Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
12,476
edits
Blavatsky H.P. - Footnotes to Cosmogony and Anthropology: Difference between revisions
Blavatsky H.P. - Footnotes to Cosmogony and Anthropology (view source)
Revision as of 05:35, 22 July 2025
, 22 Julyno edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
{{Vertical space|}} | {{Vertical space|}} | ||
{{ | {{Style P-Quote|“What are we to understand by the name God? . . . Methinks that it would be far more rational to believe that this fictitious personage is a compound of what we would call ''mother thoughts;'' of harmonious ideas forming a center of actions and a center of propulsion, a focus of all the other thoughts of which the universe is composed. . . .”}} | ||
We may be doubtful whether our Brother Cahagnet means by his “Mother Thoughts” the spiritual transcendental essences which Aristotle calls privations and Plato calls forms, species improperly understood and known as ideas; those eternal, immutable essences removed altogether {{Page aside|62}}from the sphere of sense, and cognizable more by intuition than reason. But whether or not he means that substance of which the world is but the shadow and which gives the latter the little of partial ''reality'' it possesses, his definition of the abstract Deity is undoubtedly that of the Vedantins, who define Parabrahm, ''absolute'' Intelligence and Force Itself, and hence devoid of either intelligence or force. In such a case his “Mother Thoughts” would under another name take the place of ''Îśvara'', as defined by the modern school of Benares Vedantins, though we doubt that Mr. Cahagnet has the remotest idea of the existence, let alone the philosophy, of Vedantism. | We may be doubtful whether our Brother Cahagnet means by his “Mother Thoughts” the spiritual transcendental essences which Aristotle calls privations and Plato calls forms, species improperly understood and known as ideas; those eternal, immutable essences removed altogether {{Page aside|62}}from the sphere of sense, and cognizable more by intuition than reason. But whether or not he means that substance of which the world is but the shadow and which gives the latter the little of partial ''reality'' it possesses, his definition of the abstract Deity is undoubtedly that of the Vedantins, who define Parabrahm, ''absolute'' Intelligence and Force Itself, and hence devoid of either intelligence or force. In such a case his “Mother Thoughts” would under another name take the place of ''Îśvara'', as defined by the modern school of Benares Vedantins, though we doubt that Mr. Cahagnet has the remotest idea of the existence, let alone the philosophy, of Vedantism. | ||