Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

H. P. Blavatsky's, “The Key to Theosophy”
GA 41b

H. P. Blavatsky
[adapted from the online text provided by the Theosophical Society, Pasadena

I. Theosophy and the Theosophical Society

The Meaning of the Name

Enquirer. Theosophy and its doctrines are often referred to as a new-fangled religion. Is it a religion?

Theosophist. It is not. Theosophy is Divine Knowledge or Science.

Enq. What is the real meaning of the term?

Theo. "Divine Wisdom," (Theosophia) or Wisdom of the gods, as (theogonia), genealogy of the gods. The word theos means a god in Greek, one of the divine beings, certainly not "God" in the sense attached in our day to the term. Therefore, it is not "Wisdom of God," as translated by some, but Divine Wisdom such as that possessed by the gods. The term is many thousand years old.

Enq. What is the origin of the name?

Theo. It comes to us from the Alexandrian philosophers, called lovers of truth, Philaletheians, from phil "loving," and aletheia "truth." The name Theosophy dates from the third century of our era, and began with Ammonius Saccas and his disciples 1Also called Analogeticists. As explained by Prof. Alex. Wilder, F. T. S., in his "Eclectic Philosophy," they were called so because of their practice of interpreting all sacred legends and narratives, myths and mysteries, by a rule or principle of analogy and correspondence: so that events which were related as having occurred in the external world were regarded as expressing operations and experiences of the human soul. They were also denominated Neo-Platonists. Though Theosophy, or the Eclectic Theosophical system, is generally attributed to the third century, yet, if Diogenes Laertius is to be credited, its origin is much earlier, as he attributed the system to an Egyptian priest, Pot-Amun, who lived in the early days of the Ptolemaic dynasty. The same author tells us that the name is Coptic, and signifies one consecrated to Amun, the God of Wisdom. Theosophy is the equivalent of Brahm-Vidya, divine knowledge., who started the Eclectic Theosophical system.

Enq. What was the object of this system?

Theo. First of all to inculcate certain great moral truths upon its disciples, and all those who were "lovers of the truth." Hence the motto adopted by the Theosophical Society: "There is no religion higher than truth." 2Eclectic Theosophy was divided under three heads: (1) Belief in one absolute, incomprehensible and supreme Deity, or infinite essence, which is the root of all nature, and of all that is, visible and invisible. (2) Belief in man's eternal immortal nature, because, being a radiation of the Universal Soul, it is of an identical essence with it. (3) Theurgy, or "divine work," or producing a work of gods; from theoi, "gods," and ergein, "to work." The term is very old, but, as it belongs to the vocabulary of the MYSTERIES, was not in popular use. It was a mystic belief — practically proven by initiated adepts and priests — that, by making oneself as pure as the incorporeal beings — i.e., by returning to one's pristine purity of nature — man could move the gods to impart to him Divine mysteries, and even cause them to become occasionally visible, either subjectively or objectively. It was the transcendental aspect of what is now called Spiritualism; but having been abused and misconceived by the populace, it had come to be regarded by some as necromancy, and was generally forbidden. A travestied practice of the theurgy of Iamblichus lingers still in the ceremonial magic of some modern Kabalists. Modern Theosophy avoids and rejects both these kinds of magic and "necromancy" as being very dangerous. Real divine theurgy requires an almost superhuman purity and holiness of life; otherwise it degenerates into mediumship or black magic. The immediate disciples of Ammonius Saccas, who was called Theodidaktos, "god-taught" — such as Plotinus and his follower Porphyry — rejected theurgy at first, but were finally reconciled to it through Iamblichus, who wrote a work to that effect entitled "De Mysteriis," under the name of his own master, a famous Egyptian priest called Abammon. Ammonius Saccas was the son of Christian parents, and, having been repelled by dogmatic spiritualistic Christianity from his childhood, became a Neo-Platonist, and like J. Boehme and other great seers and mystics, is said to have had divine wisdom revealed to him in dreams and visions. Hence his name of Theodidaktos. He resolved to reconcile every system of religion, and by demonstrating their identical origin to establish one universal creed based on ethics. His life was so blameless and pure, his learning so profound and vast, that several Church Fathers were his secret disciples. Clemens Alexandrinus speaks very highly of him. Plotinus, the "St. John" of Ammonius, was also a man universally respected and esteemed, and of the most profound learning and integrity. When thirty-nine years of age he accompanied the Roman Emperor Gordian and his army to the East, to be instructed by the sages of Bactria and India. He had a School of Philosophy in Rome. Porphyry, his disciple, whose real name was Malek (a Hellenized Jew), collected all the writings of his master. Porphyry was himself a great author, and gave an allegorical interpretation to some parts of Homer's writings. The system of meditation the Philaletheians resorted to was ecstacy, a system akin to Indian Yoga practice. What is known of the Eclectic School is due to Origen, Longinus, and Plotinus, the immediate disciples of Ammonius — (Vide Eclectic Philos., by A. Wilder.) The chief aim of the Founders of the Eclectic Theosophical School was one of the three objects of its modern successor, the Theosophical Society, namely, to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities.

Enq. What have you to show that this is not an impossible dream; and that all the world's religions are based on the one and the same truth?

Theo. Their comparative study and analysis. The "Wisdom-religion" was one in antiquity; and the sameness of primitive religious philosophy is proven to us by the identical doctrines taught to the Initiates during the MYSTERIES, an institution once universally diffused. "All the old worships indicate the existence of a single Theosophy anterior to them. The key that is to open one must open all; otherwise it cannot be the right key." (Eclect. Philo.)

The Policy of the Theosophical Society

Enq. In the days of Ammonius there were several ancient great religions, and numerous were the sects in Egypt and Palestine alone. How could he reconcile them?

Theo. By doing that which we again try to do now. The Neo-Platonists were a large body, and belonged to various religious philosophies; 3It was under Philadelphus that Judaism established itself in Alexandria, and forthwith the Hellenic teachers became the dangerous rivals of the College of Rabbis of Babylon. As the author of "Eclectic Philosophy" very pertinently remarks: "The Buddhistic, Vedantic, and Magian systems were expounded along with the philosophies of Greece at that period. It was not wonderful that thoughtful men supposed that the strife of words ought to cease, and considered it possible to extract one harmonious system from these various teachings. . . . Panaenus, Athenagoras, and Clement were thoroughly instructed in Platonic philosophy, and comprehended its essential unity with the Oriental systems." so do our Theosophists. In those days, the Jew Aristobulus affirmed that the ethics of Aristotle represented the esoteric teachings of the Law of Moses; Philo Judaeus endeavoured to reconcile the Pentateuch with the Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy; and Josephus proved that the Essenes of Carmel were simply the copyists and followers of the Egyptian Therapeutae (the healers). So it is in our day. We can show the line of descent of every Christian religion, as of every, even the smallest, sect. The latter are the minor twigs or shoots grown on the larger branches; but shoots and branches spring from the same trunk — the WISDOM-RELIGION. To prove this was the aim of Ammonius, who endeavoured to induce Gentiles and Christians, Jews and Idolaters, to lay aside their contentions and strifes, remembering only that they were all in possession of the same truth under various vestments, and were all the children of a common mother.4Says Mosheim of Ammonius: "Conceiving that not only the philosophers of Greece, but also all those of the different barbarian nations, were perfectly in unison with each other with regard to every essential point, he made it his business so to expound the thousand tenets of all these various sects as to show they had all originated from one and the same source, and tended all to one and the same end." If the writer on Ammonius in the Edinburgh Encyclopoedia knows what he is talking about, then he describes the modern Theosophists, their beliefs, and their work, for he says, speaking of the Theodidaktos: "He adopted the doctrines which were received in Egypt (the esoteric were those of India) concerning the Universe and the Deity, considered as constituting one great whole; concerning the eternity of the world . . . and established a system of moral discipline which allowed the people in general to live according to the laws of their country and the dictates of nature, but required the wise to exalt their mind by contemplation." This is the aim of Theosophy likewise.

Enq. What are your authorities for saying this of the ancient Theosophists of Alexandria?

Theo. An almost countless number of well-known writers. Mosheim, one of them, says that: —

"Ammonius taught that the religion of the multitude went hand-in-hand with philosophy, and with her had shared the fate of being by degrees corrupted and obscured with mere human conceits, superstitions, and lies; that it ought, therefore, to be brought back to its original purity by purging it of this dross and expounding it upon philosophical principles; and the whole Christ had in view was to reinstate and restore to its primitive integrity the wisdom of the ancients; to reduce within bounds the universally-prevailing dominion of superstition; and in part to correct, and in part to exterminate the various errors that had found their way into the different popular religions."

This, again, is precisely what the modern Theosophists say. Only while the great Philaletheian was supported and helped in the policy he pursued by two Church Fathers, Clement and Athenagoras, by all the learned Rabbis of the Synagogue, the Academy and the Groves, and while he taught a common doctrine for all, we, his followers on the same line, receive no recognition, but, on the contrary, are abused and persecuted. People 1,500 years ago are thus shown to have been more tolerant than they are in this enlightened century.

Enq. Was he encouraged and supported by the Church because, notwithstanding his heresies, Ammonius taught Christianity and was a Christian?

Theo. Not at all. He was born a Christian, but never accepted Church Christianity. As said of him by the same writer:

"He had but to propound his instructions according to the ancient pillars of Hermes, which Plato and Pythagoras knew before, and from them constituted their philosophy. Finding the same in the prologue of the Gospel according to St. John, he very properly supposed that the purpose of Jesus was to restore the great doctrine of wisdom in its primitive integrity. The narratives of the Bible and the stories of the gods he considered to be allegories illustrative of the truth, or else fables to be rejected." Moreover, as says the Edinburgh Encyclopoedia, "he acknowledged that Jesus Christ was an excellent man and the 'friend of God,' but alleged that it was not his design entirely to abolish the worship of demons (gods), and that his only intention was to purify the ancient religion."

The Wisdom-Religion Esoteric in All Ages

Enq. Since Ammonius never committed anything to writing, how can one feel sure that such were his teachings?

Theo. Neither did Buddha, Pythagoras, Confucius, Orpheus, Socrates, or even Jesus, leave behind them any writings. Yet most of these are historical personages, and their teachings have all survived. The disciples of Ammonius (among whom Origen and Herennius) wrote treatises and explained his ethics. Certainly the latter are as historical, if not more so, than the Apostolic writings. Moreover, his pupils — Origen, Plotinus, and Longinus (counsellor of the famous Queen Zenobia) — have all left voluminous records of the Philaletheian System — so far, at all events, as their public profession of faith was known, for the school was divided into exoteric and esoteric teachings.

Enq. How have the latter tenets reached our day, since you hold that what is properly called the WISDOM-RELIGION was esoteric?

Theo. The WISDOM-RELIGION was ever one, and being the last word of possible human knowledge, was, therefore, carefully preserved. It preceded by long ages the Alexandrian Theosophists, reached the modern, and will survive every other religion and philosophy.

Enq. Where and by whom was it so preserved?

Theo. Among Initiates of every country; among profound seekers after truth — their disciples; and in those parts of the world where such topics have always been most valued and pursued: in India, Central Asia, and Persia.

Enq. Can you give me some proofs of its esotericism?

Theo. The best proof you can have of the fact is that every ancient religious, or rather philosophical, cult consisted of an esoteric or secret teaching, and an exoteric (outward public) worship. Furthermore, it is a well-known fact that the MYSTERIES of the ancients comprised with every nation the "greater" (secret) and "Lesser" (public) MYSTERIES — e.g. in the celebrated solemnities called the Eleusinia, in Greece. From the Hierophants of Samothrace, Egypt, and the initiated Brahmins of the India of old, down to the later Hebrew Rabbis, all preserved, for fear of profanation, their real bona fide beliefs secret. The Jewish Rabbis called their secular religious series the Mercavah (the exterior body), "the vehicle," or, the covering which contains the hidden soul. — i.e., their highest secret knowledge. Not one of the ancient nations ever imparted through its priests its real philosophical secrets to the masses, but allotted to the latter only the husks. Northern Buddhism has its "greater" and its "lesser" vehicle, known as the Mahayana, the esoteric, and the Hinayana, the exoteric, Schools. Nor can you blame them for such secrecy; for surely you would not think of feeding your flock of sheep on learned dissertations on botany instead of on grass? Pythagoras called his Gnosis "the knowledge of things that are," or e gnosis ton onton, and preserved that knowledge for his pledged disciples only: for those who could digest such mental food and feel satisfied; and he pledged them to silence and secrecy. Occult alphabets and secret ciphers are the development of the old Egyptian hieratic writings, the secret of which was, in the days of old, in the possession only of the Hierogrammatists, or initiated Egyptian priests. Ammonius Saccas, as his biographers tell us, bound his pupils by oath not to divulge his higher doctrines except to those who had already been instructed in preliminary knowledge, and who were also bound by a pledge. Finally, do we not find the same even in early Christianity, among the Gnostics, and even in the teachings of Christ? Did he not speak to the multitudes in parables which had a two-fold meaning, and explain his reasons only to his disciples? "To you," he says, "it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven; but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables" (Mark iv. 11). "The Essenes of Judea and Carmel made similar distinctions, dividing their adherents into neophytes, brethren, and the perfect, or those initiated" (Eclec. Phil.). Examples might be brought from every country to this effect.

Enq. Can you attain the "Secret Wisdom" simply by study? Encyclopaedias define Theosophy pretty much as Webster's Dictionary does, i. e., as "supposed intercourse with God and superior spirits, and consequent attainment of superhuman knowledge by physical means and chemical processes." Is this so?

Theo. I think not. Nor is there any lexicographer capable of explaining, whether to himself or others, how superhuman knowledge can be attained by physical or chemical processes. Had Webster said "by metaphysical and alchemical processes," the definition would be approximately correct: as it is, it is absurd. Ancient Theosophists claimed, and so do the modern, that the infinite cannot be known by the finite — i.e., sensed by the finite Self — but that the divine essence could be communicated to the higher Spiritual Self in a state of ecstasy. This condition can hardly be attained, like hypnotism, by "physical and chemical means."

Enq. What is your explanation of it?

Theo. Real ecstasy was defined by Plotinus as "the liberation of the mind from its finite consciousness, becoming one and identified with the infinite." This is the highest condition, says Prof. Wilder, but not one of permanent duration, and it is reached only by the very very few. It is, indeed, identical with that state which is known in India as Samadhi. The latter is practised by the Yogis, who facilitate it physically by the greatest abstinence in food and drink, and mentally by an incessant endeavour to purify and elevate the mind. Meditation is silent and unuttered prayer, or, as Plato expressed it, "the ardent turning of the soul toward the divine; not to ask any particular good (as in the common meaning of prayer), but for good itself — for the universal Supreme Good" of which we are a part on earth, and out of the essence of which we have all emerged. Therefore, adds Plato, "remain silent in the presence of the divine ones, till they remove the clouds from thy eyes and enable thee to see by the light which issues from themselves, not what appears as good to thee, but what is intrinsically good." 5This is what the scholarly author of "The Eclectic Philosophy," Prof. A. Wilder, F. T. S., describes as "spiritual photography": "The soul is the camera in which facts and events, future, past, and present, are alike fixed; and the mind becomes conscious of them. Beyond our every-day world of limits all is one day or state — the past and future comprised in the present." . . . Death is the last ecstasis on earth. Then the soul is freed from the constraint of the body, and its nobler part is united to higher nature and becomes partaker in the wisdom and foreknowledge of the higher beings." Real Theosophy is, for the mystics, that state which Apollonius of Tyana was made to describe thus: "I can see the present and the future as in a clear mirror. The sage need not wait for the vapours of the earth and the corruption of the air to foresee events. . . . The theoi, or gods, see the future; common men the present; sages that which is about to take place." "The Theosophy of the Sages" he speaks of is well expressed in the assertion, "The Kingdom of God is within us."

Enq. Theosophy, then, is not, as held by some, a newly devised scheme?

Theo. Only ignorant people can thus refer to it. It is as old as the world, in its teachings and ethics, if not in name, as it is also the broadest and most catholic system among all.

Enq. How comes it, then, that Theosophy has remained so unknown to the nations of the Western Hemisphere? Why should it have been a sealed book to races confessedly the most cultured and advanced?

Theo. We believe there were nations as cultured in days of old and certainly more spiritually "advanced" than we are. But there are several reasons for this willing ignorance. One of them was given by St. Paul to the cultured Athenians — a loss, for long centuries, of real spiritual insight, and even interest, owing to their too great devotion to things of sense and their long slavery to the dead letter of dogma and ritualism. But the strongest reason for it lies in the fact that real Theosophy has ever been kept secret.

Enq. You have brought forward proofs that such secrecy has existed; but what was the real cause for it?

Theo. The causes for it were: Firstly, the perversity of average human nature and its selfishness, always tending to the gratification of personal desires to the detriment of neighbours and next of kin. Such people could never be entrusted with divine secrets. Secondly, their unreliability to keep the sacred and divine knowledge from desecration. It is the latter that led to the perversion of the most sublime truths and symbols, and to the gradual transformation of things spiritual into anthropomorphic, concrete, and gross imagery — in other words, to the dwarfing of the god-idea and to idolatry.

Theosophy is Not Buddhism

Enq. You are often spoken of as "Esoteric Buddhists." Are you then all followers of Gautama Buddha?

Theo. No more than musicians are all followers of Wagner. Some of us are Buddhists by religion; yet there are far more Hindus and Brahmins than Buddhists among us, and more Christian-born Europeans and Americans than converted Buddhists. The mistake has arisen from a misunderstanding of the real meaning of the title of Mr. Sinnett's excellent work, "Esoteric Buddhism," which last word ought to have been spelt with one, instead of two, d's, as then Budhism would have meant what it was intended for, merely "Wisdomism" (Bodha, bodhi, "intelligence," "wisdom") instead of Buddhism, Gautama's religious philosophy. Theosophy, as already said, is the WISDOM-RELIGION.

Enq. What is the difference between Buddhism, the religion founded by the Prince of Kapilavastu, and Budhism, the "Wisdomism" which you say is synonymous with Theosophy?

Theo. Just the same difference as there is between the secret teachings of Christ, which are called "the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven," and the later ritualism and dogmatic theology of the Churches and Sects. Buddha means the "Enlightened" by Bodha, or understanding, Wisdom. This has passed root and branch into the esoteric teachings that Gautama imparted to his chosen Arhats only.

Enq. But some Orientalists deny that Buddha ever taught any esoteric doctrine at all?

Theo. They may as well deny that Nature has any hidden secrets for the men of science. Further on I will prove it by Buddha's conversation with his disciple Ananda. His esoteric teachings were simply the Gupta Vidya (secret knowledge) of the ancient Brahmins, the key to which their modern successors have, with few exceptions, completely lost. And this Vidya has passed into what is now known as the inner teachings of the Mahayana school of Northern Buddhism. Those who deny it are simply ignorant pretenders to Orientalism. I advise you to read the Rev. Mr. Edkins' Chinese Buddhism — especially the chapters on the Exoteric and Esoteric schools and teachings — and then compare the testimony of the whole ancient world upon the subject.

Enq. But are not the ethics of Theosophy identical with those taught by Buddha?

Theo. Certainly, because these ethics are the soul of the Wisdom-Religion, and were once the common property of the initiates of all nations. But Buddha was the first to embody these lofty ethics in his public teachings, and to make them the foundation and the very essence of his public system. It is herein that lies the immense difference between exoteric Buddhism and every other religion. For while in other religions ritualism and dogma hold the first and most important place, in Buddhism it is the ethics which have always been the most insisted upon. This accounts for the resemblance, amounting almost to identity, between the ethics of Theosophy and those of the religion of Buddha.

Enq. Are there any great points of difference?

Theo. One great distinction between Theosophy and exoteric Buddhism is that the latter, represented by the Southern Church, entirely denies (a) the existence of any Deity, and (b) any conscious post-mortem life, or even any self-conscious surviving individuality in man. Such at least is the teaching of the Siamese sect, now considered as the purest form of exoteric Buddhism. And it is so, if we refer only to Buddha's public teachings; the reason for such reticence on his part I will give further on. But the schools of the Northern Buddhist Church, established in those countries to which his initiated Arhats retired after the Master's death, teach all that is now called Theosophical doctrines, because they form part of the knowledge of the initiates — thus proving how the truth has been sacrificed to the dead-letter by the too-zealous orthodoxy of Southern Buddhism. But how much grander and more noble, more philosophical and scientific, even in its dead-letter, is this teaching than that of any other Church or religion. Yet Theosophy is not Buddhism.

Rudolf Steiner's Translation into German

I. Theosophie und die Theosophische Gesellschaft

Die Bedeutung des Namens.

Der Fragende: Die Theosophie und ihre Lehren bezeichnet man oft als eine neue Religion. Ist sie eine Religion?

Der Theosophist: Das ist sie nicht. Theosophie ist göttliche Erkenntnis oder Wissenschaft.

Frage: Was bedeutet der Ausdruck wirklich?

Theos.: Göttliche Weisheit (Θεοσοφία) ist Weisheit der Götter, wie Theogonia (Θεογονία) Genealogie der Götter ist. Das Wort Θεός bezeichnet im Griechischen einen «Gott», eines der göttlichen Wesen, aber sicherlich nicht in dem Sinne, den man heute mit diesem Ausdruck verbindet. Daher kann man Theosophie nicht, wie einige tun, mit «Wissen von Gott» übersetzen, sondern mit «Göttlicher Weisheit», das ist eine Weisheit, wie sie Götter besitzen. Der Ausdruck ist viele tausend Jahre alt.

Frage: Welchen Ursprung hat der Name?

Theos.: Er ist auf uns von den griechischen Philosophen gekommen, die man Philaletheier, die «Wahrheit-Liebenden» genannt hat, von «phil» (φιλ) «einer der liebt» und «aletheia» (άλήθεία) «Wahrheit». Der Name Theosophie stammt aus dem dritten Jahrhundert der christlichen Zeitrechnung; zuerst wurde er von Ammonius Saccas und seinen Schülern angewendet, welche das eklektische Theosophische System begründeten, und die auch Analogieisten genannt wurden. Dies wird dargelegt durch Prof. Alex Wilder, in seinem Buche «Neu-Platonismus und Alchemie».1Ein Abriss der Ideen und der hauptsächlichsten Lehren der Eklektischen oder Alexandrinischen Schule, zugleich ein Überblick über die inneren Lehren der Alchemie des Mittelalters. Albany N.Y. U.S.A. 1869. Sie werden so genannt, weil sie die religiösen Legenden, Mythen und Mysterien durch eine Regel der Analogie oder «Entsprechung» so auslegten, dass die als äußere Ereignisse erzählten Vorgänge als Tatsachen des Seelenlebens und seiner Erfahrungen angesehen wurden. Sie wurden auch Neuplatonisten genannt. Obgleich die Theosophie oder das eklektische theosophische System gewöhnlich bis in das dritte Jahrhundert zurückgeleitet wird, so ist doch, wenn man Diogenes Laörtius glaubt, der Ursprung viel älter, denn er schiebt diese Lehre einem ägyptischen Priester, Pot-Amun, zu, welcher in den ältesten Zeiten der ptolemäischen Dynastie gelebt hat. Derselbe Schriftsteller sagt uns, dass der Name koptisch ist und einen solchen bezeichnet, der dem Amun geweiht ist, dem Gotte der Weisheit. Theosophie ist gleichbedeutend mit dem Sanskritwort BrahmaVidyä, göttliche Erkenntnis.

Frage: Was war die Aufgabe dieser Lehren?

Theos.: Zunächst den Schülern und allen «Wahrheit-Liebenden» gewisse große Wahrheiten zu geben. Daher hat auch die Theosophische Gesellschaft als ihr Motto angenommen: «Keine Religion ist höher als die Wahrheit».

Die eklektische Theosophie war in drei Hauptteile geteilt: 1) den Glauben an eine absolute, unbegreifliche und erhabene Gottheit oder unendliche Wesenheit, welche der Urquell der Natur ist und alles Bestehenden, des Sichtbaren und Unsichtbaren; 2) den Glauben an die ewige, unsterbliche Natur des Menschen, welche als Ausstrahlung der universellen Seele mit dieser von einerlei Wesenheit ist; 3) die Theurgie oder das «göttliche Werk», die Hervorbringung eines Werkes der Götter, von «theoi» «Götter» und «ergein» «arbeiten». Der Ausdruck ist sehr alt; aber er war nicht im Volksgebrauch, weil er nur dem Wortschatze der Mysterien angehörte. Es war ein mystischer Glaube — der besonders Adepten und Priestern eigen war — dass man die Götter bewegen könne, sich in den göttlichen Mysterien mitzuteilen, wenn man sich selbst so rein macht, wie die unkörperlichen Wesen sind — das heißt durch Rückkehr zur ursprünglichen Reinheit der Natur — und dass man diese Götter dadurch veranlassen könne, gelegentlich sichtbar zu werden, entweder subjektiv oder objektiv. Das war, vom übersinnlichen Gesichtspunkt angesehen, das, was jetzt «Spiritualismus» genannt wird; aber indem es missbraucht und nicht verstanden worden ist durch die Verallgemeinerung, ist es gekommen, dass man es als eine Art Zauberei betrachtete und verbot. Eine entstellte Art der Theurgie des Jamblichus lebt noch fort in der zeremoniellen Magie einiger moderner Kabbalisten. Die moderne Theosophie vermeidet und verwirft diese Art von Magie und Zauberei als sehr gefährlich. Wirkliche «göttliche» Theurgie erfordert eine fast übermenschliche Reinheit und Heiligkeit des Lebens; sonst verkommt sie zur Mediumschaft und schwarzen Magie. Die unmittelbaren Schüler des Ammonius Saccas, welcher Theodidaktos «Gottes-Gelehrter» genannt wurde — wie Plotin und sein Nachfolger Porphyrius —, verwarfen zuerst die Theurgie, wurden dann aber mit ihr versöhnt durch Jamblichus, der ein Werk schrieb «De Mysteriis» unter dem Namen seines eigenen Meisters, eines berühmten ägyptischen Priesters, genannt Abammon. Ammonius Saccas war der Sohn christlicher Eltern. Da er aber von seiner Kindheit an durch das dogmatische spiritualistische Christentum zurückgestoßen wurde, wurde er Neuplatoniker, und es wird von ihm wie von Jakob Böhme und andern großen Sehern und Mystikern gesagt, dass ihm in Träumen und Visionen die göttliche Weisheit geoffenbart worden ist. Daher sein Name Theodidaktos. Er beschloss, alle religiösen Systeme zu versöhnen, und, indem er ihren gleichen Ursprung darlegte, stellte er einen allgemeinen auf Sittenlehre begründeten Glauben fest. Sein Leben war so fleckenlos und rein, seine Lehren so tief und großartig, dass mehrere Kirchenväter seine vertrauten Schüler waren. Clemens der Alexandriner spricht sehr anerkennend von ihm. Plotin, der «heilige Johannes» des Ammonius, war nicht minder eine allgemein geachtete und geschätzte Persönlichkeit, von tiefster Gelehrsamkeit und Gediegenheit des Charakters. Als er neununddreißig Jahre alt den römischen Kaiser Gordian und seine Armee nach dem Osten begleitete, wurde er durch die Weisen von Baktrien und Indien eingeweiht. Er hatte eine philosophische Schule in Rom. Porphyrius, sein Schüler, ein hellenisierter Jude, dessen wahrer Name Malek war, sammelte alle Schriften seines Meisters. Porphyrius war selbst ein großer Schriftsteller und gab eine allegorische Auslegung einiger Teile von Homers Schriften. Die Art der Meditation war bei den Philaletheiern eine Art Ekstase, den indischen YogaÜbungen verwandt. Was man von der eklektischen Schule weiß, verdankt man Origenes, Longinus und Plotin, den unmittelbaren Schülern des Ammonius.

Das hauptsächlichste Bestreben der Begründer der eklektischen Theosophischen Schule war eines von den drei Zielen ihrer modernen Nachfolgerin, der Theosophischen Gesellschaft, nämlich, alle Religionen, Sekten und Nationen unter einem gemeinsamen Bekenntnis zu versöhnen, das auf die ewigen Wahrheiten aufgebaut ist.

Frage: Womit können Sie beweisen, dass dies nicht ein unmöglicher Traum ist, und dass alle Weltreligionen auf die gleiche Wahrheit gegründet sind?

Theos.: Durch das vergleichende Studium und das Eindringen in deren Wesenheit. Die «Weisheitsreligion» war eine Einige im Altertum; und die Gleichheit der ursprünglichen religiösen Lehren kann bewiesen werden durch die übereinstimmenden Lehren, die allen Eingeweihten in den Mysterien, einer allgemein verbreiteten Einrichtung, anvertraut wurden. Prof. Wilder sagt: «Alle alten Gottesdienste zeugen für das Bestehen einer einigen ihnen vorausgehenden Theosophie. Der Schlüssel, der eine öffnen kann, muss alle öffnen, im andern Falle ist es nicht der rechte Schlüssel.»

Das Ziel der Theosophischen Gesellschaft.

Frage: In der Zeit des Ammonius bestanden mehrere große Religionen, und die Anzahl der Sekten war schon allein in Ägypten und Palästina eine große. Wie konnte er diese versöhnen?

Theos.: Indem er tat, was wir heute wieder versuchen. Die Neuplatonisten waren eine weitverbreitete Körperschaft, und sie gehörten verschiedenen religiösen Anschauungen an; genau wie unsere Theosophisten.

Unter Philadelphus setzte sich der Judaismus in Alexandrien fest, und die hellenischen Lehrer wurden die gefährlichsten Nebenbuhler der Collegien der Rabbis von Babylon. Der Autor des «Neu-Platonismus» bemerkt dazu sehr einleuchtend: «Die buddhistischen, vedantischen und magischen Lehren wurden den griechischen Anschauungen verglichen. Es war kein Wunder, dass gedankenvolle Menschen der Ansicht waren, dass der Streit in Worten aufhören solle, und es als eine Möglichkeit ansahen, dass sich ein harmonischer Kern aus den verschiedenen Lehren bilden lasse ... Pantaenus, Athenagoras und Clemens waren wohl bewandert in der platonischen Philosophie, und sie begriffen deren wirkliche Übereinstimmung mit den orientalischen Anschauungen.»

Damals erklärte der Jude Aristobulus, dass die Anschauungen des Aristoteles mit den esoterischen Lehren übereinstimmen, welche den Gesetzen des Moses zu Grunde liegen; und der Jude Philo war bestrebt den Pentateuch mit der pythagoräischen und platonischen Philosophie in Einklang zu bringen. Josephus bewies, dass die Essäer von Karmel einfach die Nachahmer und Nachfolger der ägyptischen Therapeuten oder Heiler seien. So soll es jetzt sein. Wir können die Herkunft jedes christlichen Bekenntnisses und jeder — auch der kleinsten — Sekte zeigen. Die letzteren sind die kleinen Zweige oder Sprossen, die an den größeren Ästen wachsen; aber Sprossen und Äste entspringen demselben Stamm — der Weisheitsreligion. Dies nachzuweisen war das Ziel des Ammonius, der bestrebt war, Heiden und Christen, Juden und Götzendiener zu vereinigen, damit sie ihren Zwist und Streit beiseitelassen und sich nur dem hingeben, was ihr gemeinsamer Besitz ist in verschiedenen Umbhüllungen, und sich betrachteten als die Kinder einer Mutter. Dies ist auch das Ziel der Theosophie.

Mosheim sagt von Ammonius: «Indem er begriff, dass nicht nur alle griechischen Philosophen, sondern auch diejenigen der verschiedenen barbarischen Nationen vollkommen übereinstimmten in allem Wesentlichen, macht er es sich zur Aufgabe, das Verbindende ins Licht zu setzen bei allen verschiedenen Sekten, so dass sich zeigen konnte, dass sie alle aus einer Quelle stammen und zu einem gleichen Ziele führen.»

Indem derjenige, welcher über Ammonius in der «Edinburgh Encyclopaedia» geschrieben hat, über diesen spricht, beschreibt er auch genau die Meinung, die Arbeit der modernen Theosophisten, denn er sagt von Theodidaktos, was ganz auch von jenen gilt: «Er nahm die Lehren an, die von Ägypten stammten — das Esoterische davon war indischen Ursprungs — und welche die Welt und das Göttliche behandelten; er behandelte sie als ein großes Ganzes, das die Ewigkeit der Welt umfasste... Auch stellte er eine christliche Lehre auf, welche dem Volke erlaubte, im allgemeinen nach den Gesetzen des Landes und den Forderungen der Natur zu leben innerhalb deren sie sich befanden, aber er forderte zugleich die Weisen auf, sich zur Kontemplation zu erheben.»

Frage: Auf welche Autoritäten hin kann das alles von den alten Theosophisten von Alexandrien behauptet werden? Theos.: Eine große Anzahl wohlbekannter Schriftsteller. Mosheim, einer von ihnen, sagt, Ammonius habe das Folgende gelehrt: «Die Religion der Menge ging Hand in Hand mit der Philosophie, und sie habe mit ihr das gleiche Schicksal erfahren, allmählich durch untergeordnete menschliche Vorstellungen, durch Aberglauben und Lügen verdorben zu werden; deshalb müsse sie wieder auf ihre ursprüngliche Reinheit zurückgeführt werden durch Reinigung von ihren Schlacken und Herausarbeitung ihrer philosophischen Grundlagen, und Christus habe nichts anderes im Auge gehabt, als die Menschen wieder zur Weisheit der Alten in ihrer Reinheit und Wahrheit zurückzuführen, den überall herrschenden Aberglauben zu beseitigen und die mannigfaltigen Irrtümer der verschiedenen Volksreligionen auszurotten.» Das ist genau das, was auch die modernen Theosophisten wollen. Während aber der große «Wahrheitsliebende» in seinem Ziele von zwei Kirchenvätern, Clemens und Athenagoras, unterstützt wurde, während ihm die Philosophen der Akademien und Schulen beistanden, bleiben wir, die wir eine gemeinsame Lehre für Alle verkündigen, ohne Beihilfe, ja werden im Gegenteil verfolgt und missachtet. Die Menschen waren vor 1500 Jahren toleranter als in diesem «erleuchteten» Jahrhundert. Frag.: Wurde Ammonius ermutigt und unterstützt von der Kirche, weil er trotz aller Ketzerei das Christentum lehrte und ein Christ war?

Theos.: Keineswegs. Er wurde als Christ geboren, aber er nahm niemals das Kirchenchristentum an. Dr. Wilder sagt darüber: «Er hat Lehren vorgetragen, die in Übereinstimmung waren mit den alten Anschauungen des Hermes, und welche Plato und Pythagoras vorher gekannt hatten und aus denen sie ihre Philosophie weiter ausbauten. Da er nun dieselben Vorstellungen im Prolog zum Johannesevangelium fand, setzte er voraus, dass es das Ziel von Jesus war, die großen Wahrheiten in ihrer ursprünglichen Reinheit wieder herzustellen. Er betrachtete die biblischen Erzählungen und die Göttersagen entweder als allegorische Darstellungen der Wahrheit oder als Fabeln, die man verwerfen müsse.»

Außerdem wird in der «Edingburgh Encyclopaedia» gesagt: Er erkannte, dass Jesus Christus ein außerordentlicher Mensch und Freund Gottes war, und zugleich behauptete er, dass es diesem nicht darum zu tun war, allen Glauben an untergeordnete Götter abzuschaffen, sondern dass er einzig und allein die alte Religion reinigen wollte.

Die Weisheitsreligion war zu allen Zeiten eine Geheimlehre.

Frage: Da Ammonius selbst niemals etwas schrieb, wie kann man eine Sicherheit darüber haben, dass seine Lehre die angedeutete war? Theos.: Weder Buddha, Pythagoras, Konfuzius, Orpheus, Sokrates noch Jesus haben Schriften hinterlassen. Und doch sind das historische Persönlichkeiten, und ihre Lehren haben alle überlebt. Die Schüler des Ammonius, unter ihnen Origenes und Herennius, schrieben Abhandlungen und setzten seine Lehren auseinander. Auch haben Origenes, Plotinus und Longinus, der Ratgeber der berühmten Königin Zenobia, Berichte über die philalethischen Anschauungen geliefert, wenigstens insoweit als sie zum öffentlichen Bekenntnis geworden waren, denn die Schule war in eine exoterische und esoterische geteilt.

Frage: Wie konnten die Lehren der letzteren auf uns gelangen, wenn doch gesagt wird, dass die Weisheitsreligion eine Geheimlehre war?

Theos.: Die Weisheitsreligion war immer eine und dieselbe, und da sie das letzte Wort alles menschlichen Erkennens dargestellt, wurde sie immer sorgfältig bewahrt. Sie bestand lange Zeitalter hindurch, bevor sie zu den Alexandrinischen Theosophisten kam, dann erreichte sie unsere Gegenwart, und sie wird jede andere Religion und Philosophie überleben.

Frage: Wo wurde sie bewahrt und durch wen?

Theos.: Von den Eingeweihten eines jeden Gebietes; von den gründlichen Erforschern der Wahrheit und ihren Schülern und in jenen Teilen der Welt, in denen solches Suchen immer am meisten bewertet und gepflegt worden ist, in Indien, Zentralasien und Persien.

Frage: Können Beweise für die Geheimhaltung gegeben werden?

Theos.: Der beste Beweis der gegeben werden kann ist, dass eine jede alte Religion und jeder philosophische Kultus aus einem esoterischen, geheimen Lehrgebäude und aus einem exoterischen für die breite Öffentlichkeit bestand. Es ist eine wohlbekannte Tatsache, dass die Mysterien der Alten bei jedem Volke aus den «größeren» (geheimen) und «kleineren» (öffentlichen) bestanden, so z.B. die berühmten Feste von Eleusis in Griechenland. Von den Hierophanten von Samothrake, Ägypten, und den eingeweihten Brahmanen des alten Indien bis zu den späteren hebräischen Rabinen, hielten sie alle die Lehren ihres wirklichen «aus Glaubenstiefen» stammenden Erkennen geheim. Die jüdischen Rabbiner nannten ihre der Welt zugänglichen Religionsübungen «Mercavah» oder den äußeren Körper, die Hülle, welche die verborgene Seele, ihre höchste Erkenntnis, verbirgt. Die Priester der alten Religionen teilten niemals den Massen ihre wirklichen philosophischen Geheimnisse mit. Sie verabreichten den letzteren nur die Schalen. Der nördliche Buddhismus hat sein größeres und kleineres Werkzeug, die bekannt sind als Mahâyâna, die esoterische und Hinâyâna, die exoterische Schule. Diese Geheimhaltung ist nicht tadelnswert. Denn sicherlich kann sich niemand einfallen lassen, seine Schafherde mit botanischen Abhandlungen statt mit Gras zu füttern. Pythagoras nannte seine Gnosis «die Wissenschaft von den Dingen, welche sind», oder ή γνώσις τών όντων und bewahrte diese Erkenntnis nur für seine vereideten Schüler, denn solche konnten die Geistesnahrung verdauen und in ihrem Werte erkennen. Er verpflichtete sie zur Geheimhaltung. Ein geheimes Alphabet und geheime Zeichen waren in den alten ägyptischen Schriften verwendet, deren Geheimnis nur den Hierogrammatikern oder eingeweihten Priestern bekannt war. Ammonius Saccas verpflichtete, wie seine Biographen erzählen, seine Schüler durch Eidschwur, seine höheren Lehren nicht mitzuteilen, ausgenommen jenen, die genügend vorbereitet waren und selbst durch einen Eid gebunden wurden. Und finden wir nicht ein Gleiches im ersten Christentum, bei den Gnostikern, ja auch bei den Lehren Christi selbst? Sprach er zu der Menge nicht in Parabeln, die eine zweifache Bedeutung hatten, und sprach er über seine tieferen Absichten nicht ausschließlich zu seinen Schülern? «Euch kommt es zu, die Geheimnisse des Gottesreiches zu wissen; aber den Außenstehenden sollen sie nur in Gleichnissen zukommen.» Der Autor des «Neu-Platonismus» sagt: «Die Essäer von Judäa und Karmel teilten in einer ähnlichen Art ihre Anhänger in Neulinge, Brüder und in Vollkommene (die eingeweiht waren).» Aus allen Ländern können für diese Tatsache Belege gebracht werden.

Frage: Ist es möglich die «Geheimwissenschaft» durch bloßes Studium zu erlernen? Enzyklopädien sagen von der Theosophie ein ähnliches, wie Websters Diktionär, nämlich dass sie «einen Verkehr mit Gott und höheren Geistern vermitteln und als Folge davon übermenschliche Kenntnisse durch physische ... oder ... chemische Prozesse.» Ist dies so?

Theos.: Ich glaube nicht. Auch ist es nicht erfindlich, wie ein solcher Wörterbuchverfasser im Stande sein sollte, für sich selbst oder andere klar zu machen, auf welche Art durch physikalische oder chemische Prozesse übermenschliche Kenntnisse zu erlangen seien. Hätte Webster gesagt durch metaphysische und alchemistische Prozesse, so wäre die Definition annähernd korrekt gewesen. Wie er sie gibt, ist sie unmöglich. Die älteren und ebenso die neueren Theosophisten sagen, dass das Unendliche nicht von dem Endlichen erkannt werden könne, nämlich nicht von dem endlichen Selbst, dass aber die göttliche Wesenheit sich dem höheren spirituellen Selbst im Zustande der geistigen Erhebung mitteile. Diese Bedingung kann aber kaum, ebensowenig wie der hypnotische Zustand, durch «physikalische oder chemische» Prozesse erfüllt werden.

Frage: Wie ist das also zu erklären?

Theos.: Die wirklich geistige Erhebung (Ekstase) ist nach Plotin zu erklären als die «Befreiung des Geistes von seinem endlichen Bewusstsein, sodass er mit dem Unendlichen Eins wird». Dies ist ein höchster Zustand, sagt Dr. A. Wilder, der nicht von immerwährender Dauer ist, und nur von sehr wenigen erreicht wird. Er ist gleichbedeutend mit dem, was man in Indien als Samadhj kennt. Derselbe wird durch die Yogis geübt, die sich ihn physisch erleichtern durch die größte Enthaltsamkeit im Essen und Trinken, und geistig durch das Streben, die Seele zu reinigen und zu läutern. Meditation ist stilles, unausgesprochenes Gebet oder, wie Plato es ausdrückt: «Die inbrünstige Hinwendung der Seele zu Gott; nicht nur um eine besondere Gabe zu erbitten, wie beim gewöhnlichen Beter angenommen wird, sondern um das allgemeine Gute, von dem wir auf der Erde nur ein Teil sind, und aus dessen Wesenheit wir alle abstammen... Darum beobachte in der Gegenwart des Göttlich-Einen Stillschweigen, bis es die Wolken von deinen Augen hinweghebt, und dich fähig macht, durch das Licht, das von ihnen ausströmt, das wirklich Gute zu schauen, nicht was nur für ein solches gehalten wird.

Das ist dasselbe, was der gelehrte Autor des «NeuPlatonismus» Dr. A. Wilder als «geistige Photographie» beschreibt. «Die Seele ist die Kamera, in welcher Tatsachen und Ereignisse, zukünftige, vergangene und gegenwärtige in gleicher Art enthalten sind, und der Geist wird ihrer bewusst. In unserer alltäglichen begrenzten Welt ist dann alles ein Tag oder Zustand, das Vergangene und das Zukünftige sind in dem Gegenwärtigen zusammengedrängt. ... (Der Tod ist auf Erden die letzte Ekstase). Dann ist die Seele frei von den Grenzen der Körperlichkeit, ihr edlerer Teil vereinigt sich mit der höheren Natur und wird Teilhaber der Weisheit und Erkenntnis der höheren Wesenheiten.» Die wirkliche Theosophie ist, was Apollonius von Tyana so beschreibt: «Ich kann das Vergangene und Zukünftige in einem klaren Spiegel sehen. Der Weise hat nicht nötig, den Dünsten der Erde und den Verderbnissen der Luft aufzulauern, um Ereignisse vorauszusehen... Die Götter sehen das Künftige, gewöhnliche Menschen das Gegenwärtige, Weise dasjenige, was an seine Stelle treten wird.» Was Theosophie für den Weisen ist, drückt man ganz gut mit den Worten aus «das Gottesreich ist in uns.»

Frag.: Demnach ist Theosophie nicht, wie einige annehmen, etwas Neu-Ausgeklügeltes? Theos.: Nur Unwissende können so sprechen. Sie ist so alt wie die Welt, und ihre Lehren sind, wenn auch nicht ihr Name, die verbreitetste und allgemeinste Ansicht von allen.

Frag.: Woher kommt es denn aber, dass die Theosophie den Völkern des Westens so unbekannt geblieben ist? Warum sollte sie den fortgeschrittensten und gebildetsten Völkern ein so verborgenes Buch geblieben sein? Theos.: Es ist anzunehmen, dass es in alten Zeiten Völker gab, die nicht weniger gebildet und geistig fortgeschritten waren als die unsrigen. Aber es gibt verschiedene Ursachen für unsere Unwissenheit. Eine davon wurde durch St. Paulus den gebildeten Athenern angegeben: der Verlust wirklicher spiritueller Einsicht und des dahingehenden Interesses durch zu großes Hängen an Sinnendingen und die Unterwerfung unter Dogma und Ritualismus. Aber der Hauptgrund liegt in der Geheimhaltung der Theosophie.

Frag.: Es ist also bewiesen, dass ein Geheimwissen existiert; aber was war die wirkliche Ursache davon?

Theos.: Diese Ursachen waren: Erstens die Verkehrtheit und Selbstsucht der menschlichen Natur, die stets nur die Befriedigung der persönlichen Wünsche erstrebt zum Schaden der andern. Solchen Menschen konnten niemals göttliche Geheimnisse anvertraut werden. Zweitens die Unzuverlässigkeit der Menschen, die sie hindert, das geheiligte göttliche Erkennen vor Entweihung zu bewahren. Das Letztere führte zu einer fortwährenden Verdrehung der erhabensten Wahrheiten und Symbole, und zu einer Umkehrung derselben in grobsinnliche, vermenschlichte Dinge, mit andern Worten, zur Herunterziehung der Gottesidee und zu Götzendienst.

Theosophie ist nicht Buddhismus.

Frag.: Die Theosophen nennt man oft «Esoterische Buddhisten». Bekennen sie sich denn alle zu Gautama Buddha?

Theos.: Ebensowenig wie alle Musiker sich zu Wagner bekennen. Einige von ihnen sind der Religion nach Buddhisten, aber es sind weit mehr Hindus und Brahmanisten darunter als Buddhisten und mehr christlich geborene Europäer und Amerikaner als bekehrte Buddhisten. Das Missverständnis ist entstanden durch eine falsche Auffassung des Titels von A. P. Sinnetts vortrefflichem Buche: «Esoterischer Buddhismus». Das letztere Wort sollte mit einem statt mit zwei d geschrieben sein; dann wäre klar, dass Budhismus nichts anderes bedeutet als «WeisheitsReligion» (von bodha, bodhi «Intelligenz», « Weisheit»), während Buddhismus das Religionsbekenntnis des Gautama Buddha ist. Theosophie ist eben nichts anderes als Weisheits-Religion.

Frag.: Was ist für ein Unterschied zwischen dem Buddhismus, der von dem Prinzen von Kapilavastu begründeten Religion, und dem Buddhismus, der «WeisheitsReligion», die gleichbedeutend mit Theosophie ist?

Theos.: Genau der gleiche Unterschied wie zwischen der späteren rituellen und dogmatischen Theologie der Kirchen und Sekten und den «Geheimlehren» Christi, die genannt werden «die Geheimnisse vom Reiche des Geistes». Buddha war erleuchtet durch «Bodha», Einsicht, Weisheit. Diese ist in die Wurzeln und Zweige der «Geheimlehren» eingedrungen, welche der Gautama nur seinen auserwählten Arhats mitteilte.

Frag.: Es leugnen aber einige Orientalisten, dass Buddha irgendwelche geheime Lehren gegeben habe?

Theos.: Genau mit demselben Recht könnten sie leugnen, dass es für die Männer der Wissenschaft noch etwas von verborgenem Wissen in der Natur gebe. Später soll die Sache bewiesen werden durch eine Unterredung Buddhas mit seinem Schüler Ananda. Seine esoterischen Lehren waren einfach «Gupta-Vicdyâ» oder das Geheimwesen der alten Brahmanen, zu welchen deren neuere Bekenner den Schlüssel ganz und gar verloren haben. Und diese Vicdyâ ist eingeflossen in das, was als innere Lehre der «Mahâyâna»-Schule des nördlichen Buddhismus bekannt ist. Diejenigen, welche das leugnen, sind einfach unwissend und maßen sich ein orientalisches Wissen nur an. Es soll hier verwiesen werden auf Edkins «Chinesischen Buddhismus», besonders auf die Kapitel über exoterische und esoterische Lehren; und damit kann das Zeugnis der ganzen alten Welt über diesen Gegenstand verglichen werden.

Frag.: Sind nicht die theosophischen Lehren mit denen Buddhas gleichlautend?

Theos.: Gewiss, insofern diese Lehren die Seele der Weisheitsreligion sind, und sie einmal das gemeinsame Besitztum der Eingeweihten aller Völker waren. Aber Buddha war der erste, der diese Lehren in seine öffentliche Wirksamkeit verwob, und sie zur Grundlage eines öffentlichen Bekenntnisses machte. Darin liegt der große Unterschied zwischen dem exoterischen Buddhismus und jeder andern Religion. In andern Religionen sind der Ritualismus und das Dogma an die wichtigste Stelle gesetzt; im Buddhismus aber die sittliche Grundanschauung. Deshalb ist eine so große Ähnlichkeit, ja fast Gleichheit zwischen der theosophischen und buddhistischen Sittenlehre.

Frag.: Gibt es zwischen beiden wesentliche Unterschiede?

Theos.: Ein wesentlicher Unterschied zwischen der Theosophie und dem exoterischen Buddhismus, wie sich dieser in der südlichen Kirche findet, ist, dass 1) letztere die Existenz eines Göttlichen verneint; 2) ebenso ein Bewusstsein nach dem Tode oder irgend ein Überleben der Individualität des Menschen. Wenigstens ist dies die Anschauung der Siamesischen Sekte, die gegenwärtig als die reinste Form des exoterischen Buddhismus gilt. Und damit hat es seine Richtigkeit, wenn man nur Buddhas öffentliche Lehren in Betracht zieht. Der Grund für diese Tatsache soll später angegeben werden. Aber die Schulen der nördlichen buddhistischen Kirche, in jenen Gegenden in die sich die eingeweihten Arhats nach des Meisters Tode zurückgezogen haben, lehren alles was jetzt theosophische Lehre genannt wird, weil diese zum Teil aus der Erkenntnis dieser Eingeweihten besteht; dies beweist, wie die Wahrheit dem toten Buchstaben und dem Zelotismus bei den südlichen Buddhisten zum Opfer gefallen ist. Aber wie viel größer und edler, philosophischer und wissenschaftlicher ist selbst die Lehre des toten Buchstabens bei jener Kirche im Vergleich zu andern Kirchen und Religionen. Doch Theosophie ist nicht Buddhismus.

Automated Retranslation

I. Theosophy and the Theosophical Society

The Meaning of the Name

Questioner: Theosophy and its teachings are often referred to as a new religion. Is it a religion?

The Theosophist: It is not. Theosophy is divine knowledge or science.

Questioner: What does the term really mean?

Theos.: Divine Wisdom (Θεοσοφία) is the wisdom of the gods, just as Theogony (Θεογονία) is the genealogy of the gods. The Greek word Θεός denotes a “god”, one of the divine beings, but certainly not in the sense that we associate with the term today. Therefore, one cannot translate Theosophy as “knowledge of God”, as some do, but rather as “divine wisdom”, that is, the kind of wisdom that gods possess. The term is many thousands of years old.

Frag.: What is the origin of the name?

Theos.: It came to us from the Greek philosophers, who were called Philaletheians, the “truth-lovers”, from “phil” (φιλ) “one who loves” and “aletheia” (άλήθεία) “truth”. The name Theosophy dates from the third century of the Christian era; it was first used by Ammonius Saccas and his disciples, who founded the eclectic Theosophical System and were also called Analogists. This is explained by Prof. Alex Wilder in his book “Neo-Platonism and Alchemy”.1An outline of the ideas and main teachings of the eclectic or Alexandrian school, and at the same time an overview of the inner teachings of medieval alchemy. Albany N.Y. U.S.A. 1869. They are so called because they interpreted religious legends, myths and mysteries by a rule of analogy or “correspondence” in such a way that the events narrated as external happenings were seen as facts of the soul's life and its experiences. They were also called Neoplatonists. Although Theosophy or the eclectic theosophical system is usually traced back to the third century, if Diogenes Laörtius is to be believed, its origin is much older, for he attributes this doctrine to an Egyptian priest, Pot-Amun, who lived in the most ancient times of the Ptolemaic dynasty. The same writer tells us that the name is Coptic and denotes one who is consecrated to Amun, the god of wisdom. Theosophy is equivalent to the Sanskrit word Brahma-Vidyä, divine knowledge.

Frag.: What was the purpose of these teachings?

Theos.: First of all, to give certain great truths to the students and to all “truth-lovers”. That is why the Theosophical Society has adopted as its motto: “No religion is higher than truth”.

The eclectic theosophy was divided into three main parts: 1) the belief in an absolute, incomprehensible and exalted divinity or infinite entity, which is the source of nature and of everything that exists, visible and invisible; 2) the belief in the eternal, immortal nature of man, which, as an emanation of the universal soul, is of the same essence as it; 3) theurgy or “divine work”, the bringing forth of a work of the gods, from “theoi” “gods” and “ergein” “to work”. The expression is very old; but it was not in popular use, because it belonged only to the vocabulary of the mysteries. It was a mystical belief, peculiar to adepts and priests, that by making oneself as pure as the incorporeal beings are, that is, by returning to the original purity of nature, one could induce the gods to communicate in the divine mysteries, and that one could thereby cause these gods to become visible occasionally, either subjectively or objectively. From the supersensible point of view, this was what is now called “spiritualism”; but because it was misused and misunderstood, it came to be regarded as a kind of sorcery and was forbidden. A distorted form of Jamblichus' theurgy still survives in the ceremonial magic of some modern kabbalists. Modern theosophy avoids and rejects this kind of magic and sorcery as very dangerous. Real “divine” theurgy requires an almost superhuman purity and holiness of life; otherwise it degenerates into mediumship and black magic. The immediate disciples of Ammonius Saccas, who was called Theodidaktos “God-taught” — such as Plotinus and his successor Porphyrius —, first rejected theurgy, but were then reconciled to it by Jamblichus, who wrote a work “De Mysteriis” under the name of his own master, a famous Egyptian priest called Abammon. Ammonius Saccas was the son of Christian parents. But being repelled from his childhood by dogmatic spiritualistic Christianity, he became a Neoplatonist, and it is said of him, as of Jacob Boehme and other great seers and mystics, that divine wisdom was revealed to him in dreams and visions. Hence his name Theodidactos. He resolved to reconcile all religious systems, and, showing their common origin, established a general faith based on moral teaching. His life was so stainless and pure, his teachings so profound and magnificent that several church fathers were his intimate disciples. Clement of Alexandria speaks of him with great appreciation. No less a figure, and universally respected and esteemed, was Plotinus, the “Saint John” of Ammonius, who was of the deepest learning and most sterling character. When he was thirty-nine years old, he accompanied the Roman emperor Gordian and his army to the East, where he was initiated by the sages of Bactria and India. He had a philosophical school in Rome. Porphyry, his disciple, a Hellenized Jew whose real name was Malek, collected all his master's writings. Porphyry was a great writer himself and gave an allegorical interpretation of some parts of Homer's writings. The kind of meditation practiced by the Philaletheians was a kind of ecstasy, akin to the Indian yoga exercises. What is known of the eclectic school is owed to Origen, Longinus and Plotinus, the immediate disciples of Ammonius.

The main aim of the founders of the eclectic Theosophical School was one of the three objectives of its modern successor, the Theosophical Society, namely to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common creed based on eternal truths.

Question: What can you use to prove that this is not an impossible dream and that all world religions are based on the same truth?

Theos.: Through comparative study and penetration into their essence. The “religion of wisdom” was one in ancient times; and the similarity of the original religious teachings can be proven by the concordant teachings that were entrusted to all initiates in the mysteries, a widespread institution. Prof. Wilder says: “All ancient religions testify to the existence of a unified theosophy that preceded them. The key that can open one must open all; otherwise it is not the right key.”

The aim of the Theosophical Society.

Frag.: In the time of Ammonius there existed several great religions, and the number of sects was already a large one in Egypt and Palestine alone. How could he reconcile them?

Theos.: By doing what we are trying to do again today. The Neoplatons were a widespread body, and they belonged to different religious beliefs; just like our Theosophists.

Under Philadelphus, Judaism took root in Alexandria, and the Hellenic teachers became the most dangerous rivals of the colleges of Rabbis of Babylon. The author of “Neo-Platonism” remarks very aptly: “The Buddhist, Vedantic and magical teachings were compared to Greek views. It was no wonder that thoughtful people felt that the dispute should stop at words and saw it as a possibility to form a harmonious core from the various teachings... Pantaenus, Athenagoras and Clement were well versed in Platonic philosophy, and they understood its real agreement with the oriental views.

At that time the Jew Aristobulus declared that the views of Aristotle agree with the esoteric teachings on which the laws of Moses are based; and the Jew Philo endeavored to harmonize the Pentateuch with Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy. Josephus proved that the Essenes of Carmel were simply the imitators and successors of the Egyptian therapists or healers. So it is now. We can show the origin of every Christian confession and every sect, even the smallest ones. The latter are the small twigs or shoots that grow on the larger branches; but shoots and branches arise from the same trunk - the religion of wisdom. To show this was the aim of Ammonius, who endeavored to unite pagans and Christians, Jews and idolaters, so that they might lay aside their dissensions and disputes, and devote themselves to what is their common possession in various wrappings, and regard themselves as the children of one mother. This is also the aim of Theosophy.

Mosheim says of Ammonius: “By realizing that not only all Greek philosophers, but also those of various barbarian nations were in complete agreement on all essential points, he set himself the task of bringing to light the common ground shared by all the different sects, so that it could be shown that they all originated from a single source and led to the same goal.”

The writer on Ammonius in the Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, when speaking of Theodidactos, describes exactly the work of the modern Theosophists, for he says of Theodidactos what also applies to them : “He adopted the teachings that originated in Egypt — the esoteric part of which was of Indian origin — and which dealt with the world and the divine; he treated them as one great whole that embraced the eternity of the world... He also established a Christian doctrine which allowed the people to live in general according to the laws of the country and the demands of nature within which they found themselves, but at the same time he called upon the wise to rise to contemplation."

Frag.: On what authority can all this be said to have been said by the old Theosophists of Alexandria? Theos.: A great number of well-known writers. Mosheim, one of them, says that Ammonius taught the following: “The religion of the masses went hand in hand with philosophy, and it shared the same fate of gradually being corrupted by subordinate human ideas, superstitions and lies; therefore, it must be restored to its original purity by purifying it of its dross and elaborating its philosophical foundations, and Christ had no other intention than to lead people back to the wisdom of the ancients in its purity and truth, to eliminate the prevailing superstition and to eradicate the manifold errors of the various popular religions.” That is exactly what the modern theosophists want. But while the great “truth-lover” was supported in his goal by two Church Fathers, Clement and Athenagoras, and by the philosophers of the academies and schools, we, who proclaim a common teaching for all, are left without assistance and, on the contrary, are persecuted and disregarded. Men were more tolerant 1500 years ago than they have been in this so-called “enlightened” century. <501> Question: Was Ammonius encouraged and supported by the Church because, in spite of all heresy, he taught Christianity and was a Christian?

Theos.: Not at all. He was born a Christian, but he never accepted the church Christianity. Dr. Wilder says about this: “He presented teachings that were in line with the ancient views of Hermes, and which Plato and Pythagoras had previously known and from which they further developed their philosophy. When he found the same ideas in the prologue to the Gospel of John, he assumed that Jesus' goal was to restore the great truths to their original purity. He regarded the biblical stories and the legends of the gods either as allegorical representations of the truth or as fables that had to be rejected.

Furthermore, the Edinburgh Encyclopaedia says: He recognized that Jesus Christ was an extraordinary human being and a friend of God, and at the same time he asserted that his aim was not to abolish all belief in subordinate gods, but solely to purify the ancient religion.

The Wisdom Religion was always a secret teaching.

Question: Since Ammonius himself never wrote anything, how can one be sure that his teaching was as indicated? Theos.: Neither Buddha, Pythagoras, Confucius, Orpheus, Socrates nor Jesus left any writings. And yet these are historical personalities, and their teachings have all survived. The disciples of Ammonius, among them Origen and Herennius, wrote treatises and expounded his teachings. Origen, Plotinus and Longinus, the adviser of the famous Queen Zenobia, also provided accounts of the Philalethic teachings, at least insofar as they had become public belief, for the school was divided into an exoteric and an esoteric one.

Frag.: How could the teachings of the latter come down to us, when it is said that the wisdom religion was a secret teaching?

Theos.: The religion of wisdom was always one and the same, and since it represented the last word of all human knowledge, it was always carefully preserved. It existed for long ages before it came to the Alexandrian Theosophists, then it reached our present time, and it will survive every other religion and philosophy.

Question: Where has it been preserved and by whom?

Theos.: By the initiates of each area; by the thorough investigators of the truth and their disciples, and in those parts of the world where such seeking has always been most valued and cultivated, in India, Central Asia and Persia.

Question: Can any proof of the secrecy be given?

Theos.: The best proof that can be given is that every ancient religion and every philosophical cult consisted of an esoteric, secret system of teaching and an exoteric one for the general public. It is a well-known fact that the mysteries of the ancients consisted of “greater” (secret) and “lesser” (public) mysteries in every nation, such as the famous Eleusinian mysteries in Greece. From the hierophants of Samothrace, Egypt, and the initiated Brahmans of ancient India, to the later Hebrew rabbis, they all kept secret the teachings of their true knowledge that came from the depths of faith. The Jewish rabbis called their religious exercises that were accessible to the world “Mercavah” or the outer body, the shell that hides the hidden soul, their highest knowledge. The priests of the ancient religions never imparted their real philosophic secrets to the masses. They administered only the husks to the latter. Northern Buddhism has its major and minor tools, which are known as Mahâyâna, the esoteric, and Hinâyâna, the exoteric school. This secrecy is not reprehensible. For surely no one can be expected to feed his flock with botanical treatises instead of grass. Pythagoras called his gnosis “the science of the things that are,” or “ή γνώσις τών όντων,” and kept this knowledge only for his sworn disciples, for only such were able to digest the spiritual nourishment and recognize its value. He bound them to secrecy. A secret alphabet and secret signs were used in the old Egyptian writings, the secret of which was known only to the hierogrammatici or initiated priests. Ammonius Saccas, as his biographers relate, bound his disciples by oath not to communicate his higher teachings, except to those who were sufficiently prepared and themselves bound by an oath. And do we not find the same in early Christianity, among the Gnostics, and even in the teachings of Christ himself? Did he not speak to the masses in parables that had a twofold meaning, and did he not speak about his deeper intentions exclusively to his disciples? “It is for you to know the secrets of the Kingdom of God; but to outsiders they should only come in parables.” The author of “Neo-Platonism” says: “The Essenes of Judea and Carmel similarly divided their followers into novices, brothers, and perfects (who were initiated).” Evidence for this fact can be found in all countries.

Question: Is it possible to learn the “occult science” by mere study? Encyclopedias say of Theosophy, as does Webster's dictionary, that it “affords communication with God and higher spirits and as a result, superhuman knowledge through physical... or... chemical processes.” Is this so?

Theos.: I do not believe so. Nor can I see how such a compiler of a dictionary could possibly make it clear to himself or to others by what process superhuman knowledge could be acquired through physical or chemical processes. If Webster had said through metaphysical and alchemical processes, the definition would have been approximately correct. As he gives it, it is impossible. The older and also the newer theosophists say that the infinite cannot be known by the finite, namely not by the finite self, but that the divine essence communicates itself to the higher spiritual self in a state of spiritual elevation. But this condition can hardly be fulfilled by “physical or chemical” processes, any more than a hypnotic state can.

Question: How can this be explained then?

Theos.: According to Plotinus, true spiritual elevation (ecstasy) can be explained as the “liberation of the spirit from its finite consciousness, so that it becomes one with the infinite”. This is a supreme state, says Dr. A. Wilder, which is not of everlasting duration, and is attained by very few. It is equivalent to what is known in India as Samadhj. The same is practiced by the yogis, who make it easier for themselves physically by the greatest abstinence in eating and drinking, and spiritually by striving to purify and purify the soul. Meditation is silent, unspoken prayer or, as Plato puts it: “The fervent turning of the soul to God; not only to ask for a special gift, as is assumed by the ordinary prayer, but for the general good, of which we are only a part on earth, and from whose essence we all descend... Therefore, observe silence in the presence of the Divine One, until it lifts the clouds from your eyes and enables you to see the real good, not what is only thought to be such, through the light that emanates from them.

This is the same thing that the learned author of “Neoplatonism”, Dr. A. Wilder, describes as “spiritual photography”. “The soul is the camera in which facts and events, future, past and present, are contained in the same way, and the mind becomes aware of them. In our everyday limited world, everything is then a day or a state, the past and the future are compressed into the present. (Death on earth is the last ecstasy). Then the soul is free from the limitations of corporeality, its nobler part unites with the higher nature and becomes a partaker of the wisdom and knowledge of the higher entities.” The real theosophy is what Apollonius of Tyana describes as follows: “I can see the past and the future in a clear mirror. The wise man does not need to lie in wait for the vapors of the earth and the corruptions of the air in order to foresee events... The gods see the future, ordinary people see the present, and the wise see what will take its place. What Theosophy is for the wise man is well expressed by the words, “The Kingdom of God is within us.”

Question: So Theosophy is not, as some assume, a new and sophisticated idea? Theos: Only the ignorant can speak in such a way. It is as old as the world, and its teachings, if not its name, are the most widespread and generally held of all.

Question: But how is it that Theosophy has remained so unknown to Western peoples? Why should it have remained such a hidden book to the most advanced and educated peoples? Theos.: It is to be assumed that in ancient times there were peoples who were no less educated and spiritually advanced than ours. But there are various causes for our ignorance. One of them was indicated by St. Paul to the learned Athenians: the loss of real spiritual insight and interest in that direction through too great an attachment to sense things and submission to dogma and ritualism. But the main reason lies in the secrecy of Theosophy.

Frag.: It is therefore proved that a secret knowledge exists; but what was the real cause of it?

Theos.: These causes were: First, the perversity and selfishness of human nature, which always seeks only the satisfaction of personal desires to the detriment of others. Such people could never be trusted with divine secrets. Secondly, the unreliability of human beings, which prevents them from protecting the sacred divine knowledge from desecration. The latter led to a continuous distortion of the most exalted truths and symbols, and to their reversal into gross, sensualized humanized things, in other words, to the debasement of the divine idea and to idolatry.

Theosophy is not Buddhism.

Frag.: The theosophists are often called “esoteric Buddhists”. Do they all profess Gautama Buddha?

Theos.: No more than all musicians profess Wagner. Some of them are Buddhists in religion, but there are far more Hindus and Brahmanists among them than Buddhists, and more native-born Christians from Europe and America than converted Buddhists. The misunderstanding arose from a false interpretation of the title of A. P. Sinnett's excellent book: “Esoteric Buddhism.” The latter word should be spelt with one instead of two d's; then it would be clear that Buddhism means nothing more than “wisdom religion” (from bodha, bodhi “intelligence”, “wisdom”), while Buddhism is the religious confession of Gautama Buddha. Theosophy is nothing more than a wisdom religion.

Question: What is the difference between Buddhism, the religion founded by the prince of Kapilavastu, and Buddhism, the “wisdom religion,” which is synonymous with Theosophy?

Theos.: Exactly the same difference as between the later ritual and dogmatic theology of the churches and sects and the “secret teachings” of Christ, which are called “the secrets of the realm of the spirit”. Buddha was enlightened by “Bodha”, insight, wisdom. This penetrated into the roots and branches of the “secret teachings”, which Gautama only communicated to his chosen Arhats.

Question: But some orientalists deny that Buddha gave any secret teachings?

Theos.: With exactly the same right they could deny that there is still any hidden knowledge in nature for men of science. This will be proved later in the conversation between Buddha and his disciple Ananda. His esoteric teachings were simply “Gupta-Vicdyâ” or the secret lore of the ancient Brahmans, to which their newer followers have completely lost the key. And this Vicdyâ has been incorporated into what is known as the inner teaching of the “Mahâyâna” school of northern Buddhism. Those who deny this are simply ignorant and assume an oriental knowledge. Reference should be made here to Edkins' “Chinese Buddhism”, especially to the chapters on exoteric and esoteric teachings; and thus the testimony of the whole ancient world on this subject can be compared.

Frag.: Are not the theosophical teachings identical with those of Buddha?

Theos.: Certainly, in so far as these teachings are the soul of the Wisdom Religion, and were once the common possession of the initiates of all nations. But Buddha was the first to weave these teachings into his public activity and make them the basis of a public creed. Therein lies the great difference between exoteric Buddhism and every other religion. In other religions, ritualism and dogma are given the most important place; in Buddhism, however, it is the moral view. That is why there is such a great similarity, almost identity, between the theosophical and Buddhist moral teachings.

Frag.: Are there any essential differences between the two?

Theos.: An essential difference between Theosophy and exoteric Buddhism, as found in the southern Church, is that 1) the latter denies the existence of a divine; 2) likewise a consciousness after death or any survival of the individuality of man. At least, this is the belief of the Siamese sect, which is now regarded as the purest form of exoteric Buddhism. And in this it is correct, if only Buddha's public teachings are considered. The reason for this fact will be given later. But the schools of the Northern Buddhist Church, in those regions to which the initiated Arhats retired after the Master's death, teach everything that is now called the Theosophical Doctrine, because it consists partly of the knowledge of these initiates; this proves how the truth has fallen victim to the letter of the law and to zealotry among the Southern Buddhists. But how much greater and nobler, more philosophical and scientific, is even the teaching of the letter of the dead letter in that church compared to other churches and religions. But Theosophy is not Buddhism.