HPB-IU v.2 ch.10: Difference between revisions

{{Style P-No indent|clergyman failed to perceive the difference. In his conception of the matter, the denying of the personal objective existence of the Devil was itself “the sin against the Holy Ghost.”}}

It is a late day for us to expect the Christian clergy to undo and amend their work. They have too much at stake. If the Christian Church should abandon or even modify the dogma of an anthropomorphic devil, it would be like pulling the bottom card from under a castle of cards. The structure would fall. The clergymen to whom we have alluded perceived that upon the relinquishing of Satan as a personal devil, the dogma of Jesus Christ as the second deity in their trinity must go over in the same catastrophe. Incredible, or even horrifying, as it may seem, the Roman Church bases its doctrine of the godhood of Christ entirely upon the satanism of the fallen archangel. We have the testimony of Father Ventura, who proclaims the vital importance of this dogma to the Catholics.

Many zealous and earnest souls have revolted at the monstrous dogma of John Calvin, the popekin of Geneva, that {{Style S-Italic|sin is the necessary cause of the greatest good.}} It was bolstered up, nevertheless, by logic like that of des Mousseaux, and illustrated by the same dogmas. The execution of Jesus, the god-man, on the cross, was the most prodigious crime in the universe, yet it was necessary that mankind—those predestinated to ever-

Mahomet and his disciples, who held Jesus in great respect as a prophet, remarks Eliphas Levi, used to utter, when speaking of Christians, the following remarkable words: “Jesus of Nazareth was verily a true prophet of Allah and a grand man; but lo! his disciples all went insane one day, and made a god of him.”

But we have Satan presented to us as the prop and mainstay of sacerdotism—an Atlas, holding the Christian heaven and cosmos upon his shoulders. If he falls, then, in their conception, all is lost, and chaos must come again.

The first inquiry is whether the term {{Style S-Italic|Devil}}, as here used, actually represents the malignant Deity of the Christians, or an antagonistic, blind force—the dark side of nature. By the latter we are not to understand the manifestation of any evil principle that is {{Style S-Italic|malum in se,}} but only the shadow of the Light, so to say. The theories of the kabalists treat of it as a force which is antagonistic, but at the same time essential to the vitality, evolving, and vigor of the good principle. Plants would perish in their first stage of existence, if they were kept exposed to a constant sunlight; the night alternating with the day is essential to their healthy growth and development. Goodness, likewise, would speedily cease to be such, were it not alternated by its opposite. In human nature, evil denotes the antagonism of matter to the spiritual, and each is accordingly purified thereby. In the cosmos, the equilibrium must be preserved; the

In the same fargard of the “Vendidad” the Brahman divinities are involved in the same denunciation with Æshma-dæva: “I combat India, I combat Sauru, I combat the Dæva Naonhaiti.” The annotator explains them to be the Vedic gods, Indus, Gaurea, or Siva, and the two Aswins. There must be some mistake, however, for Siva, at the time the “Vedas” were completed, was an aboriginal or Æthiopian God, the Bala or Bel of Western Asia. He was not an Aryan or Vedic deity. Perhaps Sûrya was the divinity intended.

Three and a half centuries before Christ, Plato expressed his opinion of evil by saying that “there is in matter a blind, refractory force, which resists the will of the Great Artificer.” This blind force, under Christian influx, was made to see and become responsible; it was transformed into Satan!

His identity with Typhon can scarcely be doubted upon reading the account in {{Style S-Italic|Job}} of his appearance with the sons of God, before the Lord. He accuses Job of a readiness to curse the Lord to his face upon sufficient provocation. So Typhon, in the Egyptian {{Style S-Italic|Book of the Dead,}} figures as the accuser. The resemblance extends even to the names, for one of Typhon’s appellations was {{Style S-Italic|Seth,}} or {{Style S-Italic|Seph;}} as Satan, in Hebrew, means an adversary. In Arabic the word is {{Style S-Italic|Shâtana}}—to be adverse, to persecute, and Manetho says he had treacherously murdered Osiris and allied himself with the Shemites (the Israelites). This may possibly have originated the fable told by Plutarch, that, from the fight between Horus and Typhon, Typhon, overcome with fright at the mis-

The strange veneration in which the Ophites held the serpent which represented Christos may become less perplexing if the students would but remember that at all ages the serpent was the symbol of divine wisdom, which kills in order to resurrect, destroys but to rebuild the better. Moses is made a descendant of Levi, a serpent-tribe. Gautama-Buddha is of a serpent-lineage, through the Naga (serpent) race of kings who reigned in Magadha. Hermes, or the god Taaut (Thoth), in his snake-symbol is Têt; and, according to the Ophite legends, Jesus or Christos is born from a snake (divine wisdom, or Holy Ghost), {{Style S-Italic|i.e}}., he became a Son of God through his initiation into the “Serpent Science.” Vishnu, identical with the Egyptian Kneph, rests on the heavenly {{Style S-Italic|seven}}-headed serpent.

In all these scenes there is manifested no such malignant diabolism as is supposed to characterize “the adversary of souls.”

Typhon figures in the {{Style S-Italic|Book of the Dead,}} as the Accuser of souls when they appear for judgment, as Satan stood up to accuse Joshua, the high-priest, before the angel, and as the Devil came to Jesus to tempt or test him during his great fast in the wilderness. He was also the deity denominated Baal-Tsephon, or god of the crypt, in the book of {{Style S-Italic|Exodus,}} and {{Style S-Italic|Seth,}} or the pillar. During this period, the ancient or archaic worship was more or less under the ban of the government; in figurative language, Osiris had been treacherously slain and cut in fourteen (twice {{Style S-Italic|seven}}) pieces, and coffined by his brother Typhon, and Isis had gone to Byblos in quest of his body.

Finally the princes of the older {{Style S-Italic|régime,}} the gods who had, on the assault of the giants, taken the forms of animals and hidden in Æthiopia, returned and expelled the shepherds.

The several tribes and nations had their tutelar gods, and vilified those of inimical peoples. The transformation of Typhon, Satan and Beelzebub are of this character. Indeed, Tertullian speaks of Mithra, the god of the Mysteries, as a devil.

In the twelfth chapter of the {{Style S-Italic|Apocalypse,}} Michael and his angels overcame the Dragon and his angels: “and the Great Dragon was cast out, that Archaic Ophis, called Diabolos and Satan, that deceiveth the whole world.” It is added: “They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb.” The Lamb, or Christ, had to descend himself to hell, the world of the dead, and remain there three days before he subjugated the enemy, according to the myth.

The student of Lepsius, Champollion, and other Egyptologists will

The Two Brothers, the Good and Evil Principles, appear in the Myths of the {{Style S-Italic|Bible}} as well as those of the Gentiles, and Cain and Abel, Typhon and Osiris, Esau and Jacob, Apollo and Python, etc., Esau or Osu, is represented, when born, as “red all over like an hairy garment.” He is the Typhon or Satan, opposing his brother.

From the remotest antiquity the serpent was held by every people in the greatest veneration, as the embodiment of Divine wisdom and the symbol of spirit, and we know from Sanchoniathon that it was Hermes or Thoth who was the first to regard the serpent as “the most spirit-like of all the reptiles;” and the Gnostic serpent with the seven vowels over the head is but the copy of Ananta, the seven-headed serpent on which rests the god Vishnu.

Our explanation of the myth may be of little value to students of symbology, and yet we believe that the interpretation of the primitive serpent-worship as given by the initiates is the correct one. In Vol. i., p. 10, we quote from the serpent Mantra, in the {{Style S-Italic|Aytareya-Brahmana,}} a passage which speaks of the earth as the {{Style S-Italic|Sarpa Rajni,}} the Queen of the Serpents, and “the mother of all that moves.” These expressions refer to the fact that before our globe had become egg-shaped or round it was a long trail of cosmic dust or fire-mist, moving and writhing like a serpent. This, say the explanations, was the Spirit of God moving on the chaos until its breath had incubated cosmic matter and made it assume the annular shape of a serpent with its tail in its mouth—emblem of eternity

In the Hindu mythology Vasaki, the Great Dragon, pours forth upon Durga, from his mouth, a poisonous fluid which overspreads the ground, but her consort Siva caused the earth to open her mouth and swallow it.

{{Style P-Quote|“Hail, dear child of gods, great son of Jove!

Receive the honors great; the time is at hand;

At the time that the high-priest Hilkiah is said to have found the {{Style S-Italic|Book of the Law,}} the Hindu {{Style S-Italic|Puranas}} (Scriptures) were known to the Assyrians. These last had for many centuries held dominion from the Hellespont to the Indus, and probably crowded the Aryans out of Bactriana into the Punjâb. The {{Style S-Italic|Book of the Law}} seems to have been a {{Style S-Italic|purana.}} “The learned Brahmans,” says Sir William Jones, “pretend that five conditions are requisite to constitute a real {{Style S-Italic|purana:}}

It is pretty certain that whoever wrote the {{Style S-Italic|Pentateuch}} had this plan before him, as well as those who wrote the {{Style S-Italic|New Testament}} had become thoroughly well acquainted with Buddhistic ritualistic worship, legends and doctrines, through the Buddhist missionaries who were many in those days in Palestine and Greece.

Hercules was likewise “the First-Begotten.” He is also Bel, Baal, and Bal, and therefore Siva, the Destroyer. Bacchus was styled by Euripides, “Bacchus, the Son of God.” As a child, Bacchus, like the Jesus of the {{Style S-Italic|Apocryphal Gospels,}} was greatly dreaded. He is described as benevolent to mankind; nevertheless he was merciless in punishing whomever failed of respect to his worship. Pentheus, the son of Cad-

But we ought, perhaps, to explain the ancient use of allegory and symbology. The truth in the former was left to be deduced; the symbol expressed some abstract quality of the Deity, which the laity could easily apprehend. Its higher sense terminated there; and it was employed by the multitude thenceforth as an image to be employed in idolatrous rites. But the allegory was reserved for the inner sanctuary, when only the elect were admitted. Hence the rejoinder of Jesus when his disciples interrogated him because he spoke to the multitude in parables. “To you,” said he, “it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.” In the minor Mysteries a sow was washed to typify the purification of the neophyte; as her return to the mire indicated the superficial nature of the work that had been accomplished.

The whole allegory of Job is an open book to him who understands the picture-language of Egypt as it is recorded in {{Style S-Italic|the Book of the Dead.}} In the Scene of Judgment, Osiris is represented sitting on his throne,

Initiation into the Mysteries, as every intelligent person knows, was dramatic representation of scenes in the underworld. Such was the allegory of Job.

The {{Style S-Italic|Book of Job}} is a complete representation of ancient initiation, and the trials which generally precede this grandest of all ceremonies.

This passage, like all others in which the faintest allusions could be found to a “Champion,” “Deliverer,” or “Vindicator,” was interpreted into a direct reference to the Messiah; but apart from the fact that in the Septuagint this verse is translated:

To restore this skin of mine which endures these things,” etc. }}

Not only is there not the slightest allusion in the poem of Job to Christ, but it is now well proved that all those versions by different translators, which agree with that of King James, were written on the authority of Jerome, who has taken strange liberties in his {{Style S-Italic|Vulgate.}} He was the first to cram into the text this verse of his own fabrication:

Instead of offering consolations, the three friends of the suffering Job seek to make him believe that his misfortune must have come in punishment of some extraordinary transgressions on his part. Hurling back upon them all their imputations, Job swears that while his breath is in him he will maintain his cause. He takes in view the period of his prosperity “when the secret of God was upon his tabernacles,” and he was a judge

Elihu is the hierophant; he begins with a rebuke, and the sophisms of Job’s false friends are swept away like the loose sand before the west wind.

And Job, who to the dogmatic fallacies of his three friends in the bitterness of his heart had exclaimed: “No doubt but ye are {{Style S-Italic|the}} people, and wisdom shall die with you. . . . Miserable comforters are ye all. . . . Surely I would speak to the Almighty, and I desire to reason with God. But {{Style S-Italic|ye}} are forgers of lies, {{Style S-Italic|ye}} are physicians of no value!” The sore-eaten, visited Job, who in the face of the official clergy—offering for all hope the necessarianism of damnation, had in his despair nearly wavered in his patient faith, answered: “What {{Style S-Italic|ye}} know, {{Style S-Italic|the same}} do I know also; I am not inferior unto you. . . . Man cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down: he fleeth also as a shadow, {{Style S-Italic|and continueth not}}. . . . Man dieth, and wasteth away, yea, man giveth up the ghost, and {{Style S-Italic|where is he?}} . . . If a man die shall he {{Style S-Italic|live}} again? . . . When a few years are come then I shall go the way {{Style S-Italic|whence}} I shall not return. . . . O that one might plead for a man with God, as a man pleadeth for his neighbor!”

So long as the neophyte was satisfied with his own worldly wisdom and irreverent estimate of the Deity and His purposes; so long as he gave ear to the pernicious sophistries of his advisers, the hierophant kept silent. But, when this anxious mind was ready for counsel and instruction, his voice is heard, and he speaks with the authority of the Spirit of God that “constraineth” him: “Surely God will not hear {{Style S-Italic|vanity,}} neither will the Almighty regard it. . . . He respecteth not any that are wise at heart.”

What better commentary than this upon the fashionable preacher, who “{{Style S-Italic|multiplieth}} words without knowledge!” This magnificent {{Style S-Italic|prophetic}} satire might have been written to prefigure the spirit that prevails in all the denominations of Christians.

Job, now in modest confidence, responded:

Then in the judgment the deceased invokes four spirits who preside over the Lake of Fire, and is purified by them. He then is conducted to

This grandiose poem of Job was well understood by the kabalists. While many of the mediæval Hermetists were profoundly religious men, they were, in their innermost hearts—like kabalists of every age—the deadliest enemies of the clergy. How true the words of Paracelsus when worried by fierce persecution and slander, misunderstood by friends and foes, abused by clergy and laity, he exclaimed:

“O ye of Paris, Padua, Montpellier, Salerno, Vienna, and Leipzig! Ye are not teachers of the truth, but confessors of lies. Your philosophy is a lie. Would you know {{Style S-Italic|what}} magic {{Style S-Italic|really is,}} then seek it in St. John’s {{Style S-Italic|Revelation}}. . . . As you cannot yourselves prove your teachings from the {{Style S-Italic|Bible}} and the {{Style S-Italic|Revelation,}} then let your farces have an end. The {{Style S-Italic|Bible is the true key and interpreter.}} John, not less than Moses, Elias, Enoch, David, Solomon, Daniel, Jeremiah, and the rest of the prophets, was a {{Style S-Italic|magician,}} kabalist, and diviner. If now, all, or even any of those I have named, were yet living, I do not doubt that you would make an example of them in your miserable slaughter-house, and would annihilate them there on the spot, and {{Style S-Italic|if}} it were possible, the Creator of all things too!”

It will be perceived from these extended illustrations that the Satan of the {{Style S-Italic|Old Testament,}} the Diabolos or Devil of the {{Style S-Italic|Gospels}} and {{Style S-Italic|Apostolic Epistles}}, were but the antagonistic principle in matter, necessarily incident to it, and not wicked in the moral sense of the term. The Jews,

The Protestant is a reaction from the Roman Catholic Church. It is necessarily not coherent in its parts, but a prodigious host of fragments beating their way round a common centre, attracting and repelling each other. Parts are centripetally impelled towards old Rome, or the system which enabled old Rome to exist; parts still recoil under the centrifugal impulse, and seek to rush into the broad ethereal region beyond Roman, or even Christian influence.

But it may be argued, perhaps, that Hindu theology, both Brahmanical and Buddhistic, is as strongly impregnated with belief in objective devils as Christianity itself. There is a slight difference. This very {{Style S-Italic|subtlety}} of the Hindu mind is a sufficient warrant that the well-educated people, the learned portion, at least, of the Brahman and Buddhist divines, consider the Devil in another light. With them the Devil is a metaphysical abstraction, an allegory of necessary {{Style S-Italic|evil;}} while {{Style S-Italic|with Christians the myth has become a historical entity, the fundamental stone on which Christianity, with its dogma of redemption, is built.}} He is as necessary—as Des Mousseaux has shown—to the Church as the beast of the seventeenth chapter of the {{Style S-Italic|Apocalypse}} was to his rider. The English-speaking Protestants, not finding the {{Style S-Italic|Bible}} explicit enough, have adopted the {{Style S-Italic|Diabology}} of Milton’s celebrated poem, {{Style S-Italic|Paradise Lost,}} embellishing it somewhat from Goethe’s celebrated drama of {{Style S-Italic|Faust.}} John Milton, first a Puritan and finally a Quietist and Unitarian, never put forth his great production except as a work of fiction, but it thoroughly dovetailed together the different parts of Scripture. The Ilda-Baoth of the Ophites was transformed into an angel of light, and the morning star, and made the Devil in the first act of the {{Style S-Italic|Diabolic Drama.}} Then the twelfth chapter of the {{Style S-Italic|Apocalypse}} was brought in for the second act. The great red Dragon was adopted as the same illustrious personage as {{Style S-Italic|Lucifer,}} and the last scene is his fall, like that of Vulcan-Hephaistos, from Heaven into the island of Lemnos; the fugitive hosts and their

This drama of {{Style S-Italic|Paradise Lost}} comprises the unformulated belief of English-speaking “evangelical Protestant Christians.” Disbelief of its main features is equivalent, in their view, to “denying Christ” and “blaspheming against the Holy Ghost.” If John Milton had supposed that his poem, instead of being regarded as a companion of Dante’s {{Style S-Italic|Divine Comedy,}} would have been considered as another {{Style S-Italic|Apocalypse}} to supplement the {{Style S-Italic|Bible,}} and complete its demonology, it is more than probable that he would have borne his poverty more resolutely, and withheld it from the press. A later poet, Robert Pollok, taking his cue from this work, wrote another, {{Style S-Italic|The Course of Time,}} which bade fair for a season to take the rank of a later {{Style S-Italic|Scripture;}} but the nineteenth century has fortunately received a different inspiration, and the Scotch poet is falling into oblivion.

The votaries of the ancient worship were persecuted and put to death on charges of witchcraft. The Albigenses, descendants of the Gnostics, and the Waldenses, precursors of the Protestants, were hunted and massacred under like accusations. Martin Luther himself was accused of

But the reformers were nursed with the milk of their mother. Luther was as bloodthirsty as the Pope; Calvin more intolerant than Leo or Urban. Thirty years of war depopulated whole districts of Germany, Protestants and Catholics cruel alike. The new faith too opened its batteries against witchcraft. The statute books became crimsoned with bloody legislation in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Holland, Great Britain, and the North American Commonwealth. Whosoever was more liberal, more intelligent, more free speaking than his fellows was liable to arrest and death. The fires that were extinguished at Smithfield were kindled anew for magicians; it was safer to rebel against a throne than to pursue abstruse knowledge outside the orthodox dead-line.

Having now set forth the biography of the Devil from his first advent in India and Persia, his progress through Jewish, and both early and later Christian {{Style S-Italic|Theo}}logy down to the latest phases of his manifestation, we now turn back to review certain of the opinions extant in the earlier Christian centuries.

The {{Style S-Italic|Sibylline Books}} at that period seem to have been regarded with extraordinary favor. One can easily perceive that they were inspired from the same source as those of the Gentile nations.

Here is a leaf from Gallæus:

Coming from Heaven, it assumed a mortal form. . . .

Virgin, receive God in thy pure bosom—

By a Virgin. . . . The new God-sent Star was adored by the Magi,

The infant swathed was shown in a manger. . . .

This looks at first-sight like a prophecy of Jesus. But could it not mean as well some other creative God? We have like utterances concerning Bacchus and Mithras.

The {{Style S-Italic|Dionysiacs,}} written in the fifth century, serve to render this matter very clear, and even to show its close connection with the Christian legend of the birth of Jesus:

When {{Style S-Italic|Zeus,}} very coiled, his form and countenance changed,

A Dragon-Bridegroom, coiled in love-inspiring fold . . .

Thus, by the alliance with the Dragon of Æther,

The womb of Persephonè became alive with fruit,

“The {{Style S-Italic|Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,}} and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore, that {{Style S-Italic|holy}} thing which shall be born of thee shall be called Son of God,” says the angel ({{Style S-Italic|Luke}} i. 35).

“God . . . hath at the last of these days spoken to us by a Son,

As Typhon was the dark shadow of his brother Osiris, so Python is the evil side of Apollo, the bright god of visions, the seer and the soothsayer. He is killed by Python, but kills him in his turn, thus redeeming humanity from sin. It was in memory of this deed that the priestesses of the sun-god enveloped themselves in the snake-skin, typical of the fabulous monster. Under its exhilarating influence—the serpent’s skin being considered magnetic—the priestesses fell into magnetic trances, and “receiving their voice from Apollo,” they became prophetic and delivered oracles.

St. John is known to have travelled in Asia, a country governed by Magi and imbued with Zoroastrian ideas, and in those days full of Buddhist

Thus Ophios and Ophiomorphos, Apollo and Python, Osiris and Typhon, Christos and the Serpent, are all convertible terms. They are all Logoi, and one is unintelligible without the other, as day could not be known had we no night. All are regenerators and saviours, one in a spiritual, the other in a physical sense. One insures immortality for the Divine Spirit; the other gives it through regeneration of the seed. The Saviour of mankind has to die, because he unveils to humanity the great secret of the immortal ego; the serpent of {{Style S-Italic|Genesis}} is cursed because he said to {{Style S-Italic|matter,}} “Ye shall not die.” In the world of Paganism the counterpart of the “serpent” is the second Hermes, the reïncarnation of Hermes Trismegistus.

It has been repeatedly stated by the Christian missionaries in Ceylon and India that the people are steeped in demonolatry; that they are devil-worshippers, in the full sense of the word. Without any exaggeration we say that they are no more so than the masses of uneducated Christians. But even were they worshippers of (which is more than believers in) the Devil, yet there is a great difference between the teachings of their clergy on the subject of a personal devil and the dogmas of Catholic preachers and many Protestant ministers also. The Christian priests are bound to teach and impress upon the minds of their flock the existence of the Devil, and the opening pages of the present chapter show the reason why. But not only will the Cingalese Oepasampala, who belong to the highest priesthood, not confess to belief in a personal demon but even the Samenaira, the candidates and novices, would laugh at the idea. Everything in the external worship of the Buddhists is allegorical and is never otherwise accepted or taught by the educated {{Style S-Italic|pungis}} (pundits). The accusation that they allow, and tacitly agree to leave the poor people steeped in the most degrading superstitions, is not without foundation; but that they enforce such superstitions, we most vehemently deny. And in this they appear to advantage beside our Christian clergy, who (at least those who have not allowed their fanaticism to interfere with their brains), without believing a word of it, yet preach the existence of the Devil, as the personal enemy of a personal God, and the evil genius of mankind.

The Fathers were prudent as they were wise in their inventions. To be impartial, after having created a Devil, they set to creating apocryphal saints. We have named several in preceding chapters; but we must not forget Baronius, who having read in a work of Chrysostom about the holy {{Style S-Italic|Xenoris,}} the word meaning a {{Style S-Italic|pair,}} a couple, mistook it for the

Max Müller says that the serpent in Paradise is a conception which might have sprung up among the Jews, and “seems hardly to invite comparison with the much grander conceptions of the terrible power of Vritra and Ahriman in the {{Style S-Italic|Veda}} and {{Style S-Italic|Avesta}}.” With the kabalists the Devil was always a myth—God or good reversed. That modern Magus, Eliphas Levi, calls the Devil {{Style S-Italic|l’ivresse astrale}}. It is a blind force like electricity, he says; and, speaking allegorically, as he always did, Jesus remarked that he “beheld Satan like lightning fall from Heaven.”

This is at once sound logic and good sound law, for is it not a maxim of jurisprudence: {{Style S-Italic|“Qui facit per alium, facit per se?”}}

And yet, for the space of several years, the damsel suffered herself to be led astray by such a hero. How far above this odoriferous gallant is the majestic figure of the Miltonic Satan!

Let the reader then fancy, if he can, this superb chimera, this ideal of the rebellious angel become incarnate Pride, crawling into the skin of the most disgusting of all animals! Notwithstanding that the Christian catechism teaches us that Satan in {{Style S-Italic|propria persona}} tempted our first mother, Eve, in a real paradise, and that in the shape of a serpent, which of all animals was the most insinuating and fascinating! God orders him, as a punishment, to crawl eternally on his belly, and bite the dust. “A sentence,” remarks Levi, “which resembles in nothing the traditional flames of hell.” The more so, that the real zoological serpent, which was created before Adam and Eve, crawled on his belly, and bit the dust likewise, before there was any original sin.

“And Aaron shall cast lots {{Style S-Italic|upon the two goats;}} one lot for the Lord ({{Style S-Italic|Ihoh}} in the original) and one lot for the scape-goat” ({{Style S-Italic|Azazel}} ).