Page 49 (part 4)

, those who have passed through the seven races of each round -- otherwise they will rest in the lower fields; "and it represents also the seven successive Devachans, or lokas. In Amenti, one becomes pure spirit for the eternity (xxx. 4.); while in Aanroo "the soul of the spirit," or the defunct, is devoured each time by Uraeus -- the Serpent, Son of the earth (in another sense the primordial vital principles in the Sun), i.e. , the Astral body of the deceased or the "Elementary" fades out and disappears in the "Son of the earth," limited time. The soul quits the fields of Aanroo and goes on earth under any shape it likes to assume. (See chapter xcix., Book of the Dead. ) [[Vol. 1, Page]] 675 THE GODS OF EGYPT. work written by Egyptians ( vide "Book of the Dead") would speak of the one universal God of the Monotheistic systems -- the one Absolute cause of all, was as unnameable and unpronounceable in the mind of the ancient philosopher of Egypt, as it is for ever Unknowable in the conception of Mr. Herbert Spencer. As for the Egyptian in general, as M. Maspero well remarks, whenever he "arrived at the notion of divine Unity, the God One was never 'God,' simply." And Lepage Renouf very justly observed that the word Nouter , nouti , "god" had never ceased being a generic name with the Egyptians, nor has it ever become a personal pronoun. Every God was the "one living and unique God" with them. Their "monotheism was purely geographical. If the Egyptian of Memphis proclaimed the unity of Phtah to the exclusion of Ammon, the Thebeian Egyptian proclaimed the unity of Ammon to the exclusion of Phtah," as we now see done in India in the case of the Saivas and the Vaishnavas. " Ra , the 'One God' at Heliopolis is not the same as Osiris, the 'One God' at Abydos, and can be worshipped side by side with him, without being absorbed by his neighbour. The one god is but the god of the nome or the city, noutir , noutti , and does not exclude the existence of the one god of that town or of the neighbouring nome. In short, whenever speaking of Egyptian Monotheism, one ought to speak of the Gods ' One ' of Egypt, and not of the one god" (Maspero, in the Guide au Musee de Boulak.) It is by this feature, pre-eminently Egyptian, that the authenticity of the various so-called Hermetic Books , ought to be tested; and it is totally absent from the Greek fragments known as such. This proves that a Greek Neo-Platonic, or even a Christian hand, had no small share in the editing of such works. Of course the fundamental philosophy is there, and in many a place -- intact. But the style has been altered and smoothed in a monotheistic direction, as much, if not more than that of the Hebrew Genesis in its Greek and Latin translations. They may be Hermetic works, but not works written by either of the two Hermes -- or rather, by Thot (Hermes) the directing intelligence of the Universe ( See ch. xciv. , Book of the Dead ), or by Thot, his terrestrial incarnation called Trismegistus, of the Rosetta stone. But all is doubt, negation, iconoclasm and brutal indifference, in our age of the hundred "isms" and no religion. Every idol is broken save the Golden Calf. Unfortunately, no nation or nations can escape their Karmic fate any more than units and individuals do. History itself is dealt with by the so-called historians as unscrupulously as legendary lore. For this, Augustin Thierry has made the amende honorable , if one may believe his biographers. He deplored the erroneous principle that made them all (the would - be historiographers) lose their way, and each presume to [[Vol. 1, Page]] 676 THE SECRET DOCTRINE. correct tradition, "that vox populi which nine times out of ten is vox Dei ;" and he finally admitted that in legend alone rests real history; for "legend," he adds, "is living tradition, and three times out of four it is truer than what we call History."* While Materialists deny everything in the universe, save matter, Archaeologists are trying to dwarf antiquity, and seek to destroy every claim to ancient Wisdom by tampering with Chronology. Our present-day Orientalists and Historical writers are to ancient History that which the white ants are to the buildings in India. More dangerous even than those Termites, the modern Archaeologists -- the "authorities" of the future in the matter of Universal History -- are preparing for the History of past nations the fate of certain edifices in tropical countries: "History will tumble down and break into atoms in the lap of the twentieth century, devoured to its foundations by her annalists," said Michelet. Very soon, indeed, under their combined efforts, it will share the fate of those ruined cities in both Americas, which lie deeply buried under impassable virgin forests. Historical facts will remain as concealed from view by the inextricable jungles of modern hypotheses, denials and scepticism. But very happily actual History repeats herself, for she proceeds, like everything else, in cycles; and dead facts and events deliberately drowned in the sea of modern scepticism will ascend once more and reappear on the surface. . . . In our Book II. the very fact that a work with pretensions to philosophy, and which is an exposition of the most abstruse problems, has to be commenced by tracing the evolution of mankind from what are regarded as supernatural beings -- Spirits -- will arouse the most malevolent criticism. Believers in, and the defenders of, the Secret Doctrine, however, will have to bear the accusation of madness and worse , as philosophically as for long years already the writer has done. Whenever a Theosophist is taxed with insanity, he ought to reply by quoting from Montesquieu's " Lettres Persanes. " "By opening so freely their lunatic asylums to their supposed madmen, men only seek to assure each other that they are not themselves mad." [[Footnote(s)]] ------------------------------- * Revue des Deux Mondes , 1865, pp . 157 and 158. E ND OF V OL. I . Contents