Παρασκευή 30 Νοεμβρίου 2018

H.P. Blavatsky - The first message to William Q. Judge 1888


H.P. Blavatsky - The  first  message to  William Q. Judge 1888

The  First  Message 1888

To  William Q. Judge,

General  Secretary of the American Section of the Theosophical Society.

MY  DEAREST BROTHER  AND  CO-­FOUNDER OF THE  THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY :

In addressing to you this letter, which I request you to read to the Convention summoned for April 22d, I must first present my hearty congratulations and most cordial good wishes to the assembled Delegates and good Fellows of our Society, and to yourself ­the heart and soul of that Body in America. We were several, to call it to life in 1875. Since then yon have remained alone to preserve that life through good and evil report. It is to you chiefly, if not entirely, that the Theosophical Society owes its existence in 1888. Let me then thank you for it, for the first and perhaps the last, time publicly, and from the bottom of my heart, which beats only for the cause you represent so well and serve so faithfully. I ask you also to remember that, on this important occasion, my voice is but the feeble echo of other more sacred voices, and the transmitter of the approval of Those whose presence is alive in more than one true Theosophical heart, and lives, as I know, preeminently in yours. May the assembled Society feel the warm greeting as earnestly as it is given, and may every Fellow present, who realizes that he has deserved it, profit by the Blessings sent. 

Theosophy has lately taken a new start in America which marks the commencement of a new Cycle in the affairs of the Society in the West. And the policy you are now following is admirably adapted to give scope for the widest expansion of the movement, and to establish on a firm basis an organization which, while promoting feelings of fraternal sympathy, social unity, and solidarity, will leave ample room for individual freedom and exertion in the common cause that of helping mankind. 

The multiplication of local centres should be a foremost consideration in your minds, and each man should strive to be a centre of work in himself. When his inner development has reached a certain point, he will naturally draw those with whom he is in contact under the same influence; a nucleus will be formed, round which other people will gather, forming a centre from which information and spiritual influence radiate, and towards which higher influences are directed. 

But let no man set up a popery instead of Theosophy, as this would be suicidal and has ever ended most fatally. We are all fellow-students, more or less advanced ; but no one belonging to the Theosophical Society ought to count himself as more than, at best, a pupil-teacher-one who has no right to dogmatize. 

Since the Society was founded, a distinct change has come over the spirit of the age. Those who gave us commission to found the Society foresaw this, now rapidly growing, wave of transcendental influence following that other wave of mere phenomenalism. Even the journals of Spiritualism are gradually eliminating the phenomena and wonders, to replace them with philosophy. The Theosophical Society led the van of this movement; but, although Theosophical ideas have entered into every development or form which awakening spirituality has assumed, yet Theosophy pure and simple has still a severe battle to fight for recognition. The days of old are gone to return no more, and many are the Theosophists who, taught by bitter experience, have pledged themselves to make of the Society a "miracle club" no longer. The faint-hearted have asked in all ages for signs and wonders, and when these failed to be granted, they refused to believe. Such are not those who will ever comprehend Theosophy pure and simple. But there are others among us who realize intuitionally that the recognition of pure Theosophy-the philosophy of the rational explanation of things and not the tenets-is of the most vital importance in the Society, inasmuch as it alone can furnish the beacon-light needed to guide humanity on its true, path. 

This should never be forgotten, nor should the following fact be overlooked. On the day when Theosophy will have accomplished its most holy and most important mission-namely to unite firmly a body of men of all nations in brotherly love and bent on a pure altruistic work, not on a labor with selfish motives-on that day only will Theosophy become higher than any nominal brotherhood of man. This will be a wonder and a miracle truly, for the realization of which Humanity is vainly waiting for the last eighteen centuries, and which every association has hitherto failed to accomplish. 

Orthodoxy in Theosophy is a thing neither possible nor desirable. It is diversity of opinion, within certain limits that keeps the Theosophical Society a living and a healthy body, its many other ugly features notwithstanding. Were it not, also, for the existence of a large amount of uncertainty in the minds of students of Theosophy, such healthy divergences would be impossible, and the Society would degenerate into a sect, in which a narrow and stereotyped creed would take the place of the living and breathing spirit of Truth and an ever growing Knowledge. 

According as people are prepared to receive it, so will new Theosophical teachings be given. But no more will be given than the world, on its present level of spirituality, can profit by. It depends on the spread of Theosophy-the assimilation of what has been already given-how much more will be revealed and how soon. 

It must be remembered that the Society was not founded as a nursery for forcing a supply of Occultists-as a factory for the manufactory of Adepts. It was intended to stem the current of materialism, and also that of spiritualistic phenomenalism and the worship of the Dead. It had to guide the spiritual awakening that has now begun, and not to pander to psychic cravings which are but another form of materialism. For by "materialism" is meant not only an anti-philosophical negation of pure spirit, and, even more, materialism in conduct and action-brutality, hypocrisy. and, above all, selfishness,-but also the fruits of a disbelief in all but material things, a disbelief which has increased enormously during the last century, and which has led many, after a denial of all existence other than that in matter, into a blind belief in the materialization of Spirit. 

The tendency of modern civilization is a reaction towards animalism, towards a development of those qualities which conduce to the success in life of man as an animal in the struggle for animal existence. Theosophy seeks to develop the human nature in man in addition to the animal, and at the sacrifice of the superfluous animality which modern life and materialistic teachings have developed to a degree which is abnormal for the human being at this stage of his progress. 

Men cannot all be Occultists, but they can all be Theosophists. Many who have never heard of the Society are Theosophists without knowing it themselves; for the essence of Theosophy is the perfect harmonizing of the divine with the human in man, the adjustment of his god-like qualities and aspirations, and their sway over the terrestrial or animal passions in him. Kindness, absence of every ill feeling or selfishness, charity, good-will to all beings, and perfect justice to others as to one's self, are its chief features. He who teaches Theosophy preaches the gospel of good-will; and the converse of this is true also,-he who preaches the gospel of good-will, teaches Theosophy. 

This aspect of Theosophy has never failed to receive due and full recognition in the pages of the "PATH," a journal of which the American Section has good reason to be proud. It is a teacher and a power; and the fact that such a periodical should be produced and supported in the United States speaks in eloquent praise both of its Editor and its readers. 

America is also to be congratulated on the increase in the number of the Branches or Lodges which is now taking place. It is a sign that in things spiritual as well as things temporal the great American Republic is well fitted for independence and self-organization. The Founders of the Society wish every Section, as soon as it becomes strong enough to govern itself, to be as independent as is compatible with its allegiance to the Society as a whole and to the Great Ideal Brotherhood, the lowest formal grade of which is represented by the Theosophical Society. 

Here in England Theosophy is waking into new life. The slanders and absurd inventions of the Society for Psychical Research have almost paralyzed it, though only for a very short time, and the example of America has stirred the English Theosophists into renewed activity. "LUCIFER" sounded the reveille, and the first fruit has been the founding of the "Theosophical Publication Society." This Society is of great importance. It has undertaken the very necessary work of breaking down the barrier of prejudice and ignorance which has formed so great an impediment to the spread of Theosophy. It will act as a recruiting agency for the Society by the wide distribution of elementary literature on the subject, among those who are in any way prepared to give ear .to. it. The correspondence already received shows that it is creating an interest in the subject, and proves that in every large town in England there exist quite enough isolated Theosophists to form groups or Lodges under charter from the Society. But, at present, these students do not even know of each other's existence, and many of them have never heard of the Theosophical Society until now. I am thoroughly satisfied of the great utility of this new Society, composed as it is to. a large extent of members of the Theosophical Society, and being under the control of prominent Theosophists, such as you, my dear Brother W. Q. Judge, Mabel Collins, and the Countess Wachtmeister. 

I am confident that, when the real nature of Theosophy is understood, the prejudice against it, now so unfortunately prevalent, will die out. Theosophists are of necessity the friends of all movements m the world, whether intellectual or simply practical, for the amelioration of the condition of mankind. We are the friends of all those who fight against drunkenness, against cruelty to animals, against injustice to women, against corruption in society or in government, although we do not meddle in politics. We are the friends of those who exercise practical charity, who seek to lift a little of the tremendous weight of misery that rs crushing down the poor, But, in our quality of Theosophists, we cannot engage in any one of these great works in particular. As individuals we may so, but as Theosophists we have a larger, more important and much more difficult work to do. People say that Theosophists should show what is in them, that "the tree is known by its fruit. Let them build dwellings for the poor, it is said, let them open "soupkitchens" etc., etc., and the world will believe that there is something in Theosophy. These good people forget that Theosophists, as such, are poor, and that the Founders themselves are poorer than any, and that one of them, at any rate, the humble writer of these lines, has no property of her own, and has to work hard for her daily bread whenever she finds time from her Theosophical duties. The function of Theosophists is to open men's hearts and understandings to charity, justice, and generosity, attributes which belong specifically to the human kingdom and are natural to man when he has developed the qualities of a human being. Theosophy teaches the animal-man to be a human-man; and when people have learned to think and feel as truly human beings should feel and think, they will act humanely, and works of charity, justice, and generosity will be done spontaneously by all. 

Now with regard to the Secret Doctrine, the publication of which some of you urged so kindly upon me, and in such cordial terms, a while ago. I am very grateful for the hearty support promised and for the manner in which it was expressed. The MSS. of the first three volumes is now ready for the press; and its publication is only delayed by the difficulty which is experienced in finding the necessary funds. Though I have not written it with an eye to money, yet, having left Adyar, I must live and pay my way in the world so long as I remain in it. Moreover, the Theosophical Society urgently needs money for many purposes, and I feel that I should not be justified in dealing with the Secret Doctrine as I dealt with Isis Unveiled. From my former work I have received personally in all only a few hundred dollars, although nine editions have been issued. Under these circumstances I am endeavouring to find means of securing the publication of the Secret Doctrine on better terms this time, and here I am offered next to nothing. So, my dearest Brothers and Co-workers in the trans-Atlantic lands, you must forgive me the delay, and not blame me for it but the unfortunate conditions I am surrounded with.

I should like to revisit America, and sh.all perhaps do so one day, should my health permit. I have received pressing invitations to take up my abode m your great country which I love so much for its noble freedom. Colonel Olcott, too, urges upon. me very strongly to return to India, where he is fighting almost single-handed the great and hard fight m the cause of Truth; but I feel that, for the present, my duty lies in England and with the Western Theosophists, where for the moment the hardest fight against prejudice and ignorance has to be fought. But whether I be in England or in India a large part of my heart and much of my hope for Theosophy lie with you in the United States, where the Theosophical Society was founded, and of which country I myself am proud of being a citizen. But you must remember that, although there must be local Branches of the Theosophical Society, there can be no local Theosophists; and just as you all belong to the Society, so do I belong to you all. 

I shall leave my dear Friend and Colleague, Colonel Olcott, to tell you all about the condition of affairs in India where everything looks favorable, as I am informed for I have no doubt that he also will have sent his good wishes and congratulations to your Convention. 

Meanwhile, my far-away and dear Brother, accept the warmest and sincerest wishes for the welfare of your Societies and of yourself personally, and, while conveying to all your colleagues the expression of my fraternal regards, assure them that, at the moment when you will be reading to them the present lines, I shall-if alive-be in Spirit, Soul, and Thought amidst you all. 

Yours ever, in the truth of the GREAT CAUSE we are all working for, 

H.P. BLAVATSKY. 

London, April 3d, 1888.

From the book :
Five  Messages from H.P.   BLAVATSKY to  the American   Theosophists
In  Convention  Assembled: 1888  -  1889  -    1890  -   1891
WITH  A  FOREWORD 
THE   THEOSOPHY COMPANY LOS ANGELES 1922

Τετάρτη 28 Νοεμβρίου 2018

Appendix από τα δώδεκα κλειδιά του Basil Valentine (Ερμητικό Μουσείο)


Appendix από τα δώδεκα κλειδιά του Basil Valentine (Ερμητικό Μουσείο)

Η εκτύπωση του Hermetic Museum των Δώδεκα Κλειδιών περιελάμβανε ένα σύντομο προσάρτημα με έμφαση στις τρεις όψεις που εμπλέκονταν στην πρακτική των δώδεκα ''κλειδιών''. 
Εδώ δίνεται ιδιαίτερη έμφαση στην ερμηνεία του αλχημικού έργου μέσα από το Παρακελσιανό δόγμα των ''τριών αρχών'' - το άλας, το θείο και ο υδράργυρος, και μας δίνεται ένα έμβλημα για να τραβήξει την προσοχή μας στη σημασία του αριθμού τρία στο έργο.

Το φλασκί περιέχει το τρίγωνο και τα τρία φίδια των τριών Αλχημικών Αρχών που περιβάλλουν τον διπλό ερμητικό δράκο - τόσο στην φτερωτή-αιθέρια (πτητική και πνευματική) όψη όσο και στη γήινη-σωματική (σταθερή και υλική) μορφή του.

Ίσως είναι ενδιαφέρον το να δείτε την τριπλή εμφάνιση των συμβόλων στο Δώδεκα κλειδιά ως κατοπτρισμό -

ένα άλας, συστολική, περιοριστική, κρυσταλλική τάση, μια θειούχα, επεκτατική, ακτινοβολούμενη, διαλυτική τάση,

και μια ερμητική, ροή, διαπλεκόμενη, δυναμική ισορροπία δυνάμεων, η οποία πάντα επιδιώκει να εξισορροπήσει την αντίθετη ενέργεια του αλατιού και του θείου σε οποιοδήποτε εξωτερικό φαινόμενο ή εσωτερική εμπειρία.

Από : Τhe Hermetic Journal 37 Edited by Adam McLean 


Κείμενο από το βιβλίο

A short Appendix and clear Resumption of the foregoing Tract concerning the Great Stone of the Ancient Sages

I, Basil Valentine, brother of the Benedictine Order, do testify that I have written this little book, wherein, after the manner of the Ancients, I have philosophically indicated how this most rare treasure may be acquired, whereby the true Sages did prolong life unto its furthest limit.

But, notwithstanding that my conscience doth bear me witness in the sight of the Most High, before whom all concealed matters are laid bare, that I have written no falsehood, but have so exposed the truth that understanding men can require no further light (that which is laid down in the theoretical part being borne out and confirmed by the practice of the Twelve Keys), yet have I been impelled by various considerations to demonstrate by a shorter way what I have written in the said treatise, and thus cast further light thereon, whereby also the lover of the desired wisdom may obtain an increased illumination for the fulfilment of his desire. There are many who will consider that I am speaking too openly, and will hold me answerable for the wickedness that they think will follow, but let them rest assured that it will be sufficiently difficult, notwithstanding, for any thick-headed persons to find what they seek herein. At the same time the matter shall be made clear to the elect. Hearken then, thou follower of truth, to these my words, and so shalt thou find the true way !

Behold, I write nothing more than I am willing to hold by after my death and resurrection! Do thou faithfully and simply lay to heart this shorter way, as hereinafter exhibited, for my words are grounded in simplicity, and my teaching is not confused by a labyrinth of language.

I have already indicated that all things are constituted of three essences – namely, mercury, sulphur, and salt – and herein I have taught what is true. But know that the Stone is composed out of one, two, three, four, and five. Out of five – that is, the quintessence of its own substance. Out of four, by which we must understand the four elements. Out of three, and these are the three principles of all things. Out of two, for the mercurial substance is twofold. Out of one, and this is the first essence of everything which emanated from the primal fiat of creation.

But many may by all these discourses be rendered doubtful in mind as to what they must start with, and as to the consequent theory. So I will, in the first place, speak very briefly concerning Mercury, secondly concerning Sulphur, thirdly concerning Salt; for these are the essence of the Matter of our Stone.

In the first place, you must know that no ordinary quicksilver is useful, but our quicksilver is produced from the best metal by the spagyric art, pure, subtle, clear, and glistening, like a spring, pellucid even as crystal, free from all dross. Hence make water or combustible oil. For Mercury was in the beginning water, and herein all the Sages agree with my dictum and teaching. In this oil of Mercury dissolve its own Mercury, from which the water in question was made, and precipitate the Mercury with its own oil. Then we have a twofold mercurial substance; but you must know that gold must first be dissolved in a certain water, as explained in my second Key, after the purification described in the first Key, and must be reduced into a subtle calx, as is mentioned in the fourth Key. Next, this calx must be sublimated by the spirit of salt, again precipitated, and by reverberation reduced into a subtle powder. Then its own sulphur can more easily enter into its substance, and have great friendship with the same, for they have a wondrous love towards each other. Thus you have two substances in one, and it is called Mercury of the Sages, but is yet a single substance, which is the first ferment.

Παρασκευή 16 Νοεμβρίου 2018

The Theosophical Current: A Periodization by Antoine Faivre


The Theosophical Current: A Periodization by Antoine Faivre

École Pratique des Hautes Études
(Section des Sciences Religieuses), Sorbonne

When we use the term “theosophy”, (a word with a long-standing history), we should always be specific about the sense in which we intend it. In 1987, James Santucci and Jean Louis Siémons published the results of their respective research on the use of the word ‘theosophy’ during late antiquity and the Middle Ages 2 1 From this it springs out that Porphyry (234-305) appears to have been the first to introduce the term “theosophia”. In Porphyry’s view, a “theosophos” is an ideal being within whom are reconciled the combined capacities of a philosopher, an artist and a priest of the highest order . Iamblicus (250-330) spoke of “the divinely inspired Muse” (theosophos Mousê”; Proclus (412-485) uses theosophia to mean “doctrine”, whereas, among the first Christian writers, for example, Clement of Alexandria (circa 150-215), we find that “theosophos” means “moved by divine science”. Likewise, when reading the works of pseudo-Dionysus we are hard put to distinguish between “theologia”, “theosophia” and “divine philosophy”, whereas the late Platonists used the word “theosophia” to designate practically any kind of spiritual tenet, even theurgy itself. Finally, during the middle ages the term ended up acquiring the ordinary meaning of “theologia”4 , “theosophoï” thereby becoming, just as in the Summa Philosophiae attributed to Robert Grosseteste, (1175-1253) merely another name for the authors of Holy Scripture.5

These few examples exhibit as much multiplicity of meaning as they do affinity. Accordingly, 5 if we assume that the overall significance of the word ‘theosophy’ remains the “Wisdom of God” or the “science of divine things”, one can choose either to emphasize the semantic discrepancies among the different meanings or to look for a middle term and a common ground, according to our individual preference. In the first case, one risks overlooking the subtle ties which connect the different writers; in the second, one risks obscuring the contours of individual meanings so that both the authors and their theories become interchangeable. It is not only the texts from late antiquity and the middle ages which present us with this dilemma: from the time of the Renaissance until today the word ‘theosophy’ has continuously had different meanings ascribed to it. Here, my aim is not simple enumeration, because that would yield only a fragmented picture of the whole, nor shall I attempt to reduce all of these terms to one common principle (an impossible task; moreover, one which would imply a doctrinal bias). Rather, I mainly want to draw attention here to the advantage of starting from empirical data and to ask questions such as these: Is it possible for an observer to draw some major trends from the myriad uses and meanings which the word ‘theosophy’ has been given in the West, and how? If so, what are the essential elements each of these trends is comprised of? Approaching the subject in this way means we are afforded an escape from the dilemma which has just been alluded to, while at the same time the landscape is allowed to disclose itself as it really is.

It seems that the answer to the first question could hardly elude any visitor to the imaginary museum composed of the esoteric and mystical currents which pervade modern and contemporary western culture. Two major forms appear to stand out: on the one hand, there is a single esoteric current among others which does not correspond to an official Society; on the other, there is an official Society which has given to itself the title “theosophical” and simultaneously a programmed orientation. The first major form is an initially amorphous galaxy which began to acquire shape in the spiritual climate of late 16th century Germany, reaching such heights in the 17th century that it has continued to penetrate, with phases of growth and decline, part of western culture until the present day. The second major form is represented by the Theosophical Society itself, officially founded in 1875 at the instigation of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (18311891), which has pursued relatively precise directions and goals ever since its inception, (an endeavor incumbent upon any group of this kind), to the point where it is sometimes, rightly or wrongly, regarded as a new religious movement, if not a new religion. Of course, there are obvious similarities between these two: first, they both play an important part in western esotericism; and secondly, both claim to deal with “wisdom” or “knowledge” or “divine things”, not from a theological perspective, but from a gnostic one. The gnosis in question—particularly the rapport and mediation which unite the human being to the divine world—is considered to be a privileged path of transformation and salvation. Why then the attempt to distinguish between these two “theosophies”? In the first place, they do not actually rely on the same reference works; in the second place, their style is different. The referential corpus of the first belongs essentially to the Judeo-Christian type; its foundational texts date from the end of the16th to the beginning of the 17th centuries. That of the second reveals a more universal aspect; it is deeply infused with eastern elements, particularly Hindu and Buddhist. Of course, transitions and common elements among the material used by both trends are in evidence: for example, borrowings from the theosophical current by the Theosophical Society are not unknown.

In Politica Hermetica (see above, note 2) Jean-Louis Siémons points out that at least twenty references to Boehme can be found in Mme Blavatsky’s works. While acknowledging obvious discrepancies between the Theosophical Society and western theosophy, Siémons adds that these dissimilarities, “however, are not important enough to cause an insurmountable barrier . . .”. One cannot help but agree with him on this point. If we admit the existence of different rooms inside the esoteric mansion as we can observe it, then each should be allotted its own style of furniture; if, on the other hand, each of the two theosophical “ families” is large enough and rich enough to settle in one or even several of these rooms, there is nothing to prohibit their sharing the common rooms and the grounds. Likewise, although western Europe has indeed known a Romantic era, it would be meaningless to put both Novalis and Alfred de Musset into the same category unless one had in mind the concept of an “eternal Romanticism” (not unlike that of the “ primordial Tradition” so dear to some). But here we would deal with a different matter, one which is fraught with subjectivity and not without doctrinal undertones.

These preliminary distinctions being made, the purpose now is to present the genesis, development and specific features of the first form (“classical theosophy”) in the framework of a periodic overview. It appears that four different periods comprise its historical evolution, and these periods have provided me with the structure I adhere to in the present article 8 : I) From the end of the 16th century through the 17th, the development of a specific textual corpus which will be deemed “theosophic” from that time on; this period is a kind of first “Golden Age” of this particular current. II) The spreading of that corpus and its reception by historians of philosophy in the first half of the 18th century. III) Its revival in the pre-Romantic and Romantic era (i.e., the second “ Golden Age” ). IV) Its decline and also its endurance from the mid-19th century until the present.

For more : Theosophy, Imagination, Tradition Studies in Western Esotericism