(Volume I [867 pages], Volume II [525 pages])
The following book will chiefly consist of a development of the mode in which the most important of all the various branches of human science, the art of writing, was discovered and brought to perfection. …
When I go back to the most remote periods of antiquity into which it is possible to penetrate, I find clear and positive evidence of several important facts. First, no animal food was eaten—no animals were sacrificed.* Secondly, it is recorded and it seems probable, that the Gods had no names, and that no icons were used;** and almost all ancient nations had a tradition, that they once possessed sacred writings in a long-lost language. The possessors of these writings and this old language, I think, must have been the people who erected the Pyramids, the gigantic stone circles, and the other Cyclopćan buildings, which are found of such peculiar character and size all over the world. The language of these nations, or, in fact, the lost language which they used, we will now try to discover—assuming, that it was the first written language of man.
* Sacrifice—Sacrum Festum—sacrificium.
** This was because the God of Wisdom, or the wise God, was worshiped.
I believe that no person who has studied the subject ever doubted that there has been one original, universal language. Mr. Bryant says, “There are in every climate some shattered fragments of original history, some traces of a primitive and universal language; and these may be observed in the names of Deities, terms of worship, titles of honour, which prevail among nations widely separated, and who for ages had no connexion.”* … I have no doubt that in very early times, a sacred or secret written language, as was a natural consequence, consisted of a definite number of words and ideas, each word and idea represented by a number. As long as a certain pontifical government lasted, which I shall show was the first government, and was the inventor of this symbolic letter, this would remain. By degrees the priests of the order, but of distant nations, would add words to it, till the number became cumbersome, and then the discovery of syllabic writing being made, the numeral system would by degrees be deserted. This would be the first language both written and spoken, used in all nations. By degrees in each nation new words would be formed in addition to the old, and often exchanged for the old; so that we might expect what we find, namely, some of the old first words in every language. From the observation of Cluverius, that he found a thousand words of other languages in the Hebrew, and from the circumstance that it is in a less changed state than any other written language with which we are acquainted, an effect which has arisen from the accidental concealment of it, in the recess of the temple of Syria, I am induced to fix upon it as being the nearest to the original language.
* Vall. Coll. Hib. Vol. VI. p.4.
When we reflect upon the general tradition that Teut, Thoth, or Hermes, was the inventor of letters,* and that in the very old histories they are always connected with the idea of something magical, … I have formerly observed that I thought that letters were secret and considered magical. This opinion is confirmed by this observation of Guerin de Rocher, that the word used for letters or symbols of notation is also used for the idea of miracle, and is used in Genesis i. 14, as signs to divide the times. When a person considers the astonishing effect or power of letters and figures of notation, he will not be surprised that they should have given name to any miraculous effect. Nor is it surprising that the signs TT, which described, in the first symbolic letters, the soli-lunar cycle, should come to mean signs or letters generally, letters being considered the conveyors of the knowledge of Wisdom or TT, or OM.
* See Vol. I. p.174
Cicero* says, that Hermes or the fifth Mercury, whom the Egyptians call Thoth, was the inventor of letters. This is nothing but the renewed incarnation of Hermes or the fifth Buddha in Egypt.
* Natura Deod. Lib. iii.
The first word of the Alphabet is often one; which one is often described by the monogram 1. Here the idea of unity, the To On, and self-existence are united. The number ten is also the same monogram, and means excellence or perfection, and has the same reference to the hundreds that the 1 has to 10, and constantly describes the To On. In Arabic numerals, one and ten were the same—1. They are the same in Roger Bacon’s calendar.* In French we have the Ie in the pronoun je, I. All this exactly agrees with what we learn from history—that the first Etruscan and Scandinavian or Runic letters or numbers were right lines; that with the Irish** they were called after trees; that with the Greeks they were carved on staves—Axibus ligneis—and that they were formed of right lines and called Grammata or Petala or leaves, or petalon or leaf (I believe tree); and that they are found with the mythos of Virgil and the leaves of the Sibyls, and in the Rythms or Runes of Wales. Now all this leads to the important result, that this system was not at first intended as a record of language but of ideas. We see in the Arabian and Hebrew alphabets perfect order as concerns numbers, but perfect disorder as concerns letters for names of letters or of sounds; and we shall find presently all the planetary bodies and astronomical periods described by numbers, for sounds and the formation of words, was not discovered till long after arithmetic and astronomy; and that letters, selected at first without any regard to system in reading, though afterward altered by the Greeks, in their system, to accommodate it to a certain mythological superstition, very evident in the 6, 60, 600, ss, samach, xi; and, in the 9, 90, 900, Teth, of which I shall treat at large presently. In addition to this, I am quite convinced that an attentive consideration of the plates of letters given by Mr. Astle, will satisfy any person, that not only have the ancient systems once been all the same, but the forms of the letters have been nearly so. …
* Astle on Letters, p.189. ** See the Callan Inscription, Celtic Druids, Figure 13, p.5.
There are several parts of my system which are facts not theories. They are facts, that in that system of letters which we have, and that probably the oldest, viz. the Irish, the letters are called after the names of trees; that there are enow of the old Hebrew yet so called, as to raise a very high probability that they were all so originally; and that each tree's name begins with a letter answering in sound to the sound of the letter. It is a fact, that the moon's name in numbers, as above, is the name by which it was invoked in the orgies of Bacchus. It is a fact, that the Greeks called their letters gramma and petala; that the letters of all the oldest languages were in right lines, at angles, (though some of the nations certainly corrupted their alphabet to humour the mythos,) and that, at first, they mostly wrote from top to bottom.
If a person will impartially consider the great number of duplicates in the Arabic, he will at once see how unnecessary they must have been for a new-formed language : 4 symbols for d, 4 for Z or S, and 3 for T. All these were unnecessary for numbers; but, in an unformed language, must have been incumbrances; and thus, when numbers grew into letters, as letters they were dropped. With the Greeks the vowel v became f, and, in consequence, they were obliged to use for their figures two j s, and place the vau at the end. We have seen the Chaldee or Hebrew written language traced to North India, the land of the Sacć, and we have here the same alphabet of sixteen letters, brought by a tribe, as their history says, from the same place. If this was a forgery, how came its authors not to copy the Latin, the Greek, the Hebrew, of twenty-two letters, or the Arabic of twenty-eight ? It is out of all credibility that the monks or bards of the middle ages should have known of the sixteen letters.
It is now expedient to suspend our search into the origin of Letters, and to resume our inquiry (from Volume I. pp. 685,686) into the origin of the most remarkable of all the mysteries of the world—the meaning of the OM of Egypt, of Syria, of India, of Delphi, of St. Peter's, of the Kremlin, of Lambeth—or, the Om of Isaiah, of Buddha, of Cristna—of the sacred, never-to-be-spoken Om. … It brings us again to Om-Amet, Om the desire of all nations. … The original numeral alphabet of the Indian Arabians had 28 letters or forms. The Jews changed the number to 27, to make the M the centre. The Greeks changed their number to humour a superstition, the same in principle, and to make the two letters which describe their cycle, the cycle of 650, the centre letters. If we examine this closely, it is exactly the same as the plan of the Jews. The benignant dćmon of the cycle was the Son of Man, MN=650; and thus arose the generic name of the species—Man, Mannus, the Male, afterward joined to the female, making Am-mon or Om-an; and, when aspirated, Homo, hominis, hominem. In accommodation to the same mythos, the Greek vau or digamma or number six, was written j having the sound of the number x=60, three lines or three j s or xes, and the number c=600. In like manner, the M final and 600 of the Hebrews was constituted of the Amech, the 60 and 600, and the vau was, as the Vulgate calls the mother of the race, Eva. The E and U, the 5 and the 6, were the generators of all the cycles. They were both Lustrums. Thus came Eva or Eve, the mother of the race of MN, the root of Homo, of Man, the root of Mun-di, holy cycle.
When I reflect upon all the circumstances attending the knowledge of letters, I feel no doubt that they were not only considered to be magical, but that they constituted a great part of magic itself. Let us consider, only for a moment, what miracles, as figures of notation in solving problems in arithmetic, they would enable their possessors to perform. Let us consider alone the foretelling of eclipses, and let us add to this the knowledge of the periods of some of the comets, which I shall shew in a future book that the early literati did possess. In the passage quoted in Volume I. p. 675, from the Revelation xiii. 17, 18, the whole of my theory both of wisdom and of the system of using numbers for symbols and letters is, in one sentence, clearly expressed. The knowledge of the number is called wisdom, and the letters are called marks, that is, monograms or symbols, names, and numbers. Daniel (ix. 2) says, he knew a thing 95./ .*95/" bsprim mspr, from or by the letters in the book.
From 95/ spr a letter, or symbol of notation, comes 4/ sp or Sup, or Soph, wisdom. The idea of wisdom and of letters is never separated.
Vallancey says,* that storia is an Egyptian word, meaning what we should call news. It seems to have been the Hebrew 9): str, which I think meant a scribe. I believe the scribes were a learned order, a kind of priests, and that they were the only people who understood the art of writing.
* Coll. Hib. Vol. V. p.209.
If a person will think deeply he will have no difficulty in forming an idea how, when the art of writing was secret, a written word would be magical. A few lines scrawled in the presence of a person on a bit of leaf or bark might be given to him, and he might be told, whoever is a magician or initiated on seeing that scrawl, will know your name, or any other desired fact. A person must think deeply on this, or he will not see the force of the argument which arises from the dupe having no idea of the nature or power of conveying knowledge by symbols. As the Chaldćan priests were the only people who understood the secret of writing, it followed, that they were all magi or magicians; and when the secret did begin to creep out, all letters were magical or supernatural. This and some other secrets—the telescope, astronomy, the loadstone—made the Chaldćans masters of the world, and they became Moguls. Mogul is but Al-Mag, The Mage. On this account all the princes of India desire to be invested with the pallium by the old Mogul of Delhi, successor of Gengis Khan, of Tartary, the last incarnation of divine wisdom. The mythos at last always reverts to its birth-place, Indian Tartary—the mount Solima, the snow-capped Meru, where the Gods sit on the sides of the North. …
I consider that it admits of no doubt, that all written syllabic languages with which we are acquainted are the same, with merely dialectic variations; and that all the alphabets or systems of letters are one, only with the letters in different forms, as we have the English language and letter though one, yet WRITTEN IN DIFFERENT forms. The Arabic table of letters and numbers, compared with the Greek, proves this. We have here all the numbers in order, but the letters in disorder. We ought in considering these subjects never to forget, that all the various dialects of the world are like the spokes of a wheel, as we go back converging towards one another, till they meet in the centre; and, in a contrary direction, diverging, till at last they are no longer visible to one another. I believe that historical circumstances might be adduced, which would render it highly probable that, fifteen hundred years A.C., the people speaking all the then existing languages, could, though perhaps in some cases with difficulty, understand one another.
We will now try to find the meaning of the word Solomon; often spelt Soleiman, Sulimon, Suleimon, and %/-: slme.
I imagine that the following is the true translation of 2 Samuel xii. 24 and 25 : "And he called his name Solomon (%/-: slme), and Ieue loved him. And Nathan the prophet put his hand upon him ($*"-(-:*& uislh-bid) and called him after Ieue, (or on account of IE 9&"3" bobur) Jedidiah," (%*$*$* ididie) that is, the most holy IE, or, in Hebrew idiom, Holy, Holy IE. Here we have the ceirotonia and Christening, or giving the Christian name, usually given with us at the baptism. I assume that the $ d in the word $*" bid ought to be 9 r. With this the whole is sense, without it the whole is nonsense; and I think most Hebrew scholars who shall go through my work, and see all the proofs which I shall give of my theory, will agree with me that the emendation ought to be made.
Why did Jesus say he founded his church upon a rock or stone ? I have shewn the word stan or stone, both in India and Europe, to have the same meaning; therefore, it follows, that it is a very old word, probably an arithmetical word. May it have been s/=200, t/=330, n/=50, n/=50, stnn cycle of 600 ? It is very true, that the whole system was founded upon the cycle. What was the loadstone, which I have supposed carried in the Amphi-prumna as its mast, the mast of Cockayne,* of Minerva, but L’-di-stone the holy stone ? It was, most assuredly of all inanimate things, the best emblem of Wisdom. What can be more precious than the magnet ? This is highly figurative, no doubt; but who can deny that the language of Jesus was figurative, and as highly figurative too ? This Lapis would be the Lapis of 600; then, by regimine, the lapis stnn.
* See Volume I. pp. 340, 344, 345.
I am quite certain that no one who considers that Jesus taught in parables, as he said, that he might not be understood, will think it unreasonable to go to an ćnigma for the meaning of the ćnigmatical expression to Simon Peter, Cephas, Pierre, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church : Matt. xvi. 18. Now I think the stone on which Jesus meant to found his church, was Saxum, Sax, Saca, in short, Buddha or divine wisdom. This is perfect keeping with other equivoxes which Jesus is said to have used. The stone of Sax would become the stone Sax, with the Latin termination. Jesus Christ was a disciple of Buddha; that is, of Divine Wisdom. Who will deny this ? Thus we come at the first name of Buddha, Saca. … A play upon language, or an equivoque being clearly meant, no objection can be taken to an explanation arising from an equivoque. Sax is evidently divine wisdom, Buddha. It is also a stone, the anointed stone of Jacob, the emblem of the generative power or wisdom. …
The art of acrostic writing, which we find in the Talmud, the Psalms, the Runes of Scandinavia, &c., arose from the mode of making out a word from the first letters of numbers. …
Mr. Mallet has observed, "that the ancient Scandinavian poetry abounded with acrostics of various kinds, as much as the Hebrews;"* the Scandinavian, that is, the Saxon.
* Northern Ant. Vol. II. p.144.
The practice to which our grammarians have given the scientific or technical name of Anagram, partly arose from the accidental transposition of the letters of a word, when changing the writing from the numeral system of system of ciphers, and from the top downward, to the literal and horizontal, and partly from indifference as to the order in which the letters stood, when the language was in unspoken symbols. With respect to language, I believe our grammarians give too much credit to system, and by no means enough to what we call accident. A moment's reflection will shew anyone that, in the unspoken language of numerical symbols, it was not the least consequence in what order the symbols were placed. For instance, in the word Sul, whether it were Slu or Sul, precisely the same idea would be conveyed. This was the origin of Anagrams and Metathesis, to which we have given these fine names.
Endless is the nonsense which has been written respecting the ten Jewish Sephiroths; but Moore has, perhaps, alone explained them. Their name, in fact, tells us what they are. They are well known to be ten symbols; and what is Sepher but Cipher ?—the ciphers of notation up to ten, which, it is evident, contained in themselves, in the numeral language or language of ciphers, in its endless combinations, all knowledge or wisdom ? This was really Cabalistic.* This was the meaning of the ćnigma of Pythagoras, that every thing proceeded from numbers.
* See Basnage, p.199.
In this language of ciphers, every cipher or figure, to a certain extent, was, of course, the symbol of a word, viz. to 9 inclusive. … After the Arabic notation was invented, although all the figures from 9 to 99 would consist of two symbols, they were in fact representatives of but one idea. Basnage says, that the writing of Belshazzar's wall, interpreted by Daniel, consisted of but a letter or symbol for a word; this is correctly cipher writing.
We will now consider the number 9.
The Teth of the Hebrew stands for nine. I have no doubt that we have this letter nearer the original in form in the Greek Q Theta, a circle including a central point, though the Greek Theta is not unlike the Teth both in name and form. This has the same name as the Tha or Thas of the Egyptians, and the Fqaj of the Copts. It is called the everlasting number, because, by whatever number it is multiplied, if the figures be added, they make 9. Thus 7x9=63, and 6+3=9; or an equal number of nines, and for this reason it has the emblem of eternity for its figure, viz. a point and a circle. This Tha or Thas is the ninth or last number before the tens begin. The Tzaddi is the 90, the second nine before the hundreds begin; and the Tzaddi final is the third 9, standing for 900, before the thousands begin.
We constantly read of the Son of man. I have often wondered why a human being should be so called. I have little doubt that by this was meant, Son of the Solar Incarnation, Mn.
Man was the image of God, of the being described by the number 650; in short, he was the microcosm of God. Mind was Sapienta; and this was only to be made perceptible by one man to another by means of the Logos or speech. Thus mind came to be described by the word Logos, the speech or anima in motion, the spirit of God, of which the Linga was the emblem. The organ of generation, for a similar reason, was called Linga, or Lingua, language, or speech, or Logos. Mind was the To On. "Every thing tends to the To On"—"to the centre." For this reason, when the alphabet consisted of only twenty-four letters or figures, the two centre letters, the MN=650, formed its name. The name of that part of the Hom or Homo, which more immediately partook of the nature of the To On, mind and man-min-di, viz. divus, holy or sacred, that is, MN. After the sacred number, the Neros was found to be 600 and not 650, the number of the letters was reduced from 28 to 27, and the M=600 was the sacred number.* When this was the case, it is evident that those who did not understand all the reasoning might take either the LM or the MN for their sacred number 650. Thus came the Lama and the menu. Thus the Lamed came to be used indiscriminately with the Nun, as Ficinus tells us. And thus, as we might expect, Lama, Menu, and Mani, were all the same. The Lamed is, in fact, the LM-di, Holy or Sacred Lama.
* Thus, when it was desired to retain the allegory of the tree of knowledge and letters in the alphabetic numeral system, and the mansions of the moon and the days of the moon's period were found to be more correctly described by 27, the letters were reduced to 27.
At last, the Lama came to have the same name as the sheep, as the solar constellation, and as "the Lamb that taketh away the sins of the world," in the language of figures, it was L=50, M=600=650. For a similar reason the Goat, which was the same as the Lamb, was called Mn-des, M=600, N=50=650.
The Indian Fig-tree was sacred to the Sun.* It was the tree of the Lam; then, from the regimine, the tree Lam-di.
* Vall. Coll. Hib. Vol. V. p.130.
The reader may probably recollect the observations which I made in Volume I. pp. 606, 837, 838, that the Goat and the Sheep are the same genus of animal, and that they will breed forward, or continue the breed, like the Greyhound and the Pointer, not like the Horse and the Ass. This accounts for the Goat being often found where a Sheep might be expected. At last the two animals came to be equally adored, one as LM=650, the other MN=650.
After man began to theorize on the First Cause, he naturally designated it by the Monad or Unit, which was at length described by a point : on this arose many most refined speculations. It was on the Monad, on which was erected all the other numbers, till we get to ten; the whole of the fingers which formed one circle or whole, as it contained in itself all numbers. Then, by the invention of adding the other numbers over again, all numbers are formed. … Thus it was the creator, and the foundation or mother of figures, letters, and knowledge : from this, the Iedi of Judi were the followers of the holy I, or Ie, or Io. From this being the origin of letters as well as of creation, the golden fleece (holy wisdom) and the apple of the Hesperides, apples of the tree of knowledge, holy wisdom came.
The Chinese are said to have a God called Xangti, whose name is kept a profound secret, never mentioned on any occasion, but entrusted alone to those in the higher mysteries, who meditate on it with the most profound reverence. Here we have the exact history of the OM of the Indians, and of the IEUE of the Jews of the twentieth chapter of Exodus, which, when properly and mysteriously translated, means, as I have already stated, "Thou shalt not mention the name of % E &%* IEU, that is, of THE Self-existent Being." … Ie or Io was Logos, a tree of wisdom. Wisdom was letters, letters were a tree. Thus a tree was wisdom, because its leaves were letters; 0*3* ioz was the word used for letters. I was one, 1; one and a circle were 10, X; one and a circle were Io, which were IH or XH, the circle 608; one and a circle were a dot and circle, the emblem of the eternal monad—ť. It was Q, h/ 9, the emblem of the eternal number, as they called it. A circle is a cipher; it is the emblem of eternal wisdom; it is 4&:—4&2 sup or 4&' zup, SoF, wisdom. Theta was nine, because 9 was the emblem of eternity; conformably to this, the first letter of the hieroglyphic alphabet was an owl, the emblem of wisdom. …
We have seen, that in Judia of Siam, Maria and Mania were the same. Maria was one of the persons whose altars are inscribed Tribus Mariebus, of which one was the Virgo Paritura. On the Heathen and Christian monuments the letters D. M. are constantly found. The Christians say, they mean Deo Maximo, and the Heathens say, they mean the Dis Mariebus, of whose history it is pretty clear they were ignorant. But in fact they were the same, and meant Dis Mariebus—the holy three, who had the care of the dead Christ, and embalmed him. They were the three Parcć of the Europeans, who cut with their scissors the thread of life. On a Christian tombstone, in the Church of St. Clemens at Rome, they are Dís Manibus; however, the letters is and anibus have of late years been filled with cement to disguise them. But upon many Christian monuments the letters are, D. M. Sacrum XL.* This beats all our Christian antiquarians; they can make nothing of the XL. But it probably meant Deo M. 650. I think the three Marys or Parcć were the Trimurti—Tri-mr-di, the holy triple Maria or Maia. One was Mary, Sal or Sul, Om; the second, Mary Mag (or Magna) di-Helen or Magdalen; and the third, Mary the mother of Jesus. The Mag is the same as Mogul—Mag-al—ard the Almug-tree, of which the sacred part of the temple of Solomon was built, was the wood sacred to the Mag-al or ul, or great God. From this, by the regimine, came the name Mogul, as priests came to bear the names of their Gods.
* Basnage, B. iii. Ch. xxiii. p. 237, Eng. Trans.
In great numbers of places in the Old Testament, the allegory of trees and letters is referred to. What was the Rod of Aaron which threw our branches or leaves or buds ? What were the magical rods of Jacob ? What was the meaning of the branch from which the stem of Jesse was to arise ? Was Jesse I-esa ? The Gnostics frequently called Jesus the Tree of Life, and the tree itself which grew in the middle of Paradise, and, at other times, a branch. My idea that the fruit of the tree of knowledge was the acquisition of the knowledge of letters without initiation, is supported by the assertion of Enoch, that the wickedness of the world, which caused the flood, consisted in the attempts of men to obtain forbidden knowledge. It is also strengthened by a passage of Proverbs, Chap. iii. 13, 18, where Solomon says, “Happy is the man who findeth wisdom,”—“She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her.” I suppose certain of the leaf-names of figures of notation were selected by a society, and that this society being spread about in different countries, slight differences in the mode of selecting the sixteen letters took place. Thus the religious mythos was not every where described in exactly the same manner; hence we see the small variation which shews itself between the Hebrew and the Greek.
… Every man who was initiated into the mysteries, and who aspired to be a philosopher, is said to have has his own alphabet, in which he concealed his doctrines from all but his followers. At last, when writing became no longer a masonic or magical secret, each country acquired, by degrees, the habit of using some one of them. Their powers of notation, however, kept them all nearly the same, both in principle and order. (That they have all the same numerical power, has been proved by Gen. Vallancey in the plates to his fifth volume of the Coll. Hib.) And so, I have no doubt, they continued, to a very late day, with only the little variation in the last numbers of the Coptic and Greek. I think the probability is, that the order of men, (who were not, strictly speaking, priests, but nearly an order of priests, and some of whom might, perhaps, sustain the priestly office,) called Chaldćans, from central India, were the original inventors of the syllabic from the numeral system; and as for the numeral, I know of no people more likely than they to have been, the inventors of it also. … There is no fact more certain than the general solicitude of the learned ancients to keep every part of science, as much as possible, a secret, each to himself, or his sect or followers. There was an unceasing struggle between the Bees, who tried to discover, and the Drones, who endeavoured to secrete; and, for thousands of years, the Drones succeeded in preserving their science and power, by admitting only the most talented or rich of the Bees into their order, which operated doubly in their favour; it took strength from their enemies and added it to themselves. It is impossible to deny that numbers of the alphabets are formed in unaccountably complex shapes; these were the alphabets of the drones, trying to envelop every thing in mystery. If the Bees invented any, they would, for the sake of publicity, be of the simplest kind—like the first alphabets of the drones, made by them before the power and utility of the art were known, and before the necessity of using extraordinary care to keep it secret became manifest to themselves.
… Though every philosopher or his school had an alphabet of a peculiar form, each alphabet was evidently founded on that of Arabia. The first alphabet was the Arabic alphabet of numbers, each number having the name of a tree, and amounting to twenty-eight. The second was the alphabet of letters, of Cadmus, which consisted of sixteen culled out of the twenty-eight. After some time, these sixteen were increased by adopting the whole twenty-two numeral of Arabic letters, as they stand marked by the increasing numbers.* The more I meditate on thousands of trifling circumstances connected with these subjects, the more convinced I am, that, for many generations, the arts of reading, writing, and the higher branches of arithmetic, were in the hands of a ruling order, and this order was that of the high priests of Ur of the Chaldees; that is, of the country Uria of Calida, that is, Calidi—country of the holy Cali. The high-priest and ruler has been Mogh-ul from the most remote period. But the time when and the country in which the first letters were invented, is an ćnigma which I fear must remain unsolved. However, I think we may be assured, that the place was East of the Indus, and West of China—probably in the tract of country between the Nerbudda and sixty degrees north latitude. I think we cannot come nearer than this to the place. Samarkland, Mundore, Oude, and Tibet, have nearly equal claims, and there does not seem to me to be much room for speculation on the subject.
* See Celtic Druids, p.248.
General Vallancey* has shewn, that the old Chaldee alphabet is strictly the same as the Estrangelo, (vide his Plates,) and that the same as the Phśnician, which is, in fact, Hebrew or Syriac. These are the languages which we have found (vide Vol. I. pp. 702, 765,) in the College of Casi, near Oude or Youdia, or Benares, or at the temple of Solomon, at the Mere or Mount of Casi, in Cashmere, the country of the crucified Indra. And again, a thousand miles to the south, in the country of the crucified Ball-ii or Wittoba, in South India, at Terpati or Tripoly or Trichinopoly, called Pushto and Syriac and Chaldee; in each place both the Christian and Jewish mythos are recorded—the two, in fact, are united in one. Again, we have found the same Hebrew language, and the same double mythos, amalgamated in Mexico, carried thither before the invention of letters or iron. The amalgamation of the Christian and Jewish mythoses, found in both India and Mexico, and the ignorance, in the latter, of the knowledge of iron and letters, are facts which can never be separated. It is impossible to have clearer proofs that the whole existed before the time of Christ. …
* Coll. Hib. Vol. V. p. 201.
The Greek name of Numeration is Ariqmoj—of Rhyme or Measure `Ruqmoj. The Persians, according to Chardin, call it Abged, which word is evidently the a, b, g, d, of the Hebrew and Greek, and our a, b, c. And the symbolical letters of the Indian Algebra, are called Abekt, evidently at the bottom the same as the first letters of the Hebrew and Greek.* In the same manner the instrument used by the ancient Greeks and Romans to count with, and at present by the Chinese and Japanese, was and is called Abacus. Count Paravey observes, very justly, that the names Abgeb, Abekt, Abacus, Apices, prove the identity of figures and letters, and that the latter were derived from the former.** …
* Vide Bija-Gauita of Bhascara.
** Essay on Figures and letters, p.59. In almost all nations we read of a learned lost language. No one will deny that Algebra must have been considered a profoundly learned science in all nations. The Greek letters were taken from the Hebrew or Arabic; then here we have the name of this Indian learning in the names of the Hebrew letters. This almost amounts to something more than a probability—to a proof—that the Hebrew was the first language of the Indians.
After I had nearly finished what the reader has seen, I discovered in Hyde1 what in a very remarkable manner confirms my hypotheses, but which will not surprise those who have read what I have written respecting the Judćan mythos of the Mexicans and Chinese. It is an alphabet of Tartars who now govern China, and also an alphabet of the Mendeans, who, I suppose, are the Mandaites or Nazoureans or Christians of St. John or Nabathćans.2 A moment’s consideration will satisfy any Hebrew scholar, that they are both, notwithstanding the difference in the shape of letters, correctly Hebrew. They do not differ even in a single letter. After this no one will be surprised to find the Judćan mythos in China. But this Tartar alphabet must be kept a secret as the use of letters is prohibited.3
1 De Rel. Vet. Pers. in a map at the bottom of the title of a Tartar book, in my copy, p.358.
2 Vide Ibid. App. p.524. 3 Ency. Brit. Vol. I. p.727.
Jesus and Mohamed were philosophers, preachers of wisdom and morality to their countrymen, and, like Socrates and Pythagoras, neither of them left a single word of writing behind him. Some persons believe Jesus to have been murdered by the priests, others state that he escaped them; but at all events, he seems to have offered no active opposition. Mohamed, on the contrary, when struck, returned the blow and beat his enemies. But in each case the moment the preacher was gone, books enow were manufactured by those whose interest it was to establish a dominion over their fellow-creatures. In each case, I have no doubt, the early actors in the drama were well-meaning fanatical devotees. I doubt not that in India and in Europe millions went over from the religions of the two Cristnas (the God of India and the God of Rome), to that of the new Avatar, who, in the West, protected them by his arms against the sectaries of the old Avatar. For though the followers of the new Avatar never persecuted, the followers of the old one always did. It is not surprising under these circumstances, that the new Avatar should have protected his followers by his arms. This would excuse, if it did not justify, the wars of Mohamed, and also account for his success.
The principle of the fates was this : The First Cause was believed to ordain a law, or foreordain to each cycle what should happen. In every cycle the same things were repeated : the vates or fates only declared this law. Jupiter was bound by his own pre-ordained law, because, when he made that law, he, being omniscient, foresaw that he should not change it; he foresaw every thing, which, on the whole, was for the best, and, in agreement with that, he ordained every thing which would happen in the cycle, and for ever. However long the cycle may be, still if it be a cycle every thing will recur. This, although it may be false, is much more refined than our feeble conceptions, that God is changing every day, at the request or prayers of every fool who chooses to petition him; or, at least, as our book says, “when two or three are gathered together.” What is for the best, the First Cause will enact, and if he enact in time, he must enact it in a cycle, for time cannot exist out of a cycle; we can only form an idea of what we call time by means or our idea of circle or cycle. We know or believe from our senses that events proceed in succession : how can we believe that events will proceed or succeed, for ever, without a stop ? We may say we think they will, but of this we can form no idea, as we shall find, if we examine the course of our ideas closely. The Indians, meditating upon these matters, came at last, after the end of each cycle, to place the First Cause, as well as the Creator, in a state of absolute quietude; but what would this be, if continued, but Atheism ? To avoid this, they made him rest a given time, then begin and enact anew the former order of things, to create happiness—begin a new cycle. I shall be told, that this will deprive man of free will, and perhaps God too. I cannot help this. It is not my fault that this theory of the ancients is attended with a dangerous result. My declaration of their opinion or faith does not change it, or make it. If my reader will try some other theory he will soon find himself in an equal difficulty; and this arises from the fact, that we here come to the extreme of our faculties. If we go farther, we go beyond the power of the human understanding, and then, if we talk at all, we necessarily talk nonsense, as all the profound metaphysicians, like Berkeley, and the professors of the Vedanta philosophy, do.
If the mind of man could be brought to the consideration of the subject of prophecy without prejudice, he would instantly see, that in its common and usual interpretation it involves the very acme of absurdity. For what is it that God the omnipotent chooses to reveal ? Something to man for his good, which will happen in future : but, wonderful to tell, he always does this in such a manner, that man shall not know that it has been revealed, until the thing has happened. He gives it by the mouth of the priest, who is supposed sometimes to understand, sometimes not to understand it. But can any thing be more derogatory to the divine attributes ? Why does not God make his priests speak out, intelligibly and clearly ? Why did not the prophet tell the Jews, that their next Messiah should be a spiritual not a temporal Messiah, like all their former Messiahs ? But every prophecy is an ćnigma to be expounded by the priests. Here, again, we have the system of secrecy which prevails through every part of the ancient world. Every thing was allegory and ćnigma, contrived for the purpose of supporting the power of the favourite initiated.
The doctrine which I have taught of an universal Catholic or Pandćan Judaic mythos having every where prevailed, I know from its singularity and its opposition to the priesthood of the present day, will, at first, be treated only with contempt : but there are certain facts which must be accounted for, or in the end the theory will prevail, or I ought rather to say the truth will be no longer doubted. It is a certain fact, that the temple of Solomon and the tomb of Moses existed in Cashmere when the Mohamedans arrived there, and were destroyed by them; therefore they were not named by them, or built by them. The city of Oude or Ioudia, the Montes Solumi, country of Daudpotri, &c., are in the same predicament if they are admitted to have had these same names before the arrival of the Mohamedans; and this cannot be denied. It is not credible that these places should have been built, or had these names given to them, by the emigrant Samaritans, the bitter enemies of the system of David, Solomon, &c. The above are proved facts, not theories, and must be accounted for.
The same system is found near Cape Comarin; in Siam; in China; and in Mexico : all these things must be accounted for. It is true, the whole detail of the system is not found in the latter places to be exactly the same as it is in the former, because the system is accommodated to the country, and to existing circumstances in each case; but the fragments of it which are found, which, like the broken pillars and capitals when found, prove a temple anciently to have existed, render it highly probable that the very same system once existed. In deed, they do more, they prove it : while the fact that, with these fragments the most important parts of the Christian system are found to have amalgamated before the Christian ćra, raises a grand obstacle to the truth of the Judćan and Christian system, as at present laid down. It may be fairly asked, How comes the Christian doctrine—the crucifixion for instance—if there was an ancient Judćan doctrine and the crucifixion was part of it, not to be clearly found in the system of Moses and the Jews of Western Syria ? I contend that the whole Crestian mythos was an esoteric system; the system concealed in the mysteries and in the Jewish unwritten Cabala; which, in this case, will have been, in reality, no way different from the ancient mysteries of the Gentiles. The opinion that there was a Cabala or unwritten doctrine among the Jews was never denied. If there were such a thing, it must have been taught somewhere, in some place, to its possessors, and this place must have been their temple, though we read nothing about it. Thus, in fact, there must have been Jewish initiations at Jerusalem as well as at Eleusis. We know that circumcision, baptism, confirmation, and I believe the eucharist, the doctrine of a murdered and resuscitated person, were all parts of the secret mysteries; the former three of these we know fro certain were Jewish, and the Apocrypha tells us the last was.
That there is not a more full account of the adventures of the incarnate God in the Jewish canon, proves a fact which is, indeed, proved by a thousand other circumstances—that the mythos was originally an unwritten secret, kept in all countries from the mass of mankind, or a secret kept in allegories or parables, but chiefly in the latter, the favourite resource of the religion. The knowledge of the regenerated and reincarnated God was probably never openly published, as long as it could be kept concealed. It was a great mystery. It constituted the high mystery in all the temples in which the high mysteries were celebrated. There is not a country where the leading points of it are not to be discovered, and always, when discovered, found to have been carefully hidden—points sufficiently important and sufficiently numerous to warrant the conclusion, that the remainder of the system must have been known, though perhaps it is not now in our power to discover it. But I do not doubt when the very existence of the iconoclastic temple became endangered by the violence of the idolaters, the books of the Apocrypha, or secret doctrine, were written to preserve it, if possible, from being lost. But though we do not find the eight Saviours clearly made out in the books of the Jewish canon, yet we have found one of them in the Apocrypha; and they are most clearly and repeatedly foretold in the Targums by the term Messiah. The Jews were always expecting this Messiah. They believed Julius Cćsar, and, afterward Herod, to be the Messiah. But, as neither of them restored the kingdom of Solomon, he was no longer regarded as a Messiah; he passed away and was forgotten. But their book clearly state, that Cyrus was a Messiah : that was, because he restored their Temple.
I some time ago made an observation on the attachment of Pythagoras and the ancients to music. I have no doubt that music was closely connected with religion. All the ancient unwritten mysteries, (and all mysteries were once unwritten,) were originally preserved in rhythm or metre, and set to music, or contained in or preserved by music. Rhythm, metre, and music, were all invented for the purpose of aiding the memory—of assisting it more correctly to retain the sacred numbers, &c. For many generations after the use of letters became public, there were no writings in prose : all were in poetry or rhythm. All the stone pillars in the temples, erected or placed according to the numbers of the cycles, were partly for this same purpose. The sacred dances and scenic representations were for the double purpose of doing honour to the God and aiding the memory;1 precisely as the scenic representations of the acts of Jesus Christ by the Romish church originally were, or perhaps are at this day; and of which the plays called mysteries in Elizabeth’s time were a remnant. The Bards were an order to preserve and regulate the choirs, the Salii to preserve and regulate the dances. The origin of the Salii was, in fact, unknown to the Romans, and they were equally ignorant of many other of their institutions. The Salii were originally twelve in number. Their chief was called Prć-Sul,2 which serves to shew that they were probably Sul-ii—priests of Sol. They had an officer called Vates, a musician : they were probably all Bards. But the most important of these rites were the processions, or voyages of salvation, or what were called the Deisuls. In these, I have no doubt, that the whole life and adventures of the incarnate God were represented—from his birth to his resurrection and ascension.
1 It is observed by Neibuhr, that the ancients never grounded their tragedies on real, but on mythic history only. Rom. Hist. Vol. I. p.341, Ed. Walter.
2 These were priests of the Sun; and I suspect they were prhj-sul, and from hence our word priest might be derived. …
The exact process which took place in the formation of the Bardic order cannot, perhaps, be clearly made out; but there can be little doubt that it became almost exclusively devoted to the composing and singing of the sacred songs. Originally all sacrifices were feasts, and feasts were sacrifices in honour of the Deity; at these the Bards sung their sacred songs. And it was not till these matters became common, that the Bards descended to celebrate the praises of love and war. At First, these feasts were strictly confined to the temple, and to the elect; but, as the labouring classes became more enlightened, they insisted upon joining their superiors; and, by degrees, they discovered all the secret : till, at last, horribile dictu, there is now scarcely a secret left ! I have formerly stated that Clemens confessed that the Judćan mythos was in the ceremonies of Eleusis. What else can cause them to be in the secret mysteries ?
I believe, as I have repeatedly remarked, that for many generations the arts of reading, writing, and the higher branches of arithmetic, were secret, sacred, and astrological; that they were solely confined to the priesthood, which, chiefly by their means, ruled all nations; that one system of sixteen letters pervaded the whole world, and the priesthood was probably that of which we read so much in the Indian books, described by the name of the empire of Pandća. If at first the written language were the same as the spoken, yet a moment’s reflection will shew, that the latter would diverge in a variety of ways, in different countries, as time advanced. This is the allegory of the confusion of tongues mentioned in Genesis. We every where read of a sacred, lost language. We find this tradition with the Tamuls, with the Brahmins, with the Greeks, with the Druids, indeed, with all nations. And I am quite certain, that if the language of numeral symbols was not the lost language, the Synagogue Hebrew, in consequence of the state of seclusion in which it has been kept in the temple, is now nearer to it than any other.
… Now in all written languages, even those which are the most distant from each other, we find a surprising identity of words having the same meaning; for instance, we will take the Sanscrit and English, as in the Sanscrit word sam, and English word same, both meaning, like, similar. This I suppose to have arisen from the secret, unspoken language of ciphers or figures having extended over the whole world, and continuing fixed for many generations, after all similarity in the spoken languages had disappeared. I think the words which we find reduplicated, in the different and distant languages, are the words of the secret, numerical, or sacred language, accidentally fallen into common use. I think the example of seventy-three languages or systems of letters, all having the Arabic for their foundation, treated of in the work found by Mr. Von Hammer in Egypt, raises a strong presumption that Arabic (which I consider to be, in fact, Hebrew) was the parent of the whole, when in its early Cufic state, though now, no doubt, in every way changed. The fact that almost all the roots of the Hebrew are found in the Arabic, proves them to be only close dialects of one another. This idea also is supported by the place to which I have traced the Arabic—North India—where we found an Arabia and a Suracena. I need not remind my reader, that the Syriac is a close dialect of the Arabic and Hebrew; and it is scarcely possible to believe that its names of Pushto and Estrangelo should be given to the ancient sixteen letter language, (now called Tamul,) without its being, or having originally been, the same language.* Let it be remembered that the Judćan mythos is found in both North and South India. It is also expedient to retain in recollection, that the Thamas is, in a very peculiar manner, found both in Western Syria and in the Tamul-speaking part of India.
* Vide Georgius, Alph. Tib. p.583.
We have seen the way, or something very like it, in which man first discovered the written language of numerical symbols, and by what steps he probably proceeded to discover the art of alphabetic, syllabic writing. After he had discovered the advantage and followed the practice of calling the sun by the different combinations of figures which made up the first cycle of 666, and which, as I have shewn, proceeded from unthought-of and unforeseen circumstances, he would begin to try to form the next words or the remainder of his written language, whether it were symbolic or syllabic, upon some system; and I think we have an example of this in the connexion of the various words having a relation to the first superstition, that is, to the adoration of the female generative power, in the words Flora, flower, flour, pollen, Pallas, &c. We shall discover examples of this in the history of the name of the eternal city, Roma, which we shall find to have a near relationship to the letters of the Tamuls of India.
Thus the language of the Syrians and the Tamuls, of the Afghans and the Arabians, the Estrangelo, or of the Chaldćans and the Jews, was the language of the Flower—650 : and what flower was this, but the flower which grew in Carmel, the garden of God, which grew in Nazareth, or in the place of the Natzir ? What flower was this but the flower of which we so often read; which gave a name to the capital of Persia—Susiana or Susa—the Lily or Lotus ? What flower but the water rose, the rose of Ise, Iseur, Isuren, of Sharon ? “Susan, Lilium vel Rosa, Uxor Joachim.”*
* Vall. Coll. Hib. Col. IV. Part I. p.264.
An old picture found in Palestine by Dr. Clarke induced him to make some remarks on the Lotus or Lily, which, he observes, almost always accompanies the figure of the Virgin. He says, that Nazareth, at this time, signifies a flower, and, from St. Jerom, that Nazareth in Hebrew signifies a flower. This is the Lotus, equally sacred in India, Egypt, Greece, and Syria. The bean which it produced in the Nile and Ganges, was that which, when the mythos was lost, was believed by the votaries of Pythagoras to be forbidden, in his mystics, to be eaten,* but which he really never forbade.
* Clarke, Vol. II. p.411, Ed. 4to.
Nazareth, the town of Nazir or Nazwfaioj, the flower, was situated in Carmel, the vineyard or garden of God. Jesus was a flower; whence came the adoration, by the Rossicrucians, of the Rose and Cross, which Rose was Ras, and this Ras, or knowledge or wisdom, was stolen from the garden, which was also crucified, as he literally is, on the red cornelian, the emblem of the Rossicrucians—a Rose on a Cross. This crucified flower-plant was also liber, a book, a letter or tree, or Bacchus or IHS. This IHS was Logos, Linga, letters, LTR=650. THE God was also called Rose or Ras, because he was R=200, O=70, Z=90=360; or Rose=365; RS=RST=600; the Rose of the Water, or Water-rose, as it is called to this day. But this Rose of Sharon, this Logos, this word, was called in Arabic and Chaldćan werta and werd the same as our word.* Thus it was both the Linga, the generative principle, and Lingua, a word, or words, language. How curiously the system is interwoven, like rods of willows into a basket ! It was Flora, Flj=650, which was the Flora of the Romans, and the %95 pre of the Hebrews, both meaning a flower. The famous Hesperides was the Hebrew 63 oz *95 pri. The *95 pri means flower, but the 63 oz means letters as well as a tree; and, I have no doubt, is closely connected, in some secret way, with the allegory of the Arbor magna, cujus rami sunt leterć, &c. Push-to and Push-pa are the same. Push, which means flower, is the root of both. The corruption is not greater between Pushto and Pushpa, than between Pema and Padma—names of the Lotus. We have found Buddha called Pema, Padma, the Lotus, a flower. We have found him called Poti-sato; therefore Poti-sato meant flower. …
* Asiat, Res. Vol. II. p.53.
In addition to what I have said in several places respecting the similarity of Cristna and Jesus Christ, I now request my reader to observe (what I formerly overlooked), that the celebrated Arjoon, the brother of Cristna, is nothing but John with the epithet Ar prefixed. And I learn from Rammohun Roy that he was not the elder brother of Cristna, as I have formerly stated, but, as John was to Jesus, he was his cousin. He assisted him in his labours for the good of mankind, and when he was killed, the Sun stood still to hear the lamentations of Cristna for his loss.
All the names of Rome are female—Roma, Flora, Valentia : nearly its first and greatest Goddess was Vesta. Heyne suggests Roma to be Ruma.1 No person has puzzled all inquirers more than the Indian Rama,2 the cousin of Cristna. He has frequently been observed to have been to Cristna what John was to Jesus;3 and the similarity is so striking, that it puts the identity of the two mythoses out of all question. …
1 See Vol. I. p.376.
2 We have not yet found the origin of the word Ram the brother of Cristna, and of the animal of the zodiac. Now, in the language of numbers, we find in the Hebrew the Samach and the Mem final to stand for the same number—the famous number 600. From this mutual convertibility I think the Ram and the Ras have been the same.
3 See Vol. I. pp. 648, 649.
Arwma, the sweet smell,* means also a flower, that is Pushpa or Pushto. This was the language of the followers of the Phasah or the Lamb—it was the language of the Flower, of the Nazir, of the Flos-floris, of Flora, of the Arouma, and of the flour of Ceres, or the Eucharistia. It was the language of the pollen, the pollen of plants, the principle of generation, of the Pole or Phallus, of the Pole which opened the Gate of Salvation, and it was the Gate itself, the Arca-polis, place of deposit of the sacred things of the state, which were the emblems of the Arch or divine wisdom,—it was the Pala, the Pallas, (the divine wisdom,) and the Palladium or pallium of Elijah, or of the Lamb of God.
* Jone’s Lex.
Erwj amor, and this is ama, which ama aspirated is C-ama. Amor is Roma. Erwj is Sora or Sura, the Sun. (Sora-Cora-mandel.) Erwj being Cama is also Ama or Venus; in India, Cama-rina, Cama-marina, Sea-Goddess. Thus Venus and Cupid or Dipuc, that is, the Virgin mother and Child are the same; these are the black Madonnas and Bambinos of Italy. If Rama be Roma it is Amor or divine love, and is the same to Cristna as Arjoon or Jnana, wisdom, cousin or assistant of Jesus, is to Jesus.
To the celebrated society of the Rossicrucians or Rosé-cruxians, I have before alluded. I am not a member of this society, therefore, I cannot betray any secrets. This society is closely allied to the Templars; their emblem or monogram or jewel, or as malicious and bigoted adversaries would say, their object of adoration is a Red Rose on a cross, thus—
When it can be done, it is surrounded with a glory, and placed on a Calvary. When it is worn appended and made of cornelian, garnet, ruby, or red glass, the Calvary and glory are generally omitted. This is the Naurutz, Natzir, or Rose of Isuren, of Tamul, or Sharon, or the Water Rose, the Lily, Padma, Lotus, crucified for the salvation of man—crucified in the heavens at the vernal equinox : it is celebrated at that time by the Persians, in what they call their NOU ROSÉ, i.e. Neros or Naurutz. The word NOU is the Latin novus, and our new, which, added to the word Rose, makes the new Rose of the vernal equinox, and also makes on the Rose of the RSX RSS=360; and the XRS Xrs, or cross, or crs, or, with the letter e added, the Rose=365; in short, the God of Day, the RSS or divine wisdom, C, RS,* Cross-Wisdom (Ethiopicč).
* The monogram with which the title-page of the Latin Vulgate is ornamented, which, as I have stated, was given me by a Catholic priest. It is placed on the breast of an allegorical figure which wears three crowns—three crowns, not solely, if it be at all, emblematical of Heaven, Earth, and Hell, but also emblematical of an incarnation of the Creator, the Preserver, and the Destroyer—an incarnation of the Trinity or the Trimurti.
Buddha is said to have been crucified for robbing a garden of a flower. He is also, like the emblem of the Rossicrucians, called a Flower, a Rose, a Padma, a Lotus, a Lily, and Jesus Christ is called a flower. The Virgin in the pictures of the annunciation, is always presented with a flower by the ministering angel, and that flower is the Lotus or Lily. In Mexico the same thing is done, only the flower is a rose. I account for the fact that Buddha was both the flower and the robber of the flower, from the regimine of the language; (the Indians admit their ignorance;) from which the robber of the flower became the robber-flower. … He was a flower, because as flour or pollen he was the principle of fructification or generation. He was flour, because flour was the fine or valuable part of the plant of Ceres or wheat, the pollen which I am told, in this plant, and in this plant alone, renews itself when destroyed. When the flour, pollen, is killed, it grows again several times. This is a very beautiful type or symbol of the resurrection. On this account the flour of wheat was the sacrifice offered to the Crhj or Ceres in the Eucarijia. In this pollen we have the name of pall or pallium, and of Pallas, in the first language meaning wisdom. From this, language, logos, linga, wisdom, all came to be identified with letters, the tree, liber, Bacchus. Thus when the devotee ate the bread he ate the pollen, and thus ate the body of God of generation : hence might come transubstantiation. From this it came to pass, that the double allegory of the knowledge of good and evil, and of the knowledge of the generative power in the female, then in the male, and the knowledge of letters and of wisdom arose, and were blended into one.
As I have just said the mysteries themselves arose from natural circumstances. I suppose the knowledge of the Trimurti and the other doctrines of the Gnosis or Wisdom, the branch of the Cabala called Berasit, explained by me, was the secret of secrets, the grand Arcanum; that, along with this, one of the first secrets was the knowledge of the art of writing and reading. From the extreme difficulty of acquiring the art of writing and reading, it would almost necessarily be a secret science even without any intention at first of making it so. The knowledge of Wisdom became the knowledge of letters. All wisdom was conveyed by letters, by the liber, the leaves, the bole, the stem of the tree; thus the tree became the tree of knowledge to make man wise, forbidden to all but the initiated. … The Casideans, the Chaldćans, the Essenes, the Therapeutć, the Mathematici, the Freemasons, the Carmelites, the Assassins, Magi, Druids, were all the same, and all held the Chreestian doctrine, and received, at their rite of baptism, which was universal, a Chreestian name, and, by this rite, were admitted to the first step of initiation into the mysteries. Here was the reason of the universal toleration after the union of the two great sects of the Linga and Ioni took place.
On admission into the highest mysteries, the rite of circumcision was administered, or, perhaps, originally, it was the general rule, that every one who was intended for the order, should be circumcised in his youth. The word circumcised, as I have before observed, has the meaning also of initiation. It is known that into the high mysteries of Egypt and Eleusis no person was admitted who was not circumcised, though neophytes were constantly admitted. Besides, every person once admitted would choose to have his children admitted, and thus the order was kept alive; and thus it was that the order, as we have found, was both hereditary and not hereditary. The Monks constituted a class or order, at first perhaps the elect or perfect, or only the persons admitted into the very high mysteries. Perhaps the only persons who performed the functions. In the Culdees of Iona and in Wales, there were both married and unmarried members of the convents; but probably this was an abuse. Pythagoras became a neophyte, and was admitted by the ceremony of circumcision.
We will now return to the flower. In India, Buddha, as already stated, robbed the garden of a flower, for which he died. In Western Syria the female presents the fruit of the tree of the garden of love or wisdom to the male, by which means the death and regeneration of man ensue, and without which the species would not have passed on to futurity. Now what were the flowers of which the male deprived the garden of delight alluded to above ? If my reader will carefully consider every meaning which the word flower or flour or pollen possesses in plants and animals, in short in all nature, he will then readily answer the question. And if he wish to know what was the kind of fruit presented by the female to the male to produce the prolongation of the species, he may ask any naturalist, or even village surgeon, and he will tell him that the apples of love, the ova, are not the produce of the male, but of the female. They were the apples of knowledge, because, by being presented to the male and tasted by him, he acquired a delicious knowledge which he never knew before, and he caused the renewal of the animal, from generation to generation, to be ultimately absorbed in the To On. Here we have the apples of knowledge in the garden of delight. The flower spoken of was that without which there would be no generations or regenerations, it was the grand ornament in the garden, and, in this sense, the flower or plant of wisdom or knowledge. Without its stimulating and nourishing power there would be no fructification. The plant was worthless without it. It was the flower of wisdom—!-5 Pla, Pallas, Palladium, Pallium, and the Pollen of every plant; and, with men who did not possess the recondite knowledge of anatomy, it became, by mistake, the Phallus. I suppose I need not point out to my reader what, in this allegory, constituted the garden, the Can-ia, the Gunh. The female presented to the male the apples of love, the ova. He tasted and fell. With the increase of the species, cares and sorrow arose, the ground became overrun with thorns and briars, and the garden of delight faded away. From this first act came all the good and all the evil in the world; without it there had been neither good nor evil. The being man, mannus, homo, was [allegorically] not an animal; it was a plant. It is the only being in whom red blood circulates, who at the same time masticates food and produces flowers—which flowers bear fruits—of which flowers the male despoiled the female, and thus propagated the species. There is yet one other animal which, circulating red blood, bears flowers : but what is its Indian name ?—Hanu-man, the Monkey or Ape.
… Here we see the reason why a tree was selected as the ground of the allegory, for trees were literally books. The tree was very appropriately in the garden of delight or knowledge or wisdom—the tree, the alphabet, by means of which all divine science was known—the tree by the study of which the favoured youth, selected for instruction in the secret mystic art, became one of the royal SACRED caste, enjoying the contemplation of all the higher branches of knowledge, particularly astronomy. The gardens of Adonis, of Syria, I really believe were all Edens, (Eden is Adon,) delightful groves, seminaries of education in the secret sciences, delightful retreats for study, imitated by the Domus Templi of the Templars at Cambridge, and the college of Hassan Sabah at Cairo. …
Knowledge or wisdom, though not, perhaps, strictly identical, are constantly confounded. This arises from the consideration that wisdom s really the perfection of knowledge. In fact, perfect knowledge is wisdom. Jesus Christ is constantly called the branch, and the vine—the way of salvation, the way or door of life, the shepherd, the tree of life, the tree in the middle of the Garden of E-don or of wisdom. In the title-page of the Alcoran des Cordeliers, St. Francis is likened to Jesus Christ, by drawing him as a tree. Christ was Wisdom, and Wisdom was the “arbor magna in medio Paradisi, cujus rami dictiones, ulterius in ramos parvos et folia, quć sunt literć extenduntur;” the great tree in the garden of Eden, whose leaves were letters, and whose branches were words. How could the practice of calling letters by the names of trees be better described ? Buddha was Wisdom; Jesus Christ was Wisdom; consequently he was Buddha. Christ was the tree of life and of wisdom or knowledge; Buddha was Veda; Veda was wisdom—the book of life. … In the Veda was recorded all knowledge—past, present and future—the knowledge of generations or re-generations of the man, the knowledge of the renewal of cycles in sćcula sćculorum, that is, of cycles of cycles—the esoteric meaning of sćcula sćculorum, aiwn twn aiwnwn, ćones, emanations of divine wisdom. Our book which we miscal Genesis, or the book of generations, ought to be Barasit—that is, Wisdom—that is, Veda or Buddha. Thus it is called by the Jews.
But there were two trees in Paradise—the tree of knowledge and the tree of life. What was the tree of life ? We are told, that if Adam had eaten of the fruit of the tree of life he would have lived for ever ! What does this mean ? (Of course I assume that no person reading this book is so weak as to admit the literal meaning.*) A part of the text seems to be wanting. May it mean that, by the knowledge of the system of regenerations without having obtained such knowledge by previous initiation into the secret use of letters, of the Vedas, the Sophias, the ;&:9 rsut, or of the knowledge obtained by means of letters, man would have become assured of his eternal existence; or, that, by knowing the sacred truth, he would have been induced so to modify his conduct as to ensure himself a speedy absorption into the To On, to shorten the period or number of his transmigrations ? Was the fruit of the tree of life the consequences of admission into the sacred, i.e. secret, mysteries which, by producing fruits meet for salvation, produced or hastened the salvation of the initiated ? We know initiation was said exoterically to produce the most perfect happiness. The effect of initiation was, reformation of manners, the future practice of the most sublime virtues, the rendering of a man perfect—(“If thou wilt be perfect, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor”—) inducing him to desert all the little, narrow, selfish gratifications of this life, for the purpose of securing those of a life to come. These, at least, were its tendency and its object. I say not that this was certainly the meaning of the allegory of the tree of life; but it seems to me, that it must have been this, or something very like it. At all events, I think the explanation of the second part of the allegory is in good keeping with, and is not unworthy of, the first; and they are both beautiful, perhaps true. All this is strictly Masonic. I trust I am not improperly betraying the secrets of the craft, of the Megalistor Mundorum, when I state, that the designed effect of all Masonic initiation is to render a man more virtuous—consequently more happy. A perfect Mason, if such a thing could be, must be a perfect Buddhist, a perfect Jew, a perfect Christian, a perfect Mohamedan. They are all Crhj or Crhj-oi or Christs.** And, from the most remote antiquity, a man in every new cycle has been looked for, who should be in a peculiar manner Crhj, to teach glad-tidings, divine wisdom, to mankind. Moses; the conqueror of Babylon, called for this reason Cyrus; Pythagoras, Herod, Cćsar Augustus, Jesus; Mo or Om AHMED the cyclar desire of all nations; St. Francis; were all thought, each in his day, to be Crhj-oi by their followers; and the vital principle which constituted a man, in each age, a member of his religion, and not a heretic, was a belief that this Crhj was come at that time, or had previously come.
* After nearly the whole of the first volume had been printed, I met with an observation of Mr. Christie’s, (Essay on Worship of Elements, p.25,) that Dr. Kennicott had shewn that only one tree standing in Eden was forbidden : this induced me to examine the question more carefully than I had done, and I saw at one that Dr. Kennicott was right. The whole context, of all the tracts of which Genesis is composed, relates only to one tree, except one short passage at the end of the third chapter.
** Christians were first called Christs. Bingham.
I just now asked the question, whether the attempt to acquire illegal knowledge, or knowledge acquired by the possession of letters, was not the tree of life. Enoch says, the great sin of the old world, and that for which it was destroyed, was the attempt to obtain forbidden and illegal knowledge. This I consider of great importance.
In Genesis it is said, that man acquired knowledge—tasted of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil—illegally, illicitly, contrary to the command of God; in consequence, the ground was cursed, and in future he had to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow. Allegory or gross inconsistency is on the face of the story, respecting the curse of sterility fixed on the ground, in consequence of man’s disobedience; for, it is said just before, that he was placed in the garden to dress and till it; and every one knows that the ground was not cursed : the sweet chestnut and the filbert, the plants of wheat and barley, bring forth their fruit, and are succeeded by the orange, the fig, &c., before they are decayed, as freely now as they always did. Then what does this mean ? May it allude to the discovery by the people, by the uninitiated, of the art of writing, of letters, of the tree of knowledge, of the secrets of the priesthood ? May it mean, that the people, as in Tibet, were taught the effect of good conduct by the initiated, but were not initiated into its arcana, and that, in future, the arcana would be known to those only who had gone through the labours of initiation ? The expression of Enoch seems to favour this conjecture.
… This opens to us a most beautiful view of the ancient mysteries, a view in every respect justified by masonic mysteries of the present day, and anciently obscured by the unfortunate corporate and monopolising spirit, which excluded the mass of mankind from the invaluable secret, and thus kept them in a state of debasement—a weakness which seems inherent in the human character, at least a weakness attaching to the character of the great men of antiquity with very few exceptions. …
Persons may dispute about the allegory of the tree, the arbor magna in medio Paradisi, and say this or that is not the meaning of the text; but I am certain that no philosopher will deny there is a high probability that the exposition which I have given of it, was the exposition of the ancients, and that upon which their secret system was founded. The sacred books of the Tamuls, as I have before stated, (in page 15,) is said to have had five meanings. In India the mythos says, that the eldest son of God, the Adonis, the male, at the instigation of the female, robbed the garden of a flower, for which he was crucified; but that he rose again to life and immortality, and by this he wrought the salvation of man. May this be, that he secured the continuance of the generations of man ? …
… A deep consideration of what we have seen, must, I think, satisfy any one, that an uniform system may be perceived to have pervaded the whole world, and to have come down to us from the earliest time. … We seem to be fighting against a law of providence, which says, “Man, thy power of vision is limited; thou shalt not look too far either behind or before thee.” Our circle of vision, too, is narrowed not alone by Providence; the cunning and all the evil passions of priests, and the prejudice of man, caused by his being educated by them, are leagued with his weakness to impede progress, to embarrass our subject, and to render more doubtful, researches which, in their own nature, are sufficiently doubtful. When the priest cannot darken or throw into confusion, he burns, he forges, and he lies; speculating, according to a theory or plan charged on the philosophers by Mr. Faber,* but which that gentleman appears to me to have practiced himself in the case of M. Volney, and on the old proverb, that a lie uncontradicted for a fortnight, is as good as a truth. Therefore we must be content with probabilities, and not expect mathematical demonstrations.
* “It is said to have been a regular part of the atheistical system, on the continent, to misquote and misrepresent ancient authors; and the honest principle of it is this : where one reader is capable of following the cipher, ten will be incapable; of those who are capable, where one takes the trouble to do it, ten will not take the trouble; and of those who detect the falsehood, where one steps forward to expose it, ten will be silent. It may, therefore, never be detected; and if it be detected, the voice of a single individual, when the efforts of a whole conspiracy are employed to drown it, will be heard to a very little distance.” Pag. Idol. Vol. III. p.650.
In all the vast variety of systems or religions it appears to me, that no where is an original one to be found. All seem to be founded upon something which has preceded, and to have arisen out of it. If we consider the state of human understanding, this seems natural; for the mind of man is always jealous of being deceived, to a certain extent, and so far as generally to detect forgeries attempted de novo. We have several examples of the detection of attempts of this kind; and I think there is reason to believe that none have succeeded. I am quite certain, that an unprejudiced examination of every religion or sect will result in the conviction, that it was founded on somewhat which preceded it, and, generally, that it was got up more by fools than rogues; though I must now be understood to deny, that the fools were, in many cases, abundantly roguish. But there was, what they believed to be, truth at the bottom, which it was thought good or right to support, and in the support of which a little fraud was considered to be excusable, and, indeed, often meritorious. And under this pretext they ran into the greatest extremes of fraud. … The systems are like languages—both like the radii of a circle, diverging from a center, as they advanced down the stream of time, but merging into a center as we recede upwards. …
The early monuments of man, in their scientific and gigantic character, every where display power and science too great to exist without letters and arithmetic, and in the unity of their character they prove that one system must have extended over the whole world. …
What can be more striking than the universal adoration of the sun, in his character of Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer, or as the emblem of the Triple Deity, the Trimurti or Trinity—of Buddha, of Moses or Genesis, of Orpheus, and of Jesus of Nazareth ? Is there a corner of the old world which has not been stained with the blood shed on account of this beautiful, but often-misunderstood, doctrine ? The proofs are complete of its existence in the Aleim of the first verse of Genesis or Wisdom.
The doctrine of the androgynous nature of the Deity is as universal as the Trinitarian doctrine. There is no part of the old world where it is not found; and in the observations of the word Aleim, the plural feminine of the word AL, it is shewn to have existed as really with the Jews as with any other nation. All these, and many more, were the doctrines of the Cullidei or Chaldćans or Mathematici, evidently the most learned race in the world, as I have repeatedly intimated, and as I shall more satisfactorily prove.
In the Buddhist history of Wisdom, or, as we call it in Greek, Genesis, we have an account, and the first account, of the people of Chaldei. In India there are clearly found two Urs of the Chaldees, or Urianas of Collida, from either of which the Chaldei may have come. This Buddhist book expressly says, that the Brahmin who founded the Judćan state in Western Syria came from the East; therefore, if we are to believe it, they must have come from one of the two Urs which were in the East; and this is an admission of this book to which we cannot refute our assent,—every circumstance, all history and all probability support it. And I think it must be concluded, that the Chaldei, both of the West and Cape Comorin, were equally colonies of the Chaldei of central Asia or Upper India. And a little reflection may induce the belief, that settlements of Chaldei were also made even as far as Ireland, and the island of Columba or Iona.