Jump to content

Blavatsky H.P. - Animated Statues: Difference between revisions

Blavatsky H.P. - Animated Statues (view source)

Revision as of 11:34, 19 October 2026

3 bytes removed ,  19 October
BCW volume 7: correct electronic text against the original scan
mNo edit summary
(BCW volume 7: correct electronic text against the original scan)
 
Line 109: Line 109:


All this may be studied in the literature of the ancient classics, and especially in Aryan literature. Meanwhile, I have tried to explain and have given the collective and individual opinions thereon of the great philosophers of antiquity in my ''Secret Doctrine''.<ref>{{HPB-CW-comment|[Considering the date when this essay on “Animated Statues” was written, it is evident that H. P. B. meant by ''Secret Doctrine'' her early draft of it, portions of which had been sent to Adyar in September 1886. The material she refers to is not to be found in the MSS. which went to Adyar. However, by turning to pages 234-240 of the Volume published in 1897 in London under the editorship of Annie Besant, and entitled “The Secret Doctrine, Volume III,” the student will find a brief essay on “The Idols and the Teraphim,” which in our estimation is precisely the material spoken of by H. P. B. in the text above. It is quite probable that H. P. B. meant at first to incorporate it into one of the volumes of ''The Secret Doctrine'' as published in 1888, but for some reason or other did not do so; however, she included therein brief passages from it, as can be seen by consulting Vol. I, pp. 394, 395, and Vol. II, p. 453.<br>
All this may be studied in the literature of the ancient classics, and especially in Aryan literature. Meanwhile, I have tried to explain and have given the collective and individual opinions thereon of the great philosophers of antiquity in my ''Secret Doctrine''.<ref>{{HPB-CW-comment|[Considering the date when this essay on “Animated Statues” was written, it is evident that H. P. B. meant by ''Secret Doctrine'' her early draft of it, portions of which had been sent to Adyar in September 1886. The material she refers to is not to be found in the MSS. which went to Adyar. However, by turning to pages 234-240 of the Volume published in 1897 in London under the editorship of Annie Besant, and entitled “The Secret Doctrine, Volume III,” the student will find a brief essay on “The Idols and the Teraphim,” which in our estimation is precisely the material spoken of by H. P. B. in the text above. It is quite probable that H. P. B. meant at first to incorporate it into one of the volumes of ''The Secret Doctrine'' as published in 1888, but for some reason or other did not do so; however, she included therein brief passages from it, as can be seen by consulting Vol. I, pp. 394, 395, and Vol. II, p. 453.<br>
That the essay on “The Idols and the Teraphim” was not what H. P. B. intended to say on the subject in her prospective Third Volume is evidenced by the interesting fact that in ''The Secret Doctrine'', Vol. II, p. 455, she definitely states that “practical methods of such ancient divination will be found” in “Volume HI, Part II, of this present work.” The ''real'' Volume III having vanished without a trace, her explanations of such methods have never appeared in print.<br>
That the essay on “The Idols and the Teraphim” was not what H. P. B. intended to say on the subject in her prospective Third Volume is evidenced by the interesting fact that in ''The Secret Doctrine'', Vol. II, p. 455, she definitely states that “practical methods of such ancient divination will be found” in “Volume III, Part II, of this present work.” The ''real'' Volume III having vanished without a trace, her explanations of such methods have never appeared in print.<br>
In view of the facts outlined above, H. P. B.’s essay on “The Idols and the Teraphim” follows in immediate chronological sequence her essay on “Animated Statues.”—''Compiler''.]}}</ref> I hope the book will now very soon appear. Only, in order to counteract the effects of such humoristical works as ''A Fallen Idol'' on weak-minded people, who see in it only a satire upon our beliefs, I thought best to give here the testimony of the ages to the effect that such ''post-mortem'' pranks as played by Mr. Anstey’s sham ascetic, who died a sudden death, are of no rare occurrence in nature.
In view of the facts outlined above, H. P. B.’s essay on “The Idols and the Teraphim” follows in immediate chronological sequence her essay on “Animated Statues.”—''Compiler''.]}}</ref> I hope the book will now very soon appear. Only, in order to counteract the effects of such humoristical works as ''A Fallen Idol'' on weak-minded people, who see in it only a satire upon our beliefs, I thought best to give here the testimony of the ages to the effect that such ''post-mortem'' pranks as played by Mr. Anstey’s sham ascetic, who died a sudden death, are of no rare occurrence in nature.


Line 121: Line 121:
{{Style P-Align right|(Virgil, ''Aeneid'', lib. IV, 653-54)}}}}
{{Style P-Align right|(Virgil, ''Aeneid'', lib. IV, 653-54)}}}}


Sabinus and Servius Honoratus Maurus (a learned commentator of Virgil of the VIth century) have taught, as shown by Delrio, the demonologian (lib. ii, ch. xx and xxv, p. 116),<ref>{{HPB-CW-comment|[This his has reference to a work by Martin Anton Delrio (1551-1608), sometimes spelt Del Rio, entitled, ''Disquisitionum magisarum libri sex''. 3 tom. Lovanii, 1599. 4to. Other editions being those of 1600, 1603, 1608, 1613, 1657. It is not known which edition is meant by H. P. B.’s reference. In the 1599 edition, however (British Museum, 719. h. 12.), the following passage embodying the ideas brought out by H. P. B. occurs in Lib. 2. Q. XXVI, Sec. 2, Tom. 1:}}<br>
Sabinus and Servius Honoratus Maurus (a learned commentator of Virgil of the VIth century) have taught, as shown by Delrio, the demonologian (lib. ii, ch. xx and xxv, p. 116),<ref>{{HPB-CW-comment|[This has reference to a work by Martin Anton Delrio (1551-1608), sometimes spelt Del Rio, entitled, ''Disquisitionum magicarum libri sex''. 3 tom. Lovanii, 1599. 4to. Other editions being those of 1600, 1603, 1608, 1613, 1657. It is not known which edition is meant by H. P. B.’s reference. In the 1599 edition, however (British Museum, 719. h. 12.), the following passage embodying the ideas brought out by H. P. B. occurs in Lib. 2. Q. XXVI, Sec. 2, Tom. 1:}}<br>
“. . . . Addit Platonicos (fide excipio) secutus D. Augustinus, hosce malos vocari ''Lemureis''; Servius Honoratus scribit eos ''Maneis'' vocari, quamdiu in alia corpora nondum migrarunt. Idem Servius & Sabinus, ab anima separant umbram & simulacrum, putant enim (falso) homine constare umbra, corpore, & anima; animam caelum petere, corpus in terram dainere, umbram siue simulacrum descendere ad inferos: umbram volunt esse non verum corpus, sed speciem quandam corpoream, quae nequeat tangi, instar venti. Conveniunt tamen cum poëtis, istud, quicquid vel ad coelos adscendat, vel ad inferos descendat, interdum viuis apparere: ut alio loco docui, & hoc putabant malo magorum carmine euocari . . . .”<br>
“. . . . Addit Platonicos (fide excipio) secutus D. Augustinus, hosce malos vocari ''Lemureis''; Servius Honoratus scribit eos ''Maneis'' vocari, quamdiu in alia corpora nondum migrarunt. Idem Servius & Sabinus, ab anima separant umbram & simulacrum, putant enim (falso) homine constare umbra, corpore, & anima; animam caelum petere, corpus in terram dainere, umbram siue simulacrum descendere ad inferos: umbram volunt esse non verum corpus, sed speciem quandam corpoream, quae nequeat tangi, instar venti. Conveniunt tamen cum poëtis, istud, quicquid vel ad coelos adscendat, vel ad inferos descendat, interdum viuis apparere: ut alio loco docui, & hoc putabant malo magorum carmine euocari . . . .”<br>
{{HPB-CW-comment|{{Style P-Align right|—''Compiler''.]}}}}</ref> that man was composed, ''besides his soul'', of a shadow (''umbra'') and a body. The ''soul'' ascends to heaven, the ''body'' is pulverized, and the ''shadow'' is plunged in ''Hades''. . . . . This phantom—''umbra seu simulacrum''—is not a ''real'' body, they say: it is the ''appearance'' of one, that no hand can touch, as it avoids contact like a breath. Homer shows this same shadow in the phantom of Patroclus, who perished, killed by Hector, and yet “Here he is—it is ''his face'', his voice, his blood still flowing from his wounds;” (See ''Iliad'', XXIII, 65-68, and also ''Odyssey'', XI, 468.) The ancient Greeks and Latins had two souls—''anima bruta'' and ''anima divina'', the first of which is in Homer the animal soul, the image and the life of the body, and the second, the immortal, and the divine.
{{HPB-CW-comment|{{Style P-Align right|—''Compiler''.]}}}}</ref> that man was composed, ''besides his soul'', of a shadow (''umbra'') and a body. The ''soul'' ascends to heaven, the ''body'' is pulverized, and the ''shadow'' is plunged in ''Hades''. . . . . This phantom—''umbra seu simulacrum''—is not a ''real'' body, they say: it is the ''appearance'' of one, that no hand can touch, as it avoids contact like a breath. Homer shows this same shadow in the phantom of Patroclus, who perished, killed by Hector, and yet “Here he is—it is ''his face'', his voice, his blood still flowing from his wounds;” (See ''Iliad'', XXIII, 65-68, and also ''Odyssey'', XI, 468.) The ancient Greeks and Latins had two souls—''anima bruta'' and ''anima divina'', the first of which is in Homer the animal soul, the image and the life of the body, and the second, the immortal, and the divine.
Retrieved from "https://en.teopedia.org/lib/Special:MobileDiff/53112"