Changes

{{Style P-Poem|poem=“Who dares think {{Style S-Italic|one}} thing and {{Style S-Italic|another}} tell

{{Style P-Poem|poem=“Who dares think {{Style S-Italic|one}} thing and {{Style S-Italic|another}} tell

My heart detests him as the gates of Hell!”—Pope.}}

My heart detests him as the gates of Hell!”

|signature=—Pope.}}

{{Style P-Quote|“If man ceases to exist when he disappears in the grave, you must be compelled to affirm that he is the only creature in existence whom nature or providence has condescended to deceive and cheat by capacities for which there are no available objects.”—Bulwer-Lytton: {{Style S-Italic|Strange Story.}} }}

{{Style P-Quote|“If man ceases to exist when he disappears in the grave, you must be compelled to affirm that he is the only creature in existence whom nature or providence has condescended to deceive and cheat by capacities for which there are no available objects.”

|signature=—Bulwer-Lytton: ''Strange Story''. }}

 

{{Vertical space|}}

The preface of Richard A. Proctor’s latest work on astronomy, entitled {{Style S-Italic|Our Place among Infinities,}} contains the following extraordinary words: “It was their ignorance of the earth’s place among infinities, which led the ancients to regard the heavenly bodies as ruling favorably or adversely the fates of men and nations, and to dedicate the days in sets of seven to the seven planets of their astrological system.”

The preface of Richard A. Proctor’s latest work on astronomy, entitled {{Style S-Italic|Our Place among Infinities,}} contains the following extraordinary words: “It was their ignorance of the earth’s place among infinities, which led the ancients to regard the heavenly bodies as ruling favorably or adversely the fates of men and nations, and to dedicate the days in sets of seven to the seven planets of their astrological system.”

{{Style P-No indent|the time lost their lives at the hands of assassins, and neither he, nor any other commentator has been able to explain the mysterious cause of this homicidal mania.}}

{{Style P-No indent|the time lost their lives at the hands of assassins, and neither he, nor any other commentator has been able to explain the mysterious cause of this homicidal mania.}}

If we press these gentlemen for an explanation, which as pretended philosophers they are bound to give us, we are answered that it is a great deal more {{Style S-Italic|scientific}} to assign for such epidemics “agitation of the mind,” “. . . a time of political excitement (1830)” “. . . imitation and impulse,” “. . . excitable and idle boys,” and “{{Style S-Italic|hysterical}} girls{{Style S-Italic|,”}} than to be absurdly seeking for the verification of superstitious traditions in a hypothetical astral light. It seems to us that if, by some providential fatality, {{Style S-Italic|hysteria}} were to disappear entirely from the human system, the medical fraternity would be entirely at a loss for explanations of a large class of phenomena now conveniently classified under the head of “normal symptoms of certain pathological conditions of the nervous centres.” Hysteria has been hitherto the sheet-anchor of skeptical pathologists. Does a dirty peasant-girl begin suddenly to speak with fluency different foreign languages hitherto unfamiliar to her, and to write poetry—“hysterics!” Is a medium levitated, in full view of a dozen of witnesses, and carried out of one third-story window and brought back through another—“disturbance of the nervous centres, followed by a {{Style S-Italic|collective}} hysterical delusion.”^{[#fn462 462]} A Scotch terrier, caught in the room during a manifestation, is hurled by an invisible hand across the room, breaks to pieces, in his {{Style S-Italic|salto mortali,}} a chandelier, under a ceiling eighteen feet high, to fall down killed^{[#fn463 463]}—{{Style S-Italic|“canine hallucination!”}}

If we press these gentlemen for an explanation, which as pretended philosophers they are bound to give us, we are answered that it is a great deal more {{Style S-Italic|scientific}} to assign for such epidemics “agitation of the mind,” “. . . a time of political excitement (1830)” “. . . imitation and impulse,” “. . . excitable and idle boys,” and “{{Style S-Italic|hysterical}} girls{{Style S-Italic|,”}} than to be absurdly seeking for the verification of superstitious traditions in a hypothetical astral light. It seems to us that if, by some providential fatality, {{Style S-Italic|hysteria}} were to disappear entirely from the human system, the medical fraternity would be entirely at a loss for explanations of a large class of phenomena now conveniently classified under the head of “normal symptoms of certain pathological conditions of the nervous centres.” Hysteria has been hitherto the sheet-anchor of skeptical pathologists. Does a dirty peasant-girl begin suddenly to speak with fluency different foreign languages hitherto unfamiliar to her, and to write poetry—“hysterics!” Is a medium levitated, in full view of a dozen of witnesses, and carried out of one third-story window and brought back through another—“disturbance of the nervous centres, followed by a {{Style S-Italic|collective}} hysterical delusion.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn462}} A Scotch terrier, caught in the room during a manifestation, is hurled by an invisible hand across the room, breaks to pieces, in his {{Style S-Italic|salto mortali,}} a chandelier, under a ceiling eighteen feet high, to fall down killed{{Footnote mark|†|fn463}}—{{Style S-Italic|“canine hallucination!”}}

“True science has no belief,” says Dr. Fenwick, in Bulwer-Lytton’s {{Style S-Italic|Strange Story;}} “true science knows but three states of mind: denial, conviction, and the vast interval between the two, which is not belief, but the {{Style S-Italic|suspension of judgment.”}} Such, perhaps, was true science in Dr. Fenwick’s days. But the true science of our modern times proceeds otherwise; it either denies point-blank, without any preliminary investigation, or sits in the interim, between denial and conviction, and, dictionary in hand, invents new Græco-Latin appellations for non-existing kinds of hysteria!

“True science has no belief,” says Dr. Fenwick, in Bulwer-Lytton’s {{Style S-Italic|Strange Story;}} “true science knows but three states of mind: denial, conviction, and the vast interval between the two, which is not belief, but the {{Style S-Italic|suspension of judgment.”}} Such, perhaps, was true science in Dr. Fenwick’s days. But the true science of our modern times proceeds otherwise; it either denies point-blank, without any preliminary investigation, or sits in the interim, between denial and conviction, and, dictionary in hand, invents new Græco-Latin appellations for non-existing kinds of hysteria!

How often have powerful clairvoyants and adepts in mesmerism described the epidemics and {{Style S-Italic|physical}} (though to others invisible) manifestations which science attributes to epilepsy, hæmato-nervous disorders, and what not, of {{Style S-Italic|somatic origin,}} as their lucid vision saw them in the astral light. They affirm that the “electric waves” were in violent perturbation, and that they discerned a direct relation between this ethereal disturbance and the mental or physical epidemic then raging. But

How often have powerful clairvoyants and adepts in mesmerism described the epidemics and {{Style S-Italic|physical}} (though to others invisible) manifestations which science attributes to epilepsy, hæmato-nervous disorders, and what not, of {{Style S-Italic|somatic origin,}} as their lucid vision saw them in the astral light. They affirm that the “electric waves” were in violent perturbation, and that they discerned a direct relation between this ethereal disturbance and the mental or physical epidemic then raging. But

[#fn462anc 462]. Littré: “Revue des Deux Mondes.”

{{Footnote return|*|fn462}} Littré: “Revue des Deux Mondes.”

[#fn463anc 463]. See des Mousseaux’s “Œuvres des Demons.”

{{Footnote return|†|fn463}} See des Mousseaux’s “Œuvres des Demons.”

279 WHAT CAUSES EPIDEMICS?

{{Page|279|WHAT CAUSES EPIDEMICS?}}

science has heeded them not, but gone on with her encyclopædic labor of devising new names for old things.

{{Style P-No indent|science has heeded them not, but gone on with her encyclopædic labor of devising new names for old things.}}

“History,” says Du Potet, the prince of French mesmerists, “keeps but too well the sad records of sorcery. These facts were but too real, and lent themselves but too readily to dreadful malpractices of the art, to monstrous abuse! . . . But how did I come to find out that art? Where did I learn it? In my thoughts? no; it is {{Style S-Italic|nature}} herself which discovered to me the secret. And how? By producing before my own eyes, without waiting for me to search for it, indisputable facts of sorcery and magic. . . . What is, after all, somnambulistic sleep? {{Style S-Italic|A result of the potency of magic.}} And what is it which determines these attractions, these {{Style S-Italic|sudden impulses,}} these raving epidemics, rages, antipathies, crises;—these convulsions which {{Style S-Italic|you can make durable? .}} . . what is it which determines them, if not the {{Style S-Italic|very principle}} we employ, the agent {{Style S-Italic|so decidedly well known to the ancients?}} What you call nervous fluid or {{Style S-Italic|magnetism,}} the men of old called {{Style S-Italic|occult power,}} or the potency of the soul, subjection, MAGIC!”

“History,” says Du Potet, the prince of French mesmerists, “keeps but too well the sad records of sorcery. These facts were but too real, and lent themselves but too readily to dreadful malpractices of the art, to monstrous abuse! . . . But how did I come to find out that art? Where did I learn it? In my thoughts? no; it is {{Style S-Italic|nature}} herself which discovered to me the secret. And how? By producing before my own eyes, without waiting for me to search for it, indisputable facts of sorcery and magic. . . . What is, after all, somnambulistic sleep? {{Style S-Italic|A result of the potency of magic.}} And what is it which determines these attractions, these {{Style S-Italic|sudden impulses,}} these raving epidemics, rages, antipathies, crises;—these convulsions which {{Style S-Italic|you can make durable? .}} . . what is it which determines them, if not the {{Style S-Italic|very principle}} we employ, the agent {{Style S-Italic|so decidedly well known to the ancients?}} What you call nervous fluid or {{Style S-Italic|magnetism,}} the men of old called {{Style S-Italic|occult power,}} or the potency of the soul, subjection, MAGIC!”

“Magic is based on the existence of a mixed world placed {{Style S-Italic|without,}} not {{Style S-Italic|within}} us; and with which we can enter in communication by the use of certain arts and practices. . . . An element {{Style S-Italic|existing in nature,}} unknown to most men, gets hold of a person and withers and breaks him down, as the fearful hurricane does a bulrush; it scatters men far away, it strikes them in a {{Style S-Italic|thousand places at the same time,}} without their perceiving the invisible foe, or being able to protect themselves . . . all this is {{Style S-Italic|demonstrated;}} but that this element could choose friends and select {{Style S-Italic|favorites,}} obey their {{Style S-Italic|thoughts,}} answer to the human voice, and understand the meaning of {{Style S-Italic|traced signs,}} that is what people cannot realize, and {{Style S-Italic|what their reason rejects,}} and that is {{Style S-Italic|what I saw;}} and I say it here most emphatically, that for me it is a fact and {{Style S-Italic|a truth}} demonstrated for ever.”^{[#fn464 464]}

“Magic is based on the existence of a mixed world placed {{Style S-Italic|without,}} not {{Style S-Italic|within}} us; and with which we can enter in communication by the use of certain arts and practices. . . . An element {{Style S-Italic|existing in nature,}} unknown to most men, gets hold of a person and withers and breaks him down, as the fearful hurricane does a bulrush; it scatters men far away, it strikes them in a {{Style S-Italic|thousand places at the same time,}} without their perceiving the invisible foe, or being able to protect themselves . . . all this is {{Style S-Italic|demonstrated;}} but that this element could choose friends and select {{Style S-Italic|favorites,}} obey their {{Style S-Italic|thoughts,}} answer to the human voice, and understand the meaning of {{Style S-Italic|traced signs,}} that is what people cannot realize, and {{Style S-Italic|what their reason rejects,}} and that is {{Style S-Italic|what I saw;}} and I say it here most emphatically, that for me it is a fact and {{Style S-Italic|a truth}} demonstrated for ever.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn464}}

“If I entered into greater details, one could readily understand that there do exist {{Style S-Italic|around}} us{{Style S-Italic|, as in ourselves,}} mysterious beings who have {{Style S-Italic|power}} and {{Style S-Italic|shape,}} who enter and go out at will, notwithstanding the well-closed doors.”^{[#fn465 465]} Further, the great mesmerizer teaches us that the faculty of directing this fluid is a “physical property, resulting from our organization . . . it passes through all bodies . . . everything can be used as a conductor for magical operations, and it will retain the power of producing effects in its turn.” This is the theory common to all hermetic philosophers. Such is the power of the fluid, “that {{Style S-Italic|no chemical or physical forces are able to destroy it}}. . . . There is very little analogy between

“If I entered into greater details, one could readily understand that there do exist {{Style S-Italic|around}} us{{Style S-Italic|, as in ourselves,}} mysterious beings who have {{Style S-Italic|power}} and {{Style S-Italic|shape,}} who enter and go out at will, notwithstanding the well-closed doors.”{{Footnote mark|†|fn465}} Further, the great mesmerizer teaches us that the faculty of directing this fluid is a “physical property, resulting from our organization . . . it passes through all bodies . . . everything can be used as a conductor for magical operations, and it will retain the power of producing effects in its turn.” This is the theory common to all hermetic philosophers. Such is the power of the fluid, “that {{Style S-Italic|no chemical or physical forces are able to destroy it}}. . . . There is very little analogy between

[#fn464anc 464]. Du Potet: “Magie Devoilée,” pp. 51-147.

{{Footnote return|*|fn464}}[#fn464anc 464]. Du Potet: “Magie Devoilée,” pp. 51-147.

[#fn465anc 465]. Ibid., p. 201.

{{Footnote return|†|fn465}} Ibid., p. 201.

280 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|280|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

the imponderable fluids known to physicists and this animal magnetic fluid.”^{[#fn466 466]}

{{Style P-No indent|the imponderable fluids known to physicists and this animal magnetic fluid.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn466}}}}

If we now refer to mediæval ages, we find, among others, Cornelius Agrippa telling us precisely the same: “The ever-changing universal force, the ‘soul of the world,’ can fecundate anything by infusing in it its own celestial properties. Arranged according to the formula taught {{Style S-Italic|by science,}} these objects receive the gift of communicating to us their virtue. It is sufficient to wear them, to feel them immediately operating on the soul as on the body. . . . Human soul possesses, from the fact of its being of the same essence as all creation, a {{Style S-Italic|marvellous power.}} One who possesses the secret is enabled to rise in science and knowledge as high as his imagination will carry him; but he does that only on the condition of becoming closely united to this universal force . . . Truth, even the future, can be then made ever present to the eyes of the soul; and this fact has been many times demonstrated by things coming to pass as they were seen and described beforehand . . . time and space vanish before the eagle eye of the immortal soul . . . her power becomes boundless . . . she can shoot through space and envelop with her presence a man, {{Style S-Italic|no matter at what distance;}} she can plunge and penetrate him through, and make him hear the voice of the person she belongs to, as if that person were in the room.”^{[#fn467 467]}

If we now refer to mediæval ages, we find, among others, Cornelius Agrippa telling us precisely the same: “The ever-changing universal force, the ‘soul of the world,’ can fecundate anything by infusing in it its own celestial properties. Arranged according to the formula taught {{Style S-Italic|by science,}} these objects receive the gift of communicating to us their virtue. It is sufficient to wear them, to feel them immediately operating on the soul as on the body. . . . Human soul possesses, from the fact of its being of the same essence as all creation, a {{Style S-Italic|marvellous power.}} One who possesses the secret is enabled to rise in science and knowledge as high as his imagination will carry him; but he does that only on the condition of becoming closely united to this universal force . . . Truth, even the future, can be then made ever present to the eyes of the soul; and this fact has been many times demonstrated by things coming to pass as they were seen and described beforehand . . . time and space vanish before the eagle eye of the immortal soul . . . her power becomes boundless . . . she can shoot through space and envelop with her presence a man, {{Style S-Italic|no matter at what distance;}} she can plunge and penetrate him through, and make him hear the voice of the person she belongs to, as if that person were in the room.”{{Footnote mark|†|fn467}}

If unwilling to seek for proof or receive information from mediæval, hermetic philosophy, we may go still further back into antiquity, and select, out of the great body of philosophers of the pre-Christian ages, one who can least be accused of superstition and credulity—Cicero. Speaking of those whom he calls {{Style S-Italic|gods,}} and who are either human or atmospheric spirits, “We know,” says the old orator, “that of all living beings man is the best formed, and, as the gods belong to this number, they must have a human form. . . . I do not mean to say that the gods have body and blood in them; but I say that they {{Style S-Italic|seem}} as if they had bodies with blood in them. . . . Epicurus, for whom hidden things were as tangible as if he had touched them with his finger, teaches us that gods are not generally visible, but that they are {{Style S-Italic|intelligible;}} that they are not bodies having a certain solidity . . . but that we can recognize them by their {{Style S-Italic|passing}} images; that as there are {{Style S-Italic|atoms}} enough in the infinite space {{Style S-Italic|to produce such images,}} these are produced before us . . . and make us realize what are these happy, immortal beings.”^{[#fn468 468]}

If unwilling to seek for proof or receive information from mediæval, hermetic philosophy, we may go still further back into antiquity, and select, out of the great body of philosophers of the pre-Christian ages, one who can least be accused of superstition and credulity—Cicero. Speaking of those whom he calls {{Style S-Italic|gods,}} and who are either human or atmospheric spirits, “We know,” says the old orator, “that of all living beings man is the best formed, and, as the gods belong to this number, they must have a human form. . . . I do not mean to say that the gods have body and blood in them; but I say that they {{Style S-Italic|seem}} as if they had bodies with blood in them. . . . Epicurus, for whom hidden things were as tangible as if he had touched them with his finger, teaches us that gods are not generally visible, but that they are {{Style S-Italic|intelligible;}} that they are not bodies having a certain solidity . . . but that we can recognize them by their {{Style S-Italic|passing}} images; that as there are {{Style S-Italic|atoms}} enough in the infinite space {{Style S-Italic|to produce such images,}} these are produced before us . . . and make us realize what are these happy, immortal beings.”{{Footnote mark|‡|fn468}}

“When the initiate,” says Levi, in his turn, “has become quite {{Style S-Italic|lucide,}}

“When the initiate,” says Levi, in his turn, “has become quite {{Style S-Italic|lucide,}}

[#fn466anc 466]. Baron Du Potet: “Cours de Magnetisme,” pp. 17-108.

{{Footnote return|*|fn466}} Baron Du Potet: “Cours de Magnetisme,” pp. 17-108.

[#fn467anc 467]. “De Occulto Philosophiâ,” pp. 332-358.

{{Footnote return|†|fn467}} “De Occulto Philosophiâ,” pp. 332-358.

[#fn468anc 468]. Cicero: “De Natura Deorum,” lib. i., cap. xviii.

{{Footnote return|‡|fn468}} Cicero: “De Natura Deorum,” lib. i., cap. xviii.

281 LEVI’S SIDEREAL PHANTOM.

{{Page|281|LEVI’S SIDEREAL PHANTOM.}}

he communicates and directs at will the {{Style S-Italic|magnetic}} vibrations in the mass of astral light. . . . Transformed in human light at the moment of the conception, {{Style S-Italic|it}} (the light) becomes the {{Style S-Italic|first envelope of the soul;}} by combination with the subtlest fluids it forms an ethereal body, or the {{Style S-Italic|sidereal phantom,}} which is entirely disengaged {{Style S-Italic|only}} at the moment of death.”^{[#fn469 469]} To project this ethereal body, at no matter what distance; to render it more objective and tangible by condensing over its fluidic form the waves of the parent essence, is the great secret of the adept{{Style S-Italic|-magician.}}

{{Style P-No indent|he communicates and directs at will the {{Style S-Italic|magnetic}} vibrations in the mass of astral light. . . . Transformed in human light at the moment of the conception, {{Style S-Italic|it}} (the light) becomes the {{Style S-Italic|first envelope of the soul;}} by combination with the subtlest fluids it forms an ethereal body, or the {{Style S-Italic|sidereal phantom,}} which is entirely disengaged {{Style S-Italic|only}} at the moment of death.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn469}} To project this ethereal body, at no matter what distance; to render it more objective and tangible by condensing over its fluidic form the waves of the parent essence, is the great secret of the adept{{Style S-Italic|-magician.}}}}

Theurgical magic is the last expression of occult psychological science. The Academicians reject it as the hallucination of diseased brains, or brand it with the opprobrium of charlatanry. We deny to them most emphatically the right of expressing their opinion on a subject which they have never investigated. They have no more right, in their present state of knowledge, to judge of magic and Spiritualism than a Fiji islander to venture his opinion about the labors of Faraday or Agassiz. About all they can do on any one day is to correct the errors of the preceding day. Nearly three thousand years ago, earlier than the days of Pythagoras, the ancient philosophers claimed that light was ponderable—hence {{Style S-Italic|matter,}} and that light was force. The corpuscular theory, owing to certain Newtonian failures to account for it, was laughed down, and the undulatory theory, which proclaimed light {{Style S-Italic|imponderable,}} accepted. And now the world is startled by Mr.Crookes {{Style S-Italic|weighing}} light with his radiometer! The Pythagoreans held that neither the sun nor the stars were the {{Style S-Italic|sources}} of light and heat, and that the former was but an agent; but the modern schools teach the contrary.

Theurgical magic is the last expression of occult psychological science. The Academicians reject it as the hallucination of diseased brains, or brand it with the opprobrium of charlatanry. We deny to them most emphatically the right of expressing their opinion on a subject which they have never investigated. They have no more right, in their present state of knowledge, to judge of magic and Spiritualism than a Fiji islander to venture his opinion about the labors of Faraday or Agassiz. About all they can do on any one day is to correct the errors of the preceding day. Nearly three thousand years ago, earlier than the days of Pythagoras, the ancient philosophers claimed that light was ponderable—hence {{Style S-Italic|matter,}} and that light was force. The corpuscular theory, owing to certain Newtonian failures to account for it, was laughed down, and the undulatory theory, which proclaimed light {{Style S-Italic|imponderable,}} accepted. And now the world is startled by Mr.Crookes {{Style S-Italic|weighing}} light with his radiometer! The Pythagoreans held that neither the sun nor the stars were the {{Style S-Italic|sources}} of light and heat, and that the former was but an agent; but the modern schools teach the contrary.

The same may be said respecting the Newtonian law of gravitation. Following strictly the Pythagorean doctrine, Plato held that gravitation was not merely a law of the magnetic attraction of lesser bodies to larger ones, but a magnetic repulsion of similars and attraction of dissimilars. “Things brought together,” says he, “contrary to nature, are naturally at war, and repel one another.”^{[#fn470 470]} This cannot be taken to mean that repulsion occurs of necessity between bodies of dissimilar properties, but simply that when naturally antagonistic bodies are brought together they repel one another. The researches of Bart and Schweigger leave us in little or no doubt that the ancients were well acquainted with the mutual attractions of iron and the lodestone, as well as with the positive and negative properties of electricity, by whatever name they may have called

The same may be said respecting the Newtonian law of gravitation. Following strictly the Pythagorean doctrine, Plato held that gravitation was not merely a law of the magnetic attraction of lesser bodies to larger ones, but a magnetic repulsion of similars and attraction of dissimilars. “Things brought together,” says he, “contrary to nature, are naturally at war, and repel one another.”{{Footnote mark|†|fn470}} This cannot be taken to mean that repulsion occurs of necessity between bodies of dissimilar properties, but simply that when naturally antagonistic bodies are brought together they repel one another. The researches of Bart and Schweigger leave us in little or no doubt that the ancients were well acquainted with the mutual attractions of iron and the lodestone, as well as with the positive and negative properties of electricity, by whatever name they may have called

[#fn469anc 469]. Eliphas Levi.

{{Footnote return|*|fn469}} Eliphas Levi.

[#fn470anc 470]. “Timæus.” Such like expressions made Professor Jowett state in his Introduction that Plato taught the attraction of similar bodies to similar. But such an assertion would amount to denying the great philosopher even a rudimentary knowledge of the laws of magnetic poles.

{{Footnote return|†|fn470}} “Timæus.” Such like expressions made Professor Jowett state in his Introduction that Plato taught the attraction of similar bodies to similar. But such an assertion would amount to denying the great philosopher even a rudimentary knowledge of the laws of magnetic poles.

282 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|282|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

it. The reciprocal magnetic relations of the planetary orbs, which are all magnets, was with them an accepted fact, and aërolites were not only called by them magnetic stones, but used in the Mysteries for purposes to which we now apply the magnet. When, therefore, Professor A. M. Mayer, of the Stevens Institute of Technology, in 1872, told the Yale Scientific Club that the earth is a great magnet, and that “on any sudden agitation of the sun’s surface the magnetism of the earth receives a profound disturbance in its equilibrium, causing fitful tremors in the magnets of our observatories, and producing those grand outbursts of the polar lights, whose lambent flames dance in rhythm to the quivering needle,”^{[#fn471 471]} he only restated, in good English, what was taught in good Doric untold centuries before the first Christian philosopher saw the light.

{{Style P-No indent|it. The reciprocal magnetic relations of the planetary orbs, which are all magnets, was with them an accepted fact, and aërolites were not only called by them magnetic stones, but used in the Mysteries for purposes to which we now apply the magnet. When, therefore, Professor A. M. Mayer, of the Stevens Institute of Technology, in 1872, told the Yale Scientific Club that the earth is a great magnet, and that “on any sudden agitation of the sun’s surface the magnetism of the earth receives a profound disturbance in its equilibrium, causing fitful tremors in the magnets of our observatories, and producing those grand outbursts of the polar lights, whose lambent flames dance in rhythm to the quivering needle,”{{Footnote mark|*|fn471}} he only restated, in good English, what was taught in good Doric untold centuries before the first Christian philosopher saw the light.}}

The prodigies accomplished by the priests of theurgical magic are so well authenticated, and the evidence—if human testimony is worth anything at all—is so overwhelming, that, rather than confess that the Pagan theurgists far outrivalled the Christians in miracles, Sir David Brewster piously concedes to the former the greatest proficiency in physics, and everything that pertains to natural philosophy. Science finds herself in a very disagreeable dilemma. She must either confess that the ancient physicists were superior in knowledge to her modern representatives, or that there exists something in nature beyond physical science, and that {{Style S-Italic|spirit}} possesses powers of which our philosophers never dreamed.

The prodigies accomplished by the priests of theurgical magic are so well authenticated, and the evidence—if human testimony is worth anything at all—is so overwhelming, that, rather than confess that the Pagan theurgists far outrivalled the Christians in miracles, Sir David Brewster piously concedes to the former the greatest proficiency in physics, and everything that pertains to natural philosophy. Science finds herself in a very disagreeable dilemma. She must either confess that the ancient physicists were superior in knowledge to her modern representatives, or that there exists something in nature beyond physical science, and that {{Style S-Italic|spirit}} possesses powers of which our philosophers never dreamed.

“The mistake we make in some science we have specially cultivated,” says Bulwer-Lytton, “is often only to be seen by the light of a separate science as especially cultivated by another.”^{[#fn472 472]}

“The mistake we make in some science we have specially cultivated,” says Bulwer-Lytton, “is often only to be seen by the light of a separate science as especially cultivated by another.”{{Footnote mark|†|fn472}}

Nothing can be easier accounted for than the highest possibilities of magic. By the radiant light of the universal magnetic ocean, whose electric waves bind the cosmos together, and in their ceaseless motion penetrate every atom and molecule of the boundless creation, the disciples of mesmerism—howbeit insufficient their various experiments—intuitionally perceive the alpha and omega of the great mystery. Alone, the study of this agent, which is the divine breath, can unlock the secrets of psychology and physiology, of cosmical and spiritual phenomena.

Nothing can be easier accounted for than the highest possibilities of magic. By the radiant light of the universal magnetic ocean, whose electric waves bind the cosmos together, and in their ceaseless motion penetrate every atom and molecule of the boundless creation, the disciples of mesmerism—howbeit insufficient their various experiments—intuitionally perceive the alpha and omega of the great mystery. Alone, the study of this agent, which is the divine breath, can unlock the secrets of psychology and physiology, of cosmical and spiritual phenomena.

“Magic,” says Psellus, “formed the last part of the sacerdotal science. It investigated the nature, power, and quality of everything sublunary; of the elements and their parts, of animals, all various plants and their fruits, of stones and herbs. In short, it explored the essence and power of everything. From hence, therefore, it produced its effects.

“Magic,” says Psellus, “formed the last part of the sacerdotal science. It investigated the nature, power, and quality of everything sublunary; of the elements and their parts, of animals, all various plants and their fruits, of stones and herbs. In short, it explored the essence and power of everything. From hence, therefore, it produced its effects.

[#fn471anc 471]. Alfred Marshall Mayer, Ph.D.: “The Earth a Great Magnet,” a lecture delivered before the Yale Scientific Club, Feb. 14, 1872.

{{Footnote return|*|fn471}} Alfred Marshall Mayer, Ph.D.: “The Earth a Great Magnet,” a lecture delivered before the Yale Scientific Club, Feb. 14, 1872.

[#fn472anc 472]. “Strange Story.”

{{Footnote return|†|fn472}} “Strange Story.”

283 CALLING AN EAGLE FROM THE CLOUDS.

{{Page|283|CALLING AN EAGLE FROM THE CLOUDS.}}

And it formed {{Style S-Italic|statues}} (magnetized) which procure health, and made all various figures and things (talismans) which could equally become the instruments of disease as well as of health. Often, too, celestial fire is made to appear through magic, and then statues laugh and lamps are spontaneously enkindled.”^{[#fn473 473]}

{{Style P-No indent|And it formed {{Style S-Italic|statues}} (magnetized) which procure health, and made all various figures and things (talismans) which could equally become the instruments of disease as well as of health. Often, too, celestial fire is made to appear through magic, and then statues laugh and lamps are spontaneously enkindled.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn473}}}}

If Galvani’s modern discovery can set in motion the limbs of a dead frog, and force a dead man’s face to express, by the distortion of its features, the most varied emotions, from joy to diabolical rage, despair, and horror, the Pagan priests, unless the combined evidence of the most trustworthy men of antiquity is not to be relied upon, accomplished the still greater wonders of making their stone and metal statues to sweat and laugh. The {{Style S-Italic|celestial,}} pure fire of the Pagan altar was electricity drawn from the astral light. Statues, therefore, if properly prepared, might, without any accusation of superstition, be allowed to have the property of imparting health and disease by contact, as well as any modern galvanic belt, or overcharged battery.

If Galvani’s modern discovery can set in motion the limbs of a dead frog, and force a dead man’s face to express, by the distortion of its features, the most varied emotions, from joy to diabolical rage, despair, and horror, the Pagan priests, unless the combined evidence of the most trustworthy men of antiquity is not to be relied upon, accomplished the still greater wonders of making their stone and metal statues to sweat and laugh. The {{Style S-Italic|celestial,}} pure fire of the Pagan altar was electricity drawn from the astral light. Statues, therefore, if properly prepared, might, without any accusation of superstition, be allowed to have the property of imparting health and disease by contact, as well as any modern galvanic belt, or overcharged battery.

Scholastic skeptics, as well as ignorant materialists, have greatly amused themselves for the last two centuries over the {{Style S-Italic|absurdities}} attributed to Pythagoras by his biographer, Iamblichus. The Samian philosopher is said to have persuaded a she-bear to give up eating human flesh; to have forced a white eagle to descend to him from the clouds, and to have subdued him by stroking him gently with the hand, and by talking to him. On another occasion, Pythagoras actually persuaded an ox to renounce eating beans, by merely whispering in the animal’s ear!^{[#fn474 474]} Oh, ignorance and superstition of our forefathers, how ridiculous they appear in the eyes of our enlightened generations! Let us, however, analyze this absurdity. Every day we see unlettered men, proprietors of strolling menageries, taming and completely subduing the most ferocious animals, merely by the power of their irresistible will. Nay, we have at the present moment in Europe several young and physically-weak girls, under twenty years of age, fearlessly doing the same thing. Every one has either witnessed or heard of the seemingly magical power of some mesmerizers and psychologists. They are able to subjugate their patients for any length of time. Regazzoni, the mesmerist who excited such wonder in France and London, has achieved far more extraordinary feats than what is above attributed to Pythagoras. Why, then, accuse the ancient biographers of such men as Pythagoras and Apollonius of Tyana of either wilful misrepresentation or absurd superstition? When we realize that

Scholastic skeptics, as well as ignorant materialists, have greatly amused themselves for the last two centuries over the {{Style S-Italic|absurdities}} attributed to Pythagoras by his biographer, Iamblichus. The Samian philosopher is said to have persuaded a she-bear to give up eating human flesh; to have forced a white eagle to descend to him from the clouds, and to have subdued him by stroking him gently with the hand, and by talking to him. On another occasion, Pythagoras actually persuaded an ox to renounce eating beans, by merely whispering in the animal’s ear!{{Footnote mark|†|fn474}} Oh, ignorance and superstition of our forefathers, how ridiculous they appear in the eyes of our enlightened generations! Let us, however, analyze this absurdity. Every day we see unlettered men, proprietors of strolling menageries, taming and completely subduing the most ferocious animals, merely by the power of their irresistible will. Nay, we have at the present moment in Europe several young and physically-weak girls, under twenty years of age, fearlessly doing the same thing. Every one has either witnessed or heard of the seemingly magical power of some mesmerizers and psychologists. They are able to subjugate their patients for any length of time. Regazzoni, the mesmerist who excited such wonder in France and London, has achieved far more extraordinary feats than what is above attributed to Pythagoras. Why, then, accuse the ancient biographers of such men as Pythagoras and Apollonius of Tyana of either wilful misrepresentation or absurd superstition? When we realize that

[#fn473anc 473]. See Taylor’s “Pausanias;” MS. “Treatise on Dæmons,” by Psellus, and the “Treatise on the Eleusinian and Bacchic Mysteries.”

{{Footnote return|*|fn473}} See Taylor’s “Pausanias;” MS. “Treatise on Dæmons,” by Psellus, and the “Treatise on the Eleusinian and Bacchic Mysteries.”

[#fn474anc 474]. Iamblichus: “De Vita Pythag.”

{{Footnote return|†|fn474}} Iamblichus: “De Vita Pythag.”

284 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|284|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

the majority of those who are so skeptical as to the magical powers possessed by the ancient philosophers, who laugh at the old theogonies and the fallacies of mythology, nevertheless have an implicit faith in the records and inspiration of their Bible, hardly daring to doubt even that monstrous absurdity that Joshua arrested the course of the sun, we may well say {{Style S-Italic|Amen}} to Godfrey Higgins’ just rebuke: “When I find,” he says, “learned men believing {{Style S-Italic|Genesis literally,}} which the ancients, with all their failings, had too much sense to receive except allegorically, I am tempted to doubt the reality of the improvement of the human mind.”^{[#fn475 475]}

{{Style P-No indent|the majority of those who are so skeptical as to the magical powers possessed by the ancient philosophers, who laugh at the old theogonies and the fallacies of mythology, nevertheless have an implicit faith in the records and inspiration of their Bible, hardly daring to doubt even that monstrous absurdity that Joshua arrested the course of the sun, we may well say {{Style S-Italic|Amen}} to Godfrey Higgins’ just rebuke: “When I find,” he says, “learned men believing {{Style S-Italic|Genesis literally,}} which the ancients, with all their failings, had too much sense to receive except allegorically, I am tempted to doubt the reality of the improvement of the human mind.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn475}}}}

One of the very few commentators on old Greek and Latin authors, who have given their just dues to the ancients for their mental development, is Thomas Taylor. In his translation of Iamblichus’ {{Style S-Italic|Life of Pythagoras,}} we find him remarking as follows: “Since Pythagoras, as Iamblichus informs us, was initiated in all the Mysteries of Byblus and Tyre, in the sacred operations of the Syrians, and in the Mysteries of the Phœnicians, and also that he spent two and twenty years in the adyta of temples in Egypt, associated with the magians in Babylon, and was instructed by them in their venerable knowledge, it is not at all wonderful that he was skilled in magic, or theurgy, and was therefore able to perform things which surpass merely human power, and which appear to be perfectly incredible to the vulgar.”^{[#fn476 476]}

One of the very few commentators on old Greek and Latin authors, who have given their just dues to the ancients for their mental development, is Thomas Taylor. In his translation of Iamblichus’ {{Style S-Italic|Life of Pythagoras,}} we find him remarking as follows: “Since Pythagoras, as Iamblichus informs us, was initiated in all the Mysteries of Byblus and Tyre, in the sacred operations of the Syrians, and in the Mysteries of the Phœnicians, and also that he spent two and twenty years in the adyta of temples in Egypt, associated with the magians in Babylon, and was instructed by them in their venerable knowledge, it is not at all wonderful that he was skilled in magic, or theurgy, and was therefore able to perform things which surpass merely human power, and which appear to be perfectly incredible to the vulgar.”{{Footnote mark|†|fn476}}

The universal ether was not, in their eyes, simply a something stretching, tenantless, throughout the expanse of heaven; it was a boundless ocean peopled like our familiar seas with monstrous and minor creatures, and having in its every molecule the germs of life. Like the finny tribes which swarm in our oceans and smaller bodies of water, each kind having its {{Style S-Italic|habitat}} in some spot to which it is curiously adapted, some friendly and some inimical to man, some pleasant and some frightful to behold, some seeking the refuge of quiet nooks and land-locked harbors, and some traversing great areas of water, the various races of the {{Style S-Italic|elemental}} spirits were believed by them to inhabit the different portions of the great ethereal ocean, and to be exactly adapted to their respective conditions. If we will only bear in mind the fact that the rushing of planets through space must create as absolute a disturbance in this plastic and attenuated medium, as the passage of a cannon shot does in the air or that of a steamer in the water, and on a cosmic scale, we can understand that certain planetary aspects, admitting our premises to be true, may produce much more violent agitation and cause much stronger currents to flow in a given direction, than others. With the same premises conceded, we may also see why, by such various aspects of the stars, shoals of

The universal ether was not, in their eyes, simply a something stretching, tenantless, throughout the expanse of heaven; it was a boundless ocean peopled like our familiar seas with monstrous and minor creatures, and having in its every molecule the germs of life. Like the finny tribes which swarm in our oceans and smaller bodies of water, each kind having its {{Style S-Italic|habitat}} in some spot to which it is curiously adapted, some friendly and some inimical to man, some pleasant and some frightful to behold, some seeking the refuge of quiet nooks and land-locked harbors, and some traversing great areas of water, the various races of the {{Style S-Italic|elemental}} spirits were believed by them to inhabit the different portions of the great ethereal ocean, and to be exactly adapted to their respective conditions. If we will only bear in mind the fact that the rushing of planets through space must create as absolute a disturbance in this plastic and attenuated medium, as the passage of a cannon shot does in the air or that of a steamer in the water, and on a cosmic scale, we can understand that certain planetary aspects, admitting our premises to be true, may produce much more violent agitation and cause much stronger currents to flow in a given direction, than others. With the same premises conceded, we may also see why, by such various aspects of the stars, shoals of

[#fn475anc 475]. “Anacalypsis,” vol. i., p. 807.

{{Footnote return|*|fn475}} “Anacalypsis,” vol. i., p. 807.

[#fn476anc 476]. Iamblichus: “Life of Pythagoras,” p. 297.

{{Footnote return|†|fn476}} Iamblichus: “Life of Pythagoras,” p. 297.

285 DWELLERS OF THE THRESHOLD.

{{Page|285|DWELLERS OF THE THRESHOLD.}}

friendly or hostile “elementals” might be poured in upon our atmosphere, or some particular portion of it, and make the fact appreciable by the effects which ensue.

{{Style P-No indent|friendly or hostile “elementals” might be poured in upon our atmosphere, or some particular portion of it, and make the fact appreciable by the effects which ensue.}}

According to the ancient doctrines, the soulless elemental spirits were evolved by the ceaseless motion inherent in the astral light. Light is force, and the latter is produced by the {{Style S-Italic|will}}. As this will proceeds from an intelligence which cannot err, for it has nothing of the material organs of {{Style S-Italic|human}} thought in it, being the superfine pure emanation of the highest divinity itself—(Plato’s “Father”) it proceeds from the beginning of time, according to immutable laws, to evolve the elementary fabric requisite for subsequent generations of what we term human races. All of the latter, whether belonging to this planet or to some other of the myriads in space, have their earthly bodies evolved in the matrix out of the bodies of a certain class of these elemental beings which have passed away in the invisible worlds. In the ancient philosophy there was no missing link to be supplied by what Tyndall calls an “educated imagination;” no hiatus to be filled with volumes of materialistic speculations made necessary by the absurd attempt to solve an equation with but one set of quantities; our “ignorant” ancestors traced the law of evolution throughout the whole universe. As by gradual progression from the star-cloudlet to the development of the physical body of man, the rule holds good, so from the universal ether to the incarnate human spirit, they traced one uninterrupted series of entities. These evolutions were from the world of spirit into the world of gross matter; and through that back again to the source of all things. The “descent of species” was to them a descent from the spirit, primal source of all, to the “degradation of matter.” In this complete chain of unfoldings the elementary, spiritual beings had as distinct a place, midway between the extremes, as Mr. Darwin’s missing-link between the ape and man.

According to the ancient doctrines, the soulless elemental spirits were evolved by the ceaseless motion inherent in the astral light. Light is force, and the latter is produced by the {{Style S-Italic|will}}. As this will proceeds from an intelligence which cannot err, for it has nothing of the material organs of {{Style S-Italic|human}} thought in it, being the superfine pure emanation of the highest divinity itself—(Plato’s “Father”) it proceeds from the beginning of time, according to immutable laws, to evolve the elementary fabric requisite for subsequent generations of what we term human races. All of the latter, whether belonging to this planet or to some other of the myriads in space, have their earthly bodies evolved in the matrix out of the bodies of a certain class of these elemental beings which have passed away in the invisible worlds. In the ancient philosophy there was no missing link to be supplied by what Tyndall calls an “educated imagination;” no hiatus to be filled with volumes of materialistic speculations made necessary by the absurd attempt to solve an equation with but one set of quantities; our “ignorant” ancestors traced the law of evolution throughout the whole universe. As by gradual progression from the star-cloudlet to the development of the physical body of man, the rule holds good, so from the universal ether to the incarnate human spirit, they traced one uninterrupted series of entities. These evolutions were from the world of spirit into the world of gross matter; and through that back again to the source of all things. The “descent of species” was to them a descent from the spirit, primal source of all, to the “degradation of matter.” In this complete chain of unfoldings the elementary, spiritual beings had as distinct a place, midway between the extremes, as Mr. Darwin’s missing-link between the ape and man.

“Man is arrogant in proportion of his ignorance,” he makes the wise Mejnour say to Glyndon. “For several ages he saw in the countless worlds that sparkle through space like the bubbles of a shoreless ocean, only the petty candles . . . that Providence has been pleased to light for no other purpose but to make the night more agreeable to man. . . . Astronomy has corrected this delusion of human vanity, and man now reluctantly confesses that the stars are worlds, larger and more glorious than his own. . . . Everywhere, then, in this immense design, science

“Man is arrogant in proportion of his ignorance,” he makes the wise Mejnour say to Glyndon. “For several ages he saw in the countless worlds that sparkle through space like the bubbles of a shoreless ocean, only the petty candles . . . that Providence has been pleased to light for no other purpose but to make the night more agreeable to man. . . . Astronomy has corrected this delusion of human vanity, and man now reluctantly confesses that the stars are worlds, larger and more glorious than his own. . . . Everywhere, then, in this immense design, science

286 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|286|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

brings new life to light. . . . Reasoning, then, by evident analogy, if not a leaf, if not a drop of water, but is, no less than yonder star, a habitable and breathing world—nay, if even man himself, is a world to other lives, and millions and myriads dwell in the rivers of his blood, and inhabit man’s frame, as man inhabits earth—common sense (if our schoolmen had it) would suffice to teach that the circumfluent infinite which you call space—the boundless impalpable which divides earth from the moon and stars—is filled also with its correspondent and appropriate life. Is it not a visible absurdity to suppose that being is crowded upon every leaf, and yet absent from the immensities of space! The law of the great system forbids the waste even of an atom; it knows no spot where something of life does not breathe. . . . Well, then, can you conceive that space, which is the infinite itself, is alone a waste, is alone lifeless, is less useful to the one design of universal being . . . than the peopled leaf, than the swarming globule? The microscope shows you the creatures on the leaf; {{Style S-Italic|no mechanical tube is yet invented to discover the nobler and more gifted things that hover in the illimitable air.}} Yet between these last and man is a mysterious {{Style S-Italic|and terrible affinity}}. . . . But first, to penetrate this barrier, the soul with which you listen must be sharpened by intense enthusiasm, purified from all earthly desires. . . . When thus prepared, science can be brought to aid it; the sight itself may be rendered more subtile, the nerves more acute, the spirit more alive and outward, and the element itself—the air, the space—may be made, by certain secrets of the higher chemistry, more palpable and clear. And this, too, is not {{Style S-Italic|magic}} as the credulous call it; as I have so often said before, magic (a science that violates nature) exists not; it is {{Style S-Italic|but the science by which nature can be controlled.}} Now, in space there are millions of beings, {{Style S-Italic|not literally spiritual,}} for they have all, like the animalcula unseen by the naked eye, certain forms of matter, though matter so delicate, air-drawn, and subtile, that it is, as it were, but a film, a gossamer, that clothes the spirit. . . . Yet, in truth, these races differ most widely . . . some of surpassing wisdom, some of horrible malignity; some hostile as fiends to men, others gentle as messengers between earth and heaven. . . . Amid the dwellers of the threshold is one, too, surpassing in malignity and hatred all her tribe; one whose eyes have paralyzed the bravest, and whose power increases over the spirit precisely in proportion to its fear.”^{[#fn477 477]}

{{Style P-No indent|brings new life to light. . . . Reasoning, then, by evident analogy, if not a leaf, if not a drop of water, but is, no less than yonder star, a habitable and breathing world—nay, if even man himself, is a world to other lives, and millions and myriads dwell in the rivers of his blood, and inhabit man’s frame, as man inhabits earth—common sense (if our schoolmen had it) would suffice to teach that the circumfluent infinite which you call space—the boundless impalpable which divides earth from the moon and stars—is filled also with its correspondent and appropriate life. Is it not a visible absurdity to suppose that being is crowded upon every leaf, and yet absent from the immensities of space! The law of the great system forbids the waste even of an atom; it knows no spot where something of life does not breathe. . . . Well, then, can you conceive that space, which is the infinite itself, is alone a waste, is alone lifeless, is less useful to the one design of universal being . . . than the peopled leaf, than the swarming globule? The microscope shows you the creatures on the leaf; {{Style S-Italic|no mechanical tube is yet invented to discover the nobler and more gifted things that hover in the illimitable air.}} Yet between these last and man is a mysterious {{Style S-Italic|and terrible affinity}}. . . . But first, to penetrate this barrier, the soul with which you listen must be sharpened by intense enthusiasm, purified from all earthly desires. . . . When thus prepared, science can be brought to aid it; the sight itself may be rendered more subtile, the nerves more acute, the spirit more alive and outward, and the element itself—the air, the space—may be made, by certain secrets of the higher chemistry, more palpable and clear. And this, too, is not {{Style S-Italic|magic}} as the credulous call it; as I have so often said before, magic (a science that violates nature) exists not; it is {{Style S-Italic|but the science by which nature can be controlled.}} Now, in space there are millions of beings, {{Style S-Italic|not literally spiritual,}} for they have all, like the animalcula unseen by the naked eye, certain forms of matter, though matter so delicate, air-drawn, and subtile, that it is, as it were, but a film, a gossamer, that clothes the spirit. . . . Yet, in truth, these races differ most widely . . . some of surpassing wisdom, some of horrible malignity; some hostile as fiends to men, others gentle as messengers between earth and heaven. . . . Amid the dwellers of the threshold is one, too, surpassing in malignity and hatred all her tribe; one whose eyes have paralyzed the bravest, and whose power increases over the spirit precisely in proportion to its fear.”{{Footnote mark|*|fn477}}}}

Such is the insufficient sketch of elemental beings void of divine spirit, given by one whom many with reason believed to know more than he was prepared to admit in the face of an incredulous public.

Such is the insufficient sketch of elemental beings void of divine spirit, given by one whom many with reason believed to know more than he was prepared to admit in the face of an incredulous public.

[#fn477anc 477]. Bulwer-Lytton: “Zanoni.”

{{Footnote return|*|fn477}} Bulwer-Lytton: “Zanoni.”

287 WHAT MAN WAS, IS, AND MAY BE.

{{Page|287|WHAT MAN WAS, IS, AND MAY BE.}}

In the following chapter we will contrive to explain some of the esoteric speculations of the initiates of the sanctuary, as to what man was, is, and may yet be. The doctrines they taught in the Mysteries—the source from which sprang the Old and partially the New Testament, belonged to the most advanced notions of morality, and religious {{Style S-Italic|revelations.}} While the literal meaning was abandoned to the fanaticism of the unreasoning lower classes of society, the higher ones, the majority of which consisted of {{Style S-Italic|Initiates,}} pursued their studies in the solemn silence of the temples, and their worship of the {{Style S-Italic|one}} God of Heaven.

In the following chapter we will contrive to explain some of the esoteric speculations of the initiates of the sanctuary, as to what man was, is, and may yet be. The doctrines they taught in the Mysteries—the source from which sprang the Old and partially the New Testament, belonged to the most advanced notions of morality, and religious {{Style S-Italic|revelations.}} While the literal meaning was abandoned to the fanaticism of the unreasoning lower classes of society, the higher ones, the majority of which consisted of {{Style S-Italic|Initiates,}} pursued their studies in the solemn silence of the temples, and their worship of the {{Style S-Italic|one}} God of Heaven.

The speculations of Plato, in the {{Style S-Italic|Banquet,}} on the creation of the primordial men, and the essay on Cosmogony in the {{Style S-Italic|Timæus,}} must be taken allegorically, if we accept them at all. It is this hidden Pythagorean meaning in {{Style S-Italic|Timæus, Cratylus,}} and {{Style S-Italic|Parmenides,}} and a few other trilogies and dialogues, that the Neo-platonists ventured to expound, as far as the theurgical vow of secrecy would allow them. The Pythagorean doctrine that {{Style S-Italic|God is the universal mind diffused through all things,}} and the dogma of the soul’s immortality, are the leading features in these apparently incongruous teachings. His piety and the great veneration Plato felt for the Mysteries, are sufficient warrant that he would not allow his indiscretion to get the better of that deep sense of responsibility which is felt by every adept. “Constantly perfecting himself in perfect Mysteries, a man in them alone becomes truly perfect,” says he in the {{Style S-Italic|Phædrus}}.^{[#fn478 478]}

The speculations of Plato, in the {{Style S-Italic|Banquet,}} on the creation of the primordial men, and the essay on Cosmogony in the {{Style S-Italic|Timæus,}} must be taken allegorically, if we accept them at all. It is this hidden Pythagorean meaning in {{Style S-Italic|Timæus, Cratylus,}} and {{Style S-Italic|Parmenides,}} and a few other trilogies and dialogues, that the Neo-platonists ventured to expound, as far as the theurgical vow of secrecy would allow them. The Pythagorean doctrine that {{Style S-Italic|God is the universal mind diffused through all things,}} and the dogma of the soul’s immortality, are the leading features in these apparently incongruous teachings. His piety and the great veneration Plato felt for the Mysteries, are sufficient warrant that he would not allow his indiscretion to get the better of that deep sense of responsibility which is felt by every adept. “Constantly perfecting himself in perfect Mysteries, a man in them alone becomes truly perfect,” says he in the {{Style S-Italic|Phædrus}}.{{Footnote mark|*|fn478}}

He took no pains to conceal his displeasure that the Mysteries had become less secret than formerly. Instead of profaning them by putting them within the reach of the multitude, he would have guarded them with jealous care against all but the most earnest and worthy of his disciples.^{[#fn479 479]} While mentioning the gods, on every page, his monotheism is unquestionable, for the whole thread of his discourse indicates that by the term {{Style S-Italic|gods}} he means a class of beings far lower in the scale than deities, and but one grade higher than men. Even Josephus perceived and acknowledged this fact, despite the natural prejudice of his race. In his famous onslaught upon Apion, this historian says:^{[#fn480 480]} “Those, however, among the Greeks who philosophized {{Style S-Italic|in accordance with truth,}} were not ignorant of anything . . . nor did they fail to perceive the chilling

He took no pains to conceal his displeasure that the Mysteries had become less secret than formerly. Instead of profaning them by putting them within the reach of the multitude, he would have guarded them with jealous care against all but the most earnest and worthy of his disciples.{{Footnote mark|†|fn479}} While mentioning the gods, on every page, his monotheism is unquestionable, for the whole thread of his discourse indicates that by the term {{Style S-Italic|gods}} he means a class of beings far lower in the scale than deities, and but one grade higher than men. Even Josephus perceived and acknowledged this fact, despite the natural prejudice of his race. In his famous onslaught upon Apion, this historian says:{{Footnote mark|‡|fn480}} “Those, however, among the Greeks who philosophized {{Style S-Italic|in accordance with truth,}} were not ignorant of anything . . . nor did they fail to perceive the chilling

[#fn478anc 478]. Cory: “Ph{{Style S-Italic|æ}}drus,” i. 328.

{{Footnote return|*|fn478}} Cory: “Ph{{Style S-Italic|æ}}drus,” i. 328.

[#fn479anc 479]. This assertion is clearly corroborated by Plato himself, who says: “You say that, in my former discourse, I have not sufficiently explained to you the nature of the {{Style S-Italic|First. I purposely spoke enigmatically,}} that in case the tablet should have happened with any accident, either by land or sea, a person, {{Style S-Italic|without some previous knowledge of the subject, might not be able to understand its contents”}} (“Plato,” Ep. ii., p. 312; Cory: “Ancient Fragments”).

{{Footnote return|†|fn479}} This assertion is clearly corroborated by Plato himself, who says: “You say that, in my former discourse, I have not sufficiently explained to you the nature of the {{Style S-Italic|First. I purposely spoke enigmatically,}} that in case the tablet should have happened with any accident, either by land or sea, a person, {{Style S-Italic|without some previous knowledge of the subject, might not be able to understand its contents”}} (“Plato,” Ep. ii., p. 312; Cory: “Ancient Fragments”).

[#fn480anc 480]. “Josephus against Apion,” ii., p. 1079.

{{Footnote return|‡|fn480}} “Josephus against Apion,” ii., p. 1079.

288 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|288|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

superficialities of the mythical allegories, on which account they justly despised them. . . . By which thing Plato, being moved, says it is not necessary to admit any one of the other poets into ‘the Commonwealth,’ and {{Style S-Italic|he dismisses Homer}} blandly, after having crowned him and pouring unguent upon him, in order that indeed he should not destroy, by {{Style S-Italic|his myths}}, the {{Style S-Italic|orthodox belief respecting one God.”}}

{{Style P-No indent|superficialities of the mythical allegories, on which account they justly despised them. . . . By which thing Plato, being moved, says it is not necessary to admit any one of the other poets into ‘the Commonwealth,’ and {{Style S-Italic|he dismisses Homer}} blandly, after having crowned him and pouring unguent upon him, in order that indeed he should not destroy, by {{Style S-Italic|his myths}}, the {{Style S-Italic|orthodox belief respecting one God.”}}}}

Those who can discern the true spirit of Plato’s philosophy, will hardly be satisfied with the estimate of the same which Jowett lays before his readers. He tells us that the influence exercised upon posterity by the {{Style S-Italic|Timæus}} is partly due to a misunderstanding of the doctrine of its author by the Neo-platonists. He would have us believe that the hidden meanings which they found in this {{Style S-Italic|Dialogue,}} are “quite at variance with the spirit of Plato.” This is equivalent to the assumption that Jowett understands what this spirit really was; whereas his criticism upon this particular topic rather indicates that he did not penetrate it at all. If, as he tells us, the Christians seem to find in his work their trinity, the word, the church, and the creation of the world, in a Jewish sense, it is because all this {{Style S-Italic|is}} there, and therefore it is but natural that they should have found it. The outward building is the same; but the spirit which animated the dead letter of the philosopher’s teaching has fled, and we would seek for it in vain through the arid dogmas of Christian theology. The Sphinx is the same now, as it was four centuries before the Christian era; but the Œdipus is no more. He is slain because he has given to the world that which the world was not ripe enough to receive. He was the embodiment of truth, and he had to die, as every grand truth has to, before, like the Phœnix of old, it revives from its own ashes. Every translator of Plato’s works remarked the strange similarity between the philosophy of the esoterists and the Christian doctrines, and each of them has tried to interpret it in accordance with his own religious feelings. So Cory, in his {{Style S-Italic|Ancient Fragments,}} tries to prove that it is but an outward resemblance; and does his best to lower the Pythagorean Monad in the public estimation and exalt upon its ruins the later anthropomorphic deity. Taylor, advocating the former, acts as unceremoniously with the Mosaic God. Zeller boldly laughs at the pretensions of the Fathers of the Church, who, notwithstanding history and its chronology, and whether people will have it or not, insist that Plato and his school have robbed Christianity of its leading features. It is as fortunate for us as it is unfortunate for the Roman Church that such clever sleight-of-hand as that resorted to by Eusebius is rather difficult in our century. It was easier to pervert chronology “for the sake of making synchronisms,” in the days of the Bishop of Cæsarea, than it is now, and while history exists, no one can help people knowing that Plato lived 600 years before

Those who can discern the true spirit of Plato’s philosophy, will hardly be satisfied with the estimate of the same which Jowett lays before his readers. He tells us that the influence exercised upon posterity by the {{Style S-Italic|Timæus}} is partly due to a misunderstanding of the doctrine of its author by the Neo-platonists. He would have us believe that the hidden meanings which they found in this {{Style S-Italic|Dialogue,}} are “quite at variance with the spirit of Plato.” This is equivalent to the assumption that Jowett understands what this spirit really was; whereas his criticism upon this particular topic rather indicates that he did not penetrate it at all. If, as he tells us, the Christians seem to find in his work their trinity, the word, the church, and the creation of the world, in a Jewish sense, it is because all this {{Style S-Italic|is}} there, and therefore it is but natural that they should have found it. The outward building is the same; but the spirit which animated the dead letter of the philosopher’s teaching has fled, and we would seek for it in vain through the arid dogmas of Christian theology. The Sphinx is the same now, as it was four centuries before the Christian era; but the Œdipus is no more. He is slain because he has given to the world that which the world was not ripe enough to receive. He was the embodiment of truth, and he had to die, as every grand truth has to, before, like the Phœnix of old, it revives from its own ashes. Every translator of Plato’s works remarked the strange similarity between the philosophy of the esoterists and the Christian doctrines, and each of them has tried to interpret it in accordance with his own religious feelings. So Cory, in his {{Style S-Italic|Ancient Fragments,}} tries to prove that it is but an outward resemblance; and does his best to lower the Pythagorean Monad in the public estimation and exalt upon its ruins the later anthropomorphic deity. Taylor, advocating the former, acts as unceremoniously with the Mosaic God. Zeller boldly laughs at the pretensions of the Fathers of the Church, who, notwithstanding history and its chronology, and whether people will have it or not, insist that Plato and his school have robbed Christianity of its leading features. It is as fortunate for us as it is unfortunate for the Roman Church that such clever sleight-of-hand as that resorted to by Eusebius is rather difficult in our century. It was easier to pervert chronology “for the sake of making synchronisms,” in the days of the Bishop of Cæsarea, than it is now, and while history exists, no one can help people knowing that Plato lived 600 years before

289 GOD, THE UNIVERSAL MIND.

{{Page|289|GOD, THE UNIVERSAL MIND.}}

Irenæus took it into his head to establish a {{Style S-Italic|new}} doctrine from the ruins of Plato’s older Academy.

{{Style P-No indent|Irenæus took it into his head to establish a {{Style S-Italic|new}} doctrine from the ruins of Plato’s older Academy.}}

This doctrine of God being the universal mind diffused through all things, underlies all ancient philosophies. The Buddhistic tenets which can never be better comprehended than when studying the Pythagorean philosophy—its faithful reflection—are derived from this source as well as the Brahmanical religion and early Christianity. The purifying process of transmigrations—the metempsychoses—however grossly anthropo­morphized at a later period, must only be regarded as a supplementary doctrine, disfigured by theological sophistry with the object of getting a firmer hold upon believers through a popular superstition. Neither Gautama Buddha nor Pythagoras intended to teach this purely-metaphysical allegory {{Style S-Italic|literally.}} Esoterically, it is explained in the “Mystery” of the {{Style S-Italic|Kounboum}},^{[#fn481 481]} and relates to the purely spiritual peregrinations of the human soul. It is not in the dead letter of Buddhistical sacred literature that scholars may hope to find the true solution of its metaphysical subtilties. The latter weary the power of thought by the inconceivable profundity of its ratiocination; and the student is never farther from truth than when he believes himself nearest its discovery. The mastery of every doctrine of the perplexing Buddhist system can be attained only by proceeding strictly according to the Pythagorean and Platonic method; from universals down to particulars. The key to it lies in the refined and mystical tenets of the spiritual influx of divine life. “Whoever is unacquainted with my law,” says Buddha, “and dies in that state, must return to the earth till he becomes a perfect Samanean. To achieve this object, he must destroy within himself the trinity of {{Style S-Italic|Maya}}.^{[#fn482 482]} He must extinguish his passions, unite and identify himself with {{Style S-Italic|the law}} (the teaching of the secret doctrine), and comprehend the religion of {{Style S-Italic|annihilation.”}}

This doctrine of God being the universal mind diffused through all things, underlies all ancient philosophies. The Buddhistic tenets which can never be better comprehended than when studying the Pythagorean philosophy—its faithful reflection—are derived from this source as well as the Brahmanical religion and early Christianity. The purifying process of transmigrations—the metempsychoses—however grossly anthropo­morphized at a later period, must only be regarded as a supplementary doctrine, disfigured by theological sophistry with the object of getting a firmer hold upon believers through a popular superstition. Neither Gautama Buddha nor Pythagoras intended to teach this purely-metaphysical allegory {{Style S-Italic|literally.}} Esoterically, it is explained in the “Mystery” of the {{Style S-Italic|Kounboum}},{{Footnote mark|*|fn481}} and relates to the purely spiritual peregrinations of the human soul. It is not in the dead letter of Buddhistical sacred literature that scholars may hope to find the true solution of its metaphysical subtilties. The latter weary the power of thought by the inconceivable profundity of its ratiocination; and the student is never farther from truth than when he believes himself nearest its discovery. The mastery of every doctrine of the perplexing Buddhist system can be attained only by proceeding strictly according to the Pythagorean and Platonic method; from universals down to particulars. The key to it lies in the refined and mystical tenets of the spiritual influx of divine life. “Whoever is unacquainted with my law,” says Buddha, “and dies in that state, must return to the earth till he becomes a perfect Samanean. To achieve this object, he must destroy within himself the trinity of {{Style S-Italic|Maya}}.{{Footnote mark|†|fn482}} He must extinguish his passions, unite and identify himself with {{Style S-Italic|the law}} (the teaching of the secret doctrine), and comprehend the religion of {{Style S-Italic|annihilation.”}}

Here, annihilation refers but to {{Style S-Italic|matter,}} that of the visible as well as of the invisible body; for the astral soul ({{Style S-Italic|perisprit}}) is still matter, however sublimated. The same book says that what Fo (Buddha) meant to say was, that “the primitive substance is eternal and unchangeable. Its highest revelation is the pure, luminous ether, the boundless infinite space, not a void resulting from the absence of forms, but, on the contrary, {{Style S-Italic|the foundation of all forms,}} and anterior to them. But the very presence of {{Style S-Italic|forms}} denotes it to be the creation of {{Style S-Italic|Maya,}} and all her works are as nothing before the {{Style S-Italic|uncreated}} being, spirit, in whose profound and sacred repose all motion must cease forever.”

Here, annihilation refers but to {{Style S-Italic|matter,}} that of the visible as well as of the invisible body; for the astral soul ({{Style S-Italic|perisprit}}) is still matter, however sublimated. The same book says that what Fo (Buddha) meant to say was, that “the primitive substance is eternal and unchangeable. Its highest revelation is the pure, luminous ether, the boundless infinite space, not a void resulting from the absence of forms, but, on the contrary, {{Style S-Italic|the foundation of all forms,}} and anterior to them. But the very presence of {{Style S-Italic|forms}} denotes it to be the creation of {{Style S-Italic|Maya,}} and all her works are as nothing before the {{Style S-Italic|uncreated}} being, {{Style S-Small capitals|spirit}}, in whose profound and sacred repose all motion must cease forever.”

[#fn481anc 481]. See chapter ix., p. 302.

{{Footnote return|*|fn481}} See chapter ix., p. 302.

[#fn482anc 482]. “Illusion; matter in its triple manifestation in the earthly, and the astral or fontal soul, or the body, and the Platonian dual soul, the rational and the irrational one,” see next chapter.

{{Footnote return|†|fn482}} “Illusion; matter in its triple manifestation in the earthly, and the astral or fontal soul, or the body, and the Platonian dual soul, the rational and the irrational one,” see next chapter.

290 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|290|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

Thus {{Style S-Italic|annihilation}} means, with the Buddhistical philosophy, only a dispersion of matter, in whatever form or {{Style S-Italic|semblance}} of form it may be; for everything that bears a shape was created, and thus must sooner or later perish, {{Style S-Italic|i.e}}., change that shape; therefore, as something temporary, though seeming to be permanent, it is but an illusion, {{Style S-Italic|Maya;}} for, as eternity has neither beginning nor end, the more or less prolonged duration of some particular form passes, as it were, like an instantaneous flash of lightning. Before we have the time to realize that we have seen it, it is gone and passed away for ever; hence, even our astral bodies, pure ether, are but illusions of matter, so long as they retain their terrestrial outline. The latter changes, says the Buddhist, according to the merits or demerits of the person during his lifetime, and this is metempsychosis. When the spiritual {{Style S-Italic|entity}} breaks loose for ever from every particle of matter, then only it enters upon the eternal and unchangeable Nirvana. He exists in spirit, in {{Style S-Italic|nothing;}} as a form, a shape, a semblance, he is completely {{Style S-Italic|annihilated,}} and thus will die no more, for spirit alone is no {{Style S-Italic|Maya,}} but the only reality in an illusionary universe of ever-passing forms.

Thus {{Style S-Italic|annihilation}} means, with the Buddhistical philosophy, only a dispersion of matter, in whatever form or {{Style S-Italic|semblance}} of form it may be; for everything that bears a shape was created, and thus must sooner or later perish, {{Style S-Italic|i.e}}., change that shape; therefore, as something temporary, though seeming to be permanent, it is but an illusion, {{Style S-Italic|Maya;}} for, as eternity has neither beginning nor end, the more or less prolonged duration of some particular form passes, as it were, like an instantaneous flash of lightning. Before we have the time to realize that we have seen it, it is gone and passed away for ever; hence, even our astral bodies, pure ether, are but illusions of matter, so long as they retain their terrestrial outline. The latter changes, says the Buddhist, according to the merits or demerits of the person during his lifetime, and this is metempsychosis. When the spiritual {{Style S-Italic|entity}} breaks loose for ever from every particle of matter, then only it enters upon the eternal and unchangeable Nirvana. He exists in spirit, in {{Style S-Italic|nothing;}} as a form, a shape, a semblance, he is completely {{Style S-Italic|annihilated,}} and thus will die no more, for spirit alone is no {{Style S-Italic|Maya,}} but the only {{Style S-Small capitals|reality}} in an illusionary universe of ever-passing forms.

It is upon this Buddhist doctrine that the Pythagoreans grounded the principal tenets of their philosophy. “Can that spirit, which gives life and motion, and partakes of the nature of light, be reduced to non-entity?” they ask. “Can that sensitive spirit in brutes which exercises memory, one of the rational faculties, die, and become nothing?” And Whitelock Bulstrode, in his able defence of Pythagoras, expounds this doctrine by adding: “If you say, they (the brutes) breathe their spirits into the air, and there vanish, that is all I contend for. The air, indeed, is the proper place to receive them, being, according to Laertius, full of souls; and, according to Epicurus, full of atoms, the principles of all things; for even this place wherein we walk and birds fly has so much of a spiritual nature, that it is invisible, and, therefore, may well be the receiver of forms, since the forms of all bodies are so; we can only see and hear its effects; the air itself is too fine, and above the capacity of the age. What then is the ether in the region above, and what are the influences or forms that descend from thence?”

It is upon this Buddhist doctrine that the Pythagoreans grounded the principal tenets of their philosophy. “Can that spirit, which gives life and motion, and partakes of the nature of light, be reduced to non-entity?” they ask. “Can that sensitive spirit in brutes which exercises memory, one of the rational faculties, die, and become nothing?” And Whitelock Bulstrode, in his able defence of Pythagoras, expounds this doctrine by adding: “If you say, they (the brutes) breathe their spirits into the air, and there vanish, that is all I contend for. The air, indeed, is the proper place to receive them, being, according to Laertius, full of souls; and, according to Epicurus, full of atoms, the principles of all things; for even this place wherein we walk and birds fly has so much of a spiritual nature, that it is invisible, and, therefore, may well be the receiver of forms, since the forms of all bodies are so; we can only see and hear its effects; the air itself is too fine, and above the capacity of the age. What then is the ether in the region above, and what are the influences or forms that descend from thence?”

The {{Style S-Italic|spirits}} of creatures, the Pythagoreans hold, who are emanations of the most sublimated portions of ether, emanations, breaths, {{Style S-Italic|but not forms.}} Ether is incorruptible, all philosophers agree in that; and what is incorruptible {{Style S-Italic|is so far from being annihilated}} when it gets rid of the {{Style S-Italic|form,}} that it lays a good claim to immortality. “But what is that which has no body, no {{Style S-Italic|form;}} which is imponderable, invisible and indivisible; that which exists and yet {{Style S-Italic|is not?”}} ask the Buddhists. “It is Nirvana,” is the answer. It is nothing, not a region, but rather a state. When once Nirvana is

The {{Style S-Italic|spirits}} of creatures, the Pythagoreans hold, who are emanations of the most sublimated portions of ether, emanations, breaths, {{Style S-Italic|but not forms.}} Ether is incorruptible, all philosophers agree in that; and what is incorruptible {{Style S-Italic|is so far from being annihilated}} when it gets rid of the {{Style S-Italic|form,}} that it lays a good claim to {{Style S-Small capitals|immortality}}. “But what is that which has no body, no {{Style S-Italic|form;}} which is imponderable, invisible and indivisible; that which exists and yet {{Style S-Italic|is not?”}} ask the Buddhists. “It is Nirvana,” is the answer. It is {{Style S-Small capitals|nothing}}, not a region, but rather a state. When once Nirvana is

291 NIRVANA, THE FINAL BLISS.

{{Page|291|NIRVANA, THE FINAL BLISS.}}

reached, man is exempt from the effects of the “four truths;” for an effect can only be produced through a certain cause, and every cause is {{Style S-Italic|annihilated}} in this state.

{{Style P-No indent|reached, man is exempt from the effects of the “four truths;” for an effect can only be produced through a certain cause, and every cause is {{Style S-Italic|annihilated}} in this state.}}

These “four truths” are the foundation of the whole Buddhist doctrine of Nirvana. They are, says the book of {{Style S-Italic|Prajñāpāramitā^{[#fn483 483]}}} 1. The existence of pain. 2. The production of pain. 3. The annihilation of pain. 4. The way to the annihilation of pain. What is the source of pain?—Existence. Birth existing, decrepitude and death ensue; for wherever there is a form, there is a {{Style S-Italic|cause}} for pain and suffering. {{Style S-Italic|Spirit}} alone has no form, and therefore {{Style S-Italic|cannot be said to exist.}} Whenever man (the ethereal, inner man) reaches that point when he becomes utterly spiritual, hence, formless, he has reached a state of perfect bliss. Man as an objective being becomes annihilated, but the spiritual entity with its subjective life, will live for ever, for spirit is incorruptible and immortal.

These “four truths” are the foundation of the whole Buddhist doctrine of Nirvana. They are, says the book of ''Prajñāpāramitā''{{Footnote mark|*|fn483}} 1. The existence of pain. 2. The production of pain. 3. The annihilation of pain. 4. The way to the annihilation of pain. What is the source of pain?—Existence. Birth existing, decrepitude and death ensue; for wherever there is a form, there is a {{Style S-Italic|cause}} for pain and suffering. {{Style S-Italic|Spirit}} alone has no form, and therefore {{Style S-Italic|cannot be said to exist.}} Whenever man (the ethereal, inner man) reaches that point when he becomes utterly spiritual, hence, formless, he has reached a state of perfect bliss. {{Style S-Small capitals|Man}} as an objective being becomes annihilated, but the spiritual entity with its subjective life, will live for ever, for spirit is incorruptible and immortal.

It is by the spirit of the teachings of both Buddha and Pythagoras, that we can so easily recognize the identity of their doctrines. The all-pervading, universal soul, the {{Style S-Italic|Anima Mundi,}} is Nirvana; and Buddha, as a generic name, is the anthropomorphized {{Style S-Italic|monad}} of Pythagoras. When resting in Nirvana, the final bliss, Buddha is the silent monad, dwelling in darkness and silence; he is also the formless Brahm, the sublime but {{Style S-Italic|unknowable}} Deity, which pervades invisibly the whole universe. Whenever it is manifested, desiring to impress itself upon humanity in a shape intelligent to our intellect, whether we call it an {{Style S-Italic|avatar}}, or a King Messiah, or a {{Style S-Italic|permutation}} of Divine Spirit, {{Style S-Italic|Logos,}} Christos, it is all one and the same thing. In each case it is “the Father,” who is in the {{Style S-Italic|Son,}} and the Son in “the Father.” The immortal spirit overshadows the mortal man. It enters into him, and pervading his whole being, makes of him a god, who descends into his earthly tabernacle. Every man may become a Buddha, says the doctrine. And so throughout the interminable series of ages we find now and then men who more or less succeed in {{Style S-Italic|uniting}} themselves “with God,” as the expression goes, with their {{Style S-Italic|own spirit,}} as we ought to translate. The Buddhists call such men {{Style S-Italic|Arhat.}} An Arhat is next to a Buddha, and none is equal to him either in {{Style S-Italic|infused}} science, or {{Style S-Italic|miraculous}} powers. Certain fakirs demonstrate the theory well in practice, as Jacolliot has proved.

It is by the spirit of the teachings of both Buddha and Pythagoras, that we can so easily recognize the identity of their doctrines. The all-pervading, universal soul, the {{Style S-Italic|Anima Mundi,}} is Nirvana; and Buddha, as a generic name, is the anthropomorphized {{Style S-Italic|monad}} of Pythagoras. When resting in Nirvana, the final bliss, Buddha is the silent monad, dwelling in darkness and silence; he is also the formless Brahm, the sublime but {{Style S-Italic|unknowable}} Deity, which pervades invisibly the whole universe. Whenever it is manifested, desiring to impress itself upon humanity in a shape intelligent to our intellect, whether we call it an {{Style S-Italic|avatar}}, or a King Messiah, or a {{Style S-Italic|permutation}} of Divine Spirit, {{Style S-Italic|Logos,}} Christos, it is all one and the same thing. In each case it is “the Father,” who is in the {{Style S-Italic|Son,}} and the Son in “the Father.” The immortal spirit overshadows the mortal man. It enters into him, and pervading his whole being, makes of him a god, who descends into his earthly tabernacle. Every man may become a Buddha, says the doctrine. And so throughout the interminable series of ages we find now and then men who more or less succeed in {{Style S-Italic|uniting}} themselves “with God,” as the expression goes, with their {{Style S-Italic|own spirit,}} as we ought to translate. The Buddhists call such men {{Style S-Italic|Arhat.}} An Arhat is next to a Buddha, and none is equal to him either in {{Style S-Italic|infused}} science, or {{Style S-Italic|miraculous}} powers. Certain fakirs demonstrate the theory well in practice, as Jacolliot has proved.

Even the so-called {{Style S-Italic|fabulous}} narratives of certain Buddhistical books, when stripped of their allegorical meaning, are found to be the secret doctrines taught by Pythagoras. In the Pali Books called the {{Style S-Italic|Jutakâs,}} are given the 550 incarnations or metempsychoses of Buddha. They

Even the so-called {{Style S-Italic|fabulous}} narratives of certain Buddhistical books, when stripped of their allegorical meaning, are found to be the secret doctrines taught by Pythagoras. In the Pali Books called the {{Style S-Italic|Jutakâs,}} are given the 550 incarnations or metempsychoses of Buddha. They

[#fn483anc 483]. “Perfection of Wisdom.”

{{Footnote return|*|fn483}} “Perfection of Wisdom.”

292 THE VEIL OF ISIS.

{{Page|292|THE VEIL OF ISIS.}}

narrate how he has appeared in every form of animal life, and animated every sentient being on earth, from infinitesimal insect to the bird, the beast, and finally man, the microcosmic image of God on earth. Must this be taken {{Style S-Italic|literally;}} is it intended as a description of the {{Style S-Italic|actual}} transformations and existence of one and the same individual immortal, divine spirit, which by turns has animated every kind of sentient being? Ought we not rather to understand, with Buddhist metaphysicians, that though the individual human spirits are numberless, collectively they are one, as every drop of water drawn out of the ocean, metaphorically speaking, may have an individual existence and still be one with the rest of the drops going to form that ocean; for each human spirit is a scintilla of the one all-pervading light? That this divine spirit animates the flower, the particle of granite on the mountain side, the lion, the man? Egyptian Hierophants, like the Brahmans, and the Buddhists of the East, and some Greek philosophers, maintained originally that the same spirit that animates the particle of dust, lurking latent in it, animates man, manifesting itself in him in its highest state of activity. The doctrine, also, of a gradual refusion of the human {{Style S-Italic|soul}} into the essence of the primeval parent spirit, was universal at one time. But this doctrine never implied annihilation of the higher spiritual {{Style S-Italic|ego—}}only the dispersion of the {{Style S-Italic|external forms}} of man, after his terrestrial death, as well as during his abode on earth. Who is better fitted to impart to us the mysteries of after-death, so erroneously thought impenetrable, than those men who having, through self-discipline and purity of life and purpose, succeeded in uniting themselves with their “God,” were afforded {{Style S-Italic|some}} glimpses, however imperfect, of the great truth.^{[#fn484 484]} And these seers tell us strange stories about the {{Style S-Italic|variety}} of forms assumed by disembodied astral souls; forms of which each one is a spiritual though concrete reflection of the abstract state of the mind, and thoughts of the once living man.

{{Style P-No indent|narrate how he has appeared in every form of animal life, and animated every sentient being on earth, from infinitesimal insect to the bird, the beast, and finally man, the microcosmic image of God on earth. Must this be taken {{Style S-Italic|literally;}} is it intended as a description of the {{Style S-Italic|actual}} transformations and existence of one and the same individual immortal, divine spirit, which by turns has animated every kind of sentient being? Ought we not rather to understand, with Buddhist metaphysicians, that though the individual human spirits are numberless, collectively they are one, as every drop of water drawn out of the ocean, metaphorically speaking, may have an individual existence and still be one with the rest of the drops going to form that ocean; for each human spirit is a scintilla of the one all-pervading light? That this divine spirit animates the flower, the particle of granite on the mountain side, the lion, the man? Egyptian Hierophants, like the Brahmans, and the Buddhists of the East, and some Greek philosophers, maintained originally that the same spirit that animates the particle of dust, lurking latent in it, animates man, manifesting itself in him in its highest state of activity. The doctrine, also, of a gradual refusion of the human {{Style S-Italic|soul}} into the essence of the primeval parent spirit, was universal at one time. But this doctrine never implied annihilation of the higher spiritual {{Style S-Italic|ego—}}only the dispersion of the {{Style S-Italic|external forms}} of man, after his terrestrial death, as well as during his abode on earth. Who is better fitted to impart to us the mysteries of after-death, so erroneously thought impenetrable, than those men who having, through self-discipline and purity of life and purpose, succeeded in uniting themselves with their “God,” were afforded {{Style S-Italic|some}} glimpses, however imperfect, of the great truth.{{Footnote mark|*|fn484}} And these seers tell us strange stories about the {{Style S-Italic|variety}} of forms assumed by disembodied astral souls; forms of which each one is a spiritual though concrete reflection of the abstract state of the mind, and thoughts of the once living man.}}

To accuse Buddhistical philosophy of rejecting a Supreme Being—God, and the soul’s immortality, of atheism, in short, on the ground that according to their doctrines, Nirvana means {{Style S-Italic|annihilation,}} and {{Style S-Italic|Svabhâvât is}} not {{Style S-Italic|a person, but nothing,}} is simply absurd. The En (or Ayîn) of the Jewish En-Soph, also means {{Style S-Italic|nihil}} or {{Style S-Italic|nothing,}} that which is not ({{Style S-Italic|quo ad nos);}} but no one has ever ventured to twit the Jews with atheism. In both cases the real meaning of the term {{Style S-Italic|nothing}} carries with it the idea that God is {{Style S-Italic|not a thing,}} not a concrete or visible Being to which a name expressive of {{Style S-Italic|any}} object known to us on earth may be applied with propriety.

To accuse Buddhistical philosophy of rejecting a Supreme Being—God, and the soul’s immortality, of atheism, in short, on the ground that according to their doctrines, Nirvana means {{Style S-Italic|annihilation,}} and {{Style S-Italic|Svabhâvât is}} {{Style S-Small capitals|not}} {{Style S-Italic|a person, but nothing,}} is simply absurd. The En (or Ayîn) of the Jewish En-Soph, also means {{Style S-Italic|nihil}} or {{Style S-Italic|nothing,}} that which is not ({{Style S-Italic|quo ad nos);}} but no one has ever ventured to twit the Jews with atheism. In both cases the real meaning of the term {{Style S-Italic|nothing}} carries with it the idea that God is {{Style S-Italic|not a thing,}} not a concrete or visible Being to which a name expressive of {{Style S-Italic|any}} object known to us on earth may be applied with propriety.

[#fn484anc 484]. Porphyry gives the credit to Plotinus his master, of having been united with “God” six times during his life, and complains of having attained to it but twice, himself.

{{Footnote return|*|fn484}} Porphyry gives the credit to Plotinus his master, of having been united with “God” six times during his life, and complains of having attained to it but twice, himself.