Blavatsky H.P. - Miscellaneous Notes (39): Difference between revisions

From Teopedia
(Created page with "{{HPB-CW-header | item title = Miscellaneous Notes | item author = Blavatsky H.P. | volume = 9 | pages = 23-24 | publications = Lucifer, Vol. I, No. 5, Ja...")
 
mNo edit summary
 
Line 8: Line 8:
  | previous    = Blavatsky H.P. - A Note of Explanation
  | previous    = Blavatsky H.P. - A Note of Explanation
  | next        = Blavatsky H.P. - Chinese Shadows
  | next        = Blavatsky H.P. - Chinese Shadows
  | alternatives = [http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v9/y1888_007.htm KH]
  | alternatives =  
  | translations =  
  | translations =  
}}
}}


{{Page aside|24}}
{{Page aside continues|23}}
{{Page aside continues|23}}


{{Style P-Title|MISCELLANEOUS NOTES}}
{{Style P-Title|MISCELLANEOUS NOTES}}
{{Vertical space|}}


<center>[Lucifer, Vol. I, No. 5, January, 1888, pp. 406-7, 421-22]</center>
{{HPB-CW-comment|view=center|[''Lucifer'', Vol. I, No. 5, January, 1888, pp. 406-7, 421-22]}}
{{Vertical space|}}
{{Vertical space|}}


Line 24: Line 22:


{{Page aside|24}}
{{Page aside|24}}
A few years—and, who knows? perhaps only few months more, and Protestant England will have reverend scientists explaining to their congregations from the pulpits that Adam and Eve were but the “missing link”—two tailless baboons.
A few years—and, who knows? perhaps only few months more, and Protestant England will have reverend scientists explaining to their congregations from the pulpits that Adam and Eve were but the “missing link”—''two tailless baboons''.
 
{{HPB-CW-separator}}
{{HPB-CW-separator}}


Hence the Spirit of Non-Separateness in esoteric philosophy must be the ONE truth.
Hence the Spirit of ''Non-Separateness'' in esoteric philosophy must be the {{Style S-Small capitals|one}} ''truth''.


[What the Ego is, all is] Only this “Ego” is universal, not individual: Absolute Consciousness, not the human Brain.
[What the Ego is, ''all'' is] Only this “Ego” is ''universal'', not ''individual'': ''Absolute'' Consciousness, not the human Brain.


[The highest and the lowliest are ever thus akin. . .] Then why not term the philosophy “High-Low-Idealism” vice “Hylo-Idealism”?
[The highest and the lowliest are ever thus akin. . .] Then why not term the philosophy “''High-Low''-Idealism” ''vice'' “Hylo-Idealism”?


[. . . everything being, not so much cleansed of God, as very THEOBROMA, God’s food and nutrient element. . .] “Theobroma”—the same as cacao-butter. We take exception to the phraseology, not to Dr. Lewins’ ideas.
[. . . everything being, not so much cleansed of God, as very {{Style S-Small capitals|Theobroma}}, God’s food and nutrient element. . .] “Theobroma”—the same as ''cacao-butter''. We take exception ''to the phraseology'', not to Dr. Lewins’ ideas.

Latest revision as of 12:52, 26 January 2026

Miscellaneous Notes
by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writtings, vol. 9, page(s) 23-24

Publications: Lucifer, Vol. I, No. 5, January, 1888, pp. 406-7, 421-22

Also at:

In other languages:


<<     >>  | page


23...


MISCELLANEOUS NOTES

[Lucifer, Vol. I, No. 5, January, 1888, pp. 406-7, 421-22]

Both the Idealism of Mr. Herbert Spencer, and the Hylo-Idealism of Dr. Lewins are more materialistic and atheistic than any of the honestly declared materialistic views—Büchner’s and Moleschott’s included.

24 A few years—and, who knows? perhaps only few months more, and Protestant England will have reverend scientists explaining to their congregations from the pulpits that Adam and Eve were but the “missing link”—two tailless baboons.

–––––––

Hence the Spirit of Non-Separateness in esoteric philosophy must be the one truth.

[What the Ego is, all is] Only this “Ego” is universal, not individual: Absolute Consciousness, not the human Brain.

[The highest and the lowliest are ever thus akin. . .] Then why not term the philosophy “High-Low-Idealism” vice “Hylo-Idealism”?

[. . . everything being, not so much cleansed of God, as very Theobroma, God’s food and nutrient element. . .] “Theobroma”—the same as cacao-butter. We take exception to the phraseology, not to Dr. Lewins’ ideas.