{"collection":"Theosophy","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/archive_org_secretdoctrines04blavgoog/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/archive_org_secretdoctrines04blavgoog","id":"archive_org_secretdoctrines04blavgoog","license":null,"rights_basis":"archive_org_open:pre_1929_us_pd_heuristic:year=1917","source":"archive_org","source_url":"https://archive.org/details/secretdoctrines04blavgoog","summary":"Google \n\n\nThis is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project \n\nto make the world's books discoverable online. It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject \n\nto copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired.","tags":["Theosophy"],"text":"Google \n\n\nThis is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project \n\nto make the world's books discoverable online. \n\nIt has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject \n\nto copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books \n\nare our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. \n\nMarks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the \n\npublisher to a library and finally to you. \n\nUsage guidelines \n\nGoogle is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the \npublic and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to \nprevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. \nWe also ask that you: \n\n+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for \npersonal, non-commercial purposes. \n\n+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine \ntranslation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the \nuse of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. \n\n+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt \"watermark\" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find \nadditional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. \n\n+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just \nbecause we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other \ncountries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of \nany specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner \nanywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. \n\nAbout Google Book Search \n\nGoogle's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers \ndiscover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web \n\nat|http : //books . google . com/| \n\n\n(5o \n\n\n^ c \n\n\nC^j\u20ac) \n\n\nft \n\n\n. i \n\n\n\u2022< \u00bb \n\n\n\u25a0I *^ \n\n\ni Km \n\n\ni \u00bb \n\n\n.1 \n\n\n\\ I \n\n\nI \n\n\nTHE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\n\nAmYAM ThBOSOPBICAL PiLBSt \n\nPomt Loma, California \n\n\nTHE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\n\nTHE SYNTHESIS OF \nSCIENCE, RELIGION, AND PHILOSOPHY \n\n\nBY \n\n\na P. BLAVATSKY \n\nAuthor of Isis Unveiled \n\n\n44 \n\n\nThere is no Rdigion Higher than Truth* \n\n\nVOLUME n \n\nANTHROPOGENESIS \n\nSECTION n \n\n\nSECOND pomr loma edition \n\nTHE ARYAN THEOSOPHICAL PRESS \n\nPOINT LOMA. CALIFORNIA \n\n1917 \n\n\nKg i'o^( \n\n\nHAP'''ARD \nUNIVt -'SITY \n\nJa.^ 3i 19:2 \n\n\nEntered according to Act of Congress in the year 1888y by H. P. Blaoatsky, \nin the Office of the Librarian of Congress at fFashington^ D. C\" \n\n\n9 Bebtcate to all tIPrue W^o^^Hf \n\n9n <\u00a3titxf Cotmtrp^ \n\n!9tib of \u20actierp ISiau, \n\n:f or tiftp caHeb tt (orti)\u00bb atib for ttiem tt fcoaiC recorbeb. \n\n\nBOOK II, PART II \n\n\nTHE ARCHAIC SYMBOUSM \n\nOF THE \nWORLD-REUGIONS \n\n\nThe narratives of the Doctrine are its cloak. The \nsimple look Only at the garment \u2014 that is, upon the narra- \ntive of the Doctrine; more they know not The instructed, \nhowever, see not merely the cloak, but what the cloak \ncovers. \n\n(The ZoHAS, iii, 152; Franck, 119.) \n\nThs Mystissibs 09 THit Faith (are) not to be \n\nDivutGSD to all It is requisite to hide in a \n\nmystery the wisdom spoken. \n\n(Clem. Alex., Strom,, 12.) \n\n\nCONTENTS \n\n\nPAG8 \n\n\u00a7 EsoTSRic Tenets Cobbobqrated in every Scbiptuse 449 \n\n\nXVI. Adam-Adami 452 \n\n\nXVII. The \"Holy of Hmjes\" \u2014 Its Degradation 459 \n\n\nXVIII. On the Myth of the \" Fallen Angel,\" in its Various Phases 475 \n\nThe Evil Spirit: Who and What? 475 \n\nThe Gods of Light proceed from the Gods of Darkness . . . 483 \n\nThe Many Meanings of the \" War in Heaven \" 492 \n\n\nXIX. Is Pleroma Satan's Lair? 506 \n\n\nXX. Prometheus, the Titan 519 \n\nHis Origin in Ancient India 519 \n\n\nXXI. Enoichion-Henoch 529 \n\n\nXXII. The Symbousm of the Mystery-Names Iao and Jehovah, \n\nWITH their Relation to the Cross and Circle 536 \n\nv^ross and v/ircie. .. \u2022\u2022\u2022 ... \u2022>\u2022 \u2022\u2022\u2022 \u25a0\u2022\u2022 \u2022\u2022\u2022 o^o \n\nThe Fall of the Cross into Matter 553 \n\n\nXXIIL The Upanishads in Gnostic Literature 563 \n\n\nXXIV. The Cross and the Pythagorean Dekad 573 \n\n\nXXV. The Mysteries of the Hebdomad 590 \n\nSaptapama ... ... > > \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 ^90 \n\nThe Tetraktys in relation to the Heptagon 598 \n\nThe Septenary Element in the Vedas. It corroborates the \nOccult Teaching concerning the Seven Globes and the \n\nSeven Races ... ... . . \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 > \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 oUd \n\nThe Septenary in the Exoteric Works 611 \n\nSeven in Astronomy, Science and Magic 618 \n\nThe Seven Souls of the Egyptologists 630 \n\n\n^H \n\n\nBOOK II, PART II \n\n\nESOTERIC TENETS CORROBORATED IN EVERY \n\nSCRIPTURE \n\nIn view of the strangeness of the teachings, and of many a doctrine \nwhich from the modem scientific stand-point must seem absurd, some \nnecessary and additional explanations have to be made. The theories \ncontained in the Second Part of the Stanzas are even more difficult to \nassimilate than those which are embodied in Vol. I, on Cosmogony. \nTheology, therefore, has to be questioned here, as Science will be in the \nAddenda (Part III). Since our doctrines differ so widely from the \ncurrent ideas of both Materialism and Theology, the Occultists must be \never prepared to repel the attacks of either or of both. \n\nThe reader can never be too often reminded that, as the abundant \nquotations from various old Scriptures prove, these teachings are as \nold as the world; and that the present work is a simple attempt to \nrender, in modern language and in a phraseology with which the scien- \ntific and educated student is familiar, archaic Genesis and History as \ntaught in certain Asiatic centers of esoteric learning. They must be \naccepted or rejected on their own merits, fully or partially; but not \nbefore they have been carefully compared with the corresponding theo- \nlogical dogmas and the modern scientific theories and speculations. \n\nOne feels a serious doubt whether, with all its intellectual acuteness, \nour age is destined to discover in each western nation even one solitary \nuninitiated scholar or philosopher capable of fully comprehending the \nspirit of archaic philosophy. Nor can one be expected to do so, before \nthe real meaning of these terms, the Alpha and the Omega of Eastern \nesotericism, the words Sat and Asat, \u2014 so freely used in the Rig-Veda, \nand elsewhere \u2014 is thoroughly assimilated. Without this key to the \nAryan Wisdom, the Cosmogony of the Rishis and the Arhats is in \ndanger of remaining a dead letter to the average Orientalist. Asat is \nnot merely the negation of 5*0/, nor is it the \" not yet existing \" ; for Sat \nis in itself neither the \" existent,\" nor \" being.\" Sat is the immutable, \nthe ever present, changeless and eternal root, from and through which \nall proceeds. But it is far more than the potential force in the seed, \nwhich propels onward the process of development, or what is now called \nevolution. It is the ever becoming, though the never manifesting.'*' \nSat is bom from Asat, and Asat is begotten by Sat: the perpetual \n\n948. The Hegelian doctrine, which klenti- ttgmal becoming, is identical with the Ve- \nfiet Absolute Being or \" Be-ness \" with \" non- danta philosophy. \nBeing/' and represents the Universe as an \n\n\n450 THK SECRET DOCTRINE \n\nmotion in a circle, truly ; yet a circle that can be squared only at the \nsupreme Initiation, at the threshold of Paranirvana. \n\nBarth started a reflection on the Rig-Veda which was meant for a \nstem criticism, an unusual, therefore, as was thought, an original view \nof this archaic volume. It so happened, however, that, while criticising, \nthat scholar revealed a truth, without being himself aware of its full \nimportance. He premisses by saying that \" neither in the language nor \nin the thought of the Rig-Veda\" has he \"been able to discover that \nquality of primitive natural simplicity, which so many are fain to see in \nit.\" Barth had Max Miiller in his mind's eye when writing this. For \nthe famous Oxford professor has throughout characterized the hymns \nof the Rig Veda, as the unsophisticated expression of the religious feel- \ning of a pastoral innocent people. \" In the Vedic hymns the ideas and \nmjrths appear in their simplest and freshest form\"; \u2014 the Sanskrit \nscholar thinks. Barth is of a different opinion, however. \n\nSo divided and personal are the opinions of Sanskritists as to the \nimportance and intrinsic value of the Rig Veda, that those opinions \nbecome entirely biased whichever way they incline. Thus Mr. Max \nMuller declares that: \n\nNowhere is the wide distance which separates the ancient poems of India \nfrom the most ancient literature of Greece more clearly felt, than when we \ncompare the growing myths of the Veda with the full grown and decayed myths \non which the poetry of Homer is founded. The Veda is the real Theogony of \nthe Aryan races, while that of Hesiod is a distorted caricature of the original \nimage. \n\nThis is a sweeping assertion, and perhaps rather unjust in its general \napplication. But why not try to account for it? Orientalists cannot \ndo so, for they reject the chronology of the Secret Doctrine, and could \nhardly admit the fact that between the Rig- Vedic hymns and Hesiod's \nTheogony tens of thousands of years have elapsed. So they fail to see \nthat the Greek myths are no longer the primitive symbolical language of \nthe Initiates, the disciples of the gods-Hierophants, the divine ancient \n\" sacrificers,\" and that disfigured by the distance, and encumbered by \nthe exuberant growth of human profane fancy, they now stand like \ndistorted images of stars in running waves. But if Hesiod's Cos- \nmogony and Theogony are to be viewed as caricatures of the original \nimages, how much more so the myths in the Hebrew Genesis in the \nsight of those, for whom they are no more divine revelation or the \nword of God, than Hesiod's Theogony is for Mr. Gladstone. \n\nSays Barth: \n\nThe poetry it [the Rig Veda] contains appears to me, on the contrary, to \nbe of a singularly refined character and artificially elaborated, full of allusions \nand reticences, of pretensions [ ? ] to mysticism and theosophic insight, and the \n\n\nTHE VEDAS WRITTEN BY INITIATES 451 \n\nmanner of its expression is such as reminds one more frequently of the phrase- \nology in use among certain small groups of initiated, than the poetic language \nof a large community .*\u2022 \n\nWe will not stop to inquire of the critic what he can know of the \nphraseology in use among the \" initiated,\" or whether he belongs him- \nself to such a group ; for, in the latter case, he would hardly have used \nsuch language. But the above shows the remarkable disagreement \nbetween scholars even with regard to the external character of the \nRig Veda. What, then, can any of the modern Sanskritists know about \nits internal or esoteric meaning, beyond the correct inference of Barth, \nthat this Scripture has been compiled by Initiates? \n\nThe whole of the present work is an endeavor to prove this truth. \nThe ancient adepts have solved the great problems of science, however \nunwilling modem materialism may be to admit the fact. The mysteries \nof Life and Death were fathomed by the great master-minds of an- \ntiquity; and if they have preserved them in secrecy and silence, it is \nbecause these problems formed part of the sacred mysteries; and, \nsecondly, because they must have remained incomprehensible to the \nvast majority of men then, as they do now. If such teachings are still \nregarded as chimeras by our opponents in philosophy, it may be a con- \nsolation to the Theosophists to learn, on good proofs, that the specula- \ntions of modem psychologists \u2014 whether serious Idealists, like Mr. \nHerbert Spencer, or wool-gathering pseudo-Idealists \u2014 are far more \nchimerical. Indeed, instead of resting on the firm foundation of facts \nin Nature, they are the unhealthy will-o'-the-wisps of materialistic \nimagination, of the brains that evolved them \u2014 and no more. While \nthey deny, we affirm ; and our affirmation is corroborated by almost all \nthe sages of antiquity. Believing in Occultism and a host of invisible \nPotencies for good reasons, we say : Certus sum, scio quod credidi; to \nwhich our critics reply : Credat Judaeus Apella. Neither is converted \nby the other, nor does such result affect even our little planet E pur \nse muove! \n\nNor is there any need of prosel3^izing. As remarked by the wise \nCicero, \"Time destroys the speculations of man, but it confirms the \njudgment of nature.\" Let us bide our time. Meanwhile, it is not in \nthe human constitution to witness in silence the destruction of one's \ngods, whether they be true or false. And as theology and materialism \nhave combined together to destroy the old gods of antiquity and seek \nto disfigure every old philosophical conception, it is but just that the \nlovers of old wisdom should defend their position, by proving that the \nwhole arsenal of the two is, at best, formed of new weapons made out \nof very old material. \n\n949. The Religions of India, p. xiii. \n\n\n452 THE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\n\n\u00a7XVI \n\nADAM-ADAMI \n\nNames such as Adam-Adami, used by Mr. Chwolsohn in his Nabor- \nthean Agriculture ^^^ and derided by M. Renan, may prove little to \nthe profane. To the Occultist, however, once that the term is found \nin a work of such immense antiquity as the above cited, it proves a \ngood deal; for instance that Adami was a manifold symbol, originat- \ning with the Aryan people, as the root word shows, and having been \ntaken from them by the Semites and the Turanians \u2014 as many other \nthings were. \n\n\"Adam-Adami\" is a generic compound name as old as languages \nare. The Secret Doctrine teaches that Ad-i was the name given to \nthe first speaking race of mankind \u2014 in this Round \u2014 by the Aryans. \nHence the Adonim and Adoftai (the ancient plural form of the word \nAdon), which the Jews applied to their Jehovah and angels, who were \nsimply the first spiritual and ethereal sons of the earth; and the god \nAdonis, who in his many variations stood for the \" First Lord.\" Adam \nis the Sanskrit Adi-Ndth, also meaning first Lord, as ^d-lsvara, or \nany Ad (the first) followed by any adjective or substantive. The \nreason for this is that such truths were a common inheritance. It was \na revelation received by the first mankind before that time which, in \nBiblical phraseology, is called \"the period of one lip and word,\" or \nspeech; knowledge expanded by man's own intuition later on, but \nstill later hidden from profanation under an adequate symbology. The \nauthor of the \" Qabbalah, (according to) the philosophical writings \nof Ibn Gebirol,\" shows the Israelite using \"^rfonai\" (Lord), instead \nof Eh'yeh (/ am) and YHVH, and adds that, while Adonai is ren- \ndered \" Lord \" in the Bible, \" the lowest designation, or the Deity in \nNature, the more general term Elohim, is translated God.\"*** \n\nA curious work was translated in 1860 or thereabout, by the Orient- \nalist Chwolsohn, and presented to ever-incredulous and flippant Europe \nunder the innocent title of Nabathean Agriculture. In the opinion of \nthe translator that archaic volume is \" a complete initiation into the \nmysteries of the pre-Adamite nations, on the authority of undeniably \nauthentic documents.'^ It is \" an invaluable compendium, the full epi- \ntome of the Doctrines held, of the arts and sciences, not only of the \nChaldaeans, but also of the Assyrians and Canaanites of the prehistoric \n\n950. Vide infra. 951. Pag\u00ab 175. \n\n\n\" NABATHEAN AGRICULTURE \" 453 \n\nages.\" These \" Nabatheans \" \u25a0 \u2014 as some critics thought \u2014 were simply \nthe Sabaeans, or Chaldaean star-worshipers. The work is a retransla- \ntion from the Arabic, into which language it was at first translated \nfrom the Chaldaean. \n\nMasudi, the Arabic historian, speaks of these Nabatheans, and ex- \nplains their origin in this wise: \n\nAfter the Deluge [ ? ] the nations established themselves in various countries. \nAmong these were the Nabatheans, who founded the city of Babylon, and were \nthose descendants of Ham who settled in the same province under the leader- \nship of Nimrod, the son of Cush, who was the son of Ham, and great-grandson \nof Noah. . . . This took place at the time when Nimrod received the governor- \nship of Babylonia as the delegate of Dzahhak named Biurasp. \n\nThe translator, Chwolsohn, finds that the assertions of this historian \nare in perfect accord with those of Moses in Genesis; while more irrev- \nerent critics might express the opinion that for this very reason their \ntruth should be suspected. It is useless to argue this point, which is \nof no value in the present question. The weather-beaten, long-since- \nburied problem, and the difficulty of accounting, on any logical ground, \nfor the phenomenal derivation of millions of people of various races, \nof many civilized nations and tribes, from three couples (Noah's sons) \nin 346 years'*^ after the Deluge, may be left to the Karma of the \nauthor of Genesis, whether he is called Moses or Ezra. That which \nis interesting in the work noticed is its contents, the doctrines enunci- \nated in it, which are again, if read esoterically, almost all of them \nidentical with the Secret Teachings. \n\nQuatrcmere suggested that this book might have been simply a copy \nmade under Nebuchadnezzar II, from some Hamitic treatise, \" infinite- \nly more ancient,\" while the author maintains, on \" internal and external \nevidence,\" that its Chaldaean original was written out from the oral \ndiscourses and teachings of a wealthy Babylonian landowner, named \nQii-tamy, who had used for those lectures still more ancient materials. \nThe first Arabic translation is placed by Chwolsohn so far back as the \nXlllth century b. c. On the first page of this \" revelation,\" the author, \nor amanuensis, Qu-tamy, declares that \"the doctrines propounded \ntherein, were originally told by Saturn to the Moon, who communicated \nthem to her idol, which idol revealed them to her devotee, the writer \" \n\u2014 the adept Scribe of that work \u2014 Qu-tamy. \n\nThe details given by the God for the benefit and instruction of mor- \ntals, show periods of incalculable duration and a series of numberless \nkingdoms and Dynasties that preceded the appearance on Earth of \n\n952. See Gtfusis and the authorized Ark\" \" b. c. 2348.\" Chap, x, \" Nimrod the \nChronology. In chap, viii, \" Noah leavetb the first Monarch,\" stands over \" b. c 1998.\" \n\n\n454 THE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\nAdami (the \" red-earth \"). These periods have aroused, as might have \nbeen expected, the defenders of the chronology of the Biblical dead- \nletter meaning almost to fury. De Rougemont was the first to make a \n/et/^^-in-arms against the translator. He reproaches him**'* with \" sac- \nrificing Moses to an anonymous author.\" Berosus, he urges, \" however \ngreat were his chronological errors, was at least in perfect accord with \nthe prophet with regard to the first men, since he speaks of Alorus- \nAdam, or Xisuthrus-Noah, and of Belus-Nimrod,\" etc. \" Therefore,\" \nhe adds, \" the work must be an Apocrypha to be Anged with its con- \ntemporaries \u2014 the fourth book of Esdras, thai of Enoch, the Sibylline \nOracles, and the Book of Hermes \u2014 every one of these dating no \nfarther back than two or three centuries B, C!* Ewald came down \nstill harder on Chwolsohn, and finally M. Renan. In the Revue Ger- \nmanique^^* the ex-pupil pulls down the authority of his master, by \nasking him to show a reason why his Nabathean Agriculture should \nnot be the fraudulent work of some Jew of the third or fourth century \nof our era? It can hardly be otherwise \u2014 argues the romancer of the \nLife of Jesus, Since, in this in-folio on astrology and Sorcery \" we \nrecognize in the personages introduced by Qu-tamy, all the patriarchs \nof the Biblical legends, such as Adam^Adami, AnoukonNoah, and his \nIbrahim-Abraham etc., etc.\" \n\nThis is no reason, since Adam and others are generic names. Mean- \nwhile it is humbly submitted that, all things considered, an apocrypha \n\u2014 if even of the third century a. d., instead of the thirteenth century \nB. c.^ as suggested by Quatremere \u2014 is old enough to appear genuine \nas a document, and so satisfy the demands of the most exacting archae- \nologist and critic. For, even admitting, for argument's sake, that this \nliterary relic has been compiled by \" some Jew of the third century of \nour era\" \u2014 what of that? Leaving the credibility of its doctrines for \na moment aside, why should it be less entitled to a hearing, or less \ninstructive as reflecting older opinions, than any other religious work, \nalso a \"compilation from old texts\" or oral tradition \u2014 of the same \nor even a later age? In such case we should have to reject and call \n\" apocryphal \" the Kuran \u2014 two centuries older, though we know it to \nhave sprung, Minerva-like, direct from the brain of the Arabian pro- \nphet ; and we should have to pooh-pooh all the information we can get \nfrom the Talmud, which, in its present form, was also compiled from \nolder materials, and is not earlier than the IXth century of our era. \n\nThe curious \" Bible \" of the Chaldaean adept, and the various criti- \ncisms upon it (as in Chwolsohn's translation), are noticed, because \nit has an important bearing upon a great portion of the present work. \n\n953. AnnaUs J# PhUosophU, June, 1860, p. 41S. 954. April 30, 1860. \n\n\nMANY VIEWS OF MANY MINDS \n\n\n455 \n\n\nWith the exception of M. Renan, an iconoclast by principle \u2014 so \npointedly called by Jules Lemaitre \" le Paganini du Niant\" \u2014 the \nworst fault found with the work is, it would seem, that the \" apocry- \npha \" pretends to have been communicated as a revelation to an adept \nby, and from, the \" idol of the moon,\" who received it from \" Saturn.\" \nHence, very naturally, it is \" a fairy tale all round.\" To this there is \nbut one answer: it is no more a fairy tale than the Bible, and if one \nfalls, the other must follow it. Even the mode of divination through \n\" the idol of the moon \" is the same as practised by David, Saul, and \nthe High Priests of the Jewish Tabernacle by means of the Teraphim. \nIn Volume HI, Part H, of this present work, the practical methods of \nsuch ancient divination will be found. \n\nThe Nabathean Agriculture is a compilation indeed ; it is no apocry- \npha, but the repetition of the tenets of the Secret Doctrine under the \nexoteric Chaldaean form of national symbols, for the purpose of \n\" cloaking \" the tenets, just as the Books of Hermes and the Puranas \nare Eg3rptian and Hindu attempts at the same. The work was as well \nknown in antiquity as it was during the Middle Ages. Maimonides \nspeaks of it, and refers more than once to this Chaldaeo-Arabic \nMS., calling the Nabatheans by their co-religionary name, t. e., \" star- \nworshipers,\" or Sabaeans, but yet failing to see in this disfigured word \n\" Nabatheans \" the mystic name of the caste devoted to Nebo (god of \nsecret wisdom), which shows on its face that the Nabatheans were an \noccult Brotherhood.^*** The Nabatheans who, according to the Persian \nYezidi, originally came to Syria from Busrah, were the degenerate \nmembers of that fraternity; still their religion, even at that late day, \nwas purely Kabalistic.**** Nebo is the deity of the planet Mercury, and \nMercury is the god of Wisdom or Hermes, and Budha, which the Jews \ncalled 13^ \"the Lord on high, the aspiring,. . .\" and the Greeks Nabo, \nNo/Sw, hence Nabatheans. Notwithstanding that Maimonides calls their \ndoctrines \" heathenish foolishness \" and their archaic literature \" Sab- \naeorum foetum'' he places their \" agriculture,\" the Bible of Qu-tamy, \nin the first rank of Archaic literature; and Abarbanel praises it in \nunmeasured terms. Spencer, quoting the latter, speaks of it as that \n\n\n955. \"I will mention to thee the writ- \nings . . . respecting iht belief of the Sab- \neons\" he says. \" The most famous is the \nBook the 'Agriculture of the Nabatheans/ \nwhich has been translated by Ibn Wahohijah, \nThis book is full of heathen!^ foolishness. \n. . . It speaks of preparations of Tai^ismans, \nthe drawing down of the powers of the \nSpikits, Magic, Dsmons, and ghouls, which \nmake their abode in the desert.\" (Maimon- \n\n\nides, quoted by Dr. D. Chwolsohn, Die Ssabier \nund der Ssabismus, II, p. 458.) Tfie Naba- \ntheans of Mount I\u00abebanon believed in the \nSeven Archangels, as their forefathers had \nbelieved in the Seven Great Stars, the abodes \nand bodies of these Archangels, believed in \nto this day by the Roman Catholics, as is \nshown elsewhere. \n\n956. See \" Isis UnveUedr Vol. II. page \n197. \n\n\n456 THE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\n\"most excellent Oriental work/' adding \u2022\u2022^ that by Nabatheans, the \nSabaeans, the Chaldaeans, and the Egyptians, in short all those nations \nagainst whom the laws of Moses were most severely enacted, have to \nbe understood. \n\nNebo, the oldest God of Wisdom of Babylonia and Mesopotamia, \nwas identical with the Hindu Budha and Hermes-Mercury of the \nGreeks. A slight change in the sexes of the parents is the only altera- \ntion. As Budha was the Son of Soma (the Moon) in India, and of the \nwife of Brihaspati (Jupiter), so Nebo was the son of Zarpa-nitu (the \nMoon deity) and of Merodach, who had become Jupiter, after having \nbeen a Sun God. As Mercury the planet, Nebo was the \" overseer \" \namong the seven gods of the planets ; and as the personification of the \nSecret Wisdom he was Nabin, a seer and a prophet. The fact that \nMoses is made to die and disappear on the mount sacred to Nebo, \nshows him an initiate and a priest of that god under another name ; for \nthis God of Wisdom was the great creative deity, and was worshiped \nas such, not alone at Borsippa in his gorgeous Temple, or planet-tower. \nHe was likewise adored by the Moabites, the Canaanites, the Assyrians, \nand throughout the whole of Palestine: then why not by the Israelites? \n\" The planetary temple of Babylon \" had \" its holy of holies \" within \nthe shrine of Nebo, the prophet god of Wisdom. We are told in the \nHibbert Lectures, \" The ancient Babylonians had an intercessor be- \ntween men and the gods . . . and Nebo, was the 'proclaimer' or \n* prophet,' as he made known the desire of his father Merodach.\" \n\nNebo is a creator, like Budha, of the Fourth and also of the Fifth \nRace. For the former starts a new race of Adepts, and the latter, the \nSolar-lunar D)masty, or the men of these Races and Round. Both \nare the Adams of their respective creatures. Adam-Adami is a per- \nsonation of the dual Adam: of the paradigmic Adam-Kadmon, the \ncreator, and of the lower Adam, the terrestrial, who, as the Syrian \nKabalists have it, had only nephesh, \" the breath of life,\" but no living \nsoul, until after his Fall. \n\nIf, therefore, Renan persists in regarding the Chaldaean Scriptures \n\u2014 or what remains of them \u2014 as apocryphal, it is quite immaterial to \ntruth and fact. There are other Orientalists who may be of a different \nopinion; and even were they not, it would still really matter very \nlittle. These doctrines contain the teachings of Esoteric philosophy, \nand this must suffice. To those who understand nothing of s)mibology \nit may appear astrolatry, pure and simple, or to him who would conceal \nthe esoteric truth, even \"heathenish foolishness.\" Maimonides, how- \never, while expressing scorn for the esotericism in the religion of other \nnations, confessed esotericism and symbology in his own, preached \n\n957. Vol. I, p. 354. \n\n\nTHE KABALISTIC ^OUR ADAMS 457 \n\nsilence and secrecy upon the true meaning of Mosaic sayings, and thus \ncame to grief. The Doctrines of Qu-tamy, the Chaldaean, are, in \nshort, the allegorical rendering of the religion of the earliest nations \nof the Fifth Race. \n\nWhy then should M. Renan treat the name \"Adam-Adami\" with \nsuch academical contempt? The author of the Origins of Christi- \nanity evidently knows nothing of the \"origins of pagan sjrmbolism\" \nor of Esotericism either, otherwise he would have known that the \nname was a form of universal symbol, referring, ez'en with the Jews, \nnot to one man, but to four distinct humanities or mankinds. This \nis very easily proven. \n\nThe Kabalists teach the existence of four distinct Adams, or the \ntransformation of four consecutive Adams, the emanations from the \nDyooknah (divine phantom) of the Heavenly Man, an ethereal com- \nbination of Neshamah, the highest Soul or Spirit : this Adam having, \nof course, neither a gross human body, nor a body of desire. This \n\"Adam\" is the protot)rpe (tzure) of the second Adam. That they \nrepresent our Five Races is certain, as everyone can see by their de- \nscription in the Kabala : the first being the \"perfect. Holy Adam\" ; . . . \n\" a shadow that disappeared \" (the Kings of Edom) produced from the \ndivine Tzelem (Image) ; the second is called the protoplastic an- \ndrogyne Adam of the future terrestrial and separated Adam ; the third \nAdam is the man made of \" dust \" (the first, innocent Adam) ; and \nthe fourth, is the supposed forefather of our own race \u2014 the Fallen \nAdam. See, however, the admirably clear description of these in Mr. \nIsaac Myer's Qabbalah,^^^ He gives only four Adams, because of the \nKings of Edom, no doubt. \" The fourth Adam,\" he writes, \". . . was \nclothed with skin, flesh, nerves, etc. This answers to the lower Ne- \nphesh and Guff, i.e., body, united. He has the animal power of repro- \nduction and continuance of species,\" and this is the human Root-Race. \n\nIt is just at this point that the modem Kabalists \u2014 led into error by \nthe long generations of Christian mystics who have tampered with the \nKabalistic records wherever they could \u2014 diverge from the Occultists \nin their interpretations, and take the later thought for the earlier idea. \nThe original Kabala was entirely metaphysical, and had no concern \nwith animal, or terrestrial sexes ; the later Kabala has suffocated the \ndivine ideal under the heavy phallic element. The Kabalists say: \u2014 \n\" God made man male and female.\" \" Among the Qabbalists, the \nnecessity to continued creation and existence is called the Balance,\" \nsays the author of Qabbalah;^^^^ and being without this \" Balance,\" \nconnected with Ma-qom (mysterious place),^*^ even the First Race is \n\n958. Page 418, et seq. 958a. Page 118. \n\n959. Simply, the womb, the \" Holy of Holies \" with the Semites. \n\n\n458 THE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\nnot, as we have seen, recognized by the Sons of the Fifth Adam. \nFrom the highest Heavenly Man, the upper Adam who is \"male \nfemale \" or Androgyne, down to the Adam of dust, these personified \nsymbols are all connected with sex and procreation. With the Eastern \nOccultists it is entirely the reverse. The sexual relation they con- \nsider as a \" Karma \" pertaining only to the mundane relation of man, \nwho is dominated by Illusion, a thing to be put aside, the moment that \nthe person becomes \" wise.\" They consider it a most fortunate circum- \nstance if the Guru (teacher) found in his pupil an aptitude for the \npure life of Brahmacharya. Their dual symbols were to them but the , \n\npoetical imagery of the sublime correlation of creative Cosmic forces. \nAnd this ideal conception is found beaming like a golden ray upon \neach idol, however coarse and grotesque, in the crowded galleries of \nthe somber fanes of India and other Mother lands of cults. \n\nThis will be demonstrated in the following Section. \n\nMeanwhile, it may be added that, with the Gnostics, the second \nAdam also emanates from the Primeval Man, the Ophite Adamas, in \n\"whose image he is made\"; the third, from this second \u2014 an \nAndrogyne. The latter is symbolized in the 6th and 7th pairs of \nthe male- female Aeons, \u2014 Amphain-Essumene, and Vananin-Lamer \n(Father and Mother; vide Valentinian Table, in Epiphanius) \u2014 while \nthe fourth Adam, or Race, is represented by a Priapean monster. \nThe latter \u2014 a post-Christian fancy \u2014 is the degraded copy of the ante- \nChristian Gnostic sjrmbol of the \" Good One,\" or \" He, who created \nbefore anything existed,'* the Celestial Priapus \u2014 truly bom from \nVenus and Bacchus when that God returned from his expedition into \nIndia, for Venus and Bacchus are the post-types of Aditi and the \nSpirit. The later Priapus, one, however, with Agathodaimon, the \nGnostic Savior, and even with Abraxas, is no longer the gl)i)h for \nabstract creative Power, but symbolizes the four Adams, or Races, \nthe fifth being represented by the five branches cut off from the \nTree of Life on which the old man stands in the Gnostic gems. The \nntunber of the Root-Races was recorded in the ancient Greek temples \nby the seven vowels, of which five were framed in a panel in the \nInitiation halls of the Adyta. The Egyptian gljrph for it was a hand \nwith five fingers spread, the fifth or little finger being only half- \ngrown, and also five \" N's \" \u2014 hieroglyphs standing for that letter. \nThe Romans used the five vowels A E I O V in their fanes ; and this \narchaic symbol was adopted during the middle ages as a motto by \nthe House of the Hapsburgs. Sic transit gloria! \n\n\nTHE god\" sub ROSA 459 \n\n\n\u00a7 XVII \n\nTHE \" HOLY OF HOLIES \" \nITS DEGRADATION \n\nThe Sanctum Sanctorum of the Ancients, i. e., that recess on the \nWestern side of the Temple which was enclosed on three sides by \nblank walls and had its only aperture or door hung over with a curtain \n\u2014 also called the Adytum \u2014 was common to all ancient nations. \n\nNevertheless, a great difference is found between the secret mean- \nings of this S3rmbolical place, in the esoteticism of the Pagans and that \nof later Jews; though the symbology of it was originally identical \nthroughout the ancient Races and Nations. The Gentiles, by placing in \nthe Adytum a sarcophagus, or a tomb (taphos), and the solar-god to \nwhom the temple was consecrated, held it, as Pantheists, in the greatest \nveneration. They regarded it \u2014 in its esoteric meaning \u2014 as the sym- \nbol of resurrection, cosmic, solar (or diurnal), and human. It embraced \nthe wide range of periodical and (in time) punctual, Manvantaras, or \nthe re-awakenings of Kosmos, Earth, and Man to new existences ; the \nsun being the most poetical and also the most grandiose symbol of the \nsame in heaven, and man \u2014 in his re-incarnations \u2014 on Earth. The \nJews \u2014 whose realism, if judged by the dead-letter, was as practical \nand gross in the days of Moses as it is now \u2022^^ \u2014 in the course of their \nestrangement from the gods of their pagan neighbors, consummated \na national and levitical polity, by the device of setting forth their Holy \nof Holies as the most solemn sign of their Monotheism \u2014 exoteric- \nally; while seeing in it but a universal phallic symbol \u2014 esoterically. \nWhile the Kabalists knew but Ain-Soph and the \" gods \" of the Mys- \nteries, the Levites had no tomb, no god in their adytum but the \n\" Sacred \" Ark of the Covenant \u2014 their \" Holy of Holies.\" \n\nWhen the esoteric meaning of this recess is made clear, however, \nthe profane will be better able to understand why David danced \" un- \ncovered \" before the ark of the Covenant, and was so anxious to appear \nvile for the sake of his \" Lord,\" and base in his own sight.*** \n\nThe ark is the navi-form Argha oi the Mysteries. Parkhurst, who \n\n960. But it was not so, in reslity, witness spirituality from the body of their symbols; \ntheir prophets. It is the later Rabbis and leaving only their Scriptures \u2014 a dead shell, \nthe Talmudic scheme that killed out all from which the Soul has departed. \n\n961. See II Sam%9l, vi. 16-22. \n\n\n460 THE SECRET DOCTRINE \n\nhas a long dissertation upon it in his Greek dictionary, and who never \nbreathes a word about it in the Hebrew lexicon, explains it thus: \u2014 \n\n'Apx^ in this application answers to the Hebrew rasit or wisdom ... a \nword which had the meaning of the emblem of the female generative power, \nthe Arg or Area, in which the germ of all nature was supposed to float or \nbrood on the great abyss during the interval which took place after every mun- \ndane cycle. \n\nQuite so ; and the Jewish ark of the Covenant had precisely the same \nsignificance; with the supplementary addition that, instead of a beauti- \nful and chaste sarcophagus (the symbol of the matrix of Nature and \nresurrection) as in the Sanctum sanctorum of the pagans, they had \nthe ark made still more realistic in its construction by the two cherubs \nset up on the coffer or ark of the covenant, facing each other, with \ntheir wings spread in such a manner as to form a perfect yoni (as now \nseen in India). Besides which, this generative symbol had its signifi- \ncance enforced by the four mystic letters of Jehovah's name, namely, \nPI^PI^ ; or ^ meaning Jod {membrum virile, see Kabala) ; n (He, \nthe womb) ; 1 (Vau, a crook or a hook, a nail), and n again* mean- \ning also \" an opening\") ; the whole forming the perfect bisexual em- \nblem or symbol or Y (e) H (o) V (a) H, the male and female symbol. \n\nPerhaps, also, when people realize the true meaning of the office and \ntitle of the Kadesh Kadeshim, \" the holy ones,\" or \" the consecrated to \nthe temple of the Lord,\" \u2014 the \" Holy of Holies \" of the latter may \nassume an aspect far from edifying. \n\nlacchus again is lao or Jehovah; and Baal or Adon, like Bacchus, \n\nwas a phallic god. \" Who shall ascend into the hill (the high place) of \nthe Lord ? \" asks the holy king David, \"who shall stand in the place of \nhis Kadushu Wip ? \" \u2022'* Kadesh may mean in one sense to devote, \nhallow, sanctify, and even to initiate or set apart ; but it also means the \nministry of lascivious rites (the Venus-worship) and the true inter- \npretation of the word Kadesh is bluntly rendered in Deuteronomy xxiii, \n17; Hosea iv. 14; and Genesis xxxviii, from verses IS to 22. The \n\" holy \" Kadeshuth of the Bible were identical, as to the duties of their \noffice, with the Nautch-girls of the later Hindu pagodas. The Hebrew \nKadeshim, or galli, lived \" by the house of the Lord, where the women \nwove hangings for the grove,\" or the bust of Venus-Astarte, says verse \nthe seventh in the twenty-third chapter of H Kings. \n\nThe dance performed by David round the ark was the \" circlc-dance,\" \nsaid to have been prescribed by the Amazons for the Mysteries. Such \nwas the dance of the daughters of Shiloh,\u00ae'* and the leaping of the \nprophets of Baal.^** It was simply a characteristic of the Sabaean \n\n962. Psalms xxiy. 3. \n963. Judges xxi. 21, 23, si passim. 964. I Kings xviii. 26. \n\n\nWHAT WAS THE CIRCI