1
10
1
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8eed9b9ee63eb040fca306368c71fc01.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ZxlfHhaGF6brDP5Cu1Q7QUykw-LPMmSpevWT6HMxGYQXUGiP1E9imZNGLW9gbiJXVDN9zv42XNaR9OLGkr0Y9JL52GiKufFyv6NC1YqSgLc4GtkMqpC-2afD0C5BOmzUMEzS%7EO9Kf2xoSUeBlMF4GvyfTx3S4CYkffhoFKSGxrEnyfzrxmk1rPRQGHdJTSl0ZtVDuJ-P4QO3CezGZp%7Ecf093ZEP-DqZXNrMGAOyNux9-w0fOdRVplgBfFQMRSclaBUIE4PA0yqDtoI%7E%7E41huw9WRZhwQfT1pf8oXbIkFevn3-t9-crcuVA8Y0R88KGIAg-RdEWLYIT2rNdnnaidLbQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d2bc416707cc25aa9c4e81f8f299e173
PDF Text
Text
THEOSOPHY
Edited by
L. de Grandmaison, S.J.
We propose to describe in this paper the modern
movement known as Theosophical, not only because
it challenges our attention owing to its wide and
rapid diffusion, and by the number of adepts it
ceaselessly draws from the older and established
forms of religion, but because in it we can observe
the permanence of some of the strangest, as well
as the most general, of religious tendencies—such,
especially, as manifested themselves when dying
paganism made its supreme effort to kill, and itself
to draw life from, nascent Christianity. Moreover,
the founders of modern Theosophy have without
exception connected their doctrines with, and
modelled their formulae upon, ancient and mysterious
systems of religious thought, such especially as
India has produced. They strive also to link with
these the most modern concepts of philosophy or
postulates of science—the results, in their religious
aspect, of Darwinian evolution, Hegelian idealistic
monism, or of Pragmatism, and much more, forming
a singularly comprehensive totality of doctrine.
We intend, therefore, according to the plan generally
followed in this series, to describe first the history,
then the doctrines of modern Theosophy, noting
always its historical or philosophical connections
with kindred systems.1
1 Since, however, the scope of this series is not controversial, but
expository, we are content to refer the reader for a discussion of the
35
i
�2
The History of Religions
[35
I. The Founders of Theosophy
Though both the word Theosophy, and, in a sense,
the thing, are far older (as modern Theosophists are
the first to assert, and as we shall see below) than the
movement which officially began on 17th November
1875, what is popularly known as Theosophy can
never be dissociated from the names of Mme.
Blavatsky, of Mrs. Annie Besant, and, in a secondary
measure, from that of Col. Henry Streete Olcott.
(i) Helen Petrovna Hahn (1831-1891) was a
member of a noble family of South Russia, connected
through her mother with the Princes Dolgorouki.
She married General Nicephoros Blavatsky, second
in command of the Caucasian province Erivan.
Her extremely brief married life was stormy; she
fled from her husband at the age of seventeen, re
nounced the life imposed by the ordinary conditions
of society, and travelled for a considerable time,
especially in the Far East. There we are told (by
Mrs. Besant) she became the disciple of a great master
of Oriental wisdom, and became fully possessed of
that occult lore to the propagation of which her life
was henceforward devoted. A first attempt to found
a spiritistic society in Egypt failed. She crossed to
America, where she met Col. Olcott, who had been
an officer in the Northern army. He was an ex
medium and a journalist, and was examining the
spiritistic phenomena connected with the brothers
Eddy. He came entirely under her influence, though
she seems to have had a poor enough opinion of
truth and value of Theosophy to the excellent brochure of E. R. Hull, S. J.,
editor of the Bombay Examiner, entitled Theosophy and Christianity,
C.T.S., 6d. Cf too L. de Grand maison, Le Lotus Bleu, Paris, Bloud,
series Science ei Religion, 364; O. Zimmermann, “ Die neue Theosophie,” in Stimmen aus Maria-L.aach, 1910, x., 3S7-400, 479-495;
R. P. Clarke, “What is Theosophy?” The Month, Jan. 1892, p. r ;
“The Marvels of Theosophy,” ib., Feb., p. 173; “The True
Character of Theosophy,”?^., March, p. 321 ; G. Busnelli, Manuale di
Teosofia, 1, Rome, 1910.
�35]
Theosophy
3
him.1 He was made, however, first President of the
Theosophical Society, founded in New York 17th
November 1875, and certainly displayed extraordinary
talents for organization and popular propaganda.
The infant Society, however, was soon all but wrecked ;
for though it existed professedly to combat spirit
ualism equally with materialism, and to propagate
belief in the existence of the Eastern lore and sages,
it made use of not a few of the methods, and ex
perienced certain of the phenomena, of Spiritualism.
H. S. O. and H. P. B. (as it is the curious but convenient
custom of Theosophists to designate their founders)
went later on to India, where the revelations of 18841885 (infra, p. 23) were, as was quite frankly admitted,
“ a tremendous blow.”2 H. P. B. retired into tern porary
privacy, but retrieved her position and remained the
“ heart and soul of the Society ” till her death, which
took place in London, 8th May 1891. This date,
known as the White Lotus Day, is observed by social
and artistic celebrations.
This extraordinary woman, whose magnificent and
scowling features have become famous in three con
tinents, was possessed of startling talents, unlimited
audacity, and above all (we surmise) of that personal
magnetism so noticeable in all leaders of men. Her
great books, The Secret Doctrine (3 vols.), The Key
to Philosophy, Isis Unveiled? etc., and her many articles
■* “ Psychologized baby,” she calls him, Proceedings of the Societyfor
Psychical Reseaich, ix. ; London, 1885, p. 331.
2 Review of Reviews, iii. 5 56. In H. P. B. and the Masters of Wisdom :
A Detailed Examination of the Coulomb Affair, and the S.P.R. Report,
Mrs. Besant attempts a “ complete defence” of H. P. B., who had been
detected, it was generally held, in wholesale “ faking” of occult pheno
mena. Cf. too Isis and the Mah&tmas, ~W. Q. Judge, London, 1895
(his defence) ; and Isis very much Unveiled, F. E. Garrett, ib., 1895 (this
title is based on Mme. Blavatsky’s Isis Unveiled, first published in
1875, 2 vols., and lately reprinted). Cf. App. D.
3 Obtainable from the Theosophical Publishing Society (T.P.S.), 161
New Bond St., W. They are confessedly in great measure “a mosaic
of unacknowledged quotations.”
�4
The History of Religions
[35
in accredited magazines, carried her influence even
where her restless personal activity never reached.
Her information was encyclopedic, but altogether
confused, inaccurate, and at the mercy of her riotous
imagination.
,
(ii) We draw the following outline of Mrs. Besant s
life from her own Autobiography (Fisher Unwin,
1893); this shall be our excuse for the singularly
intimate character of its details. Born in London on
1 st October 1847, she united in herself Irish “other
worldliness” (“three-quarters of my blood and all
my heart”) with Devonshire common-sense. Her
father, apparently once a Catholic, grew to “detest”
all positive creed, and partly “ rationalized
her
mother’s “dainty and well-bred piety.” Annie Wood
was “too religious,” “stuff of which fanatics are
made.” She nearly became a Catholic (p. 24)Angels, fairies, “ Roman judges and Dominican in
quisitors,” Jesus, her “ ideal Prince,” haunted a child
hood narrated with singular affection and sympathy,
softening its austere Evangelical setting. Trained to
increasing independence, her girlhood yet became
intensely ritualist: she studied Keble and the Fathers,
fasted, scourged herself; grew mystically enamoured
of the Crucifix, though, in the Holy Week of 1866,
the “discrepancies” of the Gospel Passion-histories
chilled her with a first doubt. In 1867 she “drifts”
into marriage with the Rev. F. Besant, who asked a
submissiveness she could not give. Personal suffering ;
quarrels; sickness of her children ; the unromantic
duties of a home,—all this initiated a “struggle, of
three years and two months ” from which, after facing
suicide, she will emerge an “ atheist.
Her religious
doubts increase: she leaves her husband:, legal
separation will follow: she earns a miserable pittance
as a cook, governess, and nurse. Voysey and Stanley
replace the Puseyite directors. Now she studies at
the British Museum, and writes heterodox pamphlets.
�35]
Theosophy
5
She has abandoned prayer, and “ God fades out of
the daily life of those who never pray.” In 1874 she
makes acquaintance with Charles Bradlaugh. The
title “atheist” becomes for her the “ Order of Merit
of the world’s heroes”: the “Man of Sorrows” is
rejected for the “Ideal Man,” the “Hercules of
Grecian art,” the “free man who knows no Jaw.”
Faith in evolution shows her the “ sources of evil and
the method of its extinction ” : strong in this “ creed ”
and “ethical programme,” she lives happily from
1874 to 1886, and, “with some misgivings,” to 1899.
Meanwhile she lectures and writes on social, political,
and free-thought topics with that vivacity, force, and
personal communication which everywhere won for
her enthusiastic devotion, where it did not inflame
slander, abuse, prosecution, and even personal attack.
She warmly defended Malthusian principles, and was
legally deprived of the custody of her daughter, as
she had been of her little son’s; she “ almost went
mad.” Chapter X. is well entitled “At War All
Round.” After a stormy transit through socialist
propaganda (which involved a tragic break with
Bradlaugh, whose political position she now ham
pered, not helped), the dream of a brotherhood,
or “ New Church,” dawns for her. “ Since 1886 there
had been slowly growing up a conviction that my
philosophy was not sufficient.” Psychology, hypnotic
experiments, “ fact after fact came hurtling in.” “ Into
the darkness shot a ray of light—A. P. Sinnett’s
Occult World.” She experiments with spiritualism:
the phenomena are “ found to be real.” One evening,
“ a voice that was later to become the holiest sound
on earth ” bids her take courage, light is near.
After a fortnight Mr. Stead offers her “two large
volumes ” to review: they are H. P. B.’s Secret Doc
trine. A miracle takes place. She is introduced
to Mme. Blavatsky: struggles against her fascination;
yields; on 10th May 1889 is admitted as Fellow of
�6
The History of Religions
[35
the Theosophical Society. She sees that “science”
can answer the Why ? of nothing, though the How ?
of much. Experience, intuition, alone suffice, and
these are hers. Her secularist friends—Bradlaugh
soberly, Foote bitterly—denounce her; but the new
storms are soon over. Since then she has found
“ peace” in the absorbing interests of Theosophist
propaganda or contemplation. Established at the
ancient religious centre, Benares, she was visited, and
her romantic seclusion described, by M. P. Loti, in
his idealizing romance, LTnde sans les Anglais ; vers
Benares, c. vi., 1903. Her warm and frank, impulsive
yet loyal character will charm and win many who
are far from holding her doctrines ; her enthusiasm,
versatility, and organizing power will long assure her
crowds of devoted followers.
(iii) The “ T.S.”—'The Theosophical Society was,
as we have said, founded in New York on 17th Novem
ber 1875. Its objects are:—
1. To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Hu
manity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste, or
colour.
2. To promote the study of Aryan and other Eastern literatures,
religions, and sciences.1
3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and the psychical
powers of man.
The head-quarters are at Adyar, a suburb of
Madras. To become a member, all one need do is
to give in one’s name (the question of subscriptions
appears to be variously answered according to time
and place) with the intention of studying Oriental
literature, though Mrs. Besant declares that the first
object alone is obligatory. The Fellows or members
may be “ attached ” (to national branches) or “ unat
tached ” (having their, diploma from Adyar). They
may be of any religion or philosophy they like. At
1 So Key, Appendix, 308. But this curious formula elsewhere, and
more reasonably, reads: “To encourage the study of comparative
religions, of philosophy and of science. ”
�35]
Theosophy
7
first, a second group existed termed esoteric,. definitely
accepting the esoteric philosophy, believing in the
existence of the “ Masters” and in H. P. B. their mes
senger. In 1890 this “ esoteric ” group was christened
The Oriental School of Theosophy, and above both
groups exist the “Masters,” in their mysterious
seclusion in Thibet.
Its tremendous propaganda succeeds best in the
East. Buddhists and Brahmins, Parsees more re
cently and even Islam, have been reached by it.
Christian missionaries (infra, p. 21, n. 1) have felt its
active enmity.1 Reading clubs, study clubs, groups,
centres, “lodges,” are units of propaganda. The
first International Congress was held in Amsterdam
in 1904. The Theosophist (international in varying
forms), The Vahan, The Lotus Journal (for children),
T.P.S. Book Notes, Orpheus (an Art quarterly), are
the best-known English publications: we could make
a long list (about 50) of foreign bulletins. In Ger
many (which has some 10 magazines), Dr. Rudolf
Steiner is particularly zealous in organizing public
conferences and discussions. Mrs. Besant’s Order
of Service (1908) connects the T. S. with social
effort.1
2
The T.S. has its motto : No Religion is Higher, than
Truth ; and its badge: a serpent with its tail in its
mouth makes a circle, within which two intertwined
triangles, white and black, enshrine the crux ansata
(4jL), the ankh or “ life ” hieroglyphic of Egypt. In a
ring above is seen the Swastika cross
1 Bombay Examiner, 1903, 222. Katholische Missionen, xxxiii.,
Freiburg, I9O4-— 5> P* 4^ ? P. Suau, Linde Tamoule, Paris, 19m, p»
113• •
1
2 We cannot pretend the sections of this immense organization work
in perfect harmony. In Germany there are those who say, I am of
Lehmann, I of Muller, and I of Schulze. One group wishes to see the
movement rationalized ; another, moralized ; others are independents.
But this was inevitable.
�8
The History of Religions
[35
II. The Doctrines of Theosophy
The name Theosophy is no modern formation.
Ammonius Sakkas, father of Neoplatonism (cf. App.
B), claimed to have invented it, and since his time it
has often been used to describe the doctrine of an im
mediate intuition of the Divine Nature and of all things
only in their relation to it.1 From his time Theosophy
has always had its adepts, through the mediaeval
mystics, like Tauler and Eckhart, through the “ illu
minist” schools of contemplation, through J. Bohme
to Swedenborg. And throughout it has attracted
minds (we shall see) possessed by the more unwhole
some fascination of magic and the occult: the
degenerate Gnostics and Neoplatonists, the Kabbalists,
renaissance figures like Cornelius Agrippa and
“ Paracelsus.” Pico della Mirandola was a modern
ized Neoplatonist.
The occultist passion of the
Templars and the Masons descend to the Rosicrucians
of the nineteenth-century revival, to the “unknown
philosopher,” L. C. de S. Martin, “ Eliphaz Levi ” (the
ex-Abbd Constant), “Papus” (Dr Encausse), etc.
etc.2 But, through Philonic Alexandrianism and the
Gnostics, through isolated figures like Apollonius of
Tyana (p. 23, n. 2 ; App. C), through schools of thought
like some sects of Buddhism, the ideal of “ contempla1 So Brucker, in his great Critical History of Philosophy, vol. iv.,
parti., p. 645, Leipzig, 1766: The Theosophists, “that strange brood
of philosophers,” “unite in boasting that they are possessed of a divine
and superhuman wisdom.” So for Kant (Works, iii., 470, Leipzig,
1838 ; Schelling, Collected Works, I. x., 184, Stuttgart, i86i)the essence
of Theosophy is the immediate intuition of God and of all things in
Him.
2 The T.P. S. finds it worth while to advertise the works of St. John
of the Cross, St. Peter of Alcantara, Juliana of Norwich, SS. Francis of
Sales and of Assisi, Michael Molinos, Mme. Guyon, Tolstoy, Walter
Hilton ; the Imitation; of Anglican thinkers like Dr. Inge, Archdeacon
Wilberforce; of liberal scholars like Wrede, A. Meyer ; the famous
Hibbert volume, Jesus or Christ? Its ideal of Christian “mysticism”
is comprehensive. For tenth-century Jewish Theosophy, see the admir
able article of Dr. C. D. Ginsburg, “ Kabbalah,” Enc. Brit., 9th ed.,
xiii., 8j.od-8j.4a.
�Theosophy
35]
9
tion ” seeks back to the oldest philosophies of Hinduism
and the Brahmins.1
Of this continuous and comprehensive history
modern Theosophy makes its peculiar boast.
For the whole notion of Theosophy is that it is a
Divine Science, one and complete, existing from and
to eternity, known in its entirety only by a mysterious
Confraternity of Masters, handed down from genera
tion to generation of these Masters, and revealed by
them to successive centuries in such measure and
beneath such symbols as shall seem best suited to
the assimilative capacity of each. Thus Theosophy
is that Wisdom which is the source of all religions, all
philosophies, all science.
1 Hence Theosophical libraries contain much work on Oriental
religions and ethnology that is excellent, and good translations of
Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Plato, Plotinus, and the like. This too. is
why that distinguished Indian scholar, P. Oltramare, can call his studies
of ancient Indian thought IIHistoire des idtes thtosoph/iques dans
I Inde, I., La thLosophie brahmanique (Paris, 1907). But he apologizes
for the distrust his title cannot but excite, nowadays especially, when
“that title {Theosophy} is affixed to the strangest wares : an amalgam
of mysticism, charlatanism, and thaumaturgic pretensions which have
been combined, in the most unlikely fashion, with an almost childish
anxiety to apply the method and terminology of science to transcendent
matters. India itself could not but be besmirched by the ridicule and
disfavour so justly incurred by the curious doctrines of Mme. Blavatsky
and Mrs. Besant” (pp. ii, iii). M. Paul Carty competently contrasts
{Flades, cxv., 1908, 774-787) M. Oltramare’s work with Mrs. Besant’s
singularly unscientific study of Indian religions {Four Great Religions:
Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Christianity, and The Religious
Problem in India: Lectures on Islam, Jainism, Sikhism, and Theosophy,
combined in a French translation, Les religions pratiquies actiiellement
dans IInde, 1907). But, unfortunately, she can always appeal to the secret
history, the occult tradition which she has received from its Oriental
guardians, and, with regard to the origin, development, interrelation,
meaning, and value of these cults, announce to her Eastern (and even
Western) disciples conclusions at which, she frankly confesses, all normal
science scoffs. In this series see especially on Brahminism, Leet. IV.,
3-5; on Hinduism, Leet. V., pp. 6, IT, 27-30; on Buddhism,
Leet. IV., 7-29, n. b. 11-18; on Nirvana, Leet. XXXIV., pp. 13-31,
n. b. pp. 18, 21, 27-29; cf. IV., 26-28; Leet. III., 26, 27. On
Manicheism, Leet. XX., 5, 6 ; on Gnosticism and Neoplatonism, pp.
28, 29 of this paper. On the peculiar tendencies of decadent paganism,
Leet. XI., 28-30 ; XIV., 8, 18, 20-26, 29 ; XVI., 21.
35
1*
�IO
The History of Religions
[35
Of these Guardians of the Immemorial Doctrine, M. A.
Arnould (President of the French branch of the T.S.) writes (in
Les Croyances Fondamentales du Bouddhisme, Paris, 1895) that
“ their number is great” (p. 6), that they are “ Beings more com
pletely developed or evolved than antecedent or existing
humanity. These more advanced Beings have traversed the
entire human course, and help their less advanced brethren.
All humanity shall one day reach this degree of wisdom and
development, like that which Westerns assign to their anthropo
morphic God,” and then it will be their turn to help others
(pp. 15, 16). For while “a few isolated individuals, borne on by
a peculiar enthusiasm, a spiritual, moral, and physical hygiene
(infra., p. 18, n. 2) and persevering toil,” achieve the goal before
their brothers (p. 46), and alone have evolved that sixth principle,
or Buddhi, which is as superior to the intellect as the human
soul is to the animal (p. 66), yet they can and do put off their
entry into Nirvana for the sake of teaching fragments of their
lore to men, and may then be called Buddhas of Compassion
(p. 49 : cf. Leet. XXXIV., 27 ; IV., 26). Since the whole value
of Theosophy as a system imposed by authority rests upon the
character of these Mahatmas ( = “great spirits”), it were well
to be sure at least of their existence. They live, we are told,
in Thibet. H. P. B., A. B., and humbler apostles have been in
communication with them, epistolary and otherwise. The
“ metaphysical necessity” of their existence is proved by “ Hera ”
in the Lotus Bleu for September 1904, pp. 193-199. It is
postulated by the Law of Cyclic Evolution. The divine germ
in man comes from and returns to God, through an uninterrupted
series of more or less divine Beings. There cannot, therefore,
but be Mahatmas. The Lamas of Thibet have, however, denied
their existence {Month, lxxiv., 1892, p. 333); Mr. Hodgson
{P.S.P.R., ix., 1891, 312) will not admit it either. To those who
do not grant its a priori necessity, the evidence of the few
“eye-witnesses” seems, he argues, valueless: and so is the
correspondence by which they, mistakenly enough, reveal their
“miserably poor style ” and ideas which are “absolute rubbish.”1
1 Month, Ixxiv., p. 180. H. P. B. {Key to Theosophy, 1889, pp.
288-303, 215) rationalizes the Mahatmas not a little: the T.S., she
says, despises the attacks of the S. P.R.—“a flock of stupid old British
wethers, who had been led to butt at them by an over-frolicksome
lambkin from Australia” (p. 297). The Masters, though they guide
and protect, do not inspire the T.S. nor the writings of its leaders
(p. 299). So too Mrs. Besant {Introd. a la Thios., tr., Paris, 1903, p. 20):
they work for humanity, use the T.S. as an instrument, bless it and
help it at a crisis. “They have been called Initiates, Adepts, Magi,
Hierophants, Mahatmas, Elder Brothers, Masters ” {ib.). But the name
�35]
Theosophy
11
We see then in what sense it can be both affirmed
and denied that Theosophy is a religion.
Theosophy is not a religion.
But something of Theosophy can be found under all religious
symbols, in all religious dogmas, for the good reason that it is
the Religion-Science whence have issued all religions and all
sciences (A. Amould, op. cit., p. 5).
To the question “Is Theosophy a religion?” “It is not,”
answers H. P. B. (cf. Key to Theosophy, p. 1). “It is Divine
Knowledge or Science.” Similarly, “ it is the doctrinal exposition
of the Truths demonstrated by OCCULT SCIENCE” (Arnould, p. 6 :
we carefully respect italics and capitals).
But a fuller definition will be available when we
have examined its doctrine of God, the Universe
and Man.
GOD.—“Do you believe in God—the God of the Christians,
the Biblical God?” “In such a God iye do not believe. We
reject the notion of a personal, or an extra-cosmic and anthropo
morphic God. The God of theology is a bundle of contra
dictions. We will have nothing to do with him.” “Then you
are Atheists?” “ Not that we know of. We believe in a Divine
Universal Principle, the root of ALL, from which all proceeds,
and within which all shall be absorbed at the end of the great
cycle of Being. Our DEITY is everywhere, in, over, and around
every invisible atom and divisible molecule; for IT is the
mysterious power of evolution and involution, the omnipresent,
omnipotent, and even omniscient creative potentiality. IT does
not (think); because it is Absolute Thought itself. Nor does it
exist, as it is Be-ness, not a Being. Our Deity is the eternal,
incessantly evolving, not creating builder of the universe; that
matters little. Alas that among the initiates we are told to collect
Pythagoras, Orpheus, Moses, Christ, St. Paul and St.John, Clement and
Origen, Krishna and Buddha, all the high priests of so many different
cults, including those of the Temple at Jerusalem, and Alexander the
Great (Arnould, op. cit., pp. 17—19), though his was but an inferior grade,
and H. P. B. calls him (Key, p. 289) a “ drunken soldier.” It must be
remembered, whenever Theosophy contrasts its strictly “rational”
system with the “ blind faith” of the Christian (e.g. Key, 218), that the
system still reposes on the testimony of those (for Europeans, almost
exclusively H. P. B. and H. S. O.) who say they have been in communica
tion with the Mahatmas, and have received, understood, and divulgated
their doctrine.
�12
The History of Religions
[35
universe itself unfolding out of its own essence. It is a sphere
without circumference—ITSELF.” (H. P. B., Key, 61-66.)?
The Universe.—It is clear, however, that this All
is not inert. But whether the universe emanates from
God (as “ray from sun”), or is “immanent” in Him
(as “ drop in ocean ”), or is Himself (as my dream is
me), is nowhere definitely exposed. And no wonder,
since metaphors confound the clearest thought. Still,
it is to idealistic Pantheism, as we know it, that Theo
sophy inclines. There is no creation, but
“periodical and consecutive appearances of the universe from
the subjective on to the objective plane of being.” This is the
“ Cycle of Life,” the “ Days and Nights of Brahma,” or the time
of Manwantara and that of Pralaya (dissolution). (This process
is) Eternal reality casting a periodical reflection of itself on the
infinite spatial depths. This reflection “is a temporary illusion,
and, as flitting personalities, so are we ” {Key, pp. 83-85). “ In
Eternity,” M. Arnould reminds us (p. 12), “there is but a single
moment, ALWAYS. If, for a single moment, there had been
nothing, there would always have been Nothing. Before
creation, as after, is Eternity 1 Where seize, where place, the
moment of Creation? It exists not! It cannot exist! The
periods (of activity and rest) can be compared to the double
rhythmic beating of the heart. There is a great rhythmic
throbbing in the Infinite, in the Unique All, which causes
transitory forms to emanate, wherethrough the Unique Spirit
circulates and develops and reabsorbs them.” 2
1 There is here, at the outset, confusion of thought. H. P. B. has
not grasped the notion of analogy; she thinks that because “theo
logians say God s nature transcends the Cosmos, they exclude it from
the Cosmos; that because they own their idea of Him is anthropo
morphic, their definition of His nature is : that because they say He has
all the perfections of a person, therefore He has all the limitations of
personality as we experience it. On human knowledge of the Divine
Essence, r/i Leet. XX. (St. Augustine), pp. 14, 26; and XXII.
(Aquinas), 10-12, 21-27. Mrs. Besant, in a lecture given in London on
1st July 1904, exposed the theosophic mode of Pantheism, as is her wont,
m terms far more reverent and sympathetic to English hearers. Yet the
theology of Theosophy, she frankly declares, is 1 Pantheist. God is all,
11
and all is God.” {Cf “ Theosophy” in Relig. Systems of the World, p.
642, London, 1903 ; and Why I became a Theosophist, ib., 1891, p. 18.)
A Manvantara, we may add, comprises 360,000,000 years, and,
together with a Pralaya, composes the 100 billions (and more) years of
�35]
Theosophy
13
Mrs. Besant develops this : The Universe is created
by the emanation of the great breath of the Unity.
The LogcA or Word, leaping from the Silence, is a
first Trinity in a triple aspect: the First is a Substance
not to be conceived nor imagined ; the Second, Spirit
in matter, energy in form, etc., at the root of all that
is on its way to existence, essence of spirit, essence
of matter, still inconceivable by our intelligence.
The Third aspect is intelligence, universal conscious
ness, existence within the limits of the manifested.
One Logos pervades the whole, from the highest
spirit to the tiniest grain of sand (fntr., p. 21). And
in the lecture above quoted she reminds the Bishop
of London that Theosophists do indeed believe in the
Trinity, inasmuch as Logos is the name they give
to the nature of God as manifest, a triple Logos,
appearing first as “Will, root of existence”; second,
as “ Divine Wisdom, knowledge inspired by love ” ;
and thirdly, as “ Creative Activity, Creator Spirit,
immanent in all matter and form.”1
The world consists of seven interpenetrating planes,
the physical, the astral,the mental, the Buddhi, Nirvana,
a world period, or Kalpah. During a Pralaya (putting the thing in its
Indian form) only Brahma (neuter) exists—Sat, the Unknowable and
Absolute. A new Manvantara dawns: Brahma (masc.) awakes. At
once He sees, “Nothing exists.” Forthwith we have the opposition
of Being and Not Being, the Duality, sat-avidya. The vision of the
“being” that once was recurs to Him—Brahma’s own revelation,
Mahcit, the third “logos.” The Trinity, Sat, Sat-avidya, Mahat, is
complete. The out- and in-breathings of Brahma then make and
reabsorb the Universe. Zimmermann, op. cit., p. 391 ; cf. J. C.
Chatterji, Der Pfad der Vervollkommnung, Leipzig, p. 14.
1 Below this purer form of divine activity comes a hierarchy of lesser
spirits, the “gods” of Hindu, Chaldean, and Egyptian religions; the
Archangels of the Christians ; the Lords, Planetary Spirits, of “esoteric
philosophy”; for they preside over the evolution of worlds, construct
universes, direct cosmic forces. Lesser gods, “angels,” Elementals
(of a lofty kind) steer the forces of Nature on a lower plane, till we
reach those baser sprites that occult lore and magic can control. The
Roman Church has forgotten less than the others of the stored science,
on these points, of Christian Fathers and their contemporaries (ib.,
p. 21 sqq., etc.). Qi Appendices, and p. 24, n. 2.
�14
The History of Religions
[35
Parinirveina and Mahaparinirvana planes (those, that
is, of Enlightenment, of Nirvana, of full, of great-full
Nirvana. Each has its special dimension, time, con
sciousness, inhabitants. To the first belong minerals
and plants ; to the astral, animals and most men, who
are in time, however, to achieve the seventh. “ Spirit” is
for the Theosophist, however, only the purer manifesta
tion of That of which “matter” is the grosser.1
1 Into the fantastic history of this evolving and involving world we
really cannot go. It rises in a septuple spiral, mankind passing through
seven cycles corresponding to the planets. Earth-men are on the 4th ;
from Venus 18 million years ago ants and bees, etc., reached us. Each
cycle contains seven races, destined to evolve into man. In the lost con
tinent of Lemuria lived our third race, where reason first dawned. In
Atlantis, now sunk beneath the ocean, lived the fourth race, some 70,000
years after the collapse of Lemuria ; it had a high culture and knew
about aviation. The Atlanteans, who perished some 850,000 years
ago, were giants, also dwarfs ; its members were brown, red, yellow,
white, or black. It is from them that we Aryans have inherited their
precious knowledge of the hidden virtues of gems, etc., of chemistry,
or rather of ‘ ‘ alchemy, mineralogy, geology, physics, and astronomy ”
(H. P. B., Secret Doctrine). H. P. B. pitilessly scoffs at palaeontologists
who deny these things ; and H. S. O., in Theospphy, Religion, and Occult
Science, 72, at the “ abysmal ignorance’’ of Western science, formed in
the school of “ Mill, Darwin, Tyndall, Schlegel, and Burnouf.” Yet
Mrs. Besant {Introd., p. 16) finds the true successors of the Sages (whom
Plato and Pythagoras drew from) in Giordano Bruno, the “second
Pythagoras ” ; in Fichte, Kant, and Schopenhauer ; Emerson, Berkeley;
Bohme, Fludd, and Swedenborg. However, the development of the
5th Aryan race, of which we are, began 1,000,000 years ago, and in
Europe is, from a religious, philosophic, philanthropic point of view, in
a cul-de-sac. Better things, indeed, may be hoped in America. The
6th root-race of our cycle, as Leadbeater has “ established,”is due about
700 years hence. See C. W. Leadbeater, The Astral Plane: Its Scenery,
Inhabitants, and Phenomena. The Devachanic Plane or HeavenWorld. An Outline of Theosophy • A. P. Sinnett, Esoteric Buddhism.
The Occult World; J. Donelly, Atlantis, the Antediluvian World.
The Canaries and Azores are the highest peaks of Atlantis: Lemuria
stretched from Mozambique to Australia. Leadbeater knows the very
diet of the 6th root-race—it will largely consist of a sort of blanc-mange
(surely a depressing prospect, though its colour and taste will vary).
Food is partaken of in gardens; there are no chairs, but marble
depressions in the soil; the plates too are marble, and the whole is
flooded after each repast (cf Zimmermann, l.c., p. 393, n. 1). See too
W. Scott Elliot, The Lost Lemuria (with maps); The Story of Atlantis
(four maps). M. Saunier, Llgende d. symboles philosophiques, religietix et ma^onniques, Paris, 1911.
�35]
Theosophy
15
Man.—Man, the Microcosm, is himself septuple,
four parts composing the physical, three the spiritual,
man. The following is H. P. B.’s chart {Key, p. 91)
'(a) Rupa, or Sthula Sharira.
T) Prana.
(r) Linga Sharira.
(d) Kama rupa.
(2. Manas—a dual principle in
its functions.
(/) Buddhi.
fg^Atma.
(a) Physical body.
(£) Life, or Vital Principle.
(c) Astral body.
(d) The seat of animal de
sires and passions.
2. Mind, intelligence, the
higher human mind,
whose light or radia
tion links the Monad,
for the lifetime, to the
mortal man.
(/) The Spiritual Soul.
(g) Spirit.
The first four “principles” compose a man’s Per
sonality, the last three his Individuality. The Atma,
H. P. B. says, is “ one with the Absolute”; Sinnett, that
it is matter like the rest, only very subtle. Arnould
(who describes all this pp. 63-67) prudently exclaims,
“ Quant au septiemeprincipe, Atmd, rien parions pas.”
At death, the first four principles, or rather “ states of
consciousness,” evanesce : the one real man, immortal
in essence, if not in form, Manas, embodied con
sciousness {Key, p. 100), “God fallen into matter”
(A. B., Introd., p. 27), alone will subsist.
All human evolution is the effort of “this God” to
reascend to its proper plane, taking with it (for by
purification this is possible) as much of its personality
as it can redeem. But since this ascent is impossible
in the space of one “ life,” reincarnations are necessary,
the Manas plunging into matter, God being manifest
in flesh, only to return to the Devachan or heaven
plane where, during a disincarnate existence of (on
an average) 1500 years,1 it assimilates experiences
1 On this cf. Key, section ix., 143-171 5 but also 88-97, I23~I37.
R. Steiner, quoted by Zimmermann, p. 395, n. I, says incarnation usually
takes place twice in 2100 years, once in male, once in female form.
�16
The History of Religions
[35
achieved, concludes thought-processes begun, gathers
up into its simple self the results of its double selfhood
when incarnate. The Devachan plane is happy, rich,
and conscious, but is still the domain of illusion, and
even this is not reached at once.
KARMA.—The nature of this Devachan is rigorously
determined for each by the law of Karma. This
means, in brief, the absolutely determinist succession
of cause and effect throughout the entire world
process and the whole history of man’s soul. “ The
guilty must suffer,” said /Eschylus. And “ as a man
soweth, so shall he reap.”
It is the universal law of retributive justice ; it represents
Ultimate Deity, and can, therefore, have neither wrath nor
mercy, only absolute Equity, which leaves every cause, great
or small, to work out its inevitable effects; the Ultimate
law of the Universe. All great social evils, distinction of
classes; and of the sexes ; the unequal distribution of capital
and of labour,—all are due to Karma. Hence a national or
social Karma grows out of the aggregate of individual Karmas
{Key, 198-215).
In consequence, there is no room for regret, hope,
repentance, atonement, prayer.
It can neither be propitiated, nor turned aside by prayer.
We do not believe in vicarious atonement, nor in the possibility
of the remission of the smallest sin by any god. What we
believe in, is strict and impartial justice. [This is the sense in
which Karma is “Relative and Distributive,” a law of readjust
ment giving back Harmony (which is synonymous with Good) to
the world.] There is no repentance (here we resume H. P. B.’s
quotations from standard works): no “ casting our sins at the
foot of the Cross.” “ There is no destiny but what we ourselves
determine; no salvation or condemnation except what we
ourselves bring about.” Weak natures may accept the “easy
truth of vicarious atonement, intercession, forgiveness ” {Key,it.}.
“Do you ever pray?” “We do not, we act.” “Pray!”
(Buddhists would exclaim) “to whom, or to what?” (yet they are
confessedly far more virtuous than Christians {Key, 66-74).1
1 Yet H. P. B. believes in “will-prayer,” an “ internal command ” to
“ Our Father in heaven ” in its esoteric meaning, i.e. in man himself,
for man is “ God,” and not a God. The inner man is the only God we
can have cognizance of... a deific essence. It does not listen to, nor is
�35]
Theosophy
17
It must be confessed that this doctrine has to be
singularly modified in view of the irreducible human
conviction that man has free-will; can modify, by
deliberate acts, the cause and effect series of his life :
that is, that he can lift himself above, or let himself
sink below, the downward or upward tendency which
(in mechanical logic) can alone result from that sum
total of his bad, or good, actions in the past, which is
Karma. Mrs. Besant, in the lecture quoted above,
actually finds room for the Christian dogma of Re
demption, at least in the “ Broad Church ” sense,
which is not the “juridical concept” of Anselm (cf.
Leet. XX., 29) (in which Christ is substituted for the
sinner), still less the (falsely so-called) Early Christian
notion (Christ is a ransom for man to Satan, ib., 30),
but an “ at-one-ment” made between man and God
in the revelation of Love shown in the person of Jesus.
Frederick Denison Maurice, F. W. Robertson of
Brighton, are here her patrons; Mr. R. J. Campbell
would have been, had she spoken in the days of the
New Theology. Christ has Divinity within Himself:
so have we, but weakened, dormant. By contact with
Him, it awakes, unites itself with Him ; our spirit
distinct from, either finite man or the infinite essence—for all are one.
(Thus this will-power is a sheer force bringing about physical results.
All “ petition prayer” kills self-reliance ; ib.) It will be remembered
that this doctrine is romantically put in Sir E. Arnold’s Light oj Asia,
and more morosely in the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Mrs. Besant
characteristically softens this doctrine for English ears, though con
fessing that the advancing Theosophist passes naturally from petition to
contemplation ; angels or inferior powers may grant our baser requests :
every heart-beat in man has its necessary repercussion in God ; but the
more perfectly spiritual the human effort, the deeper into the divine All
does it reach, the more immediately (in human or Christian language)
into God’s heart. The league of the Golden Chain for children of
seven years and upwards, exhorts children on rising to recite, and take
as motto for the day, the formula, “ I am a link in the Golden Chain of
Love, which extends over the whole world. (I will try to think, speak,
and do, thoughts, words, and actions, clean and fair.) May every link
in the Golden Chain be bright and strong.” Children have for them
First Steps in Theosophy (by E. M. Mallet): A Golden Afternoon: The
Golden Stairs, and Other Songs, etc. Cf. infra, p. 18, n. 2.
�18
The History of Religions
[35
becomes His—Him—that is, God. Thus His own
prayer is accomplished, and we and He and the
Father are one.1
But in general this question is linked up with the
whole of Theosophic Ethic and Asceticism.
MORALITY.—This, naturally, may be self-regarding
or social, and the latter aspect is emphasized in
Theosophy, where in a physical sense one life
circulates through the whole universe ; nay, our uni
versal brotherhood is not still to be achieved, nor
perfected, still less is a metaphor, but is a substantial
fact. Directly the fleeting elements of the lower
man are recognized as such, and when he sees that the
body is but a “ sheath ” to the “ inner, truer man,”
the true Theosophist will not macerate, cut, or burn
the body, but “ de-animalize ” it by abstinence as far
as possible from food, at any rate from meat. But
there are no “hard-and-fast obligations”: even wine
and spirits—“ only less destructive than the habitual
use of hashish, opium, and other drugs”—are not
absolutely forbidden. Similarly marriage will, by
those who aim at the highest goal, be abandoned, for
the plain reason that “ no man can serve two masters ” ;
it is impossible for him to “ divide his attention
between the pursuit of occultism and a wife ” {Key,
258, 263).
Needless to say, this is but “exoteric” reasoning.
The Enlightened see that but one Soul exists in the
evolving All, and will not dream of sacrificing the life
of the meanest of their brethren, beast or fowl or fish.2
1 This version is a frank concesssion to English prejudice. Cf infra,
pp. 21, n. I ; 24, and supra, pp. 12, n. I ; 13.
2 Anna Kingsford writes The Perfect Way in Diet; Mrs. Besant,
Against Vivisection’ The Influence of Alcohol; H. Reinheimer, Nutri
,
tion and Evolution ; nor is Mr. Eustace Miles’s name absent. The Yoga
discipline (the lower nathayoga, and the royal r&jayoga} educates a man
to that full detachment which takes him quicker out of the wheel of
re-births. Special attitudes of neck and back, that the vital currents
may circulate properly, are advised ; concentration of the thought upon
the solar plexus, or on a pleasing and simple form such as a lotus or
�35]
Theosophy
19
But the essence of Theosophic Ethic is Altruism,
though in a sense this is a misnomer, since ultimately
we all are One. The only evil is Individualism; the
supreme good, all that makes for Unity. Really, “ I am
you, and you I ” (Arnould, p. 39) ; we are distinguished
only as drops in the ocean, as a ray broken in a
prism.
Hence, tolerance, sympathy, forgiveness,
social effort are essentials to the Theosophic life;
hence the supreme sacrifice of those made perfect,
who put off their reward for the sake of suffering,
backward humanity (see Key, 263-271); freedom and
unselfishness are the ideal of education.
It is in this way alone that we ultimately achieve
Nirvana. As the Theosophist treatment of this
notion adds nothing to that of the Buddhists, and
detracts in no way from its inherent difficulties, we
are content to refer the reader to the passages already
indicated, in Leet. IV. We must in loyalty remind
ourselves that any interpretation of Nirvana which
makes of it annihilation is repudiated by Theosophists. Paradise and Hell, or future rewards and
punishments (in the “ orthodox ” sense, and especially
their “eternity”) “we reject absolutely.” “Nothing
that is finite can remain stationary ”: and that which
begins—eg. our after-life—is finite', therefore it
changes: Spirit can never be reduced to nonentity,
tulip ; regular in- and out-breathings (E. A. Fletcher writes The Laiv
of the Rhythmic Breath} ; the solemn pronunciation of the mystic
syllable OM,—all this makes for progressive spiritualization, till a man
becomes a disciple (chela}, fit for the special attention of a Master (guriP).
See A. Besant: The Self and its Sheath: The Path of Discipleship: In
the Outer Court. I translate the following prayer inserted in the
October number of the (German) Theosophie, Leipzig, 1910, at p. 290.
(At each inspiration the first verse is meditated ; at the expiration, the
second):
“ I breathe the breath of Life : I send love to all mankind. I breathe
the life-dispensing ether : I send forth thoughts of life for all mankind.
I breathe the eternal movement of the divine life: I send wishes for
health for all mankind. I breathe the universal Life Spirit, full of
strength : And deny all weakness of Life and of the soul.” And so on,
ending, for Amen, “ So breathes every man that is born of God.’’
�20
The History of Religions
[35
though the “personality” may perish, “ disintegrated
into its particles.” The soul relapses : the Spirit—in
man and in all else—is “ Be-ness,” one, eternal (Key,
109-116). We do not remember our previous incar
nations, for the Ego is furnished in each with a new
body, brain, and memory—a “clean shirt” on which
it were idle to look for blood-spots, though the
murderer may wear it. “ The spiritual Ego can act
only where the personal Ego is paralysed ” ; only “ in
trance ” can servant girls and farm hands “ speak
Hebrew and play the violin” (ib., 127-142). No;
after death, the “ astral eidolons” of the lower Quaternity “ await their second death ” in Kama-loka. The
Kama-rupa phantom, thus bereft of the divine and
thinking principles, unconscious, thoughtless, can be
magnetized towards a “medium,” can actually take
form within his Aura (outside which it must dissolve
and vanish, like jelly-fish outside water), can “live a
kind of vicarious life, through the medium’s brain.”
Hence not even the miscalled “spirits” that return,
prove “memory” in the Departed. Though in the
Devachan plane (supra, p. 15) the Ego has “ unalloyed
happiness, surrounded by everything it had aspired to
in vain, and in the companionship of everyone it loved
on earth,” this is but the supreme illusion, Maya,
the “ ideal efflorescence of all the abstract, therefore
undying and eternal qualities—love and mercy, the
love of the good, the true, the beautiful,” that it had
absorbed by experience before death. The Devachanic Ego is but the “ ideal reflection ” of its old best
self. But in Nirvana there is not even this (ib., 143171).
III. Theosophy and other Religions
We have already seen (p. 11) that Theosophy offers
itself, not as a new religion, but as that supremely
ancient, profound, and universal Knowledge which is
�35]
Theosophy
21
at the root of all religions. Its “ colour ” is, however,
so strongly Oriental, that it has constantly been
confused with Buddhism. Against this it protests.
“ Buddhism,” says Arnould (p. 5), “ is but one of many
‘symbol religions’ which divide the world between
them.” Theosophists are no more Buddhists “than
all musicians are followers of Wagner” {Key, p. 12).
But Theosophists may be called Budhists—Wisdomists—since Buddha, like Christ, taught an esoteric
doctrine, which they hold. Even the “ dead letter ” of
Southern Buddhism is, however, far grander and more
noble, philosophical and scientific, than that of every
other Church or religion (zA, 12—15).1
Still less is Theosophy sheer spiritism, though
1 But, with that adaptability which has marked the T. S. since the
advent of Mrs. Besant, in Ceylon, for instance, Theosophy is profoundly
Buddhized. Cf her Buddhist Popular Lectures, delivered there in 1907.
In Ceylon Buddhist propaganda has been remarkable. In 1845
Buddhism had not a single school there. But Col. Olcott (who, by
the way, in a previous incarnation was King Asoka, cf. Leet. IV., p. 24),
preached temperance there, decrying Catholic schools, persuading the
natives to give money they saved on drink to Buddhist schools. Of
these in 1910 there were 445, of which 206 were Theosophical. There
were 436 Catholic schools, and 891 Prptestant, apportioned between 8
sects. Col. Olcott’s campaign is criticised in C. F. Gordon Cumming’s
Two Happy Years in Ceylon, ii. 413-419. In India, however, the
“ colour ” is Brahmanic. With Mrs. Besant’s help the Central Hindu
College at Benares was founded (cf. the lectures given there, Hindu
Ideals'). It imparts a complete modern and English education (intellectual
and physical), often under English certificated masters and mistresses.
But the religion and philosophy is pure Brahminism. Powerfully
supported, widely imitated, its resistance to Christianity is not only
negative. Mrs. Besant, alarmed at Brahmin conversions at St. Joseph’s
College, Trichinopoly, was making a tour in the south. “ She was
received at Madras like a goddess ; the prime minister of the Rajah
of Mysore had prostrated himself before her as before the incarnation
of the goddess Sarasvati, the goddess of science, wife of Brahma. At
Trichinopoly a crowd of Hindu devotees awaited her at the station.
She was escorted to the National High School, opposite the enemy’s
citadel, St. Joseph’s College. She delivered lecture upon lecture. On
her return home, she continued her pamphlet-campaign. She explained
conversions by the basest motives, called Jesus Christ an incarnation
of Vishnu, and in general fought explicitly and with energy the growing
influence of the missionaries.” (A. Brou, Bulletin des Missions: Eludes,
exxiv., 1910, 261-265.)
�22
The History of Religions
[35
“ spiritualist phenomena, being indubitable and scienti
fically verified (when not just simulated by charlatans),
must be reduced to one of the inferior sections of
Occult Science” (Arnould, ibi). Occult sciences,
H. P. B. insists, do exist, and are most dangerous
(Key, p. 26) ; the reason being, that persons possessed
of a certain amount of control over higher forces use
these awry, because for selfish ends. Spiritist pheno
mena, but not the spiritist explanations, can be
accepted: their theories are “ crude,” their “ bigotry
is blind ” (ib., 25-32); in fact, H. P. B. violently attacks
the “ hatred ” of the Spiritualists, and the “ famous and
infamous attack on the T.S. by the S.P.R.” (p. 273).
“ Every kind of slander, uncharitable personal remarks,
and absurd misrepresentations,” express their “ violent
hatred,” in America, then England, then France
(274-275).1
Here we should perhaps insert a brief note on the marvels of
Theosophy. The facts are disputed, and we do not pretend to
decide on the character, or even the reality, of the phenomena.
Fr. Clarke1 concedes to them a considerable measure of objec
2
tivity. Mrs. Besant, indeed, became a Theosop.hist largely on
their occasion.3 H. S. O. broke with the mediums because he saw
their phenomena equalled and surpassed, at will, and in broad
daylight, by H. P. B. and Eastern adepts. Roses fall from
1 Yet it is deplorable how linked Theosophy seems inevitably to be
with the lowest follies of Occultism. Cf. Occult Chemistry, by A. B.
and C. W. Leadbeater; Thought Forms (with coloured pictures of
forms clairvoyantly seen and “vibratory” figures), by the same; J.
Bertrand, Occultisme Ancien el Moderne, Bloud, 1900, and the ex
tremely rich documentation of Id Occultisme Contemporain, C. Godard,
ib. “ Alan Leo ” writes Astrology for All, How to Judge a Nativity,
The Horoscope in Detail, etc., etc., and offers a “ carefully delineated
horoscope for 5s.” The Kabbalah is an inexhaustible topic for Theosophist writers, and it is melancholy to judge of the confusion of thought
implied by the trash that figures, in their bulletins and advertisements,
alongside of works under distinguished names—Edwin Arnold, A.
Lang, F. W. H. Myers, William James. W. E. Waite is one of the
most prolific writers in this department.
2 Month, 1892, Feb., pp. 173, 391.
8 Why I became a Theosophist, 20-21, etc.
�35]
Theosophy
23
heaven ; letters from distant countries appear in cushions, flutter
from the ceiling; writings appear on slates, or the wall;
paintings emerge, without intervention of hand or brush ; music
resounds without musician ; persons disappear or are material
ized ; a jet-black hair is cut from among blonde tresses.1 We
cannot disguise from ourselves the fact that the “marvels” have
been ever less emphasized : that they are not the essentials of
Theosophy has always been conceded. The writings of H. P. B.
are, in Mrs. Besant’s eyes, the most marvellous of the “ pheno
mena”; or the conversion of A. P. Sinnett. To others, it is
Mrs. Besant’s own conversion that is the miracle par excellence.
But we must be allowed to refer to the Proceedings of the Society
for Psychical Research (vol. iii., parts viii., ix. ; 1885, pp. 201400) for the famous dispute upon the alleged deceits, forgeries,
and trickeries of Mme. Blavatsky, which, it seems clear, un
doubtedly descend to a very low level of imposture. Cf App. D.
Mme. Blavatsky, we saw, speaks roughly of Chris
tianity. Col. Olcott speaks of it as morally corrupt
and spiritually paralysed. M. Arnould considers it
to have narrowed and materialized Buddhism (p. 20).2
Any favour shown to Christianity is based on its
esoteric doctrine, of which creed and cult are mere
1 Cf. op. cit., 46-48, 122-125, especially 251 ; and his very interesting
Old Diary Leaves, especially third series ; and A. P. Sinnett’s Occult
World.
2 To make up. H. P. B. in her Glossary proves the reality of the
miracles of Apollonius of Tyana by a passage from St. Justin. But
not only is the passage falsely attributed to Justin (Otto, Opera
Iustini, iii. 2), but even in its setting it is an objection, which the
supposed Justin refutes! Mrs. Besant reproduces it as decisive
in Theosophy and its Evidences, p. 16. Since A. of T. {cf. Leet. XIV.
21) is so often mentioned by modern Theosophists as a Master, on
a par with Christ, we may mention that he died very old, c. 95 A.D.,
but the first written life we have of him is by Philostratus, not before
200 A.D. It is based on hearsay or untrustworthy documents, is highly
rhetorical, and wholly unscientific.
Little can be deduced with
certainty from it. It is Mr. G. R. S. Mead who is most prolific upon
the early semi-Christian movements, some of which we mention in
Appendices. C/f his Apollonius of Tyana ; Plotinus; Thrice-Greatest
Hermes (Hellenistic Gnosis) ; Echoes from the Gnosis; The World
Mystery). Philostratus (whom Kayser calls a “ Parisian feuilletoniste ”)
causes to J. Reville {Relig. h Rome s. I. Sivlres, 1886, ii. 225) a
“genuine exasperation” as he reads those pages “d’une nullite et
d’une platitude desolantes.” Not that A. is wholly despicable by any
means. But to offer him as a choice specimen of any system is
suicidal.
�24
The History of Religions
[35
symbols.1 We have seen Mrs. Besant trace the Trinity
and Redemption in Theosophy (pp. 13,17). Christ too
she will honour, because “in all the religions of the
world’’ the Second Person of that Trinity incarnates
Himself and reveals Himself as man.
If by “Christ” you mean a Divine Man, then He
is not unique [alas, are we not all Christs, more or
less?]; if you mean the Second Logos,ah, then, adore
Him with all your soul, but remember, your worship
reaches Him whom the Hindu names, and rightly,
Vishnu. And thus Theosophy “ widens our horizons,”
and offers us other Great Masters than the One
believed in, and we see written an Imitation of Buddha,
and of Krishna.
Only the name varies, Mithra,
Krishna, Bacchus, Osiris, Christ; the divine story is
the same in all religions. Confess, above all, com
municate, Mrs. Besant tells the Catholic “disciple.”
“ Hear Mass,” says A. L. B. Hardcastle (Rev. Theos.,
Sept. 1904, 199-205), and explains the “real”—yet
quite un-Catholic—meaning of its ritual.1
23
But, travelling deeper, we find out that the Roman Church
considers Christ (as do the Gnostics) as the chief of the ./Eons
(H. P. B.), and that in any case Christ is triple—the mystic Christ
(symbol of the developed esoteric initiate), the mythical (the sun
god under all his names),and the historical? The historical Christ,
born 105 “b.C. ,” was taught Hebrew by his parents, became an
Essene monk at 12, entered at 19 the monastery of Mount
Serbal, where he found a superb library of occultist books, many
1 Cf. Appendix A.
2 Only we wish he could get it right. The altar-candles are not
lighted after the priest has read, on his knees, a secret confession. We
do not, by blessing salt and water and incense, attribute to them “a sort
of conscious life ” : the “solid marble or wrought metal of the altar-rails ”
is not a “diamond barrier” between exoterist and esoterist. Christ does
not leave His “ Nirvanic consciousness” for the prison of the ciborium ;
nor will we listen to Mr. Currie {Theos. Rev., Aug. 1904) explaining the
esoteric Pater Noster. See especially W. Kingsland, The Esoteric Basis
of Christianity; C. W. Leadbeater, the Christian Creed; A. Besant,
Esoteric Christianity, or the Lesser Mysteries, London, 1901; R. Steiner,
Le mystlre chritien et les mysteres antiques, tr. Scliure, Paris, 1908.
3 Mrs. Besant, Esoteric Christianity, 1901.
�35]
Theosophy
25
of them from Trans-Himalayan India. He retires to Egypt,
enters the esoteric “lodge” which gives to all great religions
their founder. At 29 he is fit to receive, and become instrument
of, a powerful Son of God, a Buddha of Compassion. In the
form of the man Jesus, this Being moves about, preaches, cures,
is rejected. The human body suffers the penalty for its services
rendered to its superhuman occupant. For more than 50 years,
in his astral body he visits his disciples, and instructs them in
esoteric lore. About 35 B.C. they sally forth to preach. Myth
crystallizes round the historic nucleus. Jesus is virgin born ;
crucified ; ascends.—In this way it is hoped that the historical
reality of Jesus will be saved from the confusions of the Gospels,
and his spiritual grandeur made only the more evident.1 But
many a Magdalen, we fear, will find her Lord to have been
“ taken away,” and in his place only the deplorable puppet of
Gnostic and Buddhist apocrypha.
CONCLUSION.—Briefly to sum up. Theosophy wit
nesses to some- of the profoundest instincts, and the
highest aspirations of God ward-bound humanity, and
stresses some of the most far-reaching truths revealed
in or governing it. The omnipresence of the divine ;
the lofty destiny of the soul; the essential brotherhood
of man; the character-forming potency of thought;
the constant perception of spiritual reality; the
resolute effort to penetrate below surface and the letter,
—all that is noble and should prove ennobling. Also
the determination to detect God’s spirit acting every
where; to hear the divine call in the stammered
words of the humblest of the prophets; to admire the
beauties even of the least fair of the world’s religions,—
that too seeks our sympathy. Yet we cannot but
observe—even as recorders of historically known
phenomena, constantly and ubiquitously recurrent—
that these high and precious forms are kept stretched
on the rack of an impossible philosophy, are muffled
beneath the most grotesque display of pseudo
erudition, are in danger of complete dissolution in
an air of treacherous sentimentalism. We are, of
course, open to the taunt of being Westerns: our
1 C/. G. R. S. Mesd, DidJesus Live 100 B.C. ?
�26
The History of Religions
[35
minds are gross: we lack the vital intuition : we
reject the supreme Authority of the Masters. Well,
to a Western consciousness there cannot but here
reveal itself an imposssible metaphysic; a psy
chology unverified ; a fairy-tale cosmology; an un
stable ethic, with its sanctions nullified, its categories
ill-defined. We see a law of Karma in manifold wise
self-contradictory, stultifying effort; a theology that
“depersonalizes” God without rendering Him the
more sublime; which drags Him down to matter
without making Him more lovable ; that exalts man
to the divine in despite of all his conscience tells him
of his low estate. We see the effort to retain, yet
rationalize, the notion of that Divine Union which
Christianity promises, asserting it a mystery. Finally,
we see a chaotic mass of “ evidence,” unsifted, un
evaluated, unorganized by a too slipshod thought and
an uneducated judgement, rendering history unin
telligible, and in it the figure of Jesus of Nazareth as
tragic as absurd. In the leaders of this movement
we see splendid energies, outstanding talents, warmth
of sympathy passionate in its tenderness as in its
indignations, and at times a genuine touch of
mystical thought and expression. Yet we must say
of them too what Reville says of those third-century
reformers with whom they are so glad to be linked :
“ Why must it be that at the very moment they seem
about to carry us to the sublimities of the ideal religion
—they fail us ? ” Like their “ Master, ” Orpheus, victus
animi, they look back, and the vision fades and the
voice stammers; perforce we turn—to whom else
should we go ?—to Him who has the words of
eternal life.
Appendix A.—There has never been an esoteric Christianity.
The simplest Christian has always had the right to Christ’s full
doctrine. “ I have spoken openly to the world : I always taught
in the synagogue where all the Jews come together, and in secret
I spoke nothing” (John xviii. 20, the interview with Nicodemus,
�35]
Theosophy
27
and John xvi. 12, 25, are not against this). Pagan mysteries
{cf. Leet. XI. 21-24; XIV. 11; XVI. 16-19; also art. “ Paganism”
in Cath. Encycl.} exacted an oath of secrecy from Initiates ; but
even they imparted, not special doctrines, but magical formula:
and an emotional impression that the adept was elect, blessed
for this life and the next. Pliny, c. 112 A.D., tortured Christians
to find out their religion. There were many apostates, but none
had secrets to reveal (Pliny, Ep., x. 97). Converts from
paganism reveal their secrets readily. Clement and Tertullian,
who relate them, ridicule and loathe them. Clement adopts the
phraseology of the mysteries (so even Paul, Rom. xi. 25, 1 Cor.
ii. 7, etc.), but puts the Christian’s initiation in heaven. Tertullian notes that Paul celebrates the Eucharist among pagans on
board ship 1 Justin relates the whole Christian cult and creed,
addressing “ the Emperor, his sons, the senate, the whole people.”
Irenaeus shows that had the Apostles preached a secret lore—as
heretics {e.g. the Gnostics), to defend their own practice, said they
had—the Bishops (depositaries of the “tradition”) would have
known it: but they wholly ignore it. When the Church developed
and conversions became frequent, profitable, or fashionable,
careful and gradual instruction was of course insisted on : the
catechumenate became more organized. In public preaching,
especially before mixed audiences, reverence suggested reti
cence : and this (curiously) becomes quite common from c. 350
onwards, a sentiment, almost an affectation {never a law), leading
preachers not to mention what everyone quite well knew, e.g.
(Chrysostom) the Lord’s Prayer; (Sozomen) the Nicene Creed!
Basil is (probably) the only Father who suggests that this
practice (with that which at this time is liturgically regular—
the exclusion of catechumens and unbelievers from the canon of
the Mass) was a tradition imposed by Christ or the Apostles.
Not till March 19, 416, does a papal letter of Innocent I. display
a pompous mystery in speaking of liturgical details which every
sacramentary was about to publish to anyone still ignorant of
them. The so-called disciplina arcani (a term invented in 1750
by the Protestant Daille), a secret code of doctrine and rite,
supposed to include the “ forms ” of consecration, the number of
the Sacraments, the dogma of the Trinity, etc., was really invented
for purposes of controversy by theologians who thought they
found gaps in the early traditions, and had no notion of any
“ development ” in the Church’s thought and language. Details,
it was argued, were kept secret—an esoteric lore, in fact. As
unscientific was the theory of early Protestants {e.g. Casaubon)
that the Pagan mysteries evolved the sacramental system in the
Church. In brief, genuine Christianity knows no opposition of
exoteric v. esoteric creed or cult; only the travesties of ancient
heresy or modern pseudo-history have imagined it. Cf. Mgr.
�28
The History of Religions
[35
Batiffol, “Arcane,” in Diet. Thiol. Cath , and Leclercq, ZV<V. Arch.
Chret.; Huyskens, Zur Frage uber sog. Arkandisziplin, 1891.
Appendix B.—Paganism, dying, tried to fuse its religions and
philosophies, to allegorize its myths, to find in one richly symbo
lized Pantheism consolation for its religious cravings, and salva
tion from the superstition or scepticism threatening it. Into
this current even the Jews were swept, where (as at Alexandria)
they were Hellenized. Philo (c. 40 A.D.) saw in Greek philosophy
(especially Stoicism) only a loan from Moses; while the O.T.,
especially the Pentateuch, he allegorized to find in it all the
treasures of Greek speculation. God, Philo held, was too trans
cendent to reveal Himself to intellect or sense, or even to create.
Intermediate Powers, accordingly, create our low world ; and
the “second god”—God “manifest”—the Logos or Reason or
“ Word,” expressed in the Universe, is our way of knowing God.
Yet asceticism can so free the soul from matter that it can soar
by ecstasy to contemplating the Divine Nature in itself {cf. Leet.
XII. 11 ; XVIII. 20, n. 3 ; XX. 8 sqqi). On its side Paganism
welcomed the mysterious Hebrew religion, thus reinterpreted
in its favour. The mystic cults of Orpheus, of Pythagoras (with
its Eastern theories of abstinence and transmigration), Persian
dualism and Egyptian Osiric or Greek Hermetic myth, the
highly Platonized Stoicism of the age, poured into the field
prepared by the Alexandrians. Hence emerged the “New
Platonism,” taking its stand no more upon reasoning or sense
experience, but on ancient Authority and immediate Intuition.
Plutarch, Cleanthes, Epictetus, even Apollonius, are among its
heralds ; the great Gnostics also. But its true founder was
Ammonius Sakkas, d. about 245 A.D. Origen, Longinus,
Plotinus will be his disciples ; Plotinus the most famous. In his
system, God the Invisible first generates Mind {nous); Mind,
the soul; the Soul, this world of phenomena (here is almost our
modern subjective idealism). Evil is not yet; only progressive
diminution of reality. But, once plunged in matter, the soul is in
conflict and disintegrates. Practice of virtues, asceticism, lift
the life to Mind; ecstasy, to God. Porphyry says that Plotinus,
in the six years he knew him, had four ecstasies. Porphyry was
rigidly virtuous and ascetic, and violently anti-Christian. The
Greek, especially Orphic statements of religion (Leet. XII. 3)
must,he insisted, be maintained. With Iamblichus (d. 330 A.D.)
the “ theologizing ” of Neoplatonism was complete. His de
Mysteriis reaches an incredible altitude of ascetic, altruistic, and
spiritual conception ; yet (tragic, but customary, paradox I) pre
cisely from this time Neoplatonism descends to the most
grotesque of magical charlatanism, and the most futile of
pseudo-mathematical fantasies. The fifth-century university
of Athens strove to purify, but merely rationalized, desiccated
�Theosophy
35]
29
it. Its best passed over to “Dionysius,” to Augustine, and
Boetius (cf. Aug., Conf., vii. 9-21). In Christian mysticism
alone has the psychic balance been maintained. In the nihilist
systems, where sense and intellect are held valueless, where
abstinence is the supreme method, equilibrium was swiftly lost;
licence and madness wait upon pagan asceticism and ecstasy.
Cf. especially Zeller, D. Philosophic d. Gnechen, 1881, iii.,
414-865.
.
Appendix C.—The Hebrew religion, though so exclusive,
modified surrounding cults (eg. of Sabazius, Leet. XIV. 13)
and was here and there modified by them (e.g. at Samaria: the
Essenes). Christianity, itself remaining pure, created, outside
itself, extraordinary new forms, especially in Judeo-pagan areas.
Even within the 'Church, the Judaizers provoked unhealthy
speculation as to the office and hierarchy of the angels, the
nature of God, His relation to the law, the Messiah. Speculation
runs riot: a special gnosis or esoteric knowledge claims to
sound the “ deep things ” (of Satan, cries the Apocalypse ii. 6,
14) ; tends to thrust God aloof; to subordinate the Christ; to
“genealogize”intermediatespiritualbeings ; topreach a perverse
asceticism (1, 2 Thess. ; 1 Cor. iii. 11-16; 1, 2 Tim. ; the
“circular letter” called Ephesians; especially Col. i. 15-10, ii.;
Jude ; 2 Peter. It is from Paul the Gnostics will take the words
pleroma, aon ; as from John, the Word, Life : not vice versa).
Contemporary with John, Cerinthus declares God so aloof that
He cannot “touch” matter. Thus on the man Jesus, born of
Joseph and Mary, the Christ, or Spirit, descends only at the
Baptism ; the creator-god, Yahweh, cannot be God, but is an
angel. Quiet follows for a space. But under Pope Callixtus
(217-222), a Syrian, Alcibiades, appears at Rome, with a mystic
book given, in 100 A.D., to a holy man named Elkasai by
an angel 30 leagues tall, called the Son of God, coupled with a
like female figure, the Spirit of God. They preach penance and
repeated baptisms, in which the initiates invoke seven witnesses,
Heaven, Earth, holy Spirits, Angels of Prayer, Oil, Salt, Earth.
Syrian formula1 occur, to be recited backwards. East of the
Jordan and Dead Sea, even about 400 A.D., sects of these (Osseans,
Sampseans, etc.) remained. They observe Jewish rites, retain
fragmentary gospels, reject Paul, practise asceticism, and usually
say that onto Jesus, son of Joseph, an ZEon, or Spirit, or Angel
(earlier incarnate in Adam, etc.) descended at the Baptism.
But genuine Gnosticism had truer forerunners in the Syrian
systems which may be connected with Simon Magus.1 His
4j, 1 See Acts viii.
14.
5, 14. Justin, Apol., i. 26, 56.
Irenaeus, a. Heer., i. 16.
Eus., H.E., ii. 13,
�30
The History of Religions
[35
system centred in Samaria, a tainted centre of Jewish reverie.
Simon taught a Supreme Power, which was himself, and its
First Conception, Wisdom (revealed in his companion Helen).
Through her, he conceives and thereby creates, the Angels.
They, jealous of her, prevent her return to his mind, whence she
had leapt. He therefore descends to redeem her (appearing, in
suitable form, in each of the Angelic Worlds as he passes through
it) into this angel-created world. In Samaria he appears (in
Simon) as Father, in Judea as the Son (in whom he seems to die),
in the Gentiles as the Spirit. He liberates the Divinity half
lost in humanity, and mankind (by the knowledge of himself)
he emancipates, eg. from the Mosaic Law. In this “ pre-Christian
Gnosticism” Phoenician, Hellenistic, and Judaic notions fused.
A mushroom growth of heresies followed. Saturninus of Antioch
(under Trajan, 98-119) is the first outstanding figure. For him
too God is infinitely remote. Seven angels make the world and
men, in some of whom is a spark, issued from God, and to return
to Him at death. Yahweh is such an angel, in revolt against
God. Jesus, an emanation from God, has no human birth or
body, but conies to defeat Yahweh and save such men as have
the spark. Marriage and procreation are works of Satan. Yet
Saturninus is no “Christ,” nor are “ couples ” (Simon-Helen)
indicated. In similar sects (which do not persist: Origen, c. 240,
says but thirty “Simonians” survive in the whole world!) we
always find an Ineffable God, coupled with a Supreme Thought;
hence Asons in groups of seven and eight emanate. Always too
some Ason suffers misfortune, whence sparks of fire fall into the
lower world. Often a Demiurge believes himself God, and inspires
the Old Testament. The Ason “Christ,” one of the highest in
the Pleroma (scl. the totality of the Asons), joins himself to the
man Jesus and they begin redemption. But under Hadrian
(117-138) the great Gnosticsappear, gravitating (inevitably) to
Rome, but hailing (Valentinus, Basilides, Carpocrates) from
Alexandria. Common features reveal themselves. The true
God is unreachable, incommunicable. Yahweh, Creator and
Lawgiver, is therefore no true God: but, like the world, is
but one in a series of divinely originated but degenerating
beings, often involved in some mysterious catastrophe. Jesus
comes to reveal God, and to deliver such elements in world or
man as are capable of redemption. But since God cannot
really unite with man, the Incarnation is illusory and transitory.
The Passion and Resurrection are unreal: our body will not
rise. Hence either the flesh, to free the soul, must be annihilated
(whence savage asceticism); or the soul, artificially linked to
flesh, is irresponsible for the body’s vagaries (whence licence).
Hence invariable rejection of Old Testament, and prolific*
creation of “esoteric” gospels—of Thomas, Philip, Jude; the
�35]
Theosophy
31
Greater and Lesser Questions of Mary ; the Gospel of Perfection :
hence “apocrypha” placed in the mouths of ancient sages—Enoch,
Seth, Elias ; hence new inspired prophets (Bar-kabbas, Barkoph): and mythical “ interpreters ” of the Apostles (“ Glaucias,
of Peter for the Basilidians : “Theodas,” of Paul for the Valentinians). Much external ceremonial and magic formula were
used.1 It is impossible to detail this grotesque system. Men
are material (who cannot be saved), psychic (who may be),
spiritual (who must be : these are the Valentinians—they simply
have to let themselves live; their spirit is independent of their
body). Basilides’ system was “celibate,” and nearer Saturmnus’
than Simon’s. The Unbegotten begot Mind, whence the Word,
whence Knowledge, whence Wisdom and Might, whence Virtues
Powers, and Angels. Our heaven (the 3^5^) 1S populated by
angels, chief of whom is Yahweh. He tries to tyrannize ; strife
breaks out; Gods sends Mind (as Jesus) to make peace. The
Cyrenean dies in his place, whence no honour is due to the
Crucified. The Old Testament is rejected, but ordinary
morality is retained. Passions are “appendices,” and cannot
hurt the soul in the long run, though forcing it to expiate sms
in future lives (by metempsychosis). Magic, especially the
word Abraxas, conquers bad angels. Carpocrates was far more
Hellenized and need not be detailed. He was a Platonist tinged
with Gnostic Christianity. In these systems the progressive
degeneration of Light into darkness, the irreducible opposition
of Good to Bad, shows as certain a modification of Syrian
thought by Persian dualism, as of Alexandrian by Platonic
Pantheism. Alexandria can thus be more tolerant than Syria,
and connect Christ with the Creator, with whom Syria can but
contrast Him. In the symbolism of the Gnostics the serpent
playeda prominent part. For all this cf. especially Mgr. Duchesne,
History of the Early Church, i. c. n ; Mansel, Gnostic Heresies,
1875 ; C. W. King, Gnostics and their Remains, 1887 ; Hort,
Judaistic Christianity, 1894.
Appendix D.—We permit ourselves to quote the following
letters of Mme. Blavatsky from the Proceedings of the Society
for Psychical Research, vol. iii. (parts viii., ix.), 1885, 201-400,
which contains two plates of H. P. B.’s handwriting and a plan of
the miraculous shrine. (H. P. B. boldly showed this report to
A. B. before her conversion.)
1 Valentinus’ system is “ nuptial” : the (male) Abyss marries Silence 5
hence Mind and Truth, who also marry (these are the first Tetrad of
Higher 4Eons) ; hence Word and Life, whence Man and Church,
whence many further pairs of intermarrying TEons, forming the
Pleroma.
�32
The History of Religions
[35
H. P. B. to Mme. Coulomb, Oct. 1883, (p. 211):—
Now, dear, let us change the programme. Whether something
succeeds or not, I mus't try. Jacob Sassoon, the happy proprietor of
a crore of rupees, is anxious to become a Theosophist. He is ready
to give 10,000 rupees to buy and repair the head-quarters; he said to
Colonel (Ezekiel, his cousin, arranged all this), if only he saw a little
phenomenon, got the assurance that the Mahatmas could hear what
was said, or give him some other sign of their existence (? ! 1). Well,
this letter will reach you the 26th, Friday; will you go up to the Shrine
and ask K. H. [Koot Hoomi ; the name of H. P. B.’s “ Master”] to
send me a telegram that would reach me about 4 or 5 in the afternoon
same day, worded thus :—
“ Your conversation with Mr. Jacob Sassoon reached Master just now.
Were the latter even to satisfy him, still the doubter would hardly
find the moral courage to connect himself with the Society.—Ramalinga
Deb.”
If this reaches me on the 26th, even in the evening, it will still
produce a tremendous impression. Address, care of N. Khandallavalla,
Judge, Poona. Jeferai le reste. Cela coutera quatre ou cinq roupies.
Cela ne fait rien.—Yours truly,
(Signed)
H. P. B.
Page 212 :—
Le general part pour affaires a Madras . . . et veut voir le shrine . . .
il est qu’il s’attend a un phenomene car il me l’a dit . . . suppliez K. H.
... de soutenir l’honneur de famille . . . Damn les autres. Celui-la
vaut son pesant d’or. Per l’amor del Dio ou de qui vous voudrez ne
manquez pas cette occasion car elle ne se repetera plus ... a vous de
cceur.—Luna Melancolica.
Page 214:—
Ma chere Arnie,—Je n’ai pas une minute pourrepondre. Jevous supplie
faites parvenir cette lettre (here inclosed) a Damodar in a miraculous
way. It is very, very important. Oh, ma chere que je suis done malheureuse 1 De tous cotes des desagrements et des horreurs. Toute a vous.
—H. P. B.
H. P. B. said these letters were forged by Mme. Coulomb,
whom she had expelled from the T.S. We respect English,
French, punctuation, etc.—Ed.
On the general question of mysticism, much material of singular
interest and an amazing bibliography will be found in Miss
Evelyn Underhill’s Mysticism., Methuen, 1911.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Theosophy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Grandmaison, Leonce de (ed)
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 32 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Publication details from KVK (OCLC, WorldCat).
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Catholic Truth Society
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1912?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA1555
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theosophy
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Theosophy), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Theosophy