This site focuses on Madame Blavatsky and her teaching - Theosophy. It features an introduction to Theosophy,              study aids, research tools, original text, supporting evidence, membership, and visitor interaction.


From A Modern Panarion


Articles by HPB

A MOST outrageous swindle was perpetrated upon the public last Sunday evening at the Boston Theatre. Some persons with no higher aspirations in the world than a lust for a few dollars to fill their pockets, depleted by unsuccessful cheap shows, advertised a "séance," and engaged as "mediums" some of the most impudent impostors with which the world is cursed. They furthermore abused public confidence by causing it to be understood that these people were to appear before the scientific commission at St. Petersburg.

Is it not about time that some Society in Boston should be sufficiently strong financially, and have members who will have the requisite energy to act in an emergency like this? Common sense would dictate what might be done, and a determined will would overcome all obstacles. Spiritualism needs a Vigilance Committee. Public opinion will justify any measures that will tend to check this trifling. "Up, and at them!" should be the watchword until we have rid society of these pests and their supporters.

The press of Boston are disposed to be fair towards Spiritualists. But if Spiritualists do not care enough for Spiritualism to defend it from tricksters who have not sufficient skill to merit them the title of jugglers, how can they expect any different treatment than that it is receiving?

As a proof of the sincerity of the Boston press and also in support and further explanation of the above we might mention that the following card, sent to all the morning dailies, was accepted and printed in Tuesday's edition.

Boston, July 19th, 1875.

SIR,—The undersigned desire to say that the persons who advertised a so-called spiritualistic exhibition at the Boston Theatre last evening were guilty of false representations to the public. We are alone empowered by the Academy of Sciences attached to the Imperial University of St. Petersburg, Russia, to select the mediums who shall be invited by that body to display their powers during the forthcoming scientific investigation of Spiritualism, and Mr. E. Gerry Brown, editor Spiritual Scientist, of this city, is our only authorized deputy.

Neither "F. Warren," "Prof. J. T. Bates," "Miss Luydam," "Mrs. S. Gould," nor "Miss Lillie Darling" has been selected, or is at all likely to be selected for that honour.

As this swindle may be again attempted, we desire to say, once for all, that no medium accepted by us will be obliged to exhibit his powers to earn money to defray his expenses, nor will any such exhibition be tolerated. The Imperial University of St. Petersburg makes its investigation in the interest of science—not to assist charlatans to give juggling performances in theatres, upon the strength of our certificates.





From H. P. Blavatsky Theosophical Articles, Vol. III


Articles by HPB

[The subject matter of the present article has not been chosen from any desire of "finding fault" with the Christian religion, as LUCIFER is often accused of doing. No special animosity is felt towards popery any more than against any other existing dogmatic and ritualistic faith. We merely hold that "there is no higher religion than truth." Hence, being incessantly attacked by the Christians--among whom none are so bitter and contemptuous as the Romanists--who call us "idolaters" and "heathens," and otherwise denounce us, it is necessary that at times something should be said in our defence, and truth reestablished.

The Theosophists are accused of believing in Astrology, and the Devas (Dhyan Chohans) of the Hindus and Northern Buddhists. A too impulsive missionary in the Central Provinces of India has actually called us "Astrolaters," "Sabians" and "devil-worshippers." This, as usual, is an unfounded calumny and a misrepresentation. No theosophist, no Occultist in the true sense of the word has ever worshipped Devas, Nats, Angels or even planetary spirits. Recognition of the actual existence of such Beings--which, however exalted, are still gradually evolved creatures and finite--and even reverence for some of them is not worship. The latter is an elastic word, one that has been made threadbare by the poverty of the English tongue. We address a magistrate as his "worship," but it can hardly be said that we pay to him divine honours. A mother often worships her children, a husband his wife, and vice versa, but none of these prays to the object of his worship. But in neither case does it apply to the Occultists. An Occultist's reverence for certain high Spirits may be very great in some cases; aye, perhaps even as great as the reverence felt by some Christians for their Archangels Michael and Gabriel and their (St.) George of Cappadocia--the learned purveyor of Constantine's armies. But it stops there. For the Theosophists these planetary "angels" occupy no higher place than that which Virgil assigns them:

They boast ethereal vigour and are form'd
From seeds of heavenly birth,

as does also every mortal. Each and all are occult potencies having sway over certain attributes of nature. And, if once attracted to a mortal, they do help him in certain things. Yet, on the whole, the less one has to do with them the better.

Not so with the Roman Catholics, our pious detractors. The Papists worship them and have rendered to them divine homage from the beginning of Christianity to this day, and in the full acceptation of the italicised words, as this article will prove. Even for the Protestants, the Angels in general, if not the Seven Angels of the Stars particularly--are "Harbingers of the Most High" and "Ministering Spirits" to whose protection they appeal, and who have their distinct place in the Book of Common Prayer.

The fact that the Star and Planetary Angels are worshipped by the Papists is not generally known. The cult had many vicissitudes. It was several times abolished, then again permitted. It is the short history of its growth, its last re-establishment and the recurrent efforts to proclaim this worship openly, of which a brief sketch is here attempted. This worship may be regarded for the last few years as obsolete, yet to this day it was never abolished. Therefore it will now be my pleasure to prove that if anyone deserves the name of "idolatrous," it is not the Theosophists, Occultists, Kabalists and Astrologers, but, indeed, most of the Christians; those Roman Catholics, who, besides the Star-angels, worship a Kyriel of more or less problematical saints and the Virgin Mary, of whom their Church has made a regular goddess.

The short bits of history that follow are extracted from various trustworthy sources, such as the Roman Catholics will find it rather difficult to gainsay or repudiate. For our authorities are (a), various documents in the archives of the Vatican; (b), sundry works by pious and well-known Roman Catholic writers, Ultramontanes to the backbone--lay and ecclesiastical authors; and finally (c), a Papal Bull, than which no better evidence could be found.]

IN the middle of the VIIIth century of the Christian era the very notorious Archbishop Adalbert of Magdeburg, famous as few in the annals of magic, appeared before his judges. He was charged with, and ultimately convicted--by the second Council of Rome presided over by Pope Zacharia--of using during his performances of ceremonial magic the names of the "seven Spirits"--then at the height of their power in the Church--among others, that of URIEL, with the help of whom he had succeeded in producing his greatest phenomena. As can be easily shown, the church is not against magic proper, but only against those magicians who fail to conform to her methods and rules of evocation. However, as the wonders wrought by the Right Reverend Sorcerer were not of a character that would permit of their classification among "miracles by the grace, and to the glory of God," they were declared unholy. Moreover, the Archangel URIEL (lux et ignis) having been compromised by such exhibitions, his name had to be discredited. But, as such a disgrace upon one of the "Thrones" and "Messengers of the Most High" would have reduced the number of these Jewish Saptarishis to only six, and thus have thrown into confusion the whole celestial hierarchy, a very clever and crafty subterfuge was resorted to. It was, however, neither new, nor has it proved very convincing or efficacious.

It was declared that Bishop Adalbert's Uriel, the "fire of God," was not the Archangel mentioned in the second Book of Esdras; nor was he the glorious personage so often named in the magical books of Moses--especially in the 6th and 7th. The sphere or planet of this original Uriel was said, by Michael Glycas the Byzantine, to be the Sun. How then could this exalted being-the friend and companion of Adam in Eden before his fall, and, later, the chum of Seth and Enoch, as all pious Christians know-how could he ever have given a helping hand to sorcery? Never, never! the idea alone was absurd.

Therefore, the Uriel so revered by the Fathers of the Church, remained as unassailable and as immaculate as ever. It was a devil of the same name--an obscure devil, one must think, since he is nowhere mentioned--who had to pay the penalty of Bishop Adalbert's little transactions in black magic. This "bad" Uriel is, as a certain tonsured advocate has tried hard to insinuate, connected with a certain significant word of occult nature, used by and known only to Masons of a very high degree. Ignorant of the "word" itself, however, the defender has most gloriously failed to prove his version.

Such whitewashing of the archangel's character was of course necessary in view of the special worship paid to him. St. Ambrosius had chosen Uriel as a patron and paid him almost divine reverence. 1 [Footnote 1.  De fide ad gratiam, Book III  ] Again the famous Father Gastaldi, the Dominican monk, writer and Inquisitor, had proven in his curious work "On the Angels" (De Angelis) that the worship of the "Seven Spirits" by the Church had been and was legal in all the ages; and that it was necessary for the moral support and faith of the children of the (Roman) Church. In short that he who should neglect these gods was as bad as any "heathen" who did not.

Though sentenced and suspended, Bishop Adalbert had a formidable party in Germany, one that not only defended and supported the sorcerer himself, but also the disgraced Archangel. Hence, the name of Uriel was left in the missals after the trial, the "Throne" merely remaining "under suspicion." In accordance with her admirable policy the Church having declared that the "blessed Uriel," had nought to do with the "accursed Uriel" of the Kabalists, the matter rested there.

To show the great latitude offered to such subterfuges, the occult tenets about the celestial Hosts have only to be remembered. The world of Being begins with the Spiritual Fire (or Sun) and its seven "Flames" or Rays. These "Sons of Light," called the "multiple" because, allegorically speaking they belong to, and lead a simultaneous existence in heaven and on earth, easily furnished a handle to the Church to hang her dual Uriel upon. Moreover, Devas, Dhyan-Chohans, Gods and Archangels are all identical and are made to change their Protean forms, names and positions, ad libitum[Translation: At one's pleasure. -BNet ].As the sidereal gods of the Sabians became the kabalistic and talmudistic angels of the Jews with their esoteric names unaltered, so they passed bag and baggage into the Christian Church as the archangels, exalted only in their office.

These names are their "mystery" titles. So mysterious are they, indeed, that the Roman Catholics themselves are not sure of them, now that the Church, in her anxiety to hide their humble origin, has changed and altered them about a dozen times. This is what the pious de Mirville confesses:

"To speak with precision and certainty, as we might like to, about everything in connection with their (the angels') names and attributes is not an easy task. . . . For when one has said that these Spirits are the seven assistants that surround the throne of the Lamb and form its seven horns; that the famous seven-branched candlestick of the Temple was their type and symbol . . . when we have shown them figured in Revelation by the seven stars in the Saviour's hand, or by the angels letting loose the seven plagues--we shall but have stated once more one of those incomplete truths which we have to handle with such caution." (Of the Spirits before their Fall.)

Here the author utters a great truth. He would have uttered one still greater, though, had he added that no truth, upon any subject whatever, has been ever made complete by the Church. Otherwise, where would be the mystery so absolutely necessary to the authority of the ever incomprehensible dogmas of the Holy "Bride"?

These "Spirits" are called primarii principes. But what these first Principles are in reality is not explained. In the first centuries of Christianity the Church would not do so; and in this one she knows of them no more than her faithful lay sons do. She has lost the secret.

The question concerning the definite adoption of names for these angels, de Mirville tells us--"has given rise to controversies that have lasted for centuries. To this day these seven names are a mystery."

Yet they are found in certain missals and in the secret documents at the Vatican, along with the astrological names known to many. But as the Kabalists, and among others Bishop Adalbert, have used some of them, the Church will not accept these titles, though she worships the creatures. The usual names accepted are Mikael, the "quis ut Deus," the "like unto God"; GABRIEL, the "strength (or power) of God"; RAPHAEL, or "divine virtue"; URIEL, "God's light and fire"; SCALTIEL, the speech of God'; JEHUDIEL, the "praise of God" and BARACHIEL, the ' blessing of God." These "seven" are absolutely canonical, but they are not the true mystery names--the magical POTENCIES. And even among the "substitutes," as just shown, Uriel has been greatly compromised and the three last enumerated are pronounced "suspicious." Nevertheless, though nameless, they are still worshipped. Nor is it true to say that no trace of these three names--so "suspicious"--is anywhere found in the Bible, for they are mentioned in certain of the old Hebrew scrolls. One of them is named in Chapter XVI of Genesis--the angel who appears to Hagar; and all the three appear as "the Lord" (the Elohim) to Abraham in the plains of Mamre, as the "three men" who announced to Sarai the birth of Isaac (Genesis, XVIII). "Jehudiel," moreover, is distinctly named in Chapter XXIII of Exodus, as the angel in whom was "the name" (praise in the original) of God (Vide verse 21). It is through their "divine attributes," which have led to the formation of the names, that these archangels may be identified by an easy esoteric method of transmutation with the Chaldean great gods and even with the Seven Manus and the Seven Rishis of India. 2 [Footnote 2. He who knows anything of the Purânas and their allegories, knows that the Rishis therein as well as the Manus are Sons of God, of Brahmâ, and themselves gods; that they become men and then, as Saptarishi, they turn into stars and constellations. Finally that they are first 7, then 10, then 14, and finally 21. The occult meaning is evident. ] They are the Seven Sabian Gods, and the Seven Seats (Thrones) and Virtues of the Kabalists; and now they have become with the Catholics, their "Seven Eyes of the Lord," and the "Seven Thrones," instead of "Seats."

Both Kabalists and "Heathen" must feel quite flattered to thus see their Devas and Rishis become the "Ministers Plenipotentiary" of the Christian God. And now the narrative may be continued unbroken.

Until about the XVth century after the misadventure of Bishop Adalbert, the names of only the first three Archangels out of the seven stood in the Church in their full odour of sanctity. The other four remained ostracised--as names.

Whoever has been in Rome must have visited the privileged temple of the Seven Spirits, especially built for them by Michael Angelo: the famous church known as "St. Mary of the Angels." Its history is curious but very little known to the public that frequents it. It is worthy, however, of being recorded.

In 1460, there appeared in Rome a great "Saint," named Amadœus. He was a nobleman from Lusitania, who already in Portugal had become famous for his prophecies and beatific visions. 3 [Footnote 3.  He died at Rome in 1482. ] During one of such he had a revelation. The seven Archangels appeared to the holy man, so beloved by the Pope that Sixtus IV had actually permitted him to build on the site of St. Peter in Montorio a Franciscan monastery. And having appeared they revealed to him their genuine bona fide mystery names. The names used by the Church were substitutes, they said. So they were, and the "angels" spoke truthfully. Their business with Amadœus was a modest request. They demanded to be legally recognized under their legitimate patronymics, to receive public worship and have a temple of their own. Now the Church in her great wisdom had declined these names from the first, as being those of Chaldean gods, and had substituted for them astrological aliases. This then, could not be done, as "they were names of demons" explains Baronius. But so were the "substitutes" in Chaldea before they were altered for a purpose in the Hebrew Angelology. And if they are names of demons, asks pertinently de Mirville, "why are they yet given to Christians and Roman Catholics at baptism?" The truth is that if the last four enumerated are demon-names, so must be those of Michael, Gabriel and Raphael.

But the "holy" visitors were a match for the Church in obstinacy. At the same hour that Amadœus had his vision at Rome, in Sicily, at Palermo, another wonder was taking place. A miraculously-painted picture of the Seven Spirits, was as miraculously exhumed from under the ruins of an old chapel. On the painting the same seven mystery names that were being revealed at that hour to Amadoeus were also found inscribed "under the portrait of each angel," 4 [Footnote 4. Des Esprits, &c., par de Mirville. ] says the chronicler.

Whatever might be in this our age of unbelief the feelings of the great and learned leaders of various psychic and telepathic societies on this subject, Pope Sixtus IV was greatly impressed by the coincidence. He believed in Amadœus as implicitly as Mr. Brudenel believed in the Abyssinian prophet, "Herr Paulus." 5 [Footnote 5.  "Herr Paulus"-the no less miraculous production of Mr. Walter Besant's rather muddled and very one-sided fancy. ] But this was by no means the only "coincidence" of the day. The Holy Roman and Apostolic Church was built on such miracles, and continues to stand on them now as on the rock of Truth; for God has ever sent to her timely miracles. 6 [Footnote 6. En passant (Translation: In passing -BNet) -a remark may be made and a query propounded:

The "miracles" performed in the bosom of Mother Church-from the apostolic down to the ecclesiastical miracles at Lourdes-if not more remarkable than those attributed to "Herr Paulus," are at any rate  far more wide-reaching, hence, more pernicious in their result upon the human mind. Either both kinds are possible, or both are due to fraud and dangerous hypnotic and magnetic powers possessed by some men. Now Mr. W. Besant evidently tries to impress upon his readers that his novel was written in the interests of that portion of society which is so easily befooled by the other. And if so, why then not have traced all such phenomena to their original and primeval source, i.e., belief in the possibility of supernatural occurrences because of the inculated belief in the MIRACLES in the Bible, and their continuation by the Church? No Abyssinian prophet, as no "occult philosopher," has ever made such large claims to "miracle" and divine help-and no Peter's pence expected either-as the "Bride of Christ"-she, of Rome. Why has not then our author, since he was so extremely anxious to save the millions of England from delusion, and so very eager to expose the pernicious means used-why has he not tried to first explode the greater humbug, before he ever touched the minor tricks-if any? Let him first explain to the British public the turning of water into wine and the resurrection of Lazarus on the half hypnotic and half jugglery and fraud hypothesis. For, if one set of wonders may be explained by blind belief and mesmerism why not the other? Or is it because the Bible miracles believed in by every Protestant and Catholic (with the divine miracles at Lourdes thrown into the bargain the latter) cannot be as easily handled by an author who desires to remain popular, as those of the "occult philosopher" and the  spiritual medium? Indeed, no courage, no fearless defiance of the consequences are required  to denounce the helpless and now very much scared professional medium. But all these qualifications and an ardent love of truth into the bargain, are absolutely necessary if one would beard Mrs. Grundy in her den. For this the traducers of the "Esoteric Buddhists" are too pruent and wily. They only seek cheap popularity with the scoffer and the materialist. Well, sure they are, that no professional medium will ever dare call them wholesale slanderers to their faces, or seek redress from them so long as the law againg palmisty is staring him in the face. As to the "Esoteric Budhhiss" or "Occult Philosopher," there is still less danger from this quarter. The contempt of the latter for all the would-be traducers is absolute and it requires more than the clumsy denunciations of a novelist to disturb them. And why should they feel annoyed? As they are neither professional prophets, nor do they benefit by St. Peter's pence, the most malicious calumny can only make them laugh. Mr. Walter Besant, however, has said a great truth in his novel, a true pearl of foresight, dropped on a heap of mire: the "occult philosopher" does not propose to "hide his light under a bushel." ] Therefore, when also, on that very same day, an old prophecy written in very archaic Latin, and referring to both the find and the revelation was discovered at Pisa--it produced quite a commotion among the faithful. The prophecy foretold, you see, the revival of the "Planetary-Angel" worship for that period. Also that during the reign of Pope Clement VII, the convent of St. François de Paul would be raised on the emplacement of the little ruined chapel. "The event occurred as predicted," boasts de Mirville, forgetting that the Church had made the prediction true herself, by following the command implied in it. Yet this is called a "prophecy" to this day.

But it was only in the XVIth century that the Church consented at last to comply on every point with the request of her "high-born" celestial petitioners.

At that time though there was hardly a church or chapel in Italy without a copy of the miraculous picture in painting or mosaic, and that actually, in 1516, a splendid "temple to the seven spirits" had been raised and finished near the ruined chapel at Palermo--still the "angels" failed to be satisfied. In the words of their chronicler--"the blessed spirits were not contented with Sicily alone, and secret prayers. They wanted a world-wide worship and the whole Catholic world to recognize them publicly."

Heavenly denizens themselves, as it seems, are not quite free from the ambition and the vanities of our material plane! This is what the ambitious "Rectors" devised to obtain that which they wanted.

Antonio Duca, another seer (in the annals of the Church of Rome) had been just appointed rector of the Palermo "temple of the seven spirits." About that period, he began to have the same beatific visions as Amadrus had. The Archangels were now urging the Popes through him to recognize them, and to establish a regular and a universal worship in their own names, just as it was before Bishop Adalbert's scandal. They insisted upon having a special temple built for them alone, and they wanted it upon the ancient site of the famous Thermæ of Diocletian. To the erection of these Thermæ, agreeably with tradition, 40,000 Christians and 10,000 martyrs had been condemned, and helped in this task by such famous "Saints" as Marcellus and Thraso. Since then, however, as stated in Bull LV by the Pope Pius IV, "this den had remained set apart for the most profane usages and demon (magic?) rites."

But as it appears from sundry documents, all did not go quite as smooth as the "blessed spirits" would have liked, and the poor Duca had a hard time of it. Notwithstanding the strong protection of the Colonna families who used all their influence with Pope Paul III, and the personal request of Marguerite of Austria, the daughter of Charles Vth, "the seven spirits" could not be satisfied, for the same mysterious (and to us very clear) reasons, though propitiated and otherwise honoured in every way. The difficult mission of Duca, in fact, was crowned with success only thirty-four years later. Ten years before, however, namely in 1551, the preparatory purification of the Thermæ had been ordered by Pope Julius III, and a first church had been built under the name of "St. Mary of the Angels." But the "Blessed Thrones," feeling displeased with its name, brought on a war during which this temple was plundered and destroyed, as if instead of glorified Archangels they had been maleficent kabalistic Spooks.

After this, they went on appearing to seers and saints, with greater frequency than before, and clamoured even more loudly for a special place of worship. They demanded the re-erection on the same spot (the Thermæ) of a temple which should be called the "Church of the Seven Angels."

But there was the same difficulty as before. The Popes had pronounced the original titles demon-names, i.e., those of Pagan gods, and to introduce them into the church service would have been fatal. The "mystery names" of the seven angels could not be given. True enough, when the old "miraculous" picture with the seven names on it had been found, these names had been freely used in the church services. But, at the period of the Renaissance, Pope Clement XI had ordered a special report to be made on them as they stood on the picture. It was a famous astronomer of that day, a Jesuit, named Joseph Biancini, who was entrusted with this delicate mission. The result to which the inquest led, was as unexpected as it was fatal to the worshippers of the seven Sabian gods; the Pope, while commanding that the picture should be preserved, ordered the seven angelic names to be carefully rubbed out. And "though these names are traditional," and "although they have naught to do with," and are "very different from the names used by Adalbert" (the Bishop-magician of Magdeburg), as the chronicler cunningly adds, yet even their mention was forbidden in the holy churches of Rome.

Thus affairs went on from 1527 till 1561; the Rector trying to satisfy the orders of his seven "guides,"--the church fearing to adopt even the Chaldean substitutes for the "mystery-names" as they had been so "desecrated by magical practices." We are not told, however, why the mystery-names, far less known than their substitutes have ever been, should not have been given out if the blessed "Thrones" enjoyed the smallest confidence. But, it must have been "small" indeed, since one finds the "Seven Archangels" demanding their restitution for 34 years, and refusing positively to be called by any other name, and the church still deaf to their desires. The Occultists do not conceal the reason why they have ceased to use them: they are dangerously magical. But why should the Church fear them? Have not the Apostles, and Peter pre-eminently, been told "whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven," and were they not given power over every demon known and unknown? Nevertheless, some of the mystery names may be still found along with their substitutes in old Roman missals printed in 1563. There is one in the Barberini library with the whole mass-service in it, and the forbidden truly Sabian names of the seven "great gods" flashing out ominously hither and thither.

The "gods" lost patience once more. Acting in a truly Jehovistic spirit with their "stiff-necked" worshippers, they sent a plague. A terrible epidemic of obsession and possession broke out in 1553, "when almost all Rome found itself possessed by the devil," says de Mirville (without explaining whether the clergy were included). Then only Duca's wish was realized. His seven Inspirers were invoked in their own names, and "the epidemic ceased as by enchantment, the blessed ones," adds the chronicler, "proving by the divine powers they possessed, once more, that they had nothing in common with the demons of the same name,"--i.e., the Chaldean gods. 7 [Footnote 7.  But they had proved thier power earlier by sending the war, the destruction of the church, and finally the epidemic; and this does not look very angelic-to an Occultist.  ]

"Then Michael Angelo was summoned in all haste by Paul IV to the Vatican." His magnificent plan was accepted and the building of the former church begun. Its construction lasted over three years. In the archives of this now celebrated edifice, one can read that: "the narrative of the miracles that occurred during that period could not be undertaken, as it was one incessant miracle of three years' duration." In the presence of all his cardinals, Pope Paul lV ordered that the seven names, as originally written on the picture, should be restored, and inscribed around the large copy from it that surmounts to this day the high altar.

The admirable temple was consecrated to the Seven Angels in 1561. The object of the Spirits was reached; three years later, nearly simultaneously, Michael Angelo and Antonio Duca both died. They were no longer wanted.

Duca was the first person buried in the church for the erection of which he had fought the best part of his life and finally procured for his heavenly patrons. On his tomb the summary of the revelations obtained by him, as also the catalogue of the prayers and invocations, of the penances and fasts used as means of getting the "blessed" revelations and more frequent visits from the "Seven"--are engraved. In the vestry a sight of the documents attesting to, and enumerating some of the phenomena of "the incessant miracle of three years' duration" may be obtained for a small fee. The record of the "miracles" bears the imprimatur of a Pope and several Cardinals, but it still lacks that of the Society for Psychic Research. The "Seven Angels" must be needing the latter badly, as without it their triumph will never be complete. Let us hope that the learned Spookical Researchers will send their "smart boy" to Rome at an early day, and that the "blessed ones" may find at Cambridge--a Duca.

But what became of the "mystery names" so cautiously used and what of the new ones? First of all came the substitution of the name of Eudiel for one of the Kabalistic names. Just one hundred years later, all the seven names suddenly disappeared, by order of the Cardinal Albitius. In the old and venerable Church of Santa Maria della Pieta on the Piazza Colonna, the "miraculous" painting of the Seven Archangels may be still seen, but the names have been scratched out and the places repainted. Sic transit gloria [Translation:  Thus passes the glory -BNet]. A little while after that the mass and vesper services of the "Seven" were once more eliminated from the missals used, notwithstanding that "they are quite distinct" from those of the "planetary Spirits" who used to help Bishop Adalbert. But as "the robe does not really make the monk," so the change of names cannot prevent the individuals that had them from being the same as they were before. They are still worshipped and this is all that my article aims to prove.

Will this be denied? In that case I have to remind the readers hat so late as in 1825, a Spanish grandee supported by the Archbishop of Palermo made an attempt before Leo XII for the simultaneous re-establishment of the service and names. The Pope granted the Church service but refused the permission to use the old names. 8 [Footnote 8. This is quoted from the volumes of the Marquis de Mirville's "Pneumatologie des Esprits," Vol. II, p. 388. A more rabid papist and ultramontane having never existed, his testimony can hardly be suspected. He seems to glory in this idolatry and is loud in demanding its public and universal restoration.  ]

"This service, perfected and amplified by order of Paul IV, the minutes of which exist to this day at the Vatican and the Minerva, remained in force during the whole pontificate of Leo X." he Jesuits were those who rejoiced the most at the resurrection of the old worship, in view of the prodigious help they received from it, as it ensured the success of their proselytising efforts in e Philippine Islands. Pope Pius V conceded the same "divine service" to Spain, saying in his Bull, that "one could never exalt too much these seven Rectors of the world, figured by the SEVEN PLANETS," and that . . . "it looked consoling and augured well for this century, that by the grace of God, the cult of these seven ardent lights, and these seven stars, was regaining all its lustre in e Christian republic." 9[Footnote 9.  p. 358 ibid. Vide infra. ]

The same "holy Pope permitted moreover to the nuns of Matritensis to establish the fête of JEHUDIEL the patron of their convent." Whether another less pagan name has now been substituted it we are not informed--nor does it in the least matter.

In 1832 the same demand in a petition to spread the worship of the "Seven Spirits of God," was reiterated, endorsed this time by eighty-seven bishops and thousands of officials with high-sounding names in the Church of Rome. Again, in 1858, Cardinal Patrizzi and King Ferdinand II in the name of all the people of Italy reiterated their petition; and again, finally, in 1862. Thus, the Church services in honour of the seven "Spirit-Stars" have never been abrogated since 1825. To this day they are in full vigour in Palermo, in Spain, and even in Rome at "St. Mary of the Angels" and the "Gésu"--though entirely suppressed everywhere else; all this "because of Adalbert's heresy," de Mirville and the other supporters of Star-Angel worship are pleased to say. In reality there is no reason but the one already disclosed for it. Even the seven substitutes, especially the last four, have been too openly connected with black magic and astrology.

Writers of the de Mirville type are in despair. Not daring to blame the Church, they vent their wrath upon the old Alchemists and Rosicrucians. They clamour for the restitution of a public worship notwithstanding; and the imposing association formed since 1862 in Italy, Bavaria, Spain and elsewhere for the reestablishment of the cult of the Seven Spirits in all its fullness and in all Catholic Europe, gives hope that in a few years more the Seven Rishis of India now happily domiciled in the constellation of the Great Bear will become by the grace and will of some infallible Pontiff of Rome the legal and honoured divine patrons of Christendom.

And why not, since (St.) George is to this day, "the patron Saint of not only Holy Russia, Protestant Germany, fairy Venice, but also of merry England, whose soldiers,"--says W. M. Braithwaite, 10 [Footnote 10.  "St. George for Merry England," by W. M. Braithwaite. Masonic Monthly, No. 2. ] --"would uphold his prestige with their heart's blood." And surely our "Seven gods" cannot be worse than was the rascally George of Cappadocia during his lifetime!

Hence, with the courage of true believers, the Christian defenders of the Seven Star-Angels deny nothing, at any rate they keep silent whenever accused of rendering divine honours to Chaldean and other gods. They even admit the identity and proudly confess to the charge of star-worshipping. The accusation has been thrown many a time by the French Academicians into the teeth of their late leader, the Marquis de Mirville, and this is what he writes in reply:

"We are accused of mistaking stars for angels. The charge is acquiring such a wide notoriety that we are forced to answer it very seriously. It is impossible that we should try to dissimulate it without failing in frankness and courage, since this pretended mistake is repeated incessantly in the Scriptures as in our theology. We shall examine . . . this opinion hitherto so accredited, today discredited, and which attributes rightly to our SEVEN PRINCIPAL SPIRITS the rulership, not of the seven known planets, with which we are reproached, but of the seven PRINCIPAL planets11--which is quite a different thing." 12 [Footnote 12.Pneumatologie des Esprits, Vol. II. Memoire adressé aux Academies, p. 359, et seq. ]

And the author hastens to cite the authority of Babinet, the astronomer, who sought to prove in an able article of the Revue des Deux Mondes (May, 1885), that in reality besides the earth we had only SEVEN big planets.

The "seven principal planets" is another confession to the acceptance of a purely occult tenet. Every planet according to the esoteric doctrine is in its composition a Septenary like man, in its principles. That is to say, the visible planet is the physical body of the sidereal being the Atma or Spirit of which is the Angel, or Rishi, or Dhyan-Chohan, or Deva, or whatever we call it. This belief as the occultists will see (read in Esoteric Buddhism about the constitution of the planets) is thoroughly occult. It is a tenet of the Secret Doctrine--minus its idolatrous element--pure and simple. As taught in the Church and her rituals, however, and especially, as practised, it is ASTROLATRY as pure and as simple. There is no need to show here the difference between teaching, or theory, and practice in the holy Roman Catholic Church. The words "Jesuit" and "Jesuitism" cover the whole ground. The Spirit of Truth has departed ages ago--if it has ever been near it--from the Church of Rome. At this, the Protestant Church, so full of brotherly spirit and love for her sister Church, will say, Amen. The Dissenter, whose heart is as full of the love of Jesus as of hatred towards Ritualism and its mother Popery, will chuckle.

In the editorial of the Times for November 7, 1866, stands "A Terrible Indictment" against the Protestants, which says:

Under the influence of the Episcopal Bench, all the studies connected with theology have withered, until English Biblical critics are the scorn of foreign scholars. Whenever we take up the work of a theologian who is likely to be a Dean or a Bishop, we find, not an earnest inquirer setting forth the results of honest research, but merely an advocate, who, we can perceive, has begun his work with the fixed determination of proving black white in favour of his own traditional system.

If the Protestants do not recognize the "Seven Angels," nor, while refusing them divine worship, do they feel ashamed and afraid of their names, as the Roman Catholics do, on the other hand they are guilty of "Jesuitism" of another kind, just as bad. For, while professing to believe the Scriptures a direct Revelation from God, not one sentence of which should be altered under the penalty of eternal damnation, they yet tremble and cower before the discoveries of science, and try to pander to their great enemy. Geology, Anthropology, Ethnology and Astronomy, are to them what Uriel, Scaltiel, Jehudiel and Barachiel are to the Roman Catholic Church. It is six of one and half a dozen of the other. And since neither one nor the other of the two religions will abstain from anathematizing, slandering and persecuting Magic, Occultism, and even Theosophy, it is but just and proper that in their turn the Students of the Sacred Science of old should retort at last, and keep on telling the truth fearlessly to the faces of both.

[Translation: Truth is great and will prevail -BNet]

H. P. Blavatsky

Lucifer, July, 1888


From H. P. Blavatsky Theosophical Articles, Vol. III


Articles by HPB


Madam,--Since you have published a posthumous letter of my Master and beloved friend, the late Éliphas Lévi, I think it would be agreeable to you to publish, if judged suitable, a few extracts of the many manuscripts in my possession, written expressly for, and given to, me by my ever-regretted MASTER.

To begin, I send you--"Stray Thoughts on Death and Satan" from his pen.

I cannot close this letter without expressing the deep indignation aroused in me by the base diatribes published in the London Spiritualist against your Society and its members. Every honest heart is irritated at such unfair treatment, especially when proceeding from a man of honour as Mr. Harrison (Editor of the Spiritualist) who admits in his journal anonymous contributions that are tantamount to libels.

With the utmost respect, I remain,
Madam, Yours Devotedly,


Marseilles, July 29, 1881

Editor's Note.--It is with feelings of sincere gratitude that we thank Baron Spadalieri for his most valuable contribution. The late Éliphas Lévi was the most learned Kabalist and Occultist of our age, in Europe, and every thing from his pen is precious to us, in so far as it helps us to compare notes with the Eastern Occult doctrines and, by the light thrown upon both, to prove to the world of Spiritualists and Mystics, that the two systems--the Eastern-Aryan, and the Western or the Chaldeo-Jewish Kabala--are one in their principal metaphysical tenets. Only, while the Eastern Occultists have never lost the key to their esotericism, and are daily verifying and elaborating their doctrines by personal experiments, and by the additional light of modern science, the Western or Jewish Kabalists, besides having been misled for centuries by the introduction of foreign elements in it such as Christian dogmas, dead-letter interpretations of the Bible &c., have most undeniably lost the true key to the esoteric meaning of Simeon Ben Jochai's Kabala, and are trying to make up for the loss, by interpretations emanating from the depths of their imagination and inner consciousness. Such is evidently the case with J. K., the self-styled London "Adept," whose anonymous and powerless vilifications of the Theosophical Society and its members are pertinently regarded by Baron Spadalieri as "tantamount to libels." But we have to be charitable. That poor descendant of the Biblical Levites--as we know him to be--in his pigmy efforts to upset the Theosophists, has most evidently fractured his brain against one of his own "occult" sentences. There is one especially in the Spiritualist (July 22), to which the attention of the mystically inclined is drawn further down as this paragraph is most probably the cause of the sad accident which befell so handsome a head. Be it as it may, but it now disables the illustrious J.K. from communicating "scientifically his knowledge" and forces him at the same time to remain, as he expresses it, "in an incommunicable ecstatic state." For it is in no other "state" that our great modern adept, the literary man of such a "calibre"* [Footnote * To accuse a literary man of my calibre of ignorance, is as amusing a mistake as it would be have been to charge Porson of ignorance of Greek," he writes in the Spiritualist of July 8..."The occult is my special subject, and ...there is but little... that I do not know," he adds. Now, the above sentence settles the question at rest with us. Not only an "adept" but no layman or profane of the most widely recognized intellect and ability, would have ever dared, under the penalty of being henceforth and forever regarded as the most ridiculously conceited of --Æsopus' heores -- to use suc a sentence when speaking of himself! So stupidly arrogant, and cowardly impertinent has he shown himself behind the shield of his initials to far better and more worthy men than himself, in his transparent attacks upon them in the above-named Spiritualist--that it is the first and certainly the last time that we do him the honour of noticing him in these columns. Our journal has a nobler task, we trust, than to be polemizing with those, whom in vulgar parlance the world generally terms --bullies--Ed. Theos.  ] that to suspect him of "ignorance" becomes equal, in audacity, to throwing suspicion upon the virtue of Caesar's wife--could possibly have written the following lines, intended by him, we believe, as a lucid and clear exposition of his own psycho-Kabalistic lore as juxtaposed to the "hard words," "outlandish verbiage," "moral and philosophical platitudes," and "jaw-breakers" of "the learned Theosophists."

These are the "gems of occult wisdom" of the illustrious Jewish Kabalist who, like a bashful violet, hides his occult learning under two modest initials.

"In every human creature there lies latent in the involitional part of the being a sufficient quantity of the omniscient, the absolute. To induce the latent absolute, which is the involitional part of our volitional conscious being, to become manifest, it is essential that the volitional part of our being should become latent. After the preparatory purification from acquired depravities, a kind of introversion has to take place; the involitional has to become volitional, by the volitional becoming involitional. When the conscious becomes semi-unconscious, the, to us, formerly unconscious becomes fully conscious. The particle of the omniscient that is within us, the vital and growing, sleepless, involitional, occult or female principle being allowed to express itself in the volitional, mental, manifest, or masculine part of the human being, while the latter remains in a state of perfect passivity, the two formerly dissevered parts become re-united as one holy (wholly) perfect being, and then the divine manifestation is inevitable." Very luckily, J.K. gives us himself the key to this grandiloquent gush: "necessarily" he adds, "this is only safely practicable while living in uncompromisingly firm purity, for otherwise there is danger of unbalancement--insanity, or a questionable form of mediumship."

The italics are ours. Evidently with our immaculate "adept" the "involitional, occult or female principle" was not allowed to express itself in the volitional mental, manifest, or masculine part" of his being, and--behold the results!!

For the edification of our Hindu readers, who are unprogressive enough to refuse reading the lucubrations of "J.K.," or follow the mental "grand trapeze" performed by this remarkable Adept" on the columns of the Spiritualist, we may add that in the same article he informs his English readers that it is "Hindu mystification, acting on Western credulity" which "brought out the Theosophical Society." "Hindu philosophy" according to that great light of the nineteenth century is no "philosophy" but rather mysticism." . . . "Following the track of the mystifying and mystified Hindus they (the Theosophists) consider the four above faculties (Sidhis of Krishna) Anima, Mahima, Laghima and Garima to be the power they (we) have to strive for." "Indeed, what a ludicrous confusion of effect with cause"!

The fracture of the brain must have been serious indeed. Let us hope that timely and repeated lotions of "Witch-Hazel" or "the Universal Magic Balm" will have its good effects. Meanwhile, we turn the attention of our Hindu readers and students of Occultism to the identity of the doctrines taught by Éliphas Lévi (who, too, is contemptuously sneered at, and sent by the "Adept" to keep company with "Brothers," Yogis, and "Fakirs") in every essential and vital point with those of our Eastern initiates.




Death is the necessary dissolution of imperfect combinations. It is the re-absorption of the rough outline of individual life into the great work of universal life; only the perfect is immortal.

It is a bath in oblivion. It is the fountain of youth where on one side plunges old age, and whence on the other issues infancy.1 [Footnote 1.Rebirth of the Ego after death, The Eastern, and especially Buddhistic doctrine of the evolution of the new, out of the old Ego.--Ed. Theos  ]

Death is the transfiguration of the living; corpses are but the dead leaves of the Tree of Life which will still have all its leaves in the spring. The resurrection of men resembles eternally these leaves.

Perishable forms are conditioned by immortal types.

All who have lived upon earth, live there still in new exemplars of their types, but the souls which have surpassed their type receive elsewhere a new form based upon a more perfect type, as they mount ever on the ladder of worlds;2 [Footnote 2. From one loka to the other; from a positive world of causes and activity, to a negative world of effects and passivity. --Ed. Theos.  ] the bad exemplars are broken, and their matter returned into the general mass. 3 [Footnote 3. Into Cosmic matter, when they necessarily lose their self-consciousness or individuality or are annihilated, as the Eastern Kabalists say. --Ed. Theos  ]

Our souls are as it were a music, of which our bodies are the instruments. The music exists without the instruments, but it cannot make itself heard without a material intermediary; the immaterial can neither be conceived nor grasped.

Man in his present existence only retains certain predispositions from his past existences.

Evocations of the dead are but condensations of memory, the imaginary coloration of the shades. To evoke those who are no longer there, is but to cause their types to re-issue from the imagination of nature. 4 [Footnote 4.  To ardently desire to see a dead person is to evoke the images of that person, to call it forth from the astral light or ether wherein rest photographed the images of the Past. That is what is being partially done in the seance-rooms. The Spiritualists are unconscious NECROMANCERS. --Ed. Theos.  ]

To be in direct communication with the imagination of nature, one must be either asleep, intoxicated, in an ecstacy, cataleptic, or mad.

The eternal memory preserves only the imperishable; all that passes in Time belongs of right to oblivion.

The preservation of corpses is a violation of the laws of nature; it is an outrage on the modesty of death, which hides the works of destruction, as we should hide those of reproduction. Preserving corpses is to create phantoms in the imagination of the earth; 5 [Footnote 5.  To intensify these iages in the astral or sedereal light. --Ed. Theos. ] the spectres of the night-mare, of hallucination, and fear, are but the wandering photographs of preserved corpses. It is these preserved or imperfectly destroyed corpses, which spread, amid the living, plague, cholera, contagious diseases, sadness, scepticism and disgust of life. 6 [Footnote 6. People begin intuitionally to realize the great truth, and societies for burning bodies and crematories are now started in many places in Europe. --Ed. Theos.  ]

Death is exhaled by death. The cemeteries poison the atmosphere of towns, and the miasma of corpses blight the children even in the bosoms of their mothers.

Near Jerusalem in the Valley of Gehenna a perpetual fire was maintained for the combustion of filth and the carcasses of animals, and it is to this eternal fire that Jesus alluded when he says that the wicked shall be cast into Gehenna; signifying that dead souls will be treated as corpses.

The Talmud says that the souls of those who have not believed in immortality will not become immortal. It is faith only which gives personal immortality; 7 [Footnote 7. Faith and will power. Immortality is conditional, as we have ever stated. It is the reward of the pure and good. The wicked man, the material sensualist only survives. He who appreciates but physical pleasures will not and cannot live in the hereafter as a self-conscious Entity. --Ed. Theos.   ]science and reason can only affirm the general immortality.

The mortal sin is the suicide of the soul. This suicide would occur if the man devoted himself to evil with the full strength of his mind, with a perfect knowledge of good and evil, and an entire liberty of action which seems impossible in practice, but which is possible in theory, because the essence of an independent personality is an unconditioned liberty. The divinity imposes nothing upon man, not even existence. Man has a right to withdraw himself even from the divine goodness, and the dogma of eternal hell is only the assertion of eternal free-will.

God precipitates no one into hell. It is men who can go there freely, definitively and by their own choice.

Those who are in hell, that is to say, amid the gloom of evil 8 [Footnote 8.  That is to say, they are reborn in a "lower world" which s neither "Hell" nor any theological purgatory, but a world of nearly absolute matter and one preceding the last one in the "circle of necessity" from which "there is no redemption, for there reigns absolute spiritual darkness." (Book of Khiu-te.) --Ed. Theos.  ] and the sufferings of the necessary punishment, without having absolutely so willed it, are called to emerge from it. This hell is for them only a purgatory. The damned completely, absolutely and without respite, is Satan who is not a rational existence, but a necessary hypothesis.

Satan is the last word of the creation. He is the end infinitely emancipated. He willed to be like God of which he is the opposite. God is the hypothesis necessary to reason, Satan the hypothesis necessary to unreason asserting itself as free-will.

To be immortal in good, one must identify oneself with God; to be immortal in evil, with Satan. These are the two poles of the world of souls; between these two poles vegetate and die without remembrance the useless portion of mankind.

Editor's Note.--This may seem incomprehensible to the average reader, for it is one of the most abstruse of the tenets of Occult doctrine. Nature is dual: there is a physical and material side, as there is a spiritual and moral side to it; and, there is both good and evil in it, the latter the necessary shadow to its light. To force oneself upon the current of immortality, or rather to secure for oneself an endless series of rebirths as conscious individualities--says the Book of Khiu-te Vol. XXXI, one must become a co-worker with nature, either for good or for bad, in her work of creation and reproduction, or in that of destruction. It is but the useless drones, which she gets rid of, violently ejecting and making them perish by the millions as self-conscious entities. Thus, while the good and the pure strive to reach Nipang (nirvana or that state of absolute existence and absolute consciousness--which, in the world of finite perceptions, is non-existence and non-consciousness)--the wicked will seek, on the contrary, a series of lives as conscious, definite existences or beings, preferring to be ever suffering under the law of retributive justice rather than give up their lives as portions of the integral, universal whole. Being well aware that they can never hope to reach the final rest in pure spirit, or nirvana, they cling to life in any form, rather than give up that "desire for life," or Tanha which causes a new aggregation of Skandas or individuality to be reborn. Nature is as good a mother to the cruel bird of prey as she is to the harmless dove. Mother nature will punish her child, but since he has become her co-worker for destruction she cannot eject him. There are thoroughly wicked and depraved men, yet as highly intellectual and acutely spiritual for evil, as those who are spiritual for good. The Egos of these may escape the law of final destruction or annihilation for ages to come. That is what Éliphas Lévi means by becoming "immortal in evil," through identification with Satan. "I would thou wert cold or hot," says the vision of the Revelation to St. John (III. 15-16). "So then because thou art, lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." The Revelation is an absolutely Kabalistic book. Heat and cold are the two "poles," i.e., good and evil, spirit and matter. Nature spues the "lukewarm" or "the useless portion of mankind" out of her mouth, i.e., annihilates them. This conception that a considerable portion of mankind may after all not have immortal souls, will not be new even to European readers. Coleridge himself likened the case to that of an oak tree bearing, indeed, millions of acorns, but acorns of which under normal conditions not one in a thousand ever developed into a tree, and suggested that as the majority of the acorns failed to develop into a new living tree, so possibly the majority of men fail to develop into a new living entity after this earthly death.



Satan is merely a type, not a real personage.

It is the type opposed to the Divine type, the necessary foil to this in our imagination. It is the factitious shadow which renders visible to us the infinite light of the Divine.

If Satan was a real personage then would there be two Gods, and the creed of the Manicheans would be a truth.

Satan is the imaginary conception of the absolute in evil; a conception necessary to the complete affirmation of the liberty of the human will, which, by the help of this imaginary absolute seems able to equilibrate the entire power even of God. It is the boldest, and perhaps, the sublimest of the dreams of human pride.

"You shall be as Gods knowing good and evil," saith the allegorical serpent in the Bible. Truly to make evil a science is to create a God of evil, and if any spirit can eternally resist God, there is no longer one God but two Gods.

To resist the Infinite, infinite force is necessary, and two infinite forces opposed to each other must neutralize each other. 9 [Footnote 9. And evil being infinite and eternal, for it is coêval with matter, the logical deduction would be that there is neither God nor Devil--personal Entities, only One Uncreated, Infinite, Immutable and Absolute Principle or Law: EVIL  or DEVIL--the deeper it falls ito matter, GOOD or GOD as soon as it is purified from the latter and re-becomes again pure unalloyed Spirit or the ABSOLUTE in its everlasting, immutable Subjectivity. --Ed. Theos. ] If resistance on the part of Satan is possible the power of God no longer exists, God and the Devil destroy each other, and man remains alone; he remains alone with the phantom of his Gods, the hybrid sphynx, the winged bull, which poises in its human hand a sword of which the wavering lightnings drive the human imagination from one error to the other, and from the despotism of the light, to the despotism of the darkness.

The history of mundane misery is but the romance of the war of the Gods, a war still unfinished, while the Christian world still adores a God in the Devil, and a Devil in God.

The antagonism of powers is anarchy in Dogma. Thus to the church which affirms that the Devil exists the world replies with a terrifying logic: then God does not exist; and it is vain to seek escape from this argument to invent the supremacy of a God who would permit a Devil to bring about the damnation of men; such a permission would be a monstrosity, and would amount to complicity, and the god that could be an accomplice of the devil, cannot be God.

The Devil of Dogmas is a personification of Atheism. The Devil of Philosophy is the exaggerated ideal of human free-will. The real or physical Devil is the magnetism of evil.

Raising the Devil is but realizing for an instant this imaginary personality. This involves the exaggeration in one's self beyond bounds of the perversity of madness by the most criminal and senseless acts.

The result of this operation is the death of the soul through madness, and often the death of the body even, lightning-struck, as it were, by a cerebral congestion.

The Devil ever importunes, but nothing ever gives in return.

St. John calls it "the Beast" (la Bête) because its essence is human folly (la Bêtise humaine).

Éliphas Lévi's (Bonœ Memoriœ) creed, and that of his disciples.

We believe in a God-Principle, the essence of all existence, of all good and of all justice, inseparable from nature which is its law and which reveals itself through intelligence and love.

We believe in Humanity, daughter of God, of which all the members are indissolubly connected one with the other so that all must co-operate in the salvation of each, and each in the salvation of all.

We believe that to serve the Divine essence it is necessary to serve Humanity.

We believe in the reparation of evil, and in the triumph of good in the life eternal.


H.P. Blavatsky

Theosophist, October, 1881


From H. P. Blavatsky Theosophical Articles, Vol. III


Articles by HPB

ANCIENT civilization saw nothing absurd in the claims of astrology, no more than many an educated and thoroughly scientific man sees in it today. Judicial astrology, by which the fate and acts of men and nations might be foreknown, [hardly] appeared, nor does it even now appear, any more unphilosophical or unscientific than does natural astrology or astronomy-by which the events of so-called brute and inanimate nature (changes of weather, &c.), might be predicted. For it was not even prophetic insight that was claimed by the votaries of that abstruse and really grand science, but simply a great proficiency in that method of procedure which allows the astrologer to foresee certain events in the life of a man by the position of the planets at the time of his birth.

Once the probability, or even the simple possibility, of an occult influence exercised by the stars upon the destiny of man admitted-and why should the fact appear more improbable in the case of stars and man than in that of the sun-spots and potatoes?-and astrology becomes no less an exact science than astronomy. The earth, Prof. Balfour Stewart, F.R.S., tells us-"is very seriously affected by what takes place in the sun" . . . a connection "is strongly suspected between epidemics and the appearance of the sun's surface."1 [Footnote 1. One of the best known vegetable epidemics is that of the potatoe disease. The years 1846, 1860 and 1872 were bad years for the potatoe discease, and those years are not very far from the years of maximum sun-spots...there is a curious connection between these diseases affectig plants and the state of the sun...A discease that took place about three centuries since, of a periodical and very violent character, called the "sweating sickness"...took place about the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century...and this is exactly the sun-spot period...(The Sun and Earth, Lecture by Prof. Balfour Stewart) ]

And if, as that man of science tells us, "a connection of some mysterious kind between the sun and the earth is more than suspected" . . . and the problem is a most important one "to solve," how much more important the solution of that other mystery-the undoubted affinity between man and the stars-an affinity believed in for countless ages and by the most learned among men! Surely the destiny of man deserves as much consideration as that of a turnip or a potatoe . . . And if a disease of the latter may be scientifically foretold whenever that vegetable crops out during a "sun-spot period," why should not a life of disease, or health, of natural or violent death be as scientifically prognosticated by the position and appearance of the constellation with which man is as directly connected and which bears the same relation to him as the sun bears to the earth?

In its days, astrology was greatly honoured, for when in able hands it was often shown to be as precise and trustworthy in its predictions as astronomical predictions are in our own age. Omens were studied by all imperial Rome, as much, if not more than they are now in India. Tiberius practised the science; and the Saracens in Spain held star-divination in the greatest reverence, astrology passing into Western Europe through these, our first civilizers. Alphonso, the wise king of Castile and Leon, made himself famous in the thirteenth century by his "Astrological Tables" (called Alphonsine); and his code of the Siata Purtidas; and the great astronomer Kepler in the seventeenth, the discoverer of the three great laws of planetary motions (known as Kepler's laws) believed in and proclaimed astrology a true science. Kepler, the Emperor Rudolph's mathematician, he to whom Newton is indebted for all his subsequent discoveries, is the author of the "Principles of Astrology" in which he proves the power of certain harmonious configurations of suitable planets to control human impulses. In his official capacity of Imperial astronomer, he is historically known to have predicted to Wallenstein, from the position of the stars, the issue of the war in which that unfortunate general was then engaged. No less than himself, his friend, protector and instructor, the great astronomer Tycho de Brahe, believed in, and expanded, the astrological system. He was forced, moreover, to admit the influence of the constellations on terrestrial life and actions quite against his will or wish, and merely because of the constant verification of facts.

Closely related to astrology is the Kabala and its system of numerals. The secret wisdom of the ancient Chaldees left by them as an inheritance to the Jews relates primarily to the mythological science of the heavens and contains the doctrines of the hidden or occult wisdom concerning the cycles of time. In the ancient philosophy, the sacredness of numbers began with the great FIRST, the ONE, and ended with the naught or Zero, the symbol of the infinite and boundless circle, which represents the universe. All the intervening figures, in whatever combination, or however multiplied, represent philosophical ideas relating either to a moral or a physical fact in nature. They are the key to the archean views on cosmogony, in its broad sense, including man and beings, and relate to the human race and individuals spiritually as well as physically. "The numerals of Pythagoras," says Porphyry, "were hieroglyphical symbols, by means whereof he explained all ideas concerning the nature of all things" (De vitâ Pythag.). In the symbolical kabala-the most ancient system left to us by the Chaldeans-the modes of examining letters, words and sentences for hidden meaning were numerical. The gemantria (one of the three modes) is purely arithmetical and mathematical, and consists in applying to the letters of a word the sense they bear as numbers-letters being used also for figures in the Hebrew as in Greek. Figurative Gemantria deduces mysterious interpretations from the shapes of letters used in occult manuscripts and the Bible.

Thus, as shown by Cornelius Agrippa, in Numbers (X. 35), the letter Beth means the reversal of enemies. The sacred anagrams known as Zeruph yield their mysterious sense by the second mode named Themura, and consists in displacing the letters and substituting them one for another and then arranging them in rows according to their numerical value. If, of all operations in the occult sciences there is not one that is not rooted in astrology, arithmetic and especially geometry are a part of the first principles of magic. The most recondite mysteries and powers in nature are made to yield to the power of numbers. And let this not be regarded as a fallacy. He who knows the relative and respective numbers or the so-called correspondence between causes and effects will alone be able to obtain of a certainty the desired result. A small mistake, a trifling difference in an astronomical calculation and-no correct prediction of a heavenly phenomenon becomes possible. As Severinus Boethius puts it, it is by the proportion of certain numbers that all things were formed. "God geometrizes" saith Plato, meaning creative nature. If there are so many occult virtues in natural things, "what marvel if in numbers which are pure and commixed only with ideas, there should be found virtues greater and more occult?" asks Agrippa. Even Time must contain the mystery number; so also does motion, or action, and so, therefore, must all things that move, act, or are subjected to time. But "the mystery is in the abstract power of number, in its rational and formal state, not in the expression of it by the voice, as among people who buy and sell." (De Occulta Phil. cap. iii. p. cii.) The Pythagoreans claimed to discern many things in the numbers of names. And if those who having understanding were invited to "compute the number and name of the beast" by the author of St. John's Revelation it is because that author was a Kabalist.

The wiseacres of our generations raise daily the cry that science and metaphysics are irreconcilable; and facts prove as daily that it is but one more fallacy among the many that are uttered. The reign of exact science is proclaimed on every housetop, and Plato who is said to have trusted to his imagination is sneered at, while Aristotle's method built on pure reason is the one accepted by Science. Why? Because "the philosophical method of Plato was the inverse of that of Aristotle." Its starting-point was universals, the very existence of which is, "a matter of faith" says Dr. Draper, and from these it descended to particulars, or details. Aristotle, on the contrary, "rose from particulars to universals, advancing to them by inductions" (Conflict between Religion and Science). We humbly answer to this, that mathematics, the only exact and infallible science in the world of sciences-proceeds from UNIVERSALS.

It is this year especially, the year 1881, which seems to defy and challenge sober, matter-of-fact science, and by its extraordinary events above, as below, in heaven as upon earth, to invite criticism upon its strange "coincidences." Its freaks in the domains of meteorology and geology were prognosticated by the astronomers, and these every one is bound to respect. There is a certain triangle seen this year on the horizon formed of the most brilliant stars which was predicted by them, but none the less left unexplained. It is a simple geometrical combination of heavenly bodies, they say. As to that triangle, formed of the three large planets-Venus, Jupiter and Saturn-having aught to do with the destinies of either men or nations-why that is pure superstition. "The mantle of the astrologers is burnt and the predictions of some of them, whenever verified, must be attributed to simple and blind chance."

We are not so sure of that; and, if permitted, will further on tell why-meanwhile, we must remind the reader of the fact that Venus, the most intensely brilliant of the three above-named planets, as was remarked in Europe and for all we know in India also-suddenly parted company with its two companions and slowly moving onward, stopped above them, whence it goes on dazzling the inhabitants of the earth with an almost preternatural brilliancy.

The conjunction of two planets happens but rarely; that of three is still more rare; while the conjunction of four and five planets becomes an event. The latter phenomenon took place in historical times but once, 2449 years B. C., when it was observed by the Chinese astronomers and has not recurred since then. That extraordinary meeting of five large planets forebode all kinds of evils to the Celestial Empire and its peoples, and the panic then created by the predictions of the Chinese astrologers was not in vain. During the following 500 years, a series of internal broils, revolutions, wars, and changes of dynasty marked the end of the golden age of national felicity in the Empire founded by the great Fu-hi.

Another conjunction is known to have happened just before the beginning of the Christian era. In that year, three large planets had approached so closely together as to be mistaken by many for one single star of an immense size. Biblical scholars were more than once inclined to identify these "three in one" with the Trinity, and at the same [time] with the "star of the wise men of the East." But they saw themselves thwarted in such pious desires by their hereditary enemies-the irreverent men of science, who proved that the astronomical conjunction took place a year before the period claimed for the alleged birth of Jesus. Whether the phenomenon forbode good or evil is best answered by the subsequent history and development of Christianity, than which, no other religion cost so many human victims, shed such torrents of blood, nor brought the greater portion of humanity to suffer from what is now termed the "blessings of Christianity and civilization."

A third conjunction took place in 1563 A. D. It appeared near the great nebula in the constellation of Cancer. There were three great planets and according to the astronomers of those days-the most nefarious: Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. The constellation of Cancer has always had a bad reputation; that year the mere fact of its having in its neighborhood a triune conjunction of evil stars, caused the astrologers to predict great and speedy disasters. These did come to pass. A terrible plague broke out and raged in all Europe, carrying off thousands upon thousands of victims.

And now, in 1881, we have again a visit of three other "Wanderers." What do they forebode? Nothing good; and it would seem, as if of the great evils they are likely to pour on the devoted heads of hapless humanity, the fatal prelude is already being played. Let us enumerate and see how far we are from the truth. The nearly simultaneous and certainly in some cases unexpected deaths of great and the most remarkable men of our age. In the region of politics, we find the Emperor of Russia, Lord Beaconsfield, and Aga Khan; 2 [Footnote 2.  H. H. Aga Khan was one of the most remarkable men of the century. Of all the Mussulme, Shiahs or Soonis, who rejoice in the green turban, the Aga's claim to a direct descent from Mahomet through Ali rested on undeniable proofs. He again represented the historical "Assassins" of the Old Man of the Mountain. He had married a daughter of the late Shah of Persia; but political broils forced him to leave his native land and seek refuge with the British Government in India. In Bombay he had a numerous religious following. He was a high-spirited, generous man and a hero. The most noticeable feature of his life was that he was born in 1800-and died in 1881, at the age of 81. In his case too the occult influence of the year 1881 has asserted itself. ] in that of literature, Carlyle and George Eliot; in the world of art, Rubinstein, the greatest musical genius. In the domain of geology-earthquakes which have already destroyed the town of Casamiceiola on the Island of Ischia, a village in California and the Island of Chio which was laid entirely waste by the terrible catastrophe-one, moreover, predicted for that very day by the astrologer Raphael. In the domain of wars, the hitherto invincible Great Britain was worsted at the Cape by a handful of Boers; Ireland is convulsed and threatens; a plague now rages in Mesopotamia; another war is preparing between Turkey and Greece; armies of Socialists and red-handed Nihilists obscure the sun of the political horizon in Europe; and the latter thrown into a violent perturbation is breathlessly awaiting the most unexpected events [in the] future-defying the perspicacity of the most acute of her political men. In the religious spheres the heavenly triangle pointed its double horn at the monastic congregations and-a general exodus of monks and nuns-headed by the children of Loyola, followed in France. There is a revival of infidelity and mental rebellion, and with it a proportionate increase of missionary labourers (not labour), who like the hordes of Attila destroy much and build but little. Shall we add to the list of signs of these nefasti dies [Translation: days in which the courts of Rome were closed -BNet ] , the birth of the New Dispensation at Calcutta? The latter though having but a small and quite a local importance, shows yet a direct bearing upon our subject, i.e., the astrological meaning of the planetary conjunction. Like Christianity with Jesus and his Apostles the New Dispensation can henceforth boast of having had a forerunner in starry heaven-the present triune conjunction of planets. It proves, moreover, our kabalistic theory of periodical cyclic recurrences of events. As the Roman sceptical world of 1881 years ago, we are startled by a fresh revival of mendicant Ebionites, fasting Essenes and Apostles upon whom descend "cloven tongues like as of fire," and of whom we cannot even say as of the Jerusalem twelve, "that these men are full of new wine," since their inspiration is entirely due to water, we are told.

The year 1881, then, of which we have lived but one-third, promises, as predicted by astrologers and astronomers, a long and gloomy list of disasters on land, as on the seas. We have shown elsewhere (Bombay Gazette, March 30, 1881) how strange in every respect was the grouping of the figures of our present year, adding that another such combination will not happen in the Christian chronology before the year 11811, just 9,930 years hence, when-there will be no more a "Christian" chronology we are afraid, but something else. We said: "Our year 1881, offers that strange fact, that from whichever of four sides you look at its figures-from right or left, from top or bottom, from the back, by holding the paper up to the light-or even upside down, you will always have before you the same mysterious and kabalistic numbers of 1881. it is the correct number of the three figures which have most perplexed mystics for over eighteen centuries. The year 1881, in short, is the number of the great Beast of the Revelation, the number 666 of St. John's Apocalypsis-that Kabalistic Book par excellence. See for yourselves: 1+8+8 +1 make eighteen; eighteen divided thrice gives three times six, or placed in a row, 666, "the number of man."

This number has been for centuries the puzzle of Christendom and was interpreted in a thousand different ways. Newton himself worked for years over the problem, but, ignorant of the secret Kabala, failed. Before the Reformation it was generally supposed in the Church to have reference to the coming Antichrist. Since then the Protestants began to apply it in that spirit of Christian charity which so characterizes Calvinism to the Latin Popish Church, which they call the "Harlot," the "great Beast" and the "scarlet woman," and forthwith the latter returned the compliment in the same brotherly and friendly spirit. The supposition that it refers to the Roman nation-the Greek letters of the word Latinus as numerals, amounting to exactly 666-is absurd.

There are beliefs and traditions among the people which spring no one knows from whence and pass from one generation to the other, as an oral prophecy, and an unavoidable fact to come. One of such traditions, a correspondent of the Moscow Gazette happened to hear in 1874 from the mountaineers of the Tyrolian Alps, and subsequently from old people in Bohemia. "From the first day of 1876," says that tradition, "a sad, heavy period will begin for the whole world and will last for seven consecutive years. The most unfortunate and fatal year for all will be 1881. He who will survive it, has an iron head."

An interesting new combination, meanwhile, of the year 1881, in reference to the life of the murdered Czar, may be found in the following dates, every one of which marks a more or less important period in his life. It proves at all events what important . and mysterious a part, the figures 1 and 8 played in his life. 1 and 8 make 18; and the Emperor was born April 17 (1+7=8) in 1818. He died in 1881-the figures of the year of his birth and death being identical, and coinciding, moreover, with the date of his birth 17=1+7=8. The figures of the years of the birth and death being thus the same, as four times 18 can be formed out of them, and the sum-total of each year's numerals is 18. The arrival at Petersburg of the late Empress-the Czar's bride-took place on September 8; their marriage April 16-(8+8=16); their eldest daughter, the Grand Duchess Alexandra, was born August 18; the late Czarevitch Nicolas Alexandrovitch, on September the 8, 1843; (1+8+4+3=16, i.e., twice 8). The present Czar, Alexander III, was born February 26, (2+6=8); the proclamation of the ascension to the throne of the late Emperor was signed February 18; the public proclamation about the Coronation day took place April 17 (l+7=8). His entrance into Moscow for the coronation was on August 17 (1+7=8); the Coronation itself being performed August 26 (2+6=8); the year of the liberation of the Serfs, 1861, whose numerals sum up 16-i.e., twice 8!

To conclude, we may mention here a far more curious discovery made in relation, and as a supplement, to the above calculation, by a Jewish Rabbi in Russia-a Kabalist, evidently, from the use he makes of the Gemantria reckoning. It was just published in a St. Petersburg paper. The Hebrew letters as stated have all their numerical value or correspondence in arithmetical figures. The number 18 in the Hebrew Alphabet is represented by the letters-"HETH" = 8, and "JOD" = 10, i.e., 18. United together Heth and Jod form the word "khaï," or "Hai," which literally translated means the imperative-live and alive. Every orthodox Jew during his fast and holy days is bound to donate for some pious purpose a sum of money consisting of, and containing the number 18 in it. So, for instance, he will give 18 copecks, or 18 ten copeck bits, 18 rubles or 18 times 18 copecks or rubles-according to his means and degree of religious fervour. Hence, the year 1818-that of the Emperor's birth-meant, if read in Hebrew-"khaï, khaï"-or live, live-pronounced emphatically twice; while the year 1881-that of his death read in the same way, yields the fatal words "Khaï-tze" rendered in English, "thou living one depart"; or in other words, "life is ended."

Of course, those sceptically inclined will remark that it is all due to blind chance and "coincidence." Nor would we much insist upon the contrary, were such an observation to proceed but from uncompromising atheists, and materialists, who, denying the above, remain only logical in their disbelief, and have as much right to their opinion as we have to our own. But we cannot promise the same degree of indulgence whenever attacked by orthodox religionists. For, that class of persons while pooh-poohing speculative metaphysics, and even astrology-a system based upon strictly mathematical calculations, pertaining as much to exact science as biology or physiology, and open to experiment and verification-will, at the same time, firmly believe that potatoe disease, cholera, railway accidents, earthquakes and the like are all of Divine origin and, proceeding directly of God, have a meaning and a bearing on human life in its highest aspects. It is to the latter class of theists that we say: prove to us the existence of a personal God either outside or inside physical nature, demonstrate him to us as the external agent, the Ruler of the Universe; show him concerned in human affairs and destiny and exercising on them an influence, at least, as great and reasonably probable as that exercised by the sun-spots upon the destiny of vegetables and then-laugh at us. Until then, and so long as no one is prepared with such a proof and solution, in the words of Tyndall-"Let us lower our heads, and acknowledge our ignorance, priest and philosopher, one and all."

H. P. Blavatsky

Theosophist, June, 1881


From H. P. Blavatsky Theosophical Articles, Vol. II


Articles by HPB

MATERIALISTS who arraign the Occultists and Theosophists for believing that every Force (so called) in Nature has at its origin a substantial NOUMENON, an Entity, conscious and intelligent, whether it be a Planetary (Dhyan Chohan) or an Elemental, are advised to fix their attention, first of all, on a far more dangerous body than the one called the Theosophical Society. We mean the Society in the U.S. of America whose members call themselves the Substantialists. We call it dangerous for this reason, that this body, combining in itself dogmatic Church Christianity, i.e., the anthropomorphic element of the Bible--with sterling Science, makes, nevertheless, the latter subservient in all to the former. This is equivalent to saying, that the new organization, will, in its fanatical dogmatism--if it wins the day--lead on the forthcoming generations to anthropomorphism past redemption. It will achieve this the more easily in our age of Science-worship, since a show of undeniable learning must help to impart additional strength to belief in a gigantic human god, as their hypotheses, like those of modern materialistic science, may be easily built to answer their particular aim. The educated and thoughtful classes of Society, once set free from ecclesiastical thraldom, could laugh at a St. Augustine's or a "venerable" Bede's scientific data, which led them to maintain on the authority and dead letter of what they regarded as Revelation that our Earth, instead of being a sphere, was flat, hanging under a crystalline canopy studded with shining brass nails and a sun no larger than it appears. But the same classes will be always forced by public opinion into respecting the hypotheses of modern Science--in whatever direction the nature of scientific speculation may lead them. They have been so led for the last century--into crass Materialism; they may be so led again in an opposite direction. The cycle has closed, and if Science ever falls into the hands of the Opposition--the learned "Reverends" and bigoted Churchmen--the world may find itself gradually approaching the ditch on the opposite side and be landed at no distant future in crass anthropomorphism. Once more the masses will have rejected true philosophy--impartial and unsectarian--and will thus be caught again in new meshes of their own weaving, the fruitage and results of the reaction created by an all-denying age. The solemn ideal of a universal, infinite, all-pervading Noumenon of Spirit, of an impersonal and absolute Deity, will fade out of the human mind once more, and will make room for the MONSTER-GOD of sectarian nightmares.

Now, modern official science is composed--as at present--of 5 per cent of undeniable axiomatic truths and facts, and of 95 per cent of mere speculation. Furthermore, it has laid itself open to endless attacks, owing to its numerous mutually contradictory hypotheses, each one as scientific, in appearance, as the other. On the other hand, the Substantialists, who rank, as they boast, among their numbers some of the most eminent men of Science in the United States, have undeniably discovered and accumulated a vast store of facts calculated to upset the modern theories on Force and Matter. And once that their data are shown correct, in this conflict between (materialistic) Science and (a still more materialistic) Religion--the outcome of the forthcoming battle is not difficult to foresee: modern Science will be floored. The Substantiality of certain Forces of Nature cannot be denied--for it is a fact in Kosmos. No Energy or Force without Matter, no Matter without Force, Energy or Life--however latent. But this ultimate Matter is--Substance or the Noumenon of matter. Thus, the head of the golden Idol of scientific truth will fall, because it stands on feet of clay. Such a result would not be anything to be regretted, except for its immediate consequences: the golden Head will remain the same, only its pedestal will be replaced by one as weak and as much of clay as ever. Instead of resting on Materialism, science will rest on anthropomorphic superstition--if the Substantialists ever gain the day. For, instead of holding to philosophy alone, pursued in a spirit of absolute impartiality, both materialists and adherents of what is so pompously called the "Philosophy of Substantialism" work on lines traced by preconception and with a prejudged object; and both stretch their facts on the Procrustean beds of their respective hobbies. It is facts that have to fit their theories, even at the risk of mutilating the immaculate nature of Truth.

Before presenting the reader with extracts from the work of a Substantialist--those extracts showing better than would any critical review the true nature of the claims of "The Substantial Philosophy"--we mean to go no further, as we are really very little concerned with them, and intend to waste no words over their flaws and pretensions. Nevertheless, as their ideas on the nature of physical Forces and phenomena are curiously--in some respects only--like the occult doctrines, our intention is to utilize their arguments--on Magnetism, to begin with. These are unanswerable, and we may thus defeat exact science by its own methods of observation and weapons. So far, we are only acquainted with the theories of the Substantialists by their writings. It is possible that, save the wide divergence between our views on the nature of the "phenomena-producing causes"--as they queerly call physical forces--there is but little difference in our opinions with regard to the substantial nature of Light, Heat, Electricity, Magnetism, etc., etc., perhaps only one in the form and terms used. No Theosophist, however, would agree to such expressions as are used in the New Doctrine: e.g., "If its principles be true, then every force or form of Energy known to science must be a substantial Entity." For although Dr. Hall's proofs with regard to magnetic fluid being something more than "a mode of motion" are irrefutable, still there are other "forces" which are of quite a different nature. As this paper, however, is devoted to prove the substantiality of magnetism--whether animal or physical--we will now quote from the Scientific Arena (July, 1886) the best arguments that have ever appeared against the materialistic theory of modern Science.

"To admit for one moment that a single force of nature, such as sound, light, or heat, is but the vibratory motion of matter, whether that material body be highly attenuated as in the case of the supposed ether, less attenuated as in the case of air, or solid as in the case of a heated bar of iron, is to give away to the rank claims of materialism the entire analogy of nature and science in favour of a future life for humanity. And well do the materialistic scientists of this country and Europe know it. And to the same extent do they fear the spread and general acceptance of the Substantial Philosophy, knowing full well that the moment the forces of nature shall be recognised and taught by the schools as real substantial entities, and as soon as the mode-of-motion doctrines of sound, light, heat, etc., shall be abandoned, that soon will their materialistic occupation have gone for ever. . . .

"Hence, it is the aim of this present paper, after thus reiterating and enforcing the general scope of the argument as presented last month, to demonstrate force, per se, to be an immaterial substance and in no sense a motion of material particles. In this way we purpose to show the absolute necessity for Christian scientists everywhere adopting the broad principles of the Substantial Philosophy, and doing it at once, if they hope to break down materialistic atheism in this land or logically to defend religion by scientific analogy, and thus prove the substantial existence of God as well as the probable substantial existence of the human soul after death. This they now have the privilege of doing successfully, and of thus triumphantly re-enforcing their scriptural arguments by the concurrent testimony of nature herself.

"We could select any one of several of the physical forms of force as the crucial test of the new philosophy, or as the touchstone of Substantialism. But to save circumlocution and detail of unnecessary explanation as much as possible, in this leading and paramount demonstration, we select what no scientist on earth will question as a representative natural force or so-called form of energy--namely, magnetism. This force, from the very simple and direct manifestation of its phenomena in displacing ponderable bodies at a distance from the magnet, and without having any tangible substance connecting the magnet therewith, is selected for our purpose, since it has well proved the champion physical puzzle to modern mode-of-motion philosophers, both in this country and in Europe.

"Even to the greatest living physicists, such as Helmholtz, Tyndall, Sir William Thomson, and others, the mysterious action of magnetism, under any light which modern science can shed upon it, admittedly affords a problem which has proved to be completely bewildering to their intellects, simply because they have, unfortunately, never caught a glimpse of the basic principles of the Substantial Philosophy which so clearly unravels the mystery. In the light of these principles such a thinker as Sir William Thomson, instead of teaching, as he did in his opening address on the five senses before the Midland Institute, at Birmingham, England, that magnetism was but the molecular motion, or as he expressed it, but the 'quality of matter' or the 'rotation of the molecules' of the magnet, would have seen at a glance the utter want of any relation, as cause to effect, between such moving molecules in the magnet (provided they do move), and the lifting of the mass of iron at a distance.

"It is passing strange that men so intelligent as Sir William Thomson and Professor Tyndall had not long ago reached the conclusion that magnetism must of necessity be a substantial thing, however invisible or intangible, when it thus stretches out its mechanical but invisible fingers to a distance from the magnet and pulls or pushes an inert piece of metal! That they have not seen the absolute necessity for such a conclusion, as the only conceivable explanation of the mechanical effects produced, and the manifest inconsistency of any other supposition, is one of the astounding results of the confusing and blinding influence of the present false theories of science upon otherwise logical and profound intellects. And that such men could be satisfied in supposing that the minute and local vibrations of the molecules and atoms of the magnet (necessarily limited to the dimensions of the steel itself) could by any possibility reach out to a distance beyond it and thus pull or push a bar of metal, overcoming its inertia, tempts one to lose all respect for the sagacity and profundity of the intellects of these great names in science. At all events, such manifest want of perspicacity in modern physicists appeals in a warning voice of thunder tones to rising young men of this country and Europe to think for themselves in matters pertaining to science and philosophy, and to accept nothing on trust simply because it happens to be set forth or approved by some great name.

"Another most remarkable anomaly in the case of the physicists to whom we have here referred is this: while failing to see the unavoidable necessity of an actual substance of some kind going forth from the poles of the magnet and connecting with the piece of iron by which to lift it and thus accomplish a physical result, that could have been effected in no other way, they are quick to accept the agency of an all-pervading ether (a substance not needed at all in nature) by which to produce light on this earth as mere motion. and thus make it conform to the supposed sound-waves in the air! In this way, by the sheer invention of a not-needed material substance, they have sought to convert not only light, heat, and magnetism, but all the other forces of nature into modes of motion, and for no reason except that sound had been mistaken as a mode of motion by previous scientists. And strange to state, notwithstanding this supposed ether is as intangible to any of our senses, and just as unrecognised by any process known to chemistry or mechanics as is the substance which of necessity must pass out from the poles of the magnet to seize and lift the bar of iron, yet physicists cheerfully accept the former, for which no scientific necessity on earth or in heaven exists, while they stolidly refuse to recognise the latter, though absolutely needed to accomplish the results observed! Was ever such inconsistency before witnessed in a scientific theory?

"Let us scrutinize this matter a little further before leaving it. If the mere 'rotation of molecules' in the steel magnet can produce a mechanical effect on a piece of iron at a distance, even through a vacuum, as Sir William Thomson asserts, why may not the rotation of the molecules of the sun cause light at a distance without the intervening space being filled up with a jelly-like material substance, of 'enormous rigidity,' to be thrown into waves? It must strike every mind capable of thinking scientifically that the original invention of an all-pervading 'material,' 'rigid,' and 'inert' ether, as the essential cause of light at a distance from a luminous body, was one of the most useless expenditures of mechanical ingenuity which the human brain ever perpetrated--that is, if there is the slightest truth in the teaching of Sir William Thomson that the mere 'rotation of molecules' in the magnet will lift a distant bar of iron. Why cannot the rotation of the sun's molecules just as easily produce light at a distance?

"Should it be assumed in sheer desperation by the mode-of motion philosophers that it is the ether filling the space between the magnet and the piece of iron, which is thrown into vibration by the rotating molecules of the steel, and which thus lifts the distant iron, it would only be to make bad worse. If material vibration in the steel magnet, which is wholly unobservable, is communicated to the distant bar through a material substance and its vibratory motions, which are equally unobservable, is it not plain that their effects on the distant bar should be of the same mechanical character, namely, unobservable? Instead of this the iron is lifted bodily and seen plainly, and that without any observed tremor, as if done by a vibrating 'jelly' such as ether is claimed to be! Besides, such bodily lifting of a ponderable mass is utterly incongruous with mere tremor, however powerful and observable such tremor or vibration might be, according to every principle known to mechanics. Common sense ought to assure any man that mere vibration or tremor, however powerful and sensible, can pull or push nothing. It is impossible to conceive of the accomplishment of such a result except by some substantial agent reaching out from the magnet, seizing the iron, and forcibly pulling and thus displacing it. As well talk of pulling a boat to the shore without some rope or other substantial thing connecting you with the boat. Even Sir William Thomson would not claim that the boat could be pulled by getting up a molecular vibration of the shore, or even by producing a visible tremor in the water, as Dr. Hamlin so logically shewed in his recent masterly paper on Force. (See Microsm, Vol. V., p. 98).

"It is well known that a magnet will lift a piece of iron at the same distance precisely through sheets of glass as if no glass intervened. The confirmed atheist Mr. Smith, of Cincinnati, Ohio, to whom we referred in our papers on Substantialism, in the Microcosm (Vol. III, pages 278,311), was utterly confounded by this exhibition of the substantial force of magnetism acting at a distance through impervious plates of glass. When we placed a quantity of needles and tacks on the plate and passed the poles of the magnet beneath it, causing them to move with the magnet, he saw for the first time in his life the operation of a real substance, exerting a mechanical effect in displacing ponderable bodies of metal in defiance of all material conditions, and with no possible material connection or free passage between the source and termination of such substantial agency. And he asked in exclamation, if this be so, may there not be a substantial, intelligent, and immaterial God, and may I not have a substantial but immaterial soul which can live separately from my body after it is dead?

"He then raised the query, asking if we were certain that it was not the invisible pores of the glass plate through which the magnetic force found its way, and therefore whether this force might not be a refined form of matter after all? He then assisted us in filling the plate with boiled water, on which to float a card with needles placed thereon, thus to interpose between them and the magnet the most imporous of all known bodies. But it made not the slightest difference, the card with its cargo of needles moving hither and thither as the magnet was moved beneath both plates and water. This was sufficient even for that most critical but candid materialist, and he confessed that there were substantial but immaterial entities in his atheistic philosophy.

"Here, then, is the conclusive argument by which we demonstrate that magnetism, one of the forces of nature, and a fair representative of all the natural forces, is not only a real, substantial entity, but an absolutely immaterial substance: 1 [Format 1. This is a very wrong word to use. See text. --H.P.B. ] thus justifying our original classification of the entities of the universe into material and immaterial substances.

"1. If magnetism were not a real substance, it could not lift a piece of metal bodily at a distance from the magnet, any more than our hand could lift a weight from the floor without some substantial connection between the two. It is a self-evident truism as an axiom in mechanics, that no body can move or displace another body at a distance without a real, substantial medium connecting the two through which the result is accomplished, otherwise it would be a mechanical effect without a cause--a self-evident absurdity in philosophy. Hence, the force of magnetism is a real, substantial entity.

"2. If magnetism were not an immaterial substance, then any practically imporous body intervening between the magnet and the attracted object would, to some extent at least, impede the passage of the magnetic current, which it does not do. If magnetism were a very refined or attenuated form of matter, and if it thus depended for its passage through other material bodies upon their imperceptible pores then, manifestly, some difference in the freedom of its passage, and in the consequent attractive force of the distant magnet should result by great difference in the porosity of the different bodies tested, as would be the case, for example, in forcing wind through wire-netting having larger or smaller interstices, and consequently offering greater or less resistance. Whereas in the case of this magnetic substance, no difference whatever results in the energy of its mechanical pull on a distant piece of iron, however many or few of the practically imperious sheets of glass, rubber, or whatever other material body be made to intervene, or if no substance whatever but the air is interposed, or if the test be made in a perfect vacuum. The pull is always with precisely the same force, and will move the suspended piece of iron at the same distance away from it in each and every case, however refined and delicate may be the instruments by which the tests are measured."

The above quoted passages are positively unanswerable. As far as magnetic force, or fluid, is concerned the Substantialists have most undeniably made out their case; and their triumph will be hailed with joy by every Occultist. It is impossible to see, indeed, how the phenomena of magnetism--whether terrestrial or animal--can be explained otherwise than by admitting a material, or substantial magnetic fluid. This, even some of the Scientists do not deny--Helmholtz believing that electricity must be as atomic as matter--which it is (Helmholtz, "Faraday Lecture"). And, unless Science is prepared to divorce force from matter, we do not see how it can support its position much longer.

But we are not at all so sure about certain other Forces--so far as their effects are concerned--and Esoteric philosophy would find an easy objection to every assumption of the Substantialists--e.g., with regard to sound. As the day is dawning when the new theory is sure to array itself against Occultism, it is as well, perhaps, to anticipate the objections and dispose of them at once.

The expression "immaterial Substance" used above in connection with magnetism is a very strange one, and moreover, it is self-contradictory. If, instead of saying that "magnetism . . . is not only a real substantial entity but an absolutely immaterial substance," the writer should have applied this definition to light, sound or any other force in its effects, we would have nothing to say, except to remark that the adjective "supersensuous" would have been more applicable to any force than the word "immaterial."2 [Format 2. The use of the terms "matter, or substance existing in supersensuous conditions" or, "supersensuous states of matter" would avoid an outburst of fierce but just criticism not only from men of Science, but from any ordinary well educated man who knows the value of terms.  ] But to say this of the magnetic fluid is wrong, as it is an essence which is quite perceptible to any clairvoyant, whether in darkness--as in the case of odic emanations--or in light--when animal magnetism is practised. Being then a fluid in a supersensuous state, still matter, it cannot be "immaterial," and the expression becomes at once as illogical as it is sophistical. With regard to the other forces--if by "immaterial" is meant only that which is objective, but beyond the range of our present normal perceptions or senses, well and good; but then whatever Substantialists may mean by it, we Occultists and Theosophists demur to the form in which they put it. Substance, we are told in philosophical dictionaries and encyclopedias, is that which underlies outward phenomena; substratum; the permanent subject or cause of phenomena, whether material or spiritual; that in which properties inhere; that which is real in distinction from that which is only apparent--especially in this world of maya. It is in short--real, and the one real Essence. But the Occult sciences, while calling Substance the noumenon of every material form, explain that noumenon as being still matter--only on another plane. That which is noumenon to our human perceptions is matter to those of a Dhyan Chohan. As explained by our learned Vedantin Brother--T. Subba Row--Mulaprakriti, the first universal aspect of Parabrahma, its Kosmic Veil, and whose essence, to us, is unthinkable, is to the LOGOS "as material as any object is material to us" (Notes on Bhag. Gita). Hence--no Occultist would describe Substance as "immaterial" in esse.

Substance is a confusing term, in any case. We may call our body, or an ape, or a stone, as well as any kind of fabric--"substantial." Therefore, we call "Essence" rather, the material of the bodies of those Entities--the supersensuous Beings, in whom we believe, and who do exist, but whom Science and its admirers regard as superstitious nonsense, calling fictions alike a "personal" god and the angels of the Christians, as they would our Dhyan Chohans, or the Devas, "Planetary Men," Genii, etc., etc., of the Kabalists and Occultists. But the latter would never dream of calling the phenomena of Light, Sound, Heat, Cohesion, etc.--"Entities," as the Substantialists do. They would define those Forces as purely immaterial perceptive effects--without, of substantial and essential CAUSES--Within: at the ultimate end of which, or at the origin, stands an ENTITY, the essence of the latter changing with that of the Element 3 [Format 3. Useless to remind again the leader, that by Elements it is not the compound air, water and earth, that exist present to our terrestrial and sensuous perceptions that are meant--but the noumenal Elements of the ancients.  ] it belongs to. (See "Monads, Gods, and Atoms" of Volume I "Secret Doctrine," Book II.) Nor can the Soul be confused with FORCES, which are on quite another plane of perception. It shocks, therefore, a Theosophist to find the Substantialists so unphilosophically including Soul among the Forces.

Having--as he tells his readers--"laid the foundation of our argument in the clearly defined analogies of Nature," the editor of the Scientific Arena, in an article called "The Scientific Evidence of a Future Life," proceeds as follows:

"If the principles of Substantialism be true, then, as there shown, every force or form of energy known to science must be a substantial entity. We further endeavoured to show that if one form of force were conclusively demonstrated to be a substantial or objective existence, it would be a clear departure from reason and consistency not to assume all the forces or phenomena-producing causes in nature also to be substantial entities. But if one form of physical force, or one single phenomenon-producing cause, such as heat, light, or sound, could be clearly shown to be the mere motion of material particles, and not a substantial entity or thing, then by rational analogy and the harmonious uniformity of nature's laws, all the other forces or phenomena-producing causes, whether physical, vital, mental or spiritual, must come within the same category as nonentitative modes of motion of material particles. Hence it would follow in such case, that the soul, life, mind, or spirit, so far from being a substantial entity which can form the basis of a hope for an immortal existence beyond the present life, must, according to materialism, and as the mere motion of brain and nerve particles, cease to exist whenever such physical particles shall cease to move at death."

SPIRIT--a "substantial Entity"!! Surely Substantialism cannot pretend very seriously to the title of philosophy--in such case. But let us read the arguments to the end. Here we find a just and righteous attack on Materialism wound up with the same unphilosophical assertion! . . .

"From the foregoing statement of the salient positions of materialistic science, as they bear against the existence of the soul after death, we drew the logical conclusion that no Christian philosopher who accepts the current doctrines of sound, light and heat as but modes of molecular motion, can ever answer the analogical reasoning of the materialist against the immortality of man. No possible view, as we have so often insisted, can make the least headway against such materialistic reasoning or frame any reply to this great argument of Haeckel and Huxley against the soul as an entity and its possible existence separate from the body, save the teaching of Substantialism, which so consistently maintains that the soul, life, mind and spirit are necessarily substantial forces or entities from the analogies of physical science, namely, the substantial nature of all the physical forces, including gravity, electricity, magnetism, cohesion, sound, light, heat, etc.

"This impregnable position of the Substantialist from logical analogy, based on the harmonious uniformity of nature's laws and forces, forms the bulwark of the Substantial Philosophy, and must in the nature of things for ever constitute the strong tower of that system of teaching. If the edifice of Substantialism, thus founded and fortified, can be taken and sacked by the forces of Materialism, then our labours for so many years have manifestly come to naught. Say, if you please, that the armies of Substantialism are thus burning the bridges behind them. So be it. We prefer death to either surrender or retreat; for if this fundamental position cannot be maintained against the combined forces of the enemy, then all is lost, Materialism has gained the day, and death is the eternal annihilation of the human race. Within this central citadel of principles, therefore, we have intrenched ourselves to survive or perish, and here, encircled by this wall of adamant, we have stored all our treasures and munitions of war, and if the agnostic hordes of materialistic science wish to possess them, let them train upon it their heaviest artillery. . . .

"How strange, then, when materialists themselves recognize the desperateness of their situation, and so readily grasp the true bearing of this analogical argument based on the substantial nature of the physical forces, that we should be obliged to reason with professed Substantialists, giving them argument upon argument in order to prove to them that they are no Substantialists at all, in the true sense of that term, so long as they leave one single force of nature or one single phenomenon-producing cause in nature, out of the category of substantial entities!

"One minister of our acquaintance speaks glowingly of the ultimate success of the Substantial Philosophy, and proudly calls himself a Substantialist, but refuses to include sound among the substantial forces and entities, thus virtually accepting the wave-theory! In the name of all logical consistency, what could that minister say in reply to another 'Substantialist' who would insist upon the beauty and truth of Substantialism, but who could not include light? And then another who could not include heat, or electricity, or magnetism, or gravity? Yet all of them good 'Substantialists' on the very same principle as is the one who leaves sound out of the substantial category, while still claiming to be an orthodox Substantialist! Why should they not leave life-force and mind-force and spirit-force out of the list of entities, thus making them, like sound-force (as materialists insist), but the vibration of material particles, and still claim the right to call themselves good Substantialists? Haeckel and Huxley would then be duly qualified candidates for baptism into the church of Substantialism.

"The truth is, the minister who can admit for one moment that sound consists of but the motion of air-particles, and thus, that it is not a substantial entity, is a materialist at bottom, though he may not be conscious of the logical maelstrom that is whirling him to scientific destruction. We have all heard of the play of 'Hamlet,' with the Prince of Denmark left out. Such would be the scientific play of Substantialism with the sound question ignored, and the theory of acoustics handed over to Materialism. (See our editorial on 'The Meaning of the Sound Discussion,' The Microcosm, Vol. V., p. 197.)"

We sympathize with the "Minister" who refuses to include Sound among "Substantial Entities." We believe in FOHAT, but would hardly refer to his Voice and Emanations as "Entities," though they are produced by an electric shock of atoms and repercussions producing both Sound and Light. Science would accept no more our Fohat than the Sound or Light-Entities of the "Substantial Philosophy"(?). But we have this satisfaction, at any rate, that, once thoroughly explained, Fohat will prove more philosophical than either the materialistic or substantial theories of the forces of nature.

How can anyone with pretensions to both a scientific and psychological mind, speaking of Soul and especially of Spirit, place them on the same level as the physical phenomena of nature, and this, in a language one can apply only to physical facts! Even Professor Bain, "a monistic ANNIHILATIONIST," as he is called, confesses that "mental and bodily states are utterly contrasted."4 [Format 4. The Substantialists call, moreover, Spirit that which we call mind-(Manas), and thus it is Soul which takes with them the place of ATMA; in short they confure the vehicle with the Driver inside. ]

Thus, the direct conclusion the Occultists and the Theosophists can come to at any rate on the prima facie evidence furnished them by writings which no philosophy can now rebut, is--that Substantial Philosophy, which was brought forth into this world to fight materialistic science and to slay it, surpasses it immeasurably in Materialism. No Bain, no Huxley, nor even Haeckel, has ever confused to this degree mental and physical phenomena. At the same time the "apostles of Materialism" are on a higher plane of philosophy than their opponents. For, the charge preferred against them of teaching that Soul is "the mere motion of brain and nerve particles" is untrue, for they never did so teach. But, even supposing such would be their theory, it would only be in accordance with Substantialism, since the latter assures us that Soul and Spirit, as much as all "the phenomena-producing causes" (?) whether physical, mental, or spiritual--if not regarded as SUBSTANTIAL ENTITIES--"must come within the same category as non-entitative (?) modes of motion of material particles."

All this is not only painfully vague, but is almost meaningless. The inference that the acceptance of the received scientific theories on light, sound and heat, etc., would be equivalent to accepting the soul motion of molecules--is certainly hardly worth discussion. It is quite true that some thirty or forty years ago Büchner and Moleschott attempted to prove that sensation and thought are a movement of matter. But this has been pronounced by a well-known English Annihilationist "unworthy of the name of 'philosophy'." Not one man of real scientific reputation or of any eminence, not Tyndall, Huxley, Maudsley, Clifford, Bain, Spencer nor Lewis, in England, nor Virchow, nor Haeckel in Germany, has ever gone so far as to say:--"Thought IS a motion of molecules." Their only quarrel with the believers in a soul was and is, that while the latter maintain that soul is the cause of thought, they (the Scientists) assert that thought is the concomitant of certain physical processes in the brain. Nor have they ever said (the real scientists and philosophers, however materialistic) that thought and nervous motion are the same, but that they are "the subjective and objective sides of the same thing."

John Stuart Mill is a good authority and an example to quote, and thus deny the charge. For, speaking of the rough and rude method of attempting to resolve sensation into nervous motion (taking as his example the case of the nerve-vibrations to the brain which are the physical side of the light perception), "at the end of all these motions, there is something which is not motion--there is a feeling or sensation of colour" . . . he says. Hence, it is quite true to say, that "the subjective feeling" here spoken of by Mill will outlive even the acceptance of the undulatory theory of light, or heat, as a mode of motion. For the latter is based on a physical speculation and the former is built on everlasting philosophy--however imperfect, because so tainted with Materialism.

Our quarrel with the Materialists is not so much for their soulless Forces, as for their denying the existence of any "Force-bearer," the Noumenon of Light, Electricity, etc. To accuse them of not making a difference between mental and physical phenomena is equal to proclaiming oneself ignorant of their theories. The most famous Negationists are to-day the first to admit that SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS and MOTION "are at the opposite poles of existence." That which remains to be settled between us and the materialistic IDEALISTS--a living paradox by the way, now personified by the most eminent writers on Idealistic philosophy in England--is the question whether that consciousness is only experienced in connection with organic molecules of the brain or not. We say it is the thought or mind which sets the molecules of the physical brain in motion; they deny any existence to mind, independent of the brain. But even they do not call the seat of the mind "a molecular fabric," but only that it is "the mind-principle"--the seat or the organic basis of the manifesting mind. That such is the real attitude of materialistic science may be demonstrated by reminding the reader of Mr. Tyndall's confessions in his Fragments of Science, for since the days of his discussions with Dr. Martineau, the attitude of the Materialists has not changed. This attitude remains unaltered, unless, indeed, we place the Hylo-ldealists on the same level as Mr. Tyndall--which would be absurd. Treating of the phenomenon of Consciousness, the great physicist quotes this question from Mr. Martineau: "A man can say 'I feel, I think, I love'; but how does consciousness infuse itself into the problem?" And he thus answers: "The passage from the physics of the brain to the corresponding facts of consciousness is unthinkable. 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."

Thus, there appears to be far less disagreement between the Occultists and modern Science than between the former and the Substantialists. The latter confuse most hopelessly the subjective with the objective phases of all phenomena, and the Scientists do not, withstanding that they limit the subjective to the earthly or terrestrial phenomena only. In this they have chosen the Cartesian method with regard to atoms and molecules; we hold to the ancient and primitive philosophical beliefs, so intuitively perceived by Leibnitz. Our system can thus be called, as his was--"Spiritualistic and Atomistic."

Substantialists speak with great scorn of the vibratory theory of science. But, until able to prove that their views would explain the phenomena as well, filling, moreover, the actual gaps and flaws in the modern hypotheses, they have hardly the right to use such a tone. As all such theories and speculations are only provisional, we may well leave them alone. Science has made wonderful discoveries on the objective side of all the physical phenomena. Where it is really wrong is, when it perceives in matter alone--i.e., in that matter which is known to it--the alpha and the omega of all phenomena. To reject the scientific theory, however, of vibrations in light and sound, is to court as much ridicule as the scientists do in rejecting physical and objective spiritualistic phenomena by attributing them all to fraud. Science has ascertained and proved the exact rapidity with which the sound-waves travel, and it has artificially imitated--on the data of transmission of sound by those waves--the human voice and other acoustic phenomena. The sensation of sound--the response of the sensory tract to an objective stimulus (atmospheric vibrations) is an affair of consciousness: and to call sound an "Entity" on this plane, is to objectivate most ridiculously a subjective phenomenon which is but an effect after all--the lower end of a concatenation of causes. If Materialism locates all in objective matter and fails to see the origin and primary causes of the Forces--so much the worse for the materialists; for it only shows the limitations of their own capacities of hearing and seeing--limitations which Huxley, for one, recognizes, for he is unable on his own confession to define the boundaries of our senses, and still asserts his materialistic tendency by locating sounds only in cells of matter, and on our sensuous plane. Behold, the great Biologist dwarfing our senses and curtailing the powers of man and nature in his usual ultra-poetical language. Hear him (as quoted by Sterling "Concerning Protoplasm") speak of "the wonderful noonday silence of a tropical forest," which "is after all due only to the dullness of our hearing, and could our ears only catch the murmurs of these tiny maelstroms as they whirl in the innumerable myriads of living cells which constitute each tree, we should be stunned as with the roar of a great city."

The telephone and the phonograph, moreover, are there to upset any theory except the vibratory one--however materialistically expressed. Hence, the attempt of the Substantialists "to show the fallacy of the wave-theory of sound as universally taught, and to outline the substantial theory of acoustics," cannot be successful. If they shew that sound is not a mode of motion in its origin and that the forces are not merely the qualities and property of matter induced or generated in, by and through matter, under certain conditions--they will have achieved a great triumph. But, whether as substance, matter or effect, sound and light can never be divorced from their modes of manifesting through vibrations--as the whole subjective or occult nature is one everlasting perpetual motion of VORTICAL vibrations.


Lucifer, September, 1891


Support this site by visiting our donation page
Site copyright © 1996- by Estela Carson-Priede