being reached by many minds pursuing -very different paths; and these conclusions may be summed up by -saying that great changes are approaching, both in the temporal and -in the spiritual life of humanity, and that these changes will -eventuate in better things and nobler ideas. - - --- - - AN INTERPRETATION OF THE VISION, BY SERJEANT. - - (The New Dispensationist.) - -Thus may be interpreted the symbolical appearance represented and -described in the _St. Stephen’s Review_ of 24th September 1887. The -lion[66] of the house of Judah[67] arises with Victoria[68] the -female principle of the victor[69] of this world of ignorance, -error, sin, crime and misery. The lion represents that wisdom which -is the only true and lasting power on earth. He shall crush out the -anarchy and confusion now so manifest in _the world_ which is the -state of ignorance existing on this earth. Without a miracle shall -all this be accomplished? - ------ - -Footnote 66: - - It is somewhat difficult to follow the argument of this passage, - unless the meaning of the words is explained. The Lion of the - House of Judah is equivalent to “the Lord” and to “the Victor” - mentioned below. In the writer’s phraseology “Victor is the symbol - of the Trinity of Wisdom, Love, Truth.” Now the Lion is symbolical - of Wisdom; but, as it is impossible to sever one element of the - Trinity from another, it is necessary to remember that whenever - the word wisdom is used it carries with it the other two as well. - The above sentence would then seem to mean the conjunction of the - male and female principles to effect the purpose of the - manifestation of the Trinity above mentioned; by which - manifestation all ignorance is dispelled. [ED.] - -Footnote 67: - - Judah means _praised_; the true idea being _the Lord be praised_. - Too much attention cannot be paid to the meanings of the words - used in the sacred writings of all nations and peoples. - -Footnote 68: - - _i.e._ the Queen, on whose lands _the Sun never sets_; it must be - remembered that—“neither is the woman without the man, nor the man - without the woman in the Lord.”—(1 Corinthians xi, 11.) - -Footnote 69: - - “And no man can say _Jesus is Lord_ (_i.e._ Victor), but in the - Holy Spirit.”—(1 Corinthians xii., 3, Revised Version.) It is - especially necessary to remember that whenever allusion is made to - Victoria, it is not Her Most Gracious Majesty who is meant but the - unseen Victoria whose outward manifestation the Queen is alleged - to be. It is as though the Queen is the mouth-piece of the - intelligence behind, as the Foreign Secretary may be the - mouth-piece of the Foreign policy of the Government. The language - used is purely symbolical and by using words as symbols an - esoteric meaning is attached to the most commonplace events in - life. It is a truly occult argument, but one which matter-of-fact - people will regard as nonsensical. [ED.] - ------ - -As insidious doubt has crept into the hearts of the children of men, -so shall insidious truth creep in to dispel all doubt; ignorance -developed into wisdom shall be the destruction of the world.[70] -Ignorance is the former or lower expression of knowledge, and -knowledge is the former or lower expression of wisdom—ignorance[71] -is the cross—wisdom is the crown. Ignorance regarded in a true light -is really an incentive to knowledge, for no man would try to attain -to knowledge were he not ignorant. And no man would strive to attain -to wisdom, did he not possess the knowledge which ever silently -proclaims to him its crowning happiness. Wisdom is not only the -celestial crown which every embodied soul is ultimately destined to -possess, but it is also that particular state of Heaven called the -“New Jerusalem” which shall descend from the Spirit (_i.e._ God, see -John iv., 24.) to earth in these latter days (see Revelation xxi.) - ------ - -Footnote 70: - - According to the explanations of the writer (_v. supra_), _The - World_ signifies a state of ignorance and darkness. Taken in this - sense the above sentence becomes a truism. [ED.] - -Footnote 71: - - Ignorance is the equivalent of the Body, which is the Cross. By - this light the Wisdom means the life of the Spirit. [ED.] - ------ - -Man was created[72] an ignorant being for a great purpose, which he -will ultimately realise and know. Were there no ignorance, there -could be no error, without error there could be no sin. Were there -no ignorance, no sin, there could be no crime, no unhappiness, no -misery existing on the earth. When, therefore, general ignorance -shall succumb to the disintegrating power of universal intelligence -so rapidly developing in these latter days[73] (see Daniel xii., 4), -and which is the quickening of the Spirit of God in man; then the -very conditions responsible for evolving error, sin, crime, -unhappiness, and misery will be entirely done away with, and thus -the consummation of the age—or, as the old translation of the Bible -has it, the end of the world—will be brought about as a necessary -consequence of purification by the Fire of the Spirit, _Truth_, -which is the Divine Son of the Supreme Spirit, or God. “When He, the -Spirit of Truth, is come, He shall guide you into all the Truth”; -then shall the princes of the House of David[74] arise from amongst -the people to rule the nations in equity and justice, in prosperity -and peace, and the reign of the One Almighty Spirit of Wisdom, Love, -and Truth shall begin on earth—for the Lion (or wisdom) shall lie -down with the Lamb (or innocence), and a little child (or truth, see -Rev. xii., the coming man-child) shall lead them. - ------ - -Footnote 72: - - To say that Man was created ignorant for a great purpose would - argue the idea of a creator, according to orthodox ideas. But the - writer is known to repudiate this idea entirely. It is difficult, - therefore, to see what he means, unless it is that the man of - flesh was ushered into existence by an evolution which he has not - yet completed—ignorant, to acquire knowledge gradually. [ED.] - -Footnote 73: - - This is a _very_ optimistic view of the case, and we can only hope - to see it realised. The article “Signs of the Times” agrees with - the views of the writer of this article. There is a development - going on, but the forces against which it has to contend are too - dense for an early realisation of this dreamlike Golden Age. It is - too good to be true; but that it is possible to help it is also - true. The Kingdom of Heaven may be taken by violence, and an - entrance effected in an instant, but the process of attaining the - position whence the attack may be delivered, is one extending over - years. No student of occultism needs to be told this. [ED.] - -Footnote 74: - - David means _beloved_; he was the first King of Israel, chosen of - the Spirit. Israel means _one who strives with God_—_i.e._ one who - strives against ignorance in order that he may be blessed together - with his posterity. It was a name given to Jacob when he wrestled - with the Angel (Genesis xxxii., 28), and applies _to all_ who - contend on the side of the Deity. - ------ - -The soul-stirring and elevating harp of the sweet and trusting -daughters of Judah[75] is hushed—no crown surmounts it; and angels -weep and mourn over the discord now prevailing in the world. Where -are the harmonious chords which, through their inherent, soft, -loving and sympathetic notes once rendered powerless that enemy of -man—the serpent? Lost, through the ignorance and sin of the puny -earth-worms of this world! Yet Ireland, in common with the whole -earth, shall be freed ere long from the yoke of ignorance which is -so sorely oppressing all God’s creatures, for the crowned female -head symbolically represents the “Sign in Heaven” _which has -appeared_, of the Victoria or the woman[76] clothed with the Sun, -the Divine Mother from whom will proceed the Child of Wisdom, Love -and Truth, who shall rule all nations with a rod of iron,[77] and -who shall be caught up unto God and unto His Throne.[78] - ------ - -Footnote 75: - - In the writer’s phraseology, Judah is the equivalent of Erin in - this case. It becomes exceedingly difficult to follow his meaning, - for as everything is the equivalent of everything else, we are - landed in a hopeless maze of paradox. On the principle that there - is no truth without a paradox, there must be a great truth in this - article (as there is), but its disentanglement is a matter of much - labour and thought. The line of argument is the Judah meaning “be - praised”—certain people who praised or followed the Lord (or - Wisdom) were “oppressed and laid aside _their harps_.” There are - people unjustly oppressed in Ireland, not by the outer troubles, - but by the causes of the undoubted misery which prevails there. - Consequently, the daughters of Judah and Erin are equivalent terms - and interchangeable as symbols. The fact is that the author uses a - peculiar cryptogram, as he himself states. [ED.] - -Footnote 76: - - See “The Mother, the woman clothed with the Sun,” Vols. I. and - II.; and also the celebrated picture of “The Woman clothed with - the Sun,” by Carl Müller. - -Footnote 77: - - _i.e._, The Sceptre that endureth. - -Footnote 78: - - _Revelation_, xii. - ------ - -The following quotation from one of the replies to two leading -articles, which appeared in the _Manchester Courier_ of May 4th and -13th, may also tend to throw some light on the vision of the crowned -female head: “The present year heralds the jubilee of Her Majesty -Queen Victoria, on whose glorious Empire the sun never sets. It -shall also proclaim the jubilee of another Queen Victoria, well -known to the ancients as the Bride of God who awaits the arrival of -the Bridegroom. This Queen is She of Sheba[79]—the female principle -of the one who is the Victor[80] of this world of ignorance and -darkness, sin and crime; and He is the Solomon,[81] or Man of Light, -Truth and Life Eternal. On her glorious empire the golden rays of -Love and Peace shall shine forth from the Living Sun which nevermore -shall set. She is the woman clothed with the Sun, and from her will -proceed the promised man-child who shall rule all nations with a rod -of iron, and shall be caught up unto God and unto His Throne. Were -the English nation but to realise the mighty import of the grand and -everlasting truths which I now proclaim, it would, to a man, support -us in that work in which we, the New Dispensationists, daily and -hourly labour in the interests of a suffering humanity now being -slowly ground to powder in the stern mill of social ignorance and -degradation. The time has come for the promise to be made known of -the fulfilment of the “Saving health of all nations”; the prophecies -of the ancients relating to the ultimatum of the written Word of -Truth clearly point to the present age; and the Eternal Fiat has -gone forth from the Universal King: “Write, for these words are -faithful and true”—“Behold, I make all things new.” (Revelation xxi, -5.) - ------ - -Footnote 79: - - The Queen of the South or Zenith (_i.e._ the most supreme point of - the Heavens) who shall rise in judgment with this generation (see - Matthew xii, 42), She’ba represents two Hebrew words (_Shebhā_ and - _Shebhȧ_). The first of these is an obscure term, compared by - Gesenius with the Ethiopic for “man”; the second signifies an oath - or covenant. - -Footnote 80: - - _i.e._, The Christ, the Messiah. - -Footnote 81: - - _i.e._, The man of “Sol” or the Sun. Hence, Christians worship on - Sunday instead of on the Sabbath or on Saturday, as the Jews - worship. - ------ - -It is fashionable in the world to covertly sneer at the things of -the Spirit, and to regard the Living God in Heaven as a Being either -unable or unwilling to manifest His Almighty Power and Presence to -the world in this orthodox nineteenth century. To all who may be -inclined to ignorantly hold what I have here written to be the -outcome of a disordered imagination I would say, in the words of -Paul, an apostle: “not of men, neither by men.”—“We speak wisdom -among the full-grown, yet a wisdom, not of this world, nor of the -rulers of this world, _which are coming to nought_: but we speak -God’s wisdom in a mystery, even the wisdom that hath been hidden, -which God foreordained before the worlds unto our glory, _which none -of the Rulers of this world knoweth_.”[82] “Now the natural man -receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are -foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them because they are -spiritually examined. But he that is spiritual examineth all things -and is himself examined of no man.” (See 1 Corinthians, ii.) - ------ - -Footnote 82: - - _i.e._, Theosophy, or the hidden outcome of the hidden wisdom of - the ages. - ------ - -The year 1887 heralds the spiritual activity which will eventually -culminate in the glorious consummation of the age. - - W. ELDON SERJEANT. - - AN INFANT GENIUS. - -The idea of re-incarnation, that is to say of a succession of -earth-lives passed through by each individual monad, seems so new -and so daring to the Western World, that we are always being asked, -“Where are your proofs? Are we to take such a startling hypothesis -as this simply on your _ipse dixit_, or on the authority of some -ancient Oriental book or ‘problematical’ Mahatma?” - -To such a question the reply cannot be given in two or three words; -for, while maintaining that there is at least as much reliance to be -placed upon the Sacred Books of the East as on those of any other -religion, and while holding firm to the belief that there _are_ -beings of a higher order of intelligence living upon this earth, and -mixing even in its great life-currents, we cannot expect that merely -because we say “Man does not leave this earth for good and all at -Death,” we therefore shall gain credence. Before the world of -Science our position would have to be that of a Young with his -undulatory hypothesis of light, or a Dalton with his atomic theory. -We cannot bring proof positive to those who desire an Euclidic -demonstration; we can only offer to them a hypothesis, and bid them -treat it calmly and dispassionately, not flying straightway into a -fury of abuse at our great impudence in daring to suggest a heresy, -but weighing it with care, and trying whether or no it will explain -some of the dark riddles of existence. - -To ourselves, merely as a working hypothesis, the doctrine of -reincarnation seems to throw so much long-sought-for light upon the -bewildering enigmas of life, and the strange vagaries of a fickle -fortune, that we could not, even if we would, lay aside so fluent an -interpreter of the utterances of the Sphinx—Existence. The seeming -injustices in the lot of man fall into line as units of the great -battalion of cause and effect; “What a man sows that must he also -reap.” How else account for all the misery that cries aloud on every -hand, the starving multitudes, the good man persecuted, the -charlatan triumphant? In the small purview of a life summed up in -three-score years and ten, where is the indication of a Divine -intelligence that metes to each his due? - -But if this brief existence be not the only one that man incarnate -must pass through, if it be, as we are assured, but one short link -in a chain that spans a fathomless expanse of myriad years, then -does the eternity of justice proclaim itself, handed on from birth -to birth in the dark fuel of the torch of life. - -Our purpose now, however, is not to strive to catalogue the -countless instances where destiny appears to cry aloud, into the -deaf ears of man, that life is fraught with dire responsibility for -future life, but to point to a case where she, in kindlier mood, has -shown the gracious aspect of her face. - -For the last few months London has been taken by storm by the -marvellous musical talent of a child whose life, in this incarnation -at least, is barely ten years old. We allude, of course, to Josef -Hofmann. None of our readers who have heard this boy but must have -wondered whence this phenomenal skill could have been derived. Other -children have come before the public, and roused its listlessness a -little with exhibitions of infantile precocity. But this young Josef -has taken at once front rank among the stars of the musical world, -and won a place only to be compared to that of the fairy-child -Mozart. - -Whence comes this breadth of feeling, this grasp of musical -expression? It is certain that it comes not from his teacher; for -his father alone has filled that capacity, and it does not show -itself in _his_ performance; and again, the only unsatisfactory part -of the boy’s playing is clearly the result of mannerisms such as the -second-rate conductor of a provincial orchestra would, without fail, -extol and inculcate. No; it is clear that the swing of rhythm, the -determination of attack, the delicacy of sentiment, must come from a -man’s heart beating within that boyish frame, and a man’s mind -shining through that childish head. Could one forget the name of the -performer for one instant, and shut from one’s eyes his physical -presence, it were a _man_ that was revealing to us the secrets of -the notes. The rife experience of years must needs precede such -rendering of musical thought; an experience earned in many a fight -with varying fortune, in sympathy with many a tale of woe, in -rejoicing over many a glimpse of Love and Brotherhood. - -Yet ten short years are all his tale! What magician could crowd into -that tiny space the parti-coloured pictures of a fevered life of -energy? No, it must be that the child has lived upon this earth -before, has borne his lance in the thickest of the fray, has -achieved distinction in some great branch of art and garnered up a -store of thought and feeling, into the inheritance of which his -heir, himself, has entered. He may squander it again; alas, so many -have before; but there it is, for him to use aright or wrongly, and -serious is the charge imposed upon his guardians that they shall lay -the lesson to heart that to whom much is given, from him shall much -be expected. But with that aspect of the case it is not for us here -to deal. We have only adduced this boy’s genius as one of the -indications that life is in its succession a far more complex -problem than the materialists or the orthodox religionists would -lead us to believe. There are countless other suggestive little -facts of early talent that must have come within the circle of the -daily life of each of us; but without the thread of Karma whereon to -string them, we pass them by; and it is only when some remarkable -phenomenon, such as that of Josef Hofmann, bursts upon the world, -that men fall to wondering. Yet it is by the accumulation of small -details that a philosopher like Darwin worked out his scheme of -natural evolution; and it is by the testing of such a theory as that -of re-incarnation by many a little hitherto unexplained incident -that we shall find its worth. Nor is it merely as a curious prying -into mysteries that we should regard such research; for, once let a -man convince himself that though “Art is long,” yet Life, in its -recurrence, is longer, he will find in the thought that he is really -laying up treasure in heaven (the _lives_ to come), encouragement, -despite all temporary failure, to do whatsoever his hand findeth to -do with all his might. - - W. ASHTON ELLIS. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - FEAR. - - Why fearest thou the darksome shades - That creep across the path of life? - Why tremble at the thought of strife - That oftentimes the soul invades? - - Why sicken at the thought of ills? - The horrors that invade thy dreams, - The shadowland of forms, that seems - Dark terror to the soul it fills? - - Why weary of the onward way, - Or dread the roughness of the road? - Why fear to struggle ’gainst the load, - The heavy burthen of life’s clay? - - Hast thou not seen?—when gone the night - And stilled the dropping of the shower, - The weary drooping wayside flower - Drink in new life from sunbeams bright. - - Hast thou not loved, at dawn, to feast, - The longing of thy mortal eyes - With vivid colours of the skies, - Burst free from floodgates of the East? - - And hast thou never tried, in thought, - To gain a clearer, truer view? - A mystic glimpse, a vision new, - That shows the darkness as it ought? - - A phantom of material fear - Unworthy of a moment’s dread; - For darkness would itself be dead, - Unless its mother light were near! - - Then learn to grasp the purer light, - And learn to know the holier creed— - The brighter glow—the greater need, - The nearer day—the murkier night. - - P. H. D. - - - - - THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS. - - (_Continued._) - - II. - -The word Chréstos existed ages before Christianity was heard of. It -is found used, from the fifth century B.C., by Herodotus, by -Æschylus and other classical Greek writers, the meaning of it being -applied to both things and persons. - -Thus in Æschylus (Cho. 901) we read of Μαντεύματα πυθόχρηστα -(_pythochrésta_) the “oracles delivered by a Pythian God” -(_Greek-Eng. Lex._) through a pythoness; and _Pythochréstos_ is the -nominative singular of an adjective derived from _chrao_ χράω -(Eurip. _Ion_, 1, 218). The later meanings coined freely from this -primitive application, are numerous and varied. Pagan classics -expressed more than one idea by the verb χράομαι “consulting an -oracle”; for it also means “fated,” _doomed_ by an oracle, in the -sense of a _sacrificial victim to its decree_, or—“to the WORD”; as -_chrésterion_ is not only “the seat of an oracle” but also “an -offering to, or for, the oracle.”[83] _Chrestés_ χρήστης is one who -expounds or explains oracles, “a _prophet_, a _soothsayer_;”[84] and -_chrésterios_ χρηστὴριος is one who belongs to, or is in the service -of, an oracle, a god, or a “Master”;[85] this Canon Farrar’s efforts -notwithstanding.[86] - ------ - -Footnote 83: - - The word χρεών is explained by Herodotus (7. 11. 7.) as that which - an oracle declares, and τὸ χρεών is given by Plutarch (Nic. 14.) - as “fate,” “necessity.” _Vide_ Herod, 7. 215; 5. 108; and - Sophocles, Phil. 437. - -Footnote 84: - - See Liddell and Scott’s Greek-Engl. Lex. - -Footnote 85: - - Hence of a _Guru_, “a teacher,” and _chela_, a “disciple,” in - their mutual relations. - -Footnote 86: - - In his recent work—“The Early Days of Christianity,” Canon Farrar - remarks:—“Some have supposed a pleasant play of words founded on - it, as ... between _Chréstos_ (‘sweet’ Ps. xxx., iv., 8) and - Christos (Christ)” (I. p. 158, _foot-note_). But there is nothing - to suppose, since it began by a “play of words,” indeed. The name - _Christus_ was _not_ “distorted into Chrestus,” as the learned - author would make his readers believe (p. 19), but it was the - adjective and noun _Chréstos_ which became distorted into - _Christus_, and applied to Jesus. In a foot-note on the word - “Chrestian,” occurring in the First Epistle of Peter (chap. iv., - 16), in which in the _revised_ later MSS. the word was changed - into _Christian_, Canon Farrar remarks again, “Perhaps we should - read the ignorant heathen distortion, _Chréstian_.” Most decidedly - we should; for the eloquent writer should remember his Master’s - command to render unto Cæsar that which is Cæsar’s. His dislike - notwithstanding, Mr. Farrar is obliged to admit that the name - _Christian_ was first INVENTED, by the sneering, mocking - Antiochians, as early as A.D. 44, but had not come into general - use before the persecution by Nero. “Tacitus,” he says, “uses the - word Christians with something of apology. It is well known that - in the N. T. it only occurs three times, and always involves a - hostile sense (_Acts_ xi. 26, xxvi. 28, as it does in iv. 16).” It - was not Claudius alone who looked with alarm and suspicion on the - Christians, so nicknamed in derision for their carnalizing a - subjective principle or attribute, but all the pagan nations. For - Tacitus, speaking of those whom the masses called “Christians,” - describes them as a set of men _detested for their enormities_ and - crimes. No wonder, for history repeats itself. There are, no - doubt, thousands of noble, sincere, and virtuous _Christian-born_ - men and women now. But we have only to look at the viciousness of - Christian “heathen” converts; at the _morality_ of those - proselytes in India, whom the missionaries themselves decline to - take into their service, to draw a parallel between the converts - of 1,800 years ago, and the modern heathens “touched _by grace_.” - ------ - -All this is evidence that the terms Christ and Christians, spelt -originally _Chrést_ and _Chréstians_ χρηστιανοὶ[87] were -directly borrowed from the Temple terminology of the Pagans, and -meant the same thing. The God of the Jews was now substituted -for the Oracle and the other gods; the generic designation -“Chréstos” became a noun applied to one special personage; and -new terms such as _Chréstianoï_ and _Chréstodoulos_ “a follower -or servant of Chrestos”—were coined out of the old material. -This is shown by Philo Judæus, a monotheist, assuredly, using -already the same term for monotheistic purposes. For he speaks -of θεόχρηστος (_théochréstos_) “God-declared,” or one who is -declared by god, and of λόγια θεόχρηστα (_logia théochrésta_) -“sayings delivered by God”—which proves that he wrote at a time -(between the first century B.C., and the first A.D.) when -neither Christians nor Chrestians were yet known under these -names, but still called themselves the Nazarenes. The notable -difference between the two words χράω—“consulting or obtaining -response from a god or oracle” (χρεω being the Ionic earlier -form of it), and χριω (_chrio_) “to rub, to anoint” (from which -the name Christos), have not prevented the ecclesiastical -adoption and coinage from Philo’s expression θεόχρηστος of that -other term θεόχριστος “anointed by God.” Thus the quiet -substitution of the letter ι for η for dogmatic purposes, was -achieved in the easiest way, as we now see. - ------ - -Footnote 87: - - Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Lactantius, Clemens Alexandrinus, and - others spelt it in this way. - ------ - -The secular meaning of _Chréstos_ runs throughout the classical -Greek literature _pari passu_ with that given to it in the -mysteries. Demosthenes’ saying ω χρηστέ (330, 27), means by it -simply “you nice fellow”; Plato (in Phaed. 264 B) has χρηστός ει ὅτι -ἣγεῖ—“you are an excellent fellow to think....” But in the esoteric -phraseology of the temples “chrestos,”[88] a word which, like the -participle _chréstheis_, is formed under the same rule, and conveys -the same sense—from the verb χράομαι(“to consult a god”)—answers to -what we would call an adept, also a high _chela_, a disciple. It is -in this sense that it is used by Euripides (Ion. 1320) and by -Æschylus (1 C). This qualification was applied to those whom the -god, oracle, or any superior had proclaimed this, that, or anything -else. An instance may be given in this case. - ------ - -Footnote 88: - - _Vide_ Liddell and Scott’s Greek and English Lexicon. _Chréstos_ - is really one who is continually warned, advised, guided, whether - by oracle or prophet. Mr. G. Massey is not correct in saying that - “... The Gnostic form of the name Chrest, or Chrestos, denotes the - _Good God_, not a human original,” for it denoted the latter, - _i.e._, a good, holy man; but he is quite right when he adds that - “_Chrestianus_ signifies ... ‘Sweetness and Light.’” “The - _Chrestoi_, as the _Good People_, were pre-extant. Numerous Greek - inscriptions show that the departed, the hero, the saintly - one—that is, the ‘Good’—was styled _Chrestos_, or the Christ; and - from this meaning of the ‘Good’ does Justin, the primal apologist, - derive the Christian name. This identifies it with the Gnostic - source, and with the ‘Good God’ who revealed himself according to - Marcion—that is, the Un-Nefer or Good-opener of the Egyptian - theology.”—(_Agnostic Annual._) - ------ - -The words χρῆσεν οικιστῆρα used by Pindar (p. 4-10) mean “the oracle -_proclaimed_ him the coloniser.” In this case the genius of the -Greek language permits that the man so proclaimed should be called -χρήστος (_Chréstos_). Hence this term was applied to every Disciple -recognised by a Master, as also to every good man. Now, the Greek -language affords strange etymologies. Christian theology has chosen -and decreed that the name Christos should be taken as derived from -χρίΩ, χρίσω (Chriso), “anointed with scented unguents or oil.” But -this word has several significances. It is used by Homer, certainly, -as applied to the rubbing with oil of the body after bathing (_Il._ -23, 186; also in _Od._ 4, 252) as other ancient writers do. Yet the -word χρίστης (_Christes_) means rather a _white-washer_, while the -word Chrestes (χρήστης) means priest and prophet, a term far more -applicable to Jesus, than that of the “Anointed,” since, as Nork -shows on the authority of the Gospels, he never was anointed, either -as king or priest. In short, there is a deep mystery underlying all -this scheme, which, as I maintain, only a thorough knowledge of the -Pagan mysteries is capable of unveiling.[89] It is not what the -early Fathers, who had an object to achieve, may affirm or deny, -that is the important point, but rather what is now the evidence for -the real significance given to the two terms _Chréstos_ and -_Christos_ by the ancients in the pre-Christian ages. For the latter -had no object to achieve, therefore nothing to conceal or disfigure, -and their evidence is naturally the more reliable of the two. This -evidence can be obtained by first studying the meaning given to -these words by the classics, and then their correct significance -searched for in mystic symbology. - ------ - -Footnote 89: - - Again I must bring forward what Mr. G. Massey says (whom I quote - repeatedly because he has studied this subject so thoroughly and - so conscientiously). - - “My contention, or rather explanation,” he says, “is that the - author of the Christian name is the Mummy-Christ of Egypt, called - the _Karest_, which was a type of the immortal spirit in man, the - Christ within (as Paul has it), the divine offspring incarnated, - the Logos, the Word of Truth, the _Makheru_ of Egypt. It did not - originate as a mere type! The preserved mummy was the _dead body - of any one_ that was _Karest_, or mummified, to be kept by the - living; and, through constant repetition, this became a type of - the resurrection from (not of!) the dead.” See the explanation of - this further on. - ------ - -Now _Chrestos_, as already said, is a term applied in various -senses. It qualifies both Deity and Man. It is used in the former -sense in the Gospels, and in Luke (vi., 35), where it means “kind,” -and “merciful.” “χρηστός ἑστιν επι τους,” in 1 Peter (ii, 3), where -it is said, “Kind is the Lord,” χρηστός ὁ κύριος. On the other hand, -it is explained by Clemens Alexandrinus as simply meaning a good -man; _i.e._ “All who believe in _Chrést_ (a good man) both _are_, -and _are called Chréstians_, that is good men.” (Strom. lib. ii.) -The reticence of Clemens, whose Christianity, as King truly remarks -in his “_Gnostics_,” was no more than a graft upon the congenial -stock of his original Platonism, is quite natural. He was an -Initiate, a new Platonist, before he became a Christian, which fact, -however much he may have fallen off from his earlier views, could -not exonerate him from his pledge of secrecy. And as a Theosophist -and a _Gnostic_, one who _knew_, Clemens must have known that -_Christos_ was “the WAY,” while _Chréstos_ was the lonely traveller -journeying on to reach the ultimate goal through that “Path,” which -goal was _Christos_, the glorified Spirit of “TRUTH,” the reunion -with which makes the soul (the Son) ONE with the (Father) Spirit. -That Paul knew it, is certain, for his own expressions prove it. For -what do the words πάλιν ὠδίνω, ἅχρις οὕ μορφωθῆ χριστὸς ἐνὺμῖν, or, -as given in the authorised translations, “I am again in travail -until _Christ be formed in you_” mean, but what we give in its -esoteric rendering, _i.e._ “until you find _the_ Christos within -yourselves as your only ‘way.’” (_vide_ Galatians iv., 19 and 20.) - -Thus Jesus, whether of Nazareth or Lüd,[90] was a Chréstos, as -undeniably as that he never was entitled to the appellation of -_Christos_, during his life-time and before his last trial. It may -have been as Higgins thinks, who surmises that the first name of -Jesus was, perhaps, χρεισος the second χρησος, and the third χρισος. -“The word χρεισος was in use before the H (cap. _eta_) was in the -language.” But Taylor (in his answer to Pye Smith, p. 113) is quoted -saying “The complimentary epithet Chrest ... signified nothing more -than a good man.” - ------ - -Footnote 90: - - Or Lydda. Reference is made here to the Rabbinical tradition in - the Babylonian Gemara, called _Sepher Toledoth Jeshu_, about Jesus - being the son of one named Pandira, and having lived a century - earlier than the era called Christian, namely, during the reign of - the Jewish king Alexander Jannæus and his wife Salome, who reigned - from the year 106 to 79 B.C. Accused by the Jews of having learned - the magic art in Egypt, and of having stolen from the Holy of - Holies the Incommunicable Name, Jehoshua (Jesus) was put to death - by the Sanhedrin at Lud. He was stoned and then crucified on a - tree, on the eve of Passover. The narrative is ascribed to the - Talmudistic authors of “Sota” and “Sanhedrin,” p. 19, Book of - Zechiel. See “Isis Unveiled,” II. 201; Arnobius; Elephas Levi’s - “_Science des Esprits_,” and “The Historical Jesus and Mythical - Christ,” a lecture by G. Massey. - ------ - -Here again a number of ancient writers may be brought forward to -testify that _Christos_ (or _Chreistos_, rather) was, along with -χρησος = Hrésos, an adjective applied to Gentiles before the -Christian era. In _Philopatris_ it is said ει τυχοι χρηστος και εν -εθνεσιν, _i.e._ “if chrestos chance to be even among the Gentiles,” -etc. - -Tertullian denounces in the 3rd chapter of his _Apologia_ the word -“_Christianus_” as derived by “crafty interpretation;”[91] Dr. -Jones, on the other hand, letting out the information, corroborated -by good sources, that _Hrésos_ χρησός was the name given to Christ -by the Gnostics, and even by unbelievers,” assures us that the real -name ought to be χρισος or Chrisos—thus repeating and supporting the -original “pious fraud” of the early Fathers, a fraud which led to -the carnalizing of the whole Christian system.[92] But I propose to -show as much of the real meaning of all these terms as lies within -my humble powers and knowledge. Christos, or the “Christ-condition,” -was ever the synonym of the “Mahatmic-condition,” _i.e._, the union -of the man with the divine principle in him. As Paul says (Ephes. -iii. 17) “κατοικησαι τον χριστον δια της πιστεως εν ταις καρδιαις -ὑμωι.” “That you may find Christos in your _inner_ man through -_knowledge_” not faith, as translated; for _Pistis_ is “knowledge,” -as will be shown further on. - ------ - -Footnote 91: - - “Christianus quantum interpretatione de unctione deducitas. Sed ut - cum perferam Chrestianus pronunciatus a vobis (nam nec nominis - certa est notitia penes vos) de suavitate vel benignitate - compositum est.” Canon Farrar makes a great effort to show such - _lapsus calami_ by various Fathers as the results of disgust and - fear. “There can be little doubt,” he says (in _The Early Days of - Christianity_) “that the ... name Christian ... was a nick-name - due to the wit of the Antiochians.... It is clear that the sacred - writers avoided the name (Christians) because it was employed by - their enemies (Tac. Ann. xv. 44). It only became familiar when the - virtues of Christians had shed lustre upon it....” This is a very - lame excuse, and a poor explanation to give for so eminent a - thinker as Canon Farrar. As to the “virtues of Christians” ever - shedding _lustre_ upon the name, let us hope that the writer had - in his mind’s eye neither Bishop Cyril, of Alexandria, nor - Eusebius, nor the Emperor Constantine, of murderous fame, nor yet - the Popes Borgia and the Holy Inquisition. - -Footnote 92: - - Quoted by G. Higgins. (See Vol. I., pp. 569-573.) - ------ - -There is still another and far more weighty proof that the name -_Christos_ is pre-Christian. The evidence for it is found in the -prophecy of the Erythrean Sybil. We read in it ἹΗΣΟΥΣ ΧΡΕΙΣΤΟΣΘΕΟΝ -ὙΙΟΣ ΣΩΤΗΡ ΣΤΑΥΡΟΣ. Read esoterically, this string of meaningless -detached nouns, which has no sense to the profane, contains a real -prophecy—only not referring to Jesus—and a verse from the mystic -catechism of the Initiate. The prophecy relates to the coming down -upon the Earth of the Spirit of Truth (Christos), after which -advent—that has once more nought to do with Jesus—will begin the -Golden Age; the verse refers to the necessity before reaching that -blessed condition of inner (or subjective) theophany and -theopneusty, to pass through the crucifixion of flesh or matter. -Read exoterically, the words “_Iesous Chreistos theou yios soter -stauros_,” meaning literally “Iesus, Christos, God, Son, Saviour, -Cross,” are most excellent handles to hang a Christian prophecy on, -but they are _pagan_, not Christian. - -If called upon to explain the names IESOUS CHREISTOS, the answer is: -study mythology, the so-called “fictions” of the ancients, and they -will give you the key. Ponder over Apollo, the solar god, and the -“Healer,” and the allegory about his son Janus (or Ion), his priest -at Delphos, through whom alone could prayers reach the immortal -gods, and his other son Asclepios, called the _Soter_, or Saviour. -Here is a leaflet from esoteric history written in symbolical -phraseology by the old Grecian poets. - -The city of Chrisa[93] (now spelt Crisa), was built in memory of -Kreusa (or Creusa), daughter of King Erechtheus and mother of Janus -(or Ion) by Apollo, in memory of the danger which Janus escaped.[94] -We learn that Janus, abandoned by his mother in a grotto “to hide -the shame of the virgin who bore a son,” was found by Hermes, who -brought the infant to Delphi, nurtured him by his father’s sanctuary -and oracle, where, under the name of Chresis (χρησις) Janus became -first a _Chrestis_ (a priest, soothsayer, or Initiate), and then -very nearly a _Chresterion_, “a sacrificial victim,”[95] ready to be -poisoned by his own mother, who knew him not, and who, in her -jealousy, mistook him, on the hazy intimation of the oracle, for a -son of her husband. He pursued her to the very altar with the -intention of killing her—when she was saved through the pythoness, -who divulged to both the secret of their relationship. In memory of -this narrow escape, Creusa, the mother, built the city of Chrisa, or -Krisa. Such is the allegory, and it symbolizes simply the trials of -Initiation.[96] - ------ - -Footnote 93: - - In the days of Homer, we find this city, once celebrated for its - mysteries, the chief seat of Initiation, and the name of - _Chrestos_ used as a title during the mysteries. It is mentioned - in the _Iliad_, ii., 520 as “Chrisa” (χρῖσα). Dr. Clarke suspected - its ruins under the present site of _Krestona_, a small town, or - village rather, in Phocis, near the Crissæan Bay. (See E. D. - Clarke, 4th ed. Vol. viii. p. 239, “Delphi.”) - -Footnote 94: - - The root of χρητός (_Chretos_) and χρηστος (_Chrestos_) is one and - the same; χράω which means “consulting the oracle,” in one sense, - but in another one “consecrated,” _set apart_, belonging to some - temple, or oracle, or devoted to oracular services. On the other - hand, the word χρε (χρεω) means “obligation,” a “bond, duty,” or - one who is under the obligation of pledges, or vows taken. - -Footnote 95: - - The adjective χρηστὸς was also used as an adjective before proper - names as a compliment, as in Plat. Theact. p. 166A, “Ὁυτος ὁ - Σωκράτης ὁ χρηστός;” (here Socrates is the _Chréstos_), and also - as a surname, as shown by Plutarch (V. Phocion), who wonders how - such a rough and dull fellow as Phocion could be surnamed - _Chréstos_. - -Footnote 96: - - There are strange features, quite suggestive, for an Occultist, in - the myth (if one) of Janus. Some make of him the personification - of _Kosmos_, others, of _Cælus_ (heaven), hence he is “two-faced” - because of his two characters of spirit and matter; and he is not - only “Janus _Bifrons_” (two-faced), but also _Quadrifrons_—the - perfect square, the emblem of the Kabbalistic Deity. His temples - were built with _four_ equal sides, with a door and _three_ - windows on each side. Mythologists explain it as an emblem of the - _four_ seasons of the year, and _three_ months in each season, and - in all of the twelve months of the year. During the mysteries of - Initiation, however, he became the Day-Sun and the Night-Sun. - Hence he is often represented with the number 300 in one hand, and - in the other 65, or the number of days of the Solar year. Now - _Chanoch_ (Kanoch and _Enosh_ in the Bible) is, as may be shown on - Kabalistic authority, whether son of Cain, son of Seth, or the son - of Methuselah, one and the same personage. As _Chanoch_ (according - to Fuerst), he is the _Initiator_, _Instructor_—of the - astronomical circle and solar year,” as son of Methuselah, who is - said to have lived 365 years and been taken to heaven alive, as - the representative of the Sun (or god). (See Book of Enoch.) This - patriarch has many features in common with Janus, who, - exoterically, is Ion but IAO cabalistically, or Jehovah, the “Lord - God of Generations,” the mysterious Yodh, or ONE (a phallic - number). For Janus or Ion is also _Consivius, a conserendo_, - because he presided over generations. He is shown giving - hospitality to Saturn (_Chronos_ “time”), and is the _Initiator_ - of the year, or time divided into 365. - ------ - -Finding then that Janus, the solar God, and son of Apollo, the Sun, -means the “Initiator” and the “Opener of the Gate of Light,” or -secret wisdom of the mysteries; that he is born from Krisa -(esoterically _Chris_), and that he was a _Chrestos_ through whom -spoke the God; that he was finally Ion, the father of the Ionians, -and, some say, an _aspect_ of Asclepios, another son of Apollo, it -is easy to get hold of the thread of Ariadne in this labyrinth of -allegories. It is not the place here to prove side issues in -mythology, however. It suffices to show the connection between the -mythical characters of hoary antiquity and the later fables that -marked the beginning of our era of civilization. Asclepios -(Esculapius) was the divine physician, the “Healer,” the “Saviour,” -Σωτηρ as he was called, a title also given to Janus of Delphi; and -IASO, the daughter of Asclepios was the goddess of healing, under -whose patronage were all the candidates for initiation in her -father’s temple, the novices or _chrestoi_, called “the sons of -Iaso.” (_Vide_ for name, “Plutus,” by Aristoph. 701). - -Now, if we remember, firstly, that the names of IESUS in their -different forms, such as Iasius, Iasion, Jason and Iasus, were very -common in ancient Greece, especially among the descendants of Jasius -(the Jasides), as also the number of the “sons of Iaso,” the -_Mystoï_ and future Epoptai (Initiates), why should not the -enigmatical words in the Sibylline Book be read in their legitimate -light, one that had nought to do with a Christian prophecy? The -secret doctrine teaches that the first two words ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΧΡΕΙΣΤΟΣ -mean simply “son of Iaso, a Chrestos,” or servant of the oracular -God. Indeed IASO (Ιασω) _is in the Ionic dialect IESO_ (Ἱησὼ), and -the expression Ιησους (_Iesous_)—in its archaic form, ΙΗΣΟΥΣ—simply -means “the son of Iaso or _Ieso_, the healer,” _i.e._ ο Ιησοῦς -(υῖος). No objection, assuredly, can be taken to such rendering, or -to the name being written _Ieso_ instead of _Iaso_, since the first -form is _attic_, therefore incorrect, for the name is _Ionic_. -“Ieso” from which “O’ Iesous” (son of Ieso)—_i.e._ a genitive, not a -nominative—_is Ionic and cannot_ be anything else, if the age of the -Sibylline book is taken into consideration. Nor could the Sibyl of -Erythrea have spelt it originally otherwise, as Erythrea, her very -residence, was a town in Ionia (from Ion or Janus) opposite Chios; -and that the _Ionic_ preceded the _attic_ form. - -Leaving aside in this case the mystical signification of the now -famous Sibylline sentence, and giving its literal interpretation -only, on the authority of all that has been said, the hitherto -mysterious words would stand; “Son of IASO, CHRESTOS (the priest or -servant) (of the) SON of (the) GOD (Apollo) the SAVIOUR from the -CROSS”—(of flesh or matter).[97] Truly, Christianity can never hope -to be understood until every trace of dogmatism is swept away from -it, and the dead letter sacrificed to the eternal Spirit of Truth, -which is Horus, which is Crishna, which is Buddha, as much as it is -the Gnostic Christos and the true Christ of Paul. - -In the _Travels_ of Dr. Clarke, the author describes a heathen -monument found by him. - ------ - -Footnote 97: - - _Stauros_ became the cross, the instrument of crucifixion, far - later, when it began to be represented as a Christian symbol and - with the Greek letter T, the Tau. (Luc. Jud. Voc.) Its primitive - meaning was phallic, a symbol for the male and female elements; - the great serpent of temptation, the body which had to be killed - or subdued by the dragon of wisdom, the seven-vowelled solar - chnouphis or Spirit of Christos of the Gnostics, or, again, Apollo - killing Python. - ------ - - “Within the sanctuary, behind the altar, we saw the fragments of a - _marble cathedra_, upon the back of which we found the following - inscription, exactly as it is here written, no part of it having - been injured or obliterated, affording perhaps the only instance - known of a sepulchral inscription upon a monument of this - remarkable form.” - -The inscription ran thus: ΧΡΗΣΤΟΣ ΠΡΩΤΟΥ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΣ ΛΑΡΙΣΣΑΙΟΣ -ΠΕΛΑΣΓΙΟΤΗΣ ΕΤΩΝ ΙΗ or, “Chrestos, the first, a Thessalonian from -Larissa, Pelasgiot 18 years old Hero,” Chrestos the _first_ -(_protoo_), why? Read literally the inscription has little sense; -interpreted esoterically, it is pregnant with meaning. As Dr. Clarke -shows, the word Chrestos is found on the epitaphs of almost all the -ancient Larissians; but it is preceded always by a proper name. Had -the adjective Chrestos stood after a name, it would only mean “a -good man,” a posthumous compliment paid to the defunct, the same -being often found on our own modern tumular epitaphs. But the word -Chrestos, standing alone and the other word, “protoo,” following it, -gives it quite another meaning, especially when the deceased is -specified as a “hero.” To the mind of an Occultist, the defunct was -a neophyte, who had died in his 18th year _of neophytism_,[98] and -stood in the first or highest class of discipleship, having passed -his preliminary trials as a “hero;” but had died before the last -mystery, which would have made of him a “Christos,” an _anointed_, -one with the spirit of Christos or Truth in him. He had not reached -the end of the “Way,” though he had heroically conquered the horrors -of the preliminary theurgic trials. - ------ - -Footnote 98: - - Even to this day in India, the candidate loses his name and, as - also in Masonry, his age (monks and nuns also changing their - Christian names at their taking the order or veil), and begins - counting his years from the day he is accepted a chela and enters - upon the cycle of initiations. Thus Saul was “a child of one - year,” when he began to reign, though a grown-up adult. See 1 - Samuel ch. xiii. 1, and Hebrew scrolls, about his initiation by - Samuel. - ------ - -We are quite warranted in reading it in this manner, after learning -the place where Dr. Clarke discovered the tablet, which was, as -Godfrey Higgins remarks, there, where “I should expect to find it, -at Delphi, in the temple of the God IE.,” who, with the Christians -became Jah, or Jehovah, one with Christ Jesus. It was at the foot of -Parnassus, in a gymnasium, “adjoining the Castalian fountain, which -flowed by the ruins of Crisa, probably the town called Crestona,” -etc. And again. “In the first part of its course from the -(Castalian) fountain, it (the river) separates the remains of the -gymnasium ... from the valley of Castro,” as it probably did from -the old city of Delphi—the seat of the great oracle of Apollo, of -the town of Krisa (or Kreusa) the great centre of initiations and of -the _Chrestoi_ of the decrees of the oracles, where the candidates -for the last _labour_ were anointed with sacred oils[99] before -being plunged into their last trance of forty-nine hours’ duration -(as to this day, in the East), from which they arose as glorified -adepts or _Christoi_.” - - “In the Clementine Recognitions it is announced that the father - anointed his son with ‘oil that was taken from the wood of the - Tree of Life, and from this anointing he is called the Christ:’ - whence the Christian name. This again is Egyptian. Horus was the - anointed son of the father. The mode of anointing him from the - Tree of Life, portrayed on the monuments, is very primitive - indeed; and the Horus of Egypt was continued in the Gnostic - Christ, who is reproduced upon the Gnostic stones as the - intermediate link betwixt the _Karest_ and the Christ, also as - the Horus of both sexes.” (“_The name and nature of the - Christ._”—GERALD MASSEY.) - ------ - -Footnote 99: - - Demosthenes, “De Corona,” 313, declares that the candidates for - initiation into the Greek mysteries were anointed with oil. So - they are now in India, even in the initiation into the _Yogi_ - mysteries—various ointments or unguents being used. - ------ - -Mr. G. Massey connects the Greek Christos or Christ with the -Egyptian _Karest_, the “mummy type of immortality,” and proves it -very thoroughly. He begins by saying that in Egyptian the “Word of -Truth” is _Ma-Kheru_, and that it is the title of Horus. Thus, as he -shows, Horus preceded Christ as the Messenger of the Word of Truth, -the Logos or the manifestor of the divine nature in humanity. In the -same paper he writes as follows: - - The Gnosis had three phases—astronomical, spiritual, and - doctrinal, and all three can be identified with the Christ of - Egypt. In the astronomical phase the constellation Orion is called - the _Sahu_ or _mummy_. The soul of Horus was represented as rising - from the dead and ascending to heaven in the stars of Orion. The - mummy-image was the preserved one, the saved, therefore a portrait - of the Saviour, as a type of immortality. This was the figure of a - dead man, which, as Plutarch and Herodotus tell us, was carried - round at an Egyptian banquet, when the guests were invited to look - on it and eat and drink and be happy, because, when they died, - they would become what the image symbolised—that is, they also - would be immortal! This type of immortality was called the - _Karest_, or _Karust_, and it _was_ the Egyptian Christ. To - _Kares_ means to embalm, anoint, to make the Mummy as a type of - the eternal; and, when made, it was called the _Karest_; so that - this is not merely a matter of name for name, the _Karest_ for the - _Christ_. - - This image of the _Karest_ was bound up in a woof without a seam, - the proper vesture of the Christ! No matter what the length of the - bandage might be, and some of the mummy-swathes have been unwound - that were 1,000 yards in length, the woof was from beginning to - end without a seam.... Now, this seamless robe of the Egyptian - _Karest_ is a very tell-tale type of the mystical Christ, who - becomes historic in the Gospels as the wearer of a coat or chiton, - made without a seam, which neither the Greek nor the Hebrew fully - explains, but which is explained by the Egyptian _Ketu_ for the - woof, and by the seamless robe or swathing without seam that was - made for eternal wear, and worn by the Mummy-Christ, the image of - immortality in the tombs of Egypt. - - Further, Jesus is put to death in accordance with the instructions - given for making the _Karest_. Not a bone must be broken. The true - _Karest_ must be perfect in every member. “This is he who comes - out sound; whom men know not is his name.” - - In the Gospels Jesus rises again with every member sound, like the - perfectly-preserved _Karest_, to demonstrate the physical - resurrection of the mummy. But, in the Egyptian original, the - mummy transforms. The deceased says: “I am spiritualised. I am - become a soul. I rise as a God.” This transformation into the - spiritual image, the _Ka_, has been omitted in the Gospel. - - This spelling of the name as Chrest or Chrést in Latin is - supremely important, because it enables me to prove the identity - with the Egyptian _Karest_ or _Karust_, the name of the Christ as - the embalmed mummy, which was the image of the resurrection in - Egyptian tombs, the type of immortality, the likeness of the - Horus, who rose again and made the pathway out of the sepulchre - for those who were his disciples or followers. _Moreover, this - type of the Karest or Mummy-Christ is reproduced in the Catacombs - of Rome._ No representation of the supposed historic resurrection - of Jesus has been found on any of the early Christian monuments. - But, instead of the missing fact, we find the scene of Lazarus - being raised from the dead. This is depicted over and over again - as the typical resurrection where there is no real one! The scene - is not exactly in accordance with the rising from the grave in the - Gospel. It is purely Egyptian, and Lazarus is an Egyptian mummy! - Thus Lazarus, in each representation, _is_ the mummy-type of the - resurrection; Lazarus _is_ the Karest, who was the Egyptian - Christ, and who is reproduced by Gnostic art in the Catacombs of - Rome as a form of the Gnostic Christ, who _was not and could not - become an historical character_. - - Further, as the thing is Egyptian, it is probable that the name is - derived from Egyptian. If so, Laz (equal to Ras) means to be - raised up, while _aru is_ the mummy by name. With the Greek - terminal _s_ this becomes Lazarus. In the course of humanising the - mythos the typical representation of the resurrection found in the - tombs of Rome and Egypt would become the story of Lazarus being - raised from the dead. This Karast type of the Christ in the - Catacombs is not limited to Lazarus. - - By means of the _Karest_ type the Christ and the Christians can - both be traced in the ancient tombs of Egypt. The mummy was made - in this likeness of the Christ. It was the Christ by name, - identical with the _Chrestoi_ of the Greek Inscriptions. Thus the - honoured dead, who rose again as the followers of Horus-Makheru, - the Word of Truth, are found to be the Christians οι χρηστοι, on - the Egyptian monuments. _Ma-Kheru_ is the term that is always - applied to the faithful ones who win the crown of life and wear it - at the festival which is designated ‘Come thou to me’—an - invitation by Horus the Justifier to those who are the ‘Blessed - ones of his father, Osiris’—they who, having made the Word of - Truth the law of their lives, were the Justified—οι χρηστοι, the - Christians, on earth. - - In a fifth century representation of the Madonna and child from - the cemetery of St. Valentinus, the new-born babe lying in a box - or crib _is_ also the _Karest_, or mummy-type, further identified - as the divine babe of the solar mythos by the disk of the sun and - the cross of the equinox at the back of the infant’s head. Thus - the child-Christ of the historic faith is born, and visibly begins - in the _Karest_ image of the dead Christ, which was the mummy-type - of the resurrection in Egypt for thousands of years before the - Christian era. This doubles the proof that the Christ of the - Christian Catacombs was a survival of the _Karest_ of Egypt. - - Moreover, as Didron shows, there was a portrait of the Christ who - had his body _painted red_![100] It was a popular tradition that - the Christ _was_ of a red complexion. This, too, may be explained - as a survival of the Mummy-Christ. It was an aboriginal mode of - rendering things _tapu_ by colouring them red. The dead corpse was - coated with red ochre—a very primitive mode of making the mummy, - or the anointed one. Thus the God Ptah tells Rameses II. that he - has “_re-fashioned his flesh in vermilion_.” This anointing with - red ochre is called _Kura_ by the Maori, who likewise made the - Karest or Christ. - - We see the mummy-image continued on another line of descent when - we learn that among other pernicious heresies and deadly sins with - which the Knights Templars were charged, was the impious custom of - adoring a Mummy that had red eyes. Their Idol, called Baphomet, is - also thought to have been a mummy.... The Mummy was the earliest - human image of the Christ. - - I do not doubt that the ancient Roman festivals called the - _Charistia_ were connected in their origin with the _Karest_ and - the _Eucharist_ as a celebration in honour of the manes of their - departed kith and kin, for whose sakes they became reconciled at - the friendly gathering once a year.... It is here, then, we have - to seek the essential connection between the Egyptian Christ, the - Christians, and the Roman Catacombs. These Christian Mysteries, - ignorantly explained to be inexplicable, can be explained by - Gnosticism and Mythology, but in no other way. It is not that they - are insoluble by human reason, as their incompetent, howsoever - highly paid, expounders now-a-days pretend. That is but the - puerile apology of the unqualified for their own helpless - ignorance—they who have never been in possession of the gnosis or - science of the Mysteries by which alone these things can be - explained in accordance with their natural genesis. In Egypt only - can we read the matter to the root, or identify the origin of the - Christ by nature and by name, to find at last that the Christ was - the Mummy-type, and that our Christology is mummified - mythology.—(_Agnostic Annual._) - ------ - -Footnote 100: - - _Because he is cabalistically the new Adam, the “celestial man,” - and Adam was made of red earth._ - ------ - -The above is an explanation on purely scientific evidence, but, -perhaps, a little too _materialistic_, just because of that -science, notwithstanding that the author is a well-known -Spiritualist. Occultism pure and simple finds the same mystic -elements in the Christian as in other faiths, though it rejects as -emphatically its dogmatic and _historic_ character. It is a fact -that in the terms Ιησοῦς ὁ χριστος (See _Acts_ v. 42, ix. 14; 1 -Corinth. iii. 17, etc.), the article ὁ designating “Christos,” -proves it simply a surname, like that of Phocion, who is referred -to as Φωκίων ὁ χρηστός (Plut. v.). Still, the personage (Jesus) so -addressed—whenever he lived—was a great Initiate and a “Son of -God.” - -For, we say it again, the surname Christos is based on, and the -story of the Crucifixion derived from, events that preceded it. -Everywhere, in India as in Egypt, in Chaldea as in Greece, all these -legends were built upon one and the same primitive type; the -voluntary sacrifice of the _logoï_—the _rays_ of the one LOGOS, the -direct manifested emanation from the One ever-concealed Infinite and -Unknown—whose _rays_ incarnated in mankind. They consented to _fall -into matter_, and are, therefore, called the “Fallen Ones.” This is -one of those great mysteries which can hardly be touched upon in a -magazine article, but shall be noticed in a separate work of mine, -_The Secret Doctrine_, very fully. - -Having said so much, a few more facts may be added to the etymology -of the two terms. Χριστος being the verbal adjective in Greek of -χρίω “to be rubbed on,” _as ointment_ or salve, and the word being -finally brought to mean “the Anointed One,” in Christian theology; -and _Kri_, in Sanskrit, the first syllable in the name of Krishna, -meaning “to pour out, or rub over, to cover with,”[101] among many -other things, this may lead one as easily to make of Krishna, “the -anointed one.” Christian philologists try to limit the meaning of -Krishna’s name to its derivation from _Krish_, “black”; but if the -analogy and comparison of the Sanskrit with the Greek roots -contained in the names of Chrestos, Christos, and _Ch_rishna, are -analyzed more carefully, it will be found that they are all of the -same origin.[102] - ------ - -Footnote 101: - - Hence the memorialising of the doctrine during the MYSTERIES. The - pure monad, the “god” incarnating and becoming _Chrestos_, or man, - on his trial of life, a series of those trials led him to the - _crucifixion of flesh_, and finally into the Christos condition. - -Footnote 102: - - On the best authority the derivation of the Greek _Christos_ - is shown from the Sanskrit root _ghársh_ = “rub”; thus: - _ghársh-ā-mi-to_, “to rub,” and ghársh-tá-s “flayed, sore.” - Moreover, Krish, which means in one sense to plough and make - furrows, means also to cause pain, “to torture to torment,” - and ghrsh-tā-s “rubbing”—all these terms relating to Chrestos - and Christos conditions. One has _to die in Chrestos_, _i.e._, - kill one’s personality and its passions, to blot out every - idea of separateness from one’s “Father,” the Divine Spirit in - man; to become one with the eternal and absolute _Life_ and - _Light_ (SAT) before one can reach the glorious state of - _Christos_, the regenerated man, the man in spiritual freedom. - ------ - -“In Bockh’s ‘Christian Inscriptions,’ numbering 1,287, there is no -single instance of an earlier date than the third century, wherein -the name is not written _Chrest_ or _Chreist_.” (_The Name and -Nature of the Christ_, by G. Massey, “The Agnostic Annual.”) - -Yet none of these names can be unriddled, as some Orientalists -imagine, merely with the help of astronomy and the knowledge of -zodiacal signs in conjunction with phallic symbols. Because, while -the sidereal symbols of the mystic characters or personifications in -Puranâs or Bible, fulfil astronomical functions, their spiritual -anti-types rule invisibly, but very effectively, the world. They -exist as abstractions on the higher plane, as manifested ideas on -the astral, and become males, females and androgyne powers on this -lower plane of ours. _Scorpio_, as _Chrestos-Meshiac_, and Leo, as -_Christos-Messiah_ antedated by far the Christian era in the trials -and triumphs of Initiation during the Mysteries, Scorpio standing as -symbol for the latter, Leo for the glorified triumph of the “sun” of -truth. The mystic philosophy of the allegory is well understood by -the author of the “Source of Measures”; who writes: “One (Chrestos) -causing himself to go down into the pit (of Scorpio, or incarnation -in the womb) for the salvation of the world; this was the Sun, shorn -of his _golden rays_, and _crowned with blackened_[103] _ones_ -(symbolizing this loss) as the thorns; _the other_ was the -triumphant _Messiah_, mounted up to the _summit of the arch of -heaven_, personated as the _Lion of the tribe of Judah_. In both -instances he had the Cross; once in humiliation (as the son of -copulation), and once holding it in his control, as the law of -creation, he being Jehovah”—in the scheme of the authors of dogmatic -Christianity. For, as the same author shows further, John, Jesus and -even Apollonius of Tyana were but epitomizers of the history of the -Sun “under differences of aspect or condition.”[104] The -explanation, he says, “is simple enough, when it is considered that -the names _Jesus_, Hebrew יש and Apollonius, or Apollo, are alike -names of the _Sun in the heavens_, and, necessarily, the history of -the one, as to his travels through _the signs_, with the -personifications of his sufferings, triumphs and miracles, could be -but the _history of the other_, where there was a wide-spread, -common method of describing those travels by personification.” The -fact that the Secular Church was founded by Constantine, and that it -was a part of his decree “that the venerable day of the _Sun_ should -be the day set apart for the worship of Jesus Christ as _Sun_-day,” -shows that they knew well in that “Secular Church” “that the -allegory rested upon an astronomical basis,” as the author affirms. -Yet, again, the circumstance that both Purânas and Bible are full of -solar and astronomical allegories, does not militate against that -other fact that all such scriptures in addition to these two are -_closed_ books to the scholars “having authority.”(!) Nor does it -affect that other truth, that all those systems are _not the work of -mortal man_, nor are they his invention in their origin and basis. - ------ - -Footnote 103: - - The Orientalists and Theologians are invited to read over and - study the allegory of Viswakarman, the “Omnificent,” the Vedic - God, the architect of the world, who sacrificed himself _to - himself_ or the world, after having offered up all worlds, _which - are himself_, in a “Sarva Madha” (general sacrifice)—and ponder - over it. In the Purânic allegory, his daughter _Yoga-siddha_ - “Spiritual consciousness,” the wife of _Surya_, the Sun, complains - to him of the too great effulgence of her husband; and Viswakarmâ, - in his character of _Takshaka_, “wood cutter and carpenter,” - placing the Sun upon his lathe cuts away a part of his brightness. - Surya looks, after this, crowned with dark thorns instead of rays, - and becomes Vikarttana (“shorn of his rays”). All these names are - terms which were used by the candidates when going through the - trials of Initiation. The Hierophant-Initiator personated - Viswakarman; the father, and the general _artificer_ of the gods - (the adepts on earth), and the candidate-Surya, the Sun, who had - to kill all his fiery passions and wear the crown of thorns _while - crucifying his body_ before he could rise and be re-born into a - new life as the glorified “Light of the World”—Christos. No - Orientalist seems to have ever perceived the suggestive analogy, - let alone to apply it! - -Footnote 104: - - The author of the “Source of Measures” thinks that this “serves to - explain why it has been that the _Life of Apollonius of Tyana, by - Philostratus_ has been so carefully kept back from translation and - popular reading.” Those who have studied it in the original have - been forced to the comment that either the “_Life of Apollonius_ - has been taken from the New Testament, or that New Testament - narratives have been taken from the _Life of Apollonius_, because - of the manifest sameness of the _means of construction_ of the - narrative.” (p. 260). - ------ - -Thus “Christos,” under whatever name, means more than _Karest_, a -mummy, or even the “anointed” and the _elect_ of theology. Both of -the latter apply to _Chréstos_, the man of sorrow and tribulation, -in his physical, mental, and psychic conditions, and both relate to -the Hebrew _Mashiac_ (from whence Messiah) condition, as the word is -etymologised[105] by Fuerst, and the author of “The Source of -Measures,” p. 255. Christos is the crown of glory of the suffering -Chréstos of the mysteries, as of the candidate to the final UNION, -of whatever race and creed. To the true follower of the SPIRIT OF -TRUTH, it matters little, therefore, whether Jesus, as man and -Chrestos, lived during the era called Christian, or before, or never -lived at all. The Adepts, who lived and died for humanity, have -existed in many and all the ages, and many were the good and holy -men in antiquity who bore the surname or title of Chrestos before -Jesus of Nazareth, otherwise Jesus (or Jehoshua) Ben Pandira was -born.[106] Therefore, one may be permitted to conclude, with good -reason, that Jesus, or Jehoshua, was like Socrates, like Phocian, -like Theodorus, and so many others surnamed _Chréstos_, _i.e._, the -“good, the excellent,” the gentle, and the holy Initiate, who showed -the “way” to the Christos condition, and thus became himself “the -Way” in the hearts of his enthusiastic admirers. The Christians, as -all the “Hero-worshippers” have tried to throw into the background -all the other Chréstoï, who have appeared to them as rivals of -_their_ Man-God. But if the voice of the MYSTERIES has become silent -for many ages in the West, if Eleusis, Memphis, Antium, Delphi, and -Crèsa have long ago been made the tombs of a Science once as -colossal in the West as it is yet in the East, there are successors -now being prepared for them. We are in 1887 and the nineteenth -century is close to its death. The twentieth century has strange -developments in store for humanity, and may even be the last of its -name. - - H. P. B. - ------ - -Footnote 105: - - The word שיה _shiac_, is in Hebrew the same word as a verbal, - signifying _to go down into the pit_. As a noun, _place of thorns, - pit_. The _hifil_ participle of this word is [Hebrew] or Messiach, - or the Greek _Messias_, _Christ_, and means “he who causes to go - down into the pit” (or hell, in dogmatism). In esoteric - philosophy, this going down _into the pit_ has the most mysterious - significance. The Spirit “Christos” or rather the “Logos” (_read_ - Logoï), is said to “go down into the pit,” when it incarnates in - flesh, _is born as a man_. After having robbed the _Elohim_ (or - gods) of their secret, the _pro-creating_ “fire of life,” the - Angels of Light are shown cast down into the pit or abyss of - matter, called _Hell_, or the bottomless pit, by the kind - theologians. This, in Cosmogony and Anthropology. During the - Mysteries, however, it is the _Chréstos_, _neophyte_, (as man), - etc., who had to descend into the crypts of Initiation and trials; - and finally, during the “Sleep of Siloam” or the final _trance_ - condition, during the hours of which the new Initiate has the last - and final mysteries of being divulged to him. Hades, Schéol, or - Patala, are all one. The same takes place in the East now, as took - place 2,000 years ago in the West, during the MYSTERIES. - -Footnote 106: - - Several classics bear testimony to this fact. Lucian, c. 16, says - Φωκίων ὁ χρηστὸς, and Φωκίων ὁ ἐπὶκλην (“λεγόμενος,” surnamed - “χρηστος.”) In Phædr. p. 226 E, it is written, “you mean Theodorus - the Chrestos.” “Τὸν χρηστὸν λεγεις Θεὸδωρον”. Plutarch shows the - same; and Χρηστος—Chrestus, is the proper name (see the word in - _Thesaur._ Steph.) of an orator and disciple of Herodes Atticus. - ------ - - (_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - - - SIMILITUDES OF DEMOPHILUS. - -It is the business of a musician to harmonize every instrument, but -of a well educated man to adapt himself harmoniously to every -fortune. - -It is necessary that a well educated man should depart from life -elegantly, as from a banquet. - - ------------------------------------ - - GOLDEN SENTENCES OF DEMOCRITUS. - -It is beautiful to impede an unjust man; but if this be not -possible, it is beautiful not to act in conjunction with him. - -Sin should be abstained from, not through fear, but, for the sake of -the becoming. - -Many who have not learnt to argue rationally, still live according -to reason. - -Vehement desires about any one thing render the soul blind with -respect to other things. - -The equal is beautiful in everything, but excess and defect to me do -not appear to be so. - -It is the property of a divine intellect to be always intently -thinking about the beautiful. - - - =Correspondence.= - - A LAW OF LIFE: KARMA. - -[The following letter has been received by the editors, in criticism -on Mr. Keightley’s article on “Karma”; and as it raises many rather -important points, an attempt has been made to answer them. Mr. -Beatty’s letter is somewhat difficult to deal with, for though it -asks many questions, they are so inextricably mingled with its -author’s thoughts that it would be unfair to disentangle them from -the context. It is a pity that Mr. Beatty, in his haste to -criticize, did not wait for the conclusion of the article, as he -might have saved himself some trouble. If his real desire is to -learn, it would be well that he should approach the endeavour in a -less flippant spirit and evolve the critic out of the criticaster. -In many of his arguments he has, so to say, “given himself away,” -but, in the interests of space and of the readers of LUCIFER, only -those questions and arguments which bear directly on the points at -issue have been selected for answer. The point which Mr. Beatty does -“not care to discuss,” and which refers to the mystery of Godliness, -has been omitted. Perhaps, if Mr. Beatty continues to read, mark, -learn, _and inwardly digest_, he may in some _future incarnation_ -solve the mystery.] - -In an article in LUCIFER, under the above heading, Mr. Keightley -declares it to be “very difficult, if not well-nigh impossible,” to -understand Karma, and I grant him that his essay is a practical -demonstration of his allegation. The difficulty (1.) does not, -however, hinder him from attempting to define the refractory term. -“Karma,” he says, “is the working of the great law which governs -reincarnation,” or “a manifestation of the One, Universal, Divine -Principle in the phenomenal world,” or again, “the great law of -harmony which governs the universe.” Now, waiving altogether the -question of reincarnations, I shall proceed to examine whether Mr. -Keightley makes good his contention that “harmony,” in his sense of -the word, “governs the Universe.” He says, “the man who denies the -existence of harmony in the universe has transgressed the law and is -experiencing punishment. He does this unconsciously to himself, -because the law of harmony forms an unconscious impulse to its -readjustment when it has been broken.” Here there are several things -to be considered. In the first place, it may be asked: (2.) Does a -man, by merely denying the existence of a law of Nature or the -universe, transgress that law? I think not.[107] Secondly. Can a law -of the universe be “broken”? Here again I must reply in the -negative; for who is going to contend that the law of gravitation -has ever been “broken,”[108] has ever ceased to act, has ever -required “re-adjustment”? A man can break no law of Nature in the -sense of bringing that law into abeyance. If then, a law of harmony -governs the universe there can be no such thing as discord. (3.) Yet -Mr. Keightley admits that there _is_ discord, that the law of -harmony has been “broken” and needs “readjustment” This is a -surrendering of his position and a patent admission that harmony is -not constant or universal. He then proceeds to draw an illustration -from music. “In musical chords, the composing notes, if taken by -twos and threes, will be found in discord, but, when taken together, -produce a harmony.” This is a particularly unfortunate subject of -illustration. For does it not show that discord is an element in the -universe as well as harmony? Why are discords introduced into music? -Simply to make the harmony more effective. The reason for this, -however, does not lie in any so-called universal law of harmony, but -rather in the constitution of animate existences. Fundamentally, -sensation is the consciousness of difference. Where the difference -is great the feeling is great. If we wish to have the keenest -sensation of sweetness we must first taste something bitter. Thus it -is that occasional discords heighten harmony. But are the discords -any less real on that account? Certainly not; for there can no more -be harmony without discord, than there can be an up without a down. -This, moreover, is only another illustration of the fact that human -knowledge is merely relative. Must we, however, admit that the -universal law may be harmony while our experience tells us that -there are discords without number? Unless ignorance be considered as -superior to positive knowledge, I see no room for the admission. If -a man’s house tumbles about his ears, does it become any less a fact -by trying to persuade himself and his neighbours that it is still -standing? This seems to be the method of Mr. Keightley. He has, -however, yet another argument “The universe ... is essentially an -evidence of harmony; otherwise it could not exist, for it would fall -to pieces.” This is a palpable begging of the question, and, -besides, very absurd. The universe is a harmony, because a universe -must be a harmony! “Otherwise it could not exist.” Now how does our -harmonist know whether it could exist or not? Of what other universe -has he experience or knowledge? “It would fall to pieces.” Where, I -wonder, would it fall to? Perhaps it is even now fast falling to -pieces, and who can tell us differently? As far as ordinary people -can judge, it seems, as regards the parts we are acquainted with, to -be falling into more or less concrete masses, but not many sane -people believe it can fall into nothingness. After all this vain -contention for universal harmony we find Mr. Keightley settling down -like ordinary mortals to the conviction that the world is far from -harmonious or perfect. One unfortunate individual who cannot be -persuaded that all is harmony, is told that “he is incapable of -understanding it because his attention is solely devoted to that -which produces discord.” How comes it that the universe does not -fall to pieces as a result of this discord? Surely we are in a -precarious condition, if every obstinate fool who persists in crying -out when he has been hurt, endangers the stability of the universe. -Did ever anyone meet with a universe where there is less evidence of -harmony? One brute force ever in conflict with another. Infernal -forces piling up mountain on the top of mountain; supernal forces -blasting, rending, excoriating and tumbling these mountains down -again into the valleys; the oak struggling against the inwarping -ivy, the fawn attempting vainly to escape from the claws of the -tiger, the child agonising while parasites eat slowly and -mercilessly into its lungs, liver, or brain; the strong everywhere -victorious over the weak; each sect and each party exerting itself -ferociously to scoop out the viscera of its rival. Such is the -world, such all records declare it to have been, and such it gives -ample promise of continuing. But if the world is not really so, and -on the contrary is one immensity of joyous harmony, who can tell us -why the evidence is so deceptive? Here again, Mr. Keightley -introduces to us a most remarkable statement. “The one Divine -principle is divided by man’s actions into two opposing forces of -good and evil, and man’s progress depends on the exertion of his -will to preserve harmony and prevent deviation to one side or the -other.” Give us by all means in preference to this for common sense, -for rationality and for every other quality that makes it -digestible, the childish story of Eve, the apple and the fall. - ------ - -Footnote 107: - - Mr. Keightley’s meaning (and it is difficult for the words to bear - any other interpretation) was that the denial of harmony is - evidence that, at some previous time, the man who denies has set - himself in opposition to the law, in virtue of those very desires - and instincts of his animal personality to which Mr. Beatty - alludes later on. In this sense, Mr. Beatty is right in saying - that a law of the universe cannot be broken; but its limits may be - transgressed, and consequently an attempt made by man to make - himself into a small, but rival universe. It is the old story of - the china pot and the iron kettle, and the fact that china gets - the worst of it is conclusive that the china is struggling - _against_ Nature. - -Footnote 108: - - Will Mr. Beatty explain the phenomenon of a comet flirting its - tail round the sun in defiance of the “_law_ of gravitation”? - ------ - -Beyond doubt, Mr. Keightley has a profound faith in man as a power -in the universe and an instrument for evil. By a most singular -process of metaphysical alchemy man decomposes the “Divine -principle” into “two opposing forces of good and evil.” It seems -from this revised version of an old story that man introduced evil -into the universe. Why is man so important that a universe should be -polluted for his sake? Surely man did not make himself, and whatever -powers were in him for evil or for good must have been potential in -that from which he sprang. Man can create nothing, neither evil nor -good, neither a tendency to do right nor an inclination to do wrong. -“Man’s will” is always a tremendous force for good or evil in the -hands of theologians and metaphysicians. Did man make his own -“will?” If not, how can he be responsible for what he does? -Everybody knows that man can act according to his likes or dislikes. -But does anybody imagine that he can make his own likes or dislikes? -(4.) He can do as he wishes, but he wishes according to his nature, -and this he cannot transcend, consequently he is not responsible to -the Author of his nature for what his nature inclines him to do. But -what are we to understand by the rest of the sentence? Man’s will is -“to preserve harmony and prevent deviation to one side or the -other.” First the will brings about evil in the “Divine principle,” -destroying harmony, then it is to reproduce harmony and at the same -time to maintain a balance between good and evil, and “prevent -deviation to the one side or the other.” This to Mahatmas and -possessors of the “sixth sense” may seem plain logic, but it far -surpasses my comprehension.[109] I am, perhaps, as averse to “the -pernicious doctrine of reward and punishment after death, in heaven -or in hell” as Mr. Keightley can be, but I can by no means deduce -from it the results which to him appear so inevitable. “Nothing,” he -says, “could have been found more calculated to circumscribe the -view of life as a whole, and concentrate man’s attention on -temporary matters.... He either rejected the idea of soul as -altogether worthless, or else he transferred his interest to the -soul’s welfare in heaven—in either case concentrating his attention -on what is inevitably transient.” How the idea of never-ending -existence in heaven or in hell can have the effect of circumscribing -“the view of life as a whole,” and of concentrating “man’s attention -on temporary matters,” is to me an insolvable puzzle. That it should -have quite the opposite effect, does not seem to require proof. Why, -in the name of mystery, should he “reject the idea of soul as -worthless,” and how can transferring “his interest to the soul’s -welfare in heaven” be called a concentrating of “his attention on -what is inevitably transient?” Truly this Karma is a bewildering -subject![110] - ------ - -Footnote 109: - - Very little doubt that it does. Mankind is only very gradually - developing its fifth sense on the intellectual plane. Intuition - might have carried our critic over the difficulty, but in some - parts of his criticism he seems hardly to have begun to evolute - the intellectual sense. - -Footnote 110: - - “This Karma,” as Mr. Beatty expresses it, would not be quite so - bewildering a subject if critics would bear in mind the context - and not fall foul of a detached expression—not even a sentence. - The “interest of the soul’s welfare in heaven” is concentrated by - John Smith on John Smith as John Smith in heaven, and in order - that the said John Smith may go on enjoying the things he loved on - earth. As his earth life has ended, John Smith has changed and is - “transient.” If he were not transient a very natural inference - would follow, that progress, evolution, &c., on whatever plane of - being does not prevail. - ------ - -Do plants and animals come under the law of Karma? is the next -question discussed by Mr. Keightley. An extract from the -_Theosophist_ seems to discountenance such a thing. But are its -arguments really conclusive against it? I do not think so. It says, -“A piece of iron is attracted to a magnet without having any desire -in the matter.” Now, in the first place, this is pure assumption, -and has its origin in vainglorious human egotism.[111] It is evident -that from objective data alone we cannot decide what is the -subjective state of the molecules of the attracted iron. In the -second place, we are only acquainted with the iron as a cause -producing changes in us. No matter how we interpret these changes, -they cannot even tell us the real nature of iron, merely considered -objectively. Again the extract proceeds: “An animal usually follows -the instincts of its nature without any merit or demerit for so -doing; a child or an idiot may smilingly kick over a lamp, which may -set a whole city on fire.... A person can only be held responsible -according to his ability to perceive justice, and to distinguish -between good and evil.” According to this doctrine, man is not an -“animal,” and does not follow his instincts. To those who are -acquainted, even slightly, with the method and regularity of Nature, -this contention will appear, on the face of it, untenable. For why -should there be an exception in the case of man?[112] Has man -instincts, desires, and inclinations, or has he not? If he has, why -should he have them if he is not to follow them? And if in any case -he does not follow them, is it not with him as with the “animals”? -Is it not because he is deterred by influences from without, or -hereditary influences from within? And of all these instincts, -desires and influences, how is he to know which to obey, to know -which is of Divine sanction? He has conscience, of course, but -conscience is a very variable quantity, and indeed, it might not be -too much to say that there is hardly a crime in the world that has -not, at one time or another, been commended by conscience. -Conscience is only one phase of the man’s mental activity, and was -no more created by him than was his power of vision. We talk of -“children and idiots,” and their being irresponsible, but are not -untamed savages also irresponsible? And if we admit that there may -be beings as much higher than we, as we are higher than children, -idiots, and savages, will they not, with reason and justice, regard -us as irresponsible? The truth is, there never was a greater chimera -conjured up by unreasoning fancy than that one of man’s -responsibility to a Supreme Power. Man is responsible only to man, -and man’s conduct is without merit except from a human view-point. -We are good or bad by reason of all the forces that act on and -through us. - -My object in writing what I have written is to show to Theosophists -the dense darkness in which I wander. Will some God-illumined mind -not take pity upon, and draw me up from the labyrinthian gloom, -where illusions mislead me at every step? My “sixth sense” seems -wholly dormant, and Nirvana, that haven of rest, seems distant, by -many a weary league of rocky path and burning desert. Pity me. - - Adyar, 17th October, 1887. H. S. OLCOTT, P.T.S. - ------ - -Footnote 111: - - Mr. Beatty hardly maintains his position of consistent materialism - here; and it is at least as vainglorious to deny as to assert. - -Footnote 112: - - Man has the “animal” in him of course, but he has also the power - of judgment or discrimination. Mr. Beatty’s wish to be - critically pessimistic seems here to run away with his power of - discrimination. - ------ - -(1.) The difficulty experienced in fathoming the mysteries of Karmic -Law arises from the conditions of our present intellectual -environment and general evolutionary status. It has been, also, -frequently stated that a _complete_ comprehension of its workings is -reserved for the Initiate who has transcended the domain of -terrestrial activity—viz., the necessity for soul-evolution through -successive births. But, passing over this consideration, it is -evident that, in the process of bringing down fragments of the -Divine Truth on to the plane of mere intellectual interpretation, an -inevitable distortion must ensue. The rays of spiritual light will -be split up and refracted as they pass through the prism of the -brain. Mr. Beatty will recognise this fact more clearly owing to his -belief “that _human_ knowledge is _merely relative_.” Surely, when -that most familiar fact of our experience, the “perception of -matter,” is, metaphysically speaking, an illusion, the relativity of -_mental_ conceptions of spiritual truths would appear to be a -necessity. According to Huxley, Spencer, Du Bois Reymond, and all -leading thinkers, we know nothing of things as they are even on this -plane, which to the materialist is “All in all.” The essence of the -thing “perceived” escapes us; all we really grasp is its -presentation in consciousness. It is, therefore, clear that in -interpreting realities on the superphysical plane, we cannot advance -beyond word-symbols and adumbrations. The intuition of the -individual must effect the rest. - -Such considerations, however, in no way militate against the -successful defence of Esoteric philosophy on purely intellectual -lines. Translated into terms of human thought, its metaphysics must -be shown to blend intimately with the _facts_ of science and -psychology, and its ability to solve the enigmas of life -demonstrated. “Philosophy is chaos,” remarks the author of “Absolute -Relativism,” referring to modern thought. If we are to avoid the -spectacle of a future “moral chaos,” also, as the fruit of the -materialistic Upas tree, some fresh impulse must be infused into the -dry bones of Western metaphysics—some _raison d’être_ assigned to -life, and an ideal worthy of man’s noblest efforts presented to the -multitude of _laissez-faire_ pessimists. Such is an aspect of the -work now before us. - -(2.) A man may certainly injure himself[113] by shutting his eyes to -a spiritual interpretation of the Universe and its workings. The -only acquisition he can carry with him after physical death is the -_aroma_ of the vast aggregate of mental states generated in one -incarnation. The _personality_ or brain-consciousness of the -physical man is, after all, a mere feeler projected into this -objective plane to harvest experience for its individual Self. It -does not at all follow that any experience may be acquired which the -Monad is enabled to assimilate. Abstract thinking, religious -aspirations, scientific lore; poetry, the nobler emotions, and all -such efflorescences of human consciousness, furnish the “material” -which go to build up the _transcendental individuality_ of the Ego -progressing towards the Nirvana. The materialist presents a frequent -instance of soul-death—so far as the fruitage of the personality is -concerned. His knowledge may be enormous, but being unspiritualised, -a mere creature of the physical brain, it cannot blossom into -luxuriance in the Devachanic interim between successive births. -Consequently, as the True Self—the “transcendental subject” of the -neo-Kantian German school—only assimilates experience suitable to -its own exalted nature, it becomes evident that, ideals apart, the -philosophy of a man is of very great importance. At the same time, -it need not be said that sectarian “religion” is almost more -pernicious than materialism, inasmuch as it combines the two factors -of crass ignorance and spiritual torpor. - -Footnote 113: - - No law of Nature can be set aside, but a man _transgresses_ a law - of his [mental] being when he deliberately places himself under - the sway of certain “evil” forces. The gist of Mr. Beatty’s - criticism is not quite evident here. - ------ - -(3.) Harmony _is_ essentially the law of the Universe. The -contrasted aspects of Nature come into being subsequently to the -differentiation of matter from its several _protyles_ in the -commencement of a cycle of becoming, or Manwantara, and can have no -reality except in the experience of conscious Egos.[114] For beneath -the surface of the great ocean of cosmic illusion—beneath the clash -of apparently clashing forces—lies the Eternal Harmony. The -semblance of discord is but a ripple on the stream of Maya, or -illusion. One aspect of esoteric solution of apparent evils is dealt -with in the last issue of LUCIFER (_vide_ art., “Origin of Evil”). -But Mr. Beatty will not find himself in a position to accept its -validity so long as he continues to “waive the question of -reincarnation,” the acceptance of that doctrine lying at the root of -the real explanation. - ------ - -Footnote 114: - - The _phenomenal_ contrast is not denied, but it is representative - of no fundamental want of harmony. In the same way the contrast of - Subject and Object is essential to our present finite - consciousness, although it has no basis of reality beyond the - limits of conditional being. Moreover, even in this phenomenal - Universe, equilibrium (harmony) is most certainly maintained by - the very conflict of the contrasted forces alluded to. - ------ - -The Universe must, at bottom, be a Harmony. Why?[115] The -equilibrating action of the forces around us is a sufficient proof -of the fact; the apparent discord existing, as argued by Spinoza, -solely in the sensations of conscious beings. The matter in reality -involves the re-opening of the much debated question as to whether -an optimistic or pessimistic pantheism is the creed of the true -philosopher. Can we with von Hartmann postulate the strange -contradiction of an absolutely wise (though from our standpoint -unconscious) cause behind phenomena confronted with a “worthless -universe?” Obviously not. Moreover, as pantheists necessarily regard -the individual mind as only a rushlight compared with the blazing -sun of the Universal Mind, its source, how is a final conclusion as -to the “unfathomable folly” of manifested being possible? On the -other hand, a non-recognition of the Maya of appearances is a tacit -impeachment of the wisdom of the Absolute. The pantheist—and -pantheism alone accounts for consciousness itself—is, at least, -logically driven into the admission that the “nature of things” is -sound and that, probably, apparent flaws in the mechanicism of the -Universe would, if viewed from a wider standpoint than the human, -altogether vanish. - ------ - -Footnote 115: - - Mr. Beatty asks how the Universe would come to a stand-still, if - the law of Harmony was suspended. Now suppose, for instance, the - law of “gravity” was not _counterbalanced_ by the action of other - “forces,” what would happen? Science assures us that everything - would have long before gravitated to a common centre, and a - universal dead-lock have ensued! _Vice versa_, if “gravity” were - to lapse. _Verb. Sap._ - ------ - -If, however, the Spinozistic axiom that evil _exists only in us_, is -true—and it is not for a relativist of our critic’s type to deny the -fact—pessimism is rooted in the recognition of the equilibrating -action of the law of Karma. The examples cited by Mr. Beatty of -brute forces “one in conflict with another;” of the sufferings of -animals in the struggle for existence; and more especially of human -suffering in no way controvert the views of the “Harmonists.” The -first group is representative of those forces which balance one -another by oscillating about a common centre of equilibrium, -producing harmony by conflict, just as in the case of the so-called -centripetal and centrifugal forces, which regulate the earth’s -orbital journey. The second group is, undoubtedly, characterised by -the infliction of much incidental pain. But in all instances where -Nature immolates the individual organism on the altar of natural -selection, she does it for the benefit of the species or the -“survival of the fittest”—the individuals borne down by violence in -the struggle, reaping, one and all, the results of a compensatory -Karma. In the domain of _human_ suffering, moral debasement, etc., -an entirely new factor supervenes—the equilibrating influence of a -_positive_ Karma, which in biblical language demands “an eye for an -eye and a tooth for a tooth.” - -(4). “Why,” asks our critic, “is man so important that the Universe -was polluted for his sake?” In the first place, Humanity is, by no -means, unimportant; the panorama of evolution only existing in order -to evolve the Ego from the animal stage up to that of a conscious -God. The designation of nature as divided into “good” and “evil” -principles, has been taken by Mr. Beatty in its absolute, as opposed -to its relative, aspect. Man pollutes only himself and his fellows -by “sin”; nature remaining constant _per se_. “How can he be -responsible for what he does?” he continues. He is only so within -certain wide limits defined by his previous Karma—the tendencies -moral, mental and spiritual, generated in previous lives, -continually driving him on to certain lines of action. The “Free -Will absolute” of the theologians is as unpsychological and -worthless a concept as it is possible to formulate. Not so the -doctrine that the Ego is able to _mould_ its tendencies of thought -and emotion within “constitutional limits.” It was the recognition -of this fact which led John Stuart Mill to take up a midway position -between the equally absurd extremes of Free Will and Necessarianism. -The same conviction led the prophet of Materialism, Dr. Louis -Büchner, to contradict his whole system by admitting human liberty -within a certain area mapped out by “Heredity” and Environment, and -Professor Clifford to invest the “conscious, automaton” Man with the -power to control his own ideas!! Responsibility varies enormously, -and is, perhaps, almost wanting in the savage (who, however, is in -all cases the degraded relic of primæval civilisation). In all -cases, the human Ego must be held to be the evolver of the group of -tendencies which make up the personality of each re-birth. The -sensualist is the victim of a “Frankenstein’s monster,” into which -he has infused strength through many lives. We really cannot follow -Mr. Beatty when he writes: “Has man instincts, desires, and -inclinations, or has he not? If he has, _why should he have them if -he is not to follow them_?” He has them because they are the -heritage handed down to him from past lives, and also because his -Karma as an individual is bound up with that of the race to which he -belongs. It rests with him as to how far he chooses to _modify_ them -“for weal or woe,” for every moment the exhaustion of past Karma -runs parallel with the creation of new. It is certainly a strange -doctrine here enunciated by Mr. Beatty, that the possession of -certain “instincts, etc,” justifies their gratification. Crime, -debauchery and cruelty would be difficult to deal with on this -hypothesis! It is certainly true—to some extent—that “we are good or -bad by reason of all the forces that act on or through us.” These -latter are the stimuli to action (_subject to the control of the -will_), but are in their turn the resultant of previous Karma. -Judging from the general tone of his criticism, it would appear that -his first acquaintance with the esoteric philosophy does not date -back to a very remote antiquity. - - A. K. - - ------------------ - - “THE LATEST ATTACK ON CHRISTIANITY.” - -In the July number of the _Quarterly Review_ there is an article -reviewing the recent book of J. C. Morrison upon “The Service of Man -or the Future Religion.” And although Mr. Morrison, in his book, -writes to urge that the chief and primary principle of religion is -“to promote the spirit of self-sacrifice, and to direct men’s -energies to the service of their fellow creatures,” yet the -_Quarterly Review_ pours every kind of insult and obloquy on Mr. -Morrison. - -But herein is the gross contradiction, that the _Quarterly Review_ -admits that the primary principle of Christianity has the very same -objects in view, as Mr. Morrison urges the future religion should -have. And yet the _Quarterly Review_ ridicules Mr. Morrison, and -describes his book as an attack upon Christianity. - -Then, surely, when two persons thus fall out with one another, -whilst both advocate the same lofty and noble principles, there must -be some gross misunderstanding between them! - -The error thus which they both labour under, is one and the same; -for the _Quarterly Review_ errs, in assuming that the teaching or -doctrine of the Church is indisputably, and infallibly, the teaching -or doctrine of Christ. And Mr. Morrison errs in assuming that the -teaching or doctrine of Christ is the same as the doctrine of the -Church. - -So that if the teaching of the Church is not the teaching of Christ, -then Mr. Morrison in attacking the supposed Christianity of the -Church is not really attacking Christianity, but only attacking the -spurious doctrine of the Church, which has passed current as -Christianity; _ex gr._, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Elijah, in denouncing -the religion of the priests, did not attack true religion (as the -priests would assert), but only their adulterated and spurious -religion. - -And Christ tells us that the Priests and Pharisees made the word of -God of none effect by their traditions. And St Paul tells us that, -with the authority of the Chief Priest, he had, before conversion, -imprisoned and put men to death, and made them blaspheme (Acts -xxvi., 11) against God and the Church. - -Therefore, before we accept the Church and Christianity to be -synonymous terms, and not only signifying but being actually the -Church of Christ, and so, verily, Christianity, we must have a clear -and definite understanding as to what we mean, and wish others to -understand what we mean, by “the Church.” - -For the world, outside of Christianity, and often inside, is at its -wits’ end to know which of the numerous churches and sects, which -all claim to be the Church of Christ, is really and truly the Church -of Christ; because the World witnesses that they all reject one -another. - -Then surely, whilst the world witnesses rival and hostile churches -all claiming to be “the Church” and Christianity, Mr. Morrison is -not at all necessarily attacking the Church of Christ, or true -Christianity, when he attacks the doctrine, or the Christianity of -the churches. - -And this proposition of course, opens and raises the question as to -what is Christianity, which the _Quarterly Review_ either avoids or -assumes to be established, as being “_a sound belief in the merits -of the Saviour_,” which of course means belief in the Atonement as -commonly taught. But how can the truth of Christianity be possibly -established, whilst to this day the doctrine of Atonement taught by -the Church as Christianity, cannot be reconciled as either good or -true; and is moreover a mystery to the leaders of it, a stumbling -block to the Jews, and foolishness to the world, making the -preaching of the Church as Canon Liddon admits, utterly powerless? -The _Quarterly Review_ assumes that the doctrine of the Church has -been taught as Christianity for 1,800 years; and that 1,800 years’ -teaching of it has proved it to be Christianity, because the -_Quarterly Review_ assumes that there has been liberty for 1,800 -years to disprove the doctrine of the Church, and that the doctrine -of the Church, not having been disproved, is a proof that it cannot -be disproved. But the fact that to this very day there is no liberty -allowed in the pulpits of the National Churches to discuss the -doctrine of the Church (it being a law with the rulers of the Church -that “the doctrine of the Church may not be touched”), utterly -refutes all the assumptions of the _Quarterly Review_. - -For whilst there is no liberty, even for fair and candid criticism -in the pulpit, on the doctrine of the Church, even in this age of -liberty and education, there could have been none when the Church, -for centuries, had power to imprison, slay, and excommunicate or -boycott; and used it against those who even questioned the doctrine -of the Church. - -But we are told, by the great Bishop Butler, in his “Analogy of -Religion” (and whom the _Quarterly Review_ admits to be an authority -of the very highest class), that the doctrine of Atonement is -positively immoral, excepting for the supposed divine authority; and -the Bishop himself looked forward to the day, when the progress of -liberty and education should throw greater light upon this doctrine -of the Church, and indisputably determine whether or no it has the -divine authority, it was then supposed or asserted to have. - -So great has been our progress in education and liberty that _The -Guardian_ of the 3rd August, in its review of this book of Mr. -Morrison’s, says, if Christianity is Calvinism with its doctrine of -substitution and justification, then it is _madness_ any longer to -attempt defending the morality of Christianity. - -It is true that it is one thing to make this admission in the review -of a book, and another thing to publish it from the pulpit; and it -is true that the admission would be withdrawn or crucified by -silence; but the _Quarterly Review_ itself, in its argument by -analogy of the human and divine mind, admits that this doctrine of -Atonement is immoral, because it admits that no authority could be -divine which called immorality morality, as it asserts that -_whatever is moral humanly speaking, is also moral divinely -speaking, only in an infinitely greater degree_, and the converse. -So that an attack on an immoral doctrine of the Church is not an -attack on Christianity, if the doctrine of the Church is not the -teaching of Christ, as it can be shown that it is not, as soon as -liberty is allowed in the pulpits of the National Churches, for -explaining the truth of a _Crucified Christ_, and removing the -mystery that has been created, which causes it to be a stumbling -block to the Jews, and foolishness to the world. - -We are told that the late Archbishop Whately said, that if the -Christian Religion did not come from God, miraculously (in the sense -commonly taught), yet the religion, nevertheless, exists, and -therefore the phenomenon has to be explained how it could have -arisen and been propagated without miracles. - -But the _Quarterly Review_ asserts that for 1,800 years all the -attempts to explain it, without the aid of miracles, have utterly -failed, and therefore it must be assumed to be miraculous. - -But before there can be any justification for such a bold -assumption, as that what is taught as Christianity is infallibly, -and indisputably, the teaching of Jesus Christ, what is meant by the -term Christianity, or Christian religion must be clearly defined: -for the Roman Catholic Church denounces the Protestant, and the -Protestant denounces the Roman Church, as having naught to do with -Christianity; so that even if there is anything held in common -between these Churches (as “the faith of the Primitive Church,” or -“the faith once delivered to the Saints,” or any other faith), yet -whatever it is, or is called, it would seem to be of not the -slightest value whatever, in saving them from rejecting one another -absolutely. - -Canon Liddon, however, asserts that all the doctrine and teaching of -the Church derives its authority from a miraculous resurrection of -Jesus, with a material and physical body of flesh, blood, and bones, -in direct defiance of the teaching of Jesus, that the flesh -profiteth nothing, and that it was the words which He spoke, “_They -were_ spirit, _they_ were life.” (John vi., 63.) - -And if we believe that the Holy Spirit of God could speak without -the aid of a material body, composed of flesh, blood, and bones, in -a still small voice to the conscience or soul of Moses and Elijah (1 -Kings xix., 12); and if we believe that the same Holy Spirit is -_present_ even now (where two or three are gathered together—Matt, -xvii., 23), why should not the presence of the still small voice of -the Holy Spirit, speaking to the conscience or soul of the Apostles, -be of itself deemed sufficient, without needing the aid of a -material body? - -Again, if the _presence_ of the still small voice of the Holy -Spirit, speaking to the soul of man, has been deemed sufficient by -the world both before the crucifixion of Christ, and since the -crucifixion of Christ, why should it be deemed necessary to raise up -the crucified One, with a body of flesh, blood and bones, only to -teach what the still small voice of the Holy Spirit was able, -willing, and _present_ to teach, and to doubt which would be -Atheism? And, moreover, whilst such teaching was sufficient, it -would be a contradiction to vouchsafe more. - -Therefore, if the still small voice of the Holy Spirit is sufficient -and _present_ to guide us into all truth, it must have been -sufficient for the Apostles also (John xvi., 13); and, therefore, -Christ’s religion is not dependent upon a material resurrection of -the body, with flesh, blood and bones. - -Here, once more, we see the necessity of liberty being allowed in -the pulpit, for fair and candid criticism on the doctrine of the -Church, for the purpose of eliminating error and eliciting truth; so -that it may be clearly seen and known what is Christ’s religion, as -it might indeed be possible that a material resurrection would seem -necessary to support the doctrine of the Church, though wholly -unnecessary for the support of Christ’s religion, or gospel. - -Although the _Quarterly Review_ asserts that men have failed for -1,800 years to account for the existence of Christianity, unless it -had a miraculous resurrection to support it, yet it by no means -follows that, because a miracle is supposed to be needed to support -a doctrine of the Church, therefore a miracle is needed for -supporting the doctrine, gospel, or religion of Christ; which -exists, and will continue to exist, without needing the aid of -belief in a miraculous resurrection of the material body, to support -it. And it only needs that there should be liberty allowed in the -pulpits of the National Churches to show the deficiency of faith in -Christ’s spiritual resurrection, to see there is no need for belief -in that carnal, gross, and material resurrection of the body, with -flesh, blood and bones. - -Then, let there be liberty allowed in the pulpits of the National -Churches; because it is not true that there has ever been liberty -for 1,800 years to explain the Mystery of a Crucified Christ; for, -it is refused to the present day. If any man, on behalf of the -Church, contradicts this, and asserts there is liberty to explain, -in the Church, the truth of a crucified Christ, let him mention one -Church, or one clergyman that will allow it, and I will test its -truth by asking for the same permission that the rulers of the -Synagogue accorded to St Paul at Antioch, Acts xiii., 15. - -The _Quarterly Review_ says the clergy have no objection to free -discussion—that it is the very air they breathe, and that it has -been the life of Christian Truth. These are bold and brave words, -but where is there even one clergyman that will endorse them, and -act upon them? Where? - -Isaiah says, “Open ye the gates that the truth may enter in” (xxvi., -2). But instead of reverencing the just and righteous “Son of Man,” -the chief priests and rulers of the Ancient Church condemned “the -Just One,” to be slain as a blasphemer, whose blood ought to be shed -for an Atonement. And the chief priests of our Church have combined -that this doctrine should not be touched, so that by their practice -they make their statement of the _Quarterly Review_ utterly untrue. -For if there is one clergyman, A.D. 1887, who will support the -_Quarterly Review’s_ statement, and open his pulpit for explaining -the truth of “Christ crucified” and proclaiming Christian truth, as -taught by Christ—Where is he? and who is he? - -And if there is not one, then need the Church be surprised that men -attack, not the Christianity of Jesus Christ, but only an erroneous -doctrine of the Church, miscalled Christianity? - - (REV.) T. G. HEADLEY. - -_Manor House, Petersham, S. W._ - -P.S.—Although the _Quarterly Review_ admits that Mr. Morrison has -established a high position in literature, and that he seeks to -promote the same lofty and noble principles as true Christianity -inculcates; yet it speaks of Mr. Morrison’s book as bad and -incomplete; feeble and illogical; full of perversities, -monstrosities, misrepresentations, and misquotations; adding, that -it is bitter, unscrupulous, ignorant, inconsistent, offensive, -bullying, brow-beating, overbearing, absurd, and ridiculous, as well -as indecent and false; insulting and flagrant; inconsecutive and -unjust; full of jugglery and a disgrace. - -Is this an exhibition of how theologians, or the clergy, as the -reviewer is most probably a clergyman, love free discussion, and -crucify those from whom they differ by damning them in this gross -manner? - - ------------------ - - ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY. - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -In the numerous letters that have repeatedly appeared recently in -the _Times_ opposing the statements of the Rev. Canon Isaac Taylor, -in his speech at the late Church Congress, on the very great -progress of Islam, and the comparative failure of Christianity (as -taught), in India and Africa, it is frequently asserted that _“Islam -is the only religion that has laid an immutable barrier on human -progress;”_ and that _“no system could have been devised with more -consummate skill (than the Koran of Islam) for shutting out the -light of truth, from the Nations over which Islam has sway.”_ - -But surely this is equally as true of our Church, whilst it also -makes it an immutable law, as it has done to this day, that “_the -doctrine of the Church may not be touched_”? For how could any -system have been devised with more consummate skill for shutting out -the light of truth, than to delude the people to crucify “the Just -One,” as a blasphemer whose blood ought to be shed for an atonement, -and afterwards to quote Scripture in support of this doctrine (as -necessary to be believed in order to escape being cursed here and -damned hereafter), and stamp out and boycott all who doubted it? - -And yet this is the present state of things. - -And therefore, whilst the clergy have power to say that “_the -doctrine of the Church may not be touched_,” how is the mystery of a -Crucified Christ to be explained and translated, so that it may be -seen to be “_a light to lighten the Gentiles, and also the glory of -Israel_,” instead of being, as it is now, a stumbling block to the -Jews, foolishness to the world, and a mystery to the teachers of it, -making those who accept it, in India and Africa, worse than they -were before? - -Then is there not a cause for demanding that liberty should be -allowed in the Church, for explaining, in the pulpit, the mystery of -a Crucified Christ, so that it may no longer remain a mystery for -want only of this liberty? - - (REV.) T. G. HEADLEY. - - ------------------ - - HYLO-IDEALISM.—AN APOLOGY. - -My attention has been directed to a somewhat slighting notice of the -above theory of human nature, on pages 72 and 75 of your issue for -September, the contents of which are, doubtless, most suggestive of -the _nouvelles couches mentales_ at the basis of all _nouvelles -couches sociales_, and which Physical Science, in its vulgar -realism, has altogether missed. - -My main position, to which all else is but subsidiary, is that the -worlds both of thought and thing, which thus become identified and -unified, _must_ be a product of _our own_ personality or Egoity, -which thus constitutes each Ego Protagonist and Demiurge, from -whose tribunal there can be no possible appeal. This being -granted, and even Max Müller, in his “Science of Thought,” -considers the position _impregnable_, it matters not one jot, at -least in the first line and as far as my main object is concerned, -whether the Ego be a Body or a “Spirit.” Our own individuality, as -sum and substance of all “things,” is the only essential point of -the question. So that it may be argued either on the somatic -(hylozoic) or “Spiritual” hypothesis of life and mind. I have -always contended that Hylo-Idealism, or Auto-centricism, is the -only thorough and legitimate outcome of the phenomenal world -theory—this representative _Weltanschanung_ having been, for some -generations past, the accredited creed both of physical science -and philosophy. It is well summed up in Kant’s negation of “_Das -Ding an sich_.$1“$2”$3 Vulgar Physical Science, as interpreted by -its greatest hierophants, from Newton to Huxley and Darwin, from -its incarnate dualism, is fatally handicapped in its search after -the _final_ “good, beautiful, and true.” Even Cardinal Newman is -in a similar case, when he predicates _two_ luminous spectra, God -and Self, as the sole entities. The former Spectrum, on the -Hylo-ideal, or visional, or phenomenal hypothesis, _must_ be only -the functional _imago_ of the latter; Self being thus proved to be -“Alpha and Omega, beginning and ending, first and last.” Beyond -Self, it is manifest, mortal mind can never range. Whether Self be -body or “spirit” is, I repeat, for my chief contention, quite -immaterial—I sit on both sides of the stile, facing both ways. - - ROBERT LEWINS, M.D. - - ------------------ - - HYLO-IDEAISM. - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -As a hostile notice of the above philosophy has appeared in your -columns, will you kindly permit me to say a few words in its -defence? Not, of course, that I can hope in these few lines to -really make clear to the casual reader the greatest change in human -thought ever witnessed on earth (a change not merely as regards the -form or matter of existence, but as regards its very nature)—yet I -may hope that a few seasonable words may be the means of inducing at -least a few to enquire further into a theory, the self-evident -simplicity of which is so great, that, I am convinced, it needs but -to be understood to command universal acceptance. - -The term Hylo-Ideaism is no self-contradiction, but undeniable -verity, based on the first two facts of all existence; viz., the -assumption of the material on the one hand, and the actuality of the -ideal on the other. The primary, undeniable and necessary assumption -of the “reality” of existence supplies us with the first half of our -designation, and the recognition of the correlative truism that this -existence—based on our own assumption—is, therefore, only our own -idea, completes our title, and amply vindicates the self-sufficiency -of Hylo-Ideaistic philosophy. For here is not a mere unended -argument, leaving us at both ends stranded on mere metaphysical -speculation, but a self-sustaining circle[116] where both ends meet, -and materiality and ideality are blended as one, and indissoluble. - ------ - -Footnote 116: - - Yet, unless _metaphysical_ speculation comes to the rescue of the - new philosophy, and, completing, explains it on the old Vedantic - lines, the “circle,” instead of being a “self-sustaining” one, is - more than likely to become a—“vicious circle.”—ED. - ------ - -It matters not on what basis we proceed, whether we speak of -existence as material or ideal, or “spiritual” or anything else—a -moment’s reflection is sufficient to establish us in a position of -consistent monism. For all thought or knowledge is but sensation, -and sensation is and must be purely subjective, existing in, and by, -the ego itself. As now we cannot outstrip our own sensations (only a -madman could controvert this proposition—which includes -_everything_)—therefore are we absolutely, and for ever, limited to -self-existence, and the same holds good of all possible or imaginary -existence whatsoever. For the first essential of any conscious -existence—that which indeed constitutes it—is a sentient subject, -and inasmuch as all connected with this subject—thought, knowledge, -feeling, fancy, sentiment—are all _purely subjective_, _i.e._, in -the subject itself, so must the subject be to itself the sum of all -things, and objective existence only its own fancy by which it -realises itself. This then utterly disposes of all fancied objective -dualism by reducing all existence within the ring-fence of the ego -itself, and this not as mere speculative theory but as positive -fact, which, whether we recognise it or not, remains fact still—we -_are_ limited to Self, whether we know it or not. - -Then finally, _in self_, we harmonise the antithesis between the -material and the ideal by recognising the two as absolutely -inter-dependent, each upon the other, and therefore one consistent -and indivisible whole. The ideal (thought, fancy, sentiment) is, and -must be, but the property and outcome of the material (the nominal -reality), which, on the other hand, is itself (and can be) but the -assumption of the ideal. Destroy reality and thought is dead, blind -thought and reality is a blank; and thus are the ideal and the -material but the two sides of one and the self-same shield, and the -line of our argument joins itself in one consistent circle, which -constitutes the existence of the Ego—He who creates light and -darkness, heaven and earth, pleasure and pain, God and devil—who is, -in Himself, the sum of all things, (viz. “thinks”) beyond which is -naught, naught, naught, for the fancy of His own which imagines a -“beyond” is, itself, but fancy—self-contained in Self. - - Thou Unity of force sublime, - Th’ eternal mystery of thy time - Runs on unstay’d for ever; - Yet, self-containing God of all, - As raptur’d at thy feet I fall - In thee myself I worship. - HERBERT L. COURTNEY. - -Cambridge, November, 1887. - - [EDITOR’S NOTE.—In reference to the supposed “slighting - remark” of which Dr. Lewins speaks, and the no less supposed - “hostile notice,” as Mr. Herbert L. Courtney puts it—contained - in our September number—we demur to the accusation. Both - gentlemen will find it, however, fully answered in the - “Literary Jottings” of this number; where, also, their - respective pamphlets “AUTO-CENTRICISM,” “HUMANISM _versus_ - THEISM,” and “The New Gospel of Hylo-Idealism”—are amply - noticed by the “Adversary.”] - - ---------------------------- - - ANSWERS TO QUERIES. - -A CORRESPONDENT from New York writes: - - .... “The Editors of LUCIFER would confer a great benefit on those - who are attracted to the movement which they advocate, if they - would state: - - “(1.) Whether a would-be-theosophist-occultist is required to - abandon his worldly ties and duties such as family affection, love - of parents, wife, children, friends, etc.? - - “I ask this question because it is rumoured here that some - theosophical publications have so stated, and would wish to know - whether such a _sine quâ non_ condition really exists in your - Rules? The same, however, is found in the New Testament. ‘He that - loveth father or mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me; and he - that loveth son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me, - etc., etc.,’ is said in Matthew (x. 37). Do the MASTERS of - Theosophy demand as much? - - “Yours in the Search of Light, - “L. M. C.” - -This is an old, old question, and a still older charge against -theosophy, started first by its enemies. We emphatically answer, NO; -adding that no _theosophical_ publication could have rendered itself -guilty of such a FALSEHOOD and calumny. No follower of theosophy, -least of all a disciple of the “Masters of Theosophy” (the _chela_ -of a _guru_), would ever be accepted on such conditions. Many were -the candidates, but “few the chosen.” Dozens were refused, simply -because married and having a sacred duty to perform to wife and -children.[117] None have ever been asked to forsake father or -mother; for he who, being necessary to his parent for his support, -leaves him or her to gratify his own selfish consideration or thirst -for knowledge, however great and sincere, _is “unworthy”_ of the -Science of Sciences, “or ever to approach a holy MASTER.” - ------ - -Footnote 117: - - We know but two cases of _married_ “chelas” being accepted; but - both these were Brahmins and had _child-wives_, according to Hindu - custom, and they were _Reformers_ more than _chelas_, trying to - abrogate child-marriage and slavery. Others had to obtain the - consent of their wives before entering the “Path,” as is usual in - India since long ages. - ------ - -Our correspondent must surely have confused in his mind Theosophy -with Roman Catholicism, and Occultism with the dead-letter teachings -of the Bible. For it is only in the Latin Church that it has become -a meritorious action, which is called serving God and Christ, to -“abandon father and mother, wife and children,” and every duty of an -honest man and citizen, in order to become a monk. And it is in St. -Luke’s Gospel that one reads the terrible words, put in the mouth of -Jesus: “If any _man_ come to me, and _hate not his father, and -mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters_, yea, -_his own life_ also, HE CANNOT BE MY DISCIPLE.” (xiv. 26.) - -_Saint_ (?) Jerome teaches, in one of his writings, “If thy father -lies down across thy threshold, if thy mother uncovers to thine eyes -the bosom which suckled thee, _trample on thy father’s lifeless -body_, TRAMPLE ON THY MOTHER’S BOSOM, and _with eyes unmoistened and -dry, fly to the Lord, who calleth thee_!” - -Surely then, it is not from any _theosophical_ publication that our -correspondent could have learnt such an infamous charge against -theosophy and its MASTERS—but rather in some _anti-Christian_, or -_too_ dogmatically “Christian” paper. - -Our society has never been “more Catholic than the Pope.” It has -done its best to follow out the path prescribed by the Masters; and -if it has failed in more than one respect to fulfil its arduous -task, the blame is certainly not to be thrown on either Theosophy, -nor its Masters, but on the limitations of human nature. The -_Rules_, however, of _chelaship_, or discipleship, are there, in -many a Sanskrit and Tibetan volume. In Book IV. of _Kiu-ti_, in the -chapter on “_the Laws of Upasans_” (disciples), the qualifications -expected in a “regular _chela_” are: (1.) Perfect physical -health.[118] (2.) Absolute mental and physical purity. (3.) -Unselfishness of purpose; universal charity; pity for all animate -beings. (4.) Truthfulness and unswerving faith in the laws of Karma. -(5.) A courage undaunted in the support of truth, even in face of -peril to life. (6.) An intuitive perception of one’s being the -vehicle of the manifested divine _Atman_ (spirit). (7.) Calm -indifference for, but a just appreciation of, everything that -constitutes the objective and transitory world. (8.) Blessing of -both parents[119] and _their permission to become an Upasan_ -(chela); and (9.) Celibacy, and freedom from any obligatory duty. - ------ - -Footnote 118: - - This rule 1. applies only to the “temple chelas,” who must be - _perfect_. - -Footnote 119: - - Or one, if the other is dead. - ------ - -The two last rules are most strictly enforced. No man _convicted of -disrespect to his father or mother_, or _unjust abandonment of his -wife_, can ever be accepted even as a _lay chela_. - -This is sufficient, it is hoped. We have heard of chelas who, having -_failed_, perhaps in consequence of the neglect of some such duty, -for one or another reason, have invariably thrown the blame and -responsibility for it on the teaching of the Masters. This is but -natural in poor and weak human beings who have not even the courage -to recognise their own mistakes, or the rare nobility of publicly -confessing them, but are always trying to find a scapegoat. Such we -pity, and leave to the Law of Retribution, or Karma. It is not these -weak creatures, who can ever be expected to have the best of the -enemy described by the wise Kirátárjuniya of Bharavi:— - - “The enemies which rise within the body. - Hard to be overcome—the evil passions— - Should manfully be fought, _who conquers these - Is equal to the conqueror of worlds_.” (xi. 32.) - - [ED.] - - --- - -We have received several communications for publication, bearing on -the subjects discussed in the editorial of our last issue, “Let -every man prove his own work.” A few brief remarks may be made, not -in reply to any of the letters—_which, being anonymous, and -containing no card from the writers, cannot be published_ (nor are -such noticed, as a general rule)—but to the ideas and accusations -contained in one of them, a letter signed “M.” Its author takes up -the cudgels on behalf of the Church. He objects to the statement -that this institution lacks the enlightenment necessary to carry out -a true system of philanthropy. He appears, also, to demur to the -view that “the practical people either go on doing good -unintentionally and often do harm,” and points to the workers amid -our slums as a vindication of Christianity—which, by-the-bye, was in -no sense attacked in the editorial so criticized. - -To this, repeating what was said, we maintain that more mischief has -been done by emotional charity than sentimentalists care to face. -Any student of political economy is familiar with this fact, which -passes for a truism with all those who have devoted attention to the -problem. No nobler sentiment than that which animates the unselfish -philanthropist is conceivable; but the question at issue is not -summed up in the recognition of this truth. The practical results of -his labours have to be examined. We have to see whether he does not -sow the seeds of a greater—while relieving a lesser—evil. - -The fact that “thousands are making great efforts in all the cities -throughout our land” to meet want, reflects immense credit on the -character of such workers. It does not affect their creed, for such -natures would remain the same, whatever the prevailing dogmas -chanced to be. It is certainly a very poor illustration of the -fruits of centuries of dogmatic Christianity that England should be -so honeycombed with misery and poverty as she is—especially on the -biblical ground that a tree must be judged by its fruits! It might, -also, be argued, that the past history of the Churches, stained as -it is with persecutions, the suppression of knowledge, crime and -brutality, necessitates the turning over of a new leaf. The -difficulties in the way are insuperable. “Churchianity” has, indeed, -done its best to keep up with the age by assimilating the teachings -of, and making veiled truces with, science, but it is incapable of -affording a true spiritual ideal to the world. - -The same Church-Christianity assails with fruitlesss pertinacity, -the ever-growing host of Agnostics and Materialists, but is _as -absolutely ignorant, as the latter, of the mysteries beyond the -tomb_. The great necessity for the Church, according to Professor -Flint, is to keep the leaders of European thought within its fold. -By such men it is, however, regarded as an anachronism. The Church -is eaten up with scepticism within its own walls; free-thinking -clergymen being now very common. This constant drain of vitality has -reduced the true religion to a very low ebb, and it is to infuse a -new current of ideas and aspirations into modern thought, in short, -to supply a logical basis for an elevated morality, a science and -philosophy which is suited to the knowledge of the day, that -Theosophy comes before the world. Mere physical philanthropy, apart -from the infusion of new influences and ennobling conceptions of -life into the minds of the masses, is worthless. The gradual -assimilation by mankind of great spiritual truths will alone -revolutionize the face of civilization, and ultimately result in a -far more effective panacea for evil, than the mere tinkering of -superficial misery. Prevention is better than cure. Society creates -its own outcasts, criminals, and profligates, and then condemns and -punishes its own Frankensteins, sentencing its own progeny, the -“bone of its bone, and the flesh of its flesh,” to a life of -damnation on earth. Yet that society recognises and enforces most -hypocritically Christianity—_i.e._ “Churchianity.” Shall we then, or -shall we not, infer that the latter is unequal to the requirements -of mankind? Evidently the former, and most painfully and obviously -so, in its present dogmatic form, which makes of the beautiful -ethics preached on the Mount, a Dead Sea fruit, a whitened -sepulchre, and no better. - -Furthermore, the same “M.,” alluding to Jesus as one with regard to -whom there could be only two alternatives, writes that he “was -either the Son of God or the vilest impostor who ever trod this -earth.” We answer, not at all. Whether the Jesus of the New -Testament ever lived or not, whether he existed as an historical -personage, or was simply a lay figure around which the Bible -allegories clustered—the Jesus of Nazareth of Matthew and John, is -the ideal for every would-be sage and Western candidate Theosophist -to follow. That such an one as he, was _a_ “Son of God,” is as -undeniable as that he was neither the _only_ “Son of God,” nor the -first one, nor even the last who closed the series of the “Sons of -God,” or the children of Divine Wisdom, on this earth. Nor is that -other statement that in “His life he (Jesus) has ever spoken of -himself as co-existent with Jehovah, the Supreme, the Centre of the -Universe,” correct, whether in in its dead letter, or hidden mystic -sense. In no place does Jesus ever allude to “_Jehovah_”; but, on -the contrary, attacking the Mosaic laws and the alleged Commandments -given on Mount Sinai, he disconnects himself and his “Father” most -distinctly and emphatically from the Sinaitic tribal God. The whole -of Chapter V., in the Gospel of Matthew, is a passionate protest of -the “man of peace, love and charity,” against the cruel, stern, and -selfish commandments of “the man of war,” the “Lord” of Moses (Exod. -xv., 3). “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old times,”—so -and so—“But I say unto you,” quite the reverse. Christians who still -hold to the Old Testament and the Jehovah of the Israelites, are at -best _schismatic Jews_. Let them be that, by all means, if they will -so have it; but they have no right to call themselves even -_Chréstians_, let alone _Christians_.[120] - -It is a gross injustice and untruth to assert, as our anonymous -correspondent does, that “the freethinkers are notoriously unholy -in their lives.” Some of the noblest characters, as well as -deepest thinkers of the day, adorn the ranks of Agnosticism, -Positivism and Materialism. The latter are the worst enemies of -Theosophy and Mysticism; but this is no reason why strict justice -should not be done unto them. Colonel Ingersoll, a rank -materialist, and the leader of freethought in America, is -recognised, even by his enemies, as an ideal husband, father, -friend and citizen, one of the noblest characters that grace the -United States. Count Tolstoi is a freethinker who has long parted -with the orthodox Church, yet his whole life is an exemplar of -Christ-like altruism and self-sacrifice. Would to goodness every -“Christian” should take those two “_infidels_” as his models in -private and public life. The munificence of many freethinking -philanthropists stands out in startling contrast with the apathy -of the monied dignitaries of the Church. The above fling at the -“enemies of the Church,” is as absurd as it is contemptible. - -“What can you offer to the dying woman who fears to tread alone the -DARK UNKNOWN?” we are asked. Our Christian critic here frankly -confesses (_a._) that Christian dogmas have only developed _fear_ of -death, and (_b._) the _agnosticism_ of the _orthodox believer_ in -Christian theology as to the future _post-mortem_ state. It is, -indeed, difficult to appreciate the peculiar type of bliss which -orthodoxy offers its believers in—_damnation_. - -The dying man—the average Christian—with a _dark_ retrospect in life -can scarcely appreciate this boon; while the Calvinist or the -Predestinarian, who is brought up in the idea that God may have -pre-assigned him from eternity to everlasting misery, through no -fault of that man, but simply because he is God, is more than -justified in regarding the latter as ten times worse than any devil -or fiend that unclean human fancy could evolve. - -Theosophy, on the contrary, teaches that _perfect, absolute justice_ -reigns in nature, though short-sighted man fails to see it in its -details on the material and even psychic plane, and that every man -determines his own future. The true Hell is life on Earth, as an -effect of Karmic punishment following the preceding life during -which the evil causes were produced. The Theosophist fears _no -hell_, but confidently expects rest and bliss during the _interim_ -between two incarnations, as a reward for all the unmerited -suffering he has endured in an existence into which he was ushered -by Karma, and during which he is, in most cases, as helpless as a -torn-off leaf whirled about by the conflicting winds of social and -private life. Enough has been given out at various times regarding -the conditions of post-mortem existence, to furnish a solid block of -information on this point. Christian theology has nothing to say on -this burning question, except where it veils its ignorance by -mystery and dogma; but Occultism, unveiling the symbology of the -Bible, explains it thoroughly.—[ED.] - ------ - -Footnote 120: - - See “The Esoteric Character of the Gospels,” in this number. - ------ - - - =LITERARY JOTTINGS= - - HYLO-IDEALISM _versus_ “LUCIFER,” and the “ADVERSARY.” - -Under the head of CORRESPONDENCE in the present number, two -remarkable letters are published. (See Text.) Both come from fervent -Hylo-Idealists—a Master and Disciple, if we mistake not—and both -charge the “Adversary,” one, of a “slighting,” the other, of a -“hostile notice” of Hylo-Idealism, in the September number of -“_Lucifer_.” - - * * - -Such an accusation is better met and answered in all sincerity; and, -therefore, the reply is, a flat denial of the charge. No -_slight_—nor _hostility_ either, could be shown to “Hylo-Idealism,” -as the “little stranger” in the happy family of philosophies was -hitherto as good as unknown to “Lucifer’s” household gods. It was -_chaff_, if anything, but surely no hostility; and even that was -concerned with only some dreadful words and sentences, with -reference to the new teaching, and had nothing whatever to do with -Hylo-Idealism proper—a _terra incognita_ for the writer at the time. -But now that three pamphlets from the pens of our two correspondents -have been received in our office, for review, and carefully read, -Hylo-Idealism begins to assume a more tangible form before the -reviewer’s eye. It becomes easier to separate the grain from the -chaff, the theory from the (no doubt) scientific, nevertheless, most -irritating, words in which it is presented to the reader. - - * * - -This is meant in all truth and sincerity. The remarks which our two -correspondents have mistaken for expressions of hostility, were as -justified _then_, as they are _now_. What ordinary mortal, we ask, -before he had time (to use Dr. Lewins’ happiest expressions) to -“_asself_ or _cognose_”—let alone _intercranialise_[121] (!!)—the -hylo-idealistic theories, however profound and philosophical these -may be, who, having so far come into direct contact with only the -_images_ thereof “subjected by his own _egoity_” (_i.e._ as words -and sentences), who could avoid feeling his hair standing on end, -over “_his organs of mentation_,” while spelling out such -terrible words as “_vesiculo-neurosis_ in conjunction with -_medico-psychological symptomatology_,” “_auto-centricism_,” and the -like? Such interminable, outlandish, multisyllabled and -multicipital, newly-coined compound terms and whole sentences, -maybe, and no doubt are, highly learned and scientific. They may be -most expressive of true, real meaning, to a specialist of Dr. -Lewins’ powers of thought; nevertheless, I make bold to say, that -they are far more calculated to obscure than to enlighten the -ordinary reader. In our modern day, when new philosophies spring out -from the spawn of human overworked intellect like mushrooms from -their mycelium after a rainy morning, the human brain and -its capacities ought to be taken into a certain thoughtful -consideration, and spared useless labour. Notwithstanding Dr. -Lewins’ praiseworthy efforts to prove that brain (as far as we -understand his aspirations and teachings) is the only reality in the -whole kosmos, its limitations are painfully evident, on the whole. -As philanthropists and theosophists, we entreat the founder of -Hylo-Idealism and his disciples to be merciful to their new god, the -“Ego-Brain,” and not tax too heavily its powers, if they would see -it happily reign. For otherwise, it is sure to collapse before the -new theory—or, let us call it philosophy—is even half appreciated by -that “Ego-Brain.” - ------ - -Footnote 121: - - “AUTO-CENTRICISM, or, _The Brain Theory of Life and Mind_,” p. 41. - ------ - - * * - -By speaking as we do, we are only pursuing a life-long policy. We -have criticized and opposed the coinage of hard Greek and Latin -words by the New York Pantarchists; laughed at Hæckel’s pompous -tendency to invent thirty-three syllabled terms, and speak of the -_perigenesis_ of _plastidules_, instead of honest whirling atoms—or -whatever he means; and derided the modern psychists for calling -simple thought transference “telepathic impact.” And now, we -tearfully beg Dr. Lewins, in the interests of humanity, to have pity -on his poor readers: for, unless he hearkens to our advice, we shall -be compelled, in dire self-defence, to declare an open war to his -newly-coined words. We shall fight the usurper “Solipsism” in favour -of the legitimate king of the Universe—EGOISM—to our last breath. - - * * - -At the same time, as we have hitherto been ignorant of the latest -philosophy, described by Mr. H. L. Courtney as “the greatest change -in human thought,” may we be permitted to enquire whether it is -spelt as its Founder spells it, namely, “Hylo-Idealism,” or as his -disciple, Mr. Courtney does, who writes Hylo-Ideaism? Is the latter -a _schism_, an improvement on the original name, a _lapsus calami_, -or what? And now, having disburdened our heart of a heavy weight, we -may proceed to give an opinion (so far very superficial), on the -three Hylo-Idealistic (or _Ideaistic_) pamphlets. - - --- - -_Under the extraordinary title of_ “AUTO-CENTRICISM” and “HUMANISM -_versus_ THEISM,” or “Solipsism (Egoism)=Atheism” (W. Stewart & Co., -41, Farringdon Street, E.C.; and Freethought Publishing Co., 63, -Fleet Street, E.C.)—Dr. Lewins publishes a series of letters on the -subject of the philosophy of which he is the founder. It is -impossible not to feel admiration for the manner in which these -letters are written. They show a great deal of sincere conviction -and deep thought, and give evidence of a most wide and varied -reading. However his readers may dissent from the writer’s -conclusions, the research with which he has strengthened his theory, -cannot fail to attract their attention, and smooth their way through -the somewhat tortuous labyrinth of arguments before them. But— - -Dr. Lewins is among those who regard consciousness as a function of -the nerve-tissue; and in this aspect, he is an uncompromising -materialist. Yet, on the other hand, he holds that the Universe, -God, and thought, have no reality whatever, apart from the -individual Ego. The Ego is again resolvable into brain-process. We -thus arrive at the doctrine that Brain is the workshop in which all -our ideas of external things are originated. Apart from brain there -is no Ego, no external world. What, then, is the Brain itself—this -solitary object in a void universe? Hylo-Idealism does not say. -Thus, the author cannot escape the confusion of thought which his -unique working-union of materialism and idealism involves. The -_oscillation_ between these two poles is strikingly apparent in the -subjoined quotations. At one point Matter is discussed as if it were -an objective reality; at another, it is regarded as a mere “phantasm -of the Ego.” The Brain alone survives throughout in solitary state. -We quote from the two pamphlets— - - MATTER ASSERTED. - - “_Matter_, organic and inorganic, is now fully known ... to - perform all _material_ operations.” - - —_Auto-Centricism_, p. 40. - - “Man is _all body and matter_.” - - —_Do_, p. 40. - - “Abstract thought [is] _neuropathy_ ... disease of the _nervous - centres_.” - - —_Humanism versus Theism_, p. 25. - - “What we call mind ... is a function of certain _nerve structures - in the organism_.” - - —_Humanism v. Theism_, p. 24. - - MATTER DENIED. - - “_All discovery_ is ... a _subjective phenomenon_.” - - —_Humanism v. Theism_, p. 17. - - “_All things_ are for us but _modes of perception_.”—[Mental - figments]. - - The “celestial vault and garniture of Earth,” are “a _mere - projection of our own inner consciousness_.” - - —_Humanism v. Theism_, p. 17. - - “We _get rid of Matter altogether_.” - - —_Humanism v. Theism_, p. 17. - - “The whole objective world ... is _phenomenal or ideal_.” - - —_Auto-Centricism_, p. 9. - - “_Everything_ is spectral” (_i.e._, unreal). - - —_Ibid_, p. 13. - -Matter is at one time credited with a real being, and again resolved -into a mere mental figment as _circumstances demand_. If Matter is, -as the author frequently states, unreal, it is, at least clear that -the brain, one of its many phases, goes with it!! - -As to the learned doctor’s assertion that perception is relative, a -theory which runs through his whole work, we have but one answer. -This conception is, in no sense whatever, a monopoly of -Hylo-Idealists, as Dr. Lewins appears to think. The illusory nature -of the phenomenal world—of the things of sense—is not only a belief -common to the old Brahminical metaphysics, and to the majority of -modern psychologists, but it is also a vital tenet of Theosophy. The -latter distinctly realises matter as a “bundle of attributes,” -ultimately resolvable into the subjective sensations of a -“percipient.” The connection of this simple truth with the -hylo-idealistic denial of soul is not apparent. Its acceptance has, -also, no bearing on the problem as to whether there may not exist a -duality—_within the limits of manifested being_—or contrast between -Mind and the Substance of matter. This Cosmic Duality is symbolised -by the Vedantins in the relations between the Logos and -Mulaprakriti—_i.e._, the Universal Spirit and the “material” basis -(or root) of the objective planes of nature. The _Monism_, then, of -Dr. Lewins and other negative thinkers of the day, is evidently at -fault, when applied to unify the contrast of mental and material -facts in the conditioned universe. Beyond the latter, it is indeed -valid, but that is scarcely a question for practical philosophy. - -To close with a reference this once to Dr. Lewins’ letter (see -“Correspondence” in the text), in which he makes his subsequent -assertion to the effect that God is the “functional (_sic_) image,” -of the Ego, we should prefer to suggest that all individual “selves” -are but dim reflections of the universal soul of the Kosmos. The -orthodox concept of God is not, as he contends, a myth or phantasm -of the brain; it is rather an expression of a vague consciousness of -the universal, all-pervading Logos. It is because SELF pinions man -within a narrow sphere “beyond which mortal mind can never range,” -that the destruction of the personal sense of separateness is -indispensable to the Occultist. - - --- - -“THE NEW GOSPEL OF HYLO-IDEALISM, _or Positive Agnosticism_,” -(Freethought Publishing Co., 73, Fleet Street, E. C. Price 3d.), is -another pamphlet on the same subject, in which Mr. Herbert L. -Courtney contributes his quota to the discussion of the “Brain -Theory of mind and matter.” He is, if we mistake not, an avowed -disciple of Dr. Lewins, and, perhaps, identical with the “C. N.,” -who watched over the cradle of the “new philosophy.” The whole gist -of the latter may be summed up as an attempt to frame a -working-union of Materialism and Idealism. This result is effected -on two lines (1) in the acceptance of the idealistic theorem, that -the so-called external world only exists in our consciousness; and -(2) in the designation of that consciousness, in its turn, as a mere -function of Brain. The first of these contentions is unquestionably -valid, in so far as it concerns the world of appearances, or _Maya_; -it is, however, as “old as the hills,” and incorporated into the -Hylo-Ideal argument from anterior sources. The second is untenable, -for the simple reason that on the premises of the new creed itself, -the brain, as an object of perception, can possess no reality -outside of the Ego. Hegelians might reply that Brain is but an -_i.e._ of the Ego, and cannot hence determine the existence of the -latter—its creator. - - --- - -Metaphysicism will, however, find much to interest them in Mr. -Courtney’s brochure, representative, as it is, of the new and more -subtle phase into which modern scepticism is entering. Some -expressions we may demur to—_e.g._, “That which we see is not -Sirius, but the light-wave.” So far from the light-wave being -“seen,” it is a mere working hypothesis of Science. All we -experience is the retinal sensation, the objective counterpart to -which is a matter of pure inference. So far as we can learn, -Hylo-Idealism is chiefly based upon gigantic paradoxes, and even -contradictions in terms. For, with regard to the speculations anent -the Noumenon (p. 8.) what justification can be found for terming it -“MATTER,” especially as it is said to be “unknowable”? Obviously it -may be of the nature of mind, or—_something_ HIGHER. How is the -Hylo-Idealist to know? - - --- - -“LAYS OF ROMANCE AND CHIVALRY,” by Mr. W. Stewart Ross. (Stewart and -Co., Farringdon Street.) In this neat little volume the author -presents to the reader a collection of vigorous verse, mostly of -chivalrous character. Some of these pieces, such as the “Raid of -Vikings” and “Glencoe,” are of merit, despite an occasional echo of -Walter Scott, whose style seems to have had a considerable modifying -influence on the author’s diction. It is in the “Bride of Steel” -that this feature is most noticeable— - - “I love thee with a warrior’s love, - My Sword, my Life, my Bride! - Dear, dear as ever knighthood bore, - Though yet no gout of battle-gore - Thy virgin blade hath dyed!” - -Apart from this unconscious influence of the great Scottish bard, -the ring of originality and feeling which characterises Mr. Stewart -Ross’s poetry is most refreshing. The little volume sparkles with -the vein of romance, and after perusing it, in spite of occasional -anachronisms and other literary errors, we are not surprised to hear -of the favourable reception hitherto accorded to it. - - --- - -In the _Secular Review_ for November 26th, Mr. Beatty makes an -attack upon a former article in LUCIFER, entitled “The Origin of -Evil.” We find, however, Mr. Beatty exhibiting crass ignorance of -the ideas he criticises, as when, for instance, he speaks of the -“_Buddhistic_” Parabram (_sic_). To begin with, every tyro in -Oriental philosophy knows that “Parabrahm” is a Hindu Vedantic idea, -and has no connection whatever with Buddhist thought. If Mr. Beatty -wishes to become a serious critic, he must first learn the _a_, _b_, -_c_, of the subject with which he professes to deal. His article is -unfinished, but it seems only fair at the present stage to call his -attention to so glaring an error. - - --- - -THE GNOSTICS AND THEIR REMAINS, ANCIENT AND MEDIÆVAL. By C. W. King, -M.A. Second Edition. David Nutt, 270 Strand, London, 1887. pp. 466, -8vo. - -It would be unfair to the erudite and painstaking author of “_The -Gnostics and Their Remains_” for a reviewer to take the title of his -book as altogether appropriate, for it suggests too high a standard -of criticism. Mr. King says in the introduction that his book is -intended to be subsidiary to the valuable treatise of M. Matter, -adding: “I refer the reader to him for the more complete elucidation -of the _philosophy_ of Gnosticism, and give my full attention to its -_Archæological_ side.” The italics are the author’s, and they disarm -criticism as far as the philosophical side of Gnosticism is -concerned; for thus italicised, this passage is, at the outset, as -plain a confession as could, in conscience, be expected of an author -of a fact which the reader would probably have found out for -himself, before he closed the volume: namely, that the work is -chiefly valuable as an Archæological compendium of “Gnostic -Remains.” Unfortunately, the most interesting point about the -Gnostics is their philosophy, of which their Archæological remains -are, properly speaking, little more than illustrations. But the fact -is, that the hard-shelled Archæologist is the last man in the world -to appreciate the real esoteric signification of symbolism. All true -symbols have many meanings, and for the purposes of descriptive -Archæology the more superficial of these meanings are sufficient. -Ignorance of the deeper meaning may indeed be bliss for the -Archæologist, for it necessitates an amount of ingenuity in the -fitting together of “remains,” that commands the admiration of the -public, and is productive in the Archæological bosom of that -agreeable sensation known as “fancying oneself.” As a laborious -collector and compiler, and an ingenious worker-up of materials into -interesting reading, too much can hardly be said in Mr. King’s -praise, and had he a greater intuitional power, and a knowledge of -esoteric religion, his great industry and erudition would make his -writings valuable even to students of Occultism. - -Since the publication of the former edition of his work, -twenty-three years ago, Mr. King has come across and read the -_Pistis Sophia_. The discovery of this, the only remaining Gnostic -Gospel, or rather, Gospel fragment, is attributed to Schwartze, and -the Latin translation to Petermann (in 1853). But Mr. King does not -seem to be aware that as far back as 1843, another and ampler copy -than that in the British Museum was in the hands of a Russian -Raskolnik (dissident), a Cossack, who lived and married in -Abyssinia; and another is in the possession of an Englishman, an -Occultist, now in the United States, who brought it from Syria. It -seems a pity that in the interim Mr. King did not also read _Isis -Unveiled_, by H. P. Blavatsky, published by Bouton in New York in -1876, as its perusal would have saved him a somewhat absurd and -ludicrous blunder. In his _Preface_, Mr. King says:—“There seems to -be reason for suspecting that the Sibyl of Esoteric Buddhism drew -the first notions of her new religion from the analysis of the -_inner man_, as set forth in my first edition.”[122] The only person -to whom this passage could apply is one of the Editors, the author -of _Isis Unveiled_. And this, her first publication, contains the -same and only doctrine she has always, or ever, promulgated. _Isis -Unveiled_ has passed through eight editions, and has been read by -many thousands of persons; and not only they, but everyone who is -not strangely ignorant of the very literature with which it was Mr. -King’s business to make himself conversant, are perfectly aware that -the two large volumes which compose that work are entirely devoted -to a defence of the philosophy, science, and religion of the -ancients, especially of the old Aryans, whose religion can hardly be -called a “new” one, still less—“Esoteric Buddhism.” If properly -spelt, however, the latter word, or Buddhism, ought to be written -with one “d,” as in this case it means Wisdom. But “Budhism,” or the -wisdom-religion of the Aryans, was still less a religion, in the -exoteric sense, than is Buddhism, but rather a philosophy. In that -part of _Isis Unveiled_ which treats of the Gnostics, Mr. King will -find a few quotations from his writings side by side with quotations -from other writers on the same subject; but he will find no “new -religion” there, or anywhere else, in the works of H. P. Blavatsky. -And, if anyone drew the “first notions” of their religion from his -“analysis of the inner man,” it must have been the early Aryans, -who, unfortunately, have neglected to acknowledge the obligation. -What makes Mr. King’s self-complacency the more ridiculous, is that -in his preface he himself accuses someone else of “the grave error -of representing their (the Gnostics’) doctrines as _novel_, and the -pure _inventions_ of the persons who preached them.” And in another -place he confesses that he owes to Matter the first idea which has -now become a settled conviction with him, that “the seeds of the -_gnosis_ were originally of Indian growth.” If Matter “faintly -discerned” this truth, on the other hand Bailly, Dupuis, and others -had seen it quite clearly, and had declared it most emphatically. So -that Mr. King’s “discovery” is neither very new nor very original. - ------ - -Footnote 122: - - This modest assumption is followed by the generous promise to - furnish “investigators of the same order” as the supposed “Sibyl,” - with “a still more profound theosophy.” This is extremely - considerate and kind. But if it is _Pistis-Sophia_ which the - author had in his mind, then he had better apply to Theosophists - for the explanation of the most recondite points in that gnostic - fragment, while translating it, as he proposes doing from Latin. - For though the world of the Orientalists “of the same order” as - _himself_, may labour under the mistaken impression that no one - except themselves knew or know anything about _Pistis-Sophia_ till - 1853—Theosophists know better. Does Mr. King really imagine that - no one besides himself knows anything about the Gnostics “and - their remains,” or what _he_ knows is the only correct thing to - know? Strange delusion, if so; yet quite a harmless one, we - confess. - ------ - -Mr. King must be aware that of late years immense additions have -been made to western knowledge of eastern philosophies and -religions—a new region in ancient literature having, in fact, been -opened up by the labours of Orientalists, both European and Eastern. -A study of these Oriental systems throws a strong though often a -false light upon the inner meaning of Gnostic symbolism and ideas -generally, which Mr. King acknowledges to have come from Indian -sources; and certainly the reader has a right to expect a little -more knowledge in that direction from a writer of Mr. King’s -pretensions, than is displayed. For example, in the section about -Buddhism in the work before us: one is tempted sometimes to ask -whether it is flippancy or superficiality that is the matter with -the author—when he calls the ancient Indian gymnosophists “fakirs,” -and confounds them with Buddhists. Surely he need hardly be told -that fakirs are Mahomedans, and that the Gymnosophists he mentions -were Brahmin Yogis. - -The work, however, is a valuable one in its way; but the reader -should not forget that “there seems reason for suspecting” that the -author does not always know exactly what he is talking about, -whenever he strays too far from Archæology, on which he is no doubt -an authority. - - --- - -THE JEWISH WORLD enters bravely enough (in its issue of the 11th -November 1887) on its new character of professor of symbology and -History. It accuses in no measured terms one of the editors of -LUCIFER of ignorance; and criticises certain expressions used in our -October number, in a foot-note inserted to explain why the “Son of -the Morning” LUCIFER is called in Mr. G. Massey’s little poem, “Lady -of Light.” The writer objects, we see, to Lucifer-Venus being called -in one of its aspects “the Jewish Astoreth;” or to her having ever -been offered cakes by the Jews. As explained in a somewhat confused -sentence: “There _was no Jewish Astoreth_, though the Syrian -goddess, Ashtoreth, or Astarte, often appears in Biblical -literature, the moon goddess, the complement of Baal, the Sun God.” - -This, no doubt, is extremely learned and conveys quite _new_ -information. Yet such an astounding statement as that the whole of -the foot-note in LUCIFER is “pure imagination and bad history” is -very risky indeed. For it requires no more than a stroke or two of -our pen to make the whole edifice of this denial tumble on the -_Jewish World_ and mangle it very badly. Our contemporary has -evidently forgotten the wise proverb that bids one to let “sleeping -dogs lie,” and therefore, it is with the lofty airs of superiority -that he informs his readers that though the Jews in Palestine lived -surrounded with (? _sic_) this pagan form of worship, and _may, at -times_, (?!) have wandered towards it, they HAD NOTHING IN THEIR -WORSHIP IN COMMON WITH CHALDEAN OR SYRIAN BELIEFS IN MULTIPLICITY OF -DEITIES? (!!) - -This is what any impartial reader might really term “bad history,” -and every Bible worshipper describe as a _direct lie_ given to the -Lord God of Israel. It is more than _suppressio veri suggestio -falsi_, for it is simply a cool denial of facts in the face of both -Bible and History. We advise our critic of the _Jewish World_ to -turn to _his_ own prophets, to Jeremiah, foremost of all. We open -“Scripture” and find in it: “the Lord God” while accusing _his_ -“backsliding Israel and treacherous Judah” of following in “the ways -of Egypt and of Assyria,” of drinking the waters of Sihor, and -“serving strange Gods” enumerating his grievances in this wise: - - “According _to the number of thy cities_ are thy gods, O Judah, - (Jer. ii. 28.). - - “Ye have turned back to the iniquities of your forefathers who - went after other gods to serve them (xi.) ... _according to the - number of the streets of Jerusalem_ have ye set up altars to that - shameful thing, even altars unto Baal” (_Ib._). - -So much for Jewish _monotheism_. And is it any more “pure -imagination” to say that the Jews offered cakes to their Astoreth -and called her “Queen of Heaven”? Then the “Lord God” must, indeed, -be guilty of more than “a delicate expansion of facts” when -thundering to, and through, Jeremiah:— - - “Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah, and in the - streets of Jerusalem? The children gather wood, and the fathers - kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough TO MAKE CAKES _to - the Queen of Heaven_, and to pour out drink offerings _unto the - gods_.” (Jer. vii. 17-18). - -“The Jews _may_ AT TIMES” only (?) have wandered towards pagan forms -of worship but “had _nothing in common_ in it with Syrian beliefs in -multiplicity of deities.” Had they not? Then the ancestors of the -editors of the _Jewish World_ must have been the victims of -“suggestion,” when, snubbing Jeremiah (and not entirely without good -reason),they declared to him: - - “As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the - Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do - whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense - unto the Queen of Heaven[123] ... _as we have done, we_, AND OUR - FATHERS, _our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and - in the streets of Jerusalem_, for _then_ had we plenty of - victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But _since we left off - to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven_, and to _pour out drink - offerings unto her_ ... and (_to_) _make her cakes to worship her - ... we have wanted all things_, and have been consumed by the - sword and by the famine....” (Jer. xliv. 16, 17, 18, 19). - ------ - -Footnote 123: - - Astoreth-Diana, Isis, Melita, Venus, etc., etc. - ------ - -Thus, according to their own confession, it is not “at times” that -the Jews made cakes for, and worshipped Astoreth and the strange -gods, but constantly: doing, moreover, _as their forefathers_, kings -and princes _did_. - -“_Bad_ history”? And what was the “golden calf” but the sacred -heifer, the symbol of the “Great Mother,” first the planet Venus, -and then the moon? For the esoteric doctrine holds (as the Mexicans -held) that Venus, the morning star, was _created before the sun and -moon; metaphorically_, of course, not astronomically,[124] the -assumption being based upon, and meaning that which the _Nazars_ and -the Initiate alone understood among the Jews, but that the writers -of the _Jewish World_ are not supposed to know. For the same reason -the Chaldeans maintained that the moon was produced before the sun -(_see Babylon—Account of Creation, by George Smith_). The morning -star, Lucifer-Venus was dedicated to that Great Mother symbolized by -the heifer or the “Golden Calf.” For, as says Mr. G. Massey in his -lecture on “The Hebrews and their Creations,” “This (the Golden -Calf) being of either sex, it supplied a twin-type for Venus, as -Hathor or Ishtar (Astoreth), the double star, that was male at -rising, and female at sunset” She is the “Celestial Aphrodite,” -_Venus Victrix_ νιχηφόρος associated with _Ares_ (see Pausanias i, -8, 4, 11, 25, 1). - ------ - -Footnote 124: - - Because the stars and planets are the symbols and houses of Angels - and Elohim, who were, of course, “created,” or evoluted before the - physical or cosmic sun or moon. “The sun god was called the child - of the moon god Sin, in Assyria, and the lunar god Taht, is called - the father of Osiris, the sun god ‘in Egypt.’” (G. Massey.) - ------ - -We are told that “happily for them (the Jews) there was no Jewish -Astoreth.” The _Jewish World_ has yet to learn, we see, that there -would have been no Greek Venus Aphrodite; no _Ourania_, her earlier -appellation; nor would she have been confounded with the Assyrian -Mylitta (Herod, 1, 199; Pausan., 1, 14, 7; Hesiod, Μυληταν την -Ουρανιαν Ασσυριοι) had it not been for the Phœnicians and other -Semites. We say the “Jewish Astoreth,” and we maintain what we say, -on the authority of the Iliad, the Odyssey, of Renan, and many -others. Venus Aphrodite is one with the Astarte, Astoreth, etc. of -the Phœnicians, and she is one (as a planet) with “Lucifer” the -“Morning Star.” So far back as the days of Homer, she was confounded -with _Kypris_, an Oriental goddess brought by the Phœnician Semites -from their Asiatic travels (_Iliad_, V, 330, 422, 260). Her worship -appears first at Cythere, a Phœnician settlement depôt or -trade-establishment (_Odys._, VIII. 362.; Walcker, _griech. -götterl._ I, 666.) Herodotus shows that the sanctuary of Ascalon, in -Syria, was the most ancient of the fanes of Aphrodite Ourania (I, -105): and Decharme tells us in his _Mythologie de la Grèce Antique_, -that whenever the Greeks alluded to the origin of Aphrodite they -designated her as _Ourania_, an epithet translated from a _semitic -word_, as Jupiter _Epouranios_ of the Phœnician inscriptions, was -the _Samemroum_ of Philo of Byblos, according to Renan (_Mission de -Phenicie_). Astoreth was a goddess of generation, presiding at human -birth (as Jehovah was _god of generation_, foremost of all). She was -the moon-goddess, and a planet at the same time, whose worship -originated with the Phœnicians and Semites. It flourished most in -the Phœnician settlements and colonies in Sicily, at Eryax. There -hosts of _Hetairae_ were attached to her temples, as hosts of -_Kadeshim_, called by a more sincere name in the Bible, were, to the -house of the Lord, “where the women wove hangings for the grove” -(II. Kings, xxiii, 7). All this shows well the Semitic provenance of -Astoreth-Venus in her capacity of “great Mother.” Let us pause. We -advise sincerely the _Jewish World_ to abstain from throwing stones -at other peoples’ beliefs, so long as its own faith is but a house -of glass. And though Jeremy Taylor may think that “to be proud of -one’s learning is the greatest ignorance,” yet, in this case it is -but simple justice to say that it is really desirable for our -friends the Jews that the writer in LUCIFER of the criticised note -about Astoreth _should know less_ of history and the Bible, and her -unlucky critic in the _Jewish World_ learn a little more about it. - - “ADVERSARY.” - - - - - =THEOSOPHICAL= <br> =AND MYSTIC PUBLICATIONS= - - -THE THEOSOPHIST for October opens with the first of a series of -articles on the “Elohistic Cosmogony.” The views put forward by the -writer are certainly both striking and original, and, although Dr. -Pratt diverges very considerably from the recognised standard of -kabalistic orthodoxy, his interpretation of the Jewish version of -cosmic evolution will assuredly excite considerable interest. - -Following on Dr. Pratt’s learned article, come a few—unfortunately, -too few—pages of extremely interesting notes on the Folk-lore of the -Himalayan tribes, contributed by Captain Banon. The _Theosophist_ -has often been indebted to Captain Banon for similar notes -respecting such little known tribes and people; and it is much to be -regretted that the many members of the Theosophical Society who -reside in or visit such out-of-the-way places, do not make it a rule -to collect these traditions and send them for publication in the -_Theosophist_ or one of the other Theosophical magazines. - -Dr. Hartmann continues his series of “Rosicrucian Letters,” with a -number of extracts from the papers of Karl von Eckartshausen, who -died in 1792. Dr. Hartmann deserves the gratitude of all students -for rendering accessible these records and notes of past generations -of “seekers after the Truth.” - -Dr. Buck contributes a pithy and thoughtful article on “The Soul -Problem,” and Mr. Lazarus continues his exposition of the kabalistic -doctrine of the Microcosm. Besides these there are further -instalments of two valuable translations from Hindu works of great -antiquity and authority; the “Crest Jewel of Wisdom,” by -Sankaracharya and the “Kaivalyanita.” It is much to be desired that -one of our Hindu brothers, who adds to a knowledge of his own mystic -literature, an acquaintance with Western modes of thought and -expression, would devote a series of articles to the exposition of -the fundamental standpoint and ideas of such works as these. Such an -article would add enormously to the value of these translations to -the Western world. - -In the _November_ number, Dr. Pratt takes up the _Jehovistic_ -cosmogony, which he contrasts and compares with the _Elohistic_ -version already referred to. In his view, the Jehovistic teaching -embodies the conception of the world as “created” and “ruled” by an -_extra-natural_ and _personal_ deity, as opposed to the more -philosophical and pantheistic conception of the earlier Elohistic -writers. - -Under the title of _An Ancient Weapon_, this issue contains an -instructive account of the evocation of certain astral forces -according to the ancient Vedic rites. As here described, the _evil -intention_, with which the rite is performed, transforms it into a -ceremony of _Black Magic_, but this does not render the account any -less valuable. - -This is followed by the first of a series of articles on _The -Allegory of the Zoroastrian Cosmogony_, which promises to furnish -much food for thought and study. - -_Rosicrucian Letters_ contains this time an extract from an old MS., -headed _The Temple of Solomon_, which is well worthy of careful -attention. - -Besides these we have a sketch of the life and writings of -Madvachary, the great teacher of Southern India, and some further -testimonies to the fact of “self-levitation” from eye-witnesses. -Rama Prasad gives some most valuable details of the “Science of -Breathing,” one of the most curious branches of occult physics, -while the remainder of the number is occupied by an article on -“Tetragrammaton,” which may be interesting to students of the -Kabbala, and continuations of the “Kabbala and the Microcosm,” and -of the translations from Indian books mentioned in connection with -the October number. - -These two numbers contain much valuable matter and well maintain the -reputation which the _Theosophist_ originally gained for itself. - - --- - -In THE PATH for October we notice especially the following articles: - -_Nature’s Scholar_, a most poetically-conceived and well-worked-out -Idyll, by J. C. Ver Plank, in which the underlying occult truth is -presented to the reader in a most attractive form. - -Following this is a much needed warning against the dangers of -_Astral Intoxication_. Admirably expressed, it points out the true, -and indicates the false, path with great clearness; and we desire to -call the earnest attention of such of our readers as are engaged in -_psychic_ development to its importance. - -“Pilgrim” contributes some further _Thoughts in Solitude_, the -leading idea of which may be indicated by its concluding lines, -which are quoted from Sir Philip Sydney of heroic fame: - - “Then farewell, World! thy uttermost I see, - Eternal Love, maintain thy life in me!” - -_Tea-Table Talk_ is even more interesting and suggestive than usual, -and, besides those above mentioned, this well-filled number contains -Part IV. of the series of articles on _The Poetry of Re-incarnation -in Western Literature_, which deals with the _Platonic Poets_. - -The _November_ number opens with an able continuation of Mr. -Brehon’s article on _The Bhagavat-Gita_, commenced so long ago as -last April, of which we hope to peruse a further instalment. -Following this is a short article indicating the term “Medium” from -the loathsome connotations which phenomenal spiritualism has -attached to it. We then come to a paper on Goethe’s _Faust_, read -before one of the branches of the Theosophical Society in America. -It is of great interest to students of literature and will furnish a -clue to the real meaning of much of the poet’s writing. - -Mr. Johnston makes some most suggestive remarks on _Cain and Abel_; -Harij speaks in no uncertain tones of _Personalities_ and Truth, -while Hadji Erinn points out the _Path of Action_, and warns the -members of the T. S. that they must not expect their road to become -easier and plainer before them, while yet the society is undergoing -the trials of its education. - -Zadok gives some able answers to questions on various points of -practical occultism and Julius, in _Tea-Table Talk_, points out how -many people are really entering on the path of Theosophy—even though -unconsciously. - - --- - -LE LOTUS, for October and November, is even more interesting than -usual. In the October number are contained two very valuable -articles. The first of these is a paper on Paracelsus from the pen -of Dr. Hartmann, who is especially qualified to handle the subject -by his profound study of the work, and especially the manuscripts, -of that great occultist. M. “Papus” contributes a most lucid and -able exposition of some Kabbalistic doctrines, the _practical_ value -of which has been hitherto but little realised even by professed -students of mysticism. - -The opening article in the November issue is headed, _The -Constitution of the Microcosm_. It is written in a clear and -attractive style, and contains a most thorough and complete -explanation of the various classifications of the principles which -enter into the constitution of man. - -“Amaravella” has evidently studied the whole subject very deeply, -and he shows the relation of these various classifications to one -another in a way which will clear up many of the misconceptions -which have arisen. - -M. “Papus” writes on Alchemy in a manner which shows how conversant -he is with this little-understood topic. We therefore look forward -with great anticipations to the perusal of his book “_Traité -élémentaire de science occulte_,” the fourth chapter of which -contains the article referred to. - -It is very evident that Theosophy is making great and rapid progress -in France, and this is in great measure due to the untiring and -unselfish devotion of the editor of _Le Lotus_, M. Gaboriau, whom we -congratulate most warmly on the success which has attended his -efforts. - - --- - -_L’Aurore_ for October contains an article on the so-called “Star of -Bethlehem,” which repeats the assurance that the world is entering -on a new and happier life-phase. - -Unfortunately, it seems more than probable that before this -amelioration takes place, the world must pass through the valley of -the shadow of Death, and endure calamities far worse than any it has -yet seen. Lady Caithness continues her erudite and interesting -article on the lost ten tribes of Israel. Her thesis is put forward -in admirable language, and supported by a great wealth of biblical -quotations. Unfortunately, the task undertaken is an impossible one. -There never were twelve tribes of Israel—two only—Judah and the -Levites, having had a real existence in the flesh. The remainder are -but euhemerizations of the signs of the Zodiac, and were introduced -because they were necessary to the Kabalistic scheme on which the -“History” of the Jews was written. - -Lady Barrogill relates the well-known story of an English bishop and -the ghost of a Catholic priest, who haunted his former residence in -order to secure the destruction of some notes he had taken (contrary -to the rule of the Church) of an important confession which he had -heard. - -Besides these articles we find the continuation of the serial -romance, “L’amour Immortel,” and LUCIFER has to thank the editor for -the appreciative notice contained in this number. - - - - - LUCIFER - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - VOL. I. LONDON, JANUARY 15TH, 1888. NO. 5. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - =1888.= - - -People usually wish that their friends shall have a happy new -year, and sometimes “prosperous” is added to “happy.” It is not -likely that much happiness or prosperity can come to those who are -living for the truth under such a dark number as 1888; but still -the year is heralded by the glorious star Venus-Lucifer, shining -so resplendently that it has been mistaken for that still rarer -visitor, the star of Bethlehem. This too, is at hand; and surely -something of the Christos spirit must be born upon earth under -such conditions. Even if happiness and prosperity are absent, it -is possible to find something greater than either in this coming -year. Venus-Lucifer is the sponsor of our magazine, and as we -chose to come to light under its auspices, so do we desire to -touch on its nobility. This is possible for us all personally, and -instead of wishing our readers a happy or prosperous New Year, we -feel more in the vein to pray them to make it one worthy of its -brilliant herald. This can be effected by those who are courageous -and resolute. Thoreau pointed out that there are artists in life, -persons who can change the colour of a day and make it beautiful -to those with whom they come in contact. We claim that there are -adepts, masters in life who make it divine, as in all other arts. -Is it not the greatest art of all, this which affects the very -atmosphere in which we live? That it is the most important is seen -at once, when we remember that every person who draws the breath -of life affects the mental and moral atmosphere of the world, and -helps to colour the day for those about him. Those who do not help -to elevate the thoughts and lives of others must of necessity -either paralyse them by indifference, or actively drag them down. -When this point is reached, then the art of life is converted into -the science of death; we see the black magician at work. And no -one can be quite inactive. Although many bad books and pictures -are produced, still not everyone who is incapable of writing or -painting well insists on doing so badly. Imagine the result if -they were to! Yet so it is in life. Everyone lives, and thinks, -and speaks. If all our readers who have any sympathy with LUCIFER -endeavoured to learn the art of making life not only beautiful but -divine, and vowed no longer to be hampered by disbelief in the -possibility of this miracle, but to commence the Herculean task at -once, then 1888, however unlucky a year, would have been fitly -ushered in by the gleaming star. Neither happiness nor prosperity -are always the best of bedfellows for such undeveloped mortals as -most of us are; they seldom bring with them peace, which is the -only permanent joy. The idea of peace is usually connected with -the close of life and a religious state of mind. That kind of -peace will however generally be found to contain the element of -expectation. The pleasures of this world have been surrendered, -and the soul waits contentedly in expectation of the pleasures of -the next. The peace of the philosophic mind is very different from -this and can be attained to early in life when pleasure has -scarcely been tasted, as well as when it has been fully drunk of. -The American Transcendentalists discovered that life could be made -a sublime thing without any assistance from circumstances or -outside sources of pleasure and prosperity. Of course this had -been discovered many times before, and Emerson only took up again -the cry raised by Epictetus. But every man has to discover this -fact freshly for himself, and when once he has realised it he -knows that he would be a wretch if he did not endeavour to make -the possibility a reality in his own life. The stoic became -sublime because he recognised his own absolute responsibility and -did not try to evade it; the Transcendentalist was even more, -because he had faith in the unknown and untried possibilities -which lay within himself. The occultist fully recognises the -responsibility and claims his title by having both tried and -acquired knowledge of his own possibilities. The Theosophist who -is at all in earnest, sees his responsibility and endeavours to -find knowledge, living, in the meantime, up to the highest -standard of which he is aware. To all such LUCIFER gives greeting! -Man’s life is in his own hands, his fate is ordered by himself. -Why then should not 1888 be a year of greater spiritual -development than any we have lived through? It depends on -ourselves to make it so. This is an actual fact, not a religious -sentiment. In a garden of sunflowers every flower turns towards -the light. Why not so with us? - -And let no one imagine that it is a mere fancy, the attaching of -importance to the birth of the year. The earth passes through its -definite phases and man with it; and as a day can be coloured so can -a year. The astral life of the earth is young and strong between -Christmas and Easter. Those who form their wishes now will have -added strength to fulfil them consistently. - - - TO THE MORNING STAR. - - Lucifer, Lucifer Son of the Morning, - Trembling and fair on the opening skies, - Heralding, truly, a day that is dawning, - Telling the “Light of the World” shall arise. - - Lucifer, Lucifer, all through the Ages - Weary hearts struggled and watched for the light, - Now it is coming, and thou the forerunner, - Mystical prophet, the herald of Right. - - There in the desert of Night where thou dwellest, - Round thee in myriads the feebler lights stand; - Lucifer, Lucifer, ever thou tellest - The glorious Kingdom of Right is at hand. - - Rising and setting, O, Star of the Morning! - Strangely prophetic, thou atom of light; - Revealing in silence the law of creation. - Out from the unseen abyss of the night, - - Into a world where the stars, sympathetic, - Seem to be fraught with a pulsating breath; - Brilliant, yet shining like tear-drops pathetic, - But sinking at last in oblivion of death! - - Sinking, but wrapped in the shroud of the Morning, - Folded in splendour as light shall arise; - Lucifer, herald of Truth that is dawning, - Ride through thy glorious pathway, the skies! - - Soon in the east, with a splendour triumphant, - Morning shall break like a great altar-fire, - Ignorance, darkness, and gross superstition, - Shall melt in its beams, and in silence expire! - - HELEN FAGG. - - ----------------------- - - .... “THE faith that you call sacred—‘sacred as the most delicate - or manly or womanly sentiment of love and honour’—is the faith - that nearly all of your fellow men are to be lost. Ought an honest - man to be restrained from denouncing that faith because those who - entertain it say that their feelings are hurt? You say to me: - ‘There is a hell. A man advocating the opinions you advocate will - go there when he dies.’ I answer: ‘There is no hell, the Bible - that teaches it is not true.’ And you say: ‘How can you hurt my - feelings?’”—R. G. INGERSOLL.—_Secular Review._ - - - “TO THE READERS OF ‘LUCIFER.’” - - -Our magazine is only four numbers old, and already its young life is -full of cares and trouble. This is all as it should be; _i.e._, like -every other publication, it must fail to satisfy _all_ its readers, -and this is only in the nature of things and the destiny of every -printed organ. But what seems a little strange in a country of -culture and freethought is that LUCIFER should receive such a number -of _anonymous_, spiteful, and often abusive letters. This, of -course, is but a casual remark, the waste-basket in the office being -the only addressee and sufferer in this case; yet it suggests -strange truths with regard to human nature.[125] - ------ - -Footnote 125: - - “VERBUM SAP.” It is not our intention to notice anonymous - communications, even though they should emanate in a round-about - way from Lambeth Palace. The matter “_Verbum Sap_” refers to is - not one of taste; the facts must be held responsible for the - offence; and, as the Scripture hath it, “Woe to them by whom the - offence cometh!” - ------ - -Sincerity is true wisdom, it appears, only to the mind of the moral -philosopher. It is rudeness and insult to him who regards -dissimulation and deceit as culture and politeness, and holds that -the shortest, easiest, and safest way to success is to let sleeping -dogs and old customs alone. But, if the dogs are obstructing the -highway to progress and truth, and Society will, as a rule, reject -the wise words of (St.) Augustine, who recommends that “no man -should prefer custom before reason and truth,” is it a sufficient -cause for the philanthropist to walk out of, or even deviate from, -the track of truth, because the selfish egoist chooses to do so? -Very true, as remarked somewhere by Sir Thomas Browne that not every -man is a proper champion for the truth, nor fit to take up the -gauntlet in its cause. Too many of such defenders are apt, from -inconsideration and too much zeal, to charge the troops of error so -rashly that they “remain themselves as trophies to the enemies of -truth.” Nor ought all of us (members of the Theosophical Society) to -do so personally, but rather leave it only to those among our -numbers who have voluntarily and beforehand sacrificed their -personalities for the cause of Truth. Thus teaches us one of the -Masters of Wisdom in some fragments of advice which are published -further on for the benefit of the Theosophists (see the article that -follows this). While enforcing upon such public characters in our -ranks as editors, and lecturers, etc., the duty of telling -fearlessly “the Truth to the face of LIE,” he yet condemns the habit -of private judgment and criticism in every individual Theosophist. - -Unfortunately, these are not the ways of the public and readers. -Since our journal is entirely unsectarian, since it is neither -theistic nor atheistic, Pagan nor Christian, orthodox nor heterodox, -therefore, its editors discover eternal verities in the most -opposite religious systems and modes of thought. Thus LUCIFER fails -to give full satisfaction to either infidel or Christian. In the -sight of the former—whether he be an Agnostic, a Secularist, or an -Idealist—to find divine or occult lore underlying “the rubbish” in -the Jewish Bible and Christian Gospels is sickening; in the opinion -of the latter, to recognise the same truth as in the Judeo-Christian -Scriptures in the Hindu, Parsi, Buddhist, or Egyptian religious -literature, is vexation of spirit and blasphemy. Hence, fierce -criticism from both sides, sneers and abuse. Each party would have -us on its own sectarian side, recognising as truth, only that which -its particular _ism_ does. - -But this cannot nor shall it be. Our motto was from the first, and -ever shall be: “THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN—TRUTH.” Truth we -search for, and, once found, we bring it forward before the world, -whencesoever it comes. A large majority of our readers is fully -satisfied with this our policy, and that is plainly sufficient for -our purposes. - -It is evident that when toleration is not the outcome of -indifference it must arise from wide-spreading charity and -large-minded sympathy. Intolerance is preeminently the consequence -of ignorance and jealousy. He who fondly believes that he has got -the great ocean in his family water-jug is naturally intolerant of -his neighbour, who also is pleased to imagine that he has poured the -broad expanses of the sea of truth into his own particular pitcher. -But anyone who, like the Theosophists knows how infinite is that -ocean of eternal wisdom, to be fathomed by no one man, class, or -party, and realizes how little the largest vessel made by man -contains in comparison to what lies dormant and still unperceived in -its dark, bottomless depths, cannot help but be tolerant. For he -sees that others have filled their little water-jugs at the same -great reservoir in which he has dipped his own, and if the water in -the various pitchers seems different to the eye, it can only be -because it is discoloured by impurities that were in the vessel -before the pure crystalline element—a portion of the one eternal and -immutable truth—entered into it. - -There is, and can be, but one absolute truth in Kosmos. And little -as we, with our present limitations, can understand it in its -essence, we still know that if it is absolute it must also be -omnipresent and universal; and that in such case, it must be -underlying every world-religion—the product of the thought and -knowledge of numberless generations of thinking men. Therefore, that -a portion of truth, great or small, is found in every religious and -philosophical system, and that if we would find it, we have to -search for it at the origin and source of every such system, at its -roots and first growth, not in its later overgrowth of sects and -dogmatism. Our object is not to destroy any religion but rather to -help to filter each, thus ridding them of their respective -impurities. In this we are opposed by all those who maintain, -against evidence, that their particular pitcher alone contains the -whole ocean. How is our great work to be done if we are to be -impeded and harassed on every side by partisans and zealots? It -would be already half accomplished were the intelligent men, at -least, of every sect and system, to feel and to confess that the -little wee bit of truth they themselves own must necessarily be -mingled with error, and that their neighbours' mistakes are, like -their own, mixed with truth. - -Free discussion, temperate, candid, undefiled by personalities and -animosity, is, we think, the most efficacious means of getting rid -of error and bringing out the underlying truth; and this applies to -publications as well as to persons. It is open to a magazine to be -tolerant or intolerant; it is open to it to err in almost every way -in which an individual can err; and since every publication of the -kind has a responsibility such as falls to the lot of few -individuals, it behoves it to be ever on its guard, so that it may -advance without fear and without reproach. All this is true in a -special degree in the case of a theosophical publication, and -LUCIFER feels that it would be unworthy of that designation were it -not true to the profession of the broadest tolerance and -catholicity, even while pointing out to its brothers and neighbours -the errors which they indulge in and follow. While thus keeping -strictly, in its editorials, and in articles by its individual -editors, to the spirit and teachings of pure theosophy, it -nevertheless frequently gives room to articles and letters which -diverge widely from the esoteric teachings accepted by the editors, -as also by the majority of theosophists. Readers, therefore, who are -accustomed to find in magazines and party publications only such -opinions and arguments as the editor believes to be unmistakably -orthodox—from his peculiar standpoint—must not condemn any article -in LUCIFER with which they are not entirely in accord, or in which -expressions are used that may be offensive from a sectarian or a -_prudish_ point of view, on the ground that such are unfitted for a -theosophical magazine. They should remember that precisely because -LUCIFER is a theosophical magazine, it opens its columns to writers -whose views of life and things may not only slightly differ from its -own, but even be diametrically opposed to the opinion of the -editors. The object of the latter is to elicit truth, not to advance -the interest of any particular _ism_, or to pander to any hobbies, -likes or dislikes, of any class of readers. It is only snobs and -prigs who, disregarding the truth or error of the idea, cavil and -strain merely over the expressions and words it is couched in. -Theosophy, if meaning anything, means truth; and truth has to deal -indiscriminately and in the same spirit of impartiality with vessels -of honour and of dishonour alike. No theosophical publication would -ever dream of adopting the coarse—or shall we say terribly -sincere—language of a Hosea or a Jeremiah; yet so long as those holy -prophets are found in the Christian Bible, and the Bible is in every -respectable, pious family, whether aristocratic or plebeian; and so -long as the Bible is read with bowed head and in all reverence by -young, innocent maidens and school-boys, why should our Christian -critics fall foul of any phrase which may have to be used—if truth -be spoken at all—in an occasional article upon a scientific subject? -It is to be feared that the same sentences now found objectionable, -because referring to Biblical subjects, would be loudly praised and -applauded had they been directed against any gentile system of faith -(_Vide certain missionary organs_). A little charity, gentle -readers—charity, and above all—_fairness_ and JUSTICE. - -Justice demands that when the reader comes across an article in this -magazine which does not immediately approve itself to his mind by -chiming in with his own peculiar ideas, he should regard it as a -problem to solve rather than as a mere subject of criticism. Let him -endeavour to learn the lesson which only opinions differing from his -own can teach him. _Let him be tolerant, if not actually -charitable_, and postpone his judgment till he extracts from the -article the truth it must contain, adding this new acquisition to -his store. One ever learns more from one’s enemies than from one’s -friends; and it is only when the reader has credited this hidden -truth to LUCIFER, that he can fairly presume to put what he believes -to be the errors of the article, he does not like, to the debit -account. - -[Illustration: decorative] - - ADAPTATIONS. - -We have been asked to give permission for Mr. Gerald Massey’s lines -on LUCIFER, Lady of Light, to be “adapted” and sung to the “Lord -Jesus Christ” in a chapel. This is flattering for both parties -concerned. The editors have no objection, but Mr. Massey is obdurate -enough to refuse his permission and sufficiently unfeeling to have -called the pretty “adaptation” a PARODY. The “Lady of Light” was to -have run in this wise:— - - “Star of the Day and the Night, - Star of the Dark that is dying, - Star of the Dawn that is nighing, - Jesu, our Saviour, our Light!” etc. - -But how truly appropriate it would be if Mr. Massey’s lines on -Shakspeare were also “adapted” and applied to the Lord Buddha. - - “FOR HIM NO MARTYR-FIRES HAVE BLAZED, - NO RACK BEEN USED, NOR SCAFFOLDS RAISED; - FOR HIM NO LIFE WAS EVER SHED - TO MAKE THE CONQUEROR’S PATHWAY RED. - OUR PRINCE OF PEACE IN GLORY HATH GONE, - WITHOUT A SINGLE SWORD BEING DRAWN; - WITHOUT ONE BATTLE-FLAG UNFURLED, - TO MAKE HIS CONQUEST OF OUR WORLD. - AND FOR ALL TIME HE WEARS HIS CROWN - OF LASTING, LIMITLESS, RENOWN; - HE REIGNS WHATEVER MONARCHS FALL, - HIS THRONE IS AT THE HEART OF ALL.” - - SOME WORDS ON DAILY LIFE. - - (_Written by a Master of Wisdom._) - -“It is divine philosophy alone, the spiritual and psychic blending -of man with nature, which, by revealing the fundamental truths that -lie hidden under the objects of sense and perception, can promote a -spirit of unity and harmony in spite of the great diversities of -conflicting creeds. Theosophy, therefore, expects and demands from -the Fellows of the Society a great mutual toleration and charity for -each other’s shortcomings, ungrudging mutual help in the search for -truths in every department of nature—moral and physical. And this -ethical standard must be unflinchingly applied to daily life. - -“Theosophy should not represent merely a collection of moral -verities, a bundle of metaphysical ethics, epitomized in theoretical -dissertations. Theosophy _must be made practical_; and it has, -therefore, to be disencumbered of useless digressions, in the sense -of desultory orations and fine talk. Let every Theosophist only do -his duty, that which he can and ought to do, and very soon the sum -of human misery, within and around the areas of every Branch of your -Society, will be found visibly diminished. Forget SELF in working -for others—and the task will become an easy and a light one for -you.... - -“Do not set your pride in the appreciation and acknowledgment of -that work by others. Why should any member of the Theosophical -Society, striving to become a Theosophist, put any value upon his -neighbours’ good or bad opinion of himself and his work, so long as -he himself knows it to be useful and beneficent to other people? -Human praise and enthusiasm are short-lived at best; the laugh of -the scoffer and the condemnation of the indifferent looker-on are -sure to follow, and generally to out-weigh the admiring praise of -the friendly. Do not despise the opinion of the world, nor provoke -it uselessly to unjust criticism. Remain rather as indifferent to -the abuse as to the praise of those who can never know you as you -really are, and who ought, therefore, to find you unmoved by either, -and ever placing the approval or condemnation of your own _Inner -Self_ higher than that of the multitudes. - -“Those of you who would know yourselves in the spirit of truth, -learn to live alone even amidst the great crowds which may sometimes -surround you. Seek communion and intercourse only with the God -within your own soul; heed only the praise or blame of that deity -which can never be separated from your _true_ self, _as it is verily -that God itself_: called the HIGHER CONSCIOUSNESS. Put without delay -your good intentions into practice, never leaving a single one to -remain only an intention—expecting, meanwhile, neither reward nor -even acknowledgment for the good you may have done. Reward and -acknowledgment are in yourself and inseparable from you, as it is -your Inner Self alone which can appreciate them at their true degree -and value. For each one of you contains within the precincts of his -inner tabernacle the Supreme Court—prosecutor, defence, jury and -judge—whose sentence is the only one without appeal; since none can -know you better than you do yourself, when once you have learned to -judge that Self by the never wavering light of the inner -divinity—your higher CONSCIOUSNESS. Let, therefore, the masses, -which can never know your true selves, condemn your outer selves -according to their own false lights.... - -“The majority of the public Areopagus is generally composed of -self-appointed judges, who have never made a permanent deity of any -idol save their own personalities—their lower selves; for those who -try in their walk in life, to follow their _inner light_ will never -be found judging, far less condemning, those weaker than themselves. -What does it matter then, whether the former condemn or praise, -whether they humble you or exalt you on a pinnacle? They will never -comprehend you one way or the other. They may make an idol of you, -so long as they imagine you a faithful mirror of themselves on the -pedestal or altar which they have reared for you, and while you -amuse or benefit them. You cannot expect to be anything for them but -a temporary _fetish_, succeeding another fetish just overthrown, and -followed in your turn by another idol. Let, therefore, those who -have created that idol destroy it whenever they like, casting it -down with as little cause as they had for setting it up. Your -Western Society can no more live without its Khalif of an hour than -it can worship one for any longer period; and whenever it breaks an -idol and then besmears it with mud, it is not the model, but the -disfigured image created by its own foul fancy and which it has -endowed with its own vices, that Society dethrones and breaks. - -“Theosophy can only find objective expression in an all-embracing -code of life, thoroughly impregnated with the spirit of mutual -tolerance, charity, and brotherly love. Its Society, as a body, has -a task before it which, unless performed with the utmost discretion, -will cause the world of the indifferent and the selfish to rise up -in arms against it. Theosophy has to fight intolerance, prejudice, -ignorance, and selfishness, hidden under the mantle of hypocrisy. It -has to throw all the light it can from the torch of Truth, with -which its servants are entrusted. It must do this without fear or -hesitation, dreading neither reproof nor condemnation. Theosophy, -through its mouthpiece, the Society, has to tell the TRUTH to the -very face of LIE; to beard the tiger in its den, without thought or -fear of evil consequences, and to set at defiance calumny and -threats. _As an Association_, it has not only the right, but the -duty to uncloak vice and do its best to redress wrongs, whether -through the voice of its chosen lecturers or the printed word of its -journals and publications—making its accusations, however, as -impersonal as possible. But its Fellows, or Members, have -_individually_ no such right. Its followers have, first of all, to -set the example of a firmly outlined and as firmly applied morality, -before they obtain the right to point out, even in a spirit of -kindness, the absence of a like ethic unity and singleness of -purpose in other associations or individuals. No Theosophist should -blame a brother, whether within or outside of the association; -neither may he throw a slur upon another’s actions or denounce him, -lest he himself lose the right to be considered a Theosophist. For, -as such, he has to turn away his gaze from the imperfections of his -neighbour, and centre rather his attention upon his own -shortcomings, in order to correct them and become wiser. Let him not -show the disparity between claim and action in another, but, whether -in the case of a brother, a neighbour, or simply a fellow man, let -him rather ever help one weaker than himself on the arduous walk of -life. - -“The problem of true Theosophy and its great mission are, first, the -working out of clear unequivocal conceptions of ethic ideas and -duties, such as shall best and most fully satisfy the right and -altruistic feelings in men; and second, the modelling of these -conceptions for their adaptation into such forms of daily life, as -shall offer a field where they may be applied with most -equitableness. - -“Such is the common work placed before all who are willing to act on -these principles. It is a laborious task, and will require strenuous -and persevering exertion; but it must lead you insensibly to -progress, and leave you no room for any selfish aspirations outside -the limits traced.... Do not indulge personally in unbrotherly -comparison between the task accomplished by yourself and the work -left undone by your neighbours or brothers. In the fields of -Theosophy _none is held to weed out a larger plot of ground than his -strength and capacity will permit him_. Do not be too severe on the -merits or demerits of one who seeks admission among your ranks, as -the truth about the actual state of the inner man can only be known -to Karma, and can be dealt with justly by that all-seeing LAW alone. -Even the simple presence amidst you of a well-intentioned and -sympathising individual may help you magnetically.... You are the -free volunteer workers on the fields of Truth, and as such must -leave no obstruction on the paths leading to that field. - - . . . . . . . . . - -“_The degree of success or failure are the landmarks the masters -have to follow, as they will constitute the barriers placed with -your own hands between yourselves and those whom you have asked -to be your teachers. The nearer your approach to the goal -contemplated—the shorter the distance between the student and -the Master._” - - - =THE BLOSSOM AND THE FRUIT=: - - _THE TRUE STORY OF A MAGICIAN_. - - (_Continued._) - - --------------------- - - BY MABEL COLLINS. - - --------------------- - - CHAPTER VII. - -The cloud lifted to reveal Fleta’s face. She was bending over him; -she was at his side; she was almost leaning her face on his. - -“My dear, my dear,” she said in a soft whispering voice, “has the -blow been too great? Tell me, Hilary, speak to me? Have you still -your senses?” - -“And you love that man?” was Hilary’s sole answer, fixing his eyes -in a cold strange gaze on her. - -“Oh! Hilary, you talk of what is unknown to you! I love him, yes, -and with a love so profound it is unimaginable to you.” - -“And you tell me this! You tell this to the man who loves you, and -who has already devoted his whole life to you! Do you want a madman -for your service?” - -“A life!” exclaimed Fleta, with a strange tone that had a ring as of -scorn in it. “What is a life? I count it nothing. Our great aims lie -beyond such considerations.” - -Hilary raised himself and looked into her face. - -“Then you are mad,” he said, “and if so, a madman in your service is -but fit. Nevertheless, my Princess, do not forget with what forces -you have to contend. I am but a man; you have accepted my love. Only -just now you have made me a murderer at heart—in desire. How soon -shall I be one in reality? That depends on you, Fleta. The next time -I see your gaze fixed on that man’s face as I saw it but now I will -kill him.” - -Fleta rose to her full height and lifted her face to the sky; as she -stood there a sort of shiver passed through her, a shiver as of -pain. Instantly Hilary’s humour changed. “You are ill,” he -exclaimed. She turned her eyes on him. - -“When that murderous mood is on you, it will not be Father Ivan that -you kill, but me, whom you profess to love. Do you understand that?” - -“Ah!” cried Hilary, uttering a sound as if his heart was bursting -under the torture, “that is because you love him so! Well, I can -only long and serve. I have no power to protest. Yet I ask you, oh! -Princess, is it fit to use a man’s heart to play at your queenly -coquetries with? A king, your betrothed—a mysterious priest, the man -you love—are not these enough but that you must take a boy, obscure -and untaught in such misfortunes, and trample on his love? It is -unlike the nobility I have seen in you. Good-bye, for this, -Princess! I am never your lover again as I was before. I can never -believe in your pure sweet heart—only this morning it seemed to me -as a pearl, as a drop of limpid water. Good-bye, my idol! Yet I am -your servant to obey always, for I gave you my life to do with as -you would. Call me, and I come, like your dog; but I will not stay -by you, for no longer is it anything but pain to do so.” - -With these wild, fierce reproaches, which seemed to stir the quiet -air of the woodland, and make it seethe and burn with passion and -despair, he turned and went from her. Fleta stood motionless, and -her eyes drooped heavily; only she murmured, “We were born under the -same star!” - -Her voice was very low, yet it reached Hilary’s ear. The words -seemed to lash his heart. - -“Under the same star!” he repeated, in a voice of agony, standing -suddenly still. “No, Fleta. You are the queen, I the subject. Not -only so, but you know it, and use your power to the full. Did you -not promise yourself utterly to me to be mine?” - -“I promised to give you my love for yours; I promised to give you -all that you can take of me. My love is greater than you can even -imagine, else I would not have listened to one word of your -reproaches. They have humbled me, but I have borne it.” - -“Ah, Fleta! you talk enigmas,” exclaimed Hilary, moving rapidly back -to her side; “you are enough to madden a man; yet I cannot but love -you. Why is this? Every act of yours proves you heartless, -faithless, and yet I love you! Why is this? Oh, that I could read -the riddle of your existence! Who are you?—What is this mysterious -place?—Who is that priest whose rule you acknowledge? I _will_ -know!” - -Fleta turned on him a sudden sweet smile, that seemed to light up -his inner being as the flame of a lamp illumines a dusky room. - -“Yes,” she said, “find out. I cannot tell you, yet I desire you—oh! -indeed, I desire you to know. Compel the secret—force it. Yes, yes, -Hilary!” - -She spoke eagerly, with a bright ring in her voice that thrilled his -soul. He forgot the Princess, the conspirator, the religieuse—he -only remembered the girl he loved—young, fresh, flower-like, with -the fair sweet face close to his own. With an unutterable cry of -love he held out his arms to her. - -“Oh, my dear, my love, come!” he said, in trembling tones that -vibrated with his passion. But Fleta turned away without a word and -walked through the tall ferns, her robe trailing on the ground. No -backward glance, no turn of the head, not even a movement of those -white statuesque hands which hung at her sides. In one was a long -grass which she had plucked before she came to him. Even that, -though it fluttered in the wind, had a strangely stiff air, as if it -had become a part of that statue which but a moment since was a -woman. Hilary stood gazing after this retreating figure, powerless -to move, powerless to rouse in his mind any thought but one; and -that was not a thought. It was knowledge—consciousness. He knew, he -felt, that he dared not follow Fleta and address her as men address -the women they love; he dared not woo her with the fever on his lips -that burned there. And why? Not because of her royal birth, or her -beauty, or her power. He knew not why—he could not understand -himself. It was as though a spell were cast on him that held him -silent and motionless. - -When at last she was out of sight a sudden reaction took place. The -whole burning force of the strong young man’s nature broke loose and -raged wildly through his whole system; he no longer was capable of -thought, he only felt the blood that rushed to his head and made his -brain reel as though he had drunk strong wine. He suddenly became -aware that he had aged, grown, become a new creature in these last -moments of experience. He had called himself a man five minutes ago; -but now he knew that when he had uttered those words, he was only a -boy. Across a great gulf of feeling he looked back at the love that -was in him when he had so spoken. Now his passion burned like a fire -on the altar of life; every instant the flames grew stronger and -mounted more fiercely to his inflamed brain. - -The savage had burst forth. The savage untamed man, which smoulders -within, and hides behind the cultivated faces of a gentle age. One -strong touch on the chord of passion, and Hilary Estanol, a -chivalric and courteous product of a refined time, knew himself to -be a man, and knew that man to be a savage. A savage, full of -desire, of personal longing, thinking of nothing but his own needs. -And to Hilary this sudden starting forth of the nature within him -seemed like a splendid unfolding. He remained standing, erect, -strong, resolute. His seething mind hastily went over his whole -position and Fleta’s. Everything suddenly bore a new, vivid, -stirring aspect. - -“This is a nest of conspirators!” he exclaimed to himself. “That -man, Ivan, is a conspirator or worse, else he would not hide here. -What crowned head is it that he threatens? He is a criminal. I will -discover his secret; I will rescue Fleta from him; by the strength -of my love I will win her love from him; I will make her my own. -Come, I must calm myself—I must be sober, for I have to find out the -meaning of this mysterious place.” - -He walked slowly through the wood, trying to still the throbbing in -his brain, to check the fierce pulsations of his heart and blood. He -knew that now he needed all his instincts, all his natural -intelligence, all his power of defence; for, in his present humour, -he walked as an enemy to all men; by his new tide of feeling he had -made every man his enemy. The young King Otto had a prior right to -the Fleta whom he desired to make his own; King Otto was indeed his -enemy. Ivan had her love; how bitterly did Hilary hate that priest! -And Adine, the false Fleta—what was she but a mere tool of the -priest’s, a creature used to baffle and blind him? She was the one -most likely to trip his steps, for she defied even the knowledge -which his love gave him of Fleta’s face! - -He was full of energy and activity, and his blood desired to be -stilled by action. He had quickly decided that he must immediately -do two things: inspect the whole exterior of the house, so as to get -some notion of what rooms were in it, and what their uses; and -explore the outer circle of the grounds, to see if there was any -difficulty about leaving them. As the latter task involved most -exercise, he chose to undertake it first, and swiftly, with long -strides, made his way through the woodlands in the direction where -the boundaries must lie. It did not take him long to traverse a -considerable distance; for he felt stronger than ever in his life -before. He had been a delicate lad, now he knew himself to be a -strong man, as if new blood ran in his veins. The moon was high in -the heavens, it was nearly full, and its light was strong. By it he -soon discovered that the strange place in which he was had a more -cunning and effective defence than any high wall or iron barrier. It -was surrounded by tangled virgin woodland growth, where, as it -seemed, no man’s foot could have ever trodden. - -Hilary found it hard to believe that such wild land existed within a -drive of the city. But it was there, and there was no passing -through it, unless he worked his way with a wood-axe, inch by inch, -as men do when they make a clearing. Such a task was hopeless, even -if he had the tools, for it was impossible to tell in what direction -to move. - -He returned at last, after many fruitless efforts; there seemed to -be no vestige of a path. He had discovered the gate by which their -entrance had been made; and discovered also that it was guarded. A -figure moved slowly to and fro in the shadow of the trees; not with -the air of one strolling for pleasure, but with the regular -movements of a sentry. It was an unfamiliar figure, but dressed in -the garb of the order. - -Hilary went quietly along by the side of the path that led to the -house. It was useless to waste more time on this investigation; -quite clearly he was a prisoner. And it seemed to him equally clear -that unless he could escape, no information would be of any use to -him. He must be able to carry it to the city, where he would be free -to take it to Fleta’s father, or even to other crowned heads in -other countries, according to its nature. As he walked quietly on, -revolving his position, he saw that the task he had set himself was -no light one, even for a strong man possessed by love. These monks -belonged to an extraordinarily powerful order, and were men of great -ability. - -Here he was, in the very heart of one of their secret centres, which -was, presumably, political. Fleta and King Otto were under their -influence. And they were magicians; very certain he felt that they -knew some of Nature’s secrets, and had trained Fleta in her -mysterious powers. And from this hidden and carefully guarded place -he was determined to escape, taking with him its secret—and Fleta! -Fleta, his love, his own, yet whom he had to win by his strength. - - CHAPTER VIII. - -In the long corridor through which Fleta had led Hilary to Father -Ivan’s room there was another door, which was fastened in a very -different manner. It was held in its place by iron clamps which -would puzzle the beholder, for they fastened on the outside as -though they secured the door of a prison instead of being any -protection for the inhabitant of the room beyond. It was inside this -door that Fleta was now lying down to rest for the night. Had Hilary -known this what agony would have torn him! He would have felt that -he must break those bars and release the prisoner within them, -however supernatural the strength might be which would be needed. He -was spared the sharp pain of knowing this, however, and he was not -likely to learn it, for a strange sentinel patrolled the long -corridor with even step—Father Ivan himself. Without any pause he -went steadily to and fro. - -It was about midnight that Father Ivan went into his room and -glanced at a clock on the chimney-piece; not quite midnight, but -very nearly. Hilary was lying awake in his room, tossing to and fro -on a very luxurious and tempting bed, which gave him, however, no -hope of rest. He had wandered round and round the house a dozen -times, only to find himself bewildered by its strange shape, and the -shrubberies which grew up close to the walls, and disheartened by -the solid barricading of those windows which it was easy to -approach. And yet at last he found a window wide open, and a room -brightly lit; a lamp stood on the table and showed the pleasant -room, well-furnished, and with a bed in it, dressed in fine linen -and soft laces such as perhaps only members of an ascetic order know -how to offer to their guests. Hilary stood a moment on the -threshold, and then suddenly recognised it as his own room. It gave -him an odd feeling, this, as if he had been watched and arranged -for; treated like a prisoner. Well, it was useless to evade that -dark fact—a prisoner he was. Recognising defeat for the moment, -Hilary determined to accept it as gracefully as might be. He -entered, closed his window and the strong shutters which folded over -it, and then quickly laid himself down with intent to sleep. But -sleep would not come, and he found all his thoughts and all his -interest centred on Father Ivan. He tried to prevent this but could -not; he chased Fleta’s image in vain—he could scarcely remember her -beautiful face! What was its shape and colour? He tortured himself -in trying to recall the face he loved so dearly. But always Father -Ivan’s figure was before his eyes; and suddenly it struck him that -this vision was almost real, for he saw Ivan raise his hand in a -commanding gesture which seemed to be directed towards himself. A -moment later and he fell fast asleep, like a tired child. At this -moment Ivan was standing in his own room, looking for an instant at -the clock. He stood, perhaps, a little longer than was needed in -order to see the time; and a frown came on his fine clear forehead -which drew the arched eyebrows together. Then he turned quickly, -left his room, and closed its door behind him. He went to the door -which was so strongly barred, and noiselessly loosened its -fastenings, which swung heavily yet quite softly away from it. He -opened the door and went in. - -In a sort of curtained recess was a low divan, which quite filled -it, rising hardly a foot from the ground. This was covered with -great rugs made of bear and wolf skin. Fleta lay stretched upon -them, wrapped in a long cloak of some thick white material, which -was bordered all round with white fur, and, indeed, lined with it, -too. And yet when Ivan stooped and touched her hand it was cold as -ice. - -“Come,” he said; and turning, went slowly away from her. Fleta rose -and followed him. Her eyes were half-closed, and had something of -the appearance of a sleep-walker’s, and yet not altogether, for -though they appeared dim and unseeing yet there was purpose, and -consciousness, and resolution in them. No one who had not seen Fleta -before in this state could have recognised those eyes, so set and -strange were they. Ivan approached a large curtained archway, and -drawing the curtain aside he motioned to Fleta to pass through. As -she did so he touched one of her hands, as it hung at her side. -Immediately she raised it, and throwing the cloak aside showed that -she held a white silk mask. Her dress beneath the cloak was of white -silk. Slowly she raised the mask to her face and was about to put it -on when a change of state came so suddenly upon her that it was like -a tropical tornado. She opened her starry eyes wide and vivid light -flashed from them; she flung the mask away upon the floor and -clasped her hands violently together, while her whole frame shook -with emotion. - -“Why must I mask myself?” she exclaimed. “You have not told me why.” - -“I have,” said Ivan, very quietly. “No woman has ever entered there -till now.” - -“What then?” cried Fleta, fiercely. “There is no shame in being a -woman! Have I not assailed that door in vain in a different -character? Now, a woman, I demand entrance. Master, I will not -disguise myself.” - -“Be it so,” said Ivan, “yet take the mask with you lest your mood -should change again. You were willing, you remember, but a while -since.” - -Fleta stood motionless regarding the mask as it lay on the floor. -Then she lifted her head suddenly and looked Ivan straight in the -eyes. - -“I will cast my sex from me, and mask my womanhood without any such -help as that.” - -Immediately that she had spoken Ivan walked on. They were in a long -corridor, lit, and with the walls faintly coloured in pale pink on -which shone some silver stars. Yet, bright though it was, this -corridor seemed strangely solemn. Why was it so? Fleta looked from -side to side, and could not discover. There was something new to her -which she did not understand. Though she had been instructed in so -many of the mysteries, and so much of the knowledge of the order, -she had never entered this corridor, nor indeed had she before known -of its existence. They slowly neared the end of it where was a high -door made of oak, and seemingly very solidly fastened; but Father -Ivan opened it easily enough. - -“My God!” cried Fleta instantly, in a low voice of deep amazement. -“Where am I? What country am I in? Father, was that corridor a magic -place? This is no longer my own country! How far have you carried me -in this short time?” - -“A long way my daughter; come, do not delay.” - -A vast plain, prairie-like, stretched before them, encircled on the -right by the narrowing end of a huge arm of mountains which -disappeared upon the far horizon. Upon the plain was one spot, was -one place, where a livid flame-like light burned, and could be seen, -though the whole scene was bathed in strong moonlight. Ivan -commenced to rapidly take his way down a steep path which lay before -them. And then Fleta became aware that they were themselves upon a -height and had to descend into the plain. She did not look back; all -her thoughts were centred on that vivid light which she now saw came -from the windows of a great building. Then she suddenly saw that a -number of persons were in the plain; although it was so large yet -there were enough people to look like a crowd, which was gathering -together from different directions. All were approaching the -building. - -“Father,” she said to Ivan, who was leading the way rapidly. “Will -they go in?” - -“Into the Temple? Those on the plain? Indeed no. They are outside -worshippers; that crowd is in the world and of it, and yet has -courage to come here often when there is no light, and the icy winds -blow keen across the plain.” - -“And they never enter. Why, my master, they can have no strength.” - -Ivan glanced back for an instant, a curious look in his eyes. - -“It is not always strength that is needed,” he said in a low voice. -Fleta did not seem to hear him; her eyes were fixed on the temple -windows. Suddenly she stopped and cried out: - -“Is this a dream?” - -“You are not asleep,” said Ivan with a smile. - -“Asleep! no,” she answered, and went on her way with increased -rapidity. - -Very soon they stood on the plain and advanced with great speed -towards the temple. Fleta was naturally hardy; but now it seemed to -her that the very idea of fatigue was absurd. She could scale -mountains in order to reach that light. And yet what was it in it -that drew her so? None but herself could have told. But Fleta’s -heart beat passionately with longing at the sight of it. Ivan turned -on her a glance of compassion. - -“Keep quiet,” he said. - -He was answered with a look and tone of fervour. - -“Yes: if it is in human power,” she replied. - -The great crowds were slowly gathering towards the temple and formed -themselves into masses of silent and scarcely moving figures. Fleta -was now among them and though so absorbed by the idea of the goal -before her, she was attracted by the strange appearance of these -people. They were of all ages and nationalities, but more than -two-thirds of them were men; they one and all had the appearance of -sleep-walkers, seeming perfectly unconscious of the scene in which -they moved and of their object in reaching it. Their whole nature -was turned inwards; so it appeared to Fleta. Why then had they come -to this strange place, so difficult of access, if when come they -could neither see nor hear? Fleta considered these things rapidly in -her mind and would again have asked an explanation of Father Ivan -but that while her steps slackened a little, his had hastened. He -had already reached the door of the temple—when Fleta reached it he -was not there. Of course he had entered, and Fleta, without fear or -hesitation, put her hand on the great bar which held the door and -lifted it. It was not difficult to lift; it seemed to yield to her -touch, and swung back smoothly. With a slight push the great door -opened a little before her—not wide; only as far as she had pushed -it. Ah! there was the light! There, in her eyes! It was like life -and joy to Fleta. She turned her eyes up to gaze on it, and stood an -instant with her hands clasped, in ecstacy. - -Someone brushed lightly by, and, passing her, went straight in. That -reminded her that she, too, desired to go straight in. She nerved -herself for the supreme effort. For she was learned enough to know -that only the initiate in her faith could enter that door; and she -had not, in any outward form, passed the initiation. But she -believed she had passed it in her soul; she had tested her emotions -on every side and found the world was nothing to her; she had flung -her mask away believing her woman’s shape and face to be the merest -outward appearance, which would be unseen at the great moment. And -now it hardly seemed as if she were a woman—she stood transfigured -by the nobility of her aspirations—and some who stood on the step -outside remained there awestruck by her majestic beauty. By a -supreme effort she resolved to face all—and to conquer all. She -boldly entered the door and went up the white marble steps within -it. A great hall was before her, flooded with the clear, soft light -she loved; an innumerable number of objects presented themselves to -her amazed eyes, but she did not pause to look at them—she guessed -that the walls were jewelled from their sparkling—she guessed that -the floor was covered with flowers, which lay on a polished silver -surface, from the gleaming and the colour—and who were these, the -figures in silver dresses with a jewel like an eye that saw, clasped -at the neck? A number came towards her. She would not allow herself -to feel too exultant—she tried to steady herself—and yet joy came -wildly into her heart, for she felt that she was already one of this -august company. But their faces, as they gathered nearer, were all -strange and unfamiliar. She looked from one to another. - -“Where is Ivan?” she murmured. - -Suddenly all was changed. The white figures grew in numbers till -there seemed thousands—with outstretched hands they pushed Fleta -down the steps—down, down, down, resist how she might. She did more! -She fought, she battled, she cried aloud, first for justice, then -for pity. But there was no relenting, no softening in these -superhuman faces. Fleta fled at last from their overpowering numbers -and inexorable cruelty, and then there came a great cry of voices, -all uttering the same words; - -“You love him! Go!” - -Fleta fell, stunned and broken, at the foot of the outer step, and -the great door closed behind her. But she was not unconscious for -more than a few minutes. She opened her eyes and looked at the -starry sky. Then she felt suddenly that she could not endure even -that light and that the stars were reading her soul. She rose and -hurried away, blindly following in any path that her feet found. It -did not take her to any familiar place. She found herself in a dark -wood. The moss was soft and fragrant and violets scented it. She lay -down upon it, drawing her white cloak round her and hiding her eyes -from the light. - - CHAPTER IX. - -It seemed to her that for long ages she was alone. Her mind achieved -great strides of thought which at another time would have appeared -impossible to her. She saw before her clearly her own folly, her own -mistake. Yesterday she would not have credited it—yesterday it would -have been unmeaning to her. But now she understood it, and -understood too how heavy and terrible was her punishment; for it was -already upon her. She lay helpless, her eyes shut, her whole body -nerveless. Her punishment was here. She had lost all hope, all -faith. - -A gentle touch on her hand roused her consciousness, but she was too -indifferent to open her eyes. It mattered little to her what or who -was near her. The battle of her soul was now the only real thing in -life to her. - -A voice that seemed strangely familiar fell on her ears; yet last -time she had heard it it was loud, fierce, arrogant; now it was -tender and soft, and full of an overwhelming wonder and pity. - -“You, Princess Fleta, here? My God! what can have happened? Surely -she is not dead? No! What is it, then?” - -Fleta slowly opened her eyes. It was Hilary who knelt beside her; -she was lying on the dewy grass, and Hilary knelt there, the morning -sun shining on his head and lighting up his beautiful boy’s face. -And Fleta as she lay and looked dully at him felt herself to be -immeasurably older than he was; to be possessed of knowledge and -experience which seemed immense by his ignorance. And yet she lay -here, nerveless, hopeless. - -“What is it?” again asked Hilary, growing momently more distressed. - -“Do you want to know?” she said gently, and yet with an accent of -pity that was almost contempt in her tone. “You would not -understand.” - -“Oh, tell me!” said Hilary. “I love you—let me serve you!” - -She hardly seemed to hear his words, but his voice of entreaty made -her go on speaking in answer: - -“I have tried,” she said, “and failed.” - -“Tried what?” exclaimed Hilary, “and how failed? Oh, my Princess, I -believe these devils of priests have given you some fever—you do not -know what you are saying!” - -“I know very well,” replied Fleta; “I am in no fever. I am all but -dead—that is no strange thing, for I am stricken.” Hilary looked at -her as she lay, and saw that her words were true. How strange a -figure she looked, lying there so immovably, as if crushed or dead, -upon the dewy grass; wrapped in her white robes. And her face was -white with a terrible whiteness; the great eyes looked out from the -white face with a sad, smileless gaze; and would those pale drawn -lips never smile again? Was the radiant, brilliant Fleta changed for -ever into this paralysed white creature? Hilary knew that even if it -was so he loved her more passionately and devotedly than before. His -soul yearned towards her. - -“Tell me, explain to me, what has done this?” he cried out, growing -almost incoherent in his passionate distress. “I demand to know by -my love for you. What have you tried to do in this awful past -night?” - -Fleta opened her eyes, the lids of which had drooped heavily, and -looked straight into his as she answered: - -“I have tried for the Mark of the White Brotherhood. I have tried to -pass the first initiation of the Great Order. I did not dream I -could fail, for I have passed through many initiations which men -regard with fear. But I have failed.” - -“I cannot believe,” said Hilary, “that you could fail in anything. -You are—dreaming—you are feverish. Let me lift you, let me carry you -into the house.” - -“Yes, I have failed,” answered Fleta dully; “failed, because I had -not measured the strength of my humanity. It is in me—in me still! I -am the same as any other woman in this land. I, who thought myself -supreme—I, who thought myself capable of great deeds! Ah, Hilary, -the first simple lesson is yet unlearned. I have failed because I -loved—because I love like any other fond and foolish woman! And yet -no spark of any part of love but devotion is in my soul. That is too -gross. Is it possible to purge even that away? Yes, those of the -White Brotherhood have done it. I will do it even if it take me a -thousand years, a dozen lifetimes!” - -She had raised herself from the ground as she spoke, for a new -fierce passion had taken the place of the dull despair in her -manner; she had raised herself to her feet, and then unable to stand -had fallen on to her knees. Hilary listened yet hardly heard; only -some of her words hurried into his mind. He bent down till his face -touched her white cloak where it lay on the grass, and kissed it a -dozen times. - -“You have failed because of love? Oh, my Princess, then it is not -failure! Men live for love, men die for love! It is the golden power -of life. Oh, my Princess, let me take you from this terrible -place—come back with me to the world where men and women know love -to be the one great joy for which all else is well lost. Fleta, -while I doubted that you loved me I was as wax; but now that I know -you do, and with a love so great that it has power to check the -career of your soul, now I am strong, I am able to do all that a -strong man can do. Come, let me raise you and take you away from -here to a place of peace and delight!” - -He had risen to his feet and stood before her, looking magnificent -in the morning sunshine. He was slight of build, yet that slightness -was really indicative of strength; when Hilary Estanol had been -effeminate it was because he had not cared to be anything else. He -stood grandly now, his hands stretched towards her; a man, lofty, -transformed by the power of love. Fleta looking at him saw in his -brilliant eyes the gleam of the conquering savage. She rose suddenly -and confronted him. - -“You are mistaken,” she said abruptly. “It is not you that I love.” - -Then, as suddenly as Fleta had moved and spoken, the man before her -vanished, with his nobility, and left the savage only, unvarnished, -unhumanised. - -“My God,” gasped Hilary, almost breathless from the sudden blow, -“then it is that accursed priest?” - -“Yes,” answered Fleta, her eyes on his, her voice dull, her whole -form like that of a statue, so emotionless did she seem, “it is that -accursed priest.” - -She moved away from him and looked about her. The spot was familiar. -She was in the woodland about the monastery. She could find her way -home now without difficulty. And yet how weak she was, and how hard -it was to take each footstep! After moving a few paces she stood -still and tried to rouse herself, tried to use her powerful will. - -“Where are my servants?” she said in a low voice. “Where are those -who do my bidding?” - -She closed her eyes, and standing there in the sunlight, used all -her power to call the forces into action which she had learned to -control. For she was a sufficiently learned magician to be the -mistress of some of the secrets of Nature. But now it seemed she was -helpless—her old powers were gone. A low, bitter cry of anguish -escaped from her lips as she realised this awful fact. Hilary, -terrified by the strange sound of her voice, hastily approached her -and looked into her face. Those dark eyes, once so full of power, -were now full of an agony such as one sees in the eyes of a hunted -and dying creature. Yet Fleta did not faint or fail, or cling to the -strong man who stood by her side. After a moment she spoke, with a -faint yet steady voice. - -“Do you know the way to the gate?” she asked. - -“Yes,” replied Hilary; who indeed had but recently explored the -whole demesne. - -“Take my hand,” she said, “and lead me there.” - -She used her natural power of royal command now; feeble though she -was, she was the princess. Hilary did not dream of disobeying her. -He took the cold and lifeless hand she extended to him, and led her -as quickly as was possible over the grass, through the trees and -flowering shrubs, to the gateway. As they neared it she spoke: - -“You are to go back to the city,” she said. “Do not ask why—you must -go; yet I will tell you this—it is for your own safety. I have lost -my power—I can no longer protect you, and there are both angels and -devils in this place. I have lost all! all! And I have no right to -risk your sanity as well as my own. You must go.” - -“And leave you here?” said Hilary, bewildered. - -“I am safe,” she answered proudly. “No power in heaven or earth can -hurt me now, for I have cast my all on one stake. Know this, Hilary, -before we part; I shall never yield or surrender. I shall cast out -that love that kills me from my heart—I shall enter the White -Brotherhood. And, Hilary, you too will enter it. But, oh! not yet! -Bitter lessons have you yet to learn! Good-bye, my brother.” - -The sentinel who guarded the gate now approached them in his walk; -Fleta moved quickly towards him. After a few words had passed -between them he blew a shrill, fine whistle. Then he approached -Hilary. - -“Come,” he said, “I will show you the way for some distance and will -then obtain you a horse and a guide to the city.” - -Hilary did not hesitate in obeying Fleta’s commands; he knew he must -go. But he turned to look once more into her mysterious face. She -was no longer there. He bowed his head, and silently followed the -monk through the gate into the outer freedom of the forest. - -Fleta meantime crept back to the house through the shelter of the -trees. Her figure looked like that of an aged woman, for she was -bowed almost double and her limbs trembled as she moved. She did not -go to the centre door of the house, but approached a window which -opened to the ground and now stood wide. It was the window of -Fleta’s own room; she hurried towards it with feeble, uncertain -steps. “Rest! Rest! I must rest!” she kept murmuring to herself. But -on the very threshold she stumbled and fell. Someone came -immediately to her and tried to raise her. It was Father Ivan. Fleta -disengaged herself, tremblingly yet resolutely. She rose with -difficulty to her feet and gazed very earnestly into his face. - -“And you knew why I should fail?” she said. - -“Yes,” he answered, “I knew. You are not strong enough to stand -alone amid the spirit of humanity. I knew you clung to me. Well have -you suffered from it. I know that very soon you will stand alone.” - -“Of what use would that mask have been?” demanded Fleta, pursuing -her own thoughts. - -“None. If you had obeyed me and worn it you would have been of so -craven a spirit you could never have reached the temple, never have -seen the White Brotherhood. You have done these things, which are -more than any other woman has accomplished.” - -“I will do yet more,” said Fleta. “I will be one of them.” - -“Be it so,” answered Ivan. “To do so you must suffer as no woman has -yet had strength to suffer. The humanity in you must be crushed out -as we crush a viper beneath our feet.” - -“It shall be. I may die, but I will not pause. Good-bye, my master. -As I am a queen in the world of men and women, so you are king in -the world of soul, and to you I have done homage; that homage they -call love. It is so, perhaps. I am blind yet, and know not. But no -more may you be my king. I am alone, and all knowledge I gain I must -now gain myself.” - -Ivan bowed his head as if in obedience to an unanswerable decree, -and in a moment had walked away among the trees. Fleta watched him -stonily till he was out of sight, then dragged herself within the -window to fall helplessly upon the ground, shaken by sobs and strong -shudders of despair. - - --- - - CHAPTER X. - -It was late in the day before Fleta again came out of her room. She -seemed to have recovered her natural manner and appearance; and yet -there was a change in her which anyone who knew her well must see. -She had not been into the general rooms, or greeted the other -guests; nor did she do so now. Her face was full of resolution, but -she was calm, at all events externally. Without going near the guest -rooms or the great entrance hall, she made her way round the house -to where a very small door stood almost hidden in an angle of the -wall. It was such a door as might lead to the cellars of a house, -and when Hilary had explored the night before he had scarcely -noticed it. But it was exceedingly solid and well fastened. Fleta -gave a peculiar knock upon it with a fan which she carried in her -hand. It was immediately opened, and Father Amyot appeared. - -“Do you want me?” he asked. - -“Yes; I want you to go on an errand for me.” - -“Where am I to go?” - -“I do not know; probably you will know. I must speak to one of the -White Brotherhood.” - -Amyot’s face clouded and he looked doubtfully at her. - -“What is there you can ask that Ivan cannot answer?” - -“Does it matter to you?” said Fleta imperiously. “You are my -messenger, that is all.” - -“You cannot command me as before,” said Father Amyot. - -“What! do you know that I have failed? Does all the world know it?” - -“The world?” echoed Amyot, contemptuously. “No; but all the -Brotherhood does, and all its servants do. No one has told me, but I -know it.” - -“Of course,” said Fleta to herself. “I am foolish.” She turned away -and walked up and down on the grass, apparently buried in deep -thought. Presently she raised her head suddenly, and quickly moved -towards Amyot, who still stood motionless in the dim shadow of the -little doorway. She fixed her eyes on him; they were blazing with an -intense fire. Her whole attitude was one of command. - -“Go,” she said. - -Father Amyot stood but for a moment; and then he came out slowly -from the doorway, shutting it behind him. - -“You have picked up a lost treasure,” he said. “You have found your -will again. I obey. Have you told me all your command?” - -“Yes. I must speak to one of the White Brothers. What more can I -say? I do not know one from another. Only be quick!” - -Instantly Amyot strode away over the grass and disappeared. Fleta -moved slowly away, thinking so deeply that she did not know any one -was near her till a hand was put gently on her arm. She looked up, -and saw before her the young king, Otto. - -“Have you been ill,” he asked, looking closely into her face. - -“No,” she answered. “I have only been living fast—a century of -experience in a single night! Shall I talk to you about it, my -friend?” - -“I think not,” answered Otto, who now was walking quietly by her -side. “I may not readily understand you. I am anxious above all to -advance slowly and grasp each truth as it comes to me. I have been -talking a long time to-day to Father Ivan; and I feel that I cannot -yet understand the doctrines of the order except as interpreted -through religion.” - -“Through religion?” said Fleta. “But that is a mere externality.” - -“True, and intellectually I see that. But I am not strong enough to -stand without any external form to cling to. The precepts of -religion, the duty of each towards humanity, the principle of -sacrifice one for another, these things I can understand. Beyond -that I cannot yet go. Are you disappointed with me?” - -“No, indeed,” answered Fleta. “Why should I be.” - -Otto gave a slight sigh as of relief. “I feared you might be,” he -answered; “but I preferred to be honest. I am ready, Fleta, to be a -member of the order, a devout member of the external Brotherhood. -How far does that place me from you who claim a place among the wise -ones of the inner Brotherhood.” - -Fleta looked at him very seriously and gravely. - -“I claim it,” she said; “but is it mine? Yet I will win it, Otto; -even at the uttermost price, I will make it mine.” - -“And at what cost?” said Otto. “What is that uttermost price?” - -“I think,” she said slowly, “I already feel what it is. I must learn -to live in the plain as contentedly as on the mountain tops. I have -hungered to leave my place in the world, to go to those haunts where -only a few great ones of the earth dwell, and from them learn the -secret of how to finally escape from the life of earth altogether. -That has been my dream, Otto, put into simple words; the old dream -of the Rosicrucian and those hungerers after the occult who have -always haunted the world like ghosts, unsatisfied, homeless. Because -I am a strong-willed creature, because I have learned how to use my -will, because I have been taught a few tricks of magic I fancied -myself fitted to be one of the White Brotherhood. Well, it is not -so. I have failed. I shall be your queen, Otto.” - -The young king turned on her a sudden look full of mingled emotions. -“Is that to be, Fleta? Then may I be worthy of your companionship.” - -Fleta had spoken bitterly, though not ungently. Otto’s reply had -been in a strange tone, that had exultation, reverence, gladness, in -it; but not any of the passion which is called love. A coquette -would have been provoked by a manner so entirely that of friendship. - -“Otto,” said Fleta, after a moment’s pause, during which they had -walked on side by side. “I am going to test your generosity. Will -you leave me now?” - -“My generosity?” exclaimed Otto. “How is it possible for you to -address me in that way?” Without any further word of explanation he -turned on his heel and walked quickly away. Fleta understood his -meaning very well; she smiled softly as she looked for a moment -after him. Then, as he vanished, her whole face changed, her whole -expression of attitude, too. For a little while she stood quite -still, seemingly wrapt in thought. Then steadily and swiftly she -began to move across the grass and afterwards to thread her way -through the trees. Having once commenced to move, she seemed to have -no hesitation as to the direction in which she was going. And, -indeed, if you had been able to ask her how she knew what path to -take, she would have answered that it was very easy to know. For she -was guided by a direct call from Amyot, as plainly heard as any -human voice, though audible only to her inner hearing. To Fleta, the -consciousness of the double life—the spiritual and the natural—was a -matter of constant experience, and, therefore, there was no need for -the darkness of midnight to enable her to hear a voice from what -ordinary men and women call the unseen world. To Fleta it was no -more unseen than unheard. She saw at once, conquering time and -space, the spot where she would find Father Amyot at the end of her -rapid walk; and more, the state she would find him in. The sun -streamed in its full power and splendour straight on the strange -figure of the monk, lying rigidly upon the grass. Fleta stood beside -him and looked down on his face, upturned to the sky. For a little -while she did nothing, but stood there with a frown upon her -forehead and her dark eyes full of fierce and changing feeling. -Amyot was in one of his profound trances, when, though not dead, yet -he was as one dead. - -“Already my difficulties crowd around me,” exclaimed Fleta aloud. -“What folly shall I unknowingly commit next? My poor servant—dare I -even try to restore you—or will Nature be a safer friend?” - -Full of doubt and hesitation, she turned slowly away and began to -pace up and down the grass beside the figure of the priest. -Presently she became aware that she was not alone—some one was near -her. She started and turned quickly. Ivan stood but a pace from her, -and his eyes were fixed very earnestly upon her. - -He was not dressed as a priest, but wore a simple hunting dress, -such as an ordinary sportsman or the king incognito might wear. -Simple it was, and made of coarse materials; but its easy make -showed a magnificent figure which the monkish robes had disguised. -His face had on it a deep and almost pathetic seriousness; and yet -it was so handsome, so nobly cut, and made so brilliant by the deep -blue eyes, which were bluer than their wont now, even in the full -blaze of the sun—that in fact as a man merely, here stood one who -might make any woman’s heart, queen or no queen, beat fiercely with -admiration. Fleta had never seen him like this before; to her he had -always been the master, the adept in mysterious knowledge, the -recluse who hid his love of solitude under a monkish veil. This was -Ivan! Young, superb, a man who must be loved. Fleta stood still and -silent, answering the gaze of those questioning, serious blue eyes, -with the purposeful, rebellious look which was just now burning in -her own. The two stood facing each other for some moments, without -speaking—without, as it seemed, desiring to speak. But in these -moments of silence a measuring of strength was made. Fleta spoke -first. - -“Why have you come?” she demanded. “I did not desire your presence.” - -“You have questions to ask which I alone can answer.” - -“You are the one person who cannot answer them, for I cannot ask -them of you.” - -“It is of me that you must ask them,” was all Ivan’s reply. Then he -added: “It is of me you have to learn these answers. Learn them by -experience if you like, and blindly. If you care to speak, you shall -be answered in words. This will spare you some pain, and save you -years of wasted time. Are you too proud?” - -There was a pause. Then Fleta replied deliberately: - -“Yes, I am too proud.” - -Ivan bowed his head and turned away. He stooped over Father Amyot, -and taking a flask from his pocket, rubbed some liquid on the monk’s -white and rigid lips. - -“I forbid you,” said Ivan, “to use your power over Amyot again.” - -“You forbid me?” repeated Fleta in a tone of profound amazement. -Evidently this tone was entirely new to her. - -“Yes, and you dare not disobey me. If you do, you will suffer -instantly.” - -Fleta looked the amazement which was evidently beyond her power to -express in words. Ivan’s manner was cold, almost harsh. Never had he -addressed her without gentleness before. Hastily she recovered -herself, and without pausing to address to him any other word she -turned away and went quickly through the trees and back to the -house. Otto was standing at one of the windows; she went straight to -him. - -“I wish to go back to the city at once,” she said, “will you order -my horses?” - -“May I come with you?” - -“No, but you may follow me to-morrow if you like.” - -(_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - SPECULATION. - - Man’s reasoning faith can outlive and can ride - O’er countless speculations. Navies float - On changeful waves, and for this ark-like boat - Winds from all quarters, every swelling tide - Will serve. By all the virgin spheres that glide - Like timid guests across sky-floor we note - Where lies the pole-star. Those who only quote - Their compass, fail, and antique charts must slide - To error, in this shifting sand of thought - And _new-found science_, where sweet isles of palm - And olive sink, that were as land-marks sought, - While others rise from Ocean’s fertile bed. - No storm, nor heat, nor cold I fear; my dread - Is lest the ship should meet a death-like calm. - - REVOLUTION. - - Ah! wondrous happy rounding universe - Where suns and moons alike as tears e’er mould - Themselves to beauteous circles! He that rolled - The planets, curved their paths; though seas immerse - Both shattered ship and shell, naught _shall escape_ - Th’ inevitable wheel that must restore - The seeming lost. The potent buried lore - Of saint and sage revives to melt and shape - Our thoughts to comeliness, and souls that leave - Earth’s shores float back as craft that cruising sails; - Each blessed gift that hourly from us flies, - God will rain down albeit in other guise;— - And e’en the very dew-drop _noon exhales_ - May find again the self-same rose at eve. - - MARY W. GALE. - - - TWILIGHT VISIONS. - - “At evening time there shall be light.” - —ZECH. xiv., 7. - - The day’s work done, I cast my pen aside - And rose, with aching eye and troubled brain, - Thinking how oft my fellow workers here - Have suffered in the flesh for labours wrought - In love to all mankind; and how the world - Cares nought for words which teach not of itself; - For to the world, itself is all in all, - And nought outside it can the world conceive - As real and true. And yet this earth must cease - To be for ever to each mortal, when - The Spirit casts off earth, and, in new life - Will feel and know the world to be the vale - Of deathly shadows compass’d round about - With ignorance and error, sin and crime, - With yearnings, longings, miseries, and griefs, - And all that makes the “Breath of Lives” to seem - As Angels wrestling with the powers of hell. - - * * * * - - A gentle Spirit with the twilight came - And rested on my soul; then hope with peace, - Long since to me as strangers, touched my heart, - And, sitting at the organ, soft and sweet - There streamed a flow of harmony, tho’ I - Scarce seemed to touch the keys, yet simple hymns - Called forth a train of Spirits bright and young, - Amongst them saw I all that I had known - And loved in days when life seem’d sweet to me. - I was a child again, and saw myself - As such—no aching eye—no troubled brain - Had that young being who in faith and hope - Sang songs of holiness, of peace and truth— - There, resting on his Mother’s breast, with arms - Clasped round her neck, with loving eyes that watched - The loving face, whereon a parent’s smile - Was ever present in the days now past, - Now buried in the dust with former things. - - * * * * - - In saddened notes swelled forth “Thy will be done!” - And then appeared a radiant spirit form - Of one who, as a babe, was called away, - From out this world of wretchedness and sin. - An infant—which scarce breathed upon the earth - Ere God, in His great mercy, took her home - To dwell with Him, and she, an Angel bless’d, - Now looks in pity on her parents here, - A weeping witness of the vacant lives - Which in the world their souls are forced to pass - As, hung’ring for the love of One in heaven - They stagger on from day to day in doubt— - In misery, which none but they can know. - - * * * * - - Some cursed bonds can ne’er be snapped in twain, - Save death or sin alone be brought to bear - To shatter human customs hard and vile, - And false and horrible as hell itself. - For man exists in darkness, bound by laws - Which curse and damn his very soul on earth; - Mankind will not accept the Master’s words - Or listen to His cry within the soul. - And so the world in falsehood wanders on - And dooms the inner Man of Light again - To suffer crucifixion in the flesh; - The Trinity—of Wisdom, Love and Truth— - The Christ, is absent from this “Christian” World - And ignorance with hatred lies and sin - Reign rampant in their infidel abode. - - * * * * - - “Abide with me, fast falls the eventide.” - O Lord! we suff’ring mortals here on earth - Have nought but Thee, Thou Guide of all mankind - To lead us in our wand’rings, and to turn - Our falt’ring footsteps from the way of death; - Thy Angels true are sent to fainting souls, - And lovingly their voices soft are heard - Peace! troubled hearts, hereafter all shall be - Made up in heaven. Know that sufferings - Are sent in love that we may minister, - To all your needs, and bear you safely home - To that good land ordained for all mankind— - The kingdom bright—of happiness and love, - Whereon your lives shall ever be a rest - In one long summer day of light and joy. - No mortal e’er can comprehend the peace - Of God, which shall be yours, when, from the world - Your glorious inner beings stand apart - For ever! Soon shall you know all that we - Would tell you now—yet hope and struggle on. - “At evening time there shall be Light! and then— - The Living Light shall lead you home to God, - Home to the place which He hath made,—’tis yours - For ever! We are sent to tell you this - And by the Mighty One we do not lie! - - * * * * - - “O Glorious Angels of our Loving God! - Pray tell us if this land, we fain would know, - Contains the dear ones we have loved on earth? - For what were heaven e’en to us, if we - Could nevermore be all in all to those - Who when on earth were all in all to us!” - A voice replied—’twas one I oft have heard - And learned to love with more than mortal love, - “Look up, my own! and see me with thee now - For ever on this earth. If then ’tis so, - How canst thou think that I shall ever be - Apart from thee in heav’n—the land of love - Wherein alone life’s consummation finds - A fullness in its own eternal self? - For God is all—thus He is life and love - And love eternal is the power that welds - Each atom in the universal chain - Of infinite expanse throughout the skies— - Which ever shows to godly men on earth - The Power of powers that reigneth over all!” - - * * * * - - Then in the gloom a glorious form appeared, - And, standing by my side, it pressed its lips - Upon the troubled brow which none could calm - On earth, save she who was beside me then. - And so an Angel from our loving God - Came down to comfort, in the eventide— - To show, by light of love, God’s holy truth, - Which from the world—in darkness—hath been hid - Because the world in darkness will exist, - And, living thus, man sins against himself - And so against his loving God of Life. - The promised Light appeared at evening time, - And by its living rays did I perceive— - Mankind to wander on in sin and shame; - Thus HELL prevails to-day where heaven should be.... - - WM. C. ELDON SERJEANT. - -London, _6th December, 1887_. - - - ESOTERICISM OF THE CHRISTIAN DOGMA. - - CREATION AS TAUGHT BY MOSES AND THE MAHATMAS. - - BY THE ABBÉ ROCA (_Honorary Canon_). - - [Extracts translated from the “LOTUS” _Revue des Hautes Etudes - Theosophiques_. Journal of “Isis,” the French Branch of The - Theosophical Society. December, 1887. Paris, George Carrés, 58, - Rue St André des Arts.—VERBAL TRANSLATION.] - - I. - -Thanks to the light which is now reaching us from the far East -through the Theosophical organs published in the West, it is easy to -foresee that the Catholic teaching is about to undergo a -transformation as profound as it will be glorious. All our dogmas -will pass from “the letter which killeth” to “the spirit which -giveth life,” from the mystic and sacramental to the scientific and -rational form, perhaps even to the stage of experimental methods. - -The reign of faith, of mystery and of miracle, is nearing its close; -this is plain and was, moreover, predicted by Christ himself. Faith -vanishes from the brains of men of science, to make way for the -clear perception of the essential truths which had to be veiled at -the origin of Christianity, under symbols and figures, so as to -adapt them, as far as possible, to the needs and weaknesses of the -infancy of our faith. - -Strange! It is at the very hour when Europe is attaining the age of -reason, and when she is visibly entering upon the full possession of -her powers, that India prepares to hand on to us those loftier ideas -which exactly meet our new wants, as much from the intellectual, as -from the moral, religious, social and other standpoints. - -One might believe that the “BROTHERS” kept an eye from afar on the -movements of Christendom, and that from the summits of their -Himalayan watch towers, they had waited expectantly for the hour -when they would be able to make us hear them with some chance of -being understood.... - -It is certain that the situation in the West is becoming more and -more serious. Everyone knows whence comes the imminence of the -catastrophe which threatens us; hitherto men have only evoked the -animal needs, they have only awakened and unchained the brute forces -of nature, the passional instincts, the savage energies of the lower -Kosmos. Christianity does indeed conceal under the profound -esotericism of its Parables, those truths, scientific, religious, -and social, which this deplorable situation imperiously demands, but -sad to say, sad indeed for a priest, hard, hard indeed for Christian -ears to hear, all our priesthoods, that of the Roman Catholic Church -equally with those of the Orthodox Russian, the Anglican, the -Protestant, and the Anglo-American churches, seem struck with -blindness and impotence in face of the glorious task which they -would have to fulfil in these terrible circumstances. They see -nothing; their eyes are plastered and their ears walled up. They do -not discover; one is tempted to say, they do not even suspect what -ineffable truths are hidden under the dead letter of their -teachings. - -Say, is it not into that darkness that we are all stumbling, in -State and in Church, in politics as in religion! A double calamity -forming but one for the peoples, which suffer horribly under it, and -for our civilisation which may be shipwrecked on it at any moment. -May God deliver us from a war at this moment! It would be a -cataclysm in which Europe would break to pieces in blood and fire, -as Montesquieu foresaw: “Europe will perish through the soldiers, if -not saved in time.” We must escape from this empiricism and this -fearful confusion. But who will save us? The Christ, the true -Christ, the Christ of esoteric science.[126] And how? Thus: the same -key which, under the eyes of the scientific bodies, shall open the -secrets of Nature, will open their own intellects to the secrets of -true Sociology; the same key which, under the eyes of the -priesthoods, shall open the Arcana of the mysteries and the gospel -parables, will open their intellects to these same secrets of -Sociology. Priests and savants will then develope in the radiance of -one and the same light. - ------ - -Footnote 126: - - “The Christ of esoteric science” is the _Christos_ of Spirit—an - impersonal principle entirely distinct from any carnalised Christ - or Jesus. Is it this Christos that the learned Canon Roca - means?—[ED.] - ------ - -And this key—I can assert it, for I have proved it in application to -all our dogmas—THIS KEY IS THE SAME WHICH THE MAHATMAS OFFER AND -DELIVER TO US AT THIS MOMENT.[127] - ------ - -Footnote 127: - - The capitals are our own; for these “Mahatmas” are the real - Founders and “Masters” of the Theosophical Society.—[ED.] - ------ - -There is here an interposition of Providence, before which we should -all of us offer up our own thanksgivings. For my part, I am deeply -touched by it; I feel I know not what sacred thrill! My gratitude is -the more keen since, if I confront the Hindu tradition with the -occult theosophic traditions of Judeo-Christianity, from its origin -to our own day, through the Holy Kabbala, I can recognise clearly -the agreement of the teaching of the “Brothers” with the esoteric -teaching of Moses, Jesus, and Saint Paul. - -People are sure to say: “You abase the West before the East, Europe -before Asia, France before India, Christianity before Buddhism. You -are betraying at once your Country and your Church, your quality as -a Frenchman, and your character as a Priest.” Pardon me, gentlemen! -I abase nothing whatever; I betray nothing at all! A member of -Humanity, I work for the happiness of Humanity; a son of France, I -work for the glory of France; a Priest of Jesus Christ, I work for -the triumph of Jesus Christ. You shall be forced to confess it; -suspend, therefore, your anathemas, and listen, if you please! - -We are traversing a frightful crisis. For the last hundred years we -have been trying to round the _Cape of Social Tempests_, which I -spoke of before; we have been enduring, without intermission, the -fires, the lightnings the thunders, and the earthquakes of an -unparalleled hurricane, and we feel, clearly enough, that everything -is giving way around us; under our feet and over our heads! Neither -pontiffs, nor savants, nor politicians, nor statesmen, show -themselves capable of snatching us from the abysses towards which we -are being, one is tempted to say, driven by a fatality! If, then, I -discover, in the distant East, through the darkness of this tempest, -the blessed star which alone can guide us, amidst so many shoals, -safe and sound to the longed-for haven of safety, am I wanting in -patriotism and religion because I announce to my brethren the rising -of this beneficent star?... - -I know as well as you that it was said to Peter: “I _will_ give thee -the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, that thou mayest open its gates -upon earth”; yes, doubtless, but note the tense of this verb: I -_will give_ thee: in the future. Has the Christian Pontiff already -received them—those magic Keys? Before replying look and see what -Rome has made of Christendom; see the lamentable state of Europe; -not only engaged in open war with foreign nationalities, but also -exhausting herself in fratricidal wars and preparations to -consummate her own destruction; behold everywhere Christian against -Christian, church against church, priesthood against priesthood, -class against class, school against school, and, often in the same -family, brother against brother, sons against their father, the -father against his sons! What a spectacle! And a Pope presides over -it! And while, all around, men prepare for a general slaughter, he, -the Pope, thinks only of one thing—of his temporal domain, of his -material possessions! Think you that this state of things forms the -Kingdom of Heaven, and say you still that the Pontiff of Rome has -already received the Keys thereof? - -It is written, perchance, in the decrees of Providence, that these -mysterious Keys shall be brought to the brethren of the West by the -“Brothers” of the East.... Such is, indeed, the expectation of all -the nations; the prophetic East sighs for the tenth incarnation of -Vishnu, which shall be the crown of all the Avatars which have -preceded it, and the Apocalypse, on its side, announces the -appearance of the _White Horse_ which is the symbol of the Christ -risen, glorious and triumphant before the eyes of all the peoples of -the earth. - -This is how I, priest of Jesus Christ, betray Jesus Christ, when I -acclaim the wisdom of the Mahatmas and their mission in the West! - -I have spoken of the opportuneness of the hour chosen by them for -coming to our help. I must insist upon this point. - -[_The Abbé then enforces his argument by references to the position -of Modern Science, and concludes_:—TR.] - -“The phenomena of motion,” by means of which men of science claim to -explain everything, explain nothing at all, because the very cause -of that motion is unknown to our physicists as they themselves -admit. “Consider, say to us the Mahatmas by the mouth of their -Adepts, that behind each physical energy is hidden another energy, -which itself serves as envelope to a spiritual force which is the -living soul of every manifested force.” - -And thus Nature offers us an infinite series of forces one within -another, serving mutually as sheaths, which, as d’Alembert -suspected, produce all sensible phenomena and reach all points of -the circumference starting from a central point, which is God.... - - II. - -I can now, after these preliminaries, give an example of the -transformation which, thanks to the Mahatmas, will soon take place -in the teaching of the Christian Church. I will take particularly -the dogma of the _Creation_, informing my readers that they will -find in a book I am preparing, _The New Heavens and the New Earth_, -an analogous work on all the dogmas of the Catholic faith. - -Matter exists in states of infinite variety, and, sometimes, even of -opposite appearance. The world is constituted in two poles, the -North or Spiritual, and the South or Material pole: these two poles -correspond perfectly and differ only in form, that is, in -appearance. - -Regarded from above, as the Easterns regard it, the universal -substance presents the aspect of a spiritual or divine _emanation_; -looked at from below, as the Westerns are in the habit of viewing -it, it offers, on the contrary, the aspect of a material creation. - -One sees at once the difference which must exist between the two -intellectualities and, consequently, between the two civilisations -of the East and the West. Yet there is no more error in the Genesis -of Moses, which is that of the Christian teaching, than there is in -the Genesis of the Mahatmas, which is that of the Buddhist doctrine. -The one and the other of these Geneses are absolutely founded on one -and the same reality. Whether one descends or ascends the scale of -being, one only traverses, in the East from above downwards, in the -West from below upwards, the same ladder of essences, more or less -spiritualised, more or less materialised, according as one -approaches to, or recedes from, _Pure Spirit_, which is God. - -It was, therefore, not worth while to fulminate so much on one side -or the other, here, against the theory of _emanation_, there, -against the theory of _Creation_. One always comes back to the -principle of Hermes Trismegistus: the universe is dual, though -formed of a single substance. The Kabbalists knew it well, and it -was taught long ago in the Egyptian sanctuaries, as the occultists -have never ceased to repeat it in the temples of India. - -It will soon be demonstrated, I hope, by scientific experiments such -as those of Mr. William Crookes, the Academician, that everywhere, -throughout all nature, _spirit_ and _matter_ are not _two_ but -_one_, and that they nowhere offer a real division in life. Under -every physical force there is a spiritual or a psychic force: in the -heart of the minutest atom is hidden a vital soul, the presence of -which has been perfectly determined by Claude Bernard in germs -imperceptible to the naked eye. “This soul, human, animal, vegetal -or mineral, is but a ray lent by the universal soul to every object -manifested in the Kosmos.” - -“Corporeal man and the sensible universe, says the theosophical -doctrine, are but the appearance imparted to them by the cohesion of -the interatomic or inter-astral forces which constitute both -exteriorly. The visible side of a being is an ever-changing Maya.” -The language of St. Paul is in no way different: “The aspect of the -world,” he says, “is a passing vision, an image which passes and -renews itself continually—_transit figura hujus mundi_.” - -“The real man, or the _microcosm_—and one can say as much of the -_macrocosm_—is an astral force which reveals itself through this -physical appearance, and which, having existed before the birth of -this form, does not share its fate at the hour of death: surviving -its destruction. The material form cannot subsist without the -spiritual force which sustains it; but the latter is independent of -the former, for form is created by spirit, and not spirit by form.” - -This theory is word for word that of the “Brothers” and the Adepts, -at the same time it is that of the Kabbalists and the Christians of -the School of Origen, and the Johannine Church. - -There could not be a more perfect agreement. Transfer this teaching -to the genesis of the Kosmos and you have the secret of the -formation of the World; at the same time you discover the profound -meaning of the saying of St. Paul: “The invisible things of God are -made visible to the eye of man through the visible things of the -creation,” a saying so well translated by Joseph de Maistre by the -following: “The world is a vast system of invisible things, visibly -organised.” - -The whole of the Kosmos is like a two-faced medal of which both -faces are alike. The materialists know only the lower side, while -the occultists see it from both sides at once; from the front and -from the back. It is always nature, and the same nature, but _natura -naturata_ from below, _natura naturans_ from above; here, -intelligent cause; there, brute effect; spiritual above, corporeal -below, etherealised at the North, concreted at the South Pole. - -The distinction accepted everywhere in the West down to our own day, -as essential and radical, between spirit on the one hand and matter -on the other, is no longer sustainable. The progress of science, -spurred on as it will be by Hindu ideas, will soon force the last -followers of this infantile belief to abandon it as ridiculous.... - -Yes, all, absolutely all in the world is life, but life differently -organised and variously manifested through phenomena which vary -infinitely from the most spiritualised beings, such as the Angels, -as well known to Buddhists as to Christians, though called by other -names, down to the most solidified of beings, such as stones and -metals. In the bosom of the latter, sleep, in a cataleptic -condition, milliards of vital elementary spirits. These latter only -await, to thrill into activity, the stroke of the pick or hammer to -which they will owe their deliverance and their escape from the -_limbus_, of which the Hindu doctrine speaks as well as the -Catholic. Here lies, for these souls of life, the starting point of -the _Resurrection_ and of the _Ascension_, taught equally by both -the Eastern and the Western traditions, but not understood among us. - -[_The Abbé sketches in eloquent words the development of these -“spirits of the elements,” and then continues_:—TR.] - -But as they ascend, so the spirits can also descend, for they are -always free to transfigure themselves in the divine light, or to -bury themselves in the satanic shadow of error and evil. Hence, -while time is time, “these ceaseless tears and gnashings of teeth” -of which the gospel Parables speak metaphorically, and which will -last as long as shall last the elaboration of the social atoms -destined for the collective composition of the beatific Nirvana. - -Nature is ever placing under our eyes examples of organic -transformations, analagous to those I am speaking of, as if to aid -us in comprehending our own destiny. But it seems that many men -“have eyes in order not to see,” as Jesus said. See how in order to -remove these cataracts, science, even in the West, constantly -approaching more and more that of the East, is at work producing in -its turn phenomena, which corroborate at once the Parables of the -Gospels and the teachings of nature. I will not speak of the -Salpêtrière and the marvels of hypnotism in the hands of M. Charcot -and his numerous disciples throughout the whole world. There are -things which strike me even more. - -M. Pictet, at Geneva, is creating diamonds with air and light. This -should not astonish those who know that our coal mines are nothing -but “stored-up sunlight.” With an even more marvellous industry, do -not the flowers extract from the atmosphere the luminous substance -of which they weave their fine and joyous garments? And “all that is -sown in the earth under a material form, does it not rise under a -spiritual form,” as St. Paul says? - -The glorious entities, which we call celestial spirits, have -themselves an organic form. It is defined in the canons of our -dogma, whatever the ignorance-mongers of ultramontanism may pretend. -God alone has no body, God alone is _pure Spirit_—and even to speak -thus we must consider the Deity apart from the person of Jesus -Christ, for in the “_Word made flesh_” God dwells _corporeally_, -according to the true and beautiful saying of St. Paul. - -And it is because God has no body that he is present everywhere in -the infinite, under the veils of cosmic light and ether, which serve -as his garment and under the electric, magnetic, interatomic, -interplanetary, interstellar and sound fluids, which serve him as -vehicles.... - -And it is also because God has no created form that the Kabbala -could, without error, call him _Non-Being_. Hegel probably felt this -esoteric truth when he spoke, in his heavy and cumbrous language, of -the equivalence of Being and Non-Being. - -All visible forms are thus the product, at the same time as they are -the garment and the manifestation, of spiritual forces. All sensible -order is, in reality, an _organic concretion_, a sort of living -_crystallisation_ of intelligent powers fallen from the state of -_spirituality_ into the state of materiality; in other words, fallen -from the North to the South pole of nature, in consequence of a -catastrophe called by Holy Scripture the _Fall from Eden_. This -cataclysm was the punishment of a frightful crime, of an audacious -revolt spoken of in the traditions of all Temples and called in our -dogma _original sin_. The primary priesthood of the Christian church -has hitherto lacked the light needed to explain this biological -phenomenon, which is an ascertained fact of physiology and -sociology, as I hope to prove. Questioned on this point, the priests -have always replied: It is a mystery. Now there are no mysteries -save for ignorance, and the Christ announced that “every hidden -thing should be brought to light, and proclaimed on the house-tops.” - -This is why so many new lights, coming from the East and elsewhere, -enter scientifically, in our day, into the Christian mind. Glory to -the Theosophists, glory to the Adepts, glory to the Kabbalists, -glory above all to the Hermetists everywhere, glory to those new -missionaries whose coming M. de Maistre foresaw, and whom M. de -Saint-Ives d’Alveydre lately hailed as the elect of God, charged by -him to establish a communion of knowledge and of love between all -the religious centres of the earth! - -Priests of the Roman Catholic Church, we shall enter in our turn -this wise communion of saints, on the day when we shall consent to -read anew our sacred texts, no longer in “the dead letter” of their -exotericism, but in the “living spirit” of their esotericism, and in -the threefold sense which Christian tradition has always canonically -recognised in them. - - L’ABBE ROCA (_Chanoine_). - -Chateau de Pallestres, France. - - [This is a very optimistic way of putting it, and if realized - would be like pouring the elixir of life into the decrepit body of - the Latin Church. But what will his Holiness the Pope say to - it?—ED.] - - - THE GREAT QUEST. - - CONTINUED from the December (1887) number. - -The Religionist, of course, denies that man can become a god or ever -realise in himself the attributes of Deity. He may recognise the -necessity of re-incarnation for ordinary worldly men, and even for -those who are not constant in their detachment and devotion, but he -denies the necessity for that series of trials and initiations which -must cover, at all events, more than one life-time—probably many. It -would appear as if the theory of evolution might be called in, to -aid this latter view. If it is acknowledged that we, as individuals, -have been for ever whirling on the wheel of conditioned existence; -if at the beginning of each manwantara the divine monad which -through the beginningless past has inhabited in succession the -vegetable, animal, and human forms, takes to itself a house of flesh -in exact accordance with previous Karma, it will be seen that (while -inhabiting a human body) during no moment in the past eternity have -we been nearer the attainment of Nirvana than at any other. If then -there is no thinkable connection between evolution and Nirvana, to -imagine that evolution, through stages of Adeptship, conducts to -Nirvana, is a delusion. “It is purely a question of divine -grace”—says the Religionist. If in answer to this view, it is -contended that the light of the Logos is bound, eventually, to reach -and enlighten every individual, and that the steady progress to -perfection through Chelaship and Adeptship would, therefore, be a -logical conclusion, it is objected that to assert that the light of -the Logos must eventually reach and enlighten all, would involve the -ultimate extinction of the objective Universe, which is admitted to -be without beginning or end, although it passes through alternate -periods of manifestation and non-manifestation. If to escape from -this untenable position we postulate fresh emanations of Deity into -the lowest organisms at the beginning of each manwantara, to take -the place of those who pass away into Nirvana, we are met by other -difficulties. Firstly, putting out of consideration the fact that -such a supposition is expressly denied by what is acknowledged as -revelation, the projection into the evolutionary process of a monad -free from all Karma, makes the law of Karma inoperative, for the -monad’s first association with Karma remains unexplained; and also -it becomes impossible to say what the monad was, and what was the -mode of its being prior to the projection into evolution. It must be -noted that although the law of Karma does not explain _why_ we are, -yet it satisfactorily shows _how_ we are what we are; and this is -the _raison d’être_ of the law. But the above theory takes away its -occupation. It makes Karma and the monad independent realities, -joined together by the creative energy of the Deity, while Karma -ought to be regarded as a mode of existence of the monad—which mode -ceases to be when another mode, called liberation, takes its place. -Secondly, if the monad in attaining liberation only attains to what -it was before its association with Karma, _à quoi bon_ the whole -process; while, if it is stated that the monad was altogether -non-existent before its projection, the Deity becomes responsible -for all our sufferings and sins, and we fall into either the -Calvinist doctrine of predestination as popularly conceived, or into -the still more blasphemous doctrine of the worshippers of Ahriman, -besides incurring many logical difficulties. The teaching of our -eastern philosophers is that the real interior nature of the monad -is the same as the real interior essence of the Godhead, but from -beginningless past time it has a transitory nature, considered -illusive, and the mode in which this illusion works is known by the -name of Karma. - -But were we not led astray in the first instance? Ought we not to -have acquiesced in the first above given definition of the theory of -evolution? The premiss was satisfactory enough—the mistake was in -allowing the religionist’s deduction as a logical necessity. When -the religionist states that there is no thinkable connection between -evolution and Nirvana, he merely postulates for the word evolution a -more limited scope than that which the Occultist attaches to it, -viz., the development of soul as well as that of mere form. He is -indeed right in stating that the natural man, while he remains such, -will never attain the ultimate goal of Being. True it is, for the -Occultist as for the religionist, that, to free himself from the -fatal circle of rebirths, he must “burst the shell which holds him -in darkness—tear the veil that hides him from the eternal.” The -religionist may call this the act of divine grace; but it may be -quite as correctly described as the “awakening of the slumbering God -within.” But the error of the religionist is surely in mistaking the -first glimmer of the divine consciousness for a guarantee of final -emancipation, at, say, the next death of the body, instead of merely -the first step of a probationary stage in the long vista of work for -Humanity on the higher planes of Being! - -To provide ourselves with an analogy from the very theory of -Evolution which we have been discussing, is it not more logical to -imagine that, in the same way in which we see stretched at our feet -the infinite gradations of existence, through the lower animal, -vegetable, and mineral kingdoms—between which indeed, thanks to the -recent investigations of scientific men—there is no longer -recognised to be any distinct line of demarcation—so the heights -(necessarily hidden from our view) which still remain to be scaled -by us in our upward progress to Divinity, should be similarly filled -with the gradations of the unseen hierarchy of Being? And that, as -we have evolved during millions of centuries of earth-life through -these lower forms up to the position we now occupy, so may we, if we -choose, start on a new and better road of progress, apart from the -ordinary evolution of Humanity, but in which there must also be -innumerable grades? - -That there will be progress for Humanity as a whole, in the -direction of greater spirituality, there is no doubt, but that -progress will be partaken of by continually decreasing numbers. -Whether the weeding out takes place at the middle of the “great -fifth round,” or whether it be continually taking place during the -evolutionary process, a ray of light is here thrown on the statement -met with in all the Bibles of Humanity as to the great difficulty of -the attainment. “For straight is the gate, and narrow is the way -that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it; but wide is -the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth unto destruction, and -many there be that go in thereat.” This and parallel passages -doubtless refer to the weeding out of those who are unfit to -continue the progress, on which the more spiritualized Humanity will -then have entered. The most vivid picture of the comparative handful -of elect souls, who are fit to achieve the great quest, will be -obtained by contemplating the fact already stated, that the -objective universe, with its myriads of inhabitants, will never, in -the vast abysses of the future, cease to be; and that the great -majority of humanity—the millions of millions—will thus for ever -whirl on the wheel of birth and death. - -But though Nature may give us an almost infinite number of chances -to attempt the great quest, it were madness to put by the chance -offered now, and allow the old sense-attractions to regain their -dominance, for it must be remembered that the barbarism and anarchy -which every civilisation must eventually lapse into, are periods of -spiritual deadness, and that it is when “the flower of civilisation -has blown to its full, and when its petals are but slackly held -together,” that the goad within men causes them to lift their eyes -to the sunlit mountains, and “to recognise in the bewildering -glitter the outlines of the Gates of Gold.” - -There are no doubt realms in the Devaloka where the bliss of heaven -may be realised by those who aspire to the selfish rewards of -personal satisfaction, but these cease to exist with the end of the -manwantara, and with the beginning of the next the devotee will -again have to endure incarceration in flesh. The eighth chapter of -the Bhagavad Gita does indeed state that there is a path to Nirvana -through the Devaloka, and amongst the countless possibilities of the -Infinite who shall assert that this is not so? but the context -surely implies such a detachment and devotion through life as is -difficult for us even to contemplate, much less to realize. - -However distant, therefore, may appear to us the achievement of the -great quest, when we consider how much more closely we are allied to -the animal than to the God, it must necessarily seem an infinitely -far-off goal, but though we may have to pass through many life-times -before we reach it, our most earnest prayer should be, that we may -never lose sight of that celestial goal, for surely it is the one -thing worthy of achievement! - -To many the foregoing may appear as mere speculations, and the -firmest faith indeed can scarcely call itself knowledge, but, -however necessary the complete knowledge may be, we may at least -hope that its partial possession is adequate to the requirements of -the occasion. To us whose feet tread, often wearily, towards the -path of the great quest, and whose eyes strain blindly through the -mists that wrap us round, steady perseverance and omnipotent hope -must be the watch-words—perseverance to struggle on, though the -fiends of the lower self may make every step a battle, and hope that -at any moment the entrance to the path may be found. - -As an example of these two qualities, and also because all words -that strike a high key are bound to awaken responsive echoes in -noble hearts, let us conclude with the following extract from the -Ramayana:— - -“Thus spoke Rama. Virtue is a service man owes himself, and though -there were no heaven nor any God to rule the world, it were not less -the binding law of life. It is man’s privilege to know the right and -follow it. Betray and persecute me brother men! Pour out your rage -on me O malignant devils! Smile, or watch my agony in cold disdain -ye blissful Gods! Earth, hell, heaven combine your might to crush -me—I will still hold fast by this inheritance! My strength is -nothing—time can shake and cripple it; my youth is transient—already -grief has withered up my days; my heart—alas! it is well-nigh broken -now. Anguish may crush it utterly, and life may fail; but even so my -soul that has not tripped shall triumph, and dying, give the lie to -soulless destiny that dares to boast itself man’s master.” - - “PILGRIM.” - -[Illustration: decorative description] - - WHISPER OF A ROSE. - - Behold me! an offspring of Darkness and Light. - With soft, tender petals of radiant white, - With golden heart mystery, full of perfume - That is Soul of my Breath—the Secret of Bloom. - - Infinity’s centre is heart of the rose, - And th’ breath of Creation its perfume that flows - Through ages and eons and time yet untold— - But the _Soul_ of the _Breath_ I may not unfold. - - MORA. - - THE SECLUSION OF THE ADEPT. - - [CONTINUATION OF “COMMENTS ON LIGHT ON THE PATH,” BY THE AUTHOR.] - - “Before the voice can speak in the presence of the Masters, it - must have lost the power to wound.” - -Those who give a merely passing and superficial attention to the -subject of occultism—and their name is Legion—constantly inquire -why, if adepts in life exist, they do not appear in the world and -show their power. That the chief body of these wise ones should be -understood to dwell beyond the fastnesses of the Himalayas, appears -to be a sufficient proof that they are only figures of straw. -Otherwise, why place them so far off? - -Unfortunately, Nature has done this and not personal choice or -arrangement. There are certain spots on the earth where the advance -of “civilisation” is unfelt, and the nineteenth century fever is -kept at bay. In these favoured places there is always time, always -opportunity, for the realities of life; they are not crowded out by -the doings of an inchoate, money-loving, pleasure seeking society. -While there are adepts upon the earth, the earth must preserve to -them places of seclusion. This is a fact in nature which is only an -external expression of a profound fact in super-nature. - -The demand of the neophyte remains unheard until the voice in which -it is uttered has lost the power to wound. This is because the -divine-astral life[128] is a place in which order reigns, just as it -does in natural life. There is, of course, always the centre and the -circumference as there is in nature. Close to the central heart of -life, on any plane, there is knowledge, there order reigns -completely; and chaos makes dim and confused the outer margin of the -circle. In fact, life in every form bears a more or less strong -resemblance to a philosophic school. There are always the devotees -of knowledge who forget their own lives in their pursuit of it; -there are always the flippant crowd who come and go——Of such, -Epictetus said that it was as easy to teach them philosophy as to -eat custard with a fork. The same state exists in the super-astral -life; and the adept has an even deeper and more profound seclusion -there in which to dwell. This place of retreat is so safe, so -sheltered, that no sound which has discord in it can reach his ears. -Why should this be, will be asked at once, if he is a being of such -great powers as those say who believe in his existence? The answer -seems very apparent. He serves humanity and identifies himself with -the whole world; he is ready to make vicarious sacrifice for it at -any moment—_by living not by dying for it_. Why should he not die -for it? Because he is part of the great whole, and one of the most -valuable parts of it. Because he lives under laws of order which he -does not desire to break. His life is not his own, but that of the -forces which work behind him. He is the flower of humanity, the -bloom which contains the divine seed. He is, in his own person, a -treasure of the universal nature, which is guarded and made safe in -order that the fruition shall be perfected. It is only at definite -periods of the world’s history that he is allowed to go among the -herd of men as their redeemer. But for those who have the power to -separate themselves from this herd he is always at hand. And for -those who are strong enough to conquer the vices of the personal -human nature, as set forth in these four rules, he is consciously at -hand, easily recognised, ready to answer. - ------ - -Footnote 128: - - Of course every occultist knows by reading Eliphas Levi and other - authors that the “astral” plane is a plane of unequalised forces, - and that a state of confusion necessarily prevails. But this does - not apply to the “divine astral” plane, which is a plane where - wisdom, and therefore order, prevails. - ------ - -But this conquering of self implies a destruction of qualities which -most men regard as not only indestructible but desirable. The “power -to wound” includes much that men value, not only in themselves, but -in others. The instinct of self-defence and of self-preservation is -part of it; the idea that one has any right or rights, either as -citizen, or man, or individual, the pleasant consciousness of -self-respect and of virtue. These are hard sayings to many; yet they -are true. For these words that I am writing now, and those which I -have written on this subject, are not in any sense my own. They are -drawn from the traditions of the lodge of the Great Brotherhood, -which was once the secret splendour of Egypt. The rules written in -its ante-chamber were the same as those now written in the -ante-chamber of existing schools. Through all time the wise men have -lived apart from the mass. And even when some temporary purpose or -object induces one of them to come into the midst of human life, his -seclusion and safety is preserved as completely as ever. It is part -of his inheritance, part of his position, he has an actual title to -it, and can no more put it aside than the Duke of Westminster can -say he does not choose to be the Duke of Westminster. In the various -great cities of the world an adept lives for a while from time to -time, or perhaps only passes through; but all are occasionally aided -by the actual power and presence of one of these men. Here in -London, as in Paris and St. Petersburgh, there are men high in -development. But they are only known as mystics by those who have -the power to recognise; the power given by the conquering of self. -Otherwise how could they exist, even for an hour, in such a mental -and psychic atmosphere as is created by the confusion and disorder -of a city? Unless protected and made safe their own growth would be -interfered with, their work injured. And the neophyte may meet an -adept in the flesh, may live in the same house with him, and yet be -unable to recognise him, and unable to make his own voice heard by -him. For no nearness in space, no closeness of relations, no daily -intimacy, can do away with the inexorable laws which give the adept -his seclusion. No voice penetrates to his inner hearing till it has -become a divine voice, a voice which gives no utterance to the cries -of self. Any lesser appeal would be as useless, as much a waste of -energy and power, as for mere children who are learning their -alphabet to be taught it by a professor of philology. Until a man -has become, in heart and spirit, a disciple, he has no existence for -those who are teachers of disciples. And he becomes this by one -method only—the surrender of his personal humanity. - -For the voice to have lost the power to wound, a man must have -reached that point where he sees himself only as one of the vast -multitudes that live; one of the sands washed hither and thither by -the sea of vibratory existence. It is said that every grain of sand -in the ocean bed does, in its turn, get washed up on to the shore -and lie for a moment in the sunshine. So with human beings, they are -driven hither and thither by a great force, and each, in his turn, -finds the sunrays on him. When a man is able to regard his own life -as part of a whole like this he will no longer struggle in order to -obtain anything for himself. This is the surrender of personal -rights. The ordinary man expects, not to take equal fortunes with -the rest of the world, but in some points, about which he cares, to -fare better than the others. The disciple does not expect this. -Therefore, though he be, like Epictetus, a chained slave, he has no -word to say about it. He knows that the wheel of life turns -ceaselessly. Burne Jones has shown it in his marvellous picture—the -wheel turns, and on it are bound the rich and the poor, the great -and the small—each has his moment of good fortune when the wheel -brings him uppermost—the King rises and falls, the poet is _fêted_ -and forgotten, the slave is happy and afterwards discarded. Each in -his turn is crushed as the wheel turns on. The disciple knows that -this is so, and though it is his duty to make the utmost of the life -that is his, he neither complains of it nor is elated by it, nor -does he complain against the better fortune of others. All alike, as -he well knows, are but learning a lesson; and he smiles at the -socialist and the reformer who endeavour by sheer force to -re-arrange circumstances which arise out of the forces of human -nature itself. This is but kicking against the pricks; a waste of -life and energy. - -In realising this a man surrenders his imagined individual rights, -of whatever sort. That takes away one keen sting which is common to -all ordinary men. - -When the disciple has fully recognised that the very thought of -individual rights is only the outcome of the venomous quality in -himself, that it is the hiss of the snake of self which poisons with -its sting his own life and the lives of those about him, then he is -ready to take part in a yearly ceremony which is open to all -neophytes who are prepared for it. All weapons of defence and -offence are given up; all weapons of mind and heart, and brain, and -spirit. Never again can another man be regarded as a person who can -be criticised or condemned; never again can the neophyte raise his -voice in self-defence or excuse. From that ceremony he returns into -the world as helpless, as unprotected, as a newborn child. That, -indeed, is what he is. He has begun to be born again on to the -higher plane of life, that breezy and well-lit plateau from whence -the eyes see intelligently and regard the world with a new insight. - -I have said, a little way back, that after parting with the sense of -individual rights, the disciple must part also with the sense of -self-respect and of virtue. This may sound a terrible doctrine, yet -all occultists know well that it is not a doctrine, but a fact. He -who thinks himself holier than another, he who has any pride in his -own exemption from vice or folly, he who believes himself wise, or -in any way superior to his fellow men, is incapable of discipleship. -A man must become as a little child before he can enter into the -kingdom of heaven. - -Virtue and wisdom are sublime things; but if they create pride and a -consciousness of separateness from the rest of humanity in the mind -of a man, then they are only the snakes of self re-appearing in a -finer form. At any moment he may put on his grosser shape and sting -as fiercely as when he inspired the actions of a murderer who kills -for gain or hatred, or a politician who sacrifices the mass for his -own or his party’s interests. - -In fact, to have lost the power to wound, implies that the snake is -not only scotched, but killed. When it is merely stupefied or lulled -to sleep it awakes again and the disciple uses his knowledge and his -power for his own ends, and is a pupil of the many masters of the -black art, for the road to destruction is very broad and easy, and -the way can be found blindfold. That it is the way to destruction is -evident, for when a man begins to live for self he narrows his -horizon steadily till at last the fierce driving inwards leaves him -but the space of a pin’s-head to dwell in. We have all seen this -phenomenon occur in ordinary life. A man who becomes selfish -isolates himself, grows less interesting and less agreeable to -others. The sight is an awful one, and people shrink from a very -selfish person at last, as from a beast of prey. How much more awful -is it when it occurs on the more advanced plane of life, with the -added powers of knowledge, and through the greater sweep of -successive incarnations! - -Therefore I say, pause and think well upon the threshold. For if the -demand of the neophyte is made without the complete purification, it -will not penetrate the seclusion of the divine adept, but will evoke -the terrible forces which attend upon the black side of our human -nature. - - . . . . . . - - “Before the soul can stand in the presence of the Masters its feet - must be washed in the blood of the heart.” - -The word soul, as used here, means the divine soul, or “starry -spirit.” - -“To be able to stand is to have confidence;” and to have confidence -means that the disciple is sure of himself, that he has surrendered -his emotions, his very self, even his humanity; that he is incapable -of fear and unconscious of pain; that his whole consciousness is -centred in the divine life, which is expressed symbolically by the -term “the Masters;” that he has neither eyes, nor ears, nor speech, -nor power, save in and for the divine ray on which his highest sense -has touched. Then is he fearless, free from suffering, free from -anxiety or dismay; his soul stands without shrinking or desire of -postponement, in the full blaze of the divine light which penetrates -through and through his being. Then he has come into his inheritance -and can claim his kinship with the teachers of men; he is upright, -he has raised his head, he breathes the same air that they do. - -But before it is in any way possible for him to do this, the feet of -the soul must be washed in the blood of the heart. - -The sacrifice, or surrender of the heart of man, and its emotions, -is the first of the rules; it involves the “attaining of an -equilibrium which cannot be shaken by personal emotion.” This is -done by the stoic philosopher; he, too, stands aside and looks -equably upon his own sufferings, as well as on those of others. - -In the same way that “tears” in the language of occultists expresses -the soul of emotion, not its material appearance, so blood -expresses, not that blood which is an essential of physical life, -but the vital creative principle in man’s nature, which drives him -into human life in order to experience pain and pleasure, joy and -sorrow. When he has let the blood flow from the heart he stands -before the Masters as a pure spirit which no longer wishes to -incarnate for the sake of emotion and experience. Through great -cycles of time successive incarnations in gross matter may yet be -his lot; but he no longer desires them, the crude wish to live has -departed from him. When he takes upon him man’s form in the flesh he -does it in the pursuit of a divine object, to accomplish the work of -“the Masters,” and for no other end. He looks neither for pleasure -nor pain, asks for no heaven, and fears no hell; yet he has entered -upon a great inheritance which is not so much a compensation for -these things surrendered, as a state which simply blots out the -memory of them. He lives now not in the world, but with it; his -horizon has extended itself to the width of the whole universe. - - Δ - - - THE WHITE MONK. - - By the Author of the “Professor of Alchemy.” - - PART I.—RALPH’S STORY. - -“It was after this manner, as they say,” began Ralph, swinging -himself on to a bench and pouring out for himself a tankard of our -good home-brewed, as I crouched in the hay opposite to him. “Two -centuries agone and thirty years or so, there dwelt in this very -house which I serve—and which one day, young master, you shall -rule!—Sir Gilbert de Troyes, your ancestor, and his lady, and four -fair sons, and a lovely daughter. Of these sons, twain were at the -wars, one was in his nurse’s lap, and another was gone to Italy, to -finish his studies at Parma. Thus did the old nobles use to ruin -their sons! - -“This young foregoer of yours (a goodly youth!) fell in with the -usual temptations of Satan. He held, with the poets, that the world -is the best book for men to read; and he studied it, I ween, with -diligence. Now there was a certain damsel, winsome enough, I doubt -not, in the Italian style, with black hair and the devil—save the -mark!—in her wandering eyes. So it came to pass that Master Gilbert, -younger, wooed her for his bride, like an honest gentleman, as the -old tales say he was; and so great is the power of one upright soul -amongst others, that the young witch—she was but young, poor soul! -and teachable—was charmed herself from her Italian ways, and vowed -to love and follow only him; and the day before their marriage, she -was walking with him in the streets of Parma, by night—for Master -Gilbert had a governor along with him in Italy, who must be -hoodwinked—when there chanced to espy them one Pietro Rinucci, a -clerkly fellow (with a curse upon him!) who was even studying also -at Parma, and who loved the Italian witch himself. - -“This Rinucci had been favoured of the girl, and only when she saw -the Englishman, with his blue eyes and his honest ways, had she -scorned her countryman and left him. Rinucci, after the manner of -his race-fellows, then dogged her steps, tracked her to her early -meetings with young Gilbert de Troyes, who was his unsuspecting -friend, and listened to their innocent ravings of love conjoined to -virtue. - -“Afterward, had he gone to the damsel’s poor lodging and there, with -Heaven knows what direful threats! conjured her to renounce her -honest lover and return to himself. The signorina was not like an -English girl—she neither stormed nor yielded—she cajoled and blinded -him. ‘If he would go, she would consider; perchance she did not love -the Briton truly; perchance it was a whim; she knew not. Might she -but think? it was a whirl, and her heart, alas! was o’er -susceptible; ’twould pass; he must leave her now, at least, and she -would see. Meantime Pietruccino should wear this pretty crimson -ribbon of hers till they met again.’ After even such words, and for -a kiss, he left her. But the cunning villain was more than her -match, and waited all the next day round the corners, whence he -could see her goings out and comings in. He saw her glide to her -trysting-place; he followed cautiously; he heard her give a -signalling whispered call; he heard it answered by a short, low -whistle; young Gilbert de Troyes swung merrily round the corner and -fell into his Italian sweetheart’s arms. - -“He met his death, poor, noble young fellow! ’Tis an old tale -repeated. I need scarce have wasted all these words upon it—but that -one’s heart must needs ache at these things. In the course of nature -that Italian snake, Rinucci, was bound to finish his rival there and -then. So he got behind the unwary schoolboy—for the lad was, indeed, -little more—and stabbed him, all too deep, in the back of the neck. - -“Folk say Rinucci triumphed as he set his foot on his dying -college-mate, and wiped his dagger, with a laugh, before the -horror-stricken girl. Myself can scarcely believe it; he was too -young in murder then for that. - -“Be this as it may, certain it is that he dragged away the mourning -damsel from the corpse of the man who would have saved her soul, and -took her back to himself. - -“A sickening story, boy. Wilt thou have more, young master? Yea? -Why, there is worse to come. For Mistress Italiana—no tradition -tells her name—was spirited as any gipsy woman, and full of crafty -lore, such as her race delight in. She broke her heart over her -English lover’s corpse; but she had still the Southern amusement -left her of revenge. She concocted an evil greenish powder, and -coloured Signor Pietro’s sweetmeats with it. - -“The fellow ate largely, praising the daintiness of the confection. -It was deadly enough, I daresay, in all conscience, but it killed -him not. These reptiles live on poison; morally, ’tis certain, -belike, and also physically it agreed with him. Perchance he may -have felt a qualm or two, though tradition says nought of it. -Anyway, the next fytte of this story shows us the mysterious -disappearance of the Italian girl, of whom no word hath ever since -been told. - -“She left behind her, whether willingly or no, a quantity of the -false seasoning, which Master Pietro had caused to be analysed, and -which he seems to have carefully preserved. - -“Some time after these events, we find Signor Pietro Rinucci entered -into the Monastery of Dominicans at Brescia, a repentant neophyte. -He had turned remorseful, no doubt, and in good time! The fellow had -ever strong imaginations. He was received in due time as a brother; -wore the garb of the Order, and cast his eyes down. Tradition saith -he was in great turmoil of soul at this time—judge for yourself, -young master, by what followed. - -“One fine morning Brother Petrus was missing from his small, damp -cell, and none could tell what had become of him. None, that is, -save the poverty-stricken ropemaker who had supplied him with cords -to scale the monastery walls; and his discretion had been paid for. -The fact being, I doubt not, that discipline being ever repugnant to -our young bravo’s manners, he had fled it. - -“In the meantime, the news of Gilbert de Troyes’ death had been -brought to these very doors, and certainly the grooms who then -tended the good horses of your ancestors must, even in this -saddle-room, have spent their sorrow in each other’s company. But -Ambrose de Troyes, newly back from the wars, and second-born of the -family, rose in his wrath, and swore to avenge his brother. For all -might know that the death blow had been dealt by one Pietro Rinucci, -fellow-scholar of Gilbert’s, whose absence afterward from the -University had puzzled the doctors and caused inquisition into the -matter. - -“So away went Ambrose, the soldier, to Parma. And mind ye, Ambrose -was no careless school-boy, no mean foe to a man, but a great, -staunch fellow who had seen service, and who was, moreover, by -Nature something stern and hard of purpose. - -“But at Parma they told him Rinucci was escaped into a monastery -which they named, and showed a painted portrait of him, and did so -minutely, point by point, describe the man, that Ambrose swore he -should know him, should he meet him in Heaven. And that was a strong -assertion, note ye. - -“Well, Ambrose journeyed on towards the secluded spot where the -Monastery of Dominicans lay, and was enforced to rest one night at -the village of Santa Rosa on his road. Having stabled his steed, -refreshed it and himself, and practised his arm some moments with -the good sharp sword, he slung the weapon round him and went forth -for a stroll to pass the time. - -“He came to the equivalent of what would be to us in England an -ale-house, but some way out of the village, meet for travellers to -pause and rest a moment on their way. Ambrose went in to look about -him and ordered drink for himself. He lacked a companion to pledge, -but looking round the little room saw no one but a moody man who -seemed lost in thought, though enjoying some passing sour wine. -Ambrose himself could stomach neither the fare nor the company, so -he quickly got him on his way a little further; when, meeting with a -simple shrine to the Virgin, the God-fearing soldier took his rosary -from under his baldrick, and knelt him down to pray. For something -had sore perplexed him; he had seemed to see in the features of that -morose comrade at the inn the most exact resemblance of Rinucci. But -Rinucci was safe at the Monastery, waiting till his time should -come, and the avenger should denounce him. But even as he rose from -prayer did Ambrose see a mounted messenger speeding to him, who told -him breathlessly the news had just reached Santa Rosa that the Monk -Petrus was escaped and roaming at large somewhere in the country. - -“Then Ambrose de Troyes knew he had his man; and natheless, like the -large-hearted fellow he was, he would but meet him quite alone. So -he rewarded the newsbringer and sent him away. Once more he fell on -his knees before our Lady’s image, and besought that his cause might -find Heaven’s favour, and his action in it be in every point just -and serviceable. (For he looked upon himself as sent to do such -things as might cause his brother’s soul to rest in peace.) Then he -went rapidly retracing his steps towards the inn again, and, led by -Destiny, out came Pietro Rinucci, unarmed, to meet him. Ambrose de -Troyes looked into the assassin’s eyes and knew him. Stranger still, -the piercing eyes of the cunning Italian saw, in the traits of this -bronzed warrior, relationship to the Gilbert who had been his friend -and victim. - -“‘I arrest thee, Pietro Rinucci, for the murder of my brother, -Gilbert de Troyes, and, though I may not draw upon a tonsured monk -(yea, I know thee through all thy false disguises!), yet, before I -hale thee to the ecclesiastical courts, I will show thee, snake, -what I think of thee, and of all such!’ - -“And Ambrose de Troyes smote the villain a shameful blow upon the -face. - -“Even at that instant, the monk whips me Ambrose’s sword from its -scabbard, and, with the fatal dexterity of his race, ran in upon the -stately Englishman and laid him, bleeding quick to death, upon the -hot white road. - -“‘Oh Margaret, my sister Margaret!’ the dying man raved, as if he -thirsted for help from the hand that had been kind to him. - -“‘A right pestilent breed of Britons! but easy to kill—easy to -kill,’ quoth the Monk, as he laid down the red sword by the dying -man’s side and left him alone in his agony. - -“This scene was witnessed by a terrified young country-girl, who -crouched behind a heap of stones, meanwhile, until the murderer’s -flight, and then ran to assist De Troyes, who thought she was his -sister Margaret, and said marvellous tender words, of home and of -her kindness, and of the little brother he had left in the nursery. - -“After this, there comes a period of Rinucci’s life of which we know -but little. He seems to have raced about the country, in hiding -always, but doing little harm for him. Italy, however, is debateable -ground for one of her own recreant monks, so we find Messer Pietro -fleeing Justice and coming over here to England. Whether he had had -some of his heart-searchings that he knew so often, I know not, but -deem it very likely. Here is the flaw, to my mind, in the -foreigners’ constitutions. They recognize their sins as such, not so -we English! We say our evil deeds are fate, congenital infirmity, -ignorance, negligence, or even virtues; they say their sins are -sins, and yet they do them. Had I but half the talent of sinning -that Messer Pietro seems to have owned, my faith, I would have -gloried in it! So did not he, however; he went to a father -confessor, fell on the earth, and implored absolution—for life was -still sweet to him, he said, and he would not die yet awhile. - -“The father sent him for penance to travel as a pilgrim, in a white -penitential garb to England, there to walk to the shrine of St. -Thomas à Becket, foully slain on earth by violence. - -“The father did well for his mother-country, but evilly for us. - -“The monk Petrus performed at all points the penalty enjoined him, -and afterward, having no especial call to Italy again, he followed -his roving instincts and wandered about England, even till chance -brought him to this, our, town. In this country he knew no men well -enough to desire to kill them; besides, at this period, one of his -fits of penitence seems to have been on him. Certes, he wore the -monkish habit, only different in its white colour from that of other -fraternities, and the folk grew acquainted with his white figure as -he roamed the land in deepest meditation, with his eyes bent upon -the ground. - -“Now, one day, say the chronicles (which are made up of village -tales), the White Monk, as our townsfolk called him, was sitting in -a thicket by a brook in which he was bathing his travelled feet, -when there came by the sister of his victims, even Mistress Margaret -de Troyes herself, and walked the pleasant fringes of the forest, -very near to where the wanderer sat, on the further side the elders. -She was accompanied by her mother and by another lady, both of whom -were pressing the claims of some noble suitor upon her. - -“The other ladies were in deepest mourning for Gilbert and for -Ambrose, and Mistress Margaret herself, though she wore no such -signs of grief, was most plainly clad in a pale, pure garb of -lavender. She listened quietly to all they urged, then spoke and -said: - -“‘My mother, he is a light, false man. I care not for him.’ - -“It was protested to her, her high birth, the respect in which he -would hold her for herself; above all, her fair beauty, would all -ensure his faithfulness. But Margaret said: - -“‘I beseech ye, press me no further. Heaven knows I wish the -gentleman much good, and that he may aspire to higher things. I will -pray for him, weep for him if need be; but, ladies, though I be but -a simple English maiden, I hold myself all too good for such as he -to marry and draw down, perchance, to like thoughts with himself. I -hate all evil—not the doers, mother; but the evil. We are all weak -and changeable, and I dare not come in contact of my free will with -evil influence. God might punish me by weakness of resolve against -infection.’ - -“They urged her yet once more; she might triumph and convert a soul. - -“‘In truth,’ confessed fair Margaret de Troyes, ‘ye wound me sorely, -dearest ladies mine! At such a time, when good Ambrose de Troyes is -scarce cold in his grave, to bid his sister make her choice amongst -his townsfolk; and celebrate the marriage feast with a breaking -heart! My Ambrose—to think that thou, who, if I but spake of a -moment’s weariness, would quickly place a cushion for my head, and -sit by the hour on our window-seat chafing my feet, that thou -should’st be bleeding in the death-struggles, on the hard, parched -road, in a foreign land, and I be far away, not able so much as to -raise thy dear head upon my knee! Oh, I loved him so tenderly, -strong brother of mine! I gloried in my brown-maned soldier. We -prayed together the night before he left on his sacred errand, and, -at his entreaty, I laid my hand upon his head and blessed him in Our -Lady’s name. He was a grave, good man; and you would have me turn my -thoughts from him to that other! What though I know Ambrose to be -now one of God’s angels; yet he hath left me behind him on the -earth—the first unkindness he hath ever done me! And his mother and -mine would have me think of wedlock!’ - -“The fair, pale Englishwoman bent her head, and Pietro heard her -weeping. - -“Well, it is but guesswork thenceforth. Folk say, in their coarse -way of speaking, that the White Monk ‘loved’ the lady Margaret. -Forfend! The love of such a man were an insult all too gross to -offer to the memory of any Damoiselle de Troyes. Say, rather, he -kindled to the worship of goodness in that form first of all. - -“We know that from that hour when he first saw and heard her, -Rinucci, the stained wretch, wandered ever where there was a chance -to see her, even from afar. Once, indeed he even spoke with her. -Under the favour of his sacred garment he dared to near her, and -asked: - -“‘Maiden, how say you? Is there mercy in Heaven for the worst -sinners, or no?’ - -“‘Nay, holy father,” answered the damsel, smiling, ‘thou must be -better seen in these high mysteries than I who dwell in the world, -where we all need mercy. We can but hope that our God is more -pitiful than are our fellow creatures to our faults.’ - -“‘Maiden,’ besought the White Monk further, ‘can such as thou look -pityingly upon a vice-stained fellow man?’ - -“But Margaret wept, and answered him: - -“‘Oh, father, search me not over this problem. I have lost the -dearest to me in the world, two brothers, by an assassin’s hand. If -that man stood before me, tell me, _could_ I look at him -forgivingly? Oh, never, father! Human nature is too weak.’ - -“The rencounter was over, for Pietro dared speak no more. But, -according to the custom of that day, Mistress Margaret bent her fair -head to receive the blessing of the holy father. - -“The monk started back in horror; even he was not too base to feel -that. But as the maiden still stood humbly waiting, he was forced to -stretch his hands forth from the distance, and murmur: ‘Benedicite!’ - -“The days went by and the townsfolk noted how the White Monk wasted, -and how strange he was. He would mutter to himself like a madman. He -never said a word of holy import to the cottagers with whom he -lodged at small cost. He ate almost nothing and appeared to spend -his days in solitary musing. His conduct smacked so oddly of mania -that Giles Hughson, his landlord, took to watching whither he went -and what he did. He saw him always following Margaret, but seeking -to avoid her if she turned where she might see him. He seemed to -dread her greatly, yet, to worship her, or, at least to follow her -like a lost soul looking after the light from some vanishing angel’s -wing. - -“Once Margaret turned and saw him, but recognised him not as the man -she had spoken withal. She, taking him for a _frère quetant_, -silently, without looking upon him, pressed into his hand money, -which he took, and which was found on him when he died, as you shall -hear.” - - PERCY ROSS. - -(_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - -The following remarkable passage was published some five years ago -in the _Theosophist_, of Madras (1883); and it is needless to call -attention in more detail to the fidelity with which it is being -since then verified. - -Protesting against the arbitrary chronology of the Sanskritists in -the question of Indian antiquity who make it dependent on the Greeks -and Chandragupta—whose date is represented as “the sheet-anchor of -Indian chronology” that “nothing will ever shake” (Prof. Max Müller -and Weber), the author of the prophecy remarks that “it is to be -feared that as regards India, the chronological ship of the -Sanskritists has already broken from her moorings and gone adrift -with all her precious freight of conjectures and hypotheses.” And -then adds:— - -“We are at the end of a cycle—geological and other—and at the -beginning of another. Cataclysm is to follow cataclysm. The pent-up -forces are bursting out in many quarters; and not only will men be -swallowed up or slain by thousands, “new” land appear and “old” -subside, volcanic eruptions and tidal waves appal; but secrets of an -unsuspected past will be uncovered to the dismay of Western -theorists and the humiliation of an imperious science. This drifting -ship, if watched, may be seen to ground upon the upheaved vestiges -of ancient civilisations, and fall to pieces. We are not emulous of -the prophet’s honours: but still, let this stand as a prophecy.” -(See also “_Five Years of Theosophy_,” p. 388.) - - - LOVE WITH AN OBJECT. - -Some distinguished contributors to theosophical literature have of -late been describing what qualities are necessary to constitute a -perfect man, _i.e._, an Adept. They said that among other things it -was absolutely and indispensably necessary, that such a being should -possess Love—and not merely Love in the abstract—but love regarding -some object or objects. What can they possibly mean by speaking of -“love with an object,” and could there possibly be love without any -object at all? Can that feeling be called love, which is directed -solely to the Eternal and Infinite, and takes no cognizance of -earthly illusions? Can that be love which has no object or—in other -words—is the love of forms or objects the true love at all? If a man -loved all things in the universe alike, without giving any -preference to any of them, would not such a love be practically -without any object; would it not be equal to loving nothing at all; -because in such a case the individuality of any single object would -be lost to sight? - -A love which is directed towards all things alike, an universal -love, is beyond the conception of the mortal mind, and yet this kind -of love, which bestows no favours upon any one thing, seems to be -that eternal love, which is recommended by all the sacred books of -the East and the West; because as soon as we begin to love one thing -or one being more than another, we not only detract from the rest an -amount of love which the rest may rightfully claim; but we also -become attached to the object of our love, a fate against which we -are seriously warned in various pages of these books. - -The _Bhagavad Gita_ teaches that we should not love or hate any -object of sense whatsoever, nor be attached to any object or thing, -but renounce all projects and fix our thoughts solely on It, the -Eternal, which is no-thing and no object of cognition for us, but -whose presence can be only subjectively experienced by, and within -ourselves. It says: “He is esteemed, who is equal-minded to -companions, friends, enemies, strangers, neutrals, to aliens and -kindred, yea to good and evil men” (Cap. vi., 14); and further on it -says: “He whose soul is united by devotion, seeing the same in all -around, sees the soul in everything and everything in the soul. He -who sees Me (Brahmâ) everywhere and everything in Me, him I -forsake not and he forsakes not me.... He who sees the same in -everything—Arjuna!—whether it be pleasant or grievous, from the -self-resemblance, is deemed to be a most excellent Yogin” (Cap. vi., -29, 32). - -On almost every page of the _Bhagavad Gita_ we are instructed only -to direct our love to that which is eternal in every form, and let -the form itself be a matter of secondary consideration. “He must be -regarded as a steadfast renouncer, who neither hates nor -desires.”... “In a learned and modest Brahman, in a cow, in an -elephant, in a dog, and a Swapāka; they who have knowledge see the -same thing.”... “Let no man rejoice in attaining what is pleasant, -nor grieve in attaining what is unpleasant; being fixed in mind, -untroubled, knowing Brahma and abiding in Brahma.”... “He who is -happy in himself, pleased with himself, who finds also light in -himself, this Yogin, one with Brahmâ, finds _Nirvana_ in Him.” - -The great _Hermes Trismegistus_ teaches the same identical doctrine; -for he says: “Rise and embrace me with thy whole being, and I will -teach thee whatsoever thou desirest to know.” The _Bible_ also tells -us that “God is Love” (1. John iv., 8), and that we should love Him -with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our mind (Math. -xxii., 37), and while it teaches that we should love nothing else -but God (Math. xx., 37), who is All in All (Ephes. i., 23), yet it -affirms, that this God is omnipresent, eternal and incomprehensible -to the finite understanding of mortals (1. Timoth. vi., 16). It -teaches this love to be the most important of all possessions, -without which all other possessions are useless (1. Corinth, xiii., -2), and yet this God, whom we are to love, is not an “object” (John -i., 5), but everywhere. He is in us and we in Him (Rom. xii., 5). We -are to leave all objects of sense and follow Him alone (Luc. v., 2), -although we have no means of intellectually knowing or perceiving -Him, the great Unknown, for whose sake we are to give up house and -brethren, sisters, father, mother, wife, children and lands (Mark -x., 29). - -What can all this mean, but that love itself is the legitimate -object of love? It is a divine, eternal, and infinite power, a -light, which reflects itself in every object while it seeks not the -object, but merely its own reflection therein. It is an -indestructible fire and the brighter it burns, the stronger will be -the light and the clearer will its own image appear. Love falls in -love with nothing but its own self, it is free from all other -attractions. A love which becomes attached to objects of sense, -ceases to be free, ceases to be love, and becomes mere desire. Pure -and eternal love asks for nothing, but gives freely to all who are -willing to take. Earthly love is attracted to persons and things, -but Divine spiritual love seeks only that which is divine in -everything, and this can be nothing else but love, for love is the -supreme power of all. It holds together the worlds in space, it -clothes the earth in bright and beautiful colours, it guides the -instincts of animals and links together the hearts of human beings. -Acting upon the lower planes of existence it causes terrestrial -things to cling to each other with fond embrace; but love on the -spiritual plane is free. Spiritual love is a goddess, who -continually sacrifices herself for herself and who accepts no other -sacrifice but her own self, giving for whatever she may receive, -herself in return. Therefore the _Bhagavad Gita_ says: “Nourish ye -the gods by this and let the gods nourish you. Thus nourishing each -other ye shall obtain the highest good” (Cap. iii., ii.,); and the -Bible says: “To him who has still more shall be given, and from him -who has not, even what he has shall be taken away” (Luke xix., 26). - -Love is an universal power and therefore immortal, it can never die. -We cannot believe that even the smallest particle of love ever died, -only the instruments through which it becomes manifest change their -form; nor will it ever be born, for it exists from eternity, only -the bodies into which it shines are born and die and are born again. -A Love which is not manifest is non-existent for us, to come into -existence means to become manifest. How then could we possibly -imagine a human being possessed of a love which never becomes -manifest; how can we possibly conceive of a light which never shines -and of a fire which does not give any heat? - -But “as the sun shines upon the lands of the just and the unjust, -and as the rain descends upon the acres of the evil-minded as well -as upon those of the good”; likewise divine love manifesting itself -in a perfect man is distributed alike to every one without favour or -partiality. Wherever a good and perfect human being exists, there is -divine love manifest; and the degree of man’s perfection will depend -on the degree of his capacity to serve as an instrument for the -manifestation of divine love. The more perfect he is, the more will -his love descend upon and penetrate all who come within his divine -influence. To ask favours of God is to conceive of Him as an -imperfect being, whose love is not free, but subject to the guidance -of, and preference to, mortals. To expect favours of a Mahatma is to -conceive him as an _imperfect_ man. - -True, “prayer,” _i.e._ the elevation and aspiration of the soul “in -spirit and in truth” (John xiv., 14), is useful, not because it will -persuade the light to come nearer to us, but because it will assist -us to open our eyes for the purpose of seeing the light that was -already there. Let those who desire to come into contact with the -Adepts enter their sphere by following their doctrines; seeking for -love, but not for an object of love, and when they have found the -former, they will find a superabundance of the latter throughout the -whole extent of the unlimited universe; they will find it in -everything that exists, for love is the foundation of all existence -and without love nothing can possibly continue to exist. - -Love—divine love—is the source of life, of light, and happiness. It -is the creative principle in the Macrocosm and in the Microcosm of -man. It is _Venus_, the mother of all the gods, because from her -alone originates Will and Imagination and all the other powers by -which the universe was evolved. It is the germ of divinity which -exists in the heart of man, and which may develop into a life-giving -sun, illuminating the mind and sending its rays to the centre of the -universe; for it originates from that centre and to that centre it -will ultimately return. It is a divine messenger, who carries Light -from Heaven down to the Earth and returns again to Heaven loaded -with sacrificial gifts. - -It is worshipped by all, some adore it in one form and some in -another, but many perceive only the form and do not perceive the -divine spirit. Nevertheless the spirit alone is real, the form is an -illusion. Love can exist without form, but no form can exist without -love. It is pure Spirit, but if its light is reflected in matter, it -creates desire and desire is the producer of forms. Thus the visible -world of perishable things is created. “But above this visible -nature there exists another, unseen and eternal, which, when all -created things perish, does not perish” (Bh. G. viii. 20), and “from -which they who attain to it never return.” This is the supreme abode -of Love without any object, unmanifested and imperishable, for there -no object exists. There love is united to love, enjoying supreme and -eternal happiness within her own self and that peace, of which the -mortal mind, captivated by the illusion of form, cannot conceive. -Non-existent for us, and yet existing in that Supreme _Be-ness_, in -which all things dwell, by which the universe has been spread out, -and which may be attained to by an exclusive devotion. - - EMANUEL. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - SELF MASTERY. - - (A SONNET.) - - O! for the power to lay this burden low! - This weight of self; to kill all vain desire - To clasp to our outer selves the scorching fire, - So that the God within shall live and grow! - O! for the strength to face the hidden foe, - To raise our being higher still and higher, - To breathe the breath that Holy ones inspire, - To break the bonds that bind to Earth below! - - Great, Infinite Soul! that broodeth o’er us ever, - Say, can the human will _unaided_ win - The Victor’s crown (and earthly bondage sever), - —A Heavenly flight, triumphant over sin? - O Human and Divine, forsake us never, - Thine is the power by which we enter in! - - DUM SPIRO, SPERO. - - =Reviews.= - - A MODERN MAGICIAN. A ROMANCE, by J. Fitzgerald Molloy, in Three - Volumes. Ward & Downey, 12, York Street, Covent Garden. - -Opinions may be greatly divided as to the merits of this book; and -to those who look for unexceptionable literary style as a primary -element in fiction, it may not be satisfactory. But to all those who -regard ideas as the first requisite, this work will probably prove -of great interest. It has been somewhat curious to note the -reception with which Mr. Molloy has met. The _Pall Mall Gazette_, -for instance, devotes considerable length to him, and somewhat -smartly calls him “a novelist born, but not made”; after which it -proceeds, with more apparent animus than judiciousness, to criticise -the pedantic style of conversation and narrative which the author -occasionally makes use of. Curiously enough, the critic selects for -his worst blows the phrases used by the chief inspector of the -detectives. Now, if there is one thing more common than another, it -is to find the half educated, but uncultured, men of the class from -which police inspectors are drawn, using the longest words and -phrases, not so much as a proof of their culture, as with the object -of impressing their hearers. The reviewer was perhaps right to -assail Mr. Molloy for sending his hero to Scotland Yard to hunt up -news of his erring wife, who, as he was perfectly aware, had fled -with another man. But this, and other trifling mistakes of similar -character, are venial errors, and could only be so strongly -animadverted upon in a paper which devotes itself to hunting -plagiarisms in impossible places, through envy of successful -authors; or by a reviewer who is a personal enemy of the author. As -Macintosh well said: “The critic who is discerning in nothing but -faults, may care little to be told that this is the mark of -unenviable disposition, but he might not feel equally easy, were he -convinced that he thus gives absolute proofs of ignorance and want -of taste.” To make matters worse, and more interesting to LUCIFER, -the reviewer is plainly a partisan of the Society for Psychical -Research, to which Mr. Molloy somewhat unfeelingly alludes as the -“Society of Scientific Cackle.” The review in the _Pall Mall -Gazette_ starts with smartness and intelligence, but allows itself -to run off into partisanship and prejudice. But all that is in -strict keeping with the tone of a “Gazette” which generally starts -useful work well, continues it badly, and ends by throwing mud out -of the gutter at anybody or anything which happens to run counter to -it. For instance, here is a specimen of the reviewer: - - “As a story teller he (the author) is the Bobadil of fashionable - mysticism: as a literary workman he is a pretentious bungler: his - syntax is inconceivable, his dialogue impossible, his style a - desperately careful expression of desperately slovenly thinking, - his notions of practical affairs absurd, and his conception of - science and philosophy a superstitious guess; yet he has an - indescribable flourish, a dash of half-ridiculous poetry, a - pathetic irresponsibility, a captivating gleam of Irish - imagination, and, above all, an unsuspicious good nature, that - compel a humane public to read his books rather than mortify him - by a neglect which he has done nothing malicious to deserve.” - -Such criticism can only be met from the point of view of the -reviewer, by “Set a thief to catch a thief,” and from that of Mr. -Molloy, by “Heaven save me from the penny-a-liners, actuated by -personal animus!” - -The reviewer may be allowed to have pointed out a few glaring errors -in Mr. Molloy’s style and syntax, but we add that, in pointing these -out, he has only exposed himself. - -As regards the central figure of Benoni, the adept in the book, -LUCIFER may, perhaps, say a few words. Slightly as the character is -drawn, and startling as are the deeds of this personage, there is a -majesty about him which commands respect, and we may congratulate -Mr. Molloy on his effort. We do not entirely accord with the author -in the deeds which he sets Benoni to do, but with regard to the -words and precepts which he puts into the adept’s mouth, we do -absolutely agree, and recommend our readers, and especially all the -Theosophists, to read Mr. Molloy’s book. Here the _Pall Mall_ -reviewer—being, as said, an admiring follower of the Society for -Psychical Research—again falls foul of Mr. Molloy; but we may safely -quote the impressive and truthful words of Benoni, and leave the -rest to others. - -Amerton, the hero of the book, reproaches the adept with having seen -trouble approaching him, and with having neglected to warn him. -Benoni replies: - - “That is true. It was not permitted that I should serve you then; - to test your strength it was necessary that you should bear the - trial unaided. When, some years ago. you came to me in Africa, and - asked me to solve experiences which perplexed you, and later - besought Amuni, the faithful One, to show you the pathway leading - towards light, you but obeyed a dictate of your nature impossible - to resist. That within you urged you forward to seek the sacred - mysteries of life and death. But these cannot be obtained by those - who are not prepared to endure with patience, and grow strong in - spirit. You have suffered, and thus taken the first step towards - the attainment of your desires.” - - “But, surely,” said Philip, “you might have warned me.” - - “I should have but inflicted additional pain on you.” - - “Was there no escape?” - - “None, indeed,” replied the mystic. - - “Then I was destined to meet humiliation and pain.” - - Benoni looked at him with mingled pity and affection in his gaze. - - “A child,” he said, in his low, sonorous voice, “is grieved for a - broken toy, or is humiliated by correction.” - - “But you don’t compare my wrongs to a child’s grievances?” - - “His sorrows are as real and bitter to him as your afflictions are - to you. It is only when time has passed, he reviews his distress - with wonder, seeing the pettiness of its cause. So will it be with - you. Ten years hence, you will regard this grief, desolating your - life, with equanimity; forty years later, you will remember it - with indifference, as an item in your fate. Then shall you look - back upon the brightness and darkness of your existence as one - regards the lights and shadows chequering his pathway through - woods in spring. How futile seem woe and joy, weighed with the - consideration that all men are as shadows that fade, and as - vapours which flee away.... Think, my friend,” continued the - mystic earnestly, “of your existence but as a journey towards a - goal, on which hardships must be suffered by the way. You are now - but working out the fulfillment of your fate. Remember, those who - would ascend must suffer; affliction is the flame which purifies; - pain teaches compassion.” (pp. 89, 90. Vol. III.) - -When asked of himself, Benoni replies: - - “Misfortune cannot compass, distress overwhelm, nor - disappointments assail me, because the things of the world are as - naught to my senses, and man’s life seems but a dream. Before this - stage affliction must have crucified the senses; self must be - conquered, slain, and entombed.” (p. 91, Vol. III.) - -There are other passages equally true from the occult standpoint, -and we trust their readers will benefit by them and appreciate them. - -As regards Amerton’s character, we see the natural, born, mystic -turning aside and voluntarily taking upon himself, though warned, -the bonds of married life. These become intolerable to him, and the -unhappiness of two persons results. Occultism is a jealous mistress, -and, once launched on that path, it is necessary to resolutely -refuse to recognise any attempt to draw one back from it. Amerton -wanted to crush out his natural tendencies to occultism, and failed. -It is as hard to draw back from them, and turn attention solely to -the things of the world, as it is, when studying occultism, to turn -our attention solely to the invisible regions, and neglect -absolutely the physical world. - -The other characters in the novel make it light, graceful and -pleasant reading. The interest is ever preserved from the first to -the last scene, and certainly no one could find, in all the three -volumes, one dull page in them. Moreover, Mr. Fitzgerald Molloy -seems an acute observer. Some of his secondary heroes, such as the -wealthy widow, Mrs. Henry Netley, a plebeian enamoured of rank and -title, and Lord Pompey Rokeway, “a gay, though ancient, personage,” -who uses rouge, wig, and corsets, and imagines every woman in love -with him—are portraits from nature, to one who knows anything of -modern society. In short, “The Modern Magician,” as a work of -fiction, can fearlessly bear comparison with any of the modern -productions written lately upon occult subjects, with the solitary -exception of Rider Haggard’s “She,” and surpasses some in unabated -interest. We might be more exacting and severe, perhaps, were it a -purely theosophical work. As it stands, however, we must -congratulate Mr. Molloy in having clothed the subject of mysticism -in such graceful robes; had he been as good a literary workman as he -is an excellent constructor of plots, the book should have met with -unqualified approval. Meanwhile, we wish it the greatest success. - - ------------------ - -“THE TWIN SOUL: A PSYCHOLOGICAL AND REALISTIC ROMANCE,” in two - volumes, by an Anonymous Author. Ward & Downey, 12, York Street, - Covent Garden. - -This is quite another kind of literary production than the “Modern -Magician,” just reviewed. It aspires to more serious and -philosophical mysticism, but fails rather ungloriously. There are -passages in it which, taken out of the work, especially at the -beginning of Volume I., might be made the subjects of short and -rather useful little treatises upon mystic theories; but, as a -whole, the book is one of the most disappointing novels published -for some time. It begins well, goes on from bad to worse, promises -much, holds nothing, and ends nowhere, seeming to be written not as -a work of fiction, but simply to ventilate the author’s ideas. -These—the work being anonymous—have to be judged by the novel alone. -It is rumoured that the “Twin Soul” is the occasional work of twelve -years’ labour, and the disconnected character of its events bears -out the rumour. Its style is pedantic, though good in writing, while -the matter and plot are heavy, and delivered in a long-winded and -didactic manner. - -The story is that of one Mr. Rameses, an exceedingly virtuous, -learned, and solemn Oriental millionaire, whose real nationality -remains to the end a mystery, and whose story is narrated by a -somewhat cynical English philosopher, called De Vere. The latter -tells the story in the style which suits him best, and is perfectly -natural. He is humorous and amusing, even if slightly ponderous. But -alas for the reader! Mr. De Vere suddenly stops short at an early -stage, and the story is taken up, without any apparent cause or -reason, by a man unknown, who “had less sympathy with Mr. Rameses,” -and who has all the defects of Mr. De Vere’s qualities, and a good -many of his own besides, for he is even more ponderous and more -cynical, without his humour. Mr. Rameses is a peculiar character, -but, as sketched, he is quite in keeping with his Oriental origin. -He believes in many theories: re-incarnation, socialism, certain -occult doctrines, the possibility of recovering the memory of past -incarnations, and, as a matter of course, the modern craze of the -day, the theory of “twin souls.” He is perpetually in search of his -“twin,” and hunts her with the pertinacity of a sleuth-hound under -all forms, and in all places. Mr. De Vere is the possessor of an -Assyrian collection, Egyptian papyri, and also of two female -mummies—Amenophra and Lurulâ, the first the daughter of a Pharaoh, -the second a priestess of Isis—of which the sarcophagi are covered -with hieroglyphics, which Mr. Rameses reads with most surprising -ease. The hero, claiming his memory as a palimpsest, which by -certain processes clearly discovers the obliterated record of his -past incarnations, cannot, in spite of this, make up his mind which -of the two mummies was formerly the body of his twin-soul. Finally, -he solves the doubt by declaring them both to have been the mortal -casket of his beloved—with Lurulâ for choice. The reader here has -great hopes held out to him that there will be a grand ceremony, at -which the mummies are to be unrolled, and at which the soul of the -deceased mummy will be summoned back to shuffle on a mortal coil -again. Alas! such hopes are fallacious; for the ceremony never takes -place, owing to Mr. Rameses falling in love with the sister of a -Hindu lady married to an English baronet. After much hesitation the -lady so honoured by his choice is also declared to be the vehicle of -his twin-soul, _i.e._, to save appearances—to be a re-incarnation of -the ego which formerly dwelt in the mummy or mummies. Finally, after -a long-winded oration over the mystic properties of a magnificent -present of jewels, Mr. Rameses wins “the fair Niona,” as she is -called—who, although a Hindu, is a Zoroastrian Sun-worshipper. They -are married, notwithstanding their “paganism,” according to Roman -Catholic rites, and the pair start to spend the honeymoon in Egypt, -where, in the Temple of Isis at Thebes, they are to be again united -according to the—to them—more sacred ritual of Sun-worship. After a -very interesting dream about the Deluge, which broke through an -isthmus uniting Gibraltar to North Africa, and destroyed a vast -civilization which occupied the floor of the present Mediterranean -Sea, they arrive safely in Egypt. Here the fair Hindu of Zoroastrian -persuasion and Italian name, has another interesting psychic vision, -an interview with the Sphinx, which makes her incontinently faint, -and lose consciousness. Then they proceed to Thebes, and, after due -care, make selection of the site of the Temple of Isis. They build -their bonfire and ignite it, but at the supreme moment Niona gives a -gasp, faints, and this time dies outright, with as little reason for -it as every other incident in the novel has. The return to Cairo is -immediately commenced, and here Niona, in strict keeping with Mr. -Rameses’s habits, is at once converted into a mummy. It must be -rather interesting to possess the body of three defunct twin souls, -and reflect upon their virtues. - -The rest of the book is occupied by various disquisitions of the -author, disguised flimsily under conversations of his characters on -the social and political customs of the Nineteenth century. Read -carefully, the conversations contain ideas, but are likely to offend -on account of their length and ponderousness. As regards the -construction of the book and the characters, Mr. Rameses is -interesting, in spite of his solemnity and his love of mummies, and -Mr. De Vere is amusing. The other _dramatis personæ_ seem to have -been created merely as pegs upon which to hang the author’s -opinions. What, for instance, is the object of entering into detail -upon the passionate episodes in the career of Mr. Rameses’s -secretary, or the mercenary marriage of Lady Gwendoline Pierrepoint -with “Old Methusaleh”? Their only excuse can be that they may serve -to increase the contrast between such marriages and that with a twin -soul. Taken as a whole, the ideas are interesting, and the mystic -utterances in the first volume almost correct from the orthodox -occult point. But the manner in which they are displayed is -irritating, and this chiefly because the reader is perpetually being -brought up to a point of interest, and as perpetually left -disappointed. - - ----------------------- - - - POSTHUMOUS HUMANITY.[129] - ------ - -Footnote 129: - - _Posthumous Humanity_, a study of Phantoms, by Adolphe d’Assier, - Member of the Bordeaux Academy of Sciences. Translated and - annotated by Henry S. Olcott, President of the Theosophical - Society. George Redway, London, 1887. 8vo. pp. 360. - ------ - -This is a translation from the French by Colonel H. S. Olcott, -President of the Theosophical Society, of the remarkable work of -that name, by a well-known _savant_, Adolphe d’Assier. The original -work appeared a few years ago, and produced a stir both in the -sceptical public and unbelieving science, and an outcry among the -spiritists of France, whose pet theories about the “spirits” of the -dead it upset. “Posthumous Humanity” was not only a singularly -interesting work, but it was one of the first, and perhaps the -loudest, of the bugle notes that heralded the last act of the fierce -battle between materialistic science and spiritualism; for it ended -in the virtual defeat of the former, at any rate, upon one line: it -forced the hand of the majority of sceptics in the recognition of -what is called in mysticism the “astral body” of man and animal, and -by more pretentious than wise investigators “the _phantasms_ of the -living,” forgetting those of the dead. - -That a learned member of an academy of science should, of all men, -write a serious book on the phenomena of “the Borderland,” accepting -as facts in nature such things as ghostly appearances, and the -projection of the double, is almost a phenomenon in itself. And what -makes the case the more remarkable as an indication of a new current -in public opinion, is the fact that these things, which it has -hitherto been the fashion to consign with a laugh or a shudder to -the limbo of exploded superstitions, are treated by the author in a -perfectly scientific spirit. He accounts for them, not by the usual -supposition of hallucination or stupidity on the part of observers, -but by an exceedingly ingenious and plausible postulation of forces -at work in us, and around us, which are as little “supernatural” as -any of the recognised forces of nature, or portions of man’s -constitution. Not only has M. d’Assier the courage to face the -probable ridicule of the wiseacres, but he has the audacity to turn -the tables upon “men of science,” by actually making fun of their -unmeasured pretensions, and twitting them mercilessly about their -past mistakes. Not the least remarkable feature in the case is the -fact that the author, who started into these researches an ardent -positivist, has come out of them an ardent positivist still. He -believes that what he has accomplished is to extend the reign of -matter into a region previously believed to belong to spirit, thus -planting the standard of positivism in a wider and more fruitful -region, which he has happily reclaimed from the winds and tides of -superstition. But the fact is, that although our author has gone a -good deal further than most of those who start out “on their own -hook” to explore the realms of the Occult, he cannot be said to have -penetrated very far into the mysteries of being. He has peeped in at -the door of the psychic antechamber to the spiritual world -proper—the ante-chamber in which the members of Psychical Research -Societies amuse themselves and others by playing blindman’s buff -with hypothesis—and his interesting volume tells us of the wonderful -things that go on there. The result of his researches, as he says in -his _Preface_, is the conclusion that “posthumous humanity is, in -fact, but a special example of posthumous animality, and that the -latter presents itself as the immediate consequence of the living -world.” Every tyro in theosophy knows that this conclusion is a fair -approximation to the truth, and were man nothing but an animal of -high degree, it might possibly be the whole truth. But man is an -animal, plus _something_, and this something _more_, is precisely -what M. d’Assier leaves entirely out of sight, as indeed he could -hardly help doing if he attached any importance to remaining a -Positivist. It is this _something more_, of whose very existence our -author seems profoundly unconscious, that has the chief interest for -us, for that is the spiritual and eternal part of man, in -contradistinction to the psychic portion which fades away and -disappears after a time, as M. d’Assier very justly declares. - -It seems a pity that a learned and ingenious man, like our author, -should not have begun investigations of this kind by making himself -familiar with at least the bare outline of the metaphysical and -psychological system that underlies the schools of philosophy of -India. This system is the result of very profound research into such -phenomena as our author deals with, and also into other far deeper -and more important manifestations that he has not considered at all; -and these researches have for thousands of years occupied, to a -greater or lesser degree, almost every thinking man among races -which are acknowledged to be possessed of a very high degree of -intellectual acuteness and spiritual insight. Were our Western -adventurers into the borderland between spirit and matter—the astral -world—to take this obvious precaution, they would know that the -ground over which they now laboriously make their way, has not only -been traversed before, but pretty fully surveyed and mapped out, and -that their supposed discoveries amount virtually to no more than a -verification of results long ago obtained by others. This very -needed exception in the work under review has been obviated by the -translator’s notes and supplement, without diminishing the practical -value of M. d’Assier’s treatise as a useful contribution to occult -literature. For, as his labours do actually confirm much of the -teachings of Theosophy, with regard to that part of the constitution -of man, which is common to him and the animals, the work, as it now -stands, is really a valuable occult treatise as to facts. The -important question with the world, in these times, being not so much -_what is said_, as _who it is that says it_, the fact that an -incorrigible positivist, has published his belief in the actuality -of a psychic plane of existence, and of the temporary survival in it -after death of a certain part or principle of the animal (including -man), is of the greatest help and importance to theosophy. It will -probably affect public opinion far more profoundly than if a -thousand Eastern sages proclaimed the same elementary fact of -Occultism in chorus. No better illustration of, and testimony to, -the reality of plain, broad facts in connection with wraiths, -“doubles,” and other such apparitions, can be found than in -d’Assier’s “Posthumous Humanity” in its new English garb, by Colonel -Olcott, and with the translator’s _Preface_ and annotations to the -text. These add greatly to the value of the book for the student of -Occultism. In fact, these additions serve the same purpose which a -notice of the work in LUCIFER might have been expected to have in -view; for they correct the author in some particulars, add -additional information in others, and generally forestall the critic -who writes from the Theosophical standpoint. Besides this, the -translator has added a highly interesting and unique _appendix_, -giving the opinions of numerous Hindus of various castes and sects -upon psychic phenomena of that kind, collected from various parts of -India, which, by itself, has considerable value to the student of -mystical sciences. In conclusion, we may record almost a general -opinion—save, of course, that of rank materialists—that no work yet -published on the subject dealt with by our author is better -calculated to reach the scientifically-minded enquirer. It is -written with calmness and logical clearness that takes the scoffer’s -laugh out of his mouth. It goes as far as anyone new to the subject -could be reasonably expected to follow; and the direction it takes -is the right one. It is preeminently _the_ book for the too -sceptical and ignorant enquirer to begin with. - - ----------------------- - -ספר יצירה, _Sepher Yetzirah, The Book of Formation, and the -Thirty-two Paths of Wisdom_; _translated from the Hebrew, and -collated with Latin Versions. By Dr. W. Wynn Westcott, Bath: Robert -H. Fryar_, 1887. - -This is a treatise of about 30 quarto pages on that well-known -Hebrew occult work, the Sepher Yetzirah. It consists of an -introduction, giving the historic aspects of the matter, an English -translation of the Sepher Yetzirah and the Thirty-two Paths, and -several pages of notes, giving remarks on and variant readings of -difficult and disputed passages. - -The introductory pages bear the stamp of considerable literary -research, and the translation of the Book of Formation itself is -intelligible and concise. But we can hardly say as much for the -Thirty-two Paths, which, abstruse and difficult of comprehension in -the original, are, we are afraid, no more intelligible in the -translation. Owing to the unpopularity of the subject, there are -readers who will be readily drawing the conclusion that Dr. Westcott -himself does not altogether understand their mystical bearing and -symbolism. Yet the notes on the actual text of the “Sepher Yetzirah” -are valuable, and show considerable occult knowledge. But a still -greater error is made by the translator. We notice that Dr. Westcott -has invariably rendered the word Elohim by “God,” notwithstanding -that it is a plural noun, as shown by the plural word “Chiim” joined -thereto in the ninth section of the first chapter. This will, no -doubt, prove grateful to the staff and readers of the _Jewish -World_, whose editors pride themselves, against all fact and truth, -on the _Monotheism_ of their early ancestors. It cannot fail to -strike the Kabalists as an unfortunate deviation from the original -meaning in favour of one laboriously fabricated by both Jewish and -Christian falsificators. - -The “Book of Formation” is a treatise consisting of 6 chapters and -33 sections, and thus its compilation is pentacular. The 6 chapters -refer to the Yetziratic World, the 6 periods of Genesis; while the -33 sections have a close analogy with the Thirty-two Paths which are -added at the end of the work. It is a philosophical disquisition on -the occult meanings of the ten numbers of the decimal scale, and the -22 letters of the Hebrew sacred alphabet. The first chapter deals -with the numbers, which it divides into a Tetrad (symbolising -Spirit, Air, Water, and Fire), and a Hexad (symbolising Height, -Depth, East, West, South and North). The second chapter treats -generally of the 22 letters, produced from the Air or the number 2, -and divided into 3 Mother-letters, 7 double-letters, and 12 simple -letters. The third chapter shows the symbolic reference of the 3 -Mother-letters to Air, Water, and Fire; the fourth chapter that of -the 7 double-letters to the Planets &c.; the fifth chapter that of -the 12 simple letters to the signs of the Zodiac, &c.; and the sixth -chapter forms the synthesis. - -The 32 paths are no other than symbolical developments of the 10 -Sephiroth or numbers, and the 22 letters which form the connecting -links between them. - -Altogether the work is interesting and worthy of careful study. - - ------------------ - - TREBLE CHORDS. - - POEMS BY CATHERINE GRANT FURLEY. - - Edinburgh: R. and R. Clark. - -This is an inviting little book of verse, with an ill-chosen title. -Why “Treble Chords,” when the author cannot compose anything more -than a single part? The octave is spanned by treble or threefold -chords, but Miss Furley has not yet reached the octave of -attainment! No, the book must be re-christened at its second birth; -and the protest of the _Girton Girl_, and the more sustained poem of -the _Other Isolt_, are assuredly good enough to interest and delight -a sufficient number of women to send it into a second edition. The -writer has a distinct faculty of seeing, as well as the tendency to -take the “other side,” as she does in _Isolt of Brittany_ and in -_Galatea to Pygmalion_. The moral of the latter poem is thus -presented: - - “O, frequent miracle! so often seen - We scarcely pause to think what it may mean— - Man’s power to raise within a woman’s heart - A love he does not know, nor could impart; - To wake a soul within the marble breast, - Then long to soothe it back to stony rest; - For, though the woman’s sweeter to caress, - The statue’s more convenient to possess.” - -Here is a specimen of the sonnets, not the best, perhaps, but to the -purpose: - - CIRCE. - - Men call me Circe, but my name is Love; - And my cup holds the draught of sweet and sour, - Of gain, joy, loss, renouncement, all the dower - That woman’s love brings man. I hold above - Your outstretched hand the chalice; ere you prove - Its potency, bethink you; it has power - To test your soul. If in a sinful hour - You touch it, you shall sink as those who strove - Of old to win my heart. Lo! there they be, - Not men but beasts; for with impure desire - They sought me, and Love holds _that_ blasphemy; - And for their sin doth bid them dwell in mire - Nor know their shame. Had they been pure in thought, - My cup had strengthened them and injured not. - -It is but a tiny handful, this, of first flowers; not even a -gathering of first-fruits. But they have the fragrance of promise, -and a freshness of real rarity. Whether the fruit will set and -mature must depend upon the sunshine and the rain and other -surroundings of the struggling life, and on the depth of soil and -strength of rootage. Of these we cannot judge; but the first-flowers -are sweet and pretty and worth a word of welcome. - - G. M. - - ------------------ - - THE CREATOR, AND WHAT WE MAY KNOW OF THE METHOD OF CREATION.[130] - ------ - -Footnote 130: - - The Fernley Lecture, 1887, by Dr. Dallinger. T. Woolmer, 2, Castle - Street, City Road, London E.C. (1s. 6d., paper covers.) - ------ - -The above is the title of a lecture, forming the seventeenth of what -are known as the “Fernley Lectures,” delivered annually, by the -leading minds in the Ministry of the Wesleyan Methodist Society. -This specific lecture is the latest of the series, and was delivered -in Manchester, August 1st in present year, by the Rev. W. H. -Dallinger, LL.D., F.R.S., Pres. R.M.S., etc., Governor of Wesley -College, Sheffield. - -The lecture occupies an unique position amongst its fellows, and -will bear a most favourable comparison with any that have been -delivered by the various Presidents of the Royal Society on the -sciences of the day. For clearness of argument and lucidity of -thought—_as far as it goes_—it is unsurpassed, and, as a specimen of -the power of English language, it is a treat to all who can estimate -its value. It is all this, and more, and here its significance and -suggestiveness comes in, and I can do no less than characterise its -delivery under the circumstances, to an auditory that represents (in -the eyes of the sect itself, at all events) the purest form of -Evangelical religion, as a startling phenomenon, and as such I -consider a notice of it in no way out of place in a theosophical -journal. That such a lecture should be allowed to be delivered and -favourably received, not only by the audience, but by the Wesleyan -body at large, is a “sign of the times” that the intelligent -observer cannot fail to discern. It is, undoubtedly, an index finger -that marks a large advance in the progress of human emancipation -from the increasingly intolerable yoke of Churchianic or -Ecclesiastical tyranny; and all “friends of progress” will -cheerfully render to the worthy and eloquent lecturer the thanks -that are due for his manly and outspoken views upon the profoundest -question of the age. The strangest part is the spectacle of a -“Minister of the Gospel,” himself a scientist of no mean order, -proclaiming from a Methodist platform his adherence to, and -acceptance of, the doctrines of Charles Darwin, as true exponents of -the “Method of Creation,” which means that “Natural Selection,” and -survival of the “Fittest,” accounts for the origin of species and -the indefinite variety of extinct and extant animal forms of life. -Why not include vegetable forms as well? Methinks the fabulous -“missing link” between the vegetable and animal kingdoms may, -without much difficulty, be actually spotted. Nature, as delineated -by the great “Naturalist,” must have been very peevish and unkind to -her worshippers, when she mocks them by destroying every vestige, -even to the veriest fragmentary fossil, of this anxiously looked for -and expectant missing link, between the animal (brute) and man! To -my view, the continuous chain of sequential life forms, as presented -in the Darwinian theory, evinces a vast number of “missing links,” -and, unless these can be supplied, it will not bear the strain when -tested by the unclouded intellect of man. The philosopher of -Materialism may accept the Darwinian theories (for as yet they are -nothing less or more) as gospel, but the spiritual philosopher will -not, nor can he accept them as truth, simply because he recognises a -factor, which is an abomination in the eyes of the materialistic -“wise ones.” It is this factor that the eloquent and learned -lecturer pleads for, without suspecting what it really is. I have -reason to know that our reverend scientist regards this “Spiritual” -factor with the utmost contempt. But I leave this, and pass on to -notice some of the really valuable thoughts and facts that ennoble -the lecture, which is addressed to “thoughtful and earnest minds, -not concerned specially with questions of philosophy, metaphysics, -and science, but alive to the advanced knowledge and thought of our -times, and anxious to know how the great foundation of religious -belief, the existence of Deity, is affected by the splendid advance -of our knowledge of nature.” - -This expression “existence of Deity” is conveniently elastic enough -to cover the ground of argument by a scientific theologian, inasmuch -as it may be taken to mean a personal God, according to sound -Evangelical belief, and thus assume a plausible defence of Theism -versus Atheism; or, it may admit of a much wider application to an -“Unknown God”; for when the lecturer does venture to delineate the -characteristic of Deity as the Creator, it is such terms as -“Inscrutable Power or Creator,” “Eternal Mind,” “Infinite -Intelligence,” &c., which is tantamount to saying that the Primal -Cause of all that is, is unknowable; and if this is what Dr. -Dallinger really means, he is at one with the Spiritual Philosopher; -but this will be a curious weapon in the hands of an ecclesiastical -theologian—as dangerous as it is curious. By the use of these terms -the reverend author shields himself from the charge of materialistic -heresy, albeit to the clear-sighted one there are several, if not -many, weak and vulnerable points in the defensive armour; but if the -adherents and votaries of the “faith once delivered to the saints” -might be a little chary in their acceptance of him as a “sound” -exponent of religious truth, yet all progressive minds will hail him -as a fearless champion for the truth as delivered by the Book of -Nature and interpreted by the splendid achievements of modern -science. - - “The study of phenomena, their succession and their - classification, is the essential work of science. It has no - function, and is possessed of no instrument with which to look - behind or below the sequence, in quest of some higher relation. - The eye and mind of the experimentalist know only of antecedent - and consequent. These fill the whole circle of his research; let - him find these, and he has found all.” - -Here the domain of “science” is defined by a master mind, which -tells us that “the researches of science are physical.” The -observable, finite contents of space and time are the subjects of -its analysis. Existence, not the cause of existence, succession, not -the reason of succession, method, not the origin of method, are the -subjects of physical research. A primordial cause cannot be the -subject of experiment nor the object of demonstration. It must for -ever transcend the most delicate physical re-action, the profoundest -analysis, and the last link in the keenest logic. Science refuses -absolutely to recognise mind as the primal cause of the sequences of -matter. This is just—within the strict region of its research—for -phenomena, their sequences and classification, are its sole domain. -But observe; science universally puts _force_ where the reason asks -for cause. The forces affecting matter are tacitly assumed to be -competent to account for every activity, every sequence, every -phenomenon, and all the harmonies of universal being, a nexus for -the infinite diversities and harmonies, a basis for all the -equilibrium of nature, is found by modern science in force. But -force is as absolutely inscrutable as mind. Force can never be known -in itself; it is known by its manifestations. It is not a -phenomenon, it produces phenomena. We cannot know it; but we know -nothing without it. The ultimate analysis of physical science is the -relations of matter and force. In irreducible terms, therefore, the -final analysis of science is _matter as affected by motion_. - -We now see, from the above excerpta, the goal to which the “splendid -discoveries” of modern science lead its votaries, as portrayed by an -authority that claims to speak not as other men; and if it is not a -veritable dismal swamp, leading to nothing or negation; a miasma -suffocating the aspirations of those who are trusting to the -leadership of _savants_ to guide them in the path that conveys them -to the habitat of true wisdom and knowledge of themselves; then I -can only say of such, “miserable comforters are ye all.” - -But the question intervenes here: is this a true definition of the -end and aim of science? It may be to the majority of the Royal -Society; but I may tell those who claim to be the conservators of -science, and who arrogate to themselves the right to define the -boundaries of even physical science, that they do not possess the -_all_ of human intelligence, and that there are, outside their -societies, men who refuse to bow the knee to the modern scientific -Baal, who refuse to be cajoled by the use of terms that mystify but -certainly do not enlighten. For instance, who is one wit the wiser -when, having reached the end of its tether, science discovers that -“matter and motion” govern and regulate all things observable by the -human eye, or within the range of the human mind? To the credit of -the author of the last Fernley Lecture, he sees and acknowledges the -dilemma into which “materialistic” science is driven; but whether -“theological” science, so ably represented by himself, can -altogether evade it, is a question that I do not here stay to -propound. This much, however, I may say, scientific dicta -notwithstanding, there is another department of scientific research -which _does_ form the _nexus_—the _veritable_ missing link—between -the known and their unknown, and this is the science of psychology, -which commences just where the professors of science (physical) -confess themselves baffled, and are unable, or rather unwilling, to -advance further in this to them _terra incognita_. The wilful -ignoring of this by Materialistic leaders of thought ends by putting -them out of court in the discussion of the profound problems arising -out of the discoveries of the psychological scientist. In -presence of facts, the evidence for which are world wide and as -demonstrable—_on their own plane or ground_—as geological, or -astronomical facts which the psychologist adduces, of what -conceivable use are the “relations of matter and force” of the -physicist, as explanatory of the laws, &c., pertaining to the new -world discovered by psychological _Savants_? - -It will be new to many of your readers to find the Rev. Dr. -“hob-nobbing” with Professor Huxley, who is quoted as—_not_ a -Materialist! The learned professor appears to be indignant with -those who are zealous for “the fundamental article of the faith -materialistic,” who “parade force and matter as the Alpha and Omega -of existence,” and says, “If I were forced to choose between -Materialism and Idealism, I would elect for the latter”; and the -lecturer adds, “Truly, if our choice must be between them, this is -the normal alternative.” It were better had the Professor given some -inkling as to what _he_ meant by this high-sounding term -“Idealism.”[131] - ------ - -Footnote 131: - - Both the Idealism of Mr. Herbert Spencer, and the Hylo-Idealism of - Dr. Lewins are more materialistic and atheistic than any of the - honestly declared materialistic views—Buchner’s and Molaschott’s - included.—[ED.] - ------ - -The author again says—“I adopt gladly the language of Professor -Huxley: Belief, in the scientific sense of the word, is a serious -matter, and needs, strong foundations. If it were given me to look -beyond the abyss of geologically recorded time to the still more -remote period when the earth was passing through physical and -chemical conditions, I should expect to be a witness of the -evolution of living protoplasm from not-living matter.” - -“So should I,” adds the Rev. Dr., who brings in Mr. Crooks (?), of -whom the lecturer says, “I do not forget the recent and splendid -service done by Mr. Crooks to the philosophical side of chemistry. -It is a most subtle and exquisite means of endeavouring to deduce -the _method_, the ‘_law_’ according to which what we know as the -‘chemical elements’ were built up. He obtains indications of a -primitive element—a something out of which the elements were -evolved. He calls it _protyle_ or first stuff, and from its presence -concludes that the elements, as we know them, have been evolved from -simpler matter—or perhaps, indeed, from one sole kind of matter.” In -the following sentences he tries hard to depreciate this “splendid -discovery” by Mr. Crooks, the reason for which is anything but -difficult to discover. Dr. Dallinger _knows_ that Mr. Crooks -published a work entitled “Researches in the Phenomena of -Spiritualism,” containing his _Experimental_ Investigations in -Psychic Force, which he, in conjunction with his friend Huxley, -thinks it beneath him to notice. - -But _I_ claim the “splendid discovery” of Mr. Crooks to be of far -more transcendent importance than the learned scientist will admit. -It comes marvellously near to the scientific demonstration of the -ethic propounded by the “philosophy of spirit,” “There is but one -life, and one substance, by which life is manifested in an -infinitude of forms in all universes, from the simplest to the most -complex organic.” - -On this subject the Lecture contains the following eloquent, and, I -may add, brilliant peroration. - - “Life, it is well known, has its phenomena inherent in, and - strictly confined to, a highly complex compound, with fixed - chemical constituents. This compound, in its living state, is - known as protoplasm. It is clear, colourless, and to our finest - optical resources, devoid of discoverable structure. There is - not a living thing on earth but possesses its life in - protoplasm, from a microscopic fungus, to Man. To depict the - properties of Life in irreducible simplicity, take one of the - lowliest instances within the range of science. Let it be one of - the exquisitely minute, almost infinitely prolific, and - universally diffused living forms that set up, and carry on, - putrefaction. The lesser of them may, when considered as solid - specks, vary from the fifty-thousand-millionth of a cubic inch - to the twenty-billionth of a cubic inch (evidently far beneath - the unaided optic power of the human eye to see). I select one - that is oval in shape. Its mission as an organism, is to break - up and set free the chemical elements that had been locked up in - dead organic compounds. (Query—Was this tiny creature - self-generated, or was it the product of the _dead_ organism?) - Its own substance wears out by this and other means; and it has - the power to renovate the waste from the dead decomposition in - which it lives, constructing, in the lavatory of its protoplasm, - new living matter. But more; this vital and inconceivably minute - speck multiplies with astounding rapidity in two ways; by the - first and common process, in the course of a minute and a half, - the entire body is divided into two precisely similar bodies, - each one perfect; almost immediately these again divide, and so - on in geometric ratio through all the populated fluid; the - rapidity of this intense and wonderful vital action transcending - all thought. By this process alone, a single form may, in three - hours, give rise to a population of organisms as great as the - human population of the globe. This is life—whether vegetable or - animal none can determine—in the simplest form in which it can - be known, and which distinguish it for ever and everywhere from - what is not life.” - -Several equally interesting examples of recent scientific -discoveries are given, but space forbids me to more than mention -them. Science, as represented by the _Savants_, evidently believes -in an unbridged chasm between the forms of life and not-life. The -Scientist and Philosopher of Spirit join issue on this, for they -declare that “Life is present everywhere, and _in_ all forms, -organic or non-organic, and without the presence of Life no -forms—not even mineral—could be phenomenal or _ex_istent.” - -Your space does not permit me to deal with more than one other, and, -to many, the more important subject of Biblical records coming -within the domain of science. Here is a specimen of how the learned -scientist and theologian deals with the biblical account of -Creation. - - “And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth the living creature - after his kind.’ That is the utterance of the human conception, - which can alone represent to us the divine resolve to fill the - earth with life—and the joy of living things. ‘And it was so.’ But - what epochs of countless ages filled the incalculable - interval?”[132] - ------ - -Footnote 132: - - A few years—and, who knows? perhaps only few months more, and - Protestant England will have reverend scientists explaining to - their congregations from the pulpits that Adam and Eve were but - the “missing link”—_two tailless baboons_.—[ED.] - ------ - -The boldness of this utterance from one in the position of the -Reverend Lecturer can be well imagined. It contains the elements of -combustion which need but the spark of investigation to deal a death -blow to the established Churchianic dogma of Biblical infallibility -in its literal sense. I conclude by repeating that such a -deliverance by a ministerial representative of the Wesleyan -denomination is a phenomenon that strikingly indicates the “Signs of -the times,” and which shows that the emancipation of the human mind -from the bonds of theological presumption is not far distant. - - WILLIAM OXLEY. - -Higher Broughton, Manchester, _December_ 11th, 1887. - - ------------------ - -ABSOLUTE MONISM; OR, MIND IS MATTER AND MATTER IS MIND. By SUNDARAM -IYER, F.T.S. Madras, 1887. - -Under the above title the author issues an address delivered at the -last convention of the delegates of the Theosophical Society at -Adyar. Metaphysicians, who note with interest all criticisms of -Western psychology from the Oriental standpoint, will welcome the -appearance of this extremely able and instructive _brochure_, which -constitutes the first instalment of Absolute Monism. The object of -the writer is to discuss the point whether an examination of all -theories, as to relations of mind and body, “does not lead us to the -Unistic theory that Mind is Matter, and Matter is Mind.” He -endeavours to merge the apparent dualism of subject and object into -a fundamental unity:— - - “Is mind a product of organized matter? No ... for organized - matter is only a combination of material particles, as is - unorganized matter. How is it, then, that there is the - manifestation of Mind in the one case, and not in the other?... - Can subjective facts ever emerge out of a group of molecules? - Never; as many times never as there are molecules in the group. - And why? Because Mind cannot issue from No Mind.” (p. 13.) - -The line of argument adopted _versus_ Materialism—the doctrine that -mental facts are the _resultant_ of chemical changes in the brain; -force and matter being the only Ultimates of Existence—is -unquestionably forcible. Mind can never be resolved into a -“bye-product” of brain activity, for several valid reasons. In the -first place, in its aspect of thought, it exhibits _concentration on -an end_, _intelligence_ and _interest_ in the subject under -consideration, all of which characteristics, according to -Tyndall and Du Bois Reymond, are necessarily absent from those -remarshallings of atoms and molecules which are declared to -“cerebrate out” mental phenomena! In the second place, the gulf -between consciousness and molecular change has never been bridged; -an admission to which the leading physicists and physiologists of -the day lend all the weight of their authority. The terms -“consciousness” and “matter” are expressive of things so utterly -contrasted, that all attempts to deduce the former from the latter -have met with signal discredit. Nevertheless, materialists assume -the contrary, whenever the necessities of their philosophy demand -it. Hence, we find men, like Büchner, admitting in one place that -“in the relation of soul and brain, phenomena occur which _cannot be -explained by ... matter and force_,” and elsewhere resolving -mind into the “_activity of the tissues of the brain_,” “a -mode of motion”—contradictions, the flagrancy of which is -enhanced by the fact that the same author invests the physical -automaton Man with a power to control his actions! Lastly, the -degradation of consciousness into “brain-function” by constituting -philosophers, theologians, scientists, and all alike “conscious -automata”—(machines whose thoughts are determined _for_, not _by_ -their conscious Egos)—knocks away the basis of argument. The only -resource becomes universal scepticism; a denial of the possibility -of attaining truth. Can impartiality, correct thinking and -agreement, be expected on the part of controversialists who form -part of a comedy of Automata? - -If mind is not inherent in matter, it cannot be evolved by mere -nervous complexity. The combination of two chemical elements cannot -result in a compound in which something more than the constituent -factors are present. It is sometimes urged that, since the -properties of substances are often altogether changed in the course -of chemical combinations—new ones arising with the temporary lapse -of the old—consciousness may be explained as a “peculiar property” -of matter under some of its conditions. Mr. Sundaram Iyer meets this -objection ably. “Aquosity,” it is said, is a property of oxygen and -hydrogen in combination, though not in isolation. To this he -answers, “chemical properties are either purely subjective facts or -objectivo-subjective ones” (p. 57). They exist only in the -consciousness of the percipient, and represent no external and -independent reality. Psychologists of the type of Huxley would do -well to recall this fact, apart from the considerations springing -from other data. - -Our author is loud in his praises of _Panpsychism_, that phase of -pantheism which regards all matter as saturated with a potential -psyche. He speaks of the “catholicity, sublimity and beauty ... not -to say the philosophy, and logic, and truthfulness of this creed of -thought.” It is, however, clear that some of the authorities he -cites in support of this view, more especially Clifford, Tyndall, -and Ueberweg, represent a phase of thought which is too -materialistic to do justice to an elevated pantheistic concept. -Clifford’s _conscious_ mind-_stuff_ is sublimated materialism, and -Ueberweg speaks of those “sensations” present in “inanimate” objects -which are “concentrated” in the human brain, as if they represented -so many substances to be weighed in scales. Instructive and -thoughtful as is the discussion of this subject (pp. 32-63), its -value would have been increased by a survey of the pantheistic -schools of German speculation, so many of whose conclusions are -absolutely at one with esoteric views as to the Logos and the -metaphysics of consciousness. - -After discussing the primary and secondary (so-called) qualities of -matter, as tabulated by Mill, Hamilton and others, Mr. Sundaram Iyer -passes on the question: “What is force?” - - “Force _is_ matter ... it may be related to matter in ... four - ways:—firstly, it may be an extraneous power to matter, acting - upon it from without; secondly, it may be an inherent power in - matter, influencing it from within, but yet distinct from the - substance of matter; thirdly, it may be an innate power in matter, - influencing it from within, and not distinct from the substance of - matter; or fourthly, it may be a function of the substance of - matter.” (p. 76-7.) - -After an interesting criticism of current theories, he concludes -that:— - - “Function is simply the phenomenal effect of the latent cause, - namely force, but never force itself. This potential existence, - which is in matter, _is a physical existence_. If not it cannot, - as shown before, produce any impression whatsoever upon or in the - substance of matter.” - -Matter is force and force is matter. It is not quite evident, -however, whether this position is strictly reconcilable with the -remark that “the primary qualities of matter are all simplifiable -into ... extension and (its) motion (actual or possible).” - -If force is a _physical existence_, and the real _substance_ of -matter at the same time, we get back no further into the mystery of -what things-in-themselves really are. Physical existence remains the -reality behind physical existence and the realization of matter and -force, as aspects only of one basis, in no way simplifies the crux. - -It is not clear, moreover, what is the exact meaning the author -intends by the use of the word “force.” Is it motion—molar or -molecular—or the unknown cause of motion? According to Professor -Huxley, “force” is merely an expression used to denote the _cause_ -of motion, whatever that may be. We only _know_ this cause in its -_aspect_ of motion, and cannot penetrate behind the veil in order to -grasp the Noumenon of which motion is the phenomenal effect. The -necessity, therefore, of recognising the fact that _motion_ is all -that falls within the cognizance of sense, forbids the (profane) -scientist to use the term “force” as representative of anything but -an abstraction. The question is complicated by the consideration -that the _substantiality_ of various so-called “forces” appears most -probable, and that this substantiality becomes objectively real to -sense, only on a plane beyond this—the domain of matter in its order -of physical differentiations. - -The materialistic doctrine that force merely = a motion of matter is -contradicted by the fact that, as shown by Mill, _motion can be -temporarily neutralized_. Lift a heavy weight on to a shelf and the -mechanical energy expended in the act is latent in the potentiality -of the weight to fall to the ground again. There is _no immediate -equivalent_, as the attraction of the earth for the object remains -the same (the now greater distance tending to diminish the amount -though in a very minute degree.) - -It may be further noted that, granting Mr. Sundaram Iyer’s -definition of matter as “_extension pure and simple_,” to be correct -(p. 112), it is difficult to understand how he predicates this -barren content as endowed with _motion_ (p. 83.) What moves? - -The rest of the _brochure_ is taken up with some excellent criticism -of current conceptions of atoms, space and heterogenealism (a creed -now so sorely wounded by Mr. Crooke’s “Protyle.”) Dealing with one -of the late Mr. G. H. Lewe’s utterances, the author remarks -with great truth: “By some mysterious law of occurrence the -self-contradictions of the bulk of the erudite and enlightened are -in point of gravity, palpableness, and number in direct proportion -to their erudition and enlightenment.” With how many contrasted -dicta from the pages of our Büchners, Spencers, Bains etc., etc., -could this conclusion be supported. - -One word before we close. Is the title of the work well chosen? It -appears to us the least satisfactory sentence which has been traced -by the writer’s pen. The definition of “mind as matter and matter as -mind” not only offers no solution of the great psychological problem -discussed, but does injustice to the contents of the work itself. - -In the process of definition we “assemble representative examples of -the phenomena,” under investigation and “our work lies in -generalizing these, in detecting community in the midst of -difference.” Now, there is _no community whatever_ between mental -and material facts. For as Professor Bain writes: - -“Extension is but the first of a long series of properties all -present in matter, _all absent in mind_ ... our mental experience, -our feelings and thoughts, have no _extension_, no _place_, no -_form_[133] or _outline_, or _mechanical division_ of parts; and we -are incapable of attending to anything mental until we shut off the -view of all that.”—“_Mind and Body._” pp. 125 and 135. - ------ - -Footnote 133: - - Nevertheless _objectively_ viewed thoughts are actual entities to - the occultist. - ------ - -The phenomenal contrast of mind and matter is not only at the root -of our present constitution but an essential of our terrestrial -consciousness. Duality is illusion in the ultimate analysis; but -within the limits of a Universe-cycle or Great Manwantaræ it holds -true. The _two_ bases of manifested Being—the Logos (spirit) and -Mulaprakriti, (Matter, or rather its Noumenon) are unified in the -absolute reality, but in the Manvantaric Maya, under space and time -conditions, they _are contrasted though mutually interdependent -aspects of the_ ONE CAUSE. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - EDITORS’ NOTES. - -We have a good deal of correspondence now in type, but must stand -over till next month owing to lack of space. - -In particular we wish to acknowledge a letter on Hylo-Idealism, -signed C. N., forwarded to us by Dr. Lewins from a correspondent of -his now in the East. This letter places Hylo-Idealism in a new and -very different light, and its straightforward style and language are -in strong contrast to the turgid effusions of such writers as G. M. -McC. An extract from one of the latter’s letters to the “_Secular -Review_” (January 7, 1888), for instance, says that “Specialism _is_ -Superficialism, and _vice versa_, both being _fractionalism_; -and that the true desideratum is generalisationism (_i.e._ -_all-roundism_ and _all-throughism_), whereby and wherein the -Kantian and Hegelian metaphysic may be precipitated and modern -Materialism sublimed? There is only one alembic for both, and that -is Solipsism—that true ‘wisdom of the ages,’ in which the -profoundest thinker is at one with the little child.—G. M. -McC.”!!![134] - - ------------------ - -The following books have been received and will be noticed in due -course:— - -“Absolute Relativism; or, the Absolute in Relation,” by W. B. -McTaggart. (W. Stewart & Co.) - -“Spirit Revealed,” by Captain William C. Eldon Serjeant. (George -Redway.) - -“A Modern Apostle,” and other Poems, by Constance C. W. Naden. -(Kegan Paul, Trench & Co.) - -“Manuel of Etheropathy,” by Dr. Count Manzetti. - ------ - -Footnote 134: - - See also his letter under Correspondence. - ------ - - =Correspondence.= - - ------- - - THE CHURCH AND THE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT. - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -As it is often supposed that the clergy are required to be united as -one man in teaching a doctrine called Atonement, and that this -doctrine requires the clergy either to teach that “God required the -blood of Jesus to be shed and offered as a sacrifice for an -Atonement,” or to leave the Church if they reject it; therefore, -since I reject this doctrine, it is sometimes wondered how I can -either have been admitted to ordination, or, being admitted, how I -can remain in, or expect to have a hearing in, the pulpits of the -National Churches. - -_The explanation_ of my position is as follows: - -I offered myself as a candidate for ordination much later than is -usual; and _one_ of the three beneficed clergy, whose testimonials, -as to the candidate’s religious views being orthodox, each candidate -is required to provide before being accepted as a candidate for -examination and ordination, _informed_ the Bishop of London -(Jackson) that I did not hold Church of England views on the -Atonement. The Bishop, therefore, before accepting me as a -candidate, required a personal interview; when I told the Bishop, in -reply to his question, whether I had any difficulty in accepting the -doctrine of Atonement as taught in the second of the XXXIX. -Articles, that I was entering the Church in order to teach, that it -was the work of Jesus Christ to devote His life a living sacrifice -to persuade us to believe that in His love, His mind, His spirit -towards us, we saw (so far as it could be manifested in the human -form) the love, mind, and spirit of God towards us; and that the -sacrifice of Jesus consisted in His leaving nothing undone that love -could do or suffer, even to drinking to its very dregs the cup of -our hatred, whilst blind and ignorant, in order that we might accept -and believe His testimony. - -And, in addition, I told the Bishop that if the XXXIX. Articles did -not allow of this teaching, and demanded of the clergy to believe -and teach that “God required the blood of Jesus to be shed and -offered as a sacrifice for an Atonement, either to appease God’s -wrath, satisfy His justice, or propitiate His favour,” then such a -doctrine was immoral, anti-Christian, contrary to the Scriptures, -and made God to be no better than Shylock, a wolf, or a devil. And I -dared the Bishop to refuse accepting me as a candidate. - -The Bishop made no reply, neither assenting nor dissenting, and I -returned to Petersham to await the result of this interview. After a -day or two the Bishop’s chaplain wrote that I might consider my -proposal to come to the Bishop’s examination for Orders accepted; -and I was ordained without one word of comment upon the conversation -at this private interview. But my first vicar only allowed me to -preach three times, and then for the rest of the year he boycotted -me from either preaching, reading, or even speaking in the parish, -excepting only in a particular part of it. My second vicar, after -allowing me to preach three times, also boycotted me entirely. I -appealed to the Bishop, but he declined to interfere. So after -striving in vain to find a clergyman who would allow me to preach -what I was ordained to teach, I published pamphlets, and delivered -them by the hundred and thousand at the church doors after the -service, wherever there was a large congregation; but after a time -the Bishop was appealed to to stop me; when he not only denied me, -as Peter denied Jesus, but he threatened to instruct the police to -prevent me; and the ruling powers at St Paul’s Cathedral did -instruct the chief of the police to prevent me. - -As a last resort, I write letters in the Press wherever I can find a -newspaper willing to open its columns, to explain my views and -appeal to the people to obtain liberty in the Church for teaching -the truth of “Christ Crucified.” But so great is the opposition to -this, that the chief organ of the Church and the Press (the _Times_) -refuses even to allow me to advertise for a pulpit, on the ground -that it is _inadmissible_; notwithstanding all the minutest details -of divorce trials are freely _admissible_, thus proving that -everything is admissible excepting one thing, viz.: the truth of -Christ Crucified. - -And yet the Archbishop of Canterbury has recently told the world -that “the Church wishes the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but -the truth, to be told,” and the Bishops of Carlisle, Durham, -Peterborough, Manchester, Liverpool and Bedford, have also used -words to the same effect. But although I have spent the best part of -my life (17 years) in striving to find one clergyman (from the -highest to the lowest), I have not found one who would allow this -liberty to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, concerning Christ Crucified. And I appeal to the rulers of -the Church to allow this liberty—and to the people to demand and -obtain this liberty, if the rulers of the Church refuse it. For I -have a letter from Canon Liddon, in which he says to me, “I can -believe with all my heart, although I only know you from the two -letters which you have written to me (upon my sermons), that if you -were to preach, people would go to hear you as they go to hear me.” -Is there not a cause then, why I should complain of being thus -cruelly and unjustly boycotted for 17 years without any reason? - -The chief organ of the Church and the Press (the _Times_) in the -supposed chief Christian city in the world, refused to publish, even -as an advertisement, any one of the three following appeals, on the -ground that they were _inadmissible_. Yes, _inadmissible_, whilst -all the minutest details of the Barrett trial, the Dilke trial, the -Colin Campbell trial, the Seabright trial, and a host of others of a -like nature, were all _freely admissible_. - - I. - -“A pulpit wanted, in the National Church, in which liberty will be -allowed to teach the truth of Christ Crucified, openly and -fearlessly, in order that it may no longer remain either a -stumbling-block to the Jews, foolishness to the world, or a mystery -to the teachers of it (as it is to this day, for want only of this -liberty), but may verily be seen to be, as it is, and as St. Paul -asserted it to be, the power of God, and wisdom of God for the -salvation of all men.” - - II. - -“The Rev. T. G. Headley, of Petersham, S.W., appeals to the Clergy -and people of the Church of England for a pulpit in which he may be -allowed to preach seven sermons: I. on Unbelief; II. the Trial of -Abraham; III. the Day of Judgment; IV. Mary Magdalene; V. Conversion -of St. Paul; VI. Jesus, only; VII. Inspiration.” - - III. - -“The Rev. T. G. Headley, of Petersham, S.W., appeals to the Clergy -for a pulpit in which he may be allowed to explain the mystery of -Christ Crucified, that it may no longer remain a mystery.” - - Rev. T. G. HEADLEY. - -Manor House, Petersham, S.W. - - --- - -[This persistent refusal is the more remarkable as other preachers -are allowed to teach worse, _from an orthodox standpoint, of -course_. Is it _inadmissible_ “to explain the mystery of Christ -Crucified,” as the Rev. Mr. Headley is likely to, lest it should -interfere with the explanation and description of Jehovah—“_one with -Christ Jesus_” in the orthodox dogma—by the Rev. H. R. Haweis, M. -A.? Says this truthful and cultured if not very pious orator: “At -first the chief attributes of Satan were given to Jehovah. It was -God who destroyed the world, hardened Pharaoh, tempted David, -provoked to sin, and punished the sinner. This way of thinking -lingered even as late as 700 B.C.: ‘I the Lord make peace and create -evil’ (Isa. xlv. 7). We have an odd survival of this identification -of God with the Devil in the word ‘_Deuce_,’ which is none other -than ‘_Deus_,’ but which to us always means the Devil. As the Jew -grew more spiritual he gradually transferred the devilish functions -to a ‘Satan,’ or accusing spirit. The transition point appears in -comparing the early passage (2 Sam. xxiv.), when _God_ is said to -‘move’ David to number the people, with the later (1 Chron. xxi.), -where _Satan_ is said to be the instigator who ‘provoked’ the -numbering. But Satan is not yet the King Devil. We can take up our -Bible and trace the gradual transformation of Satan from an accusing -angel into the King Devil of popular theology.”—(_The Key_, etc p. -22.) This, we believe, is an even more damaging teaching for the -Orthodox Church than any theory about “Christ Crucified.” Mr. -Headley seeks to prove Christ, the Rev. Haweis ridiculing and making -away with the Devil, _destroys and makes away for ever with Jesus_, -as Christ, also. For, as logically argued by Cardinal Ventura de -Raulica, “_to demonstrate the existence of Satan, is to -re-establish_ ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL DOGMAS OF THE CHURCH, _which -serves as a basis for Christianity, and without which_, Satan (and -Jesus) would be but names”; or to put it in the still stronger terms -of the pious Chevalier des Mousseaux, “_The Devil is the chief -pillar of Faith_ ... if it was not for him, the Saviour, the -Crucified, the Redeemer, would be but the most ridiculous of -supernumeraries, and the Cross an insult to good sense.” (See _Isis -Unveil._ vol. i., 103; vol. ii., 14.) Truly so. Were there no Devil, -a Christ to save the World from him would be hardly wanted! Yet, the -Rev. Haweis says: (p. 24) “I cannot now discuss the teaching of the -N. T. on the King Devil, or I might show that Jesus did not endorse -the popular view of one King Devil, and ... notice the way in which -our translators have played fast and loose with the words _Diabolus -and Satan_;” adding that the Tree and Serpent worship was an -Oriental cult, “of which the narrative of Adam and Eve is a Semitic -form.” Is this _admissible_ orthodoxy?—ED.] - - SOCIALISM AND THEOSOPHY. - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -MESDAMES,—In the December number of LUCIFER Mr. J. B. Bright takes -exception to some remarks on Socialism in an article on -“Brotherhood,” which appeared in your pages a month previously. - -As the writer of that article, I think it right to accept Mr. -Bright’s challenge, and endeavour to replace my somewhat hasty -generalisations by a more precise statement of the teachings of -Theosophy, as they appear to me to bear on the question at issue. - -Mr. Bright objects to my use of the phrase “_materialistic_ -Socialism.” My intention was to draw a distinction between that -which “concerns itself primarily with the material or physical -condition of mankind,” and that other form of purely voluntary -association, springing, as regards each of its members, from a -recognition of their unity of purpose, and the realisation of the -idea of brotherhood, for an example of which we may turn to the -communistic system of the early Christian Church. I would point out -that this is not a fanciful distinction, as in the first case what -is described as “a juster distribution of wealth” is the very -essence of the Socialistic idea, while in the second it is only an -incident, arising from the conviction that worldly possessions have -in themselves no value in comparison with “the things of the -spirit.” I maintain then that the teachings of Theosophy are opposed -to “modern materialistic Socialism,” and I will endeavour to point -out, as briefly as possible, in what this opposition consists. - -There is at the outset a fundamental difference between Theosophy -and Socialism in the value they attach to the “material and -physical” well-being of mankind. Theosophy regards any given earth -life as an infinitesimal link in the chain of lives which leads from -the first glimmerings of a separate consciousness up to the very -threshold of Divinity and All-knowledge. And taking the doctrines of -Re-incarnation and Karma, as interacting laws, it sees in the -apparent injustices of physical life, and in the inequalities of -intellectual and moral development among mankind, the results of -good or bad use made of opportunities in previous incarnations. The -Universe is governed by the great law of Harmony, whose agent is -Karma, and infractions of this law, or rebellion against it, are -punished by the action of Karma, whether in the individual or the -race. Thus the position of every individual in respect to his fellow -men, and the position of every nation (the compound, as it were, of -individual Karmas) in respect to other nations, is the direct result -of previously acquired characteristics and affinities. The -re-incarnation of an individual will be governed by his personal -affinities; firstly, to the general Karma of his nation: secondly, -to the particular circumstances of his parentage and condition in -life. Theosophy therefore teaches that so far as regards his -individual Karma, a man’s place in Society is what he has made it, -and he has no right to cry out against the injustice of the law -which he has broken, and which inexorably exacts the penalty of his -default. This does not however quite hold good as regards the -national or the cyclic Karma. It is quite possible that by the -action of cyclic Karma injustice may be done to individuals, to be -atoned for no doubt in future existences, but at the same time -calculated to impede their due and regular development. The -combating of this cyclic Karma, in so far as it deals unjustly with -individuals, is the work of the great and wise ones of this earth, -and every true Theosophist will to the best of his ability take part -in the struggle. But the Socialist movement is itself a part of the -cyclic Karma, and in its endeavour to rectify what seem, from its -limited point of view, injustices, it cannot fail to be unjust to -those the justice of whose position in life it declines to -recognise. Thus it cannot be otherwise than that it should meet with -opposition from those whose object is the improvement of humanity as -a whole. - -I must in the second place point out that the teaching of Theosophy -is entirely opposed to the idea that any very great progress can be -made by humanity as a whole, within the space of a few generations. -Speaking of the destruction of evil in the human heart, the author -of “Light on the Path” says, “Only the strong can kill it out. The -weak must wait for its growth, its fruition, its death. And it is a -plant which lives and increases throughout the ages. It flowers when -man has accumulated unto himself innumerable existences.” This is -undoubtedly Theosophical teaching, but I do not think it tallies -with Mr. Bright’s view that “this self same society——contains within -it all the germs of such a reconstruction of the physical -environment as shall shortly place the means of spiritual and -psychical regeneration within the reach of all.” It is impossible -that Socialism or any other external organisation can “raise the -intellectual and instinctive moral standard of the whole community -to such an extent that all will, in the next generation after the -Social Revolution, be amenable to the truths” of Theosophy. This -would be equivalent to saying that every member of the community was -prepared definitely to undertake the task of self-conquest, and it -happens unfortunately that almost all the external work of Socialism -is in the opposite direction. Further, it must be distinctly pointed -out that this task of self-conquest must be undertaken and carried -through by each man for himself, and only those who have reached a -certain point in human evolution are ready for the struggle. There -is one other point on which I feel some stress must be laid. It -seems to me impossible that Theosophy, recognising as it does the -immense gulf which exists between ordinary humanity (in which term I -of course include all its followers), and those who are on the -threshold of Divinity, can fail to recognise at the same time the -principle of hierarchy in its best and noblest sense. I mean of -course a spiritual hierarchy, but even this is incompatible with -that innate hatred of domination which is so obvious in Socialism. -There is no doubt some inconsistency in this hatred of domination, -as in practice Socialists are prepared to substitute for the -existing domination of intelligence that of mere numbers, but this, -if anything, only makes the contrast between the two ideas somewhat -stronger. It is only right to point out that an accepted disciple -(not a mere student) practically surrenders his personal liberty, -and pledges himself to obedience to those great ones who are the -initiators of the Theosophical movement. - -I have endeavoured thus far to particularise my general statement -that the teachings of Theosophy were opposed to Socialism. I think -Mr. Bright’s objections to my other statements are in effect -answered in what I have already said, but I may perhaps be permitted -to deal with them separately. If Mr. Bright has understood the -meaning of the article on Brotherhood, he will, I think, see that -whereas the Theosophical idea of brotherhood is based on the -identity of the Divine spirit inherent in humanity, and thence -working downwards, the brotherhood of Socialism is based on the -assumption of equality on the material, or intellectual plane, and -has, _per se_, no existence at all on the higher plane. The -brotherhood of Theosophy, once rightly understood, will no doubt be -manifested on the lower planes, but that does not make it the same -thing as an idea of Brotherhood which begins and ends in physical -existence. - -As to my remark that Socialism is an attempt to interfere with the -action of the Laws of Karma, I should perhaps have added the word -“individual,” which, in conjunction with my reference to the parable -of the talents, should make the meaning clear. Socialism aims at the -levelling of classes, which is nothing else than a redistribution of -the responsibilities of life. I understand the parable of the -talents to indicate the true meaning of the differences in -opportunities accorded to individuals during their life on earth. -Every opportunity is also a responsibility, and from those to whom -much is given much will be demanded. Further, responsibility is -thrust upon those who can bear it, and to relieve them from it, and -transfer it to the shoulders of the weaker brethren, is an -interference with the laws of Karma, and can only lead to a -retardation of the general evolution of humanity. I will only say in -conclusion that I have endeavoured to confine my remarks to the view -of Socialism advanced by Mr. Bright. It is indeed hardly necessary -to point out that Theosophy can never be a party to the incitements -to violence, and the appeals to the baser passions which Mr. Bright -rightly deprecates, but which are unfortunately too often the -stock-in-trade of the Socialist orator. - -I feel that there are many points in Mr. Bright’s letter to which I -should be glad to reply more in detail, but I fear that in so doing -I might be considered as trenching too much on those purely -political aspects of the question which are outside the scope of -Theosophical work. - - I am, Mesdames, - Your obedient servant, - THOS. B. HARBOTTLE. - - ----------------------- - - WHAT IS THEOSOPHY? - -_The question is answered by Schopenhauer as follows_: - -“... Starting from the plane of _mental conception_ (_Vorstellung_), -and proceeding on our way towards the attainment of _objective -knowledge_, we shall never be able to arrive at a higher point than -our own conception (imagination), _i.e._ of the external appearance -of the object of our observation; but we shall never be able to -penetrate into the interior of the things and to find out what they -really are (not what they merely appear to be). So far I agree with -_Kant_. But as a counterpoise to this truth I have called attention -to another one; namely, that we are not merely the _cognising -subject_, but we are also ourselves a part of object of our -cognition, we are ourselves the _Thing itself_. There is -consequently an interior way open to us from that self-existing and -interior essence of things, which we cannot approach from the -outside; a kind of subterranean passage, a secret connection, by -which we by treason, as it were, may at once penetrate into a -fortress which was impregnable from the outside. The _Thing itself_ -can as such enter our consciousness only in a direct manner, _i.e._ -_by becoming conscious of its own self_. To attempt to know it -objectively is to ask for a self-contradiction.” (_The World as Will -and Conception._ Vol. ii., Cap. 18). - -What Schopenhauer expresses in modern philosophical language might -perhaps be stated in a few words by saying, that man cannot become -conscious of the truth unless the truth is in him, and in that case -it is not the man who recognises the truth, but the truth which -recognises itself in man. He who wants to know it objectively must -separate himself from it, because no one can see his own face -without the help of a mirror; but if he separates himself from it, -the truth exists in him no longer. It is therefore the truth itself -which may become self-conscious in man, provided there exists any -truth in him. - - F. H. - - ----------------------- - - A NOTE OF EXPLANATION. - -I would much rather suffer an unintentional misrepresentation of my -meaning than take the trouble to reply, and have no desire to -magnify small matters of difference. But a very critical friend -calls my attention to certain statements and apparent discrepancies -in the “Esoteric Character of the Gospels,” on which I will beg -leave to say a word. - -I find it affirmed on p. 300, in a foot-note, that “Mr. G. Massey -is not correct in saying that ‘_The Gnostic form of the name -Chrest or Chrestos denotes the Good God, not a human original,’ -for it denoted the latter, that is, a good, holy man._” But either -the statement has no meaning as an answer to me, or it is based on -a misunderstanding of mine.[135] I was showing that the _original_ -Christ of the Gnosis was not one particular form of human -personality, like the supposed historic Christ, and that the name -denoted a divine, and not a human _original_. I was perfectly well -aware, as your quotations show, that the name was _afterwards_ -conferred on the “good” as the Chrestoi or Chrestiani. Nor do I -say, or anywhere imply, that the “_Karest_,” or mummy-type of -immortality _was_ the _only form of the Christ_, as your -quotations again will prove. I have written enough about that -Gnostic Christ who was the Immortal Self in man, the reflection -of, or emanation from, the divine nature in humanity, and in both -sexes, not merely in one.[136] This is the Christ that never could -become a one person or be limited to one sex. This you accept and -preach; yet you can add “_Still the personage (Jesus) so addressed -by Paul—wherever he lived—was a great initiate, and a ‘Son of -God.’_”[137] But the Christos of Paul, being the Gnostic Christ, -as you admit (301), it cannot be a personage named Jesus, or a -great Initiate, who was addressed by him. It appears to me that in -passages like these, you are giving away all that is worth -contending for, and vouching for that which never has been, and -never can be, proved. I have searched for Jesus many years in the -Gospels and elsewhere without being able to catch hold of the hem -of the garment of any human personality. Ben-Pandira we know a -little of, but cannot make him out in the Christ of the Gospels. -The Christ of the Gnosis can be identified, but not with any -historic Jesus. - ------ - -Footnote 135: - - The remark made has never been meant as “an answer,” but simply as - an observation that the word “Chrestos” applied to a “good man,” a - “human original,” and not to a “good God only.” If such was not - the intention of Mr. Massey, and he amplifies his idea elsewhere, - it was not so amplified in his article in the “Agnostic Annual.” - It is, therefore, simply a bare statement of facts referring to - that particular article and no more. I do not for one moment - oppose Mr. Massey’s conclusions, nor doubt his undeniable learning - in the direction of those particular researches, _i.e._, about the - words “Christos” and “Chrestos.” What I say is, that he limits - them to the negation of an historical Christ, and, for reasons no - doubt very weighty, does not touch upon their principal esoteric - meaning in the temple-phraseology of the Mysteries.—H.P.B. - -Footnote 136: - - This is absolutely and preeminently a Theosophical doctrine taught - ever since 1875, when the Theosophical Society was founded.—[ED.] - -Footnote 137: - - This, I am afraid, is a misunderstanding (due, no doubt, to my own - fault) on the part of our learned correspondent, of the meaning - that was intended to be conveyed in the articles now criticized. - If he goes to the trouble of reading over again the paragraph that - misled him (see p. 307, 5th paragraph), he will, perhaps, see that - it is so. That which was really meant was that, though the terms - _Christos_ and _Chréstos_ are generic surnames, still, the - personage so addressed (not by Paul, necessarily, but by any one), - was a great Initiate and a “Son of God.” It is the name “Jesus,” - placed in the sentence in parentheses that made it both clumsy and - misleading. Whether Paul knew of Jehoshua Ben Pandira (and he must - have heard of him), or not, he could never have applied the - surname used by him to Jesus or any other _historic_ Christ. - Otherwise his _Epistles_ would not have been withheld and exiled - as they were. The sentence which precedes the two incriminated - statements, shows that no such thing, as understood by Mr. Massey, - could have been really meant, as it is said “Occultism pure and - simple finds the same mystic elements in the Christian as in other - faiths, _though it rejects emphatically its dogmatic and historic - character_.” The two statements, viz., that Jesus or Jehoshua Ben - Pandira _whenever he lived_, was a great Initiate and the “Son of - God”—just as Apollonius of Tyana was—and that Paul never meant - either him or any other living Initiate, but a metaphysical - Christos present in, and _personal_ to, every mystic Gnostic as to - every initiated Pagan—are not at all irreconcileable. A man may - know of several great Initiates, and yet place his own ideal on a - far higher pedestal than any of these.—[H.P.B.] - ------ - -We do not go to the Christian Gospels to learn the true nature of -the Christ, or the incarnation according to the Gnostic religion -(I use this term in preference to yours of the “Wisdom-Religion,” -as being more definite and explanatory; not as a religion, -supposed by the _Idiotai_ to have followed in the wake of Historic -Christianity!). These were known in Egypt, more than six thousand -years ago. When the monuments began the Cult of the Supreme God -Atum was extant. We know not how many æons earlier, but six -thousand years will do. Atum = Adam was the divine father of an -eternal soul which was personated as his son, named Iu-em-hept -(the Greek Imothos or Æsculapius), an image of whom used to be -seen (on shelf 3,578, b. 1874), in the British Museum. He was the -second Atum = Adam, and is called the “Eternal Word” in the -Ritual. In external phenomena this type represented the Solar God, -re-born monthly or annually in the lunar orb; in human phenomena -the Christ or Son of God as the essential and eternal soul in man. -But he was neither a man nor an Initiate. He was just what the -Logos, the Word of Truth or Ma-Kheru, the Buddha or Christ is in -other Cults.[138] - ------ - -Footnote 138: - - Nor shall I dispute this statement in general. But this does not - invalidate in one iota _my_ claim. The temple priests assumed - the names of the gods they served, and this is as well known a - fact, as that the defunct Egyptian became an “Osiris”—was - “osirified”—after his death. Yet Osiris was assuredly neither - “man nor an Initiate,” but a being hardly recognised as such by - the Royal Society of materialistic science. Why, then, could not - an “Initiate,” who had succeeded in merging his spiritual being - into the _Christos state_, be regarded as a Christos after his - last and supreme initiation, just as he was called _Chrestos_ - before that? Neither Plotinus, Porphyry nor Apollonius were - Christians, yet, according to esoteric teaching, Plotinus - realized this sublime state (of becoming or uniting himself with - his _Christos_) six times, Apollonius of Tyana four times, while - Porphyry reached the exalted state only once, when over sixty - years of age. The Gnostics called the “_Word_” “Abraxas” and - “Christos” indiscriminately, and by whatever name we may call - it, whether Ma-Kheru, or Christos or Abraxas, it is all one. - That mystic state which gives to our inner being the impulse - that attracts “the soul toward its origin and centre, the - Eternal good,” as Plotinus teaches, and makes of man a god, the - Christos or the unknown made manifest, is a preeminently - theosophical condition. It belonged to the temple mysteries, and - the teachings of the Neo-Platonists.—[H.P.B.] - ------ - -I cordially agree with “M,” a correspondent whom you quote, and wish -that all our orthodox friends would as frankly face the facts. If -any historic Jesus ever did claim to be the Gnostic Christ made -flesh[139] once for all, he would be the supremest impostor in -history. - -Let us define to ourselves very strictly what it is we do mean, or -we shall introduce the direst confusion into the conflict, and we -shall be unable to distinguish the face of friend from foe in the -cloud of battle-dust which we may raise. What I find is, that -Historic Christianity was based either upon the suppression or the -perversion of all that _was_ esoteric in Gnostic Christianity. And -to bring any aid from the one to the support of the other is to try -and re-establish with the left hand all that you are knocking down -with the right. - -I am also taken to task on page 307 for alluding to the Bible as a -“Magazine of falsehoods already exploded, or just going off,” by the -writer who adds force to my words later on in characterizing these -same writings as a “Magazine of (_wicked_) falsehoods”[140] (p. -178), which was going farther than I went, who do set down as much -to ignorance as to knavery. What I meant was, that the “Fall of Man” -in the Old Testament, is a falsification of fable, now exploded, and -that the redemption from that fall, which is promised in the New, -whether by an “Initiate” or “Son of God” is a fraud based on the -fable, and a falsehood that is going to be exploded. There is no -call to mix up the Book of the Dead, the Vedas, or any other sacred -writings, in this matter. Each tub must stand on its own bottom, and -the one that won’t, can’t hold water.[141] - - GERALD MASSEY. - -P.S. By the by, I see the Adventists, and other misleading -Delusionists are all agog just now about the wonderful fulfilment of -prophecy, and corroboration of historic fact, that we are now -witnessing. The “Star of Bethlehem” has reappeared, so they say, to -prove the truth of the Christian story. But, sad to say, it is not -the star of Christ that is now visible in the south-east before -sunrise every morning. It is Venus in her heliacal rising. It is -Venus as the Maleess, or Lucifer as “Sun of the Morning.” This -particular Star of Bethlehem—there are various others less brilliant -and less noticeable—generally does return once every nineteen months -or so, when the planet Venus is the Morning Star. Only the gaping -camel-swallowers, who know all about the “Star of Bethlehem,” and -the fulfilment of prophecy, are not up in Astronomy, and they will -no doubt squirm and strain at this small gnat of real fact offered -to them by way of an explanation. - - G. M. - ------ - -Footnote 139: - - “Christ made flesh,” would be a claim worse than imposture, as it - would be _absurdity_, but a man of flesh assuming the - _Christ-condition_ temporarily, is indeed an occult, yet living, - fact.—[ED.] - -Footnote 140: - - Just so, if it has been originally written to be accepted in its - dead letter sense. But, as I entirely agree with Mr. Massey, that - historic Christianity was based upon the suppression, and - especially the _perversion_ of that which was esoteric in - gnosticism, it is difficult to see in what it is that we disagree? - The perversion of esoteric facts in the gospels is not so cleverly - done as to prevent the true occultist from reading the Gospel - narratives between the lines.—[H.P.B.] - -Footnote 141: - - If Mr. G. Massey kindly waits till the conclusion of “the Esoteric - character of the gospels” to criticise the statements, he may - perhaps arrive at the conviction that we are not so far apart in - our ideas upon this particular question as he seems to think. Of - course my critic being an Egyptologist, opposed to the Aryan - theory, and arriving at his conclusions only by what he finds in - strictly authenticated and accepted documents—and I, as a - Theosophist and an Occultist of a certain school, accepting my - proofs on data which he rejects—_i.e._ esoteric teachings—we can - hardly agree upon every point. But the question is not whether - there was or never was an _historical_ Christ, or Jesus, between - the years 1 and 33 A.D.—but simply were the Gospels of the - gnostics (of Marcion and others, for instance) perverted later by - Christians—esoteric allegories founded on _facts_, or simply - meaningless fictions? I believe the former, and esoteric teachings - explain many of the allegories.—[H.P.B.] - ------ - - ----------------------- - - [_We give room to this remarkable letter with the object of - comparison. The Secularists are loud in proclaiming the modes of - expression of the Theosophists as “stultic profundity,” and the - Esoteric Doctrine as “a hopeless chaos,” a “rudely methodised - madness.” At the same time the Hylo-Idealists are_ PERSONÆ - GRATISSIMÆ _in the “Secular Review,” and no such remarks are - passed about their theories and style_. Readers please to compare. - “Fiat Justitia, ruat Saladinus!”—ED.] - - HYLO-IDEALISM—THE SECRET OF JESUS. - - “Behold, the Kingdom of Heaven is within you.” - -The primacy of Self is indisputable, if by reason of one fact -only—that this, self-same, Self is the initial postulate of all sane -philosophy. And, when Philosophy soars to Metaphysic, Scientific -Analysis “takes up the wondrous tale,” and its burden is Self-hood -also. All roads lead to Rome. All analysis runs into the Egoistic -Synthesis. “The One [Ego] remains, the Many change and pass.” Yet -the passing is only the flux and ebb of the One. In Hegel’s words, -“that which passes away passes away into its own self: only the -passing away passes away.” Which things are an allegory, and yet -“_solvitur ambulando_.” A recent traveller in the United States -tells us, that, in the Emerson country, he chanced upon cross-roads, -and found there an apparently contradictory direction-post. One arm -of it bore the inscription, “This is the way to Concord,” the other, -pointing in the opposite direction, was similarly worded, “This is -the way to Concord.” The Hylo-Ideal Thesis is this Ideal Concord, to -be reached whether you travel by way of Eastern Idealism, or by the -route of plainer Western Materialism. For, and here all -contradictions are reconciled, in the one Subject-object which is -Self, there is no diversity, neither Jew nor Greek, neither Idealism -only, nor Materialism only, or exclusively, but all is one.[142] And -in Unity there is no class distinction, no nomenclature, no -“otherness,” no Ebal _and_ Gerizim, but only the Mount of God. What -the Ego is, _all_ is.[143] It is the _x_ of every problem and -answers to any value save the spurious and indifferent one of the -Dualist. - ------ - -Footnote 142: - - Hence the Spirit of _Non-Separateness_ in esoteric philosophy must - be the ONE _truth_.—ED. - -Footnote 143: - - Only this “Ego” is _universal_, not _individual_: _Absolute_ - Consciousness, not the _human_ Brain.—ED. - ------ - -I find Hylo-Idealism (Auto-centricism)—this “pearl of great -price”—canvassed and examined by many modern thinkers, only to be -contemptuously cast away, though it would have made each one of them -in turn “richer than all his tribe.” But it was ever thus. In this -rejection there is no despair in the view of the _illuminati_. All -is ours, and paltering with the central truth of SOLIPSISM, as men -have ever paltered, does not change or diminish the truth itself, or -lessen the assurance of its ultimate victory, since to go from, or -flee from, the Egoistic presence is an impossibility. We wander here -and there, but to seek to transcend ourselves is vain. There must, -sooner or later, be the _resipiscentia_, the coming home at last to -Self, and Self only, as to the better home at last. - -In this view there is no _Logos_—save that indisputable one, which -maketh all things to every one of us—no “true Light” save that -effulgent one which “lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” -namely, his own creative and illuminating Egoity—_sans_ which there -is but nothingness. Such a Gospel as this should be termed the -Evangel of common-sense were it not that that phrase shows only one -side of the question—“_Virginibus, puerisque est_” but it is also -the very acme of the exalted intelligence, “the last and sharpest -height” of human thought where the atmosphere is all too rare for -mortal breath. - -The highest and the lowliest[144] are ever thus akin—“Aryan worship -secreted in the Holy of Holies the utensils of the dairy.” Grasp but -the centre truth of truths—that the Ego and its products are _one_, -that every one of us spins, from his own consciousness, the web of -thing and circumstance, which envelopes him—and you see at once and -as it were instinctively, that in this Universe-circle of Egoity -there is no “otherness” even thinkable, no lower and no higher, no -difference, nothing essentially common or unclean, everything being, -not so much cleansed of God, as very THEOBROMA,[145] God’s food and -nutrient element, seeing that in it, and by it, and through it, we -and all things CONSUBSTANTIALLY EXIST. - ------ - -Footnote 144: - - Then why not term the philosophy “_High-Low_-Idealism” _vice_ - “Hylo-Idealism”?—ED. - -Footnote 145: - - “Theobroma”—the same as _cacao-butter_. We take exception _to the - phraseology_, not to Dr. Lewins’ ideas.—ED. - ------ - -Thus _veræ causæ_ and other figments are not so much unsearchable, -or past finding out, as out of court or indifferent. Whether all be -of God, or all be from a “clam-shell,” does not matter—does not, by -one jot, affect our Thesis. Indifferently we are by origin, -patricians or “gutter-snipes.” The Ego is free of the Cosmos—equal -to either fortune, high or low, makes _its own_ universe, calls it -by its own name, and it “lives and moves and has its being.” - - G. M. McC. - - ----------------------- - - GERALD MASSEY ON SHAKSPEARE. - - Mr. Massey has sent us a circular, the contents of which should be - of interest to the lovers of Shakspeare and the buyers of rare - books. The writer says: - -“My work on the Secret Drama of Shakspeare’s Sonnets, with Sketches -of his Private Friends, and of his own Life and Character, first -published in the year 1866, the Second Edition of which was issued, -with a Supplement, for Subscribers in 1872, has now been out of -print many years. It is frequently enquired for, and very rarely to -be found in the catalogues of second-hand booksellers. Therefore I -am about to reproduce the work. It will have to be re-cast and -re-written where necessary, as the writing can now be more -definitely done. Errors must be confessed and corrected. The new -volume will be on lines similar to those of the earlier work, -accentuated in many of the details, but modified in others. There -will be something new and more decisive to say concerning both sets -of the Sonnets, which I call the Southampton and Herbert series; and -not without reason or warrant will the Comparative method be pushed -much farther than before. The work will be written up to date in the -light of the latest knowledge. The most recent data, the latest -results of Shakspearian Siftings, will be utilised; and something -will have to be said concerning the current Baconian Craze, which -was no doubt foreseen by the Great Humourist when he wrote, ‘_A most -fine figure! To prove you a Cypher!_’ is my aim to fight one last -battle on this field for what I maintain to be the cause of truth -and right; to entrust a final answer on the Sonnet question to the -types of John Guttenberg, and leave in his safe keeping a plea that -shall be heard hereafter, as a permanent memorial to the writer’s -love and admiration for Shakspeare the Poet and Man. After twenty -years the ground is felt to be firmer underfoot. The building will -have a more concrete base. I am enabled to give a closer clinch to -my conclusions, and, as I think, complete my case. Necessarily the -book must be large, 700 or 800 pp. The price will be One Guinea.” - - - - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - - - - =CORRESPONDENCE= - - INTERESTING TO ASTROLOGERS. - - ASTROLOGICAL NOTES—No. 3. - - _To the Editor of_ LUCIFER. - -Question, at London, 11.45 a.m., Feb. 26th, 1887. - -Will the quesited die from his present illness? - -Hearing by letter that my uncle, an octogenarian, was seriously ill -from pneumonia, I drew a figure for the moment of the impression to -do so, which occurred while reading the communication. His illness -had commenced about February 7th, and he was now confined to his -bed. - -The following are the elements of the figure:— - - Cusp of 10th house 0° ♓. - - — 11th house 3° ♈. - - — 12th house 20° ♉. - - — 1st house 4° - 38’♋. - - — 2nd house 20° ♋. - - — 3rd house 8° ♌. - -Planets’ places: ♆ 25° 10’ ♉; ♅ 11° 46 R ♎; ♄ 15° 54’ R ♉. ♃ 5° 48’ -R ♏; ♂ 20° 31’ 31” ♓; ☉ 7° 35’ 50” ♓; ♀ 27° 53’ 14” ♓; ☿ 23° 18’ 58” -♓; ☽ 16° 22’ 36” ♈. Caput Draconis 27° 35’ ☊; ⨁ 13 24’ ♌. - -As the quesited was the 4th of my mother’s brothers and sisters, my -mother being the 8th and last, I took the 10th house of the figure -for herself, the 12th (or 3rd from the 10th) for her eldest brother -or sister, the 2nd for the 2nd, the 4th for the 3rd, the 6th for the -4th—the quesited—and the 1st (the 8th from the 6th) for his 8th, or -house of death. ♂ was lord of his first house, and ☽ of his 8th. The -aspect was ☽ 25° 51’ 5” ♂, separating from the quindecile, and -applying to the semisextile. As the significators were in good -aspects, separating from one and applying to the other, and within -orbs of both, it signified sure recovery; more especially as ♂ -received ☽ by house, and was dignified by triplicity. Nevertheless, -the severity of the illness was shown by _Cauda Draconis_ in -quesited’s 4th house; by ♄, lord of quesited’s 4th, posited in -quesited’s 8th, retrograde, in his detriment, and in close □ to ☽, -lady of quesited’s 8th and posited in his 6th. Furthermore, as ☽, -the applying planet of the two significators, was in a cardinal sign -and in a succeedent house of the figure, each degree signified a -week; therefore as ☽ wanted 4° 8’ 55” of the perfect semisextile -aspect, I judged that he would be convalescent in 4 weeks and 1 day, -or March 27th. _On March 29th he walked out in his garden for the -first time_, and fully recovered from his attack. - - NEMO. - - ------------------ - - ERRATUM.—Page 76, 2nd column, line 2, _for_ ♍ _read_ ♏. - - LUCIFER - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - VOL. I. LONDON, FEBRUARY 15TH, 1888. NO. 6. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - “WHAT IS TRUTH?” - - “_Truth_ is the Voice of Nature and of Time— - _Truth_ is the startling monitor _within us_— - Nought is without it, it comes from the stars, - The golden sun, and every breeze that blows....” - - —W. THOMPSON BACON. - - “... Fair Truth’s immortal sun - Is sometimes hid in clouds; not that her light - Is in itself defective, but obscured - By my weak prejudice, imperfect faith - And all the thousand causes which obstruct - The growth of goodness....” - - —HANNAH MORE. - -“What is Truth?” asked Pilate of one who, if the claims of the -Christian Church are even approximately correct, must have known it. -But He kept silent. And the truth which He did not divulge, remained -unrevealed, for his later followers as much as for the Roman -Governor. The silence of Jesus, however, on this and other -occasions, does not prevent his present followers from acting as -though they had received the ultimate and absolute Truth itself; and -from ignoring the fact that only such Words of Wisdom had been given -to them as contained a share of the truth, itself concealed in -parables and dark, though beautiful, sayings.[146] - ------ - -Footnote 146: - - Jesus says to the “Twelve”—“Unto you is given the mystery of the - Kingdom of God; but _unto them that are without, all things are - done in parables_,“ etc. (Mark iv. II.) - ------ - -This policy led gradually to dogmatism and assertion. Dogmatism in -churches, dogmatism in science, dogmatism everywhere. The possible -truths, hazily perceived in the world of abstraction, like those -inferred from observation and experiment in the world of matter, are -forced upon the profane multitudes, too busy to think for -themselves, under the form of _Divine revelation_ and _Scientific -authority_. But the same question stands open from the days of -Socrates and Pilate down to our own age of wholesale negation: is -there such a thing as _absolute truth_ in the hands of any one party -or man? Reason answers, “there cannot be.” There is no room for -absolute truth upon any subject whatsoever, in a world as finite and -conditioned as man is himself. But there are relative truths, and we -have to make the best we can of them. - -In every age there have been Sages who had mastered the absolute and -yet could teach but relative truths. For none yet, born of mortal -woman in _our_ race, has, or could have given out, the whole and the -final truth to another man, for every one of us has to find that (to -him) final knowledge _in_ himself. As no two minds can be absolutely -alike, each has to receive the supreme illumination _through_ -itself, according to its capacity, and from no _human_ light. The -greatest adept living can reveal of the Universal Truth only so much -as the mind he is impressing it upon can assimilate, and no more. -_Tot homines, quot sententiæ_—is an immortal truism. The sun is one, -but its beams are numberless; and the effects produced are -beneficent or maleficent, according to the nature and constitution -of the objects they shine upon. Polarity is universal, but the -polariser lies in our own consciousness. In proportion as our -consciousness is elevated towards absolute truth, so do we men -assimilate it more or less absolutely. But man’s consciousness -again, is only the sunflower of the earth. Longing for the warm ray, -the plant can only turn to the sun, and move round and round in -following the course of the unreachable luminary: its roots keep it -fast to the soil, and half its life is passed in the shadow.... - -Still each of us can relatively reach the Sun of Truth even on this -earth, and assimilate its warmest and most direct rays, however -differentiated they may become after their long journey through the -physical particles in space. To achieve this, there are two methods. -On the physical plane we may use our mental polariscope; and, -analyzing the properties of each ray, choose the purest. On the -plane of spirituality, to reach the Sun of Truth we must work in -dead earnest for the development of our higher nature. We know that -by paralyzing gradually within ourselves the appetites of the lower -personality, and thereby deadening the voice of the purely -physiological mind—that mind which depends upon, and is inseparable -from, its medium or _vehicle_, the organic brain—the animal man in -us may make room for the spiritual; and once aroused from its latent -state, the highest spiritual senses and perceptions grow in us in -proportion, and develop _pari passu_ with the “divine man.” This is -what the great adepts, the Yogis in the East and the Mystics in the -West, have always done and are still doing. - -But we also know, that with a few exceptions, no man of the world, -no materialist, will ever believe in the existence of such adepts, -or even in the possibility of such a spiritual or psychic -development. “The (ancient) fool hath said in his heart, There is no -God”; the modern says, “There are no adepts on earth, they are -figments of your diseased fancy.” Knowing this we hasten to reassure -our readers of the Thomas Didymus type. We beg them to turn in this -magazine to reading more congenial to them; say to the miscellaneous -papers on Hylo-Idealism, by various writers.[147] - ------ - -Footnote 147: - - _e.g._, to the little article “Autocentricism”—on the same - “philosophy,” or again, to the apex of the Hylo-Idealist pyramid - in this Number. It is a letter of protest by the learned Founder - of the School in question, against a _mistake_ of ours. He - complains of our “coupling” his name with those of Mr. Herbert - Spencer, Darwin, Huxley, and others, on the question of atheism - and materialism, as the said lights in the psychological and - physical sciences are considered by Dr. Lewins too flickering, too - “compromising” and weak, to deserve the honourable appellation of - Atheists or even Agnostics. See “Correspondence” in Double Column, - and the reply by “The Adversary.” - ------ - -For LUCIFER tries to satisfy its readers of whatever “school of -thought,” and shows itself equally impartial to Theist and Atheist, -Mystic and Agnostic, Christian and Gentile. Such articles as our -editorials, the Comments on “Light on the Path,” etc, etc.—are not -intended for Materialists. They are addressed to Theosophists, or -readers who know in their hearts that Masters of Wisdom _do_ exist: -and, though _absolute_ truth is not on earth and has to be searched -for in higher regions, that there still are, even on this silly, -ever-whirling little globe of ours, some things that are not even -dreamt of in Western philosophy. - -To return to our subject. It thus follows that, though “general -_abstract_ truth is the most precious of all blessings” for many of -us, as it was for Rousseau, we have, meanwhile, to be satisfied with -relative truths. In sober fact, we are a poor set of mortals at -best, ever in dread before the face of even a relative truth, lest -it should devour ourselves and our petty little preconceptions along -with us. As for an absolute truth, most of us are as incapable of -seeing it as of reaching the moon on a bicycle. Firstly, because -absolute truth is as immovable as the mountain of Mahomet, which -refused to disturb itself for the prophet, so that he had to go to -it himself. And we have to follow his example if we would approach -it even at a distance. Secondly, because the kingdom of absolute -truth is not of this world, while we are too much of it. And -thirdly, because notwithstanding that in the poet’s fancy man is - - “... the abstract - Of all perfection, which the workmanship - Of heaven hath modelled....” - -in reality he is a sorry bundle of anomalies and paradoxes, an empty -wind bag inflated with his own importance, with contradictory and -easily influenced opinions. He is at once an arrogant and a weak -creature, which, though in constant dread of some authority, -terrestrial or celestial, will yet— - - “... like an angry ape, - Play such fantastic tricks before high Heaven - As make the angels weep.” - -Now, since truth is a multifaced jewel, the facets of which it is -impossible to perceive all at once; and since, again, no two men, -however anxious to discern truth, can see even one of those facets -alike, what can be done to help them to perceive it? As physical -man, limited and trammelled from every side by illusions, cannot -reach truth by the light of his terrestrial perceptions, we -say—develop in you the _inner_ knowledge. From the time when the -Delphic oracle said to the enquirer “Man, know thyself,” no greater -or more important truth was ever taught. Without such perception, -man will remain ever blind to even many a relative, let alone -absolute, truth. Man has to _know himself_, _i.e._, acquire the -_inner_ perceptions which never deceive, before he can master any -absolute truth. Absolute truth is _the symbol of Eternity_, and no -_finite_ mind can ever grasp the eternal, hence, no truth in its -fulness can ever dawn upon it. To reach the state during which man -sees and senses it, we have to paralyze the senses of the external -man of clay. This is a difficult task, we may be told, and most -people will, at this rate, prefer to remain satisfied with relative -truths, no doubt. But to approach even terrestrial truths requires, -first of all, _love of truth for its own sake_, for otherwise no -recognition of it will follow. And who loves truth in this age for -its own sake? How many of us are prepared to search for, accept, and -carry it out, in the midst of a society in which anything that would -achieve success _has to be built on appearances, not on reality, on -self-assertion, not on intrinsic value_? We are fully aware of the -difficulties in the way of receiving truth. The fair heavenly maiden -descends only on a (to her) congenial soil—the soil of an impartial, -unprejudiced mind, illuminated by pure Spiritual Consciousness; and -both are truly rare dwellers in civilized lands. In our century of -steam and electricity, when man lives at a maddening speed that -leaves him barely time for reflection, he allows himself usually to -be drifted down from cradle to grave, nailed to the Procrustean bed -of custom and conventionality. Now conventionality—pure and -simple—is a congenital LIE, as it is in every case a “_simulation_ -of feelings according to a received standard” (F. W. Robertson’s -definition); and where there is any simulation _there cannot be any -truth_. How profound the remark made by Byron, that “truth is a gem -that is found at a great depth; whilst on the surface of this world -all things are weighed _by the false scales of custom_,” is best -known to those who are forced to live in the stifling atmosphere of -such social conventionalism, and who, even when willing and anxious -to learn, dare not accept the truths they long for, for fear of the -ferocious Moloch called Society. - -Look around you, reader; study the accounts given by world-known -travellers, recall the joint observations of literary thinkers, the -data of science and of statistics. Draw the picture of modern -society, of modern politics, of modern religion and modern life in -general before your mind’s eye. Remember the ways and customs of -every cultured race and nation under the sun. Observe the doings and -the moral attitude of people in the civilized centres of Europe, -America, and even of the far East and the colonies, everywhere where -the white man has carried the “benefits” of so-called civilization. -And now, having passed in review all this, pause and reflect, and -then name, _if you can_, that blessed _Eldorado_, that exceptional -spot on the globe, _where_ TRUTH _is the honoured guest, and_ LIE -_and_ SHAM _the ostracised outcasts_? YOU CANNOT. Nor can any one -else, unless he is prepared and determined to add his mite to the -mass of falsehood that reigns supreme in every department of -national and social life. “Truth!” cried Carlyle, “truth, though the -heavens crush me for following her, no falsehood, though a whole -celestial Lubberland were the prize of Apostasy.” Noble words, -these. But how many think, and how many will _dare_ to speak as -Carlyle did, in our nineteenth century day? Does not the gigantic -appalling majority prefer to a man the “paradise of Do-nothings,” -the _pays de Cocagne_ of heartless selfishness? It is this majority -that recoils terror-stricken before the most shadowy outline of -every new and unpopular truth, out of mere cowardly fear, lest Mrs. -Harris should denounce, and Mrs. Grundy condemn, its converts to the -torture of being rent piecemeal by her murderous tongue. - -SELFISHNESS, the first-born of Ignorance, and the fruit of the -teaching which asserts that for every newly-born infant a new soul, -_separate and distinct_ from the Universal Soul, is “created”—this -Selfishness is the impassable wall between the _personal_ Self and -Truth. It is the prolific mother of all human vices. _Lie_ being -born out of the necessity for dissembling, and _Hypocrisy_ out of -the desire to mask _Lie_. It is the fungus growing and strengthening -with age in every human heart in which it has devoured all better -feelings. Selfishness kills every noble impulse in our natures, and -is the one deity, fearing no faithlessness or desertion from its -votaries. Hence, we see it reign supreme in the world and in -so-called fashionable society. As a result, we live, and move, and -have our being in this god of darkness under his trinitarian aspect -of Sham, Humbug, and Falsehood, called RESPECTABILITY. - -Is this Truth and Fact, or is it slander? Turn whichever way you -will, and you find, from the top of the social ladder to the bottom, -deceit and hypocrisy at work for dear Self’s sake, in every nation -as in every individual. But nations, by tacit Agreement, have -decided that selfish motives in politics shall be called “noble -national aspiration, patriotism,” etc.; and the citizen views it in -his family circle as “domestic virtue.” Nevertheless, Selfishness, -whether it breeds desire for aggrandizement of territory, or -competition in commerce at the expense of one’s neighbour, can never -be regarded as a virtue. We see smooth-tongued DECEIT and BRUTE -FORCE—the _Jachin_ and _Boaz_ of every International Temple of -Solomon—called Diplomacy, and we call it by its right name. Because -the diplomat bows low before these two pillars of national glory and -politics, and puts their masonic symbolism “in (cunning) strength -shall this my house be established” into daily practice; _i.e._, -gets by deceit what he cannot obtain by force—shall we applaud him? -A diplomat’s qualification—“dexterity or skill in securing -advantages“—for one’s own country at the expense of other countries, -can hardly be achieved by speaking _truth_, but verily by a wily and -deceitful tongue; and, therefore, LUCIFER calls such action—a -_living_, and an evident LIE. - -But it is not in politics alone that custom and selfishness have -agreed to call deceit and lie virtue, and to reward him who lies -best with public statues. Every class of Society lives on LIE, and -would fall to pieces without it. Cultured, God-and-law-fearing -aristocracy being as fond of the forbidden fruit as any plebeian, is -forced to lie from morn to noon in order to cover what it is pleased -to term its “little peccadillos,” but which TRUTH regards as gross -immorality. Society of the middle classes is honeycombed with false -smiles, false talk, and mutual treachery. For the majority religion -has become a thin tinsel veil thrown over the corpse of spiritual -faith. The master goes to church to deceive his servants; the -starving curate—preaching what he has ceased to believe -in—hood-winks his bishop; the bishop—his God. _Dailies_, political -and social, might adopt with advantage for their motto Georges -Dandin’s immortal query—“Lequel de nous deux trompe-t-on ici?”—Even -Science, once the anchor of the salvation of Truth, has ceased to be -the temple of _naked_ Fact. Almost to a man the Scientists strive -now only to force upon their colleagues and the public the -acceptance of some personal hobby, of some new-fangled theory, which -will shed lustre on their name and fame. A Scientist is as ready to -suppress damaging evidence against a current scientific hypothesis -in our times, as a missionary in heathen-land, or a preacher at -home, to persuade his congregation that modern geology is a lie, and -evolution but vanity and vexation of spirit. - -Such is the actual state of things in 1888 A.D., and yet we are -taken to task by certain papers for seeing this year in more than -gloomy colours! - -Lie has spread to such extent—supported as it is by custom and -conventionalities—that even chronology forces people to lie. The -suffixes A.D. and B.C. used after the dates of the year by Jew and -Heathen, in European and even Asiatic lands, by the Materialist and -the Agnostic as much as by the Christian, at home, are—a _lie_ used -to sanction another LIE. - -Where then is even relative truth to be found? If, so far back as -the century of Democritus, she appeared to him under the form of a -goddess lying at the very bottom of a well, so deep that it gave but -little hope for her release; under the present circumstances we have -a certain right to believe her hidden, at least, as far off as the -ever invisible _dark_ side of the moon. This is why, perhaps, all -the votaries of hidden truths are forthwith set down as lunatics. -However it may be, in no case and under no threat shall LUCIFER be -ever forced into pandering to any universally and tacitly -recognised, and as universally practised lie, but will hold to fact, -pure and simple, trying to proclaim truth whensoever found, and -under no cowardly mask. Bigotry and intolerance may be regarded as -orthodox and sound policy, and the encouraging of social prejudices -and personal hobbies at the cost of truth, as a wise course to -pursue in order to secure success for a publication. Let it be so. -The Editors of LUCIFER are Theosophists, and their motto is chosen: -_Vera pro gratiis_. - -They are quite aware that LUCIFER’S libations and sacrifices to -the goddess Truth do not send a sweet savoury smoke into the noses -of the lords of the press, nor does the bright “Son of the -Morning” smell sweet in their nostrils. He is ignored when not -abused as—_veritas odium paret_. Even his friends are beginning to -find fault with him. They cannot see _why it should not be a -purely Theosophical magazine_, in other words, why it refuses to -be dogmatic and bigoted. Instead of devoting every inch of space -to theosophical and occult teachings, it opens its pages “to the -publication of the most grotesquely heterogeneous elements and -conflicting doctrines.” This is the chief accusation, to which we -answer—why not? Theosophy is divine knowledge, and knowledge is -truth; every _true_ fact, every sincere word are thus part and -parcel of Theosophy. One who is skilled in divine alchemy, or even -approximately blessed with the gift of the perception of truth, -will find and extract it from an erroneous as much as from a -correct statement. However small the particle of gold lost in a -ton of rubbish, it is the noble metal still, and worthy of being -dug out even at the price of some extra trouble. As has been said, -it is often as useful to know what a thing _is not_, as to learn -what it _is_. The average reader can hardly hope to find any fact -in a sectarian publication under all its aspects, _pro_ and _con_, -for either one way or the other its presentation is sure to be -biassed, and the scales helped to incline to that side to which -its editor’s special policy is directed. A Theosophical magazine -is thus, perhaps, the only publication where one may hope to find, -at any rate, the unbiassed, if still only approximate truth and -fact. Naked truth is reflected in LUCIFER under its many aspects, -for no philosophical or religious views are excluded from its -pages. And, as every philosophy and religion, however incomplete, -unsatisfactory, and even foolish some may be occasionally, must be -based on a truth and fact of some kind, the reader has thus the -opportunity of comparing, analysing, and choosing from the several -philosophies discussed therein. LUCIFER offers as many facets of -the One universal jewel as its limited space will permit, and says -to its readers: “Choose you this day whom ye will serve: whether -the gods that were on the other side of the flood which submerged -man’s reasoning powers and divine knowledge, or the gods of the -Amorites of _custom_ and _social falsehood_, or again, the Lord of -(the highest) Self—the bright destroyer of the dark power of -illusion?” Surely it is that philosophy that tends to diminish, -instead of adding to, the sum of human misery, which is the best. - -At all events, the choice is there, and for this purpose only have -we opened our pages to every kind of contributors. Therefore do you -find in them the views of a Christian clergyman who believes in his -God and Christ, but rejects the wicked interpretations and the -enforced dogmas of his ambitious proud Church, along with the -doctrines of the Hylo-Idealist, who denies God, soul, and -immortality, and believes in nought save himself. The rankest -Materialists will find hospitality in our journal; aye, even those -who have not scrupled to fill pages of it with sneers and personal -remarks upon ourselves, and abuse of the doctrines of Theosophy, so -dear to us. When a journal of _free thought_, conducted by an -Atheist, inserts an article by a Mystic or Theosophist in praise of -his occult views and the mystery of Parabrahmam, and passes on it -only a few casual remarks, then shall we say LUCIFER has found a -rival. When a Christian periodical or missionary organ accepts an -article from the pen of a free-thinker deriding belief in Adam and -his rib, and passes criticism on Christianity—its editor’s faith—in -meek silence, then it will have become worthy of LUCIFER, and may be -said truly to have reached that degree of tolerance when it may be -placed on a level with any Theosophical publication. - -But so long as none of these organs do something of the kind, they -are all sectarian, bigoted, intolerant, and can never have an idea -of truth and justice. They may throw innuendoes against LUCIFER and -its editors, they cannot affect either. In fact, the editors of that -magazine feel proud of such criticism and accusations, as they are -witnesses to the absolute absence of bigotry, or arrogance of any -kind in theosophy, the result of the divine beauty of the doctrines -it preaches. For, as said, Theosophy allows a hearing and a fair -chance to all. It deems no views—if sincere—entirely destitute of -truth. It respects thinking men, to whatever class of thought they -may belong. Ever ready to oppose ideas and views which can only -create confusion without benefiting philosophy, it leaves their -expounders personally to believe in whatever they please, and does -justice to their ideas when they are good. Indeed, the conclusions -or deductions of a philosophic writer may be entirely opposed to our -views and the teachings we expound; yet, his premises and statements -of facts may be quite correct, and other people may profit by the -adverse philosophy, even if we ourselves reject it, believing we -have something higher and still nearer to the truth. In any case, -our profession of faith is now made plain, and all that is said in -the foregoing pages both justifies and explains our editorial -policy. - -To sum up the idea, with regard to absolute and relative truth, we -can only repeat what we said before. _Outside a certain highly -spiritual and elevated state of mind, during which Man is at one -with the_ UNIVERSAL MIND—_he can get nought on earth but relative -truth,_ _or truths, from whatsoever philosophy or religion_. Were -even the goddess who dwells at the bottom of the well to issue from -her place of confinement, she could give man no more than he can -assimilate. Meanwhile, every one can sit near that well—the name of -which is KNOWLEDGE—and gaze into its depths in the hope of seeing -Truth’s fair image reflected, at least, on the dark waters. This, -however, as remarked by Richter, presents a certain danger. Some -truth, to be sure, may be occasionally reflected as in a mirror on -the spot we gaze upon, and thus reward the patient student. But, -adds the German thinker, “I have heard that some philosophers in -seeking for Truth, to pay homage to her, have seen their own image -in the water and adored it instead.”... - -It is to avoid such a calamity—one that has befallen every founder -of a religious or philosophical school—that the editors are -studiously careful not to offer the reader only those truths which -they find reflected in their own personal brains. They offer the -public a wide choice, and refuse to show bigotry and intolerance, -which are the chief landmarks on the path of Sectarianism. But, -while leaving the widest margin possible for comparison, our -opponents cannot hope to find _their faces_ reflected on the clear -waters of our LUCIFER, without remarks or just criticism upon the -most prominent features thereof, if in contrast with theosophical -views. - -This, however, only within the cover of the public magazine, and so -far as regards the merely intellectual aspect of philosophical -truths. Concerning the deeper spiritual, and one may almost say -religious, beliefs, no true Theosophist ought to degrade these by -subjecting them to public discussion, but ought rather to treasure -and hide them deep within the sanctuary of his innermost soul. Such -beliefs and doctrines should never be rashly given out, as they risk -unavoidable profanation by the rough handling of the indifferent and -the critical. Nor ought they to be embodied in any publication -except as hypotheses offered to the consideration of the thinking -portion of the public. Theosophical truths, when they transcend a -certain limit of speculation, had better remain concealed from -public view, for the “evidence of things not seen” is no evidence -save to him who sees, hears, and senses it. It is not to be dragged -outside the “Holy of Holies,” the temple of the impersonal divine -_Ego_, or the indwelling SELF. For, while every fact outside _its_ -perception can, as we have shown, be, at best, only a relative -truth, a ray from the absolute truth can reflect itself only in the -pure mirror of its own flame—our highest SPIRITUAL CONSCIOUSNESS. -And how can the darkness (of illusion) comprehend the LIGHT that -shineth in it? - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - THE SOLDIER’S DAUGHTER. - - (Judges xi., 6-xi., 39.) - -In the early days of Israel’s history, whilst Israel was struggling -to be a nation and a kingdom, there was a people called the -Ammonites, who were making war upon the Israelites. - -And we are told that the Israelites, in great distress and fear, -went out of their country, into the land of Tob, to find a man named -Jephthah, who was a man of mighty valour, in order to persuade him -to return with them, and be the captain and leader of their army, to -fight against, and save them from the Ammonites. - -Now this man Jephthah was himself an Israelite by birth, but because -his mother had not been legally married to his father, Gilead, the -sons of Gilead’s lawful wife conspired together to drive him from -his hearth, home, and country, as a disgrace to the family and to -Israel; but the true reason was that they were envious and jealous -of him, in like manner as the brethren of Joseph who had previously -conspired against him. - -For Jephthah himself was wholly innocent of having done anything to -disgrace either the family or the nation. And therefore, in common -justice, he ought not to have been made to suffer merely for the -form and manner of his birth; over which neither Jephthah nor any of -us have any control, either as to the time, when, or the manner, in -which we should be born. But although Jephthah was despised and cast -out as a dog, in the days of Israel’s prosperity, yet in the day of -Israel’s adversity and weakness, Israel no longer allowed any mean -and petty distinctions to prevent her from recognising the noble -character of Jephthah, and she entreated him to forget past -ill-usage, and return to be her captain and leader to save her from -the Ammonites. - -And as this proposal of Israel afforded Jephthah the long wished-for -opportunity of returning to his country, and of establishing an -honourable reputation, _therefore_ he was not only ready to forget -and forgive the insults and injuries which he had received in the -past from his brethren, but he was also ready to return with them, -and share their troubles and dangers, even to sacrificing his life, -if need be, in order to save their lives and property. - -Jephthah was the more willing to return and make this sacrifice -because he had a daughter, an only daughter and child; and she was -all the world to him, as he was to her; “for beside her he had -neither son nor daughter,” and she had patiently and willingly -suffered with him, and borne all his sorrows as her own. - -But imagine the horror of Jephthah, after having saved the lives and -property of his brethren and countrymen by risking his own life, at -being then required, by these very brethren and countrymen, to shed -the blood of his only child! Immediately after the war was over, -Jephthah was required to sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering -to the Lord of Battles, for having assisted Israel to overcome the -Ammonites; and so great was the love of this heroine for her father, -and for everything that concerned his honour and glory, that she -willingly consented to be sacrificed as a burnt offering. - -Can anything be conceived more heartrending and terrible than that -Jephthah should thus be required by these very brethren and -countrymen whom he had saved, to shed the blood of his only child as -a sacrifice, in acknowledgment that he owed his victory to -miraculous assistance and favour, and not to his own skill and -valour? - -What to him was the deliverance either of Israel or of his brethren -(who had cared naught for him), if they now required him to -sacrifice the only being in the world that he loved, and that loved -him, and who was therefore all the world to him? - -It is true that Jephthah had made a foolish and rash vow, in the mad -excitement of the moment before going into battle, that if he came -out of the battle victorious, he would sacrifice, as a burnt -offering to the Lord, the first thing that came to meet him from his -house as he returned from the battle; but when the first person that -met Jephthah was his only daughter, _what could that Deity be, which -accepted as a sacrifice the blood of this child?_ What could the -religion of Jephthah’s brethren and countrymen be, that allowed and -required him to commit such an evil deed? - -For if Jephthah had saved his brethren and countrymen from their -enemies, could they not now save Jephthah from shedding the blood of -his daughter as a sacrifice, in the name of religion, _when_ the -very deed itself proclaimed the religion, and their conception both -of religion and of the Deity, to be evil? And if his brethren and -countrymen would not save his daughter, but even required him to -fulfil his vow, could not Jephthah save himself and his child by -refusing to commit this evil deed? But if, in order to save his own -blood from being shed as a blasphemer for an atonement, Jephthah had -to flee from the country as an outcast and a criminal, whither could -he flee to, that would make life worth keeping? For surely the world -would be no desirable place for an honest man to live in, if he had -to live at enmity with men both at home and abroad, because he had -made a rash and foolish vow, which no Deity worthy of being -worshipped could or would require him to perform? - -Because under such a sanguinary conception of religion, and of the -Deity, there was no remission, or redemption either, with, or -without, the shedding of blood. If Jephthah refused to shed the -blood of his daughter, then both his own and his daughter’s would be -shed by his brethren and countrymen, whilst if Jephthah shed the -blood of his daughter, as a sacrifice to save his own, what -remission or redemption was there in this? None! - -And he cried for a deliverer to save him and his daughter, from this -great trouble. For he had staked his life and his all upon obtaining -a position and reputation for himself and his daughter at home in -Israel; and now, to give up hope of this for ever, and to shed the -blood of his daughter, or again flee as an outcast—what was it but a -living death to Jephthah, either way, whether he remained and -sacrificed his daughter, or fled to save her? - -But who, in this agonising moment of Jephthah’s trouble, could raise -his voice to demand, in the name of religion, this diabolical -sacrifice of his innocent child? - -Yes; diabolical. For what spirit, or voice, but that of a devil or -fiend could _counsel_ men to shed the blood of this pure and noble -girl? And where could the devil or fiend be found who would _commit_ -the deed itself? - -Jephthah is mockingly told that he is the fiend who must sacrifice -his child, as Abraham is said to have offered Isaac. And Jephthah is -told that he has no one to blame but himself, for having made the -vow. But who heard the vow? or who accepted the vow? Who could he, -or they be, who would require the fulfilling of it?[148] - ------ - -Footnote 148: - - Jehovah, of course, in his own national character of Baal, Moloch, - Typhon, etc. The final and conclusive identification of the “Lord - God” of Israel with Moloch, we find in the last chapter of - _Leviticus_, concerning _things devoted not to be redeemed_.... “A - man shall devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, _both of man_ - and beast.... None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall - be redeemed, _but shall surely be put to death_ ... for it is - _most holy unto the Lord_.” (See Leviticus xxvii., 28, 29, 30.) - - “Notwithstanding the numerous proofs that the Israelites - worshipped a variety of gods, and even offered human sacrifices - until a far later period than their Pagan neighbours, they have - contrived to blind posterity in regard to truth. They sacrificed - human life as late as 169 B.C. (_Vide_ “_Joseph. contra Apion_,” - 11, 8—what Antiochus Epiphanius found in the Temple), and the - _Bible_ contains a number of such records. At a time when the - Pagans had long abandoned the abominable practice, and had - replaced the sacrificial man by the animal, and the ox of - Dionysius was sacrificed at the Bacchic Mysteries (“Anthon,” p. - 365), Jephthah is represented sacrificing his own daughter to the - ‘Lord’ for a burnt-offering.” _Isis Unveiled_, vol ii., pp. 524, - 525. - ------ - -Are they worthy of the name of brethren and countrymen who would -persuade Jephthah _to assassinate_ his daughter, in the name of -religion, or even look on at such an assassination? Would it not be -blasphemy to say that a good Deity required Jephthah to kill his -innocent child? And would not a good Deity release Jephthah from his -vow, and forbid him to sacrifice his daughter, in like manner as the -Scriptures teach us Abraham was forbidden to sacrifice his son -Isaac? And if it is said, it would have been faithless and sinful of -Jephthah after returning from the battle victorious, to have refused -the offering of his daughter as a sacrifice; yet surely to bind -Jephthah to break the Sixth Commandment, and to shed innocent blood -in the name of religion, would be making the Deity that required -such a sacrifice to be evil, and His worshippers to be the doers of -evil; and thus Jephthah would be required to sell himself to the -devil. - -And how could men be other than the doers of evil, and the priests -of evil, who would counsel Jephthah to commit this evil deed, and be -ready to commit it themselves if he hesitated? How? Whether Jephthah -received any miraculous assistance or not, in the war, yet he was in -no wise bound to surrender his personality and to become an abject -slave to the supposed power that helped him. For Jephthah’s personal -services were needed as an instrument to deliver and save the -Israelites, or his services would not have been asked for. It was -also possible that he might have given certain services, which even -a miraculous power was unable to give—as we read in the Book of -Judges that “Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the -valley, because they had chariots of iron.” (Judges i. 19.)[149] - ------ - -Footnote 149: - - It is said in the “Holy Book,” that it was “the Lord (who) was - with Judah,” who “could not drive out the inhabitants of the - valley, because they had chariots of iron,” (Judges i. 19), and - not “Judah” at all. This is but natural, according to popular - belief and superstition that “the Devil is afraid of _iron_.” The - strong connection and even identity between Jehovah and the Devil - is ably insisted upon by the Rev. Haweis. See his “Key” (p. - 22).—ED. - ------ - -And again, if all the glory of Jephthah’s victory had to be ascribed -to a miraculous power, then likewise all the shame would have to be -ascribed to that power also, for having ordained that Jephthah’s -daughter should be the first person to meet him after the war, to -pay _the price of victory_ to Jephthah, with _death to his -child_—for whom, alone, he coveted victory. - -Victory on such terms was defeat and shame, not glory; for surely -such views of religious worship must be the _d’evil_ worship which -the Psalmist speaks of (Psalm cvi., 37), and not the service or -worship of a good God who would have mercy and _not_ sacrifice, as -Abraham learnt when he went out of the Philistine city into the -wilderness, and communed with God alone on Mount Moriah. - -But it was one thing for a single individual like Abraham, at the -close of a long life, to acquire the knowledge “that God would have -mercy and not sacrifice”; and quite another thing for a Town, a -City, a Nation, or the World, to have acquired this knowledge in its -infancy; as even Abraham only acquired this knowledge by going out -of the city into the wilderness, and communing alone with God. - -We can well understand how impossible it would have been for Abraham -even to have attempted, on his return from the mountain, to teach -the Philistines the faith or gospel (that God would have mercy and -not sacrifice), from the very fact that when Jesus Christ came _into -the world_ to teach the faith or gospel, which Abraham had gone _out -of the world_ to learn, Jesus was condemned by Caiaphas to be -crucified with malefactors, as a blasphemer. And to this very day -this doctrine of the power of Caiaphas, the adversary of Jesus, -continues to be taught as the doctrine of the Church, which it is -necessary to believe in order to obtain the blessing of the Church -here and of God hereafter. - -Therefore it is manifestly evident that after Abraham had acquired -the knowledge that God would have mercy and not sacrifice, yet he -could not publish it, but could only lay it up in his heart as a -secret treasure, to be disclosed in the distant future, which in the -vision of his mind he saw. Meanwhile he prayed that the Lord would -raise up messengers and stewards to prepare the world to receive -this faith or gospel, because of its being too Herculean a task for -any one person to alter suddenly the religion of a people. - -For whilst priests continued to teach, and the people to believe -that sacrifices of human beings were acceptable to God, how was the -man who dared (suddenly and without the cloak of a parable) to -reveal and publish the contrary, to escape being himself slain as a -blasphemer, whose blood it would be doing God service to shed for an -atonement? And until the world was sufficiently educated to declare -the generation of him who should be unjustly slain (Isaiah liii.), -it could only be like throwing pearls to swine for such an one to -attempt the task. - -Then from whence, and from whom could Jephthah, who had saved -others, now look for the salvation of his daughter, or of himself, -if he refused to sacrifice that daughter? - -And, in the anguish of his soul, Jephthah rent his clothes, and -bemoaned his trouble, whilst his daughter fled to the mountains to -pour out the sorrow of her soul, during the few short days she had -yet to live. - -It is true that, in order to save her father from the cruel pain of -assassinating his devoted child, the noble girl may have voluntarily -leapt into the sulphurous flames on the burning altar; just as the -noble Roman soldier Curtius on his horse leapt down into the dark -and awful volcanic gulf as a sacrifice to save his countrymen. - -But the more heroic and divine these persons were, the more -demoniacal and diabolical must be the religion of those persons who -required them thus to suffer.[150] - ------ - -Footnote 150: - - And yet it is this “demoniacal and diabolical religion” that - passed part and parcel into Protestantism.—ED. - ------ - -It is true that the priests of such a religion may have believed in -it themselves, and may have been ready to sacrifice their own sons -and daughters in like manner; but that in no wise lessens the crime, -but on the contrary it intensifies it a hundred fold. How were the -people to be saved from a religion, of which the priests themselves -needed to be saved, whilst the priests had the sole education of the -people from infancy upwards, as well as the Chief power in the State -to make and unmake its laws, even to making and unmaking its kings? - -Whilst the priests and rulers of the church taught such a cruel -religion,[151] would not the people and priests need a Mediator to -deliver and save them from practising it? - ------ - -Footnote 151: - - So “the people and priests” do now. And as the late Rev. Henry - Ward Beecher once said in a sermon, “could Jesus come back and - behave in the streets of Christian cities as he did in those of - Jerusalem, he would be declared an impostor and then confined in - prison.”—ED. - ------ - -If He who mediated to deliver and save us was Himself condemned to -be slain, and crucified with thieves as a blasphemer whose blood -ought to be shed for an Atonement, what hope of salvation can there -be for the world from such a Religion, until the people not only -uplift the Crucified Jesus as having been no blasphemer, but also -expose the doctrine to be evil and false which is quoted as an -authority for requiring the blood of “the Just one” to be shed for -an Atonement? And if it is said that we have no longer women brought -like Jephthah’s daughter to be assassinated and burnt as a -sacrifice, or noble men condemned to be burnt as heretics, yet we -have to the present day noble men and women condemned by the Church -as evil (to be accursed here and damned hereafter), simply and -solely because they refuse to believe this evil doctrine of -Atonement, which is oftentimes such a burden to their soul (either -to accept or reject) that they are driven to the very verge of -madness. - -It is no uncommon thing to hear priests revile even our Queen as -being no true Christian, simply because they suppose she does not -believe in this evil doctrine of atonement, which is the doctrine of -Caiaphas, the enemy of Christ, and not Christ’s doctrine, teaching, -or gospel. - -Should not such scriptural stories as these of the assassination of -Jephthah’s noble daughter, of the crucifixion of Jesus, and the -spilling of the blood of a whole host of martyrs, awaken men who -have slumbered to rise, to hear, to see, to speak, and run to save -the world from having to believe in this sanguinary doctrine, which -is a stumbling-block to the Jews, foolishness to the world, and a -mystery even to the teachers of it. This doctrine of Atonement can -not be reconciled as either good or true; and therefore it is the -cause of all progress being prevented so far as the world is -dependent on the Church for progress. - -Yet the man who doubts or denies the goodness of this doctrine is -branded by the Church, to the present day, as a Sceptic and Atheist, -whom all sound Churchmen should avoid. And for sixteen centuries the -Church used its sovereign power to condemn those who rejected its -doctrine of Atonement as criminals, whom it would be doing God -service to burn as heretics; and the Church is only prevented from -doing so now _because_ (to its great regret) it has no longer the -power which it formerly had in the days of “the Inquisition.” The -doctrine remains the same still, and therefore the people owe it, as -a duty to the long roll of martyrs, to expose it. For it has been -the cause of much evil, and even to this day it assassinates the -souls of noble men and women, who incarcerate themselves in -monasteries and nunneries in the vain attempt to attain a sound -belief in it. - -But when the Church is willing to allow (what it has refused to the -present day) liberty in the pulpit for explaining the mystery and -translating the truth of a “Crucified Christ,” then it will be seen -that the truth is not only a light to the Gentiles, but also the -glory of Israel; and the truth shall make us free.[152] (John viii., -32.) - - Adyar, 17th October, 1887. H. S. OLCOTT, P.T.S. - ------ - -Footnote 152: - - Only, as such _truth_ and _freedom_ amounts to the Church - committing suicide and burying herself with her own hands, she - will never allow such a thing. She will die her natural death the - day when there will not exist a man, woman or child to believe any - longer in her dogmas. And this beneficent result might be achieved - within her own hierarchy, were there many such sincere, brave and - honest clergymen who, like the writer of this article, fear not to - speak the truth—whatever may come—[ED.] - ------ - - - - - LUNIOLATRY. - -A friend has just informed me of the fact that when President -Cleveland was making his recent tour through the States an old negro -presented him with _the left hind foot of a grave-yard rabbit, which -had been killed in the dark of the moon_. In making his present the -negro said he had sent it because he desired the reelection of -President Cleveland. “_Tell him to preserve it carefully, and that -as long as he keeps it he will always get there._” - -The friend whom I speak of had just been reading a lecture of mine -on “Luniolatry,” in which the imagery and significance of the hare -and rabbit in the moon were spoken of all too briefly, and he wishes -to know if I can interpret the meaning of the negro’s gift. I guess -so. As previously explained the hare and the rabbit are both -zootypes or living images of lunar phenomena. A rabbit pounding rice -in a mortar is a Chinese sign of the moon. Swabian children are -still forbidden to make the likeness of a rabbit or hare in shadow -on the wall, as it would be a sin against the moon. The hare in the -moon is a well-known Hindu type of Buddha. It is mythically -represented that Buddha once took the form of a hare on purpose to -offer himself as food for a poor famishing creature, and so the -Buddha was translated in that shape to be eternized as the hare in -the moon. That is one illustration of the way in which the book of -external nature was filled full of mystic meanings, the essence of -which escapes altogether in trying to read such things as -historical, no matter whether they are related of Buddha, Horus, or -Jesus. This hare or rabbit in the moon is a symbol or superstition -with various races, Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, and White. When the -meaning was understood it was a symbol; when the clue is lost it -becomes a superstition of the ignorant; thus the ancient symbolism -survives in a state of dotage with the negroes as well as with the -“noble Caucasian.” - -The frog in the moon was another lunar type. In a Chinese myth—that -is, a symbolic representation—the lunar frog has three legs, like -the Persian ass in the Bundahish. In both cases the three legs stand -for three phases of the moon reckoned at ten days each in a -luni-solar month of thirty days. Now it happens that the rabbit’s -period of gestation is thirty days; and the early races included -very curious observers amongst their naturalists, who had to think -in things and express their thought in gesture-signs and _zootypes_ -before there were such things as printer’s types. Hence the frog -that dropped its tail, the serpent that sloughed its skin, the -rabbit with its period of thirty days, were all symbols of the moon. -Enough that the rabbit _was_ a zootype of the moon, and the rabbit -is equal to the hare. Hor-Apollo tells us that when the Egyptians -would denote “an opening,” they delineate a hare, because this -animal always has its eyes open (B. I. 26). This can be corroborated -in several ways. The name of the hare in Egyptian is “Un,” which -means open, to open, the opener. It was applied to Osiris, -“Un-Nefer,” in his lunar character as the good opener, otherwise the -splendid or glorious hare, because “Nefer” means the handsome, -beautiful, perfect, or glorious. Also the city of Unnut was that of -the hare, “Un,” and this was the metropolis of the 15th Nome of -Upper Egypt, which is another mode of identifying the open-eyed hare -with the moon at the full, called the “Eye of Horus,” and with the -woman of the moon who brings her orb to the full on the 15th day of -the month (Egyptian Ritual, ch. lxxx). The hare was also a symbol of -the opening period at puberty, a sign therefore of being open, -unprohibited, or “it is lawful” (Sharpe). Hence the Namaqua -Hottentots would only permit the hare to be eaten by those who had -attained the age of the adult male. The proverb, “_Somnus -leporinus_,” relates to the hare that sleeps with its eyes open; and -in our old English pharmacopœia of the folk-lore or leech-craft, the -brains and eyes of the hare are prescribed as a cure for somnolency, -and a sovereign medicine for making or keeping people wide-awake. -The rabbit equates with the hare, and has the same symbolical value. -Now it is sometimes said that the hare-rabbit is of both sexes. So -the moon was both male and female in accordance with the dual -lunation. The new moon with the horns of the bull or the long ears -of the ass, the rabbit, or hare was considered to be male. The dark -lunation or hinder part was female. In the ancient symbolism the -front or fore-part is masculine, the hinder-part or the tail is -feminine. The two were head and tail in the earliest coinage as well -as on the latest coins. In Egypt the South was front and is male; -the North was the hinder-part and is female. Hence the old Typhon of -the Northern part was denoted by the tail-piece, and it follows that -Satan with the long tail is of feminine origin, and so the devil was -female from the first. The same symbolism was applied to the moon. -In the light half it was the male moon, in the dark half female. The -new moon was the Lord of Light, the Increaser, the sign of new life, -of saving and healing. The new moon was the messenger of immortality -to men in the form of the hare or the rabbit. The waning moon -represented the devil of darkness, the Typhonian power that said to -men “even as I die and do not rise again so will it be with you.” -Offerings were made to the new moon. When the moon was at the full -the Egyptians sacrificed a black pig to Osiris. This represented -Typhon, his conquered enemy. But in the dark half of the lunation -Typhon had the upper hand when he tore Osiris into fourteen parts -during the fourteen nights of his supremacy. The lunar zootype then -is male in front, and female in the hinder-part of the animal. In -the hieroglyphics the khepsh-leg or hind-quarter is the ideographic -type of Typhon, the evil power personified. Further, the left side -is female and Typhonian; the right is male. Ergo, _the left hind leg -of the grave-yard animal that was killed in the dark of the moon_, -stood for the hind (or last) quarter of the moon; literally the end -of it. And if the negro laid hold of that rabbit’s foot the right -way, we can read the symbol that he probably did not understand, -although he knew the rabbit’s hind foot was a good fetish. It shows -the survival of _intended_ symbolism, which represents some sort of -victory over the power of darkness analogous to taking the brush of -the fox (another Typhonian animal) after it has been hunted to -death. This was the last leg that the devil of darkness had to stand -on, and so it was a trophy snatched from the Typhonian power to be -worn in triumph as a token of good luck, of repetition or renewal, -thence a second term. - -It would be a sort of equivalent for taking the scalp of Satan, who -could only be typified by the tail or hinder leg. The gift was -tantamount to wishing “_A Happy New Moon to You!_” expressed in the -language of symbolism, which was acted instead of being spoken. The -negroes consider this particular talisman bequeathed by “_Brer -Rabbit_” represents all the virtues and powers of renewal that are -popularly attributed to the New Moon. But do not let me be -misunderstood by those who know that in the Negro Märchen the rabbit -is the good one of the typical two, and that the fox plays the -Typhonian part. The rabbit or hare of the moon may be pourtrayed in -two characters or in one of two. In both he is the hero, the Lord of -Light and conqueror of the Power of Darkness, the rabbit, so to say, -that rises again from the graveyard in or as the New Moon. The -figure of the hind quarter and latter end of the dying moon is thus -a type of the conquered Typhon, but the magical influence depends -upon its being also a type of the conqueror, the rabbit of the -resurrection or the New Moon. It is a curious coincidence that the -luckiest of all Lucky Horse-Shoes in England is one that has been -cast off the _left hind foot_ of a Mare. - -Lastly, this hind leg of the lunar rabbit is a fellow-type with the -leg of pig that is still eaten in England on Easter Monday, which is -a survival of the ancient sacrifice of the pig Typhon, in the solar -or annual reckoning, as pourtrayed in the planisphere of Denderah, -where we see the god Khunsu offering the pig by the leg in the disc -of the full moon. It must have been a potent fetish long ages ago in -Africa, and a medicine of great power according to the primitive -mysteries of the dark land. It may be surmised that much of this -fetishtic typology is still extant amongst the negroes in the United -States, and it is to be hoped that the Bureau of Ethnology at -Washington, which has done, and is doing, such good work under the -direction of Major J. W. Powell in collecting and preserving the -relics of the Red Men, will extend the range of its researches to -the black race in America, and not leave those matters to -irresponsible story-tellers. - - GERALD MASSEY. - - - - - =THE BLOSSOM AND THE FRUIT=: - - _THE TRUE STORY OF A MAGICIAN_. - - (_Continued._) - - --------------------- - - BY MABEL COLLINS. - - --------------------- - - CHAPTER XII. - -It was the day of the Princess Fleta’s wedding and the whole city -was _en fête_. - -Hilary Estanol paced the streets wildly, like a creature distracted. -He had never seen her face since the day he returned from the secret -monastery. He could not trust himself to go near her. He felt that -the savage in him must kill, must destroy, if too much provocation -were given him. - -He held this savage in check as well as he could. He would not trust -himself under the same roof with the woman he loved as he loved -nothing else in life, and who had given him her love while she gave -herself to another man. Herself! How much that meant Hilary seemed -only now to know, now that he heard her marriage bells ringing, now -that she was absolutely given. Yes, she had given herself away to -another man. Was it possible? Hilary stood still now and again in -the midst of the crowded street trying to remember the words she had -said to him in that wood in the early morn when she had accepted his -love. What had she taken from him then? He had never been the same -since. His heart lay cold, and chill, and dull within him save when -her smile or its memory woke him to life and joy. Were these gone -for ever? Impossible. He was still young—a mere boy. She could not -have stolen so much from him! No—he had the first right—he would be -her lover still and always, to whoever else she gave herself in -name. This was the point of thought to which Hilary perpetually -returned. Undoubtedly she was his, and he would claim her. But -obscured and excited as his mind was he had sufficient intelligence -to know that his must be a secret claim even though it stood before -all others. He could not go and claim her at the altar, for she had -not given him any right to. What she had said was, “Take from me -what you can.” Well, he could not make her his wife. He could not -marry a royal Princess. She was not of his class. This being so, -what could he hope for? Nothing—and yet he had her love—yes, the -last kind touch of her hand, the last sweet smile on her lips, were -still with him, and drove his blood rioting through his veins. - -At last the procession is coming—the soldiers have already cleared -the way and with their horses keep back the crowd. Hilary stands -now, still as a carven figure, watching only for one face. He sees -it suddenly—ah! so beautiful, so supremely beautiful, so -mysterious—and everything in Heaven and earth becomes invisible, -non-existent, save that one dear face. A voice rang out on the air, -clear, shrill, above all other voices. - -“Fleta! Fleta! My love! my love!” - -What a cry! It penetrated to Fleta’s ears; it reached the ears of -her bridegroom. - -In the church, amid the pomp and ceremony, and the crowd of great -people, Otto did a thing which made those near him stare. He went to -meet his bride and touched her hand. - -“Fleta,” he said, “that voice was the voice of one who loves you. -What answer do you make to it?” - -Fleta put her hand in his. - -“That is my answer,” she said. - -And so they stepped up the broad low steps to the altar. None heard -what had been said except the king. - -Fleta’s father was strangely unlike herself. He was a rugged, -morose, sombre man, ill-disposed towards all humanity, as it would -seem, save those few who held the key to his nature. Of these, his -daughter was one; some said she was the only one. Others said her -power lay in the fact that she was not his daughter, but a child of -other parents altogether than those reputed to be hers; and that a -State secret was involved in the mystery of her birth. - -At all events, it was seldom indeed that the king interfered with -Fleta. But he did so now, at this moment, with all the eyes of the -Court upon them. - -He spoke low into her ear, he stood beside her. - -“Fleta,” he said, “is this marriage right?” - -Fleta turned on him a face so full of torture, of deathly pain, that -he uttered an ejaculation of horror. - -“Say no word, my father,” she said, “it is right.” - -And then she turned her head again, and fixed her glorious eyes on -Otto. - -What a strangely beautiful bride she was! She was dressed with -extraordinary simplicity; her robe had been arranged by her own -hands in long, soft lines that fell from her neck to her feet, and a -long train lay on the ground behind her, but it was undecked by any -lace or flowers. No flowers were in her hair, no jewels on her neck. -Never had a princess been dressed so simply, a princess who was to -be a queen. The Court ladies stared in amazement. But they knew well -that there was a grace so supreme, a dignity so lofty, in this royal -girl, that however simple her dress she outshone them all, and would -outshine any woman who stood beside her. - -No one heard any of what passed between the three chief actors in -this scene; yet everyone was aware that there was something unusual -in it. There was an atmosphere of mystery, of excitement, of -strangeness. And yet what else would be possible where the Princess -Fleta was concerned? In her father’s Court she was looked upon as a -wild, capricious, imperious creature whose will none could resist. -None would have wondered had they believed her carriage to have -passed over the body of an accepted lover, now thrown aside and -discarded. So did these people interpret the character of Fleta. -Otto knew this, felt it, understood it; knew that those creatures of -intrigue and pleasure would have thought her far less worthy had -they judged her character more nearly as he did. To him she was -pure, stainless, unattainable; virgin in soul and thought. This he -said to her when, on leaving the cathedral, they entered a carriage -together and alone. They had together passed through crowds of -congratulators, nobles, great ladies, diplomats from different parts -of Europe. They had bowed and smiled, and answered courteously the -words addressed to them. And yet how far away were their thoughts -all the while! They neither of them knew who they had met, who they -had spoken to. All was lost in one absorbing thought. But it was not -the same thought. No, indeed, their minds were separated widely as -the poles. - -Fleta was filled with the sense of a great purpose. This marriage -was but the first step in a giant programme. Her thoughts had flown -now from this first step and were dwelling on the end, the -fulfilment; as an artist when he draws his first sketch sees in his -own mind the completed picture. - -Otto had but one overwhelming thought; a very simple one, expressed -instantly, in the first words he uttered when they were alone: - -“Fleta, you did not fancy that I doubted you? I never meant that! -And yet it seemed as if there was reproach in your eyes! No, Fleta, -never that. But the cry was so terrible—it cut my heart. You did not -fancy I meant any doubt?—assure me, Fleta!” - -“No, I did not,” replied Fleta quietly. “You know whose voice it -was.” - -“No—it was unrecognisable—it was nothing but a cry of torture.” - -“Ah! but I knew it,” said Fleta. “It was Hilary Estanol who cried -out my name.” - -“He said ‘Fleta, my love, my love,’” added Otto. “Is he that?” - -“Yes,” said Fleta unmoved, indeed strangely calm. “He is. More, -Otto; he has loved me long centuries ago, when this world wore a -different face. When the very surface of the earth was savage and -untaught so were we. And then we enacted this same scene. Yes Alan, -we three enacted it before, without this pomp, but with the natural -splendour of savage beauty and undimmed skies. Otto, I sinned then I -expiated my sin. Again and again have I expiated it. Again and again -has Nature punished me for my offence against her. Now at last I -know more, I see more, I understand more. The sin remains. I desired -to take, to have for myself, to be a conqueror. I conquered—I have -conquered since! how often! That has been my expiation: satiety. But -now I will no longer enjoy. I will stand on that error, that folly, -and win from it strength which shall lift me from this wretched -little theatre where we play the same dramas for ever through the -fond weariness of recurring lives.” - -Otto had drawn back from her, and gazed intently upon her as she -spoke, passion and vehemence gradually entering her low voice. As -she ceased he passed his hand over his forehead. - -“Fleta,” he said, “is this some spell of yours upon me? While you -spoke I saw your face change, and become the face of one familiar to -me, but far, far back! I smelled the intense rich scent of -innumerable fruit blossoms——Fleta, tell me, are you dreaming or -speaking fables, or is this thing true? Have I lived for you before, -loved you, served you, ages back, when the world was young?” - -“Yes,” said Fleta. - -“Ah!” cried Otto suddenly, “I feel it—there is blood on you—blood on -your hand!” - -Fleta raised her beautiful hand, and looked at it with an infinite -sadness on her face. - -“It is so,” she answered. “There is blood on it, and there will be, -until I have got beyond the reign of blood and of death. You held me -down then, Otto; you triumphed by brute force, not knowing that in -me lay a power undreamed of by you—a vital, stirring will. I could -have crushed you. But already I had used my will once, and found the -bitter, unintelligible suffering it produced. I determined to try -and understand Nature before I again used my power. So I submitted -to your tyranny; you learned to love it, and through many lives have -learned to love it more. It has brought you a crown at last, and a -little army of soldiers to defend it for you, and half-a-dozen -crafty old diplomats who want you to keep it, and who think they can -make you do just as their respective monarchs wish. Move your -puppets, Otto. No such kingdom satisfies me. I mean to win my own -crown. I will be a queen of souls, not of bodies; a queen in -reality, not in name.” - -She seemed to wrap herself in an impenetrable veil of scorn as she -ceased speaking and leaned back in the carriage. - -Some great emotion was stirring Otto through and through. At last he -spoke; and the man seemed changed—a different being. From under the -gentle manner, the docile, ready air, came struggling up the fierce -spirit of opposition. - -“You despise the crown you married me for? Is that so? Well, I will -teach you to respect it.” - -A smile dawned on Fleta’s clouded face and then was gone again in a -moment. This was all the answer she vouchsafed to the kingly threat. -Otto turned and looked at her steadily. - -“A magnificent creature,” he said, “beautiful, and with a brain of -steel, and perhaps for all I know, a heart like it. You won a great -deal from me, Fleta, a little while since. Did I not submit to the -masquerading of your mysterious Order? Did I not trust my life to -those treacherous monks of yours, submit to be blindfolded and led -into their haunt by secret ways. For what end? Ivan told me of -aspirations, of ideas, of thoughts, which only sickened my soul and -filled me with shame and despair. For I am a believer in order, in -moral rule, in the government of the world in accordance with the -principles of religion. I told you I was willing to become a member -of the order; yes, because my nature is in sympathy with its avowed -tenets. But its secret doctrines as I have heard them from you, as I -have heard them from the man you call your master, are to me -detestable. And it is for the carrying out of this unholy theory or -doctrine that you propose to surrender your life? No, Fleta; you are -now my queen.” - -“Yes,” said Fleta. “I am now your queen. I know that I have chosen -the lot willingly. You need not again tell me that I have the crown -I purposed to obtain.” - -At this moment they arrived at the palace. There was yet a weary -mass of ceremony and speaking of polite nothings to be passed -through before there was any chance of their being alone again. Otto -relapsed into the pleasant and kindly manner which was habitual with -him. Fleta fell into one of her abstracted moods, and the court -adopted its usual policy under such circumstances—let her be -undisturbed. Few of the men cared to risk the satirical answers that -came readiest to her lips when she was roused out of such a mood as -this. - -And yet at last someone did venture to rouse her; and a smile, -delicious as a burst of sunshine, came swiftly and suddenly on her -mouth. - -It was Hilary Estanol. Pale, worn, the mere ghost of himself, his -dark eyes looking strangely large in the white face they were set -in. They were fixed on her as though there were nothing else in the -world to look at. - -Fleta held out her hand to him; his companion—a military officer who -had brought him under protest, and in some doubt, for Hilary had no -friends at Court—drew back in amazement. He understood now Hilary’s -importunity. - -Hilary bent over Fleta’s hand and held his lips near it for an -instant, but did not touch it. A sort of groan came to her ear from -his lips. - -“You have resigned me?” she asked in a low vibrating whisper. - -“You have cast me off,” he answered. - -“Be it so,” she replied, “but you have lived through it, and you now -claim nothing. Is it not so? I read it in the dumb pain in your -eyes.” - -“Yes,” said Hilary, straightening himself and standing upright close -beside her, and looking down upon her beautiful dark head. “It is -so. I will not cry for the moon, nor will I weary any woman with my -regret or entreaty, even you, Fleta, though it is no dishonour to -humble oneself at the feet of such as you. No; I will bear my pain -like a man. I came here to say good-bye. You are still something -like the Fleta that I loved. To-morrow you will not be.” - -“How can you tell?” she said with her inscrutable smile. “Still, I -think you are right. And now that we are no longer lovers will you -enter with me another bond? Will you be my comrade in undertaking -the great task? I know you are fearless.” - -“The great task?” said Hilary vaguely, and he put his hand to his -forehead. - -“The one great task of this narrow life—To learn its lesson and go -beyond it.” - -“Yes, I will be your comrade,” said Hilary in an even voice and -without enthusiasm. - -“Then meet me at two this very morning at the gate of the -garden-house where you used to enter.” - -It was now just midnight. Hilary noticed this as he turned away, for -a little clock stood on a bracket close by. He looked at it, and -looked back at Fleta. Could she mean what she said? But already the -Fleta he knew had vanished; a cold, haughty, impassive young queen -was accepting the uninteresting homage of a foreign minister. The -guests were beginning to take their departure. Fleta and Otto did -not propose to take any journey in honour of their wedding as is the -custom in some places; the king opened for their use the finest set -of guests’ chambers in the palace, and these they occupied, -remaining among the visitors until all had departed. On the next day -Otto was to take his queen home; but he had had to give way to the -wishes of Fleta and her father as to the postponing of the journey. - -From the great drawing-rooms Fleta went quietly away when the last -guest had departed; she moved like a swift shadow noiselessly along -the corridors. She entered her own room, and there began, without -summoning any attendant, to hastily take off her bridal robes. On a -couch was lying the white robe and cloak which she had worn when she -had endeavoured to enter the hall of the mystics. These she put on, -and wrapping the cloak round her turned to leave the room. As she -did so she came face to face with Otto, who had entered noiselessly, -and was standing in silence beside her. She seemed scarcely to -notice him, but changed her direction and proceeded towards another -door. Otto quickly placed himself again in her way. - -“No,” he said; “you do not leave this room to-night.” - -“And why?” asked Fleta, looking gravely at his set face. - -“Because you are now my wife. I forbid it. Stay here, and with me. -Come, let me take off that cloak, without any trouble; the white -gown under it suits you even better than your wedding-dress.” - -He unfastened the clasps which held the cloak together. Fleta made -no opposition, but kept her eyes on his face; he would not meet her -gaze, though his face was white and rigid with the intensity of his -passion and purpose. - -“Do you remember,” said Fleta, “the last thing that you did when you -were with Father Ivan? Do you remember kneeling before him and -uttering these words—‘I swear to serve the master of truth and the -teacher of life——’” - -“That master—that teacher!” interrupted Otto hotly. “I reserved my -reason even in that incense-scented room. That master—that -teacher—is my own intelligence—so I phrased it in my own mind—I -recognise no other master.” - -“Your own intelligence!” repeated Fleta. “You have not yet learned -to use it. You did not so phrase the vow then; you only rephrased it -so afterwards, when you were away, and alone, and began again to -struggle for your selfish freedom. No, Otto, you have not begun to -use your intelligence. You are still the slave of your desires, -eaten up with the longing for power and the lust of the tyrannical -soul. You do not love me—you only desire to possess me. You fancy -your power is all you wish it to be. Well, put it to the test. Take -this cloak from my shoulders.” - -Otto came close, and took the cloak in his hands; and then a -sudden passion filled him—he seized her in his arms and pressed -his lips to hers—yet he did not do so, either, for the attempt was -instantaneously surrendered. He staggered back, white and -trembling. - -Fleta stood erect and proud before him. - -“That vow you took,” she said quietly, “you knew very well in the -inner recesses of your soul, in your true unblinded self, to make -you a slave of the Great Order. That vow may yet save you from -yourself, if you do not resent it too fiercely. But remember this; I -am a neophyte of that order, and you being its slave, are under my -command. I am your queen, Otto, but not your wife.” - -She passed him as she said this, and he made no effort to detain -her; indeed, the trembling had not yet left him, and his whole -strength was taken by the attempt to control it. As she reached the -door he succeeded in speaking: - -“Why did you marry me?” - -“Did I not tell you?” she said, pausing a moment and turning to look -at him. “I think I did. Because I have to learn to live on the plain -as contentedly as on the mountain tops. There is but one way for me -to do this, and that is to devote my life as your queen to the same -great purpose it would serve were I the silver-robed initiate I -desire to be. I go now to commence my work, with the aid of a lover -who has learned to surrender his love.” - -She moved magnificently from the room, looking much taller even than -her natural height. And Otto let her go without any word or sign. - - CHAPTER XIII. - -It was a fragrant night—a night rich with sweet flower-scents, not -only from the flower beds near, but coming from afar on the breeze. -Hilary stood at the gate, leaning on it and looking away at the sky, -where a faint streak of different light told of the sun’s coming. It -was quite clear, though there had been no moonlight; one of those -warm, still nights when it is easy to find one’s way, though hard to -see into the face of one near by, a night when one walks in a dream -amid changing shadows, and when the outer mysteriousness and the -dimness of one’s soul are as one. So with Hilary; so had he walked -to the gate. He waited for the woman he loved, the only woman any -man could ever love, having once known her. And yet no fever burned -now in his veins, no intoxication mounted from his heart to his -brain. Standing there, and regarding himself and his own feelings -very quietly in the stillness, it seemed to him as if he had died -yesterday when that wild cry had been unknowingly uttered; as if his -soul or his heart, or, indeed, his very self had gone forth in it. - -A light touch was laid on his shoulder, and then the gate was -opened. He passed through and walked by Fleta up the flower-bordered -pathway. She moved on without speaking, her white cloak hanging -loose from her neck, and her bare arms gleaming as it fell back from -them. - -“You who know so much tell me something,” said Hilary. “Why are you -so wise?” - -“Because I burned my soul out centuries ago,” said Fleta. “When you -have burned out your heart you will be strong as I am.” - -“Another question,” said Hilary. “Why did you fail in that -initiation?” - -Fleta stopped suddenly, and fixed fierce questioning eyes upon him. -She was terrible in this quick rush of anger. But Hilary looked on -her unmoved. It seemed to him that nothing would ever be able to -move him again. Was he dead indeed that he could thus endure the -scorching light of those brilliant eyes? - -“What makes you ask me that?” cried Fleta in a voice of pain. “Do -you demand to know?” - -“Yes; I do wish to know.” - -For a moment Fleta covered her face with her hands, and her whole -form shrank and quivered. But only for a moment; then she dropped -her hands at each side and stood erect, her queenly head poised -royally. - -“It is my punishment,” she said in a murmuring voice, “to discover -so soon how absolute are the bonds of the Great Order; how the pupil -can command the master as well as the master the pupil.” - -Then she turned abruptly upon Hilary, approaching him more nearly, -while she spoke in a quick, fierce voice. - -“Because, though I have burned out my soul, I have not burned out my -heart! Because, though I cannot love as men do, and have almost -forgotten what passion means, yet I can still worship a greater -nature than my own so deeply that it may be called love. I have not -learned to stand utterly alone and to know myself as great as any -other with the same possibilities, the same divinity in myself. I -still lean on another, look to another, hunger for the smile of -another. O, folly, when I know so well that I cannot find any rest -while that is in me. O, Ivan, my teacher, my friend, what torture it -is to wrest the image of you from its shrine within me. Powers and -forces of indifferent Nature, I demand your help!” - -She raised her arms as she uttered this invocation, and it struck -Hilary at the moment how little like a human being she looked. She -might have been the spirit of the dawn. Her voice had become -unutterably weird and mournful, like the deep cry of a broken soul. - -Without pausing for any answer she dropped her arms, drew her cloak -around her, and walked away over the dewy grass. Hilary, as silent, -as mournful, but seemingly without emotion, dropped his head and -quietly followed her track. Of old—only yesterday—what an age -ago!—he would have kept his eyes fixed on her shining dark hair or -the movements of her delicate figure. Suddenly Fleta stopped, turned -and confronted him. He raised his eyes in surprise and looked at -her. - -“You are no longer devoured by jealousy,” she said. “You can hear me -speak as I did just now without its turning you into a savage. What -has happened?” - -Her eyes seemed to penetrate his impassive and languid expression, -looking for the soul beneath. She was longing that his answer should -be the one she needed. - -“I am hopeless,” answered Hilary. - -“Of what?” - -“Of your love. I understand at last that you have a great purpose in -your life, and that I am a mere straw on a stream. I thought I had -some claim on you; I see I cannot have. I surrender myself to your -will. That is all I have left to do.” - -Fleta stood meditatively for a moment Then she looked up very sadly -in his face. - -“It is not enough,” she said. “Your gift must be a positive one.” - -Then she again turned and went on her way to the house. Here -everything was silent and even dark, for the shutters were all -closed, and evidently the place was deserted. Fleta opened a side -door with a key which was attached to her girdle; they entered and -she locked it behind them. She led the way through the quiet dim -house to the door of the laboratory; they entered the room in -silence. It wore a quite new aspect to Hilary’s eyes, and he looked -round in wonder. All was pale; there was no incense burning, no -lamps were lit; the colour had gone from the walls; a faint grey -light through a skylight, which had always hitherto been curtained, -dimly broke on the darkness of the room which still lurked deeply in -the lower part. But Hilary found enough light to see that the thing -he so hated was not present; that lay figure which was to him always -such a horror was gone. - -“Where is it?” he said after a moment, wondering at the sense of -relief with which its absence filled him. - -“What?—oh! the figure. Again you ask a question which I am compelled -to answer. Well, I cannot use that power at present; I have again to -win the right.” - -“How did you win the right before?” asked Hilary, fixing his eyes on -her; a fierce desire to know this possessed him. - -Fleta started, turned towards him, and for a moment the proud -imperiousness which ordinarily characterised her came over her form -and her features. But in another moment it was gone. She stood -before him, pale, gentle and sublime. - -“I will tell you,” she said in a clear yet very low voice. “By -taking your life.” - -Hilary looked at her in complete perplexity and bewilderment. - -“Do you not remember,” she said, “that forest, that new earth and -sky, all so sweet and strong, that wealth of apricot blossom that -came between us and the sky? Ah, Hilary, how fresh and vivid life -was then, while we lived and loved and understood not that we did -either! Was it not sweet? I loved you. Yes, I loved you—loved you.” - -Her voice broke and trembled. Hilary’s numbed heart suddenly sprang -again to life. Never had her voice contained such tones of -tenderness and passion before. - -“Oh, my dear, my Fleta, you love me still—now!” - -He sprang towards her, but she seemed to sweep him aside with one -majestic action of her bare arm. - -“With that passion,” she said, with a pale solemnity, “I can never -love now. I have not forgotten entirely what such love is—no, -Hilary, I have not forgotten—else how should I have found you again -among the multitudes of the earth?” She held out her hand to him, -and, as he clasped it, he felt it was soft and tender, that the warm -life blood of a young creature responded to his touch. “I knew you -by your dear eyes which once were so full of pure love for me that -they were like stars in my life.” - -“What came between us?” asked Hilary. - -She looked strangely at him, drew her hand away, folded her cloak -round her and then answered in one word: - -“Passion!” - -“I remember it now!” cried Hilary in sudden excitement “My God! I -see your beautiful wild face before me, I see your lips as lovely as -the soft blossom above us. Fleta, I loved you as men love—I hungered -for you—what harm lay in that?” - -“None,” she answered, standing now motionless and statue-like, -wrapped in her long, white cloak, seeming like a lovely ghost rather -then a living woman. “None—for men who care only to be men, to -reproduce men, to be and to do nothing more than that! But I had -another power within me, that seemed stronger than myself—a stirring -of the dumb soul within. When that moment came, Hilary, then came -the great decision, the fierce struggle between two souls hurled -together out of the dimness of life, and finding light in the fever -of love—yes, light!—the fire that is love makes it possible for men -to live. It gives them hope, it animates them, it makes them believe -in a future, it enables them to create men to fill that future. - -“In those old days beneath those apricot blossoms, you and I, -Hilary, were but children on this earth, new to its meaning, knowing -nothing of its purpose. How could we guide ourselves? We were -ignorant of the great power of sex, we were only at the beginning of -its lesson. So it must be with all. They must go through with the -lesson, they cannot guess it from the first! Nor could we. I did not -know what I did, Hilary, my lover, when I took your life. Had I -known I should only have been like a beast of prey. But I did not -know. You asserted your power—you claimed me. I asserted mine—I -conquered. I wanted power; and killing you as I did with that one -emotion only stirring within me, I got what I longed for. Not at -once—not till I had suffered patiently, not till I had struggled -hard to understand myself and the force that was at work within me. -And this for life after life, incarnation after incarnation. You not -only loved me but you were mine—I conquered you and used your life -and love for my own ends—to add to my power, to actually create the -life and strength I needed. By your life, by your strength, I became -a magician, read by my insight the mysteries of alchemy and the -buried secrets of power. Yes, Hilary, it is so. To you I owe myself. -I have become free from the common burdens of humanity, its -passions, its personal desires, its weary repetitions of experiences -till their edge grows blunted by long usage. I have seen the -Egyptian and the Roman, men of the old superb civilisations, trying -to reproduce their past pleasures, their past magnificence to-day, -in this modern life. It is useless, life after life full of -selfishness and pleasure, ends in the weariness of living that kills -men’s souls and darkens their thought. But you and I, Hilary, have -escaped from this dismal fate. I would not be content to live again -as I had lived before, to use the life principle which lies in love, -only for pleasure or the bringing of eidolons on to the earth. I -determined to rise, to raise myself, to raise you, and out of our -love perpetually to create something nobler than we ourselves. I -have succeeded, Hilary, I have succeeded. We stand now before the -gate of the first initiation. I tried to enter it and failed for -want of strength—for want of strength, Hilary! I could not pluck my -master’s image utterly out of my soul—I looked for him to lean on—at -least to find comfort in seeing that face I knew. Give me strength, -Hilary! Be my comrade! Help me to enter and your strength shall come -back to you a hundredfold. For your reward shall be that you too -shall enter with me.” - -She had changed from moment to moment as she spoke. She looked like -an inspired priestess—like a Divine being. Now she stood like a -flame with a strange appearance, as if her whole soul and self, -spirit and body, rose upwards in adoration. The dawn had come; the -first rays of the sun shot through the skylight and fell on her -transfigured face and gleaming hair. - -Hilary looked at her as a worshipper might look at his idol. - -“I am yours,” he said, “but I know not how to prove it.” - -She held out her hand to him, and lowered her eyes from the light to -which they had been raised until they met his. - -“We must discover the great secret together, Hilary. No longer may -you give yourself to me without knowledge. Hitherto our lives have -been but the lives of the blossom; now we must be wise and enter the -state when the fruit comes. We have to find out what that power is -which the sun represents to us; to discover the pure creative power. -But we have not strength yet, Hilary; alas! I dread and fear -sometimes. More strength means more sacrifice.” - -She drew her cloak closer round her, the light faded from her eyes -and face, and turning away she went and sat down on a couch which -was back in the shadow. Hilary felt a profound sense of sadness, of -sympathy, of sorrow, sweep over his being. He followed her and sat -down beside her. One pale hand lay on the couch, outside her cloak. -He laid his upon it, and fell deep into thought. Thus they sat, -silent, breathing softly, for long hours, till the sun was high. But -still, even then, the room was very dim and cool, and full of -shadows. - - CHAPTER XIV. - -On the next day, the same day rather, for they sat together in the -laboratory till long after the sun was high, Hilary, to his own -amazement, found that he had an official post in the household of -the young Queen which would keep him continually about her. Indeed, -he had to pack up instantly on being informed of the fact, in order -to follow Fleta to her own dominions. How this had been effected -none could tell—Hilary, least of all, for he saw immediately on -presenting himself in King Otto’s presence that he was regarded by -him with dislike and distrust. Before, Otto had scarcely noticed -him. The present state of things was decidedly a change for the -worse. However, Hilary had already perceived very clearly that to -serve under Fleta was to serve under a hard master. And he had no -longer any kind of choice. Life was inconceivable without -her—without the pain caused by her difficult service. He had rather -suffer that than enjoy any other kind of pleasure. And, indeed, -pleasure, apart from Fleta, did not appear to him to exist. - -And yet he was still capable of doubting her. - -Fleta had chosen a companion of royal birth to travel with her; a -young duchess who bore the same family name as Fleta herself. This -girl had been reared in a nunnery, and then taken to court, where -she took part in all the pageants and immediately found herself -surrounded by suitors. She was not very pretty, and certainly not at -all clever. To go with Fleta seemed to her delightful, as it would -introduce her to a new court and a fresh series of suitors. It -struck Hilary as quite extraordinary that Fleta should choose this -child as her companion—not that the Duchess was any younger than -Fleta—indeed, they were almost of an age; but Fleta appeared to -carry within her beautiful head the wisdom of centuries, while the -Duchess was a mere school-girl trained in court etiquette. - -These three were to travel together in Fleta’s own favourite -travelling carriage. She simply refused to travel with her husband. -When he addressed her on the subject, she merely replied: - -“You would weary me; and, moreover, I have work to do.” - -And so they started; and as Hilary took his place, he thought of -that strange drive when he and Fleta, and Father Amyot, had been the -three. Recollecting this made him wonder what had become of Father -Amyot; for the priest had not returned to his duties in the city. He -asked Fleta, while the thought was in his mind, why Amyot was not -with her now. - -“He is of no use to me,” she answered coldly. - -The journey was a very long and a very weary one to Hilary; for the -Duchess, finding no one else to flirt with, insisted upon flirting -with him; while Fleta lay back in her corner of the carriage hour -after hour, with her eyes closed. What was the work she had to do? -Hilary, who had overheard her answer to the King, wondered very -much. And yet, as he watched her intently he saw that her face -changed. It grew darker, more inscrutable, more set in purpose. - -Late one evening, and when they were indeed travelling later than -usual, hoping to reach their destination that same night, a curious -thing happened. All day long Fleta had been silent, seemingly buried -in thought; but sometimes when Hilary was watching her he noticed -her lips move as if in speech. He sat opposite her whenever he -could; this was not always possible, as the young Duchess would talk -to him, and the carriage being very large and roomy, he had to -change his position, and go nearer to her in order to carry on a -conversation with any comfort. But as it grew dark the Duchess grew -tired, and leaned back half asleep, for indeed they had had a long -day’s journey. - -Hilary withdrew himself to the corner opposite Fleta. It grew so -dark he could no longer see her; they had a swinging-lamp in the -roof of the carriage, but he did not want to light it unless Fleta -wished it so; and, indeed, he longed for the quiet and the darkness -very much. It made him feel more alone with her, he could try to -follow and seize her thoughts then without the perpetual disturbance -of the little Duchess’s quick eyes on him and her light voice in his -ears. - -He sat still and thought of Fleta—Fleta herself in her glorious -beauty—sitting there opposite him shrouded by the darkness. He could -endure it no longer—the man rose up in him and asserted itself—he -leaned forward and put his hand upon her. He had scarcely done so -when the Duchess uttered a shrill cry. - -“My God!” she exclaimed, in a voice of horror, “who is in the -carriage with us?” - -She flung herself across and knelt upon the floor between Hilary and -Fleta; her terror was so great she did not know what she was doing. - -Hilary leaned across her and instantly discovered that she was -right—that there was another man in the carriage besides himself. - -“Oh, kill him! kill him!” cried the little Duchess, in an agony of -fear; “he is a thief, a murderer, a robber!” - -Hilary rose up and precipitated himself upon this person whom he -could not see. A sense of self-defence, of defence of the women with -him, seized him as we see it seize the animals. He discovered that -this man had risen also. Blindly and furiously he attacked him, and -with extraordinary strength. Hilary was young and full of vigour, -but slight and not built like an athlete. Now, however, he seemed to -be one. He found his adversary to be much larger and stronger than -himself. - -A fearful struggle followed. The carriage drove on through unseen -scenery as fast as possible; Fleta could have stopped it had she -thrown the window down and cried out to the postilions. But Fleta -remained motionless—she might have fainted, she was so still. The -little Duchess simply cowered on the ground beside her, clinging to -her motionless figure. This terrified girl had not the presence of -mind to think of stopping the carriage, and so obtaining help. She -was too horror-struck to do anything. And, indeed, it was horrible, -for the swaying struggling forms sometimes were right upon the two -women, sometimes at the other side of the carriage; it was a deadly, -horrible, ghastly struggle, all the more horrid for the silence. -There were no cries, no exclamations, for indeed, so far as Hilary -was concerned, he had no breath to spare for them. There were only -gasps, and heavy breathings, and the terrible sound that comes from -a man’s throat when he is fighting for his life. How long this -hideous battle lasted none could tell—Hilary had no idea of the -passage of time. The savage in him had now come so entirely -uppermost and drowned all other consciousness, that his one thought -was he must kill—kill—kill—and at last it was done. There was a -moment when his adversary was below him, when he could use his whole -force upon him—and then came a gasp and an unearthly cry—and -silence. - -Absolute silence for a little while. No one moved, no one stirred. -The Duchess was petrified with horror. Hilary had sunk exhausted on -the seat of the carriage—not only exhausted, but bewildered, for a -host of other emotions besides savage fury began to rise within him. -What—who—-was this being he had destroyed? At that moment they were -urged into a gallop, for they were entering the city gates. Hilary -threw down the window next him with a crash. “Lights, lights!” he -cried out, “bring lights.” The carriage stopped, and there was a -crowd immediately at the windows, and the glare of torches fell into -the carriage, making it bright as day. The little Duchess was -crouched in the corner on the ground in a dead faint. Fleta sat up, -strangely white, but calm. Nothing else was to be seen, alive or -dead, save Hilary himself; and so horror-struck was he at this -discovery that he turned and buried his face in the cushions of the -carriage, and he never knew what happened—whether he wept, or -laughed, or cursed—but some strange sound of his own voice he heard -with his ears. - -There was a carriage full of servants behind Fleta’s carriage; when -hers stopped so suddenly they all got out and came quickly to the -doors. - -“The Duchess has fainted,” said Fleta, rising so as to hide Hilary; -“the journey has been too long. Is there a house near where she can -lie still a little while, and come on later to the palace?” - -Immediately offers of help were made, and the servants and those who -were glad to help them carried the poor little Duchess away. - -“On to the palace!” cried Fleta, and shut the door and drew down the -blinds. The postilion started the horses with all speed. - -Suddenly the blood in Hilary’s body began to surge and burn. Was it -Fleta’s arms that clung round him? Fleta’s lips that printed warm, -living kisses on his neck, his face, his hair? He turned and faced -her. - -“Tell me the truth,” he said. “Are you a devil?” - -“No,” she answered, “I am not. I want to find my way to the pure -good that governs life. But there are devils about me, and you have -killed one of them to-night. Hush, calm yourself; remember what we -are in the eyes of the world. For we are at the palace door, and -Otto is standing there to receive us.” - -She stepped out, the young queen. - -Hilary followed her, stumbling, broken. He said he was ill, to those -who spoke to him; and stood staring in wonder at the brilliant sight -before him. - - CHAPTER XV. - -The great hall of the palace was illuminated gloriously by huge -dragons made of gold, placed high up on the walls; within these -strange creatures were powerful lamps, which shed their light not -only through the eyes and opened mouths, but from the gleaming -claws. The whole place was filled with a blaze of light from them; -and the dresses of the household assembled below seemed to Hilary -another blaze of light, so gay were they. Yet this was only a -domestic reception. It was late, and Otto had refused to allow any -more general demonstration to take place that night. Yet Fleta, when -she threw off her travelling cloak and hood, might have been the -centre of any pageant. She showed no trace of the weariness of -travel, or even of the strange excitement she had passed through. -She was pale, but her face was calm and wore its most haughty and -unapproachable expression. Her dress of black lace hung about her -slender form like clouds. Otto was filled with pride as he noted her -superb dignity and beauty; with hatred, as he observed that her eyes -never met his own, that she treated him with just the same civility -as the steward, or any servant of the establishment. No one could -notice this but himself and perhaps Hilary, supposing the latter to -be capable of regarding anyone but Fleta herself; for she was too -much a woman of the world, this mystic, this wild girl, to admit -anyone even to the most evident of the secrets of her life. - -After a few moments passed among the little crowd assembled in the -great hall, Fleta proposed to go to her own rooms for the night, and -a stately little procession formed itself at once to conduct her -there. But before going she beckoned to Hilary. - -“The Duchess must come to me to-night,” she said. “I wish her to be -in my own room. Send a carriage and servants to fetch her.” - -How her eyes glittered! Had he ever seen them shine so vividly -before? - -“Tell me one thing,” he said hoarsely. “I believe you have taken to -yourself that creature’s life and very body that I killed for you. -Is it not true?” - -“You are shrewd,” she said with a laugh. “Yes, it is true. My whole -being is stronger for his death; I absorbed his vital power the -instant you wrenched it from him.” - -“And he?” said Hilary, with wild eyes. - -“Was one of those half-human, half-animal creatures that haunt men -to their ill, and which fools call ghosts or demons. I have done him -a service in taking his life into my own.” - -Hilary shuddered violently. - -“You doubt me,” said Fleta very quietly. “You still doubt if it is -not I who am the devil. Be it so. I am indifferent to your opinion -of me, Hilary; you cannot help loving and serving me. We were born -under the same star. Now go and give orders about the Duchess.” - -Under the same star! Those words had not come to his mind for a long -while; yet how horribly true they were. For he, Hilary, it was who -had actually done this dreadful deed and killed this unseen, -unknown, unimaginable creature. Horror made him clutch his hands -together as he thought that he had touched this thing, more, had -killed it hideously. Might it not have been some good thing striving -to baffle Fleta? Ah, yes! he still doubted her. And yet to doubt her -so completely made the very earth to sink away from under his feet. -He himself, his life, his all, were given to her, be she good or -evil! Staggering and overpowered by the terrible thoughts that -crushed his wearied brain, Hilary found his way to a supper-table; -and too exhausted to think of anything else but recruiting his -strength, sat down to drink wine—and to try to eat. This latter -seemed impossible, but the wine revived him; and presently he -remembered that it was his business to look after the Duchess. - -By-and-bye she was carried into the palace; she could not yet stand, -for she had only come out of one fainting fit to fall into another. - -And now came a strange and dreadful scene—one which only a few -witnessed, Hilary as it happened being among those few, for he -saw the Duchess taken to the suite of rooms Fleta occupied. In -the corridor Fleta came out to them; she was still in her -travelling-dress, and looked very quiet and even subdued. But at -the sight of her the young Duchess screamed as if she saw some -awful thing; she would not let Fleta touch her, she absolutely -refused to enter her room. - -“But you must be with me,” said Fleta in a low voice. - -“I will not,” answered the Duchess with a firm resolution which -amazed everyone who knew her. She rose up and walked unassisted -along the corridor and down the great staircase; she met the young -king coming up it; he had heard her shrill cries and came to see -what was happening. - -“What is the matter, little cousin?” seeing her tear-stained and -agitated face. - -“Fleta wants me to be in her room all night! I would not do it for -all the world! She is a devil—she would kill me or make her lover -kill me, and then no one would ever hear of me or even find my body. -No! No!” - -And so she ran on, down the wide stairs, leaving Otto thunderstruck. -He noticed that a number of persons were gathering on the landing -and stairs, and so, with a stern and quiet face, he passed through -the little throng, making no observation. He went down the corridor -and straight into Fleta’s room. Here he found her standing silent, -dark, like a sombre statue. One other person was in the room—Hilary -Estanol. He was in the most extraordinary state of agitation, -pouring out words and accusations; some horror appeared to possess -and blind him, for he took no notice of the king’s entrance. Fleta -did, however; she looked up at him and smiled—such a strange, sweet, -subtle smile. Seldom, indeed, had Fleta given him a look like this. -Otto’s heart leaped within him, and he knew himself her slave. For -he loved her increasingly with every passing moment; and she had but -to turn her face on him softly to make the loving soul in him burn -with ardour. But that burning was fiery indeed. He turned upon -Hilary and stayed his words by a sudden sharp order: - -“Leave the room,” he said. “And you had better go and see Doctor -Brandener before you go to bed, for you are either in a fever or -mad. Go at once.” - -Hilary was in a condition in which an order given in such a tone -took the place of the action of his own brain, and he mechanically -obeyed it. This was the best possible thing that could have happened -to him; for he was in fact in a high fever, and if he had not, -without thinking about it, done as he was told and gone to the -resident doctor of the palace, he would probably have wandered -raving about all night. As it was he was obliged to drink a strong -sleeping draught, and was placed in his bed, where he fell at once -into a sleep so profound it seemed like death. - -Hilary gone, Fleta closed the door behind him. - -“Do not let there be any struggle of wills between us to-night,” -said Fleta very softly. “I warn you, I am much stronger than I was; -I am very much stronger than you are, now. And you found before that -you could not even come near enough to touch me. Let me rest, and -that quietly; I wish to retain my beauty, both for your sake and my -own.” - -Otto paused a few moments before he made any answer to this -extraordinary speech. Then he spoke with difficulty; and as he did -so raised his hand to brush away some great drops of sweat which had -gathered on his forehead. - -“I know I am powerless against you to-night, Fleta,” he said. “I -cannot even move nearer to you. But be warned; I intend to probe the -mystery of your being. I intend to conquer you at last. I will do it -if I have to visit hell itself for the magic which shall be stronger -than yours.” - - (_To be continued._) - - ——*——— - - - - - TWILIGHT VISIONS. - - PART II.—THE CRESCENT. - - “_The_ LORD _appeared of old unto me, saying, ‘Yea, I have loved - thee with an everlasting love: therefore with loving-kindness have - I drawn thee.’_”—JER. xxxi., 3. - - “In life, in death, O Lord! abide with me!” - Thou, Ruler o’er the Living Rosy Cross— - Great Master Mason of the mortal frame, - Which is the temple of the Holy Ghost— - Grand Power of all who through the secret sun - Dost hold the soul in tenement of clay - To guide it safely through the gloom of night - Into the golden morn, when all things then - In Light of Love—thine own Eternal Self— - Shall truly stand revealed to those that strive - In truth to know the Power which all mankind - Shall worship in the Universal King. - - * * * * * - - My children! saith the living God of Love, - Now “if with all your hearts ye truly seek,”[153] - Ye surely shall find me your King in Heaven, - And finding me shall know yourselves to be - Anointed Princes—Rulers of the Earth— - The Powers of Light sent by me in the flesh, - And named Michael! You are here to fight, - To hurl down Satan to his black abyss, - Where ignorance and error, sin and crime, - And hellish spirits dark for ever dwell - With all who in the bonds of slavery - Lead deathly lives as creatures of the world— - The wretched earth-worms of that bounden sphere, - Which is the only Hell mankind can know! - - * * * * * - - The night is now far spent, and in the sky - From out a dark blue setting there hath shone - In ages past, as now, full many a star - Proclaiming to mankind the Light of Heaven, - Each with its own peculiar brilliancy - Illumining the minds of men with rays - Which point to other realms beyond this world, - And ever tell of one star differing - In glory from its fellow star on high. - - What great and hidden meaning lieth here! - Why are the stars above held forth to man - As entities which tell of other states? - The Stars of Heaven are never seen by man; - As man, he cannot know that glorious light - Sent forth—from States of Wisdom not in skies— - Through brilliant rays which meet not mortal gaze, - And are invisible save to the one - Who—seeing through perception—contacts light, - That Light of ancient days, since passed away - Into the sombre gloom of deepest night; - Because in ignorance and selfishness - Man willed to dwell in darkness on this earth. - And now behold the fallen Lucifer!— - Thou Morning Star of Truth—again arise— - To touch with thy bright rays the mind of man - And open to his gaze the Light of Love, - Reflected in the silv’ry Crescent now - About to crown the Living Cross of Truth. - - * * * * * - - Shine forth, fair Luna! Man hath waited long - For thee—O bringer of the Golden Light. - Surmount the Cross—thou Goddess of the Gods— - Which suff’ring mortals here in agony - Have borne along, desiring of their King— - Of whom thou art—those better things on earth, - Which He hath promised them in days of old, - Shall take the place of former things to pass— - With mourning, weeping, bitterness, and death— - Away for ever, as the first-born states - Of Heaven and earth and sea no more to be.[154] - - * * * * * - - Fair Keeper of the rays shed by the Sun! - Whilst feeble mortals now deny thy power, - We of the morn declare thee as thou art; - The mediate force to govern all mankind, - The force of love which mortals cannot know. - For that man holds as love is passion foul: - It hath transformed the earth into a hell, - And none save thou can mediately stand - To rid the earth—by Truth who comes from thee— - From that curs’d tyrant in the world or hell, - The devil—Satan—he that doth deceive, - Accuser of our brethren, soon to be - Bound hand and foot in heaven, then cast to earth, - When angels dark and all who fight for him - Shall fall with him through Michael’s power and might.[155] - - * * * * * - - The grandest vision seen in heaven from earth - Has burst upon the wond’ring mind of man, - For woman has appear’d with Sun array’d— - She stands on Luna, o’er her holy brow - A coronet of twelve bright golden stars: - She crieth out and travaileth in pain - To be delivered of the Child of Truth, - Which is, in love, to rule mankind as one, - The one great body in the Spirit CHRIST[156] - Who cometh now a second time to man - Through her who clothes him with a mortal form, - Our Holy Mother in the Living God. - And yet about the woman, as of old, - Damned Satan’s lurks, with seven diadems— - The dragon stands as knowledge of the World, - Which would devour the holy child of God. - But so-called knowledge is not ever true, - Frail mortals know not that the states of Heaven - Permit below themselves the states of Hell - To be—that mortals there may feel the Truth— - The everlasting fire, consuming Self— - Destroying all the former things in man - Through fiery sufferings induced by self, - Through freedom granted by a Loving God. - The Universal King in love ordains - That man shall ever reap the crop he sows, - And so the Woman clothed with the Sun, - Who sows the seed of love amongst mankind, - Shall reap the fruits of love in Heaven—her home— - Where happiness and peace eternal reign, - Wherein the dragon hath no place—no power. - All hail! thou glorious Bride, in Light array’d, - O, woman, clothed with the Bridegroom’s Power,[157] - Arise and shine! The time is now at hand - To change this earth into a heaven bright, - This hell into a paradise of Saints; - Through thee alone can mortals rise from earth - To soar into Eternity—God’s Peace; - Through thee alone can man perceive the light— - The Sun of Wisdom,[158] which shall soon appear - Acknowledged King supreme of all that is, - Which He hath made in love for all mankind. - Woman! behold a groaning world awaits - The crushing of the Serpent’s power through thee; - Look on the fairest cities of this globe, - In misery the love-starved of the earth - Now walk the streets; whilst degradation vile - Confronts them in their daily—hourly lives, - Because mankind will sell itself for gold - To one, who is the prince of hell; he rules - The States of falsehood in this mortal world - Wherein the moaning of tormented souls - Appeals to God[159] in mortal agony - To ease the burdens of their earthly lives - By teaching them of thee, O Queen of Heaven! - - * * * * * - - Woman, behold the sighing, wretchedness, - Depravity, disease and death on earth! - Pure life has left these mortals who transgress - The laws of God by being of the world; - They know not happiness and peace and thee. - Thou art of nations all, the Saving Health. - Stretch forth thine hands and save, O Queen of Heaven! - - * * * * * - - Woman! behold the man of war exists - Whose work it is to shed the blood of him - Who truly is a portion of thyself; - Nay more, thine ALL, within this weary state; - The Father of thy loved ones in the flesh! - How long wilt thou permit ungodly strife - To keep thee from thy lawful throne on earth, - The one great Empire that shall bow to thee, - That thou alone can’st rule, Queen of the South?[160] - O, Bride of Heaven, thou knowest well that He— - The Son of Man—thy bridegroom—came to save, - Not to destroy, the lives of men on earth![161] - - * * * * * - - Great Spirit Love! Bright Queen of Highest Heaven, - Send forth thy potent force, and let it fire - The hearts of all within this little sphere; - Show worldly rulers in their sinful states - That thou alone art Queen of all Mankind; - And in these petty princes of the earth - Destroy, we pray thee, all the mortal lusts - Of self, of gold, and praise, and feeble power, - Implanted in their natures by the one - Who rules them with their subjects in this hell - Created by themselves through ignorance - Of thee, O, Spirit Love, Blest Queen of Heaven! - - WM. C. ELDON SERJEANT. - -London, 28th January, 1888. - ------ - -Footnote 153: - - See Deut. iv. - -Footnote 154: - - See Rev. xxi. - -Footnote 155: - - See Rev. xii. - -Footnote 156: - - _i.e._, The invisible, universal, and eternal principle which - mortals can only conceive of as the sum total of the combined - spirits of Truth, Love, and Wisdom, when manifested in that “Son - of Man,” or HUMANITY, which is also the “Son of God,” collectively - and individually. - -Footnote 157: - - In the Kabala, the Bride of the “Heavenly Man,” _Tetragrammaton_, - is Malkuth—the foundation or kingdom. It is our earth, which, when - _regenerated_ and purified (as matter), will be united to her - bridegroom (Spirit). But in Esotericism there are two aspects of - the LOGOS, or the “Father-Son,” which latter becomes his own - father; one is the UNMANIFESTED Eternal, the other the manifested - and periodical LOGOS. The “Bride” of the former is the universe as - nature in the abstract. She is also his “MOTHER”; who, “clothed - with the bridegroom’s power,” gives birth to the manifested - universe (the second _logos_) through her own inherent, mystic - power, and is, therefore, the Immaculate Mother; “the woman - clothed with the sun, and travailing” in child birth, in - Revelation, ch. xii.—ED. - -Footnote 158: - - See Psalm lxxxiv., 11. - -Footnote 159: - - _i.e._ The Universal Spirit in whom all things exist and have - being. That Eternal Principle which fills all Space and Time, and - is SPACE and Time (in its abstract sense, as otherwise it would be - an _extra-Cosmic_ God), and is perfect in perfection. - -Footnote 160: - - See Matt. xii., 42. - -Footnote 161: - - Luke ix., 56. - ------ - - ------------------ - - EDITORS’ NOTE. - - This second part of the three which form the bulk of the poem - called “Twilight Visions” by their author—from a purely Kabalistic - standpoint of universal symbolical Esotericism, is most - suggestive. Its literary value is apparent. But literary form in - occultism counts for nothing in such mystic writing if its spirit - is sectarian—if the symbolism fails in universal application or - lacks correctness. In this, Part II., however (of the third to - come we can yet say nothing), the Christian-Judæan names may be - altered and replaced by their Sanskrit or Egyptian equivalents, - and the ideas will remain the same. It seems written in the - universal “mystery-language,” and may be readily understood by an - occultist, of whatever school or nationality. Nor will any true - mystic, versed in that international tongue, whose origin is lost - in the dark night of pre-historic ages, fail to recognise a true - Brother, who has adopted the phraseology of the Initiates of the - ancient Judæan Tanaim—Daniel and St. John of the Apocalypse—and - partially that of the Christian Gnostics, only to be the more - readily understood by the profane of Christian lands. Yet the - author means precisely the same thing that would be in the mind of - any Brahminical or Buddhist Initiate, who, while deploring the - present degenerated state of things, would place all his hope in - the transient character of even the _Kali Yuga_, and trust in the - speedy coming of the Kalki Avatar. We say again, the divine - Science and Wisdom—_Theosophia_—is universal and common property, - and the same under every sky. It is the physical type and the - outward appearance in the dress, that make of one individual a - Chinaman and of another a European, and of a third a red-skinned - American. The inner man is one, and all are “Sons of God” by - birth-right. - - The editors regret that, by an over-sight, the sub-title, “The - Cross,” that headed Part I. of “Twilight Visions,” published in - our January number, should have been omitted. - - THE WHITE MONK. - - By the Author of “A Professor of Alchemy.” - - (_Continued._) - -“Margaret had been in grief so sad and potent since her brother’s -death, that it at last brought her into a fever, from which, with -difficulty, she recovered, and which kept her long to her chamber. - -“During this time the monk roamed like a restless spirit, seeming to -seek her, and despairing because he found her not. Giles Hughson -even went so far as to suspect he was no true priest at all, until -he had seen his tonsure. Even then he was drawn into most -sacrilegious surmises by what he beheld some few nights after. - -“Having some work to do in Castle Troyes garden, he noted the White -Monk, his lodger, glide noiselessly through the grounds, hidden -behind the thick black walls of yew, and pause under the casement of -Mistress Margaret and stand there listening intently for a certain -space. At last, with a gesture of despair, he slung himself with -infinite agile stillness up some feet of the ivy that covered the -wall, from which insecure footing he did long and earnestly search -if he might see her shadow cross the room. Giles, the gardener, -swore afterwards that the sight of that priest, with his cowl fallen -back from his dark face, and that look of straining, terrified -attention had in it something so partaking of the unearthly, that -for the life of him he dared not accost the daring intruder. ‘Time -enough if there were need,’ he excused himself afterwards, ‘but -Castle Troyes is ever well enow defended, and at that time there -must have been enough of inmates watching over Margaret, the -beautiful, to win her back to life.’ - -“The horrible recklessness of an act such as this, with the carbines -of a round thirty men within a few yards of him, made the monk seem -to Giles a creature of charmed life, who may not be addressed as -ordinary mortals. - -“But the White Monk saw his discoverer when he descended and glided -away again, scared by some noise made by Margaret’s attendants. And -thus there occurred a tragedy, which you shall learn as far as it -was ever known. - -“Now Giles Hughson had a young son afflicted with total dumbness, -but whom Mistress Margaret de Troyes had taught to write; and it is -through this scholarship of his that we come to know as much as we -do of what really happened. The White Monk appeared fond of this -boy, possibly because he had seen Margaret kiss him. Thus the lad -had greater access to the monk’s small attic than any other; and -this is the tale he tells of the night after Giles had espied his -lodger clinging to the wall of Castle Troyes. - -“The boy had noiselessly, so as not to disturb the often musings of -the solitary one, stepped up the attic stairs to fetch some trifle -he wanted of the monk. Pausing timidly at the door, he beheld the -familiar white-clad figure, with an air of terrible malignity, -mixing some powder of a greenish colour, which, at the sight of the -intruder, he hastily laid aside, thinking it had not been seen. - -“But the lad was unnerved by the expression he had caught on the -monk’s face, and he forgot not so lightly. - -“At the frugal supper, that very night, he observed the monk ate -even less than was his wont, and of one dish only, the which he also -pressed upon the young lad by his side, seeming to wish to keep the -others from him. The others of the family, Giles Hughson and his -dame, did eat as usual, and were both found dead on the morrow. - -“The monk strove to comfort the poor boy by every means in his -power, but it was all of no avail. The lad seized a moment, fled -into the wood, and there wrote down all that he had seen and -suspected, with which account he presently did seek the justices. -These caused proper inquiry into the manner of the deaths of the -workman and his wife to be made, and, finding they had died of -potent poison, instituted careful search for the person of the White -Monk, who had vanished from the cottage. - -“At length they found him, in a strange state for one of his way of -living. Into the wood had he gone, but not so far as that he could -hide him. He had stopped beside a little brook, where he had sat -when first he saw fair Margaret, the sister of his victims. There, -even there, was he found, in so deep contemplation that he never -heard his pursuers’ footsteps. He had made a cross of two elder -branches (folk about us say that the elder-wood formed the Cross -whereon Christ died), and having set it on the summit of a bank, was -deep in prayer, as it seemed, before it. - -“One of his Italian repentances, I doubt not. - -“He seemed in sore distress of mind, and lost to all thought of his -surroundings. - -“So they took him; the foreign wild beast, tracked at last. But not -without trouble for he fought like the panther he was. Escaping -lissomely from their hands at the moment when they would have bound -him, the ex-bravo snatched a genuine stiletto from the folds of his -monastic frock and stabbed one man to death, laughing coarsely at -the stupid astonishment of the harquebusiers to see this weapon in -so unseemly a hand. - -“He had no chance, being taken thus unawares, and exhaustion came -upon him; so, with tremours, the officers of justice held him fast. -Before the first cord was fastened round his struggling wrists, he -fell back, rigid, in their arms; sighed once or twice, smiled -bitterly to himself at their consternation, and flung his head back, -dead. - -“A small quantity of a green powder was found on him (a large dose, -I ween, had killed so hardy a villain!), and by comparing the signs -of death with those of Giles Hughson and his wife, they saw he had -poisoned himself some time within the last five hours. Whether he -had seen Margaret again, and by seeing her upon the earth, had come -to know himself too bad for it; or whether the weariness attendant -upon sins so heavy had worn him out at last, remains a mystery. The -leeches said a man so wasted and wan as this could scarce, in the -way of Nature, have lived many years longer; but I question this, -and so did the men who had so great trouble to hold him! - -“News travelled slowly in those days from Italy to England, and it -was not until very shortly after the White Monk’s death that our -town learnt it had harboured Pietro Rinucci, the slayer of the two -good brothers, Ambrose and Gilbert de Troyes. No one ever told -Mistress Margaret that she had spoken with such a man. And now the -beautiful maiden rose from her bed, and asked for her mostly costly -gowns, of amber, blue and rosy colours; and went amongst her friends -brightly, wreathed with pearls and radiant in smiles. She was -thought to have recovered, though she looked ethereal as a daisy or -white cloud; but she said and averred that she was dying, and that -her brother Ambrose had appeared to her in a vision, bidding her -make all speed to do what remained to her upon the earth and be soon -ready, when he should come behind the angels to fetch her hence. Her -kinsfolk thought she wandered in her mind. She asked for the man who -had wooed her, and held long speech with him, very merrily, and yet -with tears; beseeching him to pause e’er he rashly threw away his -life on this earth, since we know not in the beginning, whither our -pleasant sins may carry us, and when we have no enjoyment of them, -save by memory, what are they to us? The instruments of our present -ruin. - -“‘All this,’ said the lovely Margaret with a smile, ‘hath right off, -my Lord, been heard, by you and others; but from a lady’s lips (and -that lady who is even now bent to consider the past failings of her -own life, soon to be taken from her) it hath been made evident to -me, these poor oft-repeated words shall have some power. God bless -you, my Lord—farewell.’ - -“The gentleman came out from her boudoir exceeding sobered, and -essaying as he might to conceal his tears. - -“The words of this dying angel—for so indeed she seemed—he vowed -should be as a challenge to him from God to purify his ways. And -indeed from that day the gentleman made such progress in godliness -as can be made by one of his complexion. - -“And now a strange and terrible portent was observed. - -“Those who watched by the Lady Margaret, began to see a vision, and -of that most dreaded being, the White Monk! - -“Night or day, it mattered not; with a chill like to that of Death -itself, the horrified watchers knew the presence of the phantom. In -the dark corners of the room would shape themselves dimly the -features of the murderer, Rinucci, and his monastic gown, so glaring -white in its dimness through the dark that the eye could not search -it, and gone, ever gone, if some bold spirit neared the spot where -he had thought he saw it. - -“No one said aught of this to the Lady Margaret, in fear to fright -her; and she alone, of all who watched, did never see nor feel the -constant presence. It seemed sometimes as though the phantom yearned -to make itself visible to her kind, half-divine eyes, but her -thoughts were too high-set for it to be given her to see a sight so -horrible. - -“She was much upheld by visions then—her contemplative soul shaped -to itself many fair sights and sounds that others knew not. Sitting -by the open casement in her sun-coloured gown, with white arms, -pearl encircled, leaning out, and her smile ever brighter as she -murmured to herself, she would stretch far over the lattice and -grasp at rosy clouds, which she said floated past her in the peopled -air. She would reply, still leaning out and smiling, to what she -vowed was said to her by wandering happy spirits. And all this -while, behind her, there would stand the White Mystery, with slight -hand lifting the cowl from a face whose eyes were as deep as death -and more despairing. - -“Small marvel that the murderer’s ghost should cling to our saint -while she yet lived on earth! He may have known that, once dead, -restored to Heaven, she would thenceforth move in worlds where such -as he should never have the force to breathe. - -“And in her due hour she died; and after that for a space no one saw -aught of the dread ghost. His spirit, drawn by some power to enter -our house, wherein was held all he knew of goodness, had now no -further business there, for a while. His loathed name, fraught with -horror to your ancestors’ home, was now never spoken. It was -thought, doubtless, that since Margaret de Troyes—the innocent -avenger—had unwittingly caused the murderer’s death, the house he -had so deeply injured was for ever free from his godless presence. -And, indeed, for a while, the chronicles are silent respecting him. -The next two generations were happy, and no great misfortune blasted -the house. But in the third generation there were harsh feuds in the -city, and much bloodshed, and several of your name came to violent -and sometimes mysterious ends. Then it was that there arose a -searching into past traditions to discover the secret of a certain -white spectre said to appear about the castle previous to each -calamity. Not all saw it; but still it grew known, and it bore a -marked resemblance to an ancient portrait—hung up for curiosity’s -sake—of Pietro Rinucci. - -“Well, young master, I myself served your grandfather, and I myself -can bear witness to the presence of the White Monk’s ghost on one of -the shrewd moments of the family destinies. Wilt hear it? So your -father was then a stalwart young man, away at the wars in Spain. -Your uncles, two blithe young gallants, were at home at the time I -speak of, and there was some merry-making toward in the castle. -Myself was seeing to the torches in the garden, when I chanced to -see your uncle, Geoffrey de Troyes, come hastily into the yew-walk -with his rapier drawn, followed by another youth whom I knew well, -his rival, and in some sort, his enemy. - -“As the guests danced within, these nobles fought without. A man -dared not have interposed; it was matter of life and death to them, -and they were there to prove it. - -“I was glad, as I stood on the further side the hedge, to mark the -vigour and the skill of our Geoffrey. Methought the vantage was with -him, and with my whole heart I hated his opponent, the cold, selfish -Ernle Deane, and wished him to succumb. - -“And so, by mine honour, he should have done, for my boy was the -pride of us all for swordsmanship; but it was not to be. - -“Geoffrey de Troyes never suffered more from his mortal wound than I -did in my heart and my pride, as I led him, bleeding piteously to -this very stable-room, where he sank on the hay and said he must -die. - -“‘Look to it,’ groaned the poor young noble, as he lay dying, ‘that -Mistress Beatrice Savile has this token from me—my gold chain—warn -her from me when I am dead, that she wed not Ernle Deane—he is bad -to the core, and she is too good to mend him. Oh! but for that -hateful vision!’ - -“‘What vision, a God’s name?’ I cried. - -“And he told me trembling—he who had never trembled of his whole -life!—that even at the moment when he had thought to subdue his -enemy—even as he raised his sword to strike home to a worthless -heart—even then had his arm fallen paralysed and a frightful shiver -quite unmanned him at the sight of a poor monk in white, who stood -some yards away, and raised his cowl with a thin white hand, and -fixed unearthly eyes upon him with a steadfast look that drew the -soul away from the deadliest earthly peril. - -“‘And so I fell!’ cried the shamed noble, crimsoning though the -pallor of exhaustion. ‘_I_—a practised hand, a not unworthy -courage—a De Troyes! I fell—for this!—and so would any man have -fallen,’ he defiantly ended, ‘for ’twas a devil—’twas Pietro Rinucci -himself, who came from hell to lure me from my hopes of earthly -happiness. O, life! O, Beatrice!’ - -“And I nursed him and wept over him like any woman, whilst one -young, bright life more departed, - -“In truth, young master,” ended honest Ralph, “the noble Geoffrey -may have been deceived, and fancied this; but, you shall pardon me, -I would rather think that armies of devils nightly march these -grounds than that one De Troyes was ever seen to quail, save under -magic! Thus it is that I, and that many of us yet believe in the -spectre of Pietro Rinucci, ‘the White Monk.’” - -Oh these faithful servitors, they would die for us children of the -house, I believe, and yet they have ever this curious bent to -terrify the childish minds. I know not when it was precisely that I -thus first heard the White Monk’s story, but this I know, I was -young enough to sit with my clenched fistlets supporting my chin, -and my eyes and mouth very wide open. - -“And was he always in _white_, that fearful man?” I asked, somewhere -toward the middle of the story. “_Always in white?_” I know not why, -but this detail struck my child’s phantasy more powerfully than all -the rest; _this_ was awful, this was the pith of the whole matter, -and from that moment I sat trembling, and drinking in the history -with reluctant suspense, until it became the bane of my life for a -term of years. - -For hours I lay shuddering ofttimes in my bed, dreading with my body -and my soul lest the Monk should appear to me! And never had I -courage to speak of this to anyone of the many loving house mates -who would so promptly have put an end to my fears by leaving me no -more alone at night. There is a keen, hard honour for children to -maintain, and to them the confession of nocturnal terror is as -flight to the soldier. So, as the banquet sped its course below, I -shuddered lonely in my bed in the oaken room, often weeping angrily -amidst my fears because I alone, the only son of the house, was the -only soul in it left desolate. - -A little later I was comforted in some sort by my baby sister -Margaret, who was put to sleep in an adjacent cot, and being too -tiny for Fear to reach, would sleep secure, all gold and white in -the dusky gleam of our rushlight—the one oasis of hope throughout -the terrible oaken room. Yet she in her turn, became a source of -fear to me. Should the Monk appear, and should the dire extremity -cause me to shriek, what would become of Marguerite? She would die -of sudden terror. Worse—if he should stand by her bedside, raising -his cowl off the awful face, and her blue eyes should open at that -instant? How should I protect her? - -But before I wander further, I must begin straight and tell how we -lived, and where, and to what end. - - PERCY ROSS. - - (_To be continued._) - - - - - AN AUTO-HYPNOTIC RHAPSODY. - - “_When all desires_ that dwell in the heart _cease, then the mortal - becomes immortal, and obtains Brahman_. - _When all the fetters of the heart_ here on earth _are broken_; - _When all that bind us to_ this life _is undone, then the mortal - becomes immortal—here my teaching ends_.” - - —KATHA UPANISHAD. - -I (Âtman) have crossed the sea—I have reached the other shore—I have -triumphed over gravitation, my soul is in the sun-currents, moving -sunwards with the sun. - -Where the currents are bearing me to I scarcely know, but yet -something has been revealed. - -I died the mystical death, I was received by the Dawn-Maidens—the -bright ones of the eternal twilights, the two bright Ushas, Ahana -and Antigone, Isis, and Nephtys of Aanru.[162] - ------ - -Footnote 162: - - _Aanru_ is the celestial field where the defunct’s soul received - wheat and corn, growing therein _seven cubits high_. (See “Book of - the Dead,” 124 _et seq._)—ED. - ------ - -The Ahana-Aurora of Eternity laid me asleep on her bosom, giving me -_amrita_[163] to drink, as Hebe gave to Herakles, and then I at once -knew that I (_Atman_) was immortal; the Mask of Personality had -fallen to earth, the Âtma was revealed—my true SELF—I knew my name, -and found myself soaring sunwards. Then the Voice of that DAWN said, -“I give you the ‘Amrita’ of the cessation of deaths,” and her lips -burning with sun-ardours, kissed my forehead, and said, “I bring you -to the sun; when blind—on earth, that Sanskara of sorrow—you fancied -your sun was nothing but a great centre of physical force—light and -heat, and their equivalents; but it was Maya, the Earth-Queen of -illusions, who thus deceived your earth eyes. Look now, and you can -see nothing but a vast group of mighty spirit-wills clustered round -a yet mightier Spirit centre, drawing from thence inspiration, and -ever-radiating sun effluxes, for the good and advancement of those -unhappy lower wills yet sunk in the earth. What you called light was -intelligence, and heat was—love. Did not Koré suggest this to you, O -my weak child, for she, too, was one of the Ushas, a Maiden of the -Dawn, kindling your soul to love?” - ------ - -Footnote 163: - - _Amrita_ (immortal) applied to the Soma juice, and called the - “Water of Life.”—ED. - ------ - -I was silent to this question, for a dread sorrow clung to me. - -“Though” (began again the Voice) “the sun-souls attract the -earth-souls, the lost ones, for a while, to bring them up to -themselves by the path that leads to Nirvana[164] ‘where there is no -sorrow’; yet the sun-groups of Spirits are themselves attracted by a -grander centre of force, and the Sun, with his planet-children, are -speeding in a mighty orbit round a far mightier Soul-centre—the lost -Pleiad—lost on earth to be found in Heaven. Dost thou not hear the -solemn music of that tempest flight?” And then she touched my ears, -and I heard the myriad voiced song of the blessed ones as they -passed on rejoicing, and the Voice continued: “That lost Pleiad, the -dove-woman, the ‘Woman Clothed with the Sun,’ who, as Jeremiah -prophesied, should ‘compass man,’ is that eternal womanhood which -attracts all men.” And the chorus of the psalm I heard them sing, as -they passed on Pleiad-ward, was “Freedom and Love—Love in Bi-unity. -The Two in One foretold has come even to earth.” And the souls in -that Pleiad-world are infinite in number as the sands of the seas of -countless worlds, elective affinities attract like to like, forming -celestial choirs, each member of which breathes the akasian air -synchronously with the other, and what you call in your -earth-symbol-language their “hearts,” beat and throb in unison -together as one heart, and thus become coalesced in, and by, love. - ------ - -Footnote 164: - - This is a doctrine of the Visishtadwaita sect of the Vedantins. - The _Jiva_ (spiritual life principle, the living _Monad_) of one - who attained Moksha or Nirvana, “breaks through the Brahmarandra - and goes to _Suryamandala_ (the region of the sun) through the - Solar rays. Then it goes, through a dark spot in the Sun, to - Paramapeda to which it is directed by the Supreme Wisdom acquired - by _Yoga_, and helped thereinto by the _Devas_ (gods) called - Archis, the “Flames,” or Fiery Angels, answering to the Christian - archangels.—ED. - ------ - -“Listen, O my child, to the music of their breathing,” and I said, -“Is Koré there?” Then I heard voices in Heaven, and I began to -breathe the interior akasa breath synchronously with her—our breaths -became one, I was mingled with, and melted in her; and lo! a great -mystery! that Dawn-maiden changed to Koré, and Koré gave me the -amrita of the Pleiad, and I knew that our biune love was immortal. - -I have passed over the deep waters, I am free, I have infinite peace -and infinite joy, at rest for ever. - -Have I not, like Herakles, slept on the bosom of Athéné, breathing -the wisdom of her breaths? I, too, breathe internally akasian -love-breaths, I live in the love-choirs of the Pleiad Sun, I am in -the true Nirvana, where there is no sorrow and no desire, for desire -is lost in an ever-abiding and eternal fruition. The Lotus has -bloomed in the Sun-fire,[165] and my soul is newborn in the pure -white calyx, and floats down the golden waters that wash the eternal -shores. I have found the “Path,” “suffering, and the cause of -suffering” (separation from the loved one) have been seen, and have -passed away, whilst we ever rise and pass onwards by the star-paths. -I am no more blind, but, like Orion of old, gazing eastwards on that -rising sun, the red flush of whose dawn is ever blushing in our -central souls. I have received my sight.—OM.... - - A. J. C. - Lucerne. - ------ - -Footnote 165: - - _Vide_ Legend of Jyotishka, mentioned in “Life of Buddha from the - Bkah-Hgyur.” - ------ - - --- - -Since writing the foregoing, A. J. C. has met with the following -note contained in Mr. Edwin Arnold’s interesting essay, “Death and -Afterwards,” which throws light on the views in said Rhapsody: “That -which safely bears our ‘solid world’ in the gulfs of space is no -base or basis, no moveless central rock, but _throbbing energies_ in -complex and manifold action, _in swing and wave and thrill_; -whirling us onward in mighty sweeps of three-fold rythm _to which -our hearts are set_. So therefore not solidity of base in fixity of -status is our supreme and vital need, but moving _power beyond our -ken or senses_; known to us in _energising action_, and working -through blue ‘void’; impelling us in rings of spiral orbit round a -moving sun in which we are dependent.” - -The same book contains Walt Whitman’s beautiful and striking poem on -Death, in which the poet says: - - “Have none chanted for thee a chant of fullest welcome?” - -Yes, one other, the writer of the foregoing Rhapsody, has attempted -a song in praise of Death the deliverer, and the Italian poet, -Leopardi, stated in beautiful verse years ago that the world had two -good things in it—Love and Death. - - “Due belle cose ho il mondo - L’amor e la Morte”... - - ---------- - - OUR OTHER HALF. - -When our ancient brethren, the Kabalists, Jewish as well as -Oriental, taught that the divine monad, starting on its long journey -from the bosom of the Infinite One was divided into halves, they had -a double meaning, one exoteric, the other esoteric. The exoteric -one, being that the two halves, swept through cycles upon cycles of -time, in search of each other; and, that, when they finally met, in -a perfect union, or marriage, the two halves became one on earth, -and after death, united again. The true explanation, however, the -esoteric one, is, that each and every one of us, contains within -himself, both the halves: the feminine predominating through some -incarnations, the masculine through others. It adds that, when we -evolute into the perfect being, the Adept, the Mahatma, both -principles are in perfect harmony. Or, as the Kabalists have -recorded it, harmony is in equilibrium, and equilibrium exists by -the analogy of contraries. How often we discern in the most -masculine of men, distinct feminine traits of character, and _vice -versa_, in the gentlest of the fair sex, discover masculine traits. - -The Jewish Kabbalists represented these two principles in the -letters forming their Ineffable Name. Its first three characters -mean Eve, or Eva, or Hâyah היה or woman, or by another reading it -means mother, and is, in fact, the proper name as given in Genesis -for Eve, “the mother of all living.” Adding the character י Yodh or -Yah, the male, the number one, the masculine, we have Jehovah, or -Jah-eve, or being as male-female, the perfect number—10, symbolised -by the Sephirothal Adam Kadmon. - -A few evenings ago, while pondering on this subject, in a room -devoted to occult research, where an Eastern incense burning with a -ruddy glow on the triangular-shaped altar, sent its refreshing -fragrance through the apartment, my outer senses were lulled, and -the inner ones came into play, and I became conscious of my other -“half.” I saw standing before me, a being, whom I had hitherto -considered as my guardian angel stretching out her hands to me, and -saying—“my beloved one, know thy-_self_.” - -The fire on the altar burnt low. The north-east wind, which had been -blowing in furious gusts outside, lashing the bosom of the lake into -white foam, died away, sounding like some far distant choral chant. -An unearthly silence ensued, and seemed to pervade the infinitudes -of space. A thousand voices spoke to me, saying, “Man, know -thyself.” Shadowy, ghostly forms filled the apartment. One, more -distinct than the rest, tall in form, clad in a long flowing garment -of pure white, the long black hair falling in curly locks over his -shoulders, the silky beard reaching to his waist, the light of -centuries of centuries gleaming forth from his dark eyes—extended -his right hand toward me. A thrill of unutterable delight passed -through my being. Slowly I emerged from my earthly casket, looked -for an instant at its sleeping form, then felt irresistibly drawn to -the fair being, who still stood with outstretched hands, and seemed -to lose myself in her. The twain had become one. The mystic union -had taken place. For a few brief moments I realized the -possibilities of _jnânayoga_, the wisdom-power of the adepts. Space -was annihilated. I could see systems upon systems of worlds, -galaxies of stars, suns and systems of suns, whirling through space. -I thought of some distant place, and I was there. Complex problems -solved themselves quite naturally: I had become all THOUGHT.... - -The extended hand of the tall form flashed before my eyes, and I -became unconscious. When I awoke, I found lying on the altar a -full-blown white rose. The north-east wind was again roaring in -fierce gusts, the fire on the altar had died out. The mirrors had -draped themselves with their curtains of black. The two interlaced -triangles had merged into a circle, of pure gold in colour. Once -more I took upon myself my objective life. But I had solved the -problem which has taken me seven years to solve. I was content.... - - “BERTRAND STONEX,” F.T.S. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - THE THREE DESIRES. - -The first three of the numbered rules of “Light on the Path” must -appear somewhat of an unequal character to bracket together. The -sense in which they follow each other is purely spiritual. Ambition -is the highest point of personal activity reached by the mind, and -there is something noble in it, even to an Occultist. Having -conquered the desire to stand above his fellows, the restless -aspirant, in seeking what his personal desires are, finds the thirst -for life stand next in his way. For all that are ordinarily classed -as desires have long since been subjugated, passed by, or forgotten, -before this pitched battle of the soul is begun. The desire for life -is entirely a desire of the spirit, not mental at all; and in facing -it a man begins to face his own soul. But very few have even -attempted to face it; still fewer can guess at all at its meaning. - -The connection between ambition and the desire of life is of this -kind. Men are seldom really ambitious in whom the animal passions -are strong. What is taken for ambition in men of powerful physique -is more often merely the exercise of great energy in order to obtain -full gratification of all physical desires. Ambition pure and simple -is the struggle of the mind upwards, the exercise of a native -intellectual force which lifts a man altogether above his peers. To -rise—to be preeminent in some special manner, in some department of -art, science, or thought, is the keenest longing of delicate and -highly-tuned minds. It is quite a different thing from the thirst -for knowledge which makes of a man a student always—a learner to the -end, however great he may become. Ambition is born of no love for -anything for its own sake, but purely for the sake of oneself. “It -is I that will know, I that will rise, and by my own power.” - - “Cromwell, I charge thee, fling away ambition; - By that sin fell the angels.” - -The place-seeking for which the word was originally used, differs in -degree, not in kind, from that more abstract meaning now generally -attached to it. A poet is considered ambitious when he writes for -fame. It is true; so he is. He may not be seeking a place at court, -but he is certainly seeking the highest place he knows of. Is it -conceivable that any great author could really be anonymous, and -remain so? The human mind revolts against the theory of the Baconian -authorship of Shakespeare’s works, not only because it deprives the -world of a splendid figure, but also because it makes of Bacon a -monster, unlike all other human beings. To the ordinary intelligence -it is inconceivable that a man should hide his light in this -purposeless manner. Yet it is conceivable to an occultist that a -great poet might be inspired by one greater than himself, who would -stand back entirely from the world and all contact with it. This -inspirer would not only have conquered ambition but also the -abstract desire for life, before he could work vicariously to so -great an extent. For he would part with his work for ever when once -it had gone to the world; it would never be his. A person who can -imagine making no claim on the world, neither desiring to take -pleasure from it nor to give pleasure to it, can dimly apprehend the -condition which the occultist has reached when he no longer desires -to live. Do not suppose this to mean that he neither takes nor gives -pleasure; he does both, as also he lives. A great man, full of work -and thought, eats his food with pleasure; he does not dwell on the -prospect of it, and linger over the memory, like the gluttonous -child, or the gourmand pure and simple. This is a very material -image, yet sometimes these simple illustrations serve to help the -mind more than any others. It is easy to see, from this analogy, -that an advanced occultist who has work in the world may be -perfectly free from the desires which would make him a part of it, -and yet may take its pleasures and give them back with interest. He -is enabled to give more pleasure than he takes, because he is -incapable of fear or disappointment. He has no dread of death, nor -of that which is called annihilation. He rests on the waters of -life, submerged and sleeping, or above them and conscious, -indifferently. He cannot feel disappointment, because although -pleasure is to him intensely vivid and keen, it is the same to him -whether he enjoys it himself or whether another enjoys it. It is -pleasure, pure and simple, untarnished by personal craving or -desire. So with regard to what occultists call “progress”—the -advance from stage to stage of knowledge. In a school of any sort in -the external world emulation is the great spur to progress. The -occultist, on the contrary, is incapable of taking a single step -until he has acquired the faculty of realizing progress as an -abstract fact. Someone must draw nearer to the Divine in every -moment of life; there must always be progress. But the disciple who -desires that he shall be the one to advance in the next moment, may -lay aside all hope of it. Neither should he be conscious of -preferring progress for another or of any kind of vicarious -sacrifice. Such ideas are in a certain sense unselfish, but they are -essentially characteristic of the world in which separateness -exists, and form is regarded as having a value of its own. The shape -of a man is as much an _eidolon_ as though no spark of divinity -inhabited it; at any moment that spark may desert the particular -shape, and we are left with a substantial shadow of the man we knew. -It is in vain, after the first step in occultism has been taken, -that the mind clings to the old beliefs and certainties. Time and -space are known to be non-existent, and are only regarded as -existing in practical life for the sake of convenience. So with the -separation of the divine-human spirit into the multitudes of men on -the earth. Roses have their own colours, and lilies theirs; none can -tell why this is when the same sun, the same light, gives the colour -to each. Nature is indivisible. She clothes the earth, and when that -clothing is torn away, she bides her time and re-clothes it again -when there is no more interference with her. Encircling the earth -like an atmosphere, she keeps it always glowing and green, moistened -and sun-lit. The spirit of man encompasses the earth like a fiery -spirit, living on Nature, devouring her, sometimes being devoured by -her, but always in the mass remaining more ethereal and sublime than -she is. In the individual, man is conscious of the vast superiority -of Nature; but when once he becomes conscious that he is part of an -indivisible and indestructible whole, he knows also that the whole -of which he is part stands above nature. The starry sky is a -terrible sight to a man who is just self-less enough to be aware of -his own littleness and unimportance as an individual; it almost -crushes him. But let him once touch on the power which comes from -knowing himself as part of the human spirit, and nothing can crush -him by its greatness. For if the wheels of the chariot of the enemy -pass over his body, he forgets that it is his body, and rises again -to fight among the crowd of his own army. But this state can never -be reached, nor even approached, until the last of the three desires -is conquered, as well as the first. They must be apprehended and -encountered together. - -Comfort, in the language used by occultists, is a very comprehensive -word. It is perfectly useless for a neophyte to practise discomfort -or asceticism as do religious fanatics. He may come to prefer -deprivation in the end, and then it has become his comfort. -Homelessness is a condition to which the religious Brahmin pledges -himself; and in the external religion he is considered to fulfil -this pledge if he leaves wife and child, and becomes a begging -wanderer, with no shelter of his own to return to. But all external -forms of religion are forms of comfort, and men take vows of -abstinence in the same spirit that they take pledges of boon -companionship. The difference between these two sides of life is -only apparent. But the homelessness which is demanded of the -neophyte is a much more vital thing than this. It demands the -surrender from him of choice or desire. Dwelling with wife and -child, under the shelter of a familiar roof-tree, and fulfilling the -duties of citizenship, the neophyte may be far more homeless, in the -esoteric sense, than when he is a wanderer or an outcast. The first -lesson in practical occultism usually given to a pledged disciple is -that of fulfilling the duties immediately to hand with the same -subtle mixture of enthusiasm and indifference as the neophyte would -imagine himself able to feel when he had grown to the size of a -ruler of worlds and a designer of destinies. This rule is to be -found in the Gospels and in the Bhagavad Gita. The immediate work, -whatever it may be, has the abstract claim of duty, and its relative -importance or non-importance is not to be considered at all. This -law can never be obeyed until all desire of comfort is for ever -destroyed. The ceaseless assertions and re-assertions of the -personal self must be left behind for ever. They belong as -completely to the character of this world as does the desire to have -a certain balance at the bank, or to retain the affections of a -loved person. They are equally subject to the change which is -characteristic of this world; indeed, they are even more so, for -what the neophyte does by becoming a neophyte is simply to enter a -forcing-house. Change, disillusionment, disheartenment, despair will -crowd upon him by invitation; for his wish is to learn his lessons -quickly. And as he turns these evils out they will probably be -replaced by others worse than themselves—a passionate longing for -separate life, for sensation, for the consciousness of growth in his -own self, will rush in upon him and sweep over the frail barriers -which he has raised. And no such barriers as asceticism, as -renunciation, nothing indeed which is negative, will stand for a -single moment against this powerful tide of feeling. The only -barrier is built up of new desires. For it is perfectly useless for -the neophyte to imagine he can get beyond the region of desires. He -cannot; he is still a man, Nature must bring forth flowers while she -is still Nature, and the human spirit would loose its hold on this -form of existence altogether did it not continue to desire. The -individual man cannot wrench himself instantly out of that life of -which he is an essential part. He can only change his position in -it. The man whose intellectual life dominates his animal life, -changes his position; but he is still in the dominion of desire. The -disciple who believes it possible to become selfless in a single -effort, will find himself flung into a bottomless pit as the -consequence of his rash endeavour. Seize upon a new order of -desires, purer, wider, nobler; and so plant your foot upon the -ladder firmly. It is only on the last and topmost rung of the -ladder, at the very entrance upon Divine or Mahatmic life, that it -is possible to hold fast to that which has neither substance or -existence. - -The first part of “Light on the Path” is like a chord in -music; the notes have to be struck together though they must -be touched separately. Study and seize hold of the new desires -before you have thrust out the old ones; otherwise in the -storm you will be lost. Man while he is man has substance and -needs some step to stand on, some idea to cling to. But let it -be the least possible. Learn as the acrobat learns, slowly and -with care, to become more independent. Before you attempt to -cast out the devil of ambition—the desire of something, -however fine and elevated, outside of yourself,—seize on the -desire to find the light of the world within yourself. Before -you attempt to cast out the desire of conscious life, learn to -look to the unattainable or in other language to that which -you know you can only reach in unconsciousness. In knowing -that your aim is of this lofty character, that it will never -bring conscious success, never bring comfort to you, that it -will never carry you _in your own temporary personal self_ to -any haven of rest or place of agreeable activity, you cut away -all the force and power of the desires of the lower astral -nature. For what avail is it, when these facts have been once -realised, to desire separateness, sensation or growth? - -The armour of the warrior who rises to fight for you in the battle -depicted in the second part of “Light on the Path,” is like the -shirt of the happy man in the old story. The king was to be cured of -all his ills by sleeping in this shirt; but when the one happy man -in his kingdom was found, he was a beggar, without care, without -anxiety—and shirtless. So with the divine warrior. None can take his -armour and use it, for he has none. The king could never find -happiness like that of the careless beggar. The man of the world, -however fine and cultivated he may be, is hampered by a thousand -thoughts and feelings which have to be cast aside before he can even -stand on the threshold of occultism. And, be it observed, he is -chiefly handicapped by the armour he wears, which isolates him. He -has personal pride, personal respect. These things must die out as -the personality recedes. The process described in the first part of -“Light on the Path,” is one which takes off that shell, or armour, -and casts it aside for ever. Then the warrior arises, armourless, -defenceless, offenceless, identified with the afflicters and the -afflicted, the angered and the one that angers; fighting not on any -side, but for the Divine, the highest in all. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - GOLDEN SENTENCES OF DEMOCRITUS. - -It is beautiful to impede an unjust man; but if this be not -possible, it is beautiful not to act in conjunction with him. - -Sin should be abstained from, not through fear, but, for the sake of -the becoming. - -Many who have not learnt to argue rationally, still live according -to reason. - -Vehement desires about any one thing render the soul blind with -respect to other things. - -The equal is beautiful in everything, but excess and defect to me do -not appear to be so. - -It is the property of a divine intellect to be always intently -thinking about the beautiful. - - - - - THE RELATION OF COLOUR TO THE INTERLACED - TRIANGLES, OR THE PENTACLE.[166] - ------ - -Footnote 166: - - A paper read before the Chicago Branch of the Theosophical - Society, by its Secretary, M. L. Brainard. - ------ - -Colour registers grades of vibration. Vibration registers grades of -life. Life, esoterically considered, is ascent towards its -source—the great First Cause, the celestial sun which lights -universal creation. - -If a ray of white light is passed through a triangular piece of -glass, called a prism, it becomes separated into the seven colours -known as the “solar spectrum.” Careful scientific analysis has -proven that these colours are produced by different rates of -vibration. - -It has shown that the slowest vibrations are red, the quickest -violet. The red ray of the spectrum gives 477 millions of millions -(or billions) of vibrations in a second, the orange 506, the yellow -535, the green 577, the blue 622, Indigo 658, and violet 699. - -Thus there is a regular ascent in the colour-scale from red to -violet, and the trans-violet rays go on octaves higher, becoming -invisible to the physical eye as their rates of vibration increase. - -It has also been discovered that these seven prismatic rays of the -solar spectrum correspond to the seven notes on the musical scale, -the ray of slowest vibration, red, being a correlate of the base -note of the musical gamut, and the violet ray answering to the -highest musical note. - -When the vibrations exceed a certain limit, the tympanum of the ear -has not time to recoil before a succeeding impulse arrives, and it -remains motionless. Darkness and silence are, therefore, equivalents -for the cessation of vibrations on the retina of the eye and -tympanum of the ear respectively. Incidentally it may be stated that -cold is also considered to be the cessation of vibrations through -the nerves of feeling. - -Colour, therefore, is to light what pitch is to sound—both depend on -length of vibrations. - -The thought will immediately suggest itself in this connection that -if colour and music are thus correlated, the perfect clairvoyant -might _see_ a concert as well as hear it. This is true, and there -are instances on record of such transcendent views. In one case of -this kind, it was not alone a poetical play of colour springing into -life under the touch of a German professor’s hands, but a host of -airy sprites clothed in the various rays which called them forth. - -_Isis_ declares that “sounds and colours are all spiritual numerals; -and as the seven prismatic rays proceed from one spot in Heaven, so -the seven powers of Nature, each of them a number, are the seven -radiations of the unity, the central spiritual sun.”[167] - ------ - -Footnote 167: - - “ISIS UNVEILED,” Vol 1., p. 514. - ------ - -It is easy to follow along the lines of these suggestions, and trace -the origin of chanting the seven vowels to one of their gods, among -the Egyptians, as a hymn of praise at sunrise. In the so-called -mythical Golden Age this must have been the mode of putting -themselves _en rapport_ or _in tune_ with the Cosmic powers, and -ensuring harmony while the vibrations were synchronous. - -The third necessary correlation to be considered in this analysis is -that of form. Scientific research has proven that not only are music -and colour due to rates of vibration, but form also marshals itself -into objective being in obedience to the same mysterious law. This -is demonstrated by the familiar experiment of placing some dry sand -on a square of glass, and drawing a violin bow across the edge. -Under the influence of this intonation, the sand assumes star shapes -of perfect proportion; if other material is placed on the square of -glass at the same time, other shapes are assumed, varying in -proportion to the power resident in the atoms to _respond_ to the -vibrations communicated. - -It is noticeable, however, that the vibration makes the spaces, and -the sand falls into the _rest_ places. - -We have now discovered a triangular key—light, music, form—which -will disclose to us the exact relations which colour sustains to the -interlaced triangles, the six-rayed star, universal symbol of -creative force acting upon matter.[168] This triangular key is -simply three modes of one being, three differential expressions of -one force—vibration. - ------ - -Footnote 168: - - Hence in Kabalistic symbolism the _pentacle_, or the six-pointed - star, is the sign of the _manifested_ “Logos,” or the “Heavenly - man,” the Tetragrammaton. “The four-lettered Adni (_Adonai_, “the - Lord”), is the _Eheieh_ (the symbol of _life_ or existence), is - the Lord of the six limbs (6 Sephiroth) and his Bride (_Malkuth_, - or physical nature, also Earth) is his seventh limb.” (Ch. _Book - of Numbers_ viii. 3-4.)—ED. - ------ - -That which causes the vibration we can only represent by the -Ineffable Name, behind which burns the quenchless glory of En Soph, -the Boundless. - -Thus, in our symbology we start from the centre of a circle, which -should be represented by white light. - -The seven rays issuing therefrom, must first pass through the -interior and invisible triangle of Akasa, the prism A.U.M., before -they can flow outward, and by their action upon chaos, wheel the -myriad forms of physical life into consonance with their rates of -vibration. In this manner is the visible formulated from the -invisible. By such subtle music is born the gorgeous flora of our -tropics, drinking its wealth of colour from the yellow and warm rays -of the sunlight; and in accord with the same harmony is produced the -subdued vegetation of colder climes. The blue and violet beams carry -the quick pulses of the parent flame deep within the earth, and -by-and-bye she gives back that which she has received, transformed -into a thousand brilliant hues woven in the magic loom of Love, -presided over by the solar spectrum. Or, as Egyptian myth phrases -it, Osiris (the sun) weds Isis (the earth), and the child, -Horus-Apollo, glorifies all things as the product of this divine -union. - -The culmination of light resides in the yellow ray, and hence to -that colour is given the East point in our symbolised centre of -radiation.[169] The others follow in the order of the solar -spectrum. - ------ - -Footnote 169: - - It is the secret of the great reverence shown in the East for this - colour. It is the colour of the _Yogi_ dress in India, and of the - _Gelupka_ sect (“Yellow caps”) in Thibet. It symbolizes _pure - blood_ and sunlight, and is called “the stream of life.” Red, as - its opposite, is the colour of the _Dugpas_, and black - magicians.—ED. - ------ - -But it is noticeable in this connection, that _in_ that order, the -coarsest and warmest of the visible rays—red—is placed next to the -coldest and most refined ray, the violet. Here we have the analogy -of contraries. The ray of lowest refrangibility and the ray of -highest refrangibility become next-door neighbours in the divergent -circle of necessity. What is the result? It is not hard to discover, -when we know that the cooling colours are essential to the balanced -action of the thermal rays. “A small amount of blue when combined -with other rays will even increase the heat, because it kindles into -activity its opposite warm principle, red, through chemical -affinity.” - -Having determined the law which should govern the symbology of -colours at the centre of our circle, we come next to the interlaced -triangles. - -The truly Theosophical Pentacle should be made by the interlacing of -a white triangle with a black triangle—the white representing pure -spirit, the black, gross matter. This is the true symbology, for the -reason that white reflects all colours, and black absorbs all -colours. It is the face of the White Ancient looking into the face -of the Black Ancient. - -Absolute blackness appears to give back nothing; nor does it ever, -save through processes of slow evolution, wrought by continued -vibration upon its molecules from the Divine Centre of Light. - -Continuous vibration polarizes these particles, so that at last -rising from the lowest grade of refrangibility to the highest, into -the invisible octaves of being, our planetary chain in its -culmination will reach a point where every atom will give an -answering thrill of resonance to the throbbing of the heart of the -Universe—the Central Spiritual Sun. - -As every substance in Nature has its colour, so the human family -publish their grades of advancement to the clairvoyant eye by their -astral colours; and seekers after the true Light may know what “ray” -they are in, by a comparison of their own auras with the colours of -the overshadowing soul. - -The middle rays of the solar spectrum—blue, green, and yellow—give a -very powerful triangle, a wonderful _working_ triangle of forces; -for green is Hermetic silver, yellow is Hermetic gold, and blue is a -despatch-messenger from the “Lord of the Worlds,” Jupiter. - -The blue and the yellow of this group, on account of their -position—the third and the fifth reckoned both ways—have been chosen -as the colours of our incense-holders, alternating on the points of -the Pentacle. As odours are also correlated with colours, and as -sandal-wood is the perfume which belongs to the sun, we use that -incense to intensify the vibrations from the radiating points, in -order to increase the volume of accord which will reach other -centres at a distance; for the akasa is more sensitive than an -Eolian harp—it registers the very aroma of our thoughts. It was, -therefore, no exaggeration of the poet when he said: - - “Guard well thy thought: - Our thoughts are _heard_ in Heaven.” - -But if colours and sounds are spiritual numerals, then the seven -symbolical points of the Pentacle represent numbers of the greatest -importance in world-building, and in soul-building also. For we must -all build our own souls. And the symbology of the interlacing of the -triangle of spirit with the triangle of matter, finds its -correspondence in man, the little world, who, though a spiritual -ego, yet dwells in a physical house, and whose business it is to -merge himself completely into the region of the white triangle. - -When Man has raised his vibrations into perfect harmony with the -universal sun, he has then unbound himself from the wheel of -re-birth—the Zodiac—and is ready to enter Nirvana. - -The word “heaven” in Hebrew signifies the abode of the sun. When, -therefore, the Nazarene said “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you,” -he virtually declared that all the seven cosmic powers are resident -within us. - -Esoteric science recognises man as a septenary, working in -conjunction with other orders of numerals which register divine -vibrations. - -All nature listens to that universal song, and the music of the -spheres is no fable. The swarming zöospores in the protoplasm of -plants hear it, and thrilled by that enchantment, fall into -invisible rhythm, bringing up by quick marches into the region -of Day the tiny dwellers in stem and leaf. How do we know that -the mystery of the six-sided cell of the honey-bee may not find -its solution here? Perhaps the bee is susceptible only to -vibrations which fall into these lines, and faithfully obeys the -master-musician in the construction of its hexagonal house. The -great law of cosmic and microcosmic correspondence was revealed -ages ago to the Sages who _listened_, and listening, _heard_ the -wondrous revelations breathed forth from the harp of Akasa. -Sighing winds from other worlds passed over the delicate -strings, and as they passed, uttered in soundless tones the -profound mystery of near and remote planets. These Sages dwelt -in that White Palace—the Lotus of the Heart—the sun-palace -indeed. From centre to circumference their vast circle of vision -was permeated by the reflected _All_, and from the White Palace -they ascended the sacred mountain Meru, where dwelleth wisdom -and love. - -The key which opens the White Palace is held by the seven mystic -children of the Royal Arch of the Rainbow, guarding the seven gates -of the Sun, every gate of which answers to a musical note, and every -note of which enfolds three tones. - -Hence, if we understand the analogies of colour, we may open the six -doors of Nature, and also the seventh, to Nirvana. - - M. L. BRAINARD. - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - QUESTIONS. - - What can we do in temptation’s hour? - How shall we conquer its fiery power? - How can we master it—standing _alone_, - Just on the threshold of things unknown? - - Strong is its power as Death and Hell, - Led by its lure, even angels fell! - Dazed by the glare of a rising light - How shall poor mortals see aright? - - Tempted we were in the morning of life, - With earth’s simple joys that are ever rife, - To idly bask in the sun’s warm beam - And to care no jot for a holier dream. - - Tempted again in the heyday sun, - To choose fair paths and in gardens run, - _Claiming_ as ours, all joy—all love, - Flowerets of bliss from the Heavens above. - - Temptings come now, in life’s later prime, - Deeper and stronger than in past time, - To feed with fuel the inward fire, - The passionate dream of the _soul’s desire_! - - ----------------------- - - Two feet are creeping on paths unknown, - Weary and mournful, sad and lone; - Two eyes are looking and longing for light, - Two hands are locked in a desperate fight. - - A heart is breaking with pain and grief, - A soul in strong agony cries for relief; - Echoes no kindred chord above? - Stretcheth no Hand in responsive love? - - Is our Great God, but a God of stone? - Are we—His people—dazed and alone? - Is there no Ear that can hear us cry? - No Christ,—to succour us e’er we die? - - L. F. Ff. - - - - - A THEORY OF HAUNTINGS. - - -Very few persons realise the powerful and long-lasting effects of -human “auras”—those mysterious psychical emanations which are -mentally cognised, and which silently impress one as to the -character of a locality, the idiosyncrasies of a nation, a family, -or an individual. Personal auras are strictly speaking the effects -of the innate, and presumably hidden natures, of individuals, and -are entirely the effluence of soul and mind. A house, or a -neighbourhood, becomes imbued with the individual or collective -auras of its inhabitants, which convey to the psychic senses, and -thence to the mind, a powerful impression of character. At the same -time within the aura of individuals, or families, are indelibly -imprinted their thought-pictures, which may, or may not, have been -embodied in acts; the faces and forms of relatives, friends, -visitors, of the very animals they pet, the image of their pursuits, -in short the whole life. These are imprinted in the _astral_ element -which surrounds each individual soul, as the atmosphere surrounds -our bodies; and as the air we breathe becomes changed in -respiration, so this ethereal atmosphere becomes transformed by -personal impress. - -Education, morality, religion, health, disease, happiness or misery, -are largely the effects of the widely diffused auras of individuals -continually given forth into the ambient atmosphere. As a man, or -body of men, think, act, and live, such is the quality of the aura, -or odylic sphere they emanate. This has an effect for good or evil -upon all who approach within its radius; a formative, educating -effect upon the ignorant, if it is of a high, intellectual, or -spiritual quality; or a depressing, stultifying, deforming effect -upon the minds and souls of innocent, or negative sensitives, when -it is of an impure, debased, or brutal character. - -Thought governs the world. It is by thought, and its embodiment in -acts, that progress is made. Every thought has its aura, and nothing -can prevent its diffusion in the atmospheres, both the astral and -the natural or physical. Hence being continually surrounded by the -effects of thoughts universally diffused, we are insensibly governed -by their aura of good or evil, and we grow in beauty, or are warped -in deformity, mental and bodily, from infancy, under the moulding -consequences of the local thought-auras of the family, neighbourhood -and nation in which we happen to be born. - -Psychometry proves that even stones retain the impression of the -scenes which have been enacted in their neighbourhood. That is, the -stone having been bathed in the psychic emanations of creatures, -human and animal, during, perhaps, centuries, retains such auras -indestructibly in its atmosphere; and a psychometric clairvoyant -will gradually perceive the most trivial details of the more active -life which has daily passed in the vicinity of the stone. A fragment -from the Temple of Diana of Ephesus, for instance, were it -procurable, would enable a good psychometrist to describe every -minute particular of the ancient temple worship and ceremonies. A -stone from the Colosseum held in the hand, or to the forehead of a -psychometrist, would produce a vision of the scenes in the arena -which were wont to attract the Roman population. A fossil of some -antediluvian animal would bring before the mind’s eye surroundings -corresponding to the period in which the animal had lived. In truth, -upon the plane of more ethereal matter adjacent to this, are to be -found the images of all things, subject neither to time nor the -changes of time; and there our image-producing faculties, -temporarily divested of the blinding veil of flesh, may call them up -at will. - -The aura of a great crime becomes diffused in the neighbourhood of -its commission, and concealment would be impossible if the psychic -vision of men were open instead of being closed. A picture of the -deed committed becomes impressed upon the astral atmosphere, with -the faces and forms of those engaged in its commission. This effect -is never destroyed, but may be recalled at will by a good -clairvoyante. At the same time the aura of good deeds is equally -powerful and indestructible. The one is like a transitory -convulsion, disturbing the beauty of order and harmony with Nature; -the other is the fixed and equable moral atmosphere arising from -thoughts and actions consonant with wisdom. In short, the aura of -good thoughts and deeds is the _pabulum_ of souls; the invigorating -and supporting air they inspire and respire, producing health, -happiness, mental activity, and inciting to progress. If it were not -for the good on the earth, we might doubtless often cry in -vain—“Heaven help us!”—for we should be so smothered under evil -auras that spiritual breathing, and rapport with purer realms of -life, would be a radical impossibility. - -A crime is the insane product of an unbalanced, disordered mind. It -causes a species of astral electric disturbance, which is as -sensibly felt by sensitives as any explosion or convulsion on the -natural plane. Astral, or ethereal molecules become violently -displaced, and forced into new conditions of juxtaposition. A -mysterious terror pervades the air, which affects all neighbouring -minds, even to the very animals. It is as if the living soul of -Nature had been violently wrenched from its normal condition of -peace and happiness, and stood electrified with horror, whilst upon -its veil of ethereal matter is fixed an indestructible image of the -painful tragedy which has been suddenly enacted. - -We are, in fact, surrounded, upon the soul plane of life, by an -atmosphere which receives, so to speak, a photographic impression of -even our very thoughts, which is a mirror to reflect our whole life, -an image-world, retaining sounds as well as forms. It may be made -subject to our will, which can call up before the mind, and make -visible to the eye of the soul whatsoever, without exception, we -will to see, to hear, or to know. The phantoms or apparitions of -which we so frequently hear, are matters of fact to all psychic -seers; are things as absolutely existent as any objects on the more -familiar plane of dense matter. Once to realise this great fact, and -to understand some of the laws which would enable us consciously to -control, and illustrate to our satisfaction, certain of the hidden -mysteries of the inner world of ethereal matter, from which our own -proceeds as an effect from a cause, would set us upon a mountain -height of knowledge whence all clouds of superstition, doubt, and -uncertainty, would roll away. - -There are many stories extant of certain haunting apparitions which -have been seen at various times during the lapse of centuries, -reappearing again and again in the same families as warnings, or -otherwise; or it may be a mysterious sound, such as the cry of the -“banshee” in Ireland. The popular fallacy regarding such apparitions -is that a _human_ soul, or “spirit”—it may be wrongly called—is -compelled, as a retribution for the commission of some crime, to -remain on the earth haunting the scene of its former sins. Or, if -the visitant be a benevolent ghost, it is supposed that it is some -ancestor or ancestress, ever present in loving watchfulness over the -destinies of the family, giving warning of death or danger. The idea -of a human soul being chained in this melancholy fashion to the -earth is exceedingly repugnant to most minds, and naturally excites -the utmost compassion for the poor ghost which has to wear out so -dreary a doom. Such a hypothesis contradicts all those religious -teachings which assign to souls either a state of absolute -unconscious sleep, until the day of judgment, or an abode, -presumably in a conscious state, in heaven or hell. It contradicts -all those more modern teachings of “progress” after death, of the -gradual ascension of the soul to its place of rest. If we accept the -ideas of Eastern teachers concerning those occult mysteries—that the -higher self, the spiritualised entity, gradually separates from its -more animal, or lower principles of organism, which adhere together -for a longer or shorter period as a shell-like or shadowy -personality—even then, these principles or ethereal molecules which -go to form an astral body, disintegrate after a time. They would not -be likely, at all events, to endure over a century. Apparitions of -persons deceased _within_ a century might be considered as -essentially ghosts, or shades—the shadowy, sidereal shapes of -personalities passed away from the physical plane, and in a -condition of gradual separation from all that can attach them to the -earth. And it is presumable that a phantom which is seen repeatedly -during the lapse of centuries, is merely a reflection in the astral -light, called up by the will of a seer; or projected upon the plane -of soul-vision either by some psychological disturbance, or by some -change of condition on the part of those who see the phantom. The -immediate action may be due to “_elementals_,” those mysterious -entities called by Liebnitz “Monads,” which are in close attendance -upon mankind, and have so much to do with his very existence that he -would fare but indifferently without them. Not only are they as -intimately consociated with him as his own thoughts, but certain -grades of them depend upon him also for their existence. These -beings often become tutelary, or “house-spirits,” and the _rôle_ of -re-appearing again and again, as a sort of hereditary ghost, to give -warning of death or danger, is not incompatible with their condition -of existence. Time does not exist for them, and one century would be -like any other. They live in the personal or family aura, and become -intimately blended with the daily lives of its members. When, as in -the case of royal or noble houses, the family aura remains -undisturbed in its ancient palaces or castles during centuries, a -haunting elemental would find it an easy matter to make itself -visible, frequently by a semi-materialisation, or a condensation of -the ethereal atoms of its body. In such a case it would be seen -objectively by anyone who happened to be present. In other cases, -when an apparition is only a reflection in the astral light, a -sensitive in moments of abnormal or psychic lucidity would perceive -it. Others sympathetically inclined would perceive the same. At -length, after repeated similar visions, the locality would get the -name of being haunted. The image so repeatedly beheld becomes fixed -in the atmosphere of that particular spot. Upon entering a locality -with such a reputation a species of psychological inebriation would -assail every individual so constituted as to fall under the effects -of the aura already established, and they would then always behold -the spectre thus ideally produced. These mental or astral spectres -need not necessarily be merely immovable pictures. They will move, -or walk, threaten, or act a pantomime exactly as they may have the -reputation of doing; or as the person who beholds them expects or -imagines them to be doing. - -In some respects these apparitions or warning cries may be mental -legacies left indelibly impressed in the astral light by the -powerful will of a departed ancestor, friendly or inimical, as a -blessing or a curse; or even by a member of some alien family, as a -pursuing Nemesis which falls as a retribution upon the perpetrator -of evil, but can possess no power over the innocent and good. - - FRANK FAIRHOLME. - - (_To be continued._) - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS. - - III. - - -No one can be regarded as a Christian unless he professes, or is -supposed to profess, belief in Jesus, by baptism, and in salvation, -“through the blood of Christ.” To be considered a good Christian, -one has, as a _conditio sine quâ non_, to show faith in the dogmas -expounded by the Church and to profess them; after which a man is at -liberty to lead a private and public life on principles -diametrically opposite to those expressed in the Sermon on the -Mount. The chief point and that which is demanded of him is, that he -should have—or _pretend to have_—a blind faith in, and veneration -for, the ecclesiastical teachings of his special Church. - - “Faith is the key of Christendom,” - -saith Chaucer, and the penalty for lacking it is as clearly stated -as words can make it, in St. Mark’s Gospel, Chapter xvi., verse -16th: “He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved; but he that -believeth not shall be damned.” - -It troubles the Church very little that the most careful search for -these words in the oldest texts during the last centuries, remained -fruitless; or, that the recent revision of the Bible led to a -unanimous conviction in the truth-seeking and truth-loving scholars -employed in that task, that no such _un-Christ_-like sentence was to -be found, except in some of the latest, fraudulent texts. The good -Christian people had assimilated the consoling words, and they had -become the very pith and marrow of their charitable souls. To take -away the hope of eternal damnation, for all others except -themselves, from these chosen vessels of the God of Israel, was like -taking their very life. The truth-loving and God-fearing revisers -got scared; they left the forged passage (an interpolation of eleven -verses, from the 9th to the 20th), and satisfied their consciences -with a foot-note remark of a very equivocal character, one that -would grace the work and do honour to the diplomatic faculties of -the craftiest Jesuits. It tells the “believer” that:— - - “The two oldest Greek MSS. and some other authorities OMIT from - verse 9 to the end. Some authorities _have a different ending_ to - the Gospel.”[170]— - -—and explains no further. - ------ - -Footnote 170: - - Vide “Gospel according to St. Mark,” in the _revised_ edition - printed for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, 1881. - ------ - -But the two “oldest Greek MSS.” _omit_ the verses _nolens volens_, -as these _have never existed_. And the learned and truth-loving -revisers know this better than any of us do; yet the wicked -falsehood is printed at the very seat of Protestant Divinity, and it -is allowed to go on, glaring into the faces of coming generations of -students of theology and, hence, into those of their future -parishioners. Neither can be, nor are they deceived by it, yet both -_pretend_ belief in the authenticity of the cruel words worthy of a -_theological Satan_. And this Satan-Moloch is their own _God of -infinite mercy and justice_ in Heaven, and the incarnate symbol of -love and charity on Earth—blended in one! - -Truly mysterious are your paradoxical ways, oh—Churches of Christ! - -I have no intention of repeating here stale arguments and logical -_exposés_ of the whole theological scheme; for all this has been -done, over and over again, and in a most excellent way, by the -ablest “Infidels” of England and America. But I may briefly repeat -a prophecy which is a self-evident result of the present state of -men’s minds in Christendom. Belief in the Bible _literally_, and -in a _carnalised_ Christ, will not last a quarter of a century -longer. The Churches will have to part with their cherished -dogmas, or the 20th century will witness the downfall and ruin of -all Christendom, and with it, belief even in a Christos, as pure -Spirit. The very name has now become obnoxious, and theological -Christianity must die out, _never to resurrect again_ in its -present form. This, in itself, would be the happiest solution of -all, were there no danger from the natural reaction which is sure -to follow: crass materialism will be the consequence and the -result of centuries of blind faith, unless the loss of old ideals -is replaced by other ideals, unassailable, because _universal_, -and built on the rock of eternal truths instead of the shifting -sands of human fancy. Pure immateriality must replace, in the end, -the terrible anthropomorphism of those ideals in the conceptions -of our modern dogmatists. Otherwise, why should Christian -dogmas—the perfect counterpart of those belonging to other -exoteric and pagan religions—claim any superiority? The bodies of -all these were built upon the same astronomical and physiological -(or phallic) symbols. Astrologically, every religious dogma the -world over, may be traced to, and located in, the Zodiacal signs -and the Sun. And so long as the science of comparative symbology -or any theology has only two keys to open the mysteries of -religious dogmas—and these two only very partially mastered, how -can a line of demarcation be drawn, or any difference made between -the religions of say, Chrishna and Christ, between salvation -through the blood of the “first-born primeval male” of one faith, -and that of the “only _begotten_ Son” of the other, far younger, -religion? - -Study the Vedas; read even the superficial, often disfigured -writings of our great Orientalists, and think over what you will -have learnt. Behold Brahmans, Egyptian Hierophants, and Chaldean -Magi, teaching several thousand years before our era that the gods -themselves had been only mortals (in previous births) until they won -their immortality by _offering their blood to their Supreme God_ or -chief. The “Book of the Dead,” teaches that mortal man “became one -with the gods through an interflow of a common life in the common -blood of the two.” Mortals gave the blood of their first-born sons -in sacrifice to the Gods. In his _Hinduism_, p. 35, Professor Monier -Williams, translating from the _Taitiriya Brâhmana_, writes:—“By -means of the sacrifice the gods obtained heaven.” And in the _Tandya -Brâhmana_:—“The lord of creatures offered himself a sacrifice for -the gods.”... And again in the _Satapatha Brâhmana_:—“He who, -knowing this, sacrifices with the _Purusha-madha_ or the sacrifice -of the primeval male, becomes everything.” - -Whenever I hear the Vedic rites discussed and called “disgusting -human sacrifices,” and cannibalism (_sic._), I feel always inclined -to ask, where’s the difference? Yet there is one, in fact; for while -Christians are compelled to accept the allegorical (though, when -understood, highly philosophical) drama of the New Testament -Crucifixion, as that of Abraham and Isaac literally,[171] -Brahmanism—its philosophical schools at any rate—teaches its -adherents, that this (_pagan_) sacrifice of the “primeval male” is a -purely allegorical and philosophical symbol. Read in their -dead-letter meaning, the four gospels are simply slightly altered -versions of what the Church proclaims as Satanic plagiarisms (by -anticipation) of Christian dogmas in Pagan religions. Materialism -has a perfect right to find in all of them the same sensual worship -and “solar” myths as anywhere else. Analysed and criticised -superficially and on its dead-letter face, Professor Joly (“Man -before Metals,” pp. 189-190) finding in the _Swastika_, the _crux -ansata_, and the cross pure and simple, mere sexual symbols—is -justified in speaking as he does. Seeing that “the father of the -sacred fire (in India) bore the name of _Twashtri_, that is the -divine carpenter who made the _Swastika_ and the _Pramantha_, whose -friction produced the divine child _Agni_, in Latin _Ignis_; that -his mother was named _Maya_; he himself, styled _Akta_ (_anointed_, -or _Christos_) after the priests had poured upon his head the -spirituous _soma_ and on his body butter purified by sacrifice”; -seeing all this he has a full right to remark that:— - - “The close resemblance which exists between certain ceremonies of - the worship of _Agni_ and certain rites of the Catholic religion - may be explained by their common origin. _Agni_ in the condition - of _Akta_, or anointed, is suggestive of Christ; _Maya_, Mary, his - mother; _Twashtri_, St. Joseph, the carpenter of the Bible.” - ------ - -Footnote 171: - - _Vide_ “The Soldier’s Daughter,” in this number, by the Rev. T. G. - Headley, and notice the desperate protest of this _true_ - Christian, against the _literal_ acceptance of the “blood - sacrifices,” “Atonement by blood,” etc., in the Church of England. - The reaction begins: another _sign of the times_. - ------ - -Has the professor of the Science Faculty of Toulouse explained -anything by drawing attention to that which anyone can see? Of -course not. But if, in his ignorance of the esoteric meaning of the -allegory he has added nothing to human knowledge, he has on the -other hand destroyed faith in many of his pupils in both the -“_divine_ origin” of Christianity and its Church and helped to -increase the number of Materialists. For surely, no man, once he -devotes himself to such comparative studies, can regard the religion -of the West in any light but that of a pale and enfeebled copy of -older and nobler philosophies. - -The origin of all religions—Judaeo-Christianity included—is to be -found in a few primeval truths, not one of which can be explained -apart from all the others, as each is a complement of the rest in -some one detail. And they are all, more or less, broken rays of the -same Sun of truth, and their beginnings have to be sought in the -archaic records of the Wisdom-religion. Without the light of the -latter, the greatest scholars can see but the skeletons thereof -covered with masks of fancy, and based mostly on personified -Zodiacal signs. - -A thick film of allegory and _blinds_, the “dark sayings” of -fiction and parable, thus covers the original esoteric texts from -which the New Testament—_as now known_—was compiled. Whence, then, -the Gospels, the life of Jesus of Nazareth? Has it not been -repeatedly stated that no human, _mortal_ brain could have -invented the life of the Jewish Reformer, followed by the awful -drama on Calvary? We say, on the authority of the esoteric Eastern -School, that all this came from the Gnostics, as far as the name -Christos and the astronomico-mystical allegories are concerned, -and from the writings of the ancient _Tanaïm_ as regards the -Kabalistic connection of Jesus or Joshua, with the Biblical -personifications. One of these is the mystic esoteric name of -Jehovah—not the present fanciful God of the profane Jews ignorant -of their own mysteries, the God accepted by the still more -ignorant Christians—but the compound Jehovah of the pagan -Initiation. This is proven very plainly by the glyphs or mystic -combinations of various signs which have survived to this day in -the Roman Catholic hieroglyphics. - -The Gnostic Records contained the epitome of the chief scenes -enacted during the mysteries of Initiation, since the memory of man; -though even that was given out invariably under the garb of -semi-allegory, whenever entrusted to parchment or paper. But the -ancient Tanaïm, the Initiates from whom the wisdom of the Kabala -(_oral tradition_) was obtained by the later Talmudists, had in -their possession the secrets of the mystery language, and it is _in -this language that the Gospels_ were written.[172] He alone who has -mastered the esoteric cypher of antiquity—the secret meaning of the -numerals, a common property at one time of all nations—has the full -proof of the genius which was displayed in the blending of the -purely Egypto-Jewish, Old Testament allegories and names, and those -of the pagan-Greek Gnostics, the most refined of all the mystics of -that day. Bishop Newton proves it himself quite innocently, by -showing that “St. Barnabas, the companion of St. Paul, in his -epistle (ch. ix.) discovers ... the name of Jesus crucified in the -number 318,” namely, Barnabas finds it in the mystic Greek I H T—the -_tau_ being the glyph of the cross. On this, a Kabalist, the author -of an unpublished MS. on the Key of Formation of the Mystery -Language, observes:—“But this is but a play upon the Hebrew letters -_Jodh_, _Chith_, and _Shin_, from whence the I H S as the monogram -of Christ coming down to our day, and this reads as יהש or 381, the -sum of the letters being 318 or the number of Abraham and his Satan, -and of Joshua and his Amalek ... also the number of Jacob and his -antagonist ... (Godfrey Higgins gives the authority for the number -608).... It is the number of Melchizedek’s name, for the value of -the last is 304 and Melchizedek was the priest of the most high God, -without beginning nor ending of days.” The solution and secret of -Melchizedek are found in the fact that “in the ancient Pantheons the -two planets which had existed from eternity (_æonic_ eternity) and -were eternal, were the Sun and the Moon, or Osiris and Isis, hence -the terms of _without beginning nor ending of days_. 304 multiplied -by two is 608. So also the numbers in the word Seth, who was a type -of the year. There are a number of authorities for the number 888 as -applying to the name of Jesus Christ, and as said this is in -antagonism to the 666 of the Anti-Christ.... The staple value in the -name of Joshua was the number 365, the indication of the Solar year, -while Jehovah delighted in being the indication of the Lunar -year—and Jesus Christ was both Joshua and Jehovah in the Christian -Pantheon....” - ------ - -Footnote 172: - - Thus while the three Synoptics display a combination of the pagan - Greek and Jewish symbologies the _Revelation_ is written in the - mystery language of the Tanaïm—the relic of Egyptian and Chaldean - wisdom—and St John’s Gospel is purely Gnostic. - ------ - -This is but an illustration to our point to prove that the Christian -application of the compound name Jesus-Christ is all based on -Gnostic and Eastern mysticism. It was only right and natural that -Chroniclers like the initiated Gnostics, pledged to secresy, should -veil or _cloak_ the final meaning of their oldest and most sacred -teachings. The right of the Church fathers to cover the whole with -an epitheme of euhemerized fancy is rather more dubious.[173] The -Gnostic Scribe and Chronicler deceived no one. Every Initiate into -the Archaic gnosis—whether of the pre-Christian or post-Christian -period—knew well the value of every word of the “mystery-language.” -For these Gnostics—the inspirers of primitive Christianity—were “the -most cultured, the most learned and most wealthy of the Christian -name,” as Gibbon has it. Neither they, nor their humbler followers, -were in danger of accepting the dead letter of their own texts. But -it was different with the victims of the fabricators of what is now -called _orthodox_ and _historic_ Christianity. Their successors have -all been made to fall into the mistakes of the “foolish Galatians” -reproved by Paul, who, as he tells them (Galat. iii. 1-5), having -begun (by believing) in the Spirit (of Christos), “ended by -believing in _the flesh_,”—_i.e._, a _corporeal_ Christ. For such is -the true meaning of the Greek sentence,[174] “ἐναρξάμενοι Πνεύματι -νῦν σαρκι ἐπιτελεῖσθε.” That Paul was a gnostic, a founder of a new -sect of _gnosis_ which recognized, as all other gnostic sects did, a -“Christ-Spirit,” though it went against its opponents, the rival -sects, is sufficiently clear to all but dogmatists and theologians. -Nor is it less clear that the primitive teachings of Jesus, whenever -he may have lived, could be discovered only in Gnostic teachings; -against which discovery, the falsifiers who dragged down Spirit into -matter, thus degrading the noble philosophy of primeval -Wisdom-Religion, have taken ample precautions from the first. The -works of Basilides alone—“The philosopher devoted to the -contemplation of Divine things,” as Clement describes him—the 24 -volumes of his _interpretations upon the Gospels_—were all burned by -order of the Church, Eusebius tells us (H. E., iv. 7). - ------ - -Footnote 173: - - “The claim of Christianity to possess Divine authority rests on - the ignorant belief that the mystical Christ could and did become - a Person, whereas the gnosis proves the corporeal Christ to be - only a counterfeit Presentment of the trans-corporeal man; - consequently, historical portraiture is, and ever must be, a fatal - mode of falsifying and discrediting the Spiritual Reality.” (G. - Massey, “Gnostic and Historic Christianity.”) - -Footnote 174: - - This sentence analyzed means “Shall you, who in the beginning - looked to the _Christ-Spirit_, now _end_ by believing in a Christ - of flesh,” or it means nothing. The verb ἐπιτελοῦμαι has not the - meaning of “becoming perfect,” but of “ending by,” becoming so. - Paul’s lifelong struggle with Peter and others, and what he - himself tells of his vision of a Spiritual Christ and not of Jesus - of Nazareth, as in the _Acts_—are so many proofs of this. - ------ - -As these _Interpretations_ were written at a time when the Gospels -we have now, were not yet in existence,[175] here is a good proof -that the Evangel, the doctrines of which were delivered to Basilides -by the Apostle Matthew, and Glaucus, the disciple of Peter (_Clemens -Al._ “_Strom._” vii. 7, § 106), must have differed widely from the -present New Testament Nor can these doctrines be judged by the -distorted accounts of them left to posterity by Tertullian. Yet even -the little this partisan fanatic gives, shows the chief gnostic -doctrines to be identical, under their own peculiar terminology and -personations, with those of the _Secret Doctrine_ of the East. For, -discussing Basilides, the “pious, god-like, theosophic philosopher,” -as Clement of Alexandria thought him, Tertullian exclaims: - - “After this, Basilides, the _heretic_, broke loose.[176] He - asserted that there is a Supreme God, by name Abraxas, by whom - Mind (_Mahat_) was created, which the Greeks call _Nous_. From - this emanated the Word; from the Word, Providence; from - Providence, Virtue and Wisdom; from these two again, Virtues, - _Principalities_,[177] _and Powers_ were made; thence infinite - productions and emissions of angels. Among the lowest angels, - indeed, and those that made this world, he sets _last of all_ the - god of the Jews, whom he denies to be God himself, affirming that - he is but one of the angels.”[178] (Isis Unv. vol. ii.) - ------ - -Footnote 175: - - See “Supern. Relig.,” vol. ii., chap. “Basilides.” - -Footnote 176: - - It was asked in “Isis Unveiled,” were not the views of the - Phrygian Bishop Montanus, also deemed a HERESY by the Church of - Rome? It is quite extraordinary to see how easily that Church - encourages the abuse of one _heretic_, Tertullian, against another - _heretic_, Basilides, when the abuse happens to further her own - object. - -Footnote 177: - - Does not Paul himself speak of “_Principalities_ and _Powers_ in - heavenly places” (Ephesians iii. 10; i. 21), and confess that - there be _gods_ many and _Lords_ many (Kurioi)? And angels, powers - (Dunameis), and _Principalities_? (See 1 Corinthians, viii. 5; and - Epistle to Romans, viii. 38.) - -Footnote 178: - - Tertullian: “Præscript.” It is undeniably owing only to a - remarkably casuistical, sleight-of-hand-like argument that - Jehovah, who in the _Kabala_ is simply a Sephiroth, the third, - left-hand power among the Emanations (Binah), has been elevated to - the dignity of the _One_ absolute God. Even in the Bible he is but - one of the _Elohim_ (See Genesis, chapter iii. v. 22. “The Lord - God” making no difference between himself and others.) - ------ - -Another proof of the claim that the Gospel of Matthew in the usual -Greek texts is not the original gospel written in Hebrew, is given -by no less an authority than S. Jerome (or Hieronymus). The -suspicion of a conscious and gradual _euhemerization_ of the Christ -principle ever since the beginning, grows into a conviction, once -that one becomes acquainted with a certain confession contained in -book ii. of the “Comment. to Matthew” by Hieronymus. For we find in -it the proofs of a deliberate substitution of the whole gospel, the -one now in the Canon having been evidently re-written by this too -zealous Church Father.[179] He says that he was sent toward the -close of the fourth century by “their Felicities,” the Bishops -Chromatius and Heliodorus to Cæsarea, with the mission to compare -the Greek text (the only one they ever had) with the Hebrew original -version preserved by the Nazarenes in their library, and to -translate it. He translated it, but under protest; for, as he says, -the _Evangel_ “exhibited matter _not for edification, but for -destruction.”_[180] The “destruction” of what? Of the dogma that -Jesus of Nazareth and the _Christos_ are one—evidently; hence for -the “destruction” of the newly planned religion.[181] In this same -letter the Saint (who advised his converts to kill their fathers, -trample on the bosom that fed them, by walking over the bodies of -their mothers, if the parents stood as an obstacle between their -sons and Christ)—admits that Matthew did not wish his gospel to be -_openly written_, hence that the MS. _was a secret_ one. But while -admitting also that this gospel “was written in Hebrew characters -and _by the hand of himself_” (_Matthew_), yet in another place he -contradicts himself and assures posterity that _as it was tampered -with, and re-written by a disciple of Manicheus, named Seleucus_ ... -“the ears of the Church properly refused to listen to it.” -(_Hieron._, “Comment. to Matthew,” book ii. chapter xii., 13.) - ------ - -Footnote 179: - - This is _history_. How far that _re-writing_ of, and tampering - with, the primitive gnostic fragments which are now become the New - Testament, went, may be inferred by reading “Supernatural - Religion,” which went through over twenty-three editions, if I - mistake not. The host of authorities for it given by the author, - is simply appalling. The list of the English and German Bible - critics alone seems endless. - -Footnote 180: - - The chief details are given in “Isis Unveiled,” vol. ii pp. - 180-183, _et seq._ Truly faith in the infallibility of the Church - must be _stone-blind_—or it could not have failed being killed - and—dying. - -Footnote 181: - - See Hieronymus: “De Viros,” illust. cap. 3; Olshausen: “Neuen - Test.,” p. 32. The Greek text of Matthew’s Gospel is the only one - used or ever possessed by the Church. - ------ - -No wonder that the very meaning of the terms _Chrestos_ and -_Christos_, and the bearing of both on “Jesus of Nazareth,” a name -coined out of Joshua the _Nazar_, has now become a dead letter for -all with the exception of non-Christian Occultists. For even the -Kabalists have no original data now to rely upon. The _Zohar_ and -the Kabala have been remodelled by Christian hands out of -recognition; and were it not for a copy of the Chaldean _Book of -Numbers_ there would remain no better than garbled accounts. Let not -our Brothers, the so-called Christian Kabalists of England and -France, many of whom are Theosophists, protest too vehemently; for -_this is history_ (See Munk). It is as foolish to maintain, as some -German Orientalists and modern critics still do, that the Kabala has -never existed before the day of the Spanish Jew, Moses de Leon, -accused of having forged this pseudograph in the 13th century, as to -claim that any of the Kabalistical works now in our possession are -as original as they were when Rabbi Simeon Ben Jochaï delivered the -“traditions” to his son and followers. Not a single of these books -is immaculate, none has escaped mutilation by Christian hands. Munk, -one of the most learned and able critics of his day on this subject, -proves it, while protesting as we do, against the assumption that it -is a post-Christian forgery, for he says: - -“It appears evident to us that the author made use of ancient -documents, and among these of certain _Midraschim_ or collections of -traditions and Biblical expositions, which we do not now possess.” - -After which, quoting from Tholuck (l. c. pp. 24 and 31), he adds: - -“Haya Gaon, who died in 1038, is to our knowledge the first author -who developed the theory of the Sephiroth and he gave to them the -names which we find again to be among the Kabalists (Tellenik, Moses -ben Schem Tob di Leon, p. 13, note 5); this doctor, _who had -intimate intercourse with the Syrian and Chaldean Christian savans_, -was enabled by these last to acquire a knowledge of some of the -Gnostic writings.” - -Which “Gnostic writings” and esoteric tenets passed part and parcel -into the Kabalistic works, with many more modern interpolations that -we now find in the _Zohar_, as Munk well proves. The Kabala is -Christian now, not Jewish. - -Thus, what with several generations of most active Church Fathers -ever working at the destruction of old documents and the -preparation of new passages to be interpolated in those which -happened to survive, there remains of the _Gnostics_—the -legitimate offspring of the Archaic Wisdom-religion—but a few -unrecognisable shreds. But a particle of genuine gold will glitter -for ever; and, however garbled the accounts left by Tertullian and -Epiphanius of the Doctrines of the “Heretics,” an occultist can -yet find even in them traces of those primeval truths which were -once universally imparted during the mysteries of Initiation. -Among other works with most suggestive allegories in them, we have -still the so-called _Apocryphal Gospels_, and the last discovered -as the most precious relic of Gnostic literature, a fragment -called _Pistis-Sophia_, “Knowledge-Wisdom.” - -In my next article upon the Esoteric character of the Gospels, I -hope to be able to demonstrate that those who translate _Pistis_ by -“Faith,” are utterly wrong. The word “faith” as _grace_ or something -to be believed in through unreasoned or blind faith, is a word that -dates only since Christianity. Nor has Paul ever used this term in -this sense in his Epistles; and Paul was undeniably—an INITIATE. - - H. P. B. - -(_To be continued._) - - =Reviews.= - - --- - - “SPIRIT REVEALED.”[182] - ------ - -Footnote 182: - - By Captain Wm. C. Eldon Serjeant. Published by Geo. Redway, York - Street, Covent Garden. Price 7s. 6d. - ------ - -The new work by Captain Serjeant (New Dispensationist and Fellow of -the Theosophical Society) is certainly what he describes it as -being, the “book for the age,” if, at least, it be admitted that the -age requires arousing. I have no hesitation in saying that no such -book has before been presented to the public. It sounds forth like a -trumpet to arouse the sleepers from their crass forgetfulness of -every law of Brotherly Love and Spiritual Truth. One might almost -imagine, in reading it, the sensation produced upon his -contemporaries by Ezekiel, when first he gave forth his prophecies -to a wondering world; or by Bunyan, when he startled the English of -his time with the magnificent allegory of the “Pilgrim’s Progress.” -It is true that here and there whole passages are bodily -transplanted from St John’s “Revelation,” but they are so -marvellously dovetailed into the context that, without constant -reference to the Apocalypse, it is almost impossible to say where -the quotations begin and where they end. From a literary point of -view this may be a fault; but if we recognise the one Spirit -speaking through many voices we cannot deny that the same truth may -call for repetition and expansion, and the same Spirit may emit -again, with fuller details, what it has emitted before. - -Were this an _orthodox_ journal, I am aware that I dare not advance -such tenets for fear the luckless editors should be deemed -blasphemous by their subscribers. But LUCIFER at least must allow -that the Universal Spirit has not in the sacred books of olden times -breathed its last words. Then, again, Captain Serjeant disclaims all -_personal_ responsibility for these utterances when he states that -the very passages which the reader will find the most glowing in the -fierceness of their heat, are not words conceived by his own -personality, but given to him by processes well-known to -Spiritualists as “direct” and “automatic” writing. - -The root idea of the volume is that _one Spirit_ permeates all men -and all things, and that this Spirit is that of Wisdom, Love and -Truth; yet that this Spirit is denied or hidden out of sight by its -own children; and that not till it is again made manifest in the -public affairs of the world, can mankind hope for that happiness -which it is now vainly pursuing in every other direction save the -right one, namely, _within_. The dedication of the book sounds the -key-note of its contents; for it is inscribed to “Love, the Queen of -Heaven; and to Faith, the Star of the Soul.” The inscription closes -with the words “Follow after Love—Love never faileth,” and the -reader is intentionally left to supply the third term, “God is -Love.” It is in this conception of the Supreme that we shall find -the whole meaning of the work. The words “God” and the “Father,” as -also the “Mother” and “Christ,” are employed pretty freely; yet with -this clue, we shall see that the writer believes in no _personal_ -Deity, but in one Universal Spirit, of whom each intelligence is a -manifestation in the flesh, little though such being may show or -know it. - -It is impossible in a short review to touch upon all the striking -features of “Spirit Revealed,” and I must, therefore, content myself -with noticing but a very few, referring the readers of LUCIFER to -the book itself; for they will find in it a “Guide, Philosopher and -Friend.” - -The preface reminds one of a passage in Ezekiel too often forgotten. -“And they were _scattered_, because there is no shepherd: and they -became meat to all the beasts of the field, _when they were -scattered_.” Captain Serjeant points out the necessity of a bond of -_union_ in these words:— - -“The contentions amongst many religious sects have been to a -considerable extent responsible for the rise, growth, and -development of numerous societies of professed religious, as well as -of an anti-religious character. Each and every one of these -Societies possesses its own peculiar views on the Deity, as well as -on life and death, and though the majority of the more enlightened -of them have evidently the same fundamental principles underlying -the teachings which they endeavour to inculcate in the minds of men -generally, yet the manifest confusion generated by what are -seemingly conflicting opinions, tends, unhappily, to increase the -bewilderment and distrust experienced in connection with the truths -of the Spirit throughout all classes of Society in the nineteenth -century.” - -He then proceeds to claim for his work that it “places in the hands -of Christian Ministers” (Note, that he employs the word “Christ” -continually in the sense of the divine Spirit within mankind) “many -powerful weapons wherewith to establish and uphold the universal -Church of the Living God.” The preface, which is conceived -throughout in the most elevated style of address, concludes with an -appeal to “all who, in their hearts, are ready and willing to labour -loyally in the interests of their less enlightened fellow creatures -existing in this ignorant, selfish, and love-starved world.” - -After a brief Introduction, couched in a prophetic form, the writer -deals with the nature of God, man, matter, the power of Spirit -manifest in and through matter, the omnipresence of Spirit, the -Intelligent Principle, and the Seven Rays of Truth. In these seven -chapters is comprised what I may call the theoretical part of the -book. The following quotations must suffice to show in what vein -these world-riddles are worked out. “We are endued with two natures, -one of which is human or mortal, and subject to chemical change, -commonly termed dissolution or death; the other, immortal or -spiritual, capable of adding to itself by an inherent power to -comprehend the nature, qualities and capabilities of all created -visible things, which comprehension signifies the reconversion of -all material existences into true ideas.” “It is an absolute fact -that _everything is literal_. To the spiritual man symbols are -literal; they are indeed more literal than the natural man considers -what he terms facts or realities.“ ”_The ultimate atom is Spirit._ -Finite wills are points on which the Infinite Will acts, for no -creature can will without being a manifestation of the Supreme -Intelligence who first wills that it shall will.“ - -The subsequent portion of the book deals partly with an expansion of -the general tenets laid down in these seven chapters, and their -application to the present _practical_ needs of the world; partly -with prophetic utterances as to the near approach of an awakening of -the peoples to their real position as members of one great Spiritual -community. Under the first heading a very important document is -presented to the world, being a form for enrolment in the “Universal -Rights Support Association,” which if generally adopted in the true -spirit would indeed herald the millennium. Under the second heading -in Chapter XIII. a remarkable reading of part of the Apocalypse is -given, commencing with the words from Daniel, “and at that time -shall Michael stand up, the great Prince which standeth for the -children of the people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such -as never was since there was a Nation even to that same time: At -that time the people shall be delivered, every one that shall be -found written in the book.” Such words as these are not to be -understood on the first reading, and indeed will probably meet with -nothing but derision from many. Yet LUCIFER will see in them another -and a most powerful battery opened against the powers of darkness to -wage war with which is his own chief mission. - -In conclusion I can only add that, in my humble opinion, few men -have shown such courage in facing the ridicule of society as Captain -Serjeant, and that he has chosen to risk the forfeiture of a place -in social circles to which his right is undeniable, rather than give -way to the temptation to prophesy smooth things. He is one of the -foremost in the New Dispensation movement, and a man whose working -power must be enormous, if it be measured by the labours which he -daily and voluntarily undertakes. His peculiar style of writing lays -him open to the accusation of calling himself the coming Messiah. If -his accusers would only meet him face to face, they would find that -no man is humbler than he, and none is more fully conscious nor more -loudly proclaims that “individuality is but an emanation from the -one Great Spirit,” in which alone he recognises the true Christ, the -Saviour of the world. He would tell them that in _themselves_ is -incarnate the Spirit of Wisdom, and that it only awaits its union -with the Spirit of Love, to manifest itself as the Spirit of Truth. -How little he values his own personality and his own well-being or -fame, those who know him best can testify. If Theosophy is to be a -living thing, and not a mere intellectual amusement, it is by such -men as this that it must be followed. Were there many such the world -would soon be freed from its misery, by the force of their united -volition. Verily their reward is at hand. - - WILLIAM ASHTON ELLIS. - - ----------------------- - - TRAITÉ ÉLÉMENTAIRE DE SCIENCE OCCULTE, par PAPUS. - - Published by Georges Carré, 58, Rue St Audré des Arts. - -This, the latest of the admirable publications now being issued by -M. Georges Carré, under the auspices of “L’Isis,” the French branch -of the Theosophical Society, deserves a hearty welcome at the hands -of all students of Occultism, as it fulfils the promise of its -title, which is high praise indeed. - -The book is written and constructed on correct Occult principles; it -contains seven chapters, three devoted to theory and four to the -application and practical illustration of that theory. - -After an eloquent introductory chapter, M. Papus proceeds to lead -his readers by easy transitions into the mysterious science of -numbers. This—the first key to _practical_ Occultism—is at once the -simplest and the most subtle of sciences. Hitherto there has existed -no really elementary exposition of its primary, fundamental -principles. And, as this science of numbers lies at the base of -every one of those applications of occult science which are still to -any extent studied, a knowledge of it is almost indispensable. - -Astrology, Chiromancy, Cartomancy, in short, all the arts of -divination, rest ultimately on numbers and their occult powers, as a -foundation. - -And yet, though the students of each of these several arts must, -perforce, acquire a certain knowledge of numerical science, yet very -few of them possess that knowledge in a systematic and co-ordinated -form. - -Of course M. Papus does not, and cannot, give anything like a -complete textbook on the subject, but he does give, in clear -language, the fundamental guiding principles of this science. -Moreover, he illustrates the methods of numerical working, by -numerous and well-chosen examples—an aid which is simply invaluable -to the student who is making his first entrance into this field of -study. In the third chapter these abstract formulæ are given as they -relate to man, as an individual, and as a member of that larger -whole, called humanity. This completes the purely theoretical -portion of the book, and in the fourth chapter we are shown how -these general principles work in their application. - -Signs and symbols are proved to be the _natural_ expressions of -ideas in accordance with fixed laws, and the method is applied by -way of illustration to the interpretation of the Emerald Tablet of -Hermes Trismegistus. The relation between number and form is shown -as exhibited in geometrical figures, and M. Papus gives a clue to a -subject which has puzzled many—the actual _influence_ in life of -_names_. This chapter is most enthralling, but lack of space forbids -any detailed comments, for so much would have to be said. - -Chapters five and six are almost equally interesting; full of -lucid illustration and valuable hints to the practical student, -they form almost a manual in themselves. But on one point M. Papus -is certainly in error, though, since it is on a matter of history, -its importance is relatively small. He attaches _far_ too much -weight to the Jews and to their national system of occultism—the -Kabbala. True, that system is the most familiar in Europe; but it -has been so much overlaid by a semi-esoteric veil, and additions -and interpolations by Christian Occultists, that its inner -grossness is lost sight of; so that students are apt to be led -away from the truth, and to form erroneous conceptions as to the -value and meaning of many symbols, the importance of which in -practical work is very great. What esoteric knowledge the Jews -possessed, they derived either from the Egyptians or the -Babylonians during the captivity. Hence M. Saint-Ives d’Alvidre, -his gigantic erudition notwithstanding, is altogether mistaken in -the stress he lays on their knowledge, their place in history and -their mission as a nation. This, however, is but a matter of small -moment in a book, the practical value of which it would be -difficult to over-estimate. - - ----------------------- - - THE NEW WAGNER JOURNAL. - -We have received from Mr. Geo. Redway, Publisher, 15, York Street, -W.C., the prospectus of a new Journal, “THE MEISTER,” which is about -to be edited for the _Richard Wagner Society_ by Mr. Wm. Ashton -Ellis, author of “Theosophy in the Works of Richard Wagner” -(Theosophical Society’s Transactions), and of “Richard Wagner as -Poet, Musician and Mystic,” read before the Society of Fine Arts. As -Mr. Ellis is a member of the Committee of the Wagner Society, and a -member of Council of the London Lodge of the Theosophical Society, -we hope that prominence will be given to the esoteric side of -Richard Wagner’s works; and for this hope we have justification not -only in the pamphlets above alluded to but also in the words of the -prospectus of the MEISTER. “Religion, Art, and Social Questions are -in these works (Wagner’s) presented to his readers under novel -aspects, and such as are of the greatest interest to a generation -which is eagerly scanning the horizon for some cloud which may be -the harbinger of refreshing rain long looked for to quench the -thirst of the arid sands of Materialistic Science.” - -The prospectus presents us with a specimen of the cover of the -journal, designed by Mr. Percy Anderson, an artist who has already -made a name for himself in other walks of the decorative art, and -whose first attempt in this direction shows great power of broad -effects of light and shade, and considerable expertness in -symbolism. We hope in our next issue to review the first number of -the MEISTER which, we understand, will appear on the 13th inst. It -will be published for the present _quarterly_, at the subscription -rate of 4s. per annum, but we trust that it may shortly become a -full-fledged “monthly.” - -[Illustration: decorative separator] - - NEW YEAR’S EVE. - - All sound was hushed, except the sad sad bells, - Chanting their requiem o’er the dying year; - Alone I knelt beneath the watchful stars, - And held communion with my restless soul. - - * * * * * - - The Old Year died, the sad bells all were stilled, - And o’er a silent city, shone the pure cold moon. - Then unrestrained my soul poured forth its cry, - “O God Eternal, Changless, Sacred, O. M. - Let my past die with the Old Year to-night. - And when the joy-bells hail the New Year’s birth, - Let each sweet note waft up a pæan of praise, - Straight from a new-born Soul unto its Maker.” - - * * * * * - - The New Year dawned, madly the bells clashed forth - Beneath the stars, I still knelt on—in peace. - - KATIE DUNCAN KING. - - =Correspondence.= - - --- - - AUTOCENTRICISM.[183] - ------ - -Footnote 183: - - “Autocentricism; or, the Brain Theory of Life and Mind,” being the - substance of letters written to the Secular Review (1883-4). By - Robert Lewins, M.D. “The New Gospel of Hylo-Idealism, or Positive - Agnosticism.” By Herbert L. Courtney. - ------ - -Man has made God in his own image. Taking his thoughts and passions, -fears, hope and aspirations, with part thereof he endows his -fellow-men, whose natures he knows only as figured and interpreted -by his own, and thus he becomes a social being; with part thereof he -inspires the inanimate world—“the sun, the moon, the stars, the sea, -the hills, and the plains,” and thus he becomes a poet; “with the -residue” he forms his God, and “falleth down unto it, and -worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me, for thou -art my God.” - -The first of these processes is legitimate, indeed necessary, for -there is a foundation of unity in human nature, however diverse and -complex are its varied developments; and the humanity which dwells -in all can recognize itself under strange disguises. - -The second process is innocent and elevating, so long as it is kept -within just limits, and claims to reach results subjectively, not -objectively, true. - -The third process is inevitable at a certain stage of racial -evolution, but beyond that stage becomes absolutely noxious and -degrading, because it extols as truth that which conscience and -reason have begun to condemn as untruth. - -Dead are the Gods of Egypt, those supreme plutocrats, under whom -costly mummification and burial in a sculptured tomb were the -conditions of posthumous life, so that a poor man could by no means -enter into the kingdom of Osiris. Dead are Jupiter, Apollo, Pallas, -Aphrodite, the products and reflexes of Greek majesty, beauty and -intellect; or, if not dead, they are immortalised only by the art of -their human creators. Dead, or dying, as a power to be loved and -feared, is that Jehovah who reproduces the cruelty, selfishness and -stubbornness of the typical Jew, with his substratum of conscience, -showing itself from time to time in a more or less wrong-headed zeal -for righteousness. - -In its infancy, every race unconsciously forms an ideal, and makes -this ideal its God. As the race grows in civilisation the ideal is -modified, and for some time the god continues to undergo -corresponding changes, and is, so to speak, kept up to date. But -increasing experience and knowledge bring increasing secularism of -thought and feeling, and incapacitate the mind for reconstructing -its Divinity. Religion loses its life-blood. In this stage, the -Deity is either an anachronism, incompatible with the highest -instincts of his worshippers, and therefore holding them back -morally and intellectually, or else he becomes a nonentity, an -abstraction, which can have no influence on life and conduct. It is -this effete conception which Dr. Lewins combats in the tract -entitled “Autocentricism, or the Brain Theory of Life and Mind.” - -Man, in brief, is his own God. Saints and mystics, and all the most -beautiful souls of all religions, have seen this truth as in a glass -darkly. Christ expressed it in mystic form when he said, “The -Kingdom of Heaven is within you,” and, “I and my Father are one.” -But in Christ’s time Animism was so ingrained in human nature that -it was impossible he could escape it.[184] He had not the scientific -data on which to found a true cosmology; and even had he possessed -the data, he would have lacked the power to use them. Scientific -habits of thought were necessarily alien to the mind of the Galilean -peasant.[185] He could _feel_ rather than _comprehend_ the unity of -God, Man, and the World; but he could not know that this unity is -centred in the thought-cells of the cerebral hemispheres, and that -the Divine glory is the offspring of a material organism.[186] -Scientific synthesis can now give a solid basis to Christian and -Buddhist mysticism, to Berkleyan and Kantian Idealism, by declaring -that the brain is the one phenomenon which certifies its own nomenal -existence. It thinks, therefore it is; it creates, therefore it -exists. Yet Dualism is condemned, whatever stand-point we adopt. -“For my main argument ... it matters not a jot or tittle whether you -proceed on the nöetic or hyloic basis. A European ought to take the -latter, which admits of scientific research and discovery. An -Asiatic or African, who has not the genius for original realistic -research, may safely be left to the former.”[187] Beyond himself, no -man can think. We are apt to be deluded by the exigencies of -language, and to look upon “our” ideas, “our” imaginations, as in -some way separable from ourselves; as possessions rather than -components of the Ego. Yet nothing is clearer than that the sum of -these sentient states actually _constitutes_ the Ego, so far as it -knows itself; and that a “dominant” idea, engrossing the attention -to the exclusion of all others, is for the time absolutely identical -with and equivalent to the mind which it is said to “rule.” For -moments which are eternities, because the sense of time is -abolished, the musician may be “absorbed in” or identified with his -sonata, the poet with his verse, the mystic with his vision of the -Divine Essence. “I am as great as God, and He as small as I,” sings -Angelus Silesius; but we may rather say that in such states of -rapture the relations of “great” and “small,” of “internal” and -“external,” of “space” and “infinitude,” of “time” and “eternity,” -are annihilated, and the whole universe fused into one point of -light. - ------ - -Footnote 184: - - “Autocentricism,” &c., p. 10. - -Footnote 185: - - _Christ_—A Galilean peasant! [ED.] - -Footnote 186: - - Nor does Dr. Lewins _know_: assumption is no proof. [ED.] - -Footnote 187: - - “Autocentricism,” &c., p. 33. - ------ - -This feeling, rationalised and stripped of mystery, though not of -wonder and solemnity, is the truth and life of Hylo-Idealism. -Worship is done away with, not by iconoclasm, but by apotheosis. “By -it we are, indeed, for ever and entirely relieved from the -humiliating and overwhelming sense of human insignificance, thus -making ourselves quite at home in the more than terrestrial -grandeurs of the universe, in which our planet is but a -sand-grain.”[188] - ------ - -Footnote 188: - - Ibid, p. 19. - ------ - -In conclusion, I should like to recommend Dr. Lewins’s tractate, -with its Introduction by Mr. Courtney, and its succinct and luminous -Appendix by G. M. Mc., and also Mr. Courtney’s articles reprinted -from “Our Corner” to the attention of all sincere souls. -Hylo-Idealism, or “Autocentricism,” has the merit of not being -negative merely, but also positive and constructive, substituting -for the “renunciation” preached by Christ and Buddha, a perfect -fulfilment of self, and conquering selfishness by self-expansion. It -is thus especially potent in the fields of theoretical and practical -ethics, indeed the central idea of Spinoza’s admirable and still -unsurpassed analysis of the Passions is distinctly deducible from -our thesis, though generally regarded as an excrescence rather than -a natural growth from his own. Upon all this I cannot, at present, -dwell, but must content myself with the bare indication of fields of -thought and action which are “white already to the harvest.” - -On the Nile, _Dec._ 1887. - - C. N. - - -------------- - - WHAT OF PHENOMENA? - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER: - - “I avail myself of your invitation to correspondents, in order to - ask a question. - - “How is it that we hear nothing now of the signs and wonders with - which Neo-theosophy was ushered in? Is the ‘age of miracles’ past - in the Society? - - “Yours respectfully, - “*” - -“Occult phenomena,” is what our correspondent apparently refers to. -They failed to produce the desired effect, but they were, in no -sense of the word, “miracles.” It was supposed that intelligent -people, especially men of science, would, at least, have recognised -the existence of a new and deeply interesting field of enquiry and -research when they witnessed physical effects produced at will, for -which they were not able to account. It was supposed that -theologians would have welcomed the proof, of which they stand so -sadly in need in these agnostic days, that the soul and the spirit -are not mere creations of their fancy, due to ignorance of the -physical constitution of man, but entities quite as real as the -body, and much more important. These expectations were not realized. -The phenomena were misunderstood and misrepresented, both as regards -their nature and their purpose. - -In the light which experience has now thrown upon the matter the -explanation of this unfortunate circumstance is not far to seek. -Neither science nor religion acknowledges the existence of the -Occult, as the term is understood and employed in theosophy; in the -sense, that is to say, of a super-material, but not super-natural, -region, governed by law; nor do they recognise the existence of -latent powers and possibilities in man. Any interference with the -every-day routine of the material world is attributed, by religion, -to the arbitrary will of a good or an evil autocrat, inhabiting a -supernatural region inaccessible to man, and subject to no law, -either in his actions or constitution, and for a knowledge of whose -ideas and wishes mortals are entirely dependent upon inspired -communications delivered through an accredited messenger. The power -of working so-called miracles has always been deemed the proper and -sufficient credentials of a messenger from heaven, and the mental -habit of regarding any occult power in that light is still so strong -that any exercise of that power is supposed to be “miraculous,” or -to claim to be so. It is needless to say that this way of regarding -extraordinary occurrences is in direct opposition to the scientific -spirit of the age, nor is it the position practically occupied by -the more intelligent portion of mankind at present. When people see -wonders, nowadays, the sentiment excited in their minds is no longer -veneration and awe, but curiosity. - -It was in the hope of arousing and utilizing this spirit of -curiosity that occult phenomena were shown. It was believed that -this manipulation of forces of nature which lie below the -surface—that surface of things which modern science scratches and -pecks at so industriously and so proudly—would have led to enquiry -into the nature and the laws of those forces, unknown to science, -but perfectly known to occultism. That the phenomena did excite -curiosity in the minds of those who witnessed them, is certainly -true, but it was, unfortunately, for the most part of an idle kind. -The greater number of the witnesses developed an insatiable appetite -for phenomena for their own sake, without any thought of studying -the philosophy or the science of whose truth and power the phenomena -were merely trivial and, so to say, accidental illustrations. In but -a few cases the curiosity which was awakened gave birth to the -serious desire to study the philosophy and the science themselves -and for their own sake. - -Experience has taught the leaders of the movement that the vast -majority of professing Christians are absolutely precluded by their -mental condition and attitude—the result of centuries of -superstitious teaching—from calmly examining the phenomena in their -aspect of natural occurrences governed by law. The Roman Catholic -Church, true to its traditions, excuses itself from the examination -of any occult phenomena on the plea that they are necessarily the -work of the Devil, whenever they occur outside of its own pale, -since it has a lawful monopoly of the legitimate miracle business. -The Protestant Church denies the personal intervention of the Evil -One on the material plane; but, never having gone into the miracle -business itself, it is apparently a little doubtful whether it would -know a _bona-fide_ miracle if it saw one, but, being just as unable -as its elder sister to conceive the extension of the reign of law -beyond the limits of matter and force, as known to us in our present -state of consciousness, it excuses itself from the study of occult -phenomena on the plea that they lie within the province of science -rather than of religion. - -Now science has its miracles as well as the Church of Rome. But, as -it is altogether dependent upon its instrument maker for the -production of these miracles, and, as it claims to be in possession -of the last known word in regard to the laws of nature, it was -hardly to be expected that it would take very kindly to “miracles,” -in whose production apparatus has no part, and which claim to be -instances of the operation of forces and laws of which it has no -knowledge. Modern science, moreover, labours under disabilities with -respect to the investigation of the Occult quite as embarrassing as -those of Religion; for, while Religion cannot grasp the idea of -natural law as applied to the supersensuous Universe, Science does -not allow the existence of any supersensuous universe at all to -which the reign of law could be extended; nor can it conceive the -possibility of any other state of consciousness than our present -terrestrial one. It was, therefore, hardly to be expected that -science would undertake the task it was called upon to perform with -much earnestness and enthusiasm; and, indeed, it seems to have felt -that it was not expected to treat the phenomena of occultism less -cavalierly than it had treated divine miracles. So it calmly -proceeded at once to pooh-pooh the phenomena; and, when obliged to -express some kind of opinion, it did not hesitate, without -examination, and on hearsay reports, to attribute them to fraudulent -contrivances—wires, trap-doors and so forth. - -It was bad enough for the leaders of the movement, when they -endeavoured to call the attention of the world to the great and -unknown field for scientific and religious enquiry which lies on the -borderland between matter and spirit, to find themselves set down as -agents of his Satanic Majesty, or as superior adepts in the -charlatan line; but the unkindest cut of all, perhaps, came from a -class of people whose own experiences, rightly understood, ought -certainly to have taught them better: the occult phenomena were -claimed by the Spiritualists as the work of their dear departed -ones, but the leaders in Theosophy were declared to be somewhat less -even than mediums in disguise. - -Never were the phenomena presented in any other character than that -of instances of a power _over perfectly natural though unrecognised -forces_, and incidentally over matter, possessed by certain -individuals who have attained to a larger and higher knowledge of -the Universe than has been reached by scientists and theologians, or -can ever be reached by them, by the roads they are now respectively -pursuing. Yet this power is latent in all men, and could, in time, -be wielded by anyone who would cultivate the knowledge and conform -to the conditions necessary for its development. Nevertheless, -except in a few isolated and honourable instances, never was it -received in any other character than as would-be miracles, or as -works of the Devil, or as vulgar tricks, or as amusing gape-seed, or -as the performances of those dangerous “spooks” that masquerade in -séance rooms, and feed on the vital energies of mediums and sitters. -And, from all sides, theosophy and theosophists were attacked with a -rancour and bitterness, with an absolute disregard alike of fact and -logic, and with malice, hatred and uncharitableness that would be -utterly inconceivable, did not religious history teach us what mean -and unreasoning animals ignorant men become when their cherished -prejudices are touched; and did not the history of scientific -research teach us, in its turn, how very like an ignorant man a -learned man can behave, when the truth of his theories is called in -question. - -An occultist can produce phenomena, but he cannot supply the world -with brains, nor with the intelligence and good faith necessary to -understand and appreciate them. Therefore, it is hardly to be -wondered at, that _word_ came to abandon phenomena and let the ideas -of Theosophy stand on their own intrinsic merits. - - -------------- - - MR. MOHINI M. CHATTERJI. - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -Will you kindly afford publicity in the pages of Lucifer to the -enclosed letter I have just received from Mr. Mohini M. Chatterji -who has been staying for a few months at Rome, with English friends, -on his way back to India.—Yours very truly, - - A. P. SINNETT. - - TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE LONDON LODGE OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. - -SIR,—I understand that among the members of your Society there is a -rumour to the effect that I have joined the Roman Catholic Church, -which has caused much annoyance to my friends and also to myself. I -beg therefore that you will do me the justice to make it known that -the rumour is entirely false and that I have no desire to join any -Christian Church.—I am, Sir, your obedient servant, - - MOHINI M. CHATTERJI. - -ROME (Italy), _January 30th, 1888_. - - ------------------ - - _To the Editors of_ LUCIFER. - -On behalf of the members of the London Lodge, I beg to state that -the rumour referred to in Mr. Mohini’s letter emanated from two -acquaintances of his belonging to the Romish Church, who themselves -derived their information from the R. C. priesthood. As for the -members of the L. L. they never believed in this report. - - BERTRAM KEIGHTLEY, Hon. Sec. - - - - - =CORRESPONDENCE= - - - [The editors have received the two following letters—one from the - learned Founder of Hylo-Idealism, the other from a gentleman, a - casual correspondent, of whom they know _absolutely nothing_ - except his most extraordinary way of expressing his thoughts in - words and terms hitherto unheard by ordinary mortals. Both take - the editors to task for using their undeniable right of criticism - and editorial judgment. As LUCIFER, however, is a magazine _sui - generis_, and as its policy is the greatest possible tolerance and - fairness to all parties concerned, it will abstain from its legal - prerogative of leaving the letters without reply or notice. - LUCIFER hands them over, therefore, to the “ADVERSARY,” to be - dealt with according to their respective merits. The editors have - never pretended to an “understanding of Hylo-Idealism” nor do they - entertain any such rash hope for the future. They belong to that - humble class of mortals who labour to their dying day under the - belief that 2 × 2 = 4, and can by no means, even hylo-idealistic, - make 5. “C. N.”’s letter placed the new “philosophy” in an - entirely different light; firstly, because it is written in good - English, and because the style of the writer is extremely - attractive; and secondly, because at least one point has now been - made clear to the editors: “Hylo-Idealism” is, like modern - spiritualism, the _essence of transcendental materialism_. If in - Mr. Huxley’s opinion Comte’s Positivism is, in practice, - “Catholicism _minus_ Christianity,” in the views of the editors of - LUCIFER Hylo-Idealism is “Metaphysics _minus_ psychology - and—_physics_.” Let its apostles explain away its flagrant - contradictions, and then LUCIFER will be the first to render - justice to it as a philosophy. Meanwhile, it can only acknowledge - a number of remarkably profound thoughts that are to be found - scattered in independent solitude throughout the letters of Dr. - Lewins (Humanism _v._ Theism) and others, and—no more.] - - _re_ HYLO-IDEALISM. - - To the Editors of LUCIFER. - -Perhaps space may be found in the February or other early issue of -your interesting and suggestive serial for the present curt -communication. In a footnote of your January number I am coupled -with Mr. H. Spencer as being more Atheist than Moleschott and -Büchner—to say nothing of such compromising and irresolute -scientists as Darwin, Huxley, and Co. Now, that atheistic or -non-animist standpoint is the pivot on which my whole synthesis -revolves; and is, I contend, the burning problem at this -epoch—ethical and intellectual—of the human mind—_thoroughly_ to -establish on certain concrete, rational and scientific _data_, that -is to say—not on the Utopias of Speculation and Metaphysics. My -principle is exactly that of Kant (inter alios) when he formulates -the “Thing in Itself.” But we have only to study the short and handy -“Critique of Kant,” referred to in your columns—by Kuno Fischer, -translated by Dr. Hough, to see how fast and loose that -“all-shattering” metaphysician played with his all-destructive -theme. Not only does he entirely reverse it and its corollaries in -his critique of the “Practical Reason,” and of “Judgment,” but also -in the second edition of the “Critique of Pure Reason” itself, in -which originally, as its corollary, or rather concomitant, he, like -myself, only on less sure premises, disposes of God, the Soul (Anima -or Vital Principle), and Immortality—that is of another “personal” -life after death. I hold with Lucretius, Epicurus, and others in -ancient and modern times, of whom Shelley is a typical case, that no -greater benefit can be bestowed on humanity than the elimination -from sane thought of this ghastly and maddening Triune Spectre. God -alone is quite “l’infame” Voltaire dubs the Catholic Church. Looking -through Nature “red in tooth and claws” to its _pseudo_ Author, we -must expect to find a _Pandemon_. For any omnipotent Being who, -unconditioned and unfettered in all respects, “_willed_” such a -world of pain and anguish for sentient creatures, must be a Demon -_worse_ than mythology has fabled of Satan, Moloch, Mammon, or other -fiends. It must be noted that in the classic Pantheon, the Fates, or -Fatal Sisters, are “above” all the Immortals of Olympus, including -Jove himself—a saving provision quite inadmissible in modern -Monotheism, which endows its Divinity[189] with absolute omnipotence -and fore-knowledge. - - ROBERT LEWINS, M.D. - ------ - -Footnote 189: - - Deuce, _i.e._, Devil, is the synonym of _Deus_. - ------ - - --- - - HYLO-IDEALISM. - - To the Editors of LUCIFER. - -I have to thank you for your kind insertion of my note on above in -January issue of the Magazine. - -I have not the slightest desire to quarrel with your prefaced -comments on my style of writing. It seems to you to be “turgid,” and -you take advantage of some unkind epithets lately dealt out to -Theosophy in the _Secular Review_ to return the compliment to me -with interest added. Be it so. It would seem but fair to, let me -say, compliment those, and those only, who have directly -complimented you; but I have no wish, as I have just said, to find -fault with _any_ comment on Hylo-Idealism or on the methods of its -advocacy. _All_ criticism is, I know, received by the excogitator of -the system with thanks, and, save that both he and I think your note -_re “Theobroma”_ not a little at fault (for explanation I refer you -to the well-known Messrs. Epps), I can say the same for myself. - -I can see, however, in spite of the raillery with which you honour -us, that a right understanding of Hylo-Idealism—I beg pardon, -_High-low_ Idealism—is still very far from being yours. Why, in a -recent issue of LUCIFER the old difficulty of, as I call it, the -“Coincident assumption of Materiality” is started as if it had never -before been thought of. It is, in point of fact, fully dealt with in -my “Appendix” to the “Auto-Centricism” pamphlet, which has already -passed under your review! It is not worth while to enter once more -upon this point; suffice it then to say, in addition, that I -explained it also, at full length, to a Theosophical writer—Mr. E. -D. Fawcett—in the _Secular Review_, some months ago. He had started -the same venerable objection, but after my reply, he so far honoured -me as not to return to the charge. Let him do so now, and then a -Theosophical attack and a Hylo-Ideal defence will be before you. -But, really, it is no argument against my position to extract some -half-dozen lines of my writing from a contemporary and to follow -this _soupçon_ with three printer’s “shrieks.” - -I shall wait with interest the promised letter from “C. N.,” placing -Hylo-Idealism in a “new and very different light,” as you say. This -is something quite new. Dr. Lewins, C. N., and I have, none of us, -been able, hitherto, to find any material difference between our -several presentations of the system. - - I have the honour to be, Mesdames, - Your most obedient servant, - G. M. McC. - - TO DR. LEWINS, AND THE HYLO-IDEALISTS AT LARGE. - -The several learned gentlemen of the above persuasion, who have -honoured LUCIFER with their letters and articles, will please to -accept the present as a collective Reply. Life is too short to -indulge very often in such lengthy explanations. But “une fois n’est -pas coutume.” - -In “coupling” Dr. Lewins’ name with those he mentions—especially -with Mr. Herbert Spencer’s—the Editors had assuredly no intention of -saying anything derogatory to the dignity of the founder of -Hylo-Idealism. They have called the latter system—its qualification -of _Idealistic_ notwithstanding——“atheistical,” and to this Dr. -Lewins himself does not demur. Quite the contrary. If his protest -(against a casual remark made in a footnote of two lines!) means -anything at all, it means that he feels hurt to find his name -associated with the names of such “compromising and (in _atheism_) -irresolute scientists as Darwin, Huxley, and Co.” What is it that -our erudite correspondent demurs to, then? Just that, and nothing -more. His prefixed adjectives refer to the half-heartedness of these -gentlemen in the matter of atheism and materialism, not surely, to -their scientific achievements. Indeed, these illustrious naturalists -are timid enough to leave half-opened doors in their speculations -for something to enter in which is not quite matter, and yet what it -is they do not, or _do not wish_ to know. - -Indeed, they derive man, his origin and consciousness, _only_ from -the lower forms of animal creation and the brutes, instead of -attributing life, mind and intellect—as the followers of the new -System do—simply to the pranks played by _Prakriti_ (the great -Ignorance and Illusion) on our “diseased nervous centres”—_abstract -thought_ being synonymous with _Neuropathy_ in the teachings of the -Hylo-Idealists (see _Auto-Centricism_, p. 40). But all this has been -already said and _better said_ by Kapila, in his _Sankhya_, and is -very old philosophy indeed; so that Messrs. Darwin and Co. have -been, perhaps, wise in their generation to adopt another theory. Our -great Darwinists are practical men, and avoid running after the hare -and the eagle at the same time, as the hare in such case would be -sure to run away, and the eagle to be lost in the clouds. They -prefer to ignore the ideas and conceptions of the Universe, as held -by such “loose,” and—as philosophically expressed by our -_uncompromising_ opponent—“all-shattering metaphysicians as Kant -was.” Therefore letting all such “metaphysical crack-brained -theories” severely alone, they made man and his thinking _Ego_ the -lineal descendant of the revered ancestor of the now tailless -baboon, our beloved and esteemed first cousin. This is only logical -_from the Darwinian standpoint_. What is, then, Dr. Lewins’ quarrel -with these great men, or with us? They have their theory, the -inventor of Hylo-Idealism has his theory, we, Metaphysicians, have -our ideas and theories; and, the _Moon_ shining with impartial and -equal light on the respective occiputs of Hylo-Idealists, -Animalists, and Metaphysicians, she pours material enough for every -one concerned to allow each of them to “live and let live.” No man -can be at once a Materialist and an Idealist, and remain consistent. -Eastern philosophy and occultism are based on the _absolute unity_ -of the Root Substance, and they recognise only one infinite and -universal CAUSE. The Occultists are UNITARIANS _par excellence_. But -there is such a thing as conventional, time-honoured terms with one -and the same meaning attached to them all—at any rate on this plane -of illusion. And if we want to understand each other, we are forced -to use such terms in their generally-accepted sense, and avoid -calling mind matter, and vice versâ. The definition of a -_materialised “Spirit”_ as frozen whiskey is in its place in a -humouristic pun: it becomes an absurdity in philosophy. It is Dr. -Lewins’ argument that “the very first principle of logic is, that -two ‘causes’ are not to be thought of when one is sufficient;” and -though the first and the ultimate, the Alpha and the Omega in the -existence of the Universe, is one absolute cause, yet, on the plane -of manifestations and differentiations, matter, as phenomenon, and -Spirit as noumenon, cannot be so loosely confused as to merge the -latter into the former, under the pretext that one self-evident -natural cause (however secondary in the sight of logic and reason) -is “sufficient for our purpose,” and we need not “transcend the -proper conditions of thought” and fall back upon the lower level of -“lawless and uncertain fancy”—i.e., metaphysics. (_Vide_ “Humanism -_v._ Theism,” pp. 14, 15.) - -We have nothing whatever, I say it again, against “Hylo-Idealism” -with the exception of its compound and self-contradictory name. Nor -do we oppose Dr. Lewins’ earlier thoughts, as embodied in “C. N’s” -“HUMANISM _versus_ THEISM.” That which we permit ourselves to object -to and oppose is the later system grown into a _Bifrontian_, -Janus-like monster, a hybrid _duality_ notwithstanding its forced -mask of Unity. Surely it is not because Dr. Lewins calls “Spirit—a -_fiction_” and attributes Mind, Thought, Genius, Intellect, and all -the highest attributes of thinking man to simple effects or -functions of Hylo-zoism, that the greatest problem of psychology, -_the relation of mind to matter_, is solved? No one can accuse “The -Adversary” of too much tenderness or even regard for the conclusions -of such rank materialists as the Darwinians generally are. But -surely no impartial man would attribute their constant failure to -explain the relations of mind to matter, and the confessions of -their ignorance of the ultimate constitution of that matter itself, -to timidity and irresoluteness, but rather to the right cause: -_i.e._, the _absolute impossibility of explaining spiritual effects -by physical causes_, in the first case; and the presence of that in -matter which baffles and mocks the efforts of the physical senses to -perceive or feel, and therefore to explain it, in the second case. -It is not, evidently, a desire to _compromise_ that forced Mr. -Huxley to confess that “in strictness we (the Scientists) know -nothing about the composition of matter,” but the _honesty_ of a man -of science in not speculating upon what he did not believe in, and -knew nothing about. Does J. Le Conte insult the majesty of physical -science by declaring that the creation or destruction, increase or -diminution of matter, “_lies beyond the domain of science?_”[190] -And to whose prejudices does Mr. Tyndall pander, he, who once upon a -time shocked the whole world of believers in spiritual existence, by -declaring in his Belfast address that in matter alone was “the -promise and potency of every form and quality of life” (just what -Dr. Lewins does) when he maintains that “the passage _from the -physics of the brain to the corresponding facts of_ CONSCIOUSNESS -_is unthinkable_,” and adds: - - “Granted that a definite thought and a molecular action in the - brain occur simultaneously; we do not possess the intellectual - organ nor apparently any rudiments of the organ, which would - enable us to pass by a process of reasoning from one to the other. - They appear together, but _we do not know why_. Were our minds and - senses so expanded, strengthened and illuminated, as to enable us - to see and feel the very molecules of the brain; were we capable - of following all their motions, all their groupings, all their - electric discharges, if such there be; and were we intimately - acquainted with the corresponding states of thought and feeling, - we should be as far as ever from the solution of the problem. ‘How - are these physical processes connected with the facts of - consciousness?’ The chasm between the two classes of phenomena - would still remain intellectually impassable.”[191] - ------ - -Footnote 190: - - “_Correl._ of _Vital with Chem. and Physical Forces_.” Appendix. - -Footnote 191: - - “Fragments of Science.” - ------ - -To our surprise, however, we find that our learned -correspondent—Tyndall, Huxley & Co., notwithstanding—has passed the -_intellectually impassable_ chasm by modes of perception, -“anti-intellectual,” so to speak. I say this in no impertinent mood; -but merely following Dr. Lewins on his own lines of thought. As his -expressions seem absolutely antiphrastic in meaning to those -generally accepted by the common herd, “anti-intellectual” would -mean with the Hylo-Idealists “anti-spiritual” (spirit being a -_fiction_ with them). Thus their Founder must have crossed the -impassable chasm—say, by a hylo-zoistic process of perception, -“starting from the region of rational cogitation” and not from “that -lower level of lawless and uncertain fancy,” as Theosophists, -Mystics, and other _hoi polloi_ of thought, do. He has done it to -his own “mental satisfaction,” and this is all a Hylo-Idealist will -ever aspire to, as Dr. Lewins himself tells us. He “cannot deny that -there may be _behind_ (?) nature a ‘cause of causes,’[192] but if -so, it is a god who hides himself, or itself, from mortal thought. -Nature is at all events vice-regent plenipotentiary, and with _her_ -thought has alone to deal.” Just so, and we say it too, for reasons -given in the footnote. “There is a natural solution for everything,” -he adds. “Of course, if there be no ‘cause,’ this solution is the -arrangement and co-ordination of invariable sequences in our own -minds ... rather than an ‘explanation’ or ‘accounting for’ -phenomena. Properly speaking we can ‘account for’ nothing. _Mental -satisfaction_—unity between microcosm and macrocosm, not the search -after ‘First Causes.’ ... is the true chief end of man.” (Hum. _v._ -Theism, p. 15.) - ------ - -Footnote 192: - - We Theosophists, who do not _limit_ nature, do not see the “cause - of causes” or the _unknowable_ deity _behind_ that which is - limitless, but identify that abstract Nature with the deity - itself, and explain its visible laws as secondary effects on the - plane of Universal Illusion. - ------ - -This seems the backbone of Hylo-Idealistic philosophy, which -thus appears as a cross breed between Epicurianism and the -“Illusionism” of the Buddhist Yogachâras. This stands proven -by the contradictions in his system. Dr. Lewins seems to have -achieved that, to do which every mortal scientist has hitherto -failed, firstly, by declaring (in Hum. _v._ Theism, p. 17) the -whole objective world—“_phenomenal_ or _ideal_”,[193] and -“everything in it _spectral_” (Auto-Centricism, p. 9), and yet -_admitting the reality of matter_. More than this. In the -teeth of all the scientific luminaries, from Faraday to -Huxley, who all confess to knowing NOTHING of matter, he -declares that—“Matter organic and inorganic _is now fully -known_” (Auto-Centricism, p. 40)!! - ------ - -Footnote 193: - - We call the _noumenal_—the “ideal.” - ------ - -I humbly beg Dr. Lewins’ pardon for the rude question; but does he -really mean to say what he does say? Does he want his readers to -believe that up to his appearance in this world of matter, thinking -men did not know what they were talking about, and that among all -the “Ego Brains” of this globe his brain is the one omniscient -_reality_, while all others are empty phantasms,or _spectral_ -balloons? Besides which, matter cannot surely be _real_ and _unreal_ -at the same time. If _unreal_—and he maintains it—then all Science -can know about it is that it knows _nothing_, and this is precisely -what Science confesses. And if _real_—and Dr. Lewins, as shown, -declares it likewise—then his _Idealism_ goes upside down, and -_Hylo_ alone remains to mock him and his philosophy. These may be -trifling considerations in the consciousness of an _Ego_ of Dr. -Lewins’ power, but they are very serious contradictions, and also -impediments in the way of such humble thinkers as Vedantins, -Logicians, and Theosophists, toward recognising, let alone -appreciating, “Hylo-Idealism.” Our learned correspondent pooh-poohs -Metaphysics, and at the same time not only travels on purely -metaphysical grounds, but adopts and sets forth the most -metaphysical tenets, the very gist of the PARA-metaphysical Vedanta -philosophy, tenets held also by the Buddhist “Illusionists”—the -_Yogachâras_ and _Madhyamikas_. Both schools maintain that all is -void (_sarva sûnya_), or that which Dr. Lewins calls spectral and -phantasmal. Except internal sensation or intelligence (_vijnâna_) -the Yogachâras regard everything else as illusion. Nothing that is -material can have any but a _spectral_ existence with them. So far, -our “Bauddhas” are at one with _the_ Hylo-Idealists, but they part -at the crucial moment. The New School teaches that the Brain (the -originator of consciousness) is the only factor and Creator of the -visible Universe; that in _it_ alone all our ideas of external -things are born, and that, apart from it, nothing has real -existence, everything being illusion. Now what has that Brain, or -rather the material its particles and cells are composed of, -distinct in it from other matter that it should be rendered such -honours? _Physically_, it differs very little indeed from the brain -stuff and cranium of any anthropoid ape. Unless we divorce -consciousness, or the EGO, from matter, one materialistic philosophy -is as good as the other, and none is worth living for. What his -Brain-Ego _is_, Dr. Lewins does not show anywhere. He urges that his -“atheistic or _non-animist_ (soulless) standpoint is the _pivot_” on -which his “whole synthesis revolves.” But as that “pivot” is no -higher than the physical brain with its hallucinations, then it must -be a broken reed indeed. A philosophy that goes no further than -superficial Agnosticism, and says that “what Tennyson says of Deity -_may_ be true, but it is not in the region of natural cogitation; -for it transcends the logical _Encheiresis naturæ_“ (Hum. _v._ -Theism)—is no philosophy, but simply _unqualified negation_. And one -who teaches that ”_savants_, or specialists, are the last to reach -the _summa scientiæ_, for the constant _search_ after knowledge must -ever prevent its _fruition_” (ibid), cuts the ground himself under -his feet, and thus loses the right, not only to be considered a man -of science, but likewise his claim to the title of philosopher, for -he rejects all knowledge. Dr. Lewins, quoting Schiller, “to the -effect that truth can never be reached while the mind is in its -analytic throes,” shows the poet-philosopher saying that:—“To -capture the fleeting phantom he (the analyst) must fetter it by -rules, must anatomatise its fair body into concepts, and imprison -_its living spirit_ into a bare skeleton of words”—and thus brings -this as a prop and proof of his own arguments that we need not -trouble ourselves with the “cause of causes.” But Schiller believed -in spirit and immortality, while the Hylo-Idealists deny them _in -toto_. What he says above is accepted by every Occultist and -Theosophist, simply because _he refers to the purely intellectual_ -(not Spiritual) _analysis_ on the physical plane, and according to -the present scientific methods. Such analysis, of course, will never -help man to reach the real _inner_ soul-knowledge, but must ever -leave him stranded in the bogs of fruitless speculation. - -The truth is, that Hylo-Idealism is at best QUIETISM—only on the -purely material plane. “Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we -die,” seems its motto. Dr. Lewins tells us that he holds his views -with Epicurus. I beg leave to contradict again. Epicurus insisted -upon the necessity of making away with an unphilosophical, -anthropomorphic deity— a bundle of contradictions—and so do we, -the Theosophists. But Epicurus believed in gods, finite and -conditioned in space and time, still _divine_ when compared to -objective ephemeral man: again, just as we, Theosophists, believe -in them. - -We feel sorry to have to say unpleasant truths. The Founder of -Hylo-Idealism is evidently a marvellously well-read man, his -learning is great and undeniable; and, we have always had an -instinctive respect for, and sympathy with, thinkers of his calibre. -But, we have been sent pamphlets and books on Hylo-Idealism for -review, and one would be truant to his duty to conceal one’s -honest and sincere views on anything. Therefore, we say that, -contradictions and inconsistencies in the Hylo-Idealistic system -apart, we find in it a mass of ideas and _arguments_ which come -forcibly home to us, because they are part and parcel of the Eastern -Idealism. Our premises and propositions seem to be almost identical -in some respects, but the conclusions we come to disagree in every -point, the most important of which is the true nature of matter. -This, which “has been _fabled_ as ‘Spirit,’” writes Dr. Lewins in -1878, “is really merely the ‘_vis insita_’ of matter or ‘nature’—the -latter a misnomer if creation or birth is a delusion, as it must be -on the hypothesis of the eternity of matter.” - -Here the Doctor speaks evidently of “Spirit” from the Christian -stand-point, and criticises it from this aspect. And from this -stand-point and aspect he is perfectly right; but as wrong from -those of Eastern philosophy. Did he but view Spirit, _as one with -eternal matter_, which, though eternal _in esse_ is but finite and -conditioned during its periodical manifestations, he would not so -materialise its _vis insita_—which is _vis vitæ_ but when applied to -individual manifestations, the living subjects of illusion, or -animated bodies. But this would lead us too far, and we must close -the subject with one more protest. There is a casual remark in -“Humanism _v._ Theisms” to the effect (on the authority of Ueberweg) -that “the early Greek thinkers and Sages were Hylo-Zoists.” Aye, -learned Doctor; but the early Greek thinkers understood Hylo-Zoism -(from “_Hyle_” _primordial_ matter, or what the greatest chemist in -England, Mr. Crookes, has called “protyle” _undifferentiated -matter_, and “_Zoe_,” life) in a way very different from yours. So -are we, Theosophists and Eastern Occultists, “Hylo-Zoists”; but it -is because with us “life” is the synonym both of Spirit and Matter, -or the ONE eternal and infinite LIFE whether manifested or -otherwise. That LIFE is both the eternal IDEA and its periodical -LOGOS. He who has grasped and mastered this doctrine completely has -thereby solved the mystery of BEING. - - “THE ADVERSARY.” - -P.S.—We have in type a very excellent article by Mr. L. Courtney, -which could not find room in this present number, but will appear in -March. In it, the writer says all that he _can_ possibly say in -favour of Hylo-Idealism, and that is all one can do. Thus, LUCIFER -will give one fair chance more to the new System; after which it -will have gained a certain right to neither answer at such length, -nor accept any article on Hylo-Idealism that will go beyond a page -or so.—“A.” - - ------------------------------------ - - - - - INTERESTING TO ASTROLOGERS. - - ASTROLOGICAL NOTES—No. 4. - - _To the Editor of_ LUCIFER. - -QUESTION, at London, 1887, March 2nd, 6.8 p.m. What will be the -duration of quesited’s life? - -Though the preceding figure showed that my relative would recover -from his illness,[194] yet it was obvious that the end could not be -far distant; and I drew the present figure for the minute of the -impression, to interrogate the stars. - ------ - -Footnote 194: - - NOTE.—This was shown by the preceding figure; a weak aspect in - horary astrology can only symbolize a weak result. Hence, though - the weakly good semisextile was sufficient to indicate - convalescence from a self-limited disease like pneumonia, yet it - did not denote complete restoration to health. Had the - significators been applying to a Trine, I should have judged not - only convalescence from the acute attack, but a continuance of a - vigorous old age. - ------ - -The following are the elements of the figure:— - - Cusp of 10th house 14 ♊. - — 11th house 21 ♋. - — 12th house 22 ♌. - — 1st house 17° 45’ ♍. - — 2nd house 10 ♎. - — 3rd house 9 ♏. - - Planets’ places are: - ♆ 25. 13. 15 ♉. - ♅ 11. 37. 30 R. ♎. - ♄ 15. 46. 30 R ♋. - ♃ 5. 41. 30 R ♏. - ♂ 23. 50. 45 ♓. - ☉ 11. 52. 19 ♓. - ♀ 3. 10. 30 ♈. - ☿ 29. 36. 15 ♓. - ☽ 8. 28. 15 ♊. - Caput Draconis 27. 21. 38 ♌. - ⨁ 14. 20. 56 I. - -As in the previous figure the 6th house is the quesited’s 1st, and -the 1st house is his 8th. As the time of the question was after -sunset, ☿ ruling ♏ by night was lord of his 8th, and ♅ ruling ♒ by -night was lord of his 1st. The aspect of the significators is ☿ 167° -58’ 45” ♅, separating from the Quincunx and applying to the -Opposition. The Quincunx is, like the Conjunction and Parallel, -convertible in nature, being good with benefics and evil with -malefics, and when a benefic and malefic are thus joined, the -stronger rules. It was therefore in this case doubly evil, as the -significators were separating from one evil aspect and applying to -another though not within orbs of either. As ☿, the applying planet, -was in a common sign, and is an angle of the figure, each degree -signified a week; and as 12° 1′ 15´´ were wanted to complete the -opposition, the critical period was shown to be a fraction over 12 -weeks, or May 25th. - -Danger to life was also shown by _Cauda Draconis_ in quesited’s 1st -house; by ☉ in quesited’s 1st afflicted by a very close Quincunx of -♅ lord of his 1st, ♅ moreover receiving ☉ in his Detriment, and ☉ -receiving ♅ in his Fall; and by ☽, lady of quesited’s 6th, posited -in his 4th, and afflicted by a rather close Quartile of ☉ posited in -his 1st, ☉ moreover receiving ☽ in his Anti-triplicity (_sit venia -verbo_). Nevertheless, as the significators were not actually in any -evil aspect, ☿ moreover receiving ♅ in his Triplicity, and being -almost out of ♓ his Fall and Detriment, and the Detriment of ♅; ☽, -lady of his 6th, and posited in his 4th, applying to a Trine of ♅ -lord of his 1st; and ☿ lord of his 8th applying to Conjunction with -♀ lady of his 4th, ♀ moreover receiving ☿ in her exaltation;—all -this denoted that May 25th would be the time, not indeed of certain -death, but of imminent danger, the beginning of the end. - -⨁ being in the 4th house of the figure, almost on the cusp, denoted -a legacy to my father. - -The actual result was as follows: After having been for some time in -fair health, considering his age and recent illness, _he was -suddenly taken ill and in great danger on the night of May 27th, and -on the morning of May 31st was in articulo mortis, and given up by -his two physicians_. From this, however, he rallied; relapsed on the -night of July 6th; rallied again; but _died on July 19th_ at 8.30 -a.m., after a sudden seizure of only 15 minutes’ duration, _and my -father received a legacy under his will_. - -The quesited suffered much in his last illness from cough and -dyspnœa. The certificate of death was—“_Primary_: emphysema, morbus -cordis. _Secondary_: thrombus, syncope.” With this may be compared ♄ -in ♋, having dignity in quesited’s 8th house, and afflicting ♅ lord -of quesited’s 1st. ♄ in ♋ denotes “phthisis, ulceration in lungs, -obstructions and bruises in breast, ague, scurvy, cancer, and -cough.” - - NEMO. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note - -Some longer stories and articles are continued from number to number -of the publication. Where the continued text appears in this volume, -the ‘to be continued’ note a the bottom of each section is linked to -the next. On occasion, the promised continuation is not to be found -in thi text, and no link is provided. - -On p. 236, the footnote now numbered 56 was referenced both in the -title of the review and on the repetition of that phrase in the body -of the review. The first of these has been removed as redundant. On -occasion, diacritical marks in foreign words were not printed, and -have not been added here. - -The copious quotations give rise to the occasional puzzle with -quotation marks, which make it difficult to say what the authors -intended. Where there is no simple resolution, the text is given -here as printed. The problematic paragraphs appear on p. 151, p. -164, p. 179, p. 205, p. 277, p. 295, p. 305. - -Other errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been -corrected as noted below. - -The references are to the page and line in the original. Where the -page is printed in columns, ‘L’ and ‘R’ refer to the left and right -columns. Those referenced with three numbers indicate the page, -footnote and line within the note. Since footnotes have sometimes -been moved to follow a paragraph, all references are to their -position in the printed text. - - 3.1.2 How art thou [f]allen from Heaven Restored. - - 20.1 in which the Zoroast[r]ian Mitra Inserted - - 22.1.1 tha[t] John saw Restored. - - 22.2.9 it literally means ‘to howl.’[”] Added. - - 38.4 I have p[re/er]suaded my aunt Transposed. - - 44.16 chapters of the Bha[ga]vadgita Inserted. - - 51.1 self-contained and harmonious within[.] Added. - - 55.31 the high plateaux of Central Asia[.] Added. - - 55.40 some amount of injustice in it[.] Added. - - 60.6 Count Tolstoi considers it nec[e]ssary Inserted. - - 67.2 in [leasurely] fashion _sic_ - - 69.13 in the Villa Torcello[.] Added. - - 72L.33 my books been par[a/o]died Replaced. - - 75L.55 by [C/G]. H. Pember Replaced. - - 79R.43 But as LU[FIC/CIF]ER hopes shortly to deal Transposed. - - 74R.15 [“]That the first human beings Added. - - 80R.33 [“]The famous cynic, Cratus, Removed. - - 84.41 his theosop[h]ical views. Inserted. - - 85.19 the social respectabili[l/t]y it panders to Replaced. - - 87.40 [innoculated] with vice, _sic_ - - 87.41 in his subsequent life[.] Added. - - 104.44 it grew importunate[.] Added. - - 116.8 the Hindu philosophical tenet[.] Added. - - 122.24 if he changes his a[l/t]titude Replaced. - - 122.33 that marriage is consummated.[”] Added. - - 124.32 [“]Not one would have the courage Added. - - 131.3 By [C/G]. H. Pember, M.A. Replaced. - - 132.32 by such cavalier treatment[.] Added. - - 134.12 this [insistance] upon the letter _sic_ - - 147.29 are pearls of wisdom[.] Added. - - 147.32 of the Ros[i]crucians Inserted. - - 152.28 ‘the Great Goddess[’] Added. - - 152.29 in the minds of Theosophists.[”] Added. - - 158R.43 is the day[-]house of ♅ Inserted. - - 164.6 members of that society who[ who] always find Removed. - - 172.15 and a benefic[i]ent power Removed. - - 179.3.12 principle of the Theosophists,[)] Added. - - 185.35 all occupied with [“/‘]Fou;[”/’] Replaced. - - 195.22 clos[e] to the great fire Restored. - - 204.45 Life-renewal and Life-tran[s]mission inserted. - - 201.26 draw it from you[r] own beautiful soul! Added. - - 205.38 and is himself examined of no man.[”] Added. - - 206.1 not for my life, assuredly[,/.] Replaced. - - 206.13 because it can give _me_[,] pleasure. Removed. - - 206.17 I am surr[r]ounded with a whole world Removed. - - 206.31 may be made comfortable.[”] Added. - - 209.36 within his soul.[”] Removed. - - 218.44 most wonderfull[l]y Removed. - - 217.23 aim of this work[,] the bias of the writer Added. - - 224.33 the irrational[i]ty Inserted. - - 226.40 the p[h]yschic-astral and the divine-astral Removed. - - 230.11 in[ ]dulge in the practice Removed. - - 233.3 before the seventee[n]th century Inserted. - - 233.27 cons[e]quently the great cry Inserted. - - 236.27 pheno[nem/men]a of modern spiritualism Transposed. - - 256.7 the lustre of the firma[n/m]ent Replaced. - - 260.38 uplifted to his were Fleta’s eyes[.] Added. - - 261.17 but [eat] nothing more _sic>_ - - 263.39 pushed the door open[,/.] Replaced. - - 265.38 a passionate and adoring eagerness[.] Added. - - 273.59 [l]ife of the Spirit Restored. - - 278.44 the only one to see me[,/.] Replaced. - - 283.15 repugnant to a belie[t/f] in this law Replaced. - - 284.31 in a position to apprecia[i/t]e Replaced. - - 292.17 as in the Jubilee[e] coinage Removed. - - 292.28 The question of what interpreta[ta]tion Removed. - - 293.68.2 (1 Corinthians xi, 11.[)] Added. - - 296.7 or [“/‘]problematical[”/’] Mahatma?” Replaced. - - 299.29 since it beg[u/a]n by a “play of words,” Replaced. - - 301.1.5 the Word of Truth, th[e] _Makheru_ of Egypt. Restored. - - 301.1.6 The preserved mummy was the bod[y] Restored. - - 301.15 [“]χρηστός ἑστιν επι τους,” Added. - - 302.16 and even by unbelievers,[”] _sic_ - - 302.1.1 [“]Christianus quantum interpretatione Added. - - 303.2.3 or devoted to oracul[e/a]r services Replaced. - - 304.25 “the son of Iaso or _Ieso_, the [“]healer,” Removed. - - 305.4 of this rema[r]kable form. Inserted. - - 305.36 with [“/‘]oil that was taken from the wood Replaced. - - 305.37 he is called the Christ:[”/’] Replaced. - - 305.41 also as the Horus of both sexes.[”] Added. - - 305.2.1 for in[t]itiation into the Greek Removed. - - 306.34 the name of the Christ as the e[n/m]balmed Replaced. - mummy - - 306.47 With the Greek [t]erminal _s_ Restored. - - 307.30 our Christology is mummified mythology.” Removed. - - 309.2.1 [“]The word שיה _shiac_, Removed. - - 310.19 ([“]λεγόμενος,” surnamed “χρηστος.”) Added. - - 303.3.3 [(]here Socrates is the _Chréstos_) Added. - - 303.4.12 circle and solar year,[”] _sic_ - - 311.36 tran[s]gress> that law? Inserted. - - 313.1 while parasit[i]es eat slowly Removed. - - 317.9 in the [mechanicism] of the Universe _sic_ - - 317.13 pessimism is ro[u/o]ted in the recognition Replaced. - - 322.29 and that _[“] system_ Added. - - 326.22 from any obligatory duty.[”] Removed. - - 326.28 thrown the blame and responsibi[i]lty Removed. - - 327.55 whether in[ it] its dead letter, Removed. - - 330L.14 having di[r/s]burdened our heart Replaced. - - 332L.18 they disarm cri[c/t]icism Replaced. - - 333R.61 even altars unto Baal[”] Added. - - 334R.51 [“]where the women wove hangings for the Added. - grove” - - 335L.44 and the [“]Kaivalyanita.” Added. - - 334L.29 and by the famine....[’/”] Replaced. - - 349.32 knew that man to be a savage[.] Added. - - 351.36 recognised it as his own room[,/.] Replaced. - - 360.23 it was exceedingly solid and well fastened[.] Added. - - 361.20 [“]I may not readily understand you. Added. - - 366.13 were all in all to us![”] Added. - - 367.27 that reigneth over all![”] Added. - - 372.23 cannot subsist witho[n/u]t the spiritual force Inverted. - - 373.42 have themselves an organic form[,/.] Replaced. - - 375.8 —probably many[.] Added. - - 386.25 should he meet him in Heaven[,/.] Replaced. - - 387.25 [me] Ambrose’s sword _sic_ ? - - 389.34 [“/‘]thou> must be Replaced. - - 390.19 as you shall hear.[”] Added. - - 404.11 vegetable forms [a]s well? Restored. - - 406.30 from not[—/-]living matter.[’]” Replaced/Removed. - - 407.1.1 [“]missing link” Restored. - - 409.47 (actual or possible)[”] Added. - - 411.3 the root of [uo/ou]r present constitution Transposed. - - 412.19 in accepting the doct[r]ine of Atonement Inserted. - - 413.16 the[,] Church wishes the truth, Removed. - - 417.19 and transfer it [to ]the shoulders Inserted. - - 434.29 an hono[n/u]rable reputation Inverted. - - 436.1.14 to the [‘]Lord’ for a burnt-offering Restored. - - 437.19 must be the _d[’]evil_ worship _sic_ - - 447.35 they were set in[.] Added. - - 447.27 which was habitual with him[.] Added. - - 450.2 learned to surrender his love.[”] Added. - - 456.14 follow and s[ie/ei]ze her thoughts Transposed. - - 469.7 [“]No one said aught Added. - - 472.3.1 [“]breaks through the Brahmarandra _sic_ - - 474.5 three-fold r[h]ythm Inserted. - - 477.7 it would never [h/b]e his. Replaced. - - 477.27 by personal craving or desire[.] Added. - - 481.10 the quickest violet[.] Added. - - 484.10 the very ar[ô/o]ma of our thoughts Replaced. - - 486.5 the i[n]diosyncrasies of a nation Removed. - - 490.12 “Faith is the key of Christendom,[’/”] Replaced. - - 494.41 only a coun[f/t]erfeit Presentment Replaced. - - 495.23 _but for destruction_.[”] Added. - - 502.35 the Deit[r]y is either an anachronism, Removed. - - 502.39 in the tract entitle[s/d] “Autocentricism, or Replaced. - the Brain Theory of Life and Mind.” - - 503.10 which certifies it[s] own nomenal existence. Added. - - 503.13 the nöetic or hyloic basis[.] Added. - - 503.14 admits of sci[e]ntific research Inserted. - - 503.28 such states of rapture the relatio[u/n]s Replaced. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Lucifer, by Various - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LUCIFER *** - -***** This file should be named 60852-0.txt or 60852-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/0/8/5/60852/ - -Produced by KD Weeks and the Online Distributed Proofreading -Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from -images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |