Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
6,997
edits
Blavatsky H.P. - The History of a Planet (view source)
Revision as of 14:29, 21 March 2024
, 21 Marchno edit summary
(Created page with "{{HPB-CW-header | item title = The History of a Planet | item author = Blavatsky H.P. | volume = 8 | pages = 14-27 | publications = Lucifer, Vol. I, No. 1...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
{{Page aside|20}} | {{Page aside|20}} | ||
But then, these crosses are not the symbols of Christianity, but the Egyptian ''crux ansata'', the attribute of Isis (who is Venus, and Aphrodite, Nature, also) or <big><big>'''♀'''</big></big> the planet; the fact that the Earth has the crux ansata reversed , having a great occult significance upon which there is no necessity of entering at present. | But then, these crosses are not the symbols of Christianity, but the Egyptian ''crux ansata'', the attribute of Isis (who is Venus, and Aphrodite, Nature, also) or <big><big>'''♀'''</big></big> the planet; the fact that the Earth has the crux ansata reversed <big><big><big>♁</big></big></big>, having a great occult significance upon which there is no necessity of entering at present. | ||
Now what says the Church and how does it explain the “ dreadful association”? The Church believes in the devil, of course, and could not afford to lose him. “The Devil is one of the chief pillars of the Faith” confesses unblushingly an advocate of the Ecclesia Militans. | Now what says the Church and how does it explain the “ dreadful association”? The Church believes in the devil, of course, and could not afford to lose him. “The Devil is one of the chief pillars of the Faith” confesses unblushingly an advocate of the Ecclesia Militans.<ref>Thus saith Des Mousseaux, Mœurs et pratiques des démons, p. x—and he is corroborated in this by Cardinal de Ventura. The Devil, he says, “ is one of the great personages whose life is closely allied to that of the Church; and without him . . . . the fall of man could not have taken place. If it were not for him [the Devil], the Victor over death, the Saviour, the Redeemer, the Crucified would be but the most ridiculous of supernumeraries and the Cross a real insult to good sense.” And if so, then we should feel thankful to the poor Devil.</ref> | ||
All the Alexandrian Gnostics speak to us of the fall of the Aeons and their Pleroma, and all attribute that fall to the desire to know, | {{Style P-Quote|All the Alexandrian Gnostics speak to us of the fall of the Aeons and their Pleroma, and all attribute that fall to the desire to know,}} | ||
writes another volunteer in the same army, slandering the Gnostics as usual and identifying the desire to know or occultism, magic, with Satanism. | {{Style P-No indent|writes another volunteer in the same army, slandering the Gnostics as usual and identifying the desire to know or occultism, magic, with Satanism.<ref>De Mirville. “No Devil, no Christ,” he exclaims.</ref> And then, forthwith, he quotes from Schlegel’s Philosophie de l’Histoire to show that the seven rectors (planets) of Pymander,}} | ||
commissioned by God to contain the phenomenal world in their seven circles, lost in love with their own beauty, | {{Style P-Quote|commissioned by God to contain the phenomenal world in their seven circles, lost in love with their own beauty,<ref>This is only another version of Narcissus, the Greek victim of his own fair looks.</ref> came to admire themselves with such intensity that owing to this proud self-adulation they finally fell.<ref>{{HPB-CW-comment|[Schlegel’s work is probably some French translation of his German Philosophie der Geschichte, Vienna, 1829.—Compiler.]}}</ref>}} | ||
{{Page aside|21}} | |||
Perversity having thus found its way amongst the angels, the most beautiful creature of God “revolted against its Maker.” That creature is in theological fancy Venus-Lucifer, or rather the informing Spirit or Regent of that planet. This teaching is based on the following speculation. The three principal heroes of the great sidereal catastrophe mentioned in Revelation are, according to the testimony of the Church fathers—”the Verbum, Lucifer his usurper [see editorial] and the grand Archangel who conquered him,” and whose “palaces” (the “houses,” astrology calls them) are in the Sun, Venus-Lucifer and Mercury. This is quite evident, since the positions of these orbs in the Solar system correspond in their hierarchical order to that of the “heroes” in Chapter xii of Revelation, “their names and destinies” (?) being closely connected in the theological (exoteric) system “with these three great metaphysical names.” (De Mirville’s Mémoire to the Academy of France, on the rapping Spirits and the Demons, Vol. IV, pp. 159-160.) | |||
The outcome of this was, that theological legend made of Venus-Lucifer the sphere and domain of the fallen Archangel, or Satan before his apostasy. Called upon to reconcile this statement with that other fact, that the metaphor of “the morning star” is applied to both Jesus, and his Virgin mother, and that the planet Venus-Lucifer is included, moreover, among the “stars” of the seven planetary spirits worshipped by the Roman Catholics <ref>The famous temple dedicated to the Seven Angels at Rome, and built by Michael-Angelo in 1561, is still there, now called the “Church of St. Mary of the Angels.” In the old Roman Missals printed in 1563—one or two of which may still be seen in Palazzo Barberini—one may find the religious service (officio) of the seven angels, and their old and occult names. That the “angels” are the pagan Rectors, under different names—the Jewish having replaced the Greek and Latin names—of the seven planets is proven by what Pope Pius V said in his Bull to the Spanish Clergy, permitting and encouraging the worship of the said seven spirits of the stars. “One cannot exalt too much these seven rectors of the world, figured by the seven planets as it is consoling to our century to witness by the grace of God the cult of these seven ardent lights, and of these seven stars reassuming all its lustre in the Christian republic.” (De Mirville, Des Esprits, etc., 2nd Mémoire addressed to the Academy; chapter “Les Sept Esprits et l’histoire de leur culte,” Vol. II, pp. 357-58.)</ref> under new names, the defenders of the Latin dogmas and beliefs answer as follows: | |||
{{Style P-Quote|Lucifer, the jealous neighbour of the Sun [Christ] said to himself in his great pride: “I will rise as high as he!” He was thwarted in {{Page aside|22}}his design by Mercury, though the brightness of the latter [who is St. Michael] was as much lost in the blazing fires of the great Solar orb as his own was, and though, like Lucifer, Mercury is only the assessor, and the guard of honour to the Sun.<ref>De Mirville, op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 160.</ref>}} | |||
Guards of “dishonour” now rather, if the teachings of theological Christianity were true. But here comes in the cloven foot of the Jesuit. The ardent defender of Roman Catholic Demonolatry and of the worship of the seven planetary spirits, at the same time, pretends great wonder at the coincidences between old Pagan and Christian legends, between the fable about Mercury and Venus, and the historical truths told of St. Michael—the “angel of the face”—the terrestrial double, or ferouer of Christ. He points them out saying: | |||
{{Style P-Quote|. . . . like Mercury, the archangel Michael, is the friend of the Sun, his ferouer, his Mitra, perhaps, for Michael is a psychopompic genius, one who leads the separated souls to their appointed abodes, and like Mitra, he is the well-known adversary of the demons.<ref>[de Mirville, op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 160.]</ref>}} | |||
{{Style P-No indent|This is demonstrated by the book of the Nabatheans recently discovered (by Chwolsohn), in which the Zoroastrian Mitra is called the “grand enemy of the planet Venus.” <ref>Herodotus showing the identity of Mitra and Venus, the sentence in the Nabathean Agriculture is evidently misunderstood.<br> | |||
{{HPB-CW-comment|[This refers to the researches of Dr. Daniel Avraamovich Chwolsohn, the Russian-Jewish Orientalist and Semitolog, who translated into German three Arabic manuscripts which exist in the library of the University of Leyden. They are: The Book of the Nabathean Agriculture; The Book of Poisons; and The Book of the Babylonian Tenkelûschâ, with fragments of a fourth work entitled, The Book of the Mysteries of the Sun and Moon. They were translated into Arabic by Ibn-Wa’hschijjah, a descendant of the ancient Babylonians who determined to rescue from oblivion those ancient works of his forefathers.<br> | |||
Dr. Chwolsohn published his researches under the title of: Über die Überreste der Altbabylonischen Literatur in arabischen Übersetzungen (in Mémoires des savants étrangers. Vol. VIII. St. Petersburg: Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1859; Russian transl. in the Russkiy Vestnik of 1859).<br> | |||
The author of The Book of the Nabathean Agriculture is supposed to be Qûtâmî, possibly in collaboration with others. It has been conservatively ascribed by various scholars to a period antedating the eighth century B.C., and is in all likelihood based on traditions dating from a very remote antiquity. Under the guise of agriculture, many occult beliefs are explained, and various magical secrets of nature hinted at.<br> | |||
H. P. B. devotes several pages of The Secret Doctrine (Vol. II, 452-457) to various aspects of Chwolsohn’s work, and the nature and contents of the Nabathean Agriculture. She speaks of it as being “no apocrypha, but the repetition of the tenets of the Secret Doctrine under the exoteric Chaldean form of national symbols, for the purpose of ‘cloaking’ the tenets. . .” She plainly states that “the Doctrines of Qû-tâmy, the Chaldean, are, in short, the allegorical rendering of the religion of the earliest nations of the Fifth Race.”—Compiler.]}}</ref> (de Mirville, op. cit., p. 160.)}} | |||
{{Page aside|23}} | |||
There is something in this. A candid confession, for once, of perfect identity of celestial personages and of borrowing from every pagan source. It is curious, if unblushing. While in the oldest Mazdean allegories, Mitra conquers the planet Venus, in Christian tradition Michael defeats Lucifer, and both receive, as war spoils, the planet of the vanquished deity. | |||
{{Style P-Quote|Mitra [says Döllinger] possessed, in days of old, the star of Mercury, placed between the sun and the moon, but he was given the planet of the conquered, and ever since his victory he is identified with Venus. <ref>Paganisme et Judaïsme, Vol. II, p. 109.<br> | |||
{{HPB-CW-comment|[H. P. B. quotes this passage from de Mirville, Des Esprits, etc., Vol. IV, p. 160, where ref. is given to a French translation of Döllinger’s original German work entitled Heidenthum und Judenthum. In the latter, the subject of Mithra occurs on pp. 383-390 of Part I, and the above quote seems to be only a paraphrase of various statements found therein.—Compiler.]}}</ref>}} | |||
In the Christian tradition, adds the learned Marquis, | |||
{{Style P-Quote|. . . . . St. Michael is apportioned in Heaven the throne and the palace of the foe he has vanquished. Moreover, like Mercury, during the palmy {{Page aside|24}}days of paganism, which made sacred to this [demon-] god all the promontories of the earth, the Archangel is the patron of the same in our religion.<ref>[De Mirville, op. cit., Vol. IV, pp. 160, 162, somewhat paraphrased.]</ref>}} | |||
{{Style P-No indent|This means, if it does mean anything, that now, at any rate, Lucifer-Venus is a sacred planet, and no synonym of Satan, since St. Michael has become his legal heir.}} | |||
The above remarks conclude with this cool reflection: | |||
{{Style P-Quote|It is evident that paganism has utilised [beforehand], and most marvellously, all the features and characteristics of the prince of the face of the Lord [Michael] in applying them to that Mercury, to the Egyptian Hermes-Anubis, and the Hermes-Christos of the Gnostics. Each of these was represented as the first among the divine councillors, and the god nearest to the sun, quis ut Deus.<ref>[de Mirville, op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 160.]</ref>}} | |||
Which title, with all its attributes, became that of Michael. The good Fathers, the Master Masons of the temple of Church Christianity, knew indeed how to utilize pagan material for their new dogmas. | |||
The fact is, that it is sufficient to examine certain Egyptian cartouches, pointed out by Rosellini (Égypte, Vol. I, p. 283), <ref>{{HPB-CW-comment|[ibid., p. 162, where reference is evidently to Ippolito Rosellini’s work entitled: I Monumenti dell’ Egitto e della Nubia, disegnate della spedizione scientifico-litteraria toscana in Egitto. Pisa: Presso N. Capurro e.c., 1832-44. 9 vols. 8-vo. (British Museum: 559.b.2.).—Compiler.]}}</ref> to find Mercury (the double of Sirius in our solar system) as Sothis, preceded by the words “sole” and “solis custode, o sostegno, dei dominanti . . . il forte, grande dei vigilanti,” “watchman of the sun, sustainer of dominions, and the strongest of all the vigilants.” All these titles and attributes are now those of the Archangel Michael, who has inherited them from the demons of paganism. | |||
Moreover, travellers in Rome may testify to the wonderful presence in the statue of Mitra, at the Vatican, of the best known Christian symbols. Mystics boast of it. They find | |||
{{Style P-Quote|. . . . in his lion’s head, and the eagle’s wings, those of the courageous Seraph, the master of space [Michael]; in his caduceus, the spear, {{Page aside|25}}in the two serpents coiled round the body, the struggle of the good and bad principles, and especially in the two keys which the said Mitra holds, like St. Peter, the keys with which this Seraph-patron of the latter opens and shuts the gates of Heaven, astra cludid et recludit.<ref>De Mirville, op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 162.</ref>}} | |||
To sum up, the aforesaid shows that the theological romance of Lucifer was built upon the various myths and allegories of the pagan world, and that it is no revealed dogma, but simply one invented to uphold superstition. Mercury being one of the Sun’s assessors, or the cynocephali of the Egyptians and the watch-dogs of the Sun, literally, the other was Eosphoros, the most brilliant of the planets, “qui mane oriebaris,” the early rising, or the Greek ''ὀρθρινός''. It was identical with the Amon-ra, the light-bearer of Egypt, and called by all nations “the second born of light” (the first being Mercury), the beginning of his (the Sun’s) ways of wisdom, the Archangel Michael being also referred to as the principium viarum Domini. | |||
Thus a purely astronomical personification, built upon an occult meaning which no one has hitherto seemed to unriddle outside the Eastern wisdom, has now become a dogma, part and parcel of Christian revelation. A clumsy transference of characters is unequal to the task of making thinking people accept in one and the same trinitarian group, the “Word” or Jesus, God and Michael (with the Virgin occasionally to complete it) on the one hand, and Mitra, Satan and Apollo-Abaddon on the other: the whole at the whim and pleasure of Roman Catholic Scholiasts. If Mercury and Venus (Lucifer) are (astronomically in their revolution around the Sun) the symbols of God the Father, the Son, and of their Vicar, Michael, the “Dragon-Conqueror,” in Christian legend, why should they when called Apollo-Abaddon, the “King of the Abyss,” Lucifer, Satan, or Venus—become forthwith devils and demons? If we are told that the “conqueror,” or “Mercury-Sun,” or again St. Michael of the Revelation, was given the spoils of the conquered {{Page aside|26}}angel, namely, his planet, why should opprobrium be any longer attached to a constellation so purified? Lucifer is now the “Angel of the Face of the Lord,” <ref>“Both in Biblical and pagan theologies,” says de Mirville, “the Sun has its god, its defender, and its sacrilegious usurper, in other words, its Ormuzd, its planet Mercury [Mitra], and its Lucifer-Venus [or Ahriman], taken away from its ancient master, and now given to its conqueror.” (op. cit., p. 164.) Therefore, Lucifer-Venus is quite holy now.</ref> because “that face is mirrored in it.” We think rather, because the Sun is reflecting his beams in Mercury seven times more than it does on our Earth, and twice more in Lucifer-Venus: the Christian symbol proving again its astronomical origin. But whether from the astronomical, mystical or symbological aspect, Lucifer is as good as any other planet. To advance as a proof of its demoniacal character, and identity with Satan, the configuration of Venus, which gives to the crescent of this planet the appearance of a cut-off horn, is rank nonsense. But to connect this with the horns of “The Mystic Dragon” in Revelation—“one of which was broken” <ref>In Revelation there is no “horn broken,” but it is simply said in Chapter xiii, 3, that John saw “one of his heads, as it were, wounded to death.” John knew naught in his generation of “a horned” devil.</ref>—as the two French Demonologists, the Marquis de Mirville and the Chevalier des Mousseaux, the champions of the Church militant, would have their readers believe in the second half of our present century—is simply an insult to the public. | |||
Besides which, the Devil had no horns before the fourth century of the Christian era. It is a purely Patristic invention arising from their desire to connect the god Pan, and the pagan Fauns and Satyrs, with their Satanic legend. The demons of Heathendom were as hornless and as tailless as the Archangel Michael himself in the imaginations of his worshippers. The “horns” were, in pagan symbolism, an emblem of divine power and creation, and of fertility in nature. Hence the ram’s horns of Amon, of Bacchus, and of Moses on ancient medals, and {{Page aside|27}}the cow’s horns of Isis and Diana, etc., etc., and of the Lord God of the Prophets of Israel himself. For Habakkuk gives the evidence that this symbolism was accepted by the “chosen people” as much as by the Gentiles. In Chapter iii, 3-4, that prophet speaks of the “Holy One from Mount Paran,” of the Lord God who “came from Teman,” and whose “brightness was as the light,” and who had “horns coming out of his hand.” | |||
When one reads, moreover, the Hebrew text of Isaiah, and finds that no Lucifer is mentioned at all in Chapter xiv, 12, but simply <big>'''הילל'''</big> Hillel, “a bright star,” one can hardly refrain from wondering that educated people should be still ignorant enough at the close of our century to associate a radiant planet—or anything else in nature for the matter of that—with the DEVIL! <ref>The literal words used, and their translation, are: “Aïk Naphalta Mi-Shamayim Hillel Ben-Shahar Nigdata La-Aretz Cholesch Al-Goüm,” or, “How art thou fallen from the heavens, Hillel, Son of the Morning, how art thou cast down unto the earth, thou who didst cast down the nations.” Here the word, translated “Lucifer,” is <big>'''הילל'''</big>, Hillel, and its meaning is “shining brightly or gloriously.” It is very true also, that by a pun to which Hebrew words lend themselves so easily, the verb hillel may be made to mean “to howl,” hence by an easy derivation, hillel may be constructed into “howler,” or a devil, a creature, however, one hears rarely, if ever, “howling.” In his Hebrew and English Lexicon, Art. <big>'''הל'''</big>, John Parkhurst says: “The Syriac translation of this passage renders it <big>'''אילל'''</big> howl, and even Jerome on the place observes, that it literally means howl. . . . ‘Therefore,’ says Michaelis, ‘I translate, Howl, Son of the morning, i.e.; thou star of the first magnitude’.” But at this rate, Hillel, the great Jewish-sage and reformer, might also be called “howler,” and connected with the devil!<br> | |||
{{HPB-CW-comment|[There exist divergent views among scholars concerning the Hebrew term which is sometimes spelt hillel, and sometimes hêlçl and even hailal, according to the interpretation of the vowel-points. The Hebrew expression in Isaiah, xiv, 12, hêlel bên shâhar, appears in the Greek Septuagint as <big>'''ὁ Εωσφόρος ὁ πρωῒ ἀνατέλλων'''</big> and in the Latin Vulgate as Lucifer qui mane oriebaris, conveying the idea of “early rising,” both in Greek and in Latin. The Hebrew expression bên shâhar definitely means “son of the dawn.” The Vulgate translates by the word Lucifer the Hebrew term bôqer, “light of dawn” (Job, xi, 17), the expression mazzârôth, “the Signs of the Zodiac” (Job, xxxviii, 32), and even shâhar, “the dawn” (Ps., cx, 3). Besides using the word Lucifer in connection with the King of Babylon, in the above-mentioned passage from Isaiah, the same term is used by the Vulgate in connection with the High-Priest Simon, son of Onias (Ecclesiasticus, 1, 6), and is applied to the “glory of Heaven” (Apoc., ii, 28), and even to Jesus Christ himself (II Peter, i, 19; Apoc., xxii, 16). In the Exultet (liturgy of Holy Saturday), the Church uses the title of Lucifer in connection with its Saviour, and expresses the hope that this “early morning Lucifer” will find the Easter-candle burning bright, he who knows no decline and who, returning from Hell, sheds his brilliant light upon mankind.<br> | |||
Hêlçl is derived from hâlal, “to shine” (Arab. halal; Assyrian, elêlu). The Syriac version of the Old Testament and the version of Aquila derive it from yâlal, “to lament,” and St. Jerome agrees with this derivation (Comm. in Is., v, 14, in Migne, Patrol. Lat., XXIV, 161), making of Lucifer the principal fallen angel who is supposed “to lament” the loss of his original glory, bright as the morning star. Other Fathers of the Church maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the “devil,” but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De angelis, III, iii; 4). Present-day scholars agree with H. P. B. that the supposed derivation from yâlal, “to wail,” “to howl or lament,” is untenable.<br> | |||
The passage in Isaiah, xiv, 12, discussed by H. P. B., is transliterated as follows by present-day standards: Aik nafaltah mi-shamayim hailal ben-shâhar nig’datah la-ares holesh ’al-goyim. The translation of this verse, according to King James’ Bible is; however, “How art thou fallen, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!” Some scholars translate “cast lots over nations,” instead of “weaken.”—Compiler.]}}</ref> | |||
{{Style P-Signature|H.P.B.}} | |||
{{Footnotes}} | {{Footnotes}} | ||