The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 2 of 4: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and PhilosophyBlavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Religion
The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 2 of 4: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy
Blavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Theosophy
This is the Kabalistic view of the Western Occultists, and it differs from
the more philosophical Eastern or Âryan views upon the subject.(498) The
separation of the sexes was in the programme of Nature and of natural
evolution; and the creative faculty in male and female was a gift of
Divine Wisdom. In the truth of such traditions the whole of Antiquity,
from the patrician philosopher to the humblest spiritually inclined
plebeian, has believed. And as we proceed, we may successfully show that
the _relative_ truth of such legends, if not their absolute
exactness—vouched for by such giants of intellect as were Solon,
Pythagoras, Plato, and others—begins to dawn upon more than one modern
Scientist. He is perplexed; he stands startled and confused before proofs
that are being daily accumulated before him; he feels that there is no way
of solving the many historical problems that stare him in the face, unless
he begins by accepting ancient traditions. Therefore, in saying that we
believe absolutely in ancient records and _universal_ legends, we need
hardly plead guilty before the impartial observer, for other and far more
learned writers, and that too among those who belong to the modern
Scientific School, evidently believe in much that the Occultists do—in
“dragons,” for instance, and not only symbolically, but also in their
actual existence at one time.
It would have indeed been a bold step for anyone, some thirty
years ago, to have thought of treating the public to a collection
of stories ordinarily reputed fabulous, and of claiming for them
the consideration due to genuine realities, or to have advocated
tales, time‐honoured as fictions, as actual facts; and those of
the nursery as being, in many instances, legends, more or less
distorted, descriptive of real beings or events. Nowadays it is a
less hazardous proceeding.(499)
Thus opens the Introduction to a recent (1886) and most interesting work
by Mr. Charles Gould, called _Mythical Monsters_. He boldly states his
belief in most of these monsters. He submits that:
Many of the so‐called mythical animals, which throughout long ages
and in all nations have been the fertile subjects of fiction and
fable, come legitimately within the scope of plain matter‐of‐fact
Natural History, and that they may be considered, not as the
outcome of exuberant fancy, but as creatures which really once
existed, and of which, unfortunately, only imperfect and
inaccurate descriptions have filtered down to us, probably very
much refracted, through the mists of time; ... traditions of
creatures _once coëxisting with man, some of which are so weird
and terrible as to appear at first sight to be impossible_....
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