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
In order to show that the Ancients have never “mistaken stars for Gods,”
or Angels and the sun for the highest Gods and God, but have worshipped
only the Spirit of all, and have reverenced the minor Gods supposed to
reside in the sun and planets—the difference between these two worships
has to be pointed out. Saturn, “the Father of Gods” must not be confused
with his namesake—the planet of the same name with its eight moons and
three rings. The two—though in one sense identical, as are, for instance,
physical man and his soul—must be separated in the question of worship.
This has to be done the more carefully in the case of the seven planets
and their Spirits, as the whole formation of the universe is attributed to
them in the Secret Teachings. The same difference has to be shown again
between the stars of the Great Bear, the Riksha and the Chitra
Shikhandina, “the bright‐crested,” and the Rishis—the mortal Sages who
appeared on earth during the Satya Yuga. If all of these have been so far
closely united in the visions of the seers of every age—the bible seers
included—there must have been a reason for it. Nor need one go back so far
as into the periods of “superstition” and “unscientific fancies” to find
great men in our epoch sharing in them. It is well known that Kepler, the
eminent astronomer, in common with many other great men who believed that
the heavenly bodies ruled favourably or adversely the fates of men and
nations—fully credited besides this the fact that all heavenly bodies,
even our own earth, are endowed with living and thinking souls.
Le Couturier’s opinion is worthy of notice in this relation:
We are too inclined to criticize unsparingly everything concerning
astrology and its ideas; nevertheless our criticism, to be one,
ought at least to know, lest it should be proved aimless, what
those ideas in truth are. And when among the men we thus
criticize, we find such names as those of Regiomontanus, Tycho
Brahe, Kepler, etc., there is reason why we should be careful.
Kepler was an astrologer by profession, and became an astronomer
in consequence. He was earning his livelihood by genethliac
figures, which, indicating the state of the heavens at the moment
of the birth of individuals, were a means to which everyone
resorted for horoscopes. That great man was a believer in the
principles of astrology, without accepting all its foolish
results.(611)
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