Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
15,381
edits
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
{{Style P-No indent|the {{Style S-Small capitals|individuality}}. The “ Angel ” of that Star, or the Dhyani-Buddha will be either the guiding or simply the presiding “ Angel,” so to say, in every new rebirth of the monad, ''which is part of his own essence'', through his vehicle, man, may remain for ever ignorant of this fact. The adepts have each their Dhyani-Buddha, their elder “ twin Soul,” and they know it, calling it “ Father-Soul,” and “ Father-Fire.” It is only at the last and supreme initiation, however, that they learn it when placed face to face with the bright “ Image.” How much has Bulwer Lytton known of this mystic fact when describing, in one of his highest inspirational moods, Zanoni face to face with his ''Augoeides ?''}} | {{Style P-No indent|the {{Style S-Small capitals|individuality}}. The “ Angel ” of that Star, or the Dhyani-Buddha will be either the guiding or simply the presiding “ Angel,” so to say, in every new rebirth of the monad, ''which is part of his own essence'', through his vehicle, man, may remain for ever ignorant of this fact. The adepts have each their Dhyani-Buddha, their elder “ twin Soul,” and they know it, calling it “ Father-Soul,” and “ Father-Fire.” It is only at the last and supreme initiation, however, that they learn it when placed face to face with the bright “ Image.” How much has Bulwer Lytton known of this mystic fact when describing, in one of his highest inspirational moods, Zanoni face to face with his ''Augoeides ?''}} | ||
The ''Logos'', or both the unmanifested and the manifested {{Style S-Small capitals|Word}}, is called by the Hindus, Iswara, “ the Lord,” though the Occultists give it another name. Iswara, say the Vedantins, is the highest consciousness in nature. “ This highest consciousness,” answer the Occultists, “ is only a ''synthetic unit ''in the world of the manifested Logos — or on the ''plane of illusion ; ''for it is the sum total of Dhyan-Chohanic ''consciousnesses.''” “ Oh, wise man, remove the conception ''that not-Spirit is Spirit'',” says Sankarâchârya. Atma is ''not-Spirit ''in its final Parabrahmic state, ''Iswara ''or ''Logos ''is Spirit ; or, as Occultism explains, it is a compound unity of manifested living Spirits, the parent-source and nursery of all the mundane and terrestrial monads, ''plus ''their ''divine ''reflection, which emanate from, and return into, the Logos, each in the culmination of its time. There are seven chief groups of such Dhyan Chohans, which groups will be found and recognised in every religion, for they are the primeval seven Rays. Humanity, occultism teaches us, is divided into seven distinct groups and their sub-divisions, mental, spiritual, and physical. * The monad, then, viewed as one, is above the seventh principle (in Kosmos and man), and as a triad, it is the direct radiant progeny of the said ''compound ''unit, not the breath (and special ''creation ''out of ''nihil'') of “ God,” as that unit is called ; for such an idea is quite unphilosophical, and degrades Deity, dragging it down to a finite, attributive condition. As well expressed by the translator of the “ Crest-Jewel of Wisdom ” — though ''Iswara ''is “ God ” “ unchanged in the profoundest depths of ''pralayas ''and in the intensest activity of the ''manvantaras ”'' . . ., still “ ''beyond ''(him) is | The ''Logos'', or both the unmanifested and the manifested {{Style S-Small capitals|Word}}, is called by the Hindus, Iswara, “ the Lord,” though the Occultists give it another name. Iswara, say the Vedantins, is the highest consciousness in nature. “ This highest consciousness,” answer the Occultists, “ is only a ''synthetic unit ''in the world of the manifested Logos — or on the ''plane of illusion ; ''for it is the sum total of Dhyan-Chohanic ''consciousnesses.''” “ Oh, wise man, remove the conception ''that not-Spirit is Spirit'',” says Sankarâchârya. Atma is ''not-Spirit ''in its final Parabrahmic state, ''Iswara ''or ''Logos ''is Spirit ; or, as Occultism explains, it is a compound unity of manifested living Spirits, the parent-source and nursery of all the mundane and terrestrial monads, ''plus ''their ''divine ''reflection, which emanate from, and return into, the Logos, each in the culmination of its time. There are seven chief groups of such Dhyan Chohans, which groups will be found and recognised in every religion, for they are the primeval {{Style S-Small capitals|seven}} Rays. Humanity, occultism teaches us, is divided into seven distinct groups and their sub-divisions, mental, spiritual, and physical. * The monad, then, viewed as {{Style S-Small capitals|one}}, is above the seventh principle (in Kosmos and man), and as a triad, it is the direct radiant progeny of the said ''compound ''{{Style S-Small capitals|unit}}, not the breath (and special ''creation ''out of ''nihil'') of “ God,” as that unit is called ; for such an idea is quite unphilosophical, and degrades Deity, dragging it down to a finite, attributive condition. As well expressed by the translator of the “ Crest-Jewel of Wisdom ” — though ''Iswara ''is “ God ” “ unchanged in the profoundest depths of ''pralayas ''and in the intensest activity of the ''manvantaras ”'' . . ., still “ ''beyond ''(him) is | ||
{{Footnotes start}} | {{Footnotes start}} | ||
| Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
{{Style P-No indent|the bodies subject to him in his system. Of these bodies the poor little number of ''primary ''and ''secondary ''planets known to astronomy, looks wretched enough, in truth. * Therefore, it stands to reason that there are a great number of planets, small and large, that have not been discovered yet, but of the existence of which ancient astronomers — al of them initiated adepts — must have certainly been aware. But, as their relation to the gods was sacred, it had to remain arcane, as also the names of various other planets and stars.}} | {{Style P-No indent|the bodies subject to him in his system. Of these bodies the poor little number of ''primary ''and ''secondary ''planets known to astronomy, looks wretched enough, in truth. * Therefore, it stands to reason that there are a great number of planets, small and large, that have not been discovered yet, but of the existence of which ancient astronomers — al of them initiated adepts — must have certainly been aware. But, as their relation to the gods was sacred, it had to remain arcane, as also the names of various other planets and stars.}} | ||
Besides which, even the Roman Catholic theology speaks of “ ''seventy ''planets that preside over the destinies of the nations of this globe ;” and, save the erroneous application, there is more truth in this tradition than in exact modern astronomy. The seventy planets are connected with the ''seventy ''elders of the people of Israel ''(Numb. ''11, 16'' ) ''because the ''regents ''of these planets are meant, not the orbs themselves ; and the word seventy is a play and a ''blind ''upon the 7 × 7 of the subdivisions. Each people and nation, as said already, has its ''direct ''Watcher, Guardian and Father in Heaven — a Planetary Spirit. We are willing to leave their own national God, Jehovah, to the descendants of Israel, the worshippers of ''Sabaoth ''or {{Style S-Small capitals|Saturn}} ; for, indeed, the ''monads ''of the people chosen by him are his own, and the Bible has never made a secret of it. Only the text of the English (Protestant) Bible is, in disagreement, as usual, with those of the Septuagint and the Vulgate. Thus, while in the former one reads ''(in Deuter. ''xxxii., 8 ''and ''9'' ) ''“ When the most high (not Jehovah) divided to the nations their inheritance . . . he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel,” in the ''Septuagint ''the text reads “ according ''to the number of the Angels ”'' (Planet-Angels), which is more concordant with truth and fact. Moreover, all the texts agree that “ the Lord’s ( Jehovah) ''portion ''is his people ; Jacob ''is ''the lot of ''his ''inheritance ” (Deut. xxxii. 9) ; and this settles the question. The “ Lord ” Jehovah took ''for his portion ''Israel — what have other nations to do with that particular ''national ''Deity ? Let then, the “ angel Gabriel ” watch over Iran and “ Mikael-Jehovah ” over the Hebrews. These are not the gods of other nations, and it is difficult to see why Christians | Besides which, even the Roman Catholic theology speaks of “ ''seventy ''planets that preside over the destinies of the nations of this globe ;” and, save the erroneous application, there is more truth in this tradition than in exact modern astronomy. The seventy planets are connected with the ''seventy ''elders of the people of Israel ''(Numb. ''11, 16'' ) ''because the ''regents ''of these planets are meant, not the orbs themselves ; and the word seventy is a play and a ''blind ''upon the 7 × 7 of the subdivisions. Each people and nation, as said already, has its ''direct ''Watcher, Guardian and Father in Heaven — a Planetary Spirit. We are willing to leave their own national God, Jehovah, to the descendants of Israel, the worshippers of ''Sabaoth ''or {{Style S-Small capitals|Saturn}} ; for, indeed, the ''monads ''of the people chosen by him are his own, and the Bible has never made a secret of it. Only the text of the English (Protestant) Bible is, in disagreement, as usual, with those of the Septuagint and the Vulgate. Thus, while in the former one reads ''(in Deuter. ''xxxii., 8 ''and ''9'' ) ''“ When the {{Style S-Small capitals|most high}} (not Jehovah) divided to the nations their inheritance . . . he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel,” in the ''Septuagint ''the text reads “ according ''to the number of the Angels ”'' (Planet-Angels), which is more concordant with truth and fact. Moreover, all the texts agree that “ the Lord’s ( Jehovah) ''portion ''is his people ; Jacob ''is ''the lot of ''his ''inheritance ” (Deut. xxxii. 9) ; and this settles the question. The “ Lord ” Jehovah took ''for his portion ''Israel — what have other nations to do with that particular ''national ''Deity ? Let then, the “ angel Gabriel ” watch over Iran and “ Mikael-Jehovah ” over the Hebrews. These are not the gods of other nations, and it is difficult to see why Christians | ||
{{Footnotes start}} | {{Footnotes start}} | ||