The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 3 of 4: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and PhilosophyBlavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Religion
The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 3 of 4: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy
Blavatsky, H. P. (Helena Petrovna)
Theosophy
No danger whatever, of course, for the simple reason that the modern
commentators have never had the key to Occult interpretations. And before
another word is said in defence of Plato and the Neoplatonists, the
learned master of Balliol College ought to be respectfully asked: What
does, or can he know of the Esoteric canon of interpretation? By the term
“canon” is here meant that key which was communicated orally from “mouth
to ear” by the Master to the disciple, or by the Hierophant to the
candidate for initiation; this from time immemorial throughout a long
series of ages, during which the inner—not public—Mysteries were the most
sacred institution of every land. Without such a key no correct
interpretation of either the _Dialogues_ of Plato or any Scripture, from
the _Vedas_ to Homer, from the _Zend Avesta_ to the Mosaic Books, is
possible. How then can the Rev. Dr. Jowett know that the interpretations
made by the Neoplatonists of the various sacred books of the nations were
“absurdities?” Where, again, has he found an opportunity of studying these
“interpretations”? History shows that all such works were destroyed by the
Christian Church Fathers and their fanatical catechumens, wherever they
were found. To say that such men as Ammonius, a genius and a saint, whose
learning and holy life earned for him the title of Theodidaktos (“God‐
taught”), such men as Plotinus, Porphyry, and Proclus, were “incapable of
distinguishing between the opinions of one philosopher and another, or
between the serious thoughts of Plato and his fancies,” is to assume an
untenable position for a Scholar. It amounts to saying that, (_a_) scores
of the most famous Philosophers, the greatest Scholars and Sages of Greece
and of the Roman Empire were dull fools, and (_b_) that all the other
commentators, lovers of Greek Philosophy, some of them the acutest
intellects of the age—who do not agree with Dr. Jowett—are also fools and
no better than those whom they admire. The patronising tone of the last
above‐quoted passage is modulated with the most _naïve_ conceit,
remarkable even in our age of self‐glorification and mutual‐admiration
cliques. We have to compare the Professor’s views with those of some other
scholars.
Says Prof. Alexander Wilder of New York, one of the best Platonists of the
day, speaking of Ammonius, the founder of the Neoplatonic School:
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account