Isis unveiled, Volume 2 (of 2), Theology : $b A master-key to the mysteries of ancient and modern science and theologyBlavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Religion
Isis unveiled, Volume 2 (of 2), Theology : $b A master-key to the mysteries of ancient and modern science and theology
Blavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Theosophy
If, leaving for the present the prominent founders of Christian
sects, we now turn to that of the Ophites, which assumed a definite
form about the time of Marcion and the Basilideans, we may find
in it the reason for the _heresies_ of all others. Like all other
Gnostics, they rejected the Mosaic _Bible_ entirely. Nevertheless,
their philosophy, apart from some deductions original with several
of the most important founders of the various branches of Gnosticism
was not new. Passing through the Chaldean kabalistic tradition,
it gathered its materials in the Hermetic books, and pursuing its
flight still farther back for its metaphysical speculations, we
find it floundering among the tenets of Manu, and the earliest
Hindu ante-sacerdotal genesis. Many of our eminent antiquarians
trace the Gnostic philosophies right back to Buddhism, which does
not impair in the least either their or our arguments. We repeat
again, _Buddhism is but the primitive source of Brahmanism_. It
is not against the primitive _Vedas_ that Gautama protests. It is
against the sacerdotal and official state religion of his country;
and the Brahmans, who in order to make room for and give authority
to the castes, at a later period crammed the ancient manuscripts
with interpolated slokas, intended to prove that the castes were
predetermined by the Creator by the very fact that each class of men
was issued from a more or less noble limb of Brahma. Gautama-Buddha’s
philosophy was that taught from the beginning of time in the
impenetrable secresy of the inner sanctuaries of the pagodas. We need
not be surprised, therefore, to find again, in all the fundamental
dogmas of the Gnostics, the metaphysical tenets of both Brahmanism
and Buddhism. They held that the _Old Testament_ was the revelation
of an inferior being, a subordinate divinity, and did not contain a
single sentence of their _Sophia_, the Divine Wisdom. As to the _New
Testament_, it had lost its purity when the compilers became guilty
of interpolations. The revelation of divine truth was sacrificed by
them to promote selfish ends and maintain quarrels. The accusation
does not seem so very improbable to one who is well aware of the
constant strife between the champions of circumcision and the “Law,”
and the apostles who had given up Judaism.
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