Theos-Talk Archives (December 2008 Message tt00348)

SOME REASONS FOR SECRECY    Collected writings  vol 14  page 47-last 
59:

The fact that the Occult Sciences have been withheld from the world 
at large, and denied by the Initiates to Humanity, has often been 
made matter of complaint. It has been alleged that the Guardians of 
the Secret Lore were selfish in withholding the "treasures" of 
Archaic Wisdom; that it was positively criminal to keep back such 
knowledge?"if any"?from the men of Science, etc.
Yet there must have been some very good reasons for it, since from 
the very dawn of History such has been the policy of every Hierophant 
and "Master." Pythagoras, the first Adept and real Scientist in pre-
Christian Europe, is accused of having taught in public the 
immobility of the earth, and the rotary motion of the stars around 
it, while he was declaring to his privileged Adepts his belief in the 
motion of the Earth as a planet, and in the heliocentric system. The 
reasons for such secrecy, however, are many and were never made a 
mystery of. The chief cause was given in Isis Unveiled. It may now be 
repeated.

>From the very day when the first mystic [taught by the first 
Instructor of the "divine Dynasties" of the early races, was taught] 
the means of communication between this world and the worlds of the 
invisible host, between the sphere of matter and that of pure spirit, 
he concluded that to abandon this mysterious science to the 
[desecration, willing or unwilling, of the profane] rabble?was to 
lose it. An abuse of it might lead mankind to speedy destruction; it 
was like surrounding a group of children with
??????????
* New Platonism and Alchemy, p. 6 and footnote.
??????????

 

Page 48

explosive [substances], and furnishing them with matches. The first 
[divine Instructor] initiated but a select few, and kept silence with 
the multitudes. [They recognized their "God" and each Adept felt the 
great "SELF " within himself.] The "}tman," the self, the mighty Lord 
and Protector, once that man knew him as the "I am," the "Ego Sum, " 
the "Asmi," showed his full power to him who could recognize the 
"still small voice." From the days of the primitive man described by 
the first Vedic poet, down to our modern age, there has not been a 
philosopher worthy of that name, who did not carry in the silent 
sanctuary of his heart the grand and mysterious truth. If initiated, 
he learnt it as a sacred science; if otherwise, then, like Socrates, 
repeating to himself as well as his fellowmen, the noble injunction, 
"O man, know thyself," he succeeded in recognizing his God within 
himself. "Ye are gods," the king-psalmist tells us, and we find Jesus 
reminding the scribes that this expression was addressed to other 
mortal men, claiming for themselves the same privilege without any 
blasphemy.* And, as a faithful echo, Paul, while asserting that we 
are all "the temple of the living God,"? cautiously adds that after 
all these things are only for the "wise," and it is "unlawful" to 
speak of them.?

Some of the reasons for this secrecy may here be given.
The fundamental law and master-key of practical Theurgy, in its chief 
applications to the serious study of cosmic and sidereal, of psychic 
and spiritual, mysteries was, and still is, that which was called by 
the Greek Neo-Platonists "Theophania." In its generally-accepted 
meaning this is "communication between the Gods (or God) and those 
initiated mortals who are spiritually fit to enjoy such an 
intercourse." Esoterically, however, it signifies more than this. For 
it is not only the presence of a God, but an actual?howbeit temporary?
incarnation, the blending, so to say, of the personal Deity, the 
Higher Self, with man?its representative or agent on earth. As a 
general law, the Highest God, the Over-soul of the human being (Atma-
Buddhi), only over-shadows the individual during his life, for 
purposes of instruction and revelation; or as Roman Catholics?who 
erroneously call that Over-soul the "Guardian Angel"?would say, "It 
stands outside and watches." But in the case of the theophanic 
mystery, it incarnates itself in the Theurgist for purposes of 
revelation. When the incarnation is temporary, during those 
mysterious trances or "ecstasy," which Plotinus defined as

??????????
* John x, 34, 35.
? 2 Corinth. vi, 16.
? Isis Unveiled, Vol. II, pp. 317-18.
??????????

 

Page 49

The liberation of the mind from its finite consciousness, becoming 
one and identified with the Infinite,

this sublime condition is very short. The human soul, being the 
offspring or emanation of its God, the "Father and the Son" become 
one, "the divine fountain flowing like a stream into its human bed."* 
In exceptional cases, however, the mystery becomes complete; the Word 
is made Flesh in real fact, the individual becoming divine in the 
full sense of the term, since his personal God has made of him his 
permanent life-long tabernacle? "the temple of God," as Paul says.
Now that which is meant here by the personal God of Man is, of 
course, not his seventh Principle alone, as per se and in essence 
that is merely a beam of the infinite Ocean of Light. In conjunction 
with our Divine Soul, the Buddhi, it cannot be called a Duad, as it 
otherwise might, since, though formed from }tma and Buddhi (the two 
higher Principles), the former is no entity but an emanation from the 
Absolute, and indivisible in reality from it. The personal God is not 
the Monad, but indeed the prototype of the latter, what for want of a 
better term we call the manifested Karanatman (Causal Soul),? one of 
the "seven" and chief reservoirs of the human Monads or Egos. The 
latter are gradually formed and strengthened during their incarnation-
cycle by constant additions of individuality from the personalities 
in which incarnates that androgynous, half-spiritual, half-
terrestrial principle, partaking of both heaven and earth, called by 
the Vedantins Jiva and Vijśanamaya Kośa, and by the Occultists the 
Manas (mind); that, in short, which uniting itself partially with the 
Monad, incarnates in each new birth. In perfect unity with its 
(seventh) Principle, the Spirit

??????????
* Plotinus claims to have experienced this sublime ecstasy four times 
during his mystic life; Porphyry asserts that Apollonius of Tyana was 
thus united four times to his deity?a statement which we believe to 
be a mistake, since Apollonius was a Nirmnakaya (divine incarnation ? 
not Avatara)?and he (Porphyry) only once, when over sixty years of 
age. Theophany (or the actual appearance of a God to man), Theopathy 
(or "assimilation of divine nature"), and Theopneusty (inspiration, 
or rather the mysterious power to hear orally the teachings of a God) 
have never been rightly understood [See also New Platonism and 
Alchemy, p. 13.]
? Karana-sarira is the "causal" body and is sometimes said to be the 
"personal God." And so it is, in one sense.
??????????

 

Page 50

unalloyed, it is the divine Higher Self, as every student of 
Theosophy knows. After every new incarnation Buddhi-Manas culls, so 
to say, the aroma of the flower called personality, the purely 
earthly residue of which?its dregs?is left to fade out as a shadow. 
This is the most difficult?because so transcendentally metaphysical?
portion of the doctrine.
As is repeated many a time in this and other works, it is not the 
Philosophers, Sages, and Adepts of antiquity who can ever be charged 
with idolatry. It is they in fact, who, recognising divine unity, 
were the only ones, owing to their initiation into the mysteries of 
Esotericism, to understand correctly the (hyponoia), or under-meaning 
of the anthropomorphism of the so-called Angels, Gods, and spiritual 
Beings of every kind. Each, worshipping the one Divine Essence that 
pervades the whole world of Nature, reverenced, but never worshipped 
or idolised, any of these "Gods," whether high or low?not even his 
own personal Deity, of which he was a Ray, and to whom he appealed.

The holy Triad emanates from the One, and is the Tetraktys; the gods, 
daimons, and souls are an emanation of the Triad. Heroes and men 
repeat the hierarchy in themselves.

Thus said Metrodorus of Chios, the Pythagorean, the latter part of 
the sentence meaning that man has within himself the seven pale 
reflections of the seven divine Hierarchies; his Higher Self is, 
therefore, in itself but the refracted beam of the direct Ray. He who 
regards the latter as an Entity, in the usual sense of the term, is 
one of the "infidels and atheists," spoken of by Epicurus, for he 
fastens on that God "the opinions of the multitude"?an 
anthropomorphism of the grossest kind.? The Adept and the Occultist 
know that "what are styled the Gods are only the first principles."? 
None the less they are intelligent,

??????????
* This would be in one sense Self-worship.
? "The Gods exist," said Epicurus, "but they are not what the hoi 
polloi (the multitude) suppose them to be. He is not an infidel or 
atheist who denies the existence of Gods whom the multitude worship, 
but he is such who fastens on the Gods the opinions of the 
multitude." [Diog. Laert., Lives, X, 123.]
? [Aristotle: Metaphysics, Bk. XII, 8, p. 1074 b.]
??????????

 

Page 51

conscious, and living "Principles," the Primary Seven Lights 
manifested from Light unmanifested?which to us is Darkness. They are 
the Seven? exoterically four?Kumaras or "Mind-Born Sons" of Brahma. 
And it is they again, the Dhyani-Chohans, who are the prototypes in 
the aeonic eternity of lower Gods and hierarchies of divine Beings, 
at the lowest end of which ladder of being are we?men.
Thus perchance Polytheism, when philosophically understood, may be a 
degree higher than even the Monotheism of the Protestant, say, who 
limits and conditions the Deity in whom he persists in seeing the 
Infinite, but whose supposed actions make of that "Absolute and 
Infinite" the most absurd paradox in Philosophy. From this standpoint 
Roman Catholicism itself is immeasurably higher and more logical than 
Protestantism, though the Roman Church has been pleased to adopt the 
exotericism of the heathen "multitude" and to reject the Philosophy 
of pure Esotericism.
Thus every mortal has his immortal counterpart, or rather his 
Archetype, in heaven. This means that the former is indissolubly 
united to the latter, in each of his incarnations, and for the 
duration of the cycle of births; only it is by the spiritual and 
intellectual Principle in him, entirely distinct from the lower self, 
never through the earthly personality. Some of these are even liable 
to break the union altogether, in case of absence in the moral 
individual of binding, viz., of spiritual ties. Truly, as Paracelsus 
puts it in his quaint, tortured phraseology, man with his three 
(compound) Spirits is suspended like a foetus by all three to the 
matrix of the Macrocosm; the thread which holds him united being the 
"Thread-Soul," Sãtratman, and Taijasa (the "Shining") of the 
Vedantins. And it is through this spiritual and intellectual 
Principle in man, through Taijasa?the Shining, "because it has the 
luminous internal organ as its associate"?that man is thus united to 
his heavenly prototype, never through his lower inner self or Astral 
Body, for which there remains in most cases nothing but to fade out.
Occultism, or Theurgy, teaches the means of producing such union. But 
it is the actions of man?his personal merit alone that can produce it 
on earth, or determine its duration. This lasts from a few seconds?a 
flash?to several hours, during which time the Theurgist or 
Theophanist is that overshadowing "God"

 

Page 52

himself; hence he becomes endowed for the time being with relative 
omniscience and omnipotence. With such perfect (divine) Adepts as 
Buddha* and others such a hypostatical state of avataric condition 
may last during the whole life; whereas in the case of full 
Initiates, who have not yet reached the perfect state of J§vanmukta,? 
Theopneusty, when in full sway, results for the high Adept in a full 
recollection of everything seen, heard, or sensed.

Taijasa . . . has fruition of the supersensible.?

For one less perfect it will end only in a partial, indistinct 
remembrance; while the beginner has to face in the first period of 
his psychic experiences a mere confusion, followed by a rapid and 
finally complete oblivion of the mysteries seen during this super-
hypnotic condition. The degree of recollection, when one returns to 
his waking state and physical senses, depends on his spiritual and 
psychic purification, the greatest enemy of spiritual memory being 
man's physical brain, the organ of his sensuous nature.
The above states are described for a clearer comprehension of terms 
used in this work. There are so many and such various conditions and 
states that even a Seer is liable to confound one with the other. To 
repeat: the Greek, rarely-used word, "Theophania," meant more with 
the Neo-Platonists than it does with the modern maker of 
dictionaries. The compound word, Theophania (from theos, "God," and 
phainesthai, "to appear,") does not simply mean "a manifestation of 
God to man by actual appearance"?an absurdity, by the way?but the 
actual presence of a God in man, a divine incarnation. When Simon the 
Magician claimed to be "God the Father," what he wanted to convey was 
just that which has been explained, namely, that he was a divine 
incarnation of his own Father, whether we see in
??????????
* Esoteric, as exoteric, Buddhism rejects the theory that Gautama was 
an incarnation or Avatara of Vishnu, but teaches the doctrine as 
herein explained. Every man has in him the materials, if not the 
conditions, for theophanic intercourse and Theopneusty, the inspiring 
"God" being, however, in every case, his own Higher Self, or divine 
prototype.
? One entirely and absolutely purified, and having nothing in common 
with earth except his body.
? Mândûkyopanishad, 4.
??????????

 

Page 53

the latter an Angel, a God, or a Spirit; therefore he was called 
"that power of God which is called great,"* or that power which 
causes the Divine Self to enshrine itself in its lower self?man.
This is one of the several mysteries of being and incarnation. 
Another is that when an Adept reaches during his lifetime that state 
of holiness and purity that makes him "equal to the Angels," then at 
death his apparitional or astral body becomes as solid and tangible 
as was the late body, and is transformed into the real man.? The old 
physical body, falling off like the cast-off serpent's skin, the body 
of the "new" man remains either visible or, at the option of the 
Adept, disappears from view, surrounded as it is by the Akasic shell 
that screens it. In the latter case there are three ways open to the 
Adept:
(1) He may remain in the earth's sphere (Vayu or Kamaloka), in that 
ethereal locality concealed from human sight save during flashes of 
clairvoyance. In this case his astral body, owing to its great purity 
and spirituality, having lost the conditions required for }kaśic 
light (the nether or terrestrial ether) to absorb its semi-material 
particles, the Adept will have to remain in the company of 
disintegrating shells?doing no good or useful work. This, of course, 
cannot be.
(2) He can by a supreme effort of will merge entirely into, and get 
united with, his Monad. By doing so, however, he would (a) deprive 
his Higher Self of posthumous Samadhi??a bliss which is not real 
Nirvana ? the astral, however pure, being too earthly for such state; 
and (b) he would thereby open himself to Karmic law; the action 
being, in fact, the outcome of personal selfishness ? of reaping the 
fruits produced by and for oneself ? alone.
(3) The Adept has the option of renouncing conscious Nirvana and 
rest, to work on earth for the good of mankind. This he can do in a 
twofold way: either, as above said, by consolidating his astral body 
into physical appearance, he can re-assume the self-same personality; 
or he can avail himself of an

??????????
* Acts, viii, 10 (Revised Version).
? See the explanations given on the subject in "The Elixir of Life," 
by G. Mitford (From a Chela's Diary), Five years of Theosophy, 
London, 1885. [Theosophy Co. reprint, 1980.]
??????????

 

Page 54

entirely new physical body, whether that of a newly-born infant or?as 
Śamkaracharya is reported to have done with the body of a dead Raja?
by "entering a deserted sheath," and living in it as long as he 
chooses. This is what is called "continuous existence." The Section 
entitled "The Mystery about Buddha" will throw additional light on 
this theory, to the profane incomprehensible, or to the generality 
simply absurd. Such is the doctrine taught, everyone having the 
choice of either fathoming it still deeper, or of leaving it 
unnoticed.
The above is simply a small portion of what might have been given in 
Isis Unveiled, had the time come then, as it has now. One cannot 
study and profit by Occult Science, unless one gives himself up to it?
heart, soul, and body. Some of its truths are too awful, too 
dangerous, for the average mind. None can toy and play with such 
terrible weapons with impunity. Therefore it is, as St. Paul has it, 
"unlawful" to speak of them. Let us accept the reminder and talk only 
of that which is "lawful."
The quotation on p. 47-48 relates, moreover, only to psychic or 
spiritual Magic. The practical teachings of Occult Science are 
entirely different, and few are the strong minds fitted for them. As 
to ecstasy, and such like kinds of self-illumination, this may be 
obtained by oneself and without any teacher or initiation, for 
ecstasy is reached by an inward command and control of Self over the 
physical Ego; as to obtaining mastery over the forces of Nature, this 
requires a long training, or the capacity of one born a "natural 
Magician." Meanwhile, those who possess neither of the requisite 
qualifications are strongly advised to limit themselves to purely 
spiritual development. But even this is difficult, as the first 
necessary qualification is an unshakable belief in one's own powers 
and the Deity within oneself; otherwise a man would simply develop 
into an irresponsible medium. Throughout the whole mystic literature 
of the ancient world we detect the same idea of spiritual 
Esotericism, that the personal God exists within, nowhere outside, 
the worshipper. That personal Deity is no vain breath, or a fiction, 
but an immortal Entity, the Initiator of the Initiates, now that the 
heavenly or Celestial Initiators of primitive humanity?the Śishtas of 
the preceding cycles?are no more among us. Like an under-current, 
rapid and clear, it runs without mixing its crystalline purity with 
the muddy and troubled waters of

 

Page 55

dogmatism, an enforced anthropomorphic Deity and religious 
intolerance. We find this idea in the tortured and barbarous 
phraseology of the Codex Nazaraeus,* and in the superb Neo-Platonic 
language of the Fourth Gospel of the later Religion, in the oldest 
Veda and in the Avesta, in the Abhidharma, in Kapila's Sânkhya-
Sûtras, and the Bhagavad-Gîtâ [and in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras]. We 
cannot attain Adeptship and Nirvana, Bliss and the "Kingdom of 
Heaven," unless we link ourselves indissolubly with our Rex Lucis, 
the Lord of Splendour and of Light, our immortal God within us. Aham 
eva Parabrahman?"I am verily the Supreme Brahman"?has ever been the 
one living truth in the heart and mind of the Adepts, and it is this 
which helps the Mystic to become one. One must first of all recognize 
one's own immortal Principle, and then only can one conquer, or take 
the Kingdom of Heaven by violence. Only this has to be achieved by 
the higher?not the middle, nor the third?man, the last one being of 
dust. Nor can the second man, the "Son"?on this plane, as his 
"Father" is the Son on a still higher plane?do anything without the 
assistance of the first, the "Father." But to succeed one has to 
identify oneself with one's divine Parent.

The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second [inner, our higher] 
man is the Lord from heaven . . . . Behold, I show you a mystery.?

Thus says Paul, mentioning but the dual and trinitarian man for the 
better comprehension of the non-initiated. But this is not all, for 
the Delphic injunction has to be fulfilled: man must know himself in 
order to become a perfect Adept. How few can acquire the knowledge, 
however, not merely in its inner mystical, but even in its literal 
sense, for there are two meanings in this command of the Oracle. This 
is the doctrine of Buddha and the Bodhisattvas pure and simple.
Such is also the mystical sense of what was said by Paul to the 
Corinthians about their being the "temple of God," for this meant 
Esoterically:
??????????
* [Published as The Book of Adam or Liber Adami in Latin & Syriac by 
Mathieu Norberg in 3 vols. including concordance, 1815.]
? I Cor. XV, 47, 51. [Cp. Isis II, p. 318.]
??????????

 

Page 56

Ye are the temple of [the, or your] God, and the Spirit of [a, or 
your] God dwelleth in you.*

This carries precisely the same meaning as the "I am verily Brahman" 
of the Vedantin. Nor is the latter assertion more blasphemous than 
the Pauline?if there were any blasphemy in either, which is denied. 
Only the Vedantin, who never refers to his body as being himself, or 
even a part of himself, or aught else but an illusory form for others 
to see him in, constructs his assertion more openly and sincerely 
than was done by Paul.
The Delphic command "Know thyself" was perfectly comprehensible to 
every nation of old. So it is now, save to the Christians, since, 
with the exception of the Moslems, it is part and parcel of every 
Eastern religion, including the Kabalistically instructed Jews. To 
understand its full meaning, however, necessitates, first of all, 
belief in Reincarnation and all its mysteries; not as laid down in 
the doctrine of the French Reincarnationists of the Allan Kardec 
school, but as they are expounded and taught by Esoteric Philosophy. 
Man must, in short, know who he was, before he arrives at knowing 
what he is. And how many are there among Europeans who are capable of 
developing within themselves an absolute belief in their past and 
future reincarnations, in general, even as a law, let alone mystic 
knowledge of one's immediately precedent life? Early
??????????
* I Cor. iii, 16. Has the reader ever meditated upon the suggestive 
words, often pronounced by Jesus and his Apostles? "Be ye therefore 
perfect, even as your Father . . . is perfect" (Matt.v, 48), says the 
Great Master. The words "as perfect as your Father which is in 
heaven," being interpreted as meaning God. Now the utter absurdity of 
any man becoming as perfect as the infinite, all-perfect, omniscient 
and omnipresent Deity, is too apparent. If you accept it in such a 
sense, Jesus is made to utter the greatest fallacy. What was 
Esoterically meant is, "Your Father who is above the material and 
astral man, the highest Principle (save the Monad) within man, his 
own personal God, or the God of his own personality, of whom he is 
the `prison' and the `temple.'" "If thou wilt be perfect (i.e., an 
Adept and Initiate), go and sell that thou hast" (Matt. xix, 21). 
Every man who desired to become a neophyte, a chela, then, as now, 
had to take the vow of poverty. The "Perfect" was the name given to 
the Initiates of every denomination. Plato calls them by that term. 
The Essenes had their "Perfect," and Paul plainly states that they, 
the Initiates, can only speak before other Adepts. "We speak wisdom 
among them [only] that are perfect" (I Cor. ii, 6.).
??????????

 

Page 57

education, tradition and training of thought, everything is opposing 
itself during their whole lives to such a belief. Cultured people 
have been brought up in that most pernicious idea that the wide 
difference found between the units of one and the same mankind, or 
even race, is the result of chance; that the gulf between man and man 
in their respective social positions, birth, intellect, physical and 
mental capacities?every one of which qualifications has a direct 
influence on every human life? that all this is simply due to blind 
hazard, only the most pious among them finding equivocal consolation 
in the idea that it is "the will of God." They have never analysed, 
never stopped to think of the depth of the opprobrium that is thrown 
upon their God, once the grand and most equitable law of the manifold 
rebirths of man upon this earth is foolishly rejected. Men and women 
anxious to be regarded as Christians, often truly and sincerely 
trying to lead a Christ-like life, have never paused to reflect over 
the words of their own Bible. "Art thou Elias?" the Jewish priests 
and Levites asked the Baptist.* Their Saviour taught His disciples 
this grand truth of the Esoteric Philosophy, but verily, if His 
Apostles comprehended it, no one else seems to have realized its true 
meaning. No; not even Nicodemus, who, to the assertion; "Except a man 
be born again? he cannot see the Kingdom of God," answers: "How can a 
man be born when he is old?" and is forthwith reproved by the remark: 
"Art thou a master in Israel and knowest not these things?"?as no one 
had a right to call himself a "Master" and Teacher, without having 
been initiated into the mysteries (a) of a spiritual rebirth through 
water, fire and spirit, and (b) of the rebirth from flesh.? Then 
again what can be a clearer expression
??????????
* John, i, 21.
? John, iii, 3. "Born" from above, viz., from his Monad or divine 
EGO, the seventh Principle, which remains till the end of the Kalpa, 
the nucleus of, and at the same time the overshadowing Principle, as 
the Kâranâtman (Causal Soul) of the personality in every rebirth. In 
this sense, the sentence "born anew" means "descends from above," the 
last two words having no reference to heaven or space, neither of 
which can be limited or located, since one is a state and the other 
infinite, hence having no cardinal points. (See New Testament, 
Revised Version, loc. cit.)
? This can have no reference to Christian Baptism, since there was 
none in the days of Nicodemus and he could not therefore know 
anything of it, even though a "Master."
??????????

 

Page 58

as to the doctrine of manifold rebirths than the answer given by 
Jesus to the Sadducees, "who deny that there is any resurrection," 
i.e., any rebirth, since the dogma of the resurrection in the flesh 
is now regarded as an absurdity even by the intelligent clergy:

They who shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world [Nirvana] * 
neither marry . . . neither can they die any more,

which shows that they had already died, and more than once. And again:

Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed . . . when at the 
bush, he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, 
and the God of Jacob, for he is not a God of the dead, but of the 
living.?

The sentence "now that the dead are raised" evidently applied to the 
then actual rebirths of the Jacobs and the Isaacs, and not to their 
future resurrection; for in such case they would have been still dead 
in the interim, and could not be referred to as "the living."
But the most suggestive of Christ's parables and "dark sayings" is 
found in the explanation given by him to his Apostles about the blind 
man:

Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born 
blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this [blind, physical] man sinned 
nor his parents; but that the works of [his] God should be made 
manifest in him.?

Man is the "tabernacle," the "building" only, of his God; and of 
course it is not the temple but its inmate?the vehicle of

??????????
* This word, translated in the New Testament "world" to suit the 
official interpretation, means rather an "age" (as shown in the 
Revised Version) or one of the periods during the Manvantara, a 
Kalpa, or Aeon. Esoterically the sentence would read: "He who shall 
reach, through a series of births and Karmic law, the state in which 
Humanity shall find itself after the Seventh Round and the Seventh 
Race, when comes Nirvana, Moksha, and when man becomes `equal unto 
the Angels' or Dhyani-Chohans, is a `son of the resurrection' and 
`can die no more'; then there will be no marriage, as there will be 
no difference of sexes"?a result of our present materiality and 
animalism.
? Luke, xx, 27-38.
? John, ix, 2, 3
.??????????

 

Page 59

"God"* that had sinned in a previous incarnation, and had thus 
brought the Karma of cecity upon the new building. Thus Jesus spoke 
truly; but to this day his followers have refused to understand the 
words of wisdom spoken. The Saviour is shown by his followers as 
though he were paving, by his words and explanation, the way to a 
preconceived programme that had to lead to an intended miracle. 
Verily the Grand Martyr has remained thenceforward, and for eighteen 
centuries, the Victim crucified daily far more cruelly by his 
clerical disciples and lay followers than he ever could have been by 
his allegorical enemies. For such is the true sense of the words 
"that the works of God should be made manifest in him," in the light 
of theological interpretation, and a very undignified one it is, if 
the Esoteric explanation is rejected.
Doubtless the above will be regarded as fresh blasphemy. Nevertheless 
there are a number of Christians whom we know?whose hearts go out as 
strongly to their ideal of Jesus, as their souls are repelled from 
the theological picture of the official Saviour?who will reflect over 
our explanation and find in it no offence, but perchance a relief.
??????????
* The conscious Ego, or Fifth Principle, Manas, the vehicle of the 
divine Monad or "God."