The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 3 of 4 The Synthesis of...

The Scripture of these words says,“that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”as their proper translation. Here then are the words, beyond all dispute; and beyond all question, such is the interpretation given of them by Scripture. Now the words will not bear this interpretation, and it is a false rendering. The true meaning isjust the opposite of the one given, and is—

But even more, for whilelamaiswhy, orhow, as a verbal it connects the idea ofto dazzle, or adverbially, it could run“how dazzlingly,”and so on. To the unwary reader this interpretation is enforced, and made to answer, as it were, to the fulfilment of a prophetic utterance, by a marginal reference to thefirstverse of thetwenty-secondPsalm, which reads:

For ten years or more, sat the revisers (?) of the Bible, a most imposing and solemn array of the learned of the land, the greatest Hebrew and Greek scholars of England, purporting to correct the mistakes and blunders, the sins of omission and of commission of their less learned predecessors, the translators of the Bible. Are we going to be told that none of them saw the glaring difference between the Hebrew words in Psalm xxii., azabvtha-ni, and sabachthani in Matthew; that they were not aware of the deliberate falsification?

For “falsification” it was. And if we are asked the reason why the early Church Fathers resorted to it, the answer is plain: Because the Sacramental words belonged in their true rendering to Pagan temple [pg 148] rites. They were pronounced after the terrible trials of Initiation, and were still fresh in the memory of some of the “Fathers” when the Gospel of Matthew was edited into the Greek language. Because, finally, many of the Hierophants of the Mysteries, and many more of the Initiates were still living in those days, and the sentence rendered in its true words would class Jesus directly with the simple Initiates. The words “My God, my Sun, thou hast poured thy radiance upon me!” were the final words that concluded the thanksgiving prayer of the Initiate, “the Son and the glorified Elect of the Sun.” In Egypt we find to this day carvings and paintings that represent the rite. The candidate is between two divine sponsors; one “Osiris-Sun” with the head of a hawk, representing life, the other Mercury—the ibis-headed, psychopompic genius, who guides the Souls after death to their new abode, Hades—standing for the death of the physical body, figuratively. Both are shown pouring the “stream of life,” the water of purification, on the head of the Initiate, the two streams of which, interlacing, form a cross. The better to conceal the truth, this basso-relievo has also been explained as a “Pagan presentment of a Christian truth.” The Chevalier des Mousseaux calls this Mercury:

The monogram of Chrestos and the Labarum, the standard of Constantine—who, by the by, died a Pagan and was never baptised—is a symbol derived from the above rite and also denotes “life and death.” Long before the sign of the Cross was adopted as a Christian symbol, it was employed as a secret sign of recognition among Neophytes and Adepts. Say Éliphas Lévi:

The sign of the cross adopted by the Christians does not belong exclusively to them. It is kabalistic, and represents the oppositions and quaternary equilibrium of the elements. We see by the occult verse of thePater, to which we have called attention in another work, that there were originally two ways of making it, or, at least, two very different formulas to express its meaning: one reserved for priests and initiates; the other given to neophytes and the profane.259

Jerome found the authentic and original Evangel written in Hebrew, by Matthew the Publican, at the library collected at Cæsarea by the martyr Pamphilius.“I received permission from the Nazaræans, who at Berœa of Syria used this (gospel)[pg 149]to translate it,”he writes toward the end of the fourth century.260“In the Evangel which theNazarenesandEbionitesuse,”said Jerome,“which recently I translated from Hebrew into Greek, and which is called by most persons thegenuinegospel of Matthew,”etc.261

That the apostles had received a“secret doctrine”from Jesus, and that he himself taught one, is evident from the following words of Jerome, who confessed it in an unguarded moment. Writing to the Bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, he complains that“a difficult work is enjoined, since this (translation) has been commanded me by your Felicities, whichSt. Matthew himself, the Apostle and Evangelist,did not wish to be openly written. For if this had not beensecret, he (Matthew) would have added to the Evangel that what he gave forthwas his; but he made up this booksealed up in the Hebrew characters, which he put fortheven in such a waythat the book, written in Hebrew letters and by the hand of himself, might be possessedby the men most religious; who also, in the course of time, received it from those who preceded them. But this very book they never gave to any one to be transcribed, andits textthey related some one way and some another.”262And he adds further on the same page:“And it happened that this book, having been published by a disciple of Manichæus, named Seleucus, who also wrote falselyThe Acts of the Apostles, exhibited matter not for edification, but for destruction; and that this (book) wasapproved in a synodwhich the ears of the Church properly refused to listen to.”263

Jerome admits, himself, that the book which he authenticates as being written“by the hand of Matthew,”was nevertheless a book which, notwithstanding that he translated it twice, was nearly unintelligible to him, for it was arcane. Nevertheless, Jerome coolly sets down every commentary upon it but his own asheretical. More than that, Jerome knew that this Gospel was the onlyoriginalone, yet he becomes more zealous than ever in his persecution of the“Heretics.”Why? Because to accept it was equivalent to reading the death sentence of the established Church.The Gospel according to the Hebrewswas well known to have been the[pg 150]only one accepted for four centuries by the Jewish Christians, the Nazarenes and the Ebionites. And neither of the latter accepted thedivinity ofChrist.264

The Ebionites were the first, the earliest Christians, whose representative was the Gnostic author of the Clementine Homilies, and as the author of Supernatural Religion shows,265 Ebionitic Gnosticism had once been the purest form of Christianity. They were the pupils and followers of the early Nazarenes—the kabalistic Gnostics. They believed in the Æons, as the Cerinthians did, and that “the world was put together by Angels” (Dhyân Chohans), as Epiphanius complains (Contra Ebionitas): “Ebion had the opinion of the Nazarenes, the form of Cerinthians.” “They decided that Christ was of the seed of a man,” he laments.266 Thus again:

The badge of Dan-Scorpio isdeath-life, in the symbol ☧ ascross-bones and skull, ... orlife-death... the standard of Constantine, the Roman Emperor. Abel has been shown to be Jesus, and Cain-Vulcain, or Mars, pierced him. Constantine was the Roman Emperor, whose warlike god was Mars, and a Roman soldier pierced Jesus on the cross....

But the piercing of Abel was the consummation of his marriage with Cain, and this was proper under the form of Mars Generator; hence the double glyph, one of Mars-Generator [Osiris-Sun] and Mars-Destroyer [Mercury the God of Death in the Egyptianbasso-relievo] in one; significant, again, of the primal idea of the living cosmos, or of birth and death, as necessary to the continuation of the stream of life.267

A Latin cross of a perfect Christian shape was found hewn upon the granite slabs of the Adytum of the Serapeum; and the monks did not fail to claim that the cross had been hallowed by the Pagans in a“spirit of prophecy.”At least, Sozomen, with an air of triumph, records the fact.268But archæology and symbolism, those tireless and implacable enemies of clerical false pretences, have found in the hieroglyphics of the legend running round the design at least a partial interpretation of its meaning.

According to King and other numismatists and archæologists, the cross was[pg 151]placed there as the symbol of eternal life. Such a Tau, or Egyptian cross, was used in the Bacchic and Eleusinian Mysteries. Symbol of the dual generative power, it was laid upon the breast of the Initiate, after his“new birth”was accomplished, and the Mystæ had returned from their baptism in the sea. It was a mystic sign that his spiritual birth had regenerated and united his astral soul with his divine spirit, and that he was ready to ascend in spirit to the blessed abodes of light and glory—the Eleusinia. The Tau was a magic talisman at the same time as a religious emblem. It was adopted by the Christians through the Gnostics and Kabalists, who used it largely, as their numerous gems testify. These in turn had the Tau (or handled cross) from the Egyptians, and the Latin Cross from the Buddhist missionaries, who brought it from India (where it can be found even now) two or three centuriesb.c.The Assyrians, Egyptians, ancient Americans, Hindus and Romans had it in various, but very slight modifications of shape. Till very late in the middle ages, it was considered a potent spell again at epilepsy and demoniacal possession, and the“signet of the living God”brought down in St. John's vision by the angel ascending from the east to“seal the servants of our God in the foreheads,”was but the same mystic Tau—the Egyptian Cross. In the painted glass of St. Denis (France) this angel is represented as stamping this sign on the forehead of the elect; the legend reads, SIGNUM TAY.

In King'sGnostics, the author reminds us that“this mark is commonly borne by St. Anthony, anEgyptianrecluse.”269What the real meaning of the Tau was, is explained to us by the Christian St. John, the Egyptian Hermes, and the Hindu Brahmans. It is but too evident that, with the Apostle at least, it meant the“Ineffable Name,”as he calls this“signet of the living God”a few chapters further on270the“Father's name written in their foreheads.”

The Brahmâtmâ, the chief of the Hindu Initiates, had on his head-gear two keys, symbol of the revealed mystery of life and death, placed cross-like; and in some Buddhist pagodas of Tartary and Mongolia, the entrance of a chamber within the temple, generally containing the staircase which leads to the inner dagoba,271and the porticos of somePrachidas272are ornamented with a cross formed of two fishes, as found on some of the zodiacs of the Buddhists. We should not wonder at all at learning that the sacred device in the tombs in the catacombs at Rome, the“Vesica Piscis,”was derived from the said Buddhist zodiacal sign. How general must have been that geometrical figure in the world-symbols, may be inferred from the fact that there is a Masonic tradition that Solomon's temple was built on three foundations, forming the“triple Tau”or three crosses.

In its mystical sense, the Egyptian cross owes its origin, as an emblem, to the realisation by the earliest philosophy of anandrogynous dualism of every manifestation in nature, which proceeds from the abstract ideal of a likewise androgynous deity, while the Christian emblem is simply due to chance. Had the Mosaic law[pg 152]prevailed, Jesus should have been lapidated.273The crucifix was an instrument of torture, and utterly common among Romans as it was unknown among Semitic nations. It was called the“Tree of Infamy.”It is but later that it was adopted as a Christian symbol; but during the first two decades the apostles looked upon it with horror.274It is certainly not the Christian Cross that John had in mind when speaking of the“signet of the living God,”but themysticTau—the Tetragrammaton, or mighty name, which, on the most ancient Kabalistic talismans, was represented by the four Hebrew letters composing the Holy Word.

The famous Lady Ellenborough, known among the Arabs of Damascus, and in the desert, after her last marriage, asHanoum Medjouye, had a talisman in her possession, presented to her by a Druse from Mount Lebanon. It was recognised by a certain sign on its left corner as belonging to that class of gems which is known in Palestine as a“Messianic”amulet, of the second or third centuryb.c.It is a green stone of a pentagonal form; at the bottom is engraved a fish; higher, Solomon's Seal;275and still higher, the four Chaldaic letters—Jod, He, Vau, He, IAHO, which form the name of the Deity. These are arranged in quite an unusual way, running from below upward, in reversed order, and forming the Egyptian Tau. Around these there is a legend which, as the gem is not our property, we are not at liberty to give. The Tau, in its mystical sense, as well as theCrux ansata, is theTree of Life.

It is well known that the earliest Christian emblems—before it was ever attempted to represent the bodily appearance of Jesus—were the Lamb, the Good Shepherd, andThe Fish. The origin of the latter emblem, which has so puzzled the archæologists, thus becomes comprehensible. The whole secret lies in the easily ascertained fact that, while in theKabalahthe King Messiah is called“Interpreter,”or Revealer of the Mystery, and shown to be thefifthemanation, in theTalmud—for reasons we will now explain—the Messiah is very often designated as“DAG,”or the Fish. This is an inheritance from the Chaldees, and relates—as the very name indicates—to the Babylonian Dagon, the man-fish, who was the instructor and interpreter of the people, to whom he appeared. Abarbanel explains the name, by stating that the sign of his (Messiah's) coming is the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in the signPisces.276Therefore, as the Christians were intent upon identifying their Christos with the Messiah of theOld Testament, they adopted it so readily as to forget that its true origin might be traced still further back than the Babylonian Dagon. How eagerly and closely the ideal of Jesus was united, by the early Christians, with every imaginable kabalistic and pagan tenet, may be inferred from the language of Clemens, of Alexandria, addressed to his co-religionists.

When they were debating upon the choice of the most appropriate symbol to remind them of Jesus, Clemens advised them in the following words:“Let the engraving upon the gem of your ring be eithera dove, ora ship running before the wind(the Argha), or afish.”Was the good father, when writing this sentence, labouring under the recollection of Joshua, son of Nun (calledJesusin the Greek and Slavonian versions); or had he forgotten the real interpretation of these pagan symbols?277

And now, with the help of all these passages scattered hither and thither in Isis and other works of this kind, the reader will see and judge for himself which of the two explanations—the Christian or that of the Occultist—is the nearer to truth. If Jesus were not an Initiate, why should all these allegorical incidents of his life be given? Why should such extreme trouble be taken, so much time wasted trying to make the above: (a) answer and dovetail with purposely picked out sentences in the Old Testament, to show them as prophecies; and (b) to preserve in them the initiatory symbols, the emblems so pregnant with Occult meaning and all of these belonging to Pagan mystic Philosophy? The author of the Source of Measures gives out that mystical intent; but only once now and again, in its one-sided, numerical and kabalistic meaning, without paying any attention to, or having concern with, the primeval and more spiritual origin, and he deals with it only so far as it relates to the Old Testament. He attributes the purposed change in the sentence “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani” to the principle already mentioned of the crossed bones and skull in the Labarum,

The author's idea is to show the mystic blending by the Gospel writers of Jehovah, Cain, Abel, etc., with Jesus (in accordance with Jewish kabalistic numeration); the better he succeeds, the more clearly he shows that it was a forced blending, and that we have not a record of the real events of the life of Jesus, narrated by eye-witnesses or the Apostles. The narrative is all based on the signs of the Zodiac:

Each a double sign or male-female [in ancient astrological Magic]—viz: it was Taurus-Eve, and Scorpio was Mars-Lupa, or Mars with the female wolf [in relation to[pg 154]Romulus]. So, as these signs were opposites of each other, yetmet in the centre, they were connected; and so in fact it was, and in a double sense, the conception of the year was in Taurus, as the conception of Eve by Mars, her opposite, in Scorpio. The birth would be at the winter solstice, or Christmas. On the contrary, by conception in Scorpio—viz., of Lupa by Taurus—birth would be in Leo. Scorpio was Chrēstos inhumiliation, while Leo was Christos intriumph. While Taurus-Eve fulfilled astronomical functions, Mars-Lupa fulfilled spiritual ones by type.279

MoothorMouth, was the Egyptian cognomen of Venus, (Eve, mother of all living) [asVach, mother of all living, a permutation ofAditi, as Eve was one of Sephira]or the moon. Plutarch (Isis, 374) hands it down that Isis was sometimes calledMuth, which word meansmother... (Issa, אשה, woman). (Isis, p. 372). Isis, he says is that part of Nature, which, as feminine, contains in herself, as (nutrix) nurse, all things to be born....“Certainly the moon,”speaking astronomically,“chiefly exercises this function in Taurus, Venus being the house (in opposition to Mars,generator, in Scorpio), because the sign is luna, hypsoma. Since ... Isis Metheur differs from IsisMuthand that in the vocableMuththenotion of bringing forthmay be concealed, and since fructification must take place,Solbeing joined withLunainLibra, it is not improbable that Muth first indeed signifies Venus in Libra; hence Luna in Libra.”(Beiträge zur Kenntniss, pars. 11, S. 9, underMuth.)280