Cosmic symbolism : $b Being a discussion and exposition of some recondite and obscure points in the art of the Kabalists, the mysteries of sound, form and number, and the basic principles of cosmic symbolismSepharial
Religion
Cosmic symbolism : $b Being a discussion and exposition of some recondite and obscure points in the art of the Kabalists, the mysteries of sound, form and number, and the basic principles of cosmic symbolism
Sepharial
Cabala; Occultism; Symbolism; Symbolism of numbers
Time was when the world believed that there was an inherent relativity
in things, and that nothing existed for itself alone. That is one of the
notions that we have thrown into the lumber-room. But as it fits my
needs I will bring it out into the daylight and have a look at it. The
belief that is now current in the world regarding the universe is that
it is a congeries of detached bodies, each existing for itself alone,
inhabited, maybe, or not inhabited, but capable of sustaining life of
some sort. There they are, out yonder, but what has that to do with us?
Well, the old-world notion was that by taking a dozen or so of pieces of
wood of various shapes and sizes and fitting them together you could
make what they called a chair. But nobody ever thought either that the
chair could make itself, or that the shapes, as they called them,
constituted a chair without being fitted together. The fitting was the
most important part of the business. A man picking up a shape would call
it a chair leg or whatever it might be, a back, thwart, side or seat.
None of them could be called a chair, but each of them suggested it.
Their use was in their relativity, their interdependence, their
connectedness. So it is with the throne of God, which is the universe.
That ancient notion of relativity—you will find it in the Mahabharata or
that section of it which they call the Sacred Song—was a good one.
This earth of ours is a comparatively small planet in a system of
worlds. It does not exist for itself alone, nor do those others which
surround it. Crude thinkers, without perspective, believed the earth to
be very big because it filled the eye. A threepenny-piece will cover the
Moon at arm’s length. It is all a matter of proportion. But the deeper
thinkers knew better, and if they were foolish enough to suppose that
the planets existed for this earth they also believed that the earth
existed for the planets, and they for one another. Interplanetary action
was believed in before Ptolemy wrote his book on the Influence of the
Stars, or Kepler had framed his cosmic laws, or Newton had found the
glue to hold the pieces together. The Carpenter had been at work before
ever man opened his blinking eyes to the morning sun, and what I have
called the Throne of God was made by Him for His own use. It is ours to
look and marvel.
This notion of planetary interaction, the idea that planets act and
react upon one another, involves that other which Science has not yet
condescended to observe, namely, planetary action in human life. Tycho
and Kepler, who argued things to their logical conclusion, believed in
it. Well, there are books enough on the subject already for those who
would learn about it, and I do not intend to add another to the number.
But I would like to revive an odd notion or two which even the dealers
in antiques, I mean the astrologers, especially the modern ones, have
relegated to the lumber-room.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account