"But on these subjects much, and that of a mystical kind, might be said: in keeping with which is the following: "It is good to keep close to the secret of a king," in order that _the doctrine of the entrance of souls into bodies_ may not be thrown before the common understanding, nor what is holy given to the dogs, nor pearls be cast before swine. For such a procedure would be impious, being equivalent to a betrayal of the mysterious declaration of G.o.d"s wisdom. It is sufficient, however, to represent in the style of a historic narrative what is intended to convey a secret meaning in the garb of history, that those who have the capacity may work out for themselves all that relates to the subject."
He also says, in the same work:
"If you come to the books written after the time of Jesus, you will find that those mult.i.tudes of believers who hear the parables are, as it were, "without," and worthy only of exoteric doctrines, while the disciples learn in private the explanation of the parables. _For, privately, to His own disciples did Jesus open up all things, esteeming above the mult.i.tudes those who desired to know His wisdom._ And He promises to those who believe on Him to send them wise men and scribes."
In another work, Origen states that:
"The Scriptures have a meaning, not only such as is apparent at first sight, but also another, which escapes the notice of most men. For such is written in the forms of certain Mysteries, and the image of divine things. Respecting which there is one opinion throughout the whole Church, that the whole law is indeed spiritual; _but that the spiritual meaning which the law conveys is not known to all_, but to those only on whom the grace of the Holy Spirit is bestowed in the word of wisdom and knowledge." (_De Principiis_.)
We could fill page after page with live quotations from the writings of the Early Christian Fathers, and their successors, showing the existence of the Inner Teachings. But we must rest content with those which we have given you, which are clear and to the point, and which _come from undoubted authority_.
The departure of the Church from these Inner Teachings was a great calamity, from which the Church is still suffering. As that well-known occultist, Eliphias Levi, has said:
"A great misfortune befell Christianity. The betrayal of the Mysteries by the false Gnostics--for the Gnostics, that is, _those who know_, were the Initiates of primitive Christianity--caused the Gnosis to be rejected, and alienated the Church from the supreme truths of the Kabbala, which contains all the secrets of transcendental theology.... Let the most absolute science, let the highest reason become once more the patrimony of the leaders of the people; let the sarcerdotal art and the royal art take the double sceptre of antique initiations and the social world will once more issue from its chaos. Burn the holy images no longer; demolish the temples no more; temples and images are necessary for men; but drive the hirelings from the house of prayer; let the blind be no longer leaders of the blind; reconstruct the hierarchy of intelligence and holiness, and recognize only _those who know_ as the teachers of _those who believe_." (_The Mysteries of Magic, Waite translation_.)
And now, you ask, what were taught in these Christian Mysteries--what is the Inner Teaching--what the Secret Doctrine? Simply this, good students--the Occult Philosophy and Mystic Lore which has been taught to the Elect in all times and ages, and which is embodied in our several series of lessons on THE YOGI PHILOSOPHY AND ORIENTAL OCCULTISM, _plus the special teaching regarding the nature, mission, and sacrifice of Jesus the Christ, as we have tried to explain in the present series of lessons_. The Truth is the same no matter under what name it is taught, or who teaches it. Strip it of the personal coloring of the teacher and it is seen to be the same--THE TRUTH.
In these lessons we have tried to give you the Key to the Mysteries, but unless you have studied the other lessons in which the Occult Teachings have been set forth, you will not be able to see their application in Mystic Christianity. You must bring Knowledge to these lessons, in order to take away knowledge.
THE ELEVENTH LESSON
THE ANCIENT WISDOM.
The doctrine of Metempsychosis or Re-incarnation has its roots deeply imbedded in the soil of all religions--that is, in the Inner Teachings or Esoteric phase of all religious systems. And this is true of the Inner Teachings of the Christian Church as well as of the other systems. The Christian Mysteries comprised this as well as the other fundamental occult doctrines, and the Early Church held such teachings in its Inner Circle.
And, in its essence, the doctrine of Re-birth is the only one that is in full accord with the Christian conception of ultimate justice and "fairness." As a well known writer has said concerning this subject:
"It relieves us of many and great difficulties. It is impossible for any one who looks around him and sees the sorrow and suffering in the world, and the horrible inequality in the lives of men--not inequality in wealth merely, but inequality in opportunity of progress--to harmonize these facts with the love and justice of G.o.d, unless he is willing to accept this theory that this one life is not all, but that it is only a day in the real life of the soul, and that each soul therefore has made its place for itself, and is receiving just such training as is best for its evolution. Surely the only theory which enables a man rationally to believe in Divine justice, without shutting his eyes to obvious facts, is a theory worthy of study.
"Modern theology concerns itself princ.i.p.ally with a plan for evading divine justice, which it elects to call "Salvation,"
and it makes this plan depend entirely upon what a man believes, or rather upon what he says that he believes. This whole theory of "salvation," and indeed the theory that there is anything to be "saved" from, seems to be based upon a misunderstanding of a few texts of scripture. We do not believe in this idea of a so-called divine wrath; we think that to attribute to G.o.d our own vices of anger and cruelty is a terrible blasphemy. We hold to the theory of steady evolution and final attainment for all; and we think that the man"s progress depends not upon what he believes, but upon what he does. And there is surely very much in the bible to support this idea. Do you remember St. Paul"s remark, "Be not deceived, G.o.d is not mocked; whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap"? And again, Christ said that "They that _have done good_ shall go unto the resurrection of life"--not they that have believed some particular doctrine. And when He describes the day of judgment, you will notice that no question is raised as to what anybody has believed, but only as to the works which he has done."
In this connection, we think that it is advisable to quote from the address of a well known English churchman upon this important subject.
The gentleman in question is The Ven. Archdeacon Colley, Rector of Stockton, Warwickshire, England, who said:
"In the realm of the occult and transcendental, moved to its exploration from the Sadducean bias of my early days, I have for the best part of half a century had experiences rarely equaled by any, and I am sure, surpa.s.sed by none; yet have they led me up till now, I admit, to no very definite conclusions. With suspension of judgment, therefore, not being given to dogmatize on anything, and with open mind I trust, in equipoise of thought desiring to hold an even balance of opinion "twixt this and that, I am studious still of being receptive of light from every source--rejecting nothing that in the least degree makes for righteousness, hence my taking the chair here tonight, hoping to learn what may help to resolve a few of the many perplexities of life, to wit: Why some live to the ripe old age of my dear father while others live but for a moment, to be born, gasp and die. Why some are born rich and others poor; some having wealth only to corrupt, defile, deprave others therewith, while meritorious poverty struggles and toils for human betterment all unaided. Some gifted with mentality; others pitiably lacking capacity. Some royal-souled from the first naturally, others with brutal, criminal propensities from beginning to end.
"The sins of the fathers visited upon the children unto the third and fourth generation may in heredity account for much, but I want to see through the mystery of a good father at times having a bad son, as also of one showing genius and splendid faculties--the offspring of parentage the reverse of anything suggesting qualities contributive thereto. Then as a clergyman, I have in my reading noted texts of Holy Scripture, and come across pa.s.sages in the writings of the Fathers of the Early Church which seem to be root-thoughts, or survivals of the old cla.s.sic idea of re-incarnation.
"The prophet Jeremiah (1:5) writes, "The word of the Lord came unto me saying, before I formed thee, I knew thee, and before thou wast born I sanctified thee and ordained thee a prophet."
"Does this mean that the Eternal-Uncreate chose, from foreknowledge of what Jeremiah would be, the created Ego of His immaterialized servant in heaven ere he clothed his soul with the mortal integument of flesh in human birth--schooling him above for the part he had to play here below as a prophet to dramatize in his life and teaching the will of the Unseen? To the impotent man at the Pool of Bethesda, whose infirmity was the cruel experience of eight and thirty years, the Founder of our religion said (_John 5:14._), "Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." Was it (fitting the punishment to the crime proportionately) some outrageous sin as a boy, in the spring of years and days of his inexperienced youth of bodily life, that brought on him such physical sorrow, which youthful sin in its repet.i.tion would necessitate an even worse ill than this nearly forty years of sore affliction? "Who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" (_John 9:2._), was the question of the disciples to Jesus. And our query is--Sinned _before_ he was born to deserve the penalty of being born blind?
"Then of John the Baptist--was he a reincarnation of Elijah, the prophet, who was to come again? (_Malachi 4:5._). Jesus said he _was_ Elijah, who indeed had come, and the evil-minded Jews had done unto him whatsoever they listed. Herod had beheaded him (_Matt. 11:14_ and _17:12._).
"Elijah and John the Baptist appear from our reference Bibles and Cruden"s Concordance to concur and commingle in one. The eighth verse of the first chapter of the second Book of Kings and the fourth verse of the third chapter of St. Matthew"s Gospel note similarities in them and peculiarities of dress. Elijah, as we read, was a "hairy man and girt a leathern girdle about his loins," while John the Baptist had "his raiment of camel"s hair and a leathern girdle about his loins."
Their home was the solitude of the desert. Elijah journeyed forty days and forty nights unto h.o.r.eb, the mount of G.o.d in the Wilderness of Sinai. John the Baptist was in the wilderness of Judea beyond Jordan baptizing. And their life in exile--a self-renunciating and voluntary withdrawal from the haunts of men--was sustained in a parallel remarkable way by food (bird--brought on wing--borne). "I have commanded the ravens to feed thee," said the voice of Divinity to the prophet; while locusts and wild honey were the food of the Baptist.
""And above all," said our Lord of John the Baptist to the disciples, "if ye _will_ receive it, this is Elias which was for to come."
"Origen, in the second century, one of the most learned of the Fathers of the early Church, says that this declares the pre-existence of John the Baptist as Elijah before his decreed later existence as Christ"s forerunner.
"Origen also says on the text, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated," that if our course be not marked out according to our works before this present life that now is, how would it not be untrue and unjust in G.o.d that the elder brother should serve the younger and be hated by G.o.d (though blessed of righteous Abraham"s son, of Isaac) before Esau had done anything deserving of servitude or given any occasion for the merciful Almighty"s hatred?
"Further, on the text (_Ephesians 1:4._), "G.o.d who hath chosen us before the foundation of the world," Origen says that this suggests our pre-existence ere the world was.
"While Jerome, agreeing with Origen, speaks of our rest above, where rational creatures dwell before their descent to this lower world, and prior to their removal from the invisible life of the spiritual sphere to the visible life here on earth, teaching, as he says, the necessity of their again having material bodies ere, as saints and men made "perfect as our Father which is in heaven is perfect," they once more enjoy in the angel-world their _former_ blessedness.
"Justin Martyr also speaks of the soul inhabiting the human body more than once, but thinks as a rule (instanced in the case of John the Baptist forgetting that he had been Elijah) it is not permitted us to remember our former experiences of this life while yet again we are in exile here as strangers and pilgrims in an uncongenial clime away from our heavenly home.
"Clemens Alexandrinus, and others of the Fathers, refer to re-incarnation (or transmigration or metempsychosis, as it is called in the years that are pa.s.sed of cla.s.sic times and later now as _re-birth_) to remind us of the vital truth taught by our Lord in the words, "_Ye must be born again_.""
These words, falling from the lips of a man so eminent in the staid conservative ranks of the Church of England, must attract the attention of every earnest seeker after the Truth of Christian Doctrine. If such a man, reared in such an environment, could find himself able to bear such eloquent testimony to the truth of a philosophy usually deemed foreign to his accepted creed, what might we not expect from a Church liberated from the narrow formal bounds of orthodoxy, and once more free to consider, learn and teach those n.o.ble doctrines originally held and taught by the Early Fathers of the Church of Christ?
While the majority of modern Christians bitterly oppose the idea that the doctrine of Metempsychosis ever formed any part of the Christian Doctrine, and prefer to regard it as a "heathenish" teaching, still the fact remains that the careful and unprejudiced student will find indisputable evidence in the writings of the Early Christian Fathers pointing surely to the conclusion that the doctrine of Metempsychosis was believed and taught in the Inner Circle of the Early Church.
The doctrine unquestionably formed a part of the Christian Mysteries, and has faded into comparative obscurity with the decay of spirituality in the Church, until now the average churchman no longer holds to it, and in fact regards as barbarous and heathenish that part of the teachings originally imparted and taught by the Early Fathers of the Church--the Saints and Leaders.
The Early Christians were somewhat divided in their beliefs concerning the details of Re-birth. One sect or body held to the idea that the soul of man was eternal, coming from the Father. Also that there were many degrees and kinds of souls, some of which have never incarnated in human bodies but which are living on many planes of life unknown to us, pa.s.sing from plane to plane, world to world. This sect held that some of these souls had chosen to experiment with life on the physical plane, and were now pa.s.sing through the various stages of the physical-plane life, with all of its pains and sorrows, being held by the Law of Re-birth until a full experience had been gained, when they would pa.s.s out of the circle of influence of the physical plane, and return to their original freedom.
Another sect held to the more scientific occult form of the gradual evolution of the soul, by repeated rebirth, on the physical plane, from Lower to Higher, as we have set forth in our lessons on "Gnani Yoga." The difference in the teachings arose from the different conceptions of the great leaders, some being influenced by the Jewish Occult Teachings which held to the first above mentioned doctrine, while the second school held to the doctrine taught by the Greek Mystics and the Hindu Occultists. And each interpreted the Inner Teachings by the light of his previous affiliations.
And so, some of the early writings speak of "pre-existence," while others speak of repeated "rebirth." But the underlying principle is the same, and in a sense they were both right, as the advanced occultists know full well. The fundamental principle of both conceptions is that the soul comes forth as an emanation from the Father in the shape of Spirit; that the Spirit becomes plunged in the confining sheaths of Matter, and is then known as "a soul," losing for a time its pristine purity; that the soul pa.s.ses on through rebirth, from lower to higher, gaining fresh experiences at each incarnation; that the advancing soul pa.s.ses from world to world, returning at last to its home laden with the varied experiences of life and becomes once more pure Spirit.
The early Christian Fathers became involved in a bitter controversy with the Greek and Roman philosophers, over the conception held by some of the latter concerning the absurd doctrine of the transmigration of the human soul into the body of an animal. The Fathers of the Church fought this erroneous teaching with great energy, their arguments bringing out forcibly the distinction between the true occult teachings and this erroneous and degenerate perversion in the doctrines of transmigration into animal bodies. This conflict caused a vigorous denunciation of the teachings of the Pythagorean and Platonic schools, which held to the perverted doctrine that a human soul could degenerate into the state of the animal.
Among other pa.s.sages quoted by Origen and Jerome to prove the pre-existence of the soul was that from Jeremiah (1:5): "Before thou comest from the womb I sanctified thee and I ordained thee a prophet."
The early writers held that this pa.s.sage confirmed their particular views regarding the pre-existence of the soul and the possession of certain characteristics and qualities acquired during previous birth, for, they argued, it would be injustice that a man, before birth, be endowed with uncarnal qualities; and that such qualities and ability could justly be the result only of best work and action. They also dwelt upon the prophecy of the return of Elijah, in Malachi 4:5. And also upon the (uncanonical) book "The Wisdom of Solomon," in which Solomon says: "I was a witty child, and had a good Spirit. Yea, rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled."
They also quoted from Josephus, in his book styled "De Bello Judico,"
in which the eminent Jewish writer says: "They say that all souls are incorruptible; but that the souls of good men are only removed into other bodies--but that the souls of bad men are subject to eternal punishment." They also quoted from Josephus, regarding the Jewish belief in Rebirth as evidenced by the recital of the instance in which, at the siege of the fortress of Jotapota, he sought the shelter of a cave in which were a number of soldiers, who discussed the advisability of committing suicide for the purpose of avoiding being taken prisoners by the Romans. Josephus remonstrated with them as follows:
"Do ye not remember that all pure spirits who are in conformity with the divine dispensation live on in the loveliest of heavenly places, and in the course of time they are sent down to inhabit sinless bodies; but the souls of those who have committed self-destruction are doomed to a region in the darkness of the underworld?"
Recent writers hold that this shows that he accepted the doctrine of Re-birth himself, and also as showing that it must have been familiar to the Jewish soldiery.
There seems to be no doubt regarding the familiarity of the Jewish people of that time with the general teachings regarding Metempsychosis. Philo positively states the doctrine as forming part of the teachings of the Jewish Alexandrian school. And again the question asked Jesus regarding the "sin of the man born blind" shows how familiar the people were with the general doctrine.
And so, the teachings of Jesus on that point did not need to be particularly emphasized to the common people, He reserving this instruction on the inner teachings regarding the details of Re-birth for his chosen disciples. But still the subject is mentioned in a number of places in the New Testament, as we shall see.
Jesus stated positively that John the Baptist was "Elias," whose return had been predicted by Malachi (4:5). Jesus stated this twice, positively, i.e., "This is Elijah that is to come" (_Matt. 11:14_); and again, "But I say unto you that Elijah is come already, but they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would.... Then understood the disciples that he spoke unto them of John the Baptist."
(_Matt. 17:12-13._) The Mystics point out that Jesus saw clearly the fact that John was Elijah re-incarnated, although John had denied this fact, owing to his lack of memory of his past incarnation. Jesus the Master saw clearly that which John the Forerunner had failed to perceive concerning himself. The plainly perceptible characteristics of Elijah reappearing in John bear out the twice-repeated, positive a.s.sertion of the Master that John the Baptist was the re-incarnated Elijah.
And this surely is sufficient authority for Christians to accept the doctrine of Re-birth as having a place in the Church Teachings. But still, the orthodox churchmen murmur "He meant _something else_!"