This is
the second chapter of the book “The Secret Doctrine of the
Rosicrucians.”
THE
ETERNAL PARENT
In the Secret Doctrine of the
Rosicrucians we find the following Aphorism of Creation:
The First Aphorism
“The
Eternal Parent was wrapped in the Sleep of the Cosmic Night. Light there was
not: for the Flame of Spirit was not yet rekindled. Time there was not: for
Change had not re-begun. Things there were not: for Form had not re-presented
itself. Action there was not: for there were no Things to act. The Pairs of
Opposites there were not: for there were no Things to manifest Polarity. The
Eternal Parent, causeless, indivisible, changeless, infinite, rested in
unconscious, dreamless sleep. Other than the Eternal Parent there was Naught,
either Real or Apparent.”
In this First Aphorism of Creation
the Rosicrucian student is directed to apply his attention to the concept of
the Infinite Source of All Things — the Eternal Parent "from which all
things proceed." This Eternal Parent — the Infinite Unmanifest, is
represented by the Rosicrucians by the symbol of a circle, having nothing
outside of itself and nothing within itself.
Figure 3. Symbol of the Infinite.
(This is not only a Rosicrucian symbol
but this is the usual symbol used in esotericism to represent the Unmanifested
God.)
The circle, however, must not be
interpreted as conveying the idea of limitation; rather is it intended to
convey the idea of limitlessness. The symbol, although the best possible for
the purpose, is inadequate — this by reason of the impossibility of
representing the Infinite by a finite symbol. The only adequate symbol of the
Eternal Parent would be that of Infinite Space, and this, of course, cannot be
represented by a sign, for no matter how wide the circle might be drawn there
would always be Space beyond it. But, recognizing the impossibility of an adequate symbol, the ancient Rosicrucians have adopted
the empty circle as the best possible finite symbol of the Infinite Unmanifest.
The concept of Infinite Space has
always been regarded by the Rosicrucians as the best possible concept with
which to "think of" the Infinite Unmanifest, since the latter cannot
be actually "thought" in consciousness as a Thing, and consciousness
is capable of thinking only of Things. Strictly speaking, the Infinite
Unmanifest is a "Nothing" rather than a "Thing"; and yet
not such a "Nothing" as implies "not-ness" or
"naught," but rather such a "Nothing" as implies "The
Possibility of Everything, yet without the limitations of Thingness."
Infinite Space cannot be considered
a "Thing," for it has none of the characteristics of a
"Thing." And yet it cannot be denied actual existence and presence.
Roughly speaking, it may be defined as "A No-Thing, containing within
itself the possibility of infinite Thingness, or the infinite possibility of
Things." Infinite Space must be thought of as the Absolute Container of
Everything, whether Manifest or Unmanifest — for outside of Infinite Space
there is only Nothingness, or, more strictly speaking, there is no outside of
Infinite Space.
Infinite Space, therefore, has
always been the accepted occult and esoteric symbol by means of which men are
able to "think of" the Infinite Unmanifest — the Eternal Parent,
wrapped in the Sleep of the Cosmic Night. In one of the ancient occult catechisms,
the question was asked:
-
"What is that
which ever has been, is now, and ever shall be, whether there be a Universe or
not, and whether there be gods or not?"
And
the answer is:
- "Space!"
The strength of this symbol of
Infinite Space, as indicating the Infinite Unmanifest, is perceived when the
mind tries to think, or even imagine, the absence of Infinite Space — either as
absent before its creation, or else as absent after its destruction. It will,
of course, be discovered that the human mind, and the human imagination, finds
it impossible to think of Space being absent in either event.
The mind is compelled to think of
Space as being Infinite, and as being Eternal, without regard to whatever else
is held to be either present or absent at any time, past, present, or future.
And at the same time, the mind finds that it is unable to define Space as a
Thing — yet it dare not regard it as a Nothing or Naught. It is found that
Infinite Space must be always thought of as necessarily eternally present, and
yet ever free from the limitations of Things.
Moreover, as Infinite Space is
invisible and beyond the other senses, it cannot be "known" or
cognized as a Thing. Thought regarding it must always report "not this;
not that" regarding it; and it answers to the ancient sage's statement of
Reality that:
« The Essence of Being is
without attributes, formless, devoid of distinctions, and unconditioned. It is
different from that which we know, and from that which we do not know. Words
and thought turn from it without finding it. The wise answer only by silence
all questions concerning its nature. To all suggestions concerning its
qualities, properties, and attributes, the wise simply answer:
- "neti, neti — not this,
not that!
Of THAT the wise assert simply It
IS." »
And as other ancient sages have
said:
« The imagination, the understanding,
and abstract thinking will always strive in vain to represent the Infinite; for
no form of finiteness (to which thought and speech also belong) can express the
Infinite; nor can that which was timed express the Timeless and Eternal; nor can
thought resultant from the chain of causation grasp the Causeless or
Self-Existent. »
So, in every way, and from every
angle of view, we discover that the concept of Infinite Space is a noble and
worthy symbol of THAT which we mean when we try to think of the Infinite
Unmanifest — of the Essence of Being before Manifestation into Activity and
Form.
ANALYZE OF THE FIRST
APHORISM
The First Aphorism states that: "The Eternal Parent was wrapped in the Sleep of the Cosmic
Night."
In this sentence there is a
reference to that teaching concerning the Cosmic Days and Nights, which under
some of many names is found lying at the base of all esoteric teachings and
occult philosophies. The highest human and superhuman intelligences have
testified to the fact that Rhythm is abiding in, and manifest through, the
Cosmos — from the tiniest point of Manifested Being to the Totality of Being,
there is found to ever exist the presence and manifestation of Rhythm.
There is reported to us from the
highest occult sources of information the fact that the ALL presents Itself
alternately in great periods of Manifestation (called the Cosmic Days),
followed by a like great period of Unmanifestation (called the Cosmic Nights).
During the Cosmic Night the Eternal Parent exists as if wrapped in an
unconscious and dreamless sleep, from which with the Dawn of the new Cosmic Day
it awakens gradually into Manifestation. The Cosmic Day, in turn, gradually
finds itself changing into a Twilight, which slowly but surely darkens into the
Cosmic Night when all again is stilled and quiet. And so on, and on, and on, in
infinite sequence and repetition —in infinite rhythm— the Cosmos presents this
succession of Days and Nights: of Manifestation and Unmanifestation. And, so it
has been forever and ever, and will continue forever and ever, without end,
ceasing, or interruption. Such is the report of the wise and the illumined
teachers of the race.
A great occult teacher has written
of this teaching, as follows:
« The Esoteric Doctrine teaches,
like Buddhism and Brahmanism, and even the Kabala, that the one infinite and
unknown Essence exists from all eternity, and in regular and harmonious
successions is either passive or active. In the poetical phraseology of Manu these
conditions are called the “Days” and the “Nights” of Brahma. The latter is either
“awake” or “asleep.”
. . .
Upon inaugurating an active period,
says the Secret Doctrine, an expansion of this Divine Essence from without
inwardly, and from within outwardly, occurs in obedience to eternal and
immutable law, and the phenomenal or visible universe is the ultimate result of
the long chain of cosmical forces thus progressively set in motion. In like
manner, when the passive condition is resumed, a contraction of the Divine
Essence takes place, and the previous work of creation is gradually and
progressively undone. The visible universe becomes disintegrated, its material
dispersed, and “darkness” solitary and alone, broods once more over the face of
the “deep.” To use a metaphor from the Secret Books, which will convey the idea
more clearly, an out-breathing of the 'unknown essence' produces the world; and
an inhalation causes it to disappear. This process has been going on from all
eternity, and our present universe is but one of an infinite series, which had
no beginning and will have no end. »
(It was Blavatsky who wrote the text
above, which is an excerpt from the Secret Doctrine I, p.3-4. But unfortunately
William Atkinson mistakes Brahma for Parabrahma, that is, the Creator God with
the Unmanifest God, what he calls "The Eternal Parent.")
In this connection, the student of
Herbert Spencer will find in the ancient occult doctrines and teachings an
unsuspected firm basis for the teaching of his modern master. Spencer in his
teaching of the universal presence and activity of Rhythm but echoes the old
occult teachings on the subject. Note the following from the pen of the modern
prophet of Evolution:
« Apparently, the universally
coexistent forces of attraction and repulsion which, as we have seen,
necessitate rhythm in all minor changes throughout the universe, also
necessitate rhythm in the totality of its changes — produce now an immeasurable
period during which the attracting forces predominating, cause universal
concentration, and then an immeasurable period, during which the repulsive
forces predominating, cause universal diffusion — alternate eras of Evolution
and Dissolution. »
(It would be more correct to say
activity and rest, because during periods of activity there is evolution, but
there is also involution.)
The First Aphorism further states: "Light there was not: for the Flame of
Spirit was not yet rekindled."
This is apt to prove a "hard
saying" to those who, having the half-truth only, and not realizing the
existence of the other half, have thought of Infinite Reality as being Spirit,
of which the Flame is of course the occult and esoteric symbol. But the best
ancient wisdom, as voiced by the most careful teachers, have ever taught those
qualified to know the whole truth that not only back of Matter, but also back
of Spirit, there abides an Eternal and Infinite Essence, which is neither
Spirit nor Matter, but which is the unconditioned root and source of both
Spirit and Matter.
Light and Flame —the two universally
recognized esoteric and occult symbols of Spirit— have back of them the
"lightless and heatless" Essence of Light and Heat. The Infinite
Reality is the Essence of the Spirit Light and Flame — not the Light and Flame
itself. The student will be aided in. grasping this truth, if he will
contemplate the flame of a lamp, a candle, a gas-flame, or any other kind of
physical flame; he will perceive to be present, under and at the centre of the
flame, a dark, transparent, "something" which is the
"essence" from which the Flame itself proceeds, and upon which it
draws for support and sustenance. In occult terminology the counterpart of this
on the higher planes of Being is called "the Dark Flame" — it is the
Essence of the Flame and Light, and not Flame or Light itself.
(I have not read that term anywhere.)
As an ancient writer has said:
-
"The Essence is
the 'spirit of the fire, ' and not Fire itself; therefore, the attributes of
Fire, i.e., heat, flame, and light, are not the attributes of the Essence, but
rather of the Fire of which the Essence is the Cause."
Therefore, the Infinite Unmanifest —the
sleeping Eternal Parent— must not be thought of by the student as being Spirit,
in the sense of the latter term as commonly employed in our thought. Rather is
it akin to Pure Space from which the Flame emerges, and in which it is
contained. There is close reasoning and distinction here, which will become
clear to the student as he proceeds, but which must be noted even now in
passing.
The First Aphorism further states: "Time there was not: for Change had not
begun."
Here, again, is expressed another
"hard saying" for the student who has not grasped the true meaning of
"Time." Time, in the strict philosophical meaning of the term, does
not mean pure duration of existence
— instead, it means "the measure of changing existence." An enduring
existence in which there is no change of form, activity, or degree, mental or
physical, is Timeless. Time, in fact, is but the "measure of Change."
Without Change there can be no Time, in the true sense of the latter term. Pure
Being manifests not Time. Time is the result of Becoming, or Change, and is
always measured by change or becoming in something.
The following statement from a
modern text book may serve to point to the difference between the conception of
Pure Duration, and Time:
« Pure Duration is conceived
without regard to the motions of changes in things. Time on the contrary is the
sensible measure of any portion of duration, often marked by particular
phenomena, as the apparent revolution of the celestial bodies, the rotation of
the earth on its axis, etc. Our conception of Time originates in that of
motions; and particularly in those regular and equable motions carried on in
the heavens, the parts of which, from their perfect similarity to each other,
are correct measures of the continuous and successive quantity called Time,
with which they are conceived to co-exist. Time, therefore, may be defined as,
The perceived number of successive movements. Time, based upon the movements of
the celestial bodies, or the earth, is frequently measured by instruments based
upon such movements, such as watches, clocks, sun-dials, etc. »
(This is an excerpt from the Confessions
of Augustine of Hippo.)
We are also conscious of the passage
of Time by changes in our mental states, our thoughts, our mental images, etc.,
both in the waking state or the state of dreams. Without changes in the outside
world, represented to our consciousness by perceptions of such changes, or
without changes in our mental states, Time would not exist for us. It thus
follows that given an Eternal Changeless Reality, for whom and by whom no
"outside world" has been or is manifested; and which is wrapped in an
unconscious and dreamless sleep, such as is pictured in the First Aphorism; for
such a Reality there could exist no Time —no Time would present itself— Timelessness
would abide, until Change began once more.
Therefore, the student will perceive
the necessary truth of the statement of the First Aphorism that for the Eternal
Parent, wrapped in the Sleep of the Cosmic Night, "Time there was not: for
Change had not begun." It is impossible to hold otherwise, considering the
nature of Time, and the absence of Change during the Cosmic Night of the
Eternal Parent. The student will perceive that given Infinite Existence, and
the absence of Change, then we must necessarily postulate Pure Duration, and
the absence of Time. There is no logical escape from this conclusion.
The First Aphorism further states: "Things there were not: for Form had not
re-presented itself."
Here, again, we are presented with
an unescapable conviction. A "Thing" is "Whatever exists, or is
conceived to exist, as a separate entity, and as a separable or distinguishable
object of thought." Every "Thing" must manifest
"form." "Form" is (1) the shape or structure of anything,
as distinguished from the material of which it is composed, hence, the
configuration or figure of anything; (2) the mode of acting or manifestation of
anything to the senses, or to the intellect; (3) the assemblage of qualities
constituting a conception, or the internal constitution making an existing
thing what it is."
Strictly speaking a
"Thing" must be capable of being thought of or pictured as composed
of qualities, attributes, or properties distinguishing it from other things;
hence every "Thing" must manifest form in order to be so
distinguished and perceived by the senses or by the intellect as a Thing. The
Eternal Parent —the Infinite Unmanifest— cannot be held to manifest Form, or to
display or present any particular quality, property, or attribute of
Manifestation, when in its state of Unmanifestation.
When the Eternal Parent takes upon
itself the robes of Manifestation it proceeds to manifest the appearance of
Things — these Things each displaying Form, and certain qualities, properties,
or attributes which distinguish them from other manifested Things. It is
axiomatic in metaphysics and philosophy that the Unmanifest cannot be thought
of as possessing or manifesting (in its essential nature) any one set of
qualities, properties, or attributes which appear later in its Manifestation of
Things, as distinguished from the opposite set of qualities, properties, or
attributes. And it cannot be thought of as possessing (in its essential nature)
of both of the opposing sets of qualities, attributes, or properties, for
"opposites cancel each other," and "antinomies condition
not."
Instead of possessing qualities,
properties, or attributes —or Form, in any of the meaning of that term— the
Unmanifest must be regarded as possessing the "possibility of infinite
manifestation of Form, qualities, properties, and attributes in its
manifestations," or "the infinite possibility of the manifestation of
Form, qualities, properties, or attributes in its manifested Things." The
Infinite Un-manifest cannot be thought of as a Thing, either in itself, or by
means of its symbol of Infinite Space. Rather, as an illumined occult master
has expressed it, it must be regarded as "An Omnipresent, Eternal,
Boundless, and Immutable Principle,
regarding which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of
human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or
similitude. It is beyond the range and reach of thought — it is unthinkable and
unspeakable."
In the period of the Cosmic Night,
there being nothing present except the Infinite Unmanifest, therefore it is
seen that, necessarily, "Things there were not: for Form had not
re-presented itself." There is no logical escape from this conclusion.
The First Aphorism further states: "Action there was not: for there were no
Things to act."
This statement requires little or no
explanation. There being no Things present, there were no Things to act. And
all action of the Infinite must be through, by, or in Things. All action
requires Change, and where there is no Change there can be no action. And yet,
it must not be thought that the Infinite Unmanifest is powerless, for it possesses
all Power; it must not be thought that it is motionless, for in itself it is
Abstract Motion. Speaking in finite terms, it may be said that in its state of
the Infinite Unmanifest the Eternal Parent dwells in a state of such infinite
Motion that as compared with relative Motion it is in a state of Absolute Rest.
The First Aphorism further states: "The Pairs of Opposites there were not:
for there were no Things to manifest Polarity."
As every student of philosophy
knows, or should know, every Thing manifests a combination of qualities,
properties, or attributes. Each quality, property, or attribute, is one of a
Pair of Opposites — one Pole of the Two Poles of Qualities which are ever found
present. Given one quality, property, or attribute of Thingness, it necessarily
follows that there is in existence in other Things an Opposite, or "Other
Pole" — its antithesis. There is no exception to this rule, and though the
Opposite may at first appear to be absent, diligent search will surely reveal
it, and its necessary existence must be logically predicated.
Thus we have the following familiar
Opposites: Hard and Soft, Hot and Cold, Large and Small, Far and Near, Up and
Down, Day and Night, Light and Darkness, Long and Short, etc. Even where our
language fails to supply a definite term for the Opposite of a discovered
quality, property, or attribute, the Opposite may be expressed by prefixing the
term "Not" to the observed quality, property, or attribute.
Some thinkers have sought to imply
that the term "Infinite" implies a quality, property, or attribute
which was the opposite of Finite, but this is merely a play upon words. The
word "Infinite" implies simply an absence of limitations, bounds, or form, and does not indicate
any limit, bound, or form no matter how extended. It is impossible to form a
mental image of The Infinite Unmanifest, or to attach Thingness or Form, or
quality, property, or attribute of any kind to it — hence the term
"Infinity" is not a true Opposite. It is only when Manifestation
begins that the Pairs of Opposites or Polarity put in an appearance.
The Infinite Unmanifest possesses
the possibility of an infinity of manifestations, all objects of which
manifestation must exhibit one or the other of any given set of qualities,
properties, or attributes. But to the Infinite Unmanifest itself —the Eternal
Parent, in its essence— there can be no Polarity or presence of any one set of
Pairs of Opposites.
Here, as elsewhere, the student is
directed to think of the Infinite Unmanifest by means of its symbol of Infinite
Space, whenever he wishes to test any of the statements of the First Aphorism.
The First Aphorism finally states: "The Eternal Parent, causeless,
indivisible, changeless, infinite, rested in unconscious, dreamless, sleep.
Other than the Eternal Parent there was Naught, either Real or Apparent."
(This aphorism does not exist in ancient
teaching, it was Atkinson himself who elaborated it based on his own
assumptions in order to carry out all this discussion.)
That the Eternal Parent is Causeless
is a self-evident fact, for there is nothing which could have caused the
Eternal and Original Being, from which all Manifestation proceeds. That which
is Eternal must, of necessity, be Causeless. That which is Infinite, can have
no Other which could have caused it. And it could not have been caused from or
by Nothing, for "from Nothing, nothing comes."
That the Eternal Parent is
Indivisible is likewise self-evident, for anything that can be divided or
separated into parts or particles, must in the first place be originally
composed of parts or particles. And anything that is composed of parts or
particles must be merely a Composition, an Aggregate, a Collection, or Crowd of
such parts and particles, and, therefore, not a Real Entity or Unity at all.
Moreover, that which is Infinite cannot become divided or separated into parts
or particles without losing its essential Infinity — a divided Infinite is no
Infinite at all, but merely a Collection or Crowd of Finite Things. Absolute
Indivisibility must be predicated of True Unity and Infinite Being. There is no
logical escape from this conclusion.
That the Eternal Parent is incapable
of Essential Change is likewise self-evident, for though It may manifest an infinity of change,
nevertheless it must always remain essentially Itself, and never anything else
but Itself. Moreover, not being composed essentially of qualities, properties,
or attributes, it cannot undergo the change which comes from the shifting of
the poles of the Opposites. And not having Form, it cannot experience the
change which arises from Change of Form. Absolute Immutability must be
predicated of the Eternal Parent. There is no logical escape from this
conclusion.
That the Eternal Parent is Infinite
is likewise self-evident. It must be Infinite, for there is nothing else by
which it may be limited, defined, bounded, caused, influenced, or affected.
That which is Absolute and Original, Ultimate and Elementary, can have no
binding or limiting conditions or Things. Absolute Infiniteness must be
predicated of the Eternal Parent. There is no logical escape from this
conclusion.
That the Eternal Parent rested in
"Unconscious, dreamless sleep" is held by all advanced metaphysicians
and philosophers to be a logical necessity, if we are to postulate the
existence of a period or state of Unmanifestation. For, as all psychologists
and philosophers know, consciousness (even in the form of dreams) is impossible
without Change. A changeless state of consciousness can only be expressed as Unconsciousness.
And yet, the student must not fall into the error of believing that this
Infinite Unconsciousness implies "inferiority to consciousness"; for
rather does it imply a state of "rising above" ordinary consciousness
—a state of Infinite Super-Consciousness— a state of transcending
consciousness, in which there is ever present the "possibility of
consciousness" without the exercise thereof. Ordinary consciousness is a descent from this state of
Unconsciousness, not an ascent.
This distinction is important, and must not be lost sight of by the student.
As we shall presently discover, when
Manifestation begins to dawn into appearance, then, and then only, the Eternal
Parent may be said to begin to "dream" — to dream of an infinity of
universes, succeeding each other in rhythmic sequence. And only when the
Eternal Parent shall awaken fully from the dream, into the bright noon-tide of
infinite self-consciousness, may It be thought of as being fully "awake"
and conscious. These facts will unfold themselves as we proceed with the
consideration of the Aphorisms.
"Other
than the Eternal Parent there was Naught, either Real or Apparent." Here, again, we have a self-evident
truth. There can have been no other Real being —no "other" to the
Infinite and Absolute Reality— for the predicate of Infinity and Absoluteness
carries with it the implicit predicate of Aloneness, Oneness, and Uniqueness.
There can be no "other" Real being to Infinite Reality. And, in the
absence of Manifestation, there can have been no Apparent (i.e., manifested or
"created" Thing or Things) Thing in existence in the period of the
Infinite Unmanifestation. There is no logical escape from this conclusion.
Finally, the student is once more
bidden to fall back upon the symbol of Infinite Space, in this consideration of
the Infinite Unmanifest, whenever he finds it difficult, or almost impossible,
to conceive of the truth of the statements contained in the First Aphorism as
concerned with the Eternal Parent in the state of the Infinite Unmanifest, in
the Cosmic Night. The symbol will be found perfectly adequate in order to
permit one to "think of the Infinite Un-manifest," although, of
course, it is impossible to paint a mental picture of either symbol or the
reality which it represents.
Edgar Allen Poe has well said of the
thought and concept of "The Infinite," and similar efforts of the
human mind to think of the unthinkable:
« This merest of words, and some
other expressions of which the equivalents exist in nearly all languages, is by
no means the expression of an idea, but of an effort of one. It stands for the
possible attempt at an impossible conception. Man needed a term by which to
point out the direction of this
effort — the cloud behind which lay, forever invisible, the object of this attempt. A word, in
fine, was demanded by means of which one human being might put himself in
relation at once with another human being and with a certain tendency of the human intellect. Out
of this arose this term, which is thus the representative but of the thought of a thought.
. . .
The fact is that, upon the
enunciation of any one of that class of terms to which this belongs, — the
class representing thoughts of thought,
he who has a right to say that he thinks at all feels himself called upon not to entertain a conception, but simply to direct his mental
vision toward some given point in the intellectual firmament where lies a
nebula never to be solved. To solve it, indeed, he makes no effort, for with a
rapid instinct he comprehends, not only the impossibility, but as regards all
human purposes, the inessentiality of its solution. He sees at once how it lies
out of the brain of man, and
even how, if not exactly why, it lies out of it. »
In the Secret Doctrine of the
Rosicrucians, therefore, there is no attempt made to define the Essence of the Eternal Parent — in fact, it is held, in
the spirit of Spinoza's celebrated aphorism, that "To define The Infinite is to deny The Infinite." In refusing
to ascribe the finite qualities, properties, and attributes of Personality to
the Eternal Parent, the Rosicrucians do not mean to imply that The Infinite
Reality is below the plane of
Personality, but rather that it is so immeasurably above that plane, and so infinitely transcends all Personality,
that it is childish to think or speak of it in the terms of Personality.
It has been held by eminent thinkers
that even the finite intelligence of man is capable of conceiving of a state of
intelligence as much higher than that of the most intelligent man as the latter
is higher than that of the black beetle. This being so, it can readily be seen
that such a Power, to which the manifestation of such a superlative degree of
intelligence being is but a bagatelle effort of power, is, and must be, in its
essential nature so infinitely above the plane of human personality that it is
practically an insult to think of it in the terms of Personality.
As has been frequently stated in
this consideration of the First Aphorism, the state of Being of the Infinite
and Absolute Reality —the Eternal Parent— during this state of the Infinite
Unmanifest cannot be expressed in words, for it is beyond words. It can be
thought of only symbolically — by means of Its only possible symbol, i.e., that
of Infinite Space. Even symbolized, it can be thought of only in terms of
negation; for being in the state of Absolute Being (which as Hegel says is
practically identical with Non-Being, when the term "Being" is used
in the sense of finite, conditioned, and qualified Being), it cannot be thought
of as possessing any of the qualities, attributes, or properties of Thingness.
Therefore, its state of Being can be suggested only by using the terms implying
the negation of all those qualities, properties, and attributes which men
ascribe to Things — even to those Things which they feel rather than conceive,
and which represent even the remotest limits of their mentative efforts.
Edwin Arnold, in his beautiful poem
"The Light of Asia," has well expressed the Buddhistic conception of
this "beyond-thoughtness" of the Essence of the Infinite Reality, in
the following words:
« Om Amataya! Measure not with words the
Immeasurable;
Nor sink the string of thought into the Fathomless.
Who asks does err; who answers, errs; say naught!
Shall any gazer see with mortal eyes?
Or any searcher know with mortal mind?
Veil after veil will lift — but there must be
Veil upon veil behind! »
Nor sink the string of thought into the Fathomless.
Who asks does err; who answers, errs; say naught!
Shall any gazer see with mortal eyes?
Or any searcher know with mortal mind?
Veil after veil will lift — but there must be
Veil upon veil behind! »
And, so, the Rosicrucians regard the
fact of the Infinite Ummanifest —the Absolute Essence— only under the symbol of
the Infinite Sea of Pure Space, resting in a state of Absolute Calm and
Absolute Transparency through which the mortal eye gazes and seems to see but
NOTHING: but which the Illumined Intuition knowness to be Allness instead of
Nothingness —Absolute and Infinite Being instead of Nothingness— Infinite Life,
instead of Death!
Though it cannot be perceived by
mortal sense, and though it transcends the highest effort of both intellect and
imagination to conceive or picture, yet the highest reports of Pure Reason
inform us that it must be present, and the highest reports of Intuitive Faith
render it impossible to doubt its all-presence and reality. To the ignorant and
the half-wise, this symbol may seem to indicate Nothing: but to the illumined
and truly wise, it is seen to represent Absolute ALLNESS of Reality. Gaze ye,
then, upon this symbol of Infinite Space with awe, for it represents our
highest (though feeble) efforts at expressing the nature of the Infinite
Essence of Being!
OBSERVATIONS
Here William Atkinson gives a very
long, confused and embroiled explanation of what the Unmanifest
God is.
To illustrate it more simply,
imagine this God as a space where there are no dimensions, no time, and no
trace of energy or vibration. It is such an abstract existence that for us it
is more like nothingness, and yet it is "something."
In the blog I am transcribing the
explanations that other instructors gave about the Unmanifest God, which
although often difficult to understand, they are undoubtedly more enlightening
than what William Atkinson wrote in this chapter.
No comments:
Post a Comment