Blavatsky Blogger
Taking Theosophical
ideas
into the 21st
century
Occultism
or Magic
By
H
P Blavatsky
AMONG the
numerous sciences pursued by the well-disciplined army of earnest students of
the present century, none has had less honours or more scoffing than the oldest
of them—the science of sciences, the venerable mother-parent of all
our modern
pigmies. Anxious in their petty vanity to throw the veil of oblivion over their
undoubted origin, the self-styled positive scientists, ever on the
alert,
present to the courageous scholar who tries to deviate from the beaten highway
traced out for him by his dogmatic predecessors, a formidable range of serious
obstacles.
As a rule,
Occultism is a dangerous, double-edged weapon for one to handle who is
unprepared to devote his whole life to it. The theory of it, unaided by serious
practice, will ever remain in the eyes of those prejudiced against such an
unpopular cause an idle, crazy speculation, fit only to charm the ears of
ignorant old women. When we cast a look behind us and see how for the last
thirty years modern Spiritualism has been dealt with, notwithstanding the
occurrence of daily, hourly proofs which speak to all our senses, stare us in
the eyes,
and utter their voices from “beyond the great gulf,” how can we hope, I say,
that Occultism or Magic—which stands in relation to Spiritualism as the
infinite to the finite, as the cause to the effect, or as unity to multifariousness—will
easily gain ground where Spiritualism is scoffed at? One
who
rejects priori or even doubts the immortality of man’s soul can never believe
in its Creator; and, blind to what is heterogeneous in his eyes, will
remain
still more blind to the proceeding of the latter from homogeneity.
In
relation to the Kabalah, or the compound mystic text-book of the great secrets
of Nature, we do not know of anyone in the present century who could have
commanded a sufficient dose of that moral courage which fires the heart of the
true Adept with the sacred flame of propagandism, to force him into defying
public opinion by displaying familiarity with that sublime work. Ridicule is
the
deadliest
weapon of the age, and while we read in the records of history of thousands of
martyrs who joyfully braved flames and faggots in support of their mystic
doctrines in the past centuries, we would scarcely be likely to find one
individual in the present times who would be brave enough even to defy ridicule
by seriously undertaking to prove the great truths embraced in the traditions
of
the Past.
As an instance of the above, I will mention
the article on Rosicrucianism, signed “Hiraf.” This ably-written
essay—notwithstanding some fundamental errors, which, though they are such,
would be hardly noticed except by those who had devoted their lives to the
study of Occultism in its various branches of practical teaching—indicates with
certainty to the practical reader that, for theoretical knowledge, at least,
the author need fear few rivals, still less superiors.
His
modesty, which I cannot too much appreciate in his case—though he is safe
enough behind the mask of his fancy pseudonym—need not give him any
apprehensions. There are few critics in this country of Positivism who would
willingly risk themselves in an encounter with such a powerful disputant, on
his own ground.
The
weapons he seems to hold in reserve, in the arsenal of his wonderful memory,
his learning, and his readiness to give any further information that enquirers
may wish for, will undoubtedly scare off every theorist, unless he is perfectly
sure of himself, which few are. But book-learning—and here I refer only to the
subject of Occultism—vast as it may be, will always prove insufficient even to
the analytical mind—the most accustomed to extract the quintessence of truth,
disseminated throughout thousands of contradictory statements—unless supported
by personal experience and practice.
Hence
“Hiraf” can only expect an encounter with some one who may hope to find a
chance to refute some of his bold assertions on the plea of having just such a
slight practical experience. Still, it must not be understood that these
present lines are not intended to criticize our too modest essayist. Far from
poor, ignorant me be such a presumptuous thought. My desire is simple: to help
him in his
scientific,
but, as I said before, rather hypothetical researches, by telling a little of
the little I picked up in my long travels throughout the length and
breadth of
the East—that cradle of Occultism—in the hope of correcting certain erroneous
notions he seems to be labouring under, and which are calculated to confuse
uninitiated sincere enquirers, who might desire to drink at his own source of
knowledge.
In the
first place, “Hiraf” doubts whether there are in existence, in
Then
again, when he asserts, as he does, that Rosicrucianism is almost forgotten, we
may answer him that we do not wonder at it, and add, by way
of
parenthesis, that, strictly speaking, the Rosicrucians do not now even exist,
the last of that fraternity having departed in the person of Cagliostro.
“Hiraf”
ought to add to the word Rosicrucianism “that particular sect” at least, for it
was but a sect after all, one of many branches of the same tree.
By
forgetting to specify that particular denomination and by including under the
name of Rosicrucians all those who, devoting their lives to Occultism
congregated together in Brotherhoods, “Hiraf” commits an error by which he may
unwittingly
lead people to believe that the Rosicrucians having disappeared, there are no
more Kabalists practising Occultism on the face of the earth. He also becomes
thereby guilty of an anachronism, attributing to the Rosicrucians
the
building of the pyramids and other majestic monuments, which indelibly exhibit
in their architecture the symbols of the grand religions of the past.
For it is
not so. If the main object in view was, and still is, alike, with all the great
family of the ancient and modern Kabalists, the dogmas and formulas of
certain
sects differ greatly. Springing one after the other from the great Oriental
mother-root, they scattered broadcast all over the world, and each of
them
desiring to out-rival the other by plunging deeper and deeper into the secrets
jealously guarded by Nature, some of them became guilty of the greatest
heresies against the primitive Oriental Kabalah.
While the
first followers of the secret sciences, taught to the Chaldæans by nations
whose very name was never breathed in history, remained stationary in their
studies, having arrived at the maximum, the Omega of the knowledge
permitted
to man, many of the subsequent sects separated from them, and, in their
uncontrollable thirst for more knowledge, trespassed beyond the boundaries of
truth and fell into fictions. In
consequence
of Pythagoras—so says Jamblichus— having by sheer force of energy and daring
penetrated into the mysteries of the
twenty-two
years, many foreigners were subsequently admitted to share the knowledge of the
wise men of the East, who, as a consequence, had many of their secrets
divulged. Later still, unable to preserve them in their purity, these
mysteries
were so mixed up with fictions and fables of the Grecian mythology that truth
was wholly distorted.
As the
primitive Christian religion divided, in course of time, into numerous sects,
so the science of Occultism gave birth to a variety of doctrines
and
various brotherhoods. So the Egyptian Ophites became the Christian Gnostics,
shooting forth the Basilideans of the second century, and the original
Rosicrucians
created subsequently the Paracelsists, or Fire Philosophers, the European
Alchemists, and other physical branches of their sect. (See Hargrave Jennings’
Rosicrucians.) To call indifferently every Kabalist a Rosicrucian, is
to commit
the same error as if we were to call every Christian a Baptist on the ground
that the latter are also Christians.
The
Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross was not founded until the middle of the
thirteenth century. and notwithstanding the assertions of the learned Mosheim,
it derives its name neither from the Latin word Ros (dew), nor from a cross,
the
symbol of
Lux. The origin of the Brotherhood can he ascertained by any earnest, genuine
student of Occultism, who happens to travel in Asia Minor, if he chooses to
fall in with some of the Brotherhood, and if he is willing to devote himself to
the head-tiring work of deciphering a Rosicrucian manuscript—the hardest thing
in the world-—for it is carefully preserved in the archives of the very
Lodge
which was founded by the first Kabalist of that name, but which now goes by
another name. The founder of it, a German Ritter, of the name of Rosencranz,
was a man who, after acquiring a very suspicious reputation through the
practice
of the
Black Art in his native place, reformed in consequence of a vision.
Giving up
his evil practices, he made a solemn vow, and went on foot to
there, the
Christian God, the meek, but well-informed Nazarene—trained as he was in the
high school of the Essenians, those virtuous descendants of the botanical as
well as astrological and magical Chald to Rosencranz, a Christian would say, in
a vision, but I would suggest, in the shape of a materialized spirit. The
purport of this visitation, as well as the subject of their conversation,
remained for ever a mystery to many of the
Brethren;
but immediately after that, the ex-sorcerer and Ritter disappeared, and was
heard of no more till the mysterious sect of Rosicrucians was added to the
family of Kabalists, and their powers aroused popular attention, even among
the
Eastern populations, indolent and accustomed as they are to live among wonders.
The
Rosicrucians strove to combine together the most various branches of Occultism,
and they soon became renowned for the extreme purity of their
lives and
their extraordinary powers, as well as for their thorough knowledge of
the secret
of secrets.
As
alchemists and conjurers they became proverbial. Later (I need not inform
“Hiraf” precisely when, as we drink at two different sources of knowledge),
they gave birth to the more modern Theosophists, at whose head was Paracelsus,
and to the Alchemists, one of the most celebrated of whom was Thomas Vaughan
(seventeenth
century), who wrote the most practical things on Occultism under the name of
Eugenius Philalethes. I know and can prove that
The
Rosicrucian Kabalah is but an epitome of the Jewish and the Oriental ones,
combined, the latter being the most secret of all. The Oriental Kabalah,
the
practical, full, and only existing copy, is carefully preserved at the
headquarters of this Brotherhood in the East, and, I may safely vouch, will
never come out of its possession. Its very existence has been doubted by many
of
the
European Rosicrucians. One who wants “to become” has to hunt for his knowledge
through thousands of scattered volumes, and pick up facts and lessons, bit by
bit. Unless he takes the nearest way and consents “to be made,” he will
never
become a practical Kabalist, and with all his learning will remain at the
threshold of the “mysterious gate.” The Kabalah may be used and its truths
imparted on a smaller scale now than it was in antiquity, and the existence of
the mysterious Lodge, on account of its secrecy, doubted, but it does exist and
has lost none of the primitive secret powers of the ancient Chaldæans
The
lodges, few in number, are divided into sections and known but to the Adepts;
no
one would
be likely to find them out, unless the Sages themselves found the neophyte
worthy of initiation. Unlike the European Rosicrucians—who, in order “to become
and not to be made,” have constantly put into practice the word of St. John, who
says, “Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force,” and who
have struggled alone, violently robbing Nature of her secrets—the Oriental
Rosicrucians (for such we will call them, being denied the right to pronounce
their true name), in the serene beatitude of their divine
knowledge,
are ever ready to help the earnest student struggling “to become” with
practical knowledge, which dissipates, like a heavenly breeze, the blackest
clouds of sceptical doubt.
“Hiraf” is
right again when he says thatKnowing that their mysteries, if divulged, in the
present chaotic state of society, would produce mere confusion and death, they
shut up that knowledge within themselves. Heirs to the early heavenly
wisdom of
their first forefathers, they keep the keys which unlock the most guarded of
Nature’s secrets, and impart them only gradually and with the
greatest
caution. But still they do impart sometimes.
Once all
such a cercle vicieux, “Hiraf” sins likewise in a certain comparison he makes
between Christ, Buddha, and Khoung-foo-tsee, or Confucius. A
comparison
can hardly be made between the two former wise and spiritual Illuminati, and
the Chinese philosopher. The higher aspirations and views of the two Christs
can have nothing to do with the cold, practical philosophy of the
latter,
brilliant anomaly as he was among a naturally dull and materialistic people,
peaceful and devoted to agriculture from the earliest ages of their history.
Confucius
can never bear the slightest comparison with the two great Reformers. Whereas
the principles and doctrines of Christ and Buddha were calculated to embrace
the whole of humanity, Confucius confined his attention solely to his own
country, trying to apply his profound wisdom and philosophy to the wants of his
countrymen, and little troubling his head about the rest of
mankind.
Intensely Chinese in patriotism and views, his philosophical doctrines are as
much devoid of the purely poetic element, which characterizes the teachings of
Christ and Buddha, the two divine types, as the religious tendencies of his
people lack in that spiritual exaltation which we find, for instance, in India.
Khoung-foo-tsee has not even the depth of feeling and the slight spiritual
striving of his contemporary, Lao-tsee.
Says the
learned Ennemoser:
The
spirits of Christ and Buddha have left indelible, eternal traces all over the
face of the world. The doctrines of Confucius can he mentioned only as the most
brilliant proceedings of cold human reasoning.
Harvey, in
his Universal History, has depicted the Chinese nation perfectly, in a few
words:
Their
heavy, childish, cold, sensual nature explains the peculiarities of their
history.
Hence any
comparison between the first two Reformers and Confucius, in an essay on
Rosicrucianism, in which “Hiraf” treats of the Science of Sciences and invites
the thirsty for knowledge to drink at her inexhaustible source, seems
inadmissible.
Further,
when our learned author asserts so dogmatically that the Rosicrucian learns, though
he never uses, the secret of immortality in earthly
life, he
asserts only what he himself, in his practical inexperience, thinks impossible.
The words “never” and “impossible” ought to be erased from the dictionary of
humanity, until the time at least when the great Kabalah shall all
be solved,
and so rejected or accepted. The Count St. Germain is, until this very time, a
living mystery, and the Rosicrucian Thomas Vaughan another one. The countless
authorities we have in literature, as well as in oral tradition (which
sometimes
is the more trustworthy), about this wonderful Count’s having been met and
recognized in different centuries, is no myth. Anyone who admits one of the
practical truths of the occult sciences taught by the Kabalah tacitly admits
them all.
It must be Hamlet’s “to be or not to be,” and if the Kabalah is true, then St.
Germain need be no myth.
But I am
digressing from my object, which is, firstly, to show the slight differences
between the two Kabalahs, that of the Rosicrucians and time Oriental one; and,
secondly, to say that the hope expressed by “Hiraf” to see the subject better
appreciated at some future day than it has been till now, may perhaps become
more than a hope. Time will show man things; till then, let us heartily
thank
“Hiraf” for this first well-aimed shot at those stubborn scientific runaways,
who, once before the Truth, avoid looking her in the face, and dare not even
throw a glance behind them, lest they should be forced to see that which would
greatly lessen their self-sufficiency. As a practical follower of Eastern
Spiritualism, I can confidently wait for the time, when, with the timely help
of those ‘‘who know,’’ American Spiritualism, which even in its present shape
has proved such a sore in the side of the materialists, will become a science
and a thing of mathematical certitude, instead of being regarded only as the
crazy delusion of epileptic
monomaniacs.
The first
Kabalah in which a mortal man ever dared to explain the greatest mysteries of
the universe, and show the keys to those masked doors in the ramparts of Nature
through which no mortal can ever pass without rousing dread sentries never seen
upon this side her wall,was compiled by a certain Simeon Ben Iochai, who lived
at the time of the second Temple’s destruction.
Only about
thirty years after the death of this renowned Kabalist, his MSS. and written
explanations, which had till then remained in his
possession
as a most precious secret, were used by his son Rabbi Elizzar and other learned
men. Making a compilation of the whole, they so produced the famous work called
Sohar (God’s splendour). This book proved an inexhaustible
mine for
all the subsequent Kabalists, their source of information and knowledge, and
all more recent and genuine Kabalahs were more or less carefully
copied
from the former. Before that, all the mysterious doctrines had come down in an
unbroken line of merely oral tradition as far back as man could trace himself
on earth. They were scrupulously and jealously guarded by the wise men of Chald
India, Persia and Egypt, and passed from one Initiate to another, in the same
purity of form as when handed down to the first man by the angels, students of
God’s great Theosophic Seminary. For the first time since the world’s creation,
the secret doctrines, passing through Moses who was initiated in
In
consequence of the personal ambition of this great prophet medium, he succeeded
in passing off his familiar spirit, the wrathful “Jehovah,” for the
spirit of
God himself, and so won undeserved laurels and honours.
The same
influence prompted him to alter some of the principles of the great oral
Kabalah in order to make them the more secret. These principles were laid out
in symbols by him in the first four books of the Pentateuch, but for some
mysterious reasons he with held them from Deuteronomy. Having initiated his
seventy Elders in his own way, the latter could give but what they had received
them selves, and so was prepared the first opportunity for heresy, and the
erroneous interpretation of the symbols. While the Oriental Kabalah remained in
its pure primitive shape, the Mosaic or Jewish one was full of drawbacks, and
the keys to many of the secrets—forbidden by the Mosaic law—purposely
misinterpreted.
The powers
conferred by it on the Initiates were formidable still, and of all the most
renowned
Kabalists,
King Solomon and his bigoted parent, David, not withstanding his penitential
psalms, were the most powerful. But still the doctrine remained secret and
purely oral, until, as I have said before, the days of the second
received
it orally and directly from his Master, and the very book of the Sohar was
written out on received information, which was handed down as an unvarying
stereo typed tradition by the Orientals, and altered, through the ambition of
Moses, by
the Jews.
H P Blavatsky
______________________
The Blavatsky
Blogger
Taking Theosophical
ideas
into the 21st
century
__________________________
Postings
to this Website reflect
the
views of The Blavatsky Blogger.
Please
don’t go looking for anyone else.