Fashionable Occultism

by Maria Carlson

Originally printed in the Spring 2011 issue of Quest magazine. 
Citation: Maria, Carlson. "Fashionable Occultism: The Theosophical World of Silver Age Russia
." Quest  99. 2 (Spring 2011): 50-57.

Theosophical Society - Maria Carlson is professor and associate chair of Slavic languages and literatures and courtesy professor of history at the University of Kansas . Her specialties include Russian culture, Russian intellectual history, Slavic folklore, and the Russian Silver Age. A version of this paper appeared in Journal of the Scriabin Society of AmericaIn the years that led up to the social, cultural, and political explosion that was the Russian Revolution of 1917, Russian culture moved toward fragmentation and end. To many, the approaching twentieth century must have appeared as two different worlds converging upon the same physical space. One was the "outside" world of a growing bourgeoisie, the rise of popular culture, positivism, and materialism. It was the sunlit, rational, scientific world of Max Planck and quantum mechanics, Konrad Roentgen and the X-ray, Albert Einstein and the theory of relativity, and the invention of the bicycle, cinema, the automobile, and the airplane.

But there was another world, a darker, more mysterious "inside" world. It was the world of Friedrich Nietzsche and a strange philosophy of eternal return, of Richard Wagner and the mythopoetic drama, of the French poates maudits, of painters who painted landscapes of the mind, of Allan Kardec and spiritualism, of Sigmund Freud, C. G. Jung, and the new "psychic science."

The physical reality of this dualistic world consisted of expanding industry, dirty factories, grim workers, and what appeared as the threatening vulgarity and mediocrity of a growing middle class. The power of the church over the hearts and minds of people was deteriorating, and with its deterioration and a rising atheism a coherent framework for life seemed to be disappearing. Suicide rates and drug addiction were going up, moral standards were going down. Prostitution, anti-Semitism, crushing poverty, epidemics, and disease belonged to this world. There existed a pervasive sense that civilization was coming to an end and that a degenerate Europe (including Russia) would be wiped out—by socialism, by the machine, or by a barbarian invasion from the East (the "Yellow Peril," an atavistic vision of a second Mongol invasion).

Politically, this period was also one of decay. The Romanov dynasty was destroying itself. The Russo-Japanese War of 1905-06, which ended disastrously for Russia , was followed by a revolution in 1905 that brought agrarian upheaval and major postal, telephone, railway, and factory strikes that crippled the country. We know in hindsight that this period would end with a bang—world war, revolution, and civil war.

The psychological tensions caused by this dual reality gave the elite and the sensitive a strong desire to escape from it into some alternative universe where the spirit of man was still the supreme value. Art, music, and literature, of course, offer the immediate possibility of escape from utility, materialism, "progress," mediocrity, and dullness.

In the small, intimate world of the Russian intelligentsia, there was a frantic attempt to cope creatively with the decay of old cultural values, to escape creatively from the impending crisis of culture and consciousness, to bridge the growing chasm between science and religion, reason and faith. Ironically, these psychological and philosophical tensions at the turn of the century created an intense period of blossoming in all the arts.

General Interest in the Occult

People respond in different ways to extreme shifts in their physical, intellectual, and psychic environments. Many among the Russian upper middle class and intelligentsia responded by undertaking intense spiritual searches in untraditional directions—to religious philosophies, orthodox and unorthodox, speculative mysticism, and occult and esoteric philosophies of every kind.

Occultism, in a bewildering variety of forms, was a popular intellectual fashion of the period. Most educated readers had at least a nodding acquaintance with spiritualism and Theosophy, but there was also Rosicrucianism, Freemasonry, Martinism, Hermeticism, as well as manifestations of "common" or "boulevard" mysticism, such as somnambulism, chiromancy, Tarot, phrenology, mesmerism, astrology, fortune-telling, and dream interpretation. In the cities, people attended public and private seances, demonstrations of hypnotism, and lectures by famous Indian yogis.

If occultism was an intellectual fashion of the fin de siacle, over time it was (as all fashions must be) replaced by other fashions, so that the "occult" aspect of Silver Age culture has probably not received the attention it deserves from historians. (The Silver Age is a term applied to the cultural flowering in Russia during the first two decades of the twentieth century.) What seems eccentric and esoteric to us today was not always so. Russian readers and critics at the turn of the century had little difficulty in recognizing, however superficially, the presence of occult paradigms, images, and vocabulary in the art, literature, and culture of the Silver Age. The Symbolist writer Andrei Belyi (1880-1934), for instance, was ashamed that his novel The Silver Dove was so "obviously Theosophical," yet no critic would use the word "obviously" today. Modern lack of interest in late nineteenth-century occult philosophy, however, does not mean it was unimportant for an understanding of the period. For creative, innovative individuals like Belyi, Aleksandr Scriabin, Konstantin Balmont, Max Voloshin, Nikolai Roerich, Wassily Kandinsky, occult philosophy was a lifetime pursuit that impinged on all aspects of their personal, spiritual, and creative lives. To ignore this dimension in their work is like trying to understand medieval art without a knowledge of Christianity.

Theosophy and the Russian Intelligentsia

While spiritualism, in both its mystical French form and its pseudoscientific Anglo-American guise, was by far the most popular of the occult movements entrancing Russians at the end of the nineteenth century, it was Theosophy that took particular hold of certain influential members of the Russian creative intelligentsia. Their attitude toward this movement was complex. It was not a naive acceptance of Theosophy as a pat answer to the nineteenth century's crisis of culture and consciousness. Nevertheless, they took their engagement with Theosophy seriously, viewing it as a legitimate voice in the larger dialogue on culture, religion, and philosophy that characterized their age.

The creative intelligentsia were quick to identify and respond not only to Theosophy's religious and philosophical dimensions, but also to the mythic, poetic, and aesthetic implications of Theosophical thought. This was especially true of the Russian Symbolist writers and artists, who drew inspiration from Theosophy and even used its cosmogenetic paradigm and its syncretistic doctrine to justify their own theories that true art was religious creativity and the true artist was a being in touch with the divine, a high priest.

About whom are we speaking when we refer to the Theosophically inclined creative intelligentsia? Among them were not only committed Theosophists like poets Konstantin Balmont, Nikolai Minsky, Max Voloshin, and Andrei Belyi, but also curious seekers who flirted with but eventually left Theosophy, including the writers Aleksei Remizov, Valerii Briusov, and Viacheslav Ivanov.

Certain Russian modernist painters (Roerich, Kandinsky, and Margarita Sabashnikova) felt that Theosophical knowledge enhanced the spiritual and intellectual content of their work. In music, Scriabin based his theory that the creation of music was a theurgic act—an act of magical, even divine creation— directly on Theosophical doctrine. Like the literary Symbolists, Scriabin was concerned with theurgy (the act of divine creation), the essence of incantation and rhythm as a profoundly "magic" act, sobornost ("spiritual communion") as mystical experience, art as a form of religious action, and the synthesis of matter and spirit. All these notions are central to Theosophy as well. Theosophy touched the interests of the religious and esoteric philosophers Vladimir Soloviev, Nikolai Berdaiev, and P. D. Ouspensky, who felt the psychological attraction of Theosophical thought and pursued it at a formative time in their lives, although they eventually went in other directions.

The creative intelligentsia and the Theosophists spoke a mutually intelligible, if not identical, language. Like other intellectual movements of the early twentieth century, Russian Theosophy clearly reflected the apocalypticism of its age. Theosophical notions of world catastrophe, cleansing destruction, suffering, and the building of a new, superior culture in which Russia would play a leading role were variants on the same messianic theme dear to Russian god-seekers (idealists) and god-builders (rationalists) alike. Theosophy resonated not only with the religious visions of Soloviev, Nikolai Fedorov, and Dmitry Merezhkovsky, but also with the theurgical aspirations of Maksim Gorky, based on his personal transmutations of modern Theosophy and Slavic sectarian gnosticism. Gorky's vision of a New Nature and a New World (subsequently assimilated to its socialist expression as the Radiant Future) had roots in Theosophical thought (Agursky, 81, 84ff.) Socialism produced its own Prometheanism.

Many members of the intelligentsia, particularly among the modernist writers and religious thinkers, were also able to find common ground with the Theosophists because their personal views of religion tended toward the unconventional. Like the Theosophists, they were interested in ancient mystery cults, sectarianism, gnosticism, oriental religions, and the history of religious thought. Such views were occasionally expressed at the meetings of the various religious-philosophical societies that formed in St Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev , and other cities of the Russian empire. The more intellectually inclined Theosophists also belonged to these societies and participated in their discussions. The names of the leading Russian idealist philosophers (Berdiaev, Sergei Bulgakov, E.N. Trubetskoi, Sergei Frank, Vasily Rozanov, Aleksandr Meier, Dmitry Filosofov, and N. O. Lossky) frequently appeared in Vestnik Teosofii ("Herald of Theosophy"), the principal journal of the Russian Theosophists; their lectures and articles were regularly reported and reviewed in its pages. "Closely observing the religious seeking of our time, one cannot pass by Theosophy, because for certain strata of contemporary educated society Theosophy has made it easier to come to religion," Berdiaev pointed out (Berdiaev, 1).

What Theosophy Is 

If Theosophy was important for this group of creative intelligentsia, what, exactly, was it? In the broadest sense, the word "theosophy" comes from the Greek theosophia ("divine wisdom"). Here the term refers to various systems of mystic gnosis reflected in Buddhism, Neoplatonism, mystery religions, and the speculative mysticism of philosophers like Jacob Boehme (1575-1624), Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772), and Vladimir Soloviev (1853-1900).

In the narrower sense, however, Theosophy refers to a movement, founded on November 17, 1875, in New York City by an eccentric Russian expatriate named Helena Blavatsky, or simply "HPB" (1831-91). Assisted by her spiritualist friend, Colonel Henry Olcott (1832-1907), this woman of genius (or notorious charlatan, depending on one's point of view) created the Theosophical Society, an organization that within twenty-five years was internationally headquartered in Adyar, India , and boasted tens of thousands of members worldwide. Theosophy soon spread to Russia , attracting numerous adherents from the middle and professional classes and from the gentry.

The exoteric or open aim of the Theosophical Society, as stated in its charter, was to form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity, without distinction of race, color, creed, or caste. Many Theosophists lived their creed: they did not drink alcohol or eat meat; they ran soup kitchens, pioneered Montessori education and child care, supported working women, worked with the poor, and learned Esperanto so that they could communicate internationally.

The subsidiary goals of the Society were to sponsor the study of comparative religion, philosophy, and science; to demonstrate the importance of such study; and to investigate the unexplained laws of nature and the psychic powers latent in man. A small Esoteric Section of the Society met to study the more sophisticated, theurgic mysteries of Theosophy, which were not for everyone but for the more "spiritually advanced."

Theosophists define their doctrine as a syncretic, mystical, religious-philosophical system, a "synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy," supposedly based on an ancient esoteric tradition that Blavatsky called the "Secret Doctrine" or the "Wisdom Religion." Through "comparative esotericism" (the study of all the world's religious and occult doctrines of the past), Blavatsky's Theosophy claimed to distill out the universal mother doctrine that ageless adepts had been jealously guarding from the uninitiated for thousands of years. Blavatsky called these adepts "Mahatmas" or "masters."

These ancient sages, she claimed, lived in a lodge somewhere in the Himalayas and had little truck with mankind. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, however, this "Brotherhood of the White Lodge, the Hierarchy of Adepts who watch over and guide the evolution of humanity, and who have preserved these truths unimpaired" (Besant, 41) decided that the time had come for some of these truths to be gradually revealed to mankind through certain chosen vessels. The first chosen vessel turned out to be Blavatsky herself. She explicated her wisdom religion in two lengthy texts, Isis Unveiled (1877) and The Secret Doctrine (1888), claiming that these epics of Theosophical thought were "dictated" to her by the Mahatmas, with whom she was in direct psychic communication.

The texts Blavatsky wrote outlining her "Secret Doctrine" were eclectic, syncretic, dogmatic, strongly pantheistic, and heavily laced with exotic Buddhist thought and vocabulary and not a few false analogies. Combining bits and pieces of Neoplatonism, Brahminism, Buddhism, Kabbalism, Gnosticism, Rosicrucianism, Hermeticism, and other occult doctrines past and present in an occasionally undiscriminating philosophical melange, Blavatsky was trying to create a "scientific" religion, a modern gnosis, based on absolute knowledge of things spiritual rather than on faith. It was an attempt to bridge the perceived abyss between science and religion, between reason and faith.

But behind Theosophy's neo-Buddhism lies an essentially Judeo-Christian moral ethic tempered by spiritual Darwinism (survival not of those with the fittest organism, but of those with the "fittest" spirit). Theosophy could be described as an attempt to disguise positivism as religion. This idea was seductive in its own time, given that the end of the nineteenth century, like the present era, was torn by the psychic tension produced by the seemingly unresolvable dichotomy between science and religion. And so Blavatsky's new Theosophy offered nineteenth-century man an alternative to the dominant materialism, rationalism, and positivism of the age.

Although the Theosophical Society was founded in New York in 1875 and grew quickly worldwide, the Russian Theosophical Society was not officially registered and chartered in St. Petersburg until September 30, 1908 (Old Style), following social reforms forced by the 1905 Revolution. Nevertheless, Theosophy existed in Russia long before the official registration of the Society. Russians who traveled abroad often became members of the national sections of the Society in England, Belgium, Germany, and France . Scriabin, for example, was a member of the Belgian Lodge. Most Russian Theosophists belonged to the English or German Sections. Documented private Theosophical circles existed in major Russian cities from the early 1890s, and Theosophical texts circulated in French, German, and English texts as well as in hand-copied manuscripts (a form of Theosophical samizdat).

Theosophy is a modern combination of metaphysical monism, emanationism, and pantheism. As such, it traces all existence back to the emanations of a single, ineffable, unknowable Godhead. The Godhead emanates and creates the universe. Because the universe "unrolls" from the Godhead, God is everywhere and in everything (pantheism). At the end of time, all existence "rolls back up" into the Godhead. This is the "outbreathing" and the "inbreathing" of Brahma. The process cyclically repeats into eternity.

The human soul, likewise an emanation of this single reality of the Godhead, transmigrates through an enormous number of lifetimes, first downward, from spirit into matter, then back up from matter into spirit. Each incarnation is shaped by the karma generated by good or evil acts. At the end of the nineteenth century, Blavatsky announced that the present era of earth history marks a turning point at which the downward march of humanity into matter must be reversed; enlightened individuals, aided by the revelations of Theosophical doctrine, are ready to begin the ascent to the realm of the spirit, ready to be rolled up into the Godhead, to become god.

Theosophy and the Creative Artist

If we are interested in understanding creative artists motivated by speculative mysticism (as Scriabin, Belyi, Roerich, and Kandinsky were), then we need to become sufficiently acquainted with Theosophy to discern evidence of the contact of the creative personality with it, when valid, and to consider the ways in which a Theosophical world conception or the use of key Theosophical imagery and vocabulary might influence the artist's work. Some knowledge of Theosophy can be particularly productive in dealing with modernism in Russian literature and abstraction in Russian painting, for example. In his book The Sounding Cosmos, Sixten Ringbom writes about the tremendous social and intellectual changes that occurred during the fin de siacle and points out that it is no coincidence that "abstract art [in all its various expressions] emerged by the end of the first decade of our [twentieth] century, the same decade that saw the publication of Theosophical works describing the non-objective worlds in texts and illustrations." He goes on to say that Theosophy was "the creed that contained, as it were, a built-in link between the spiritualistic world conception and its materialization in an image" (Ringbom, 24).

In the case of Kandinsky and Piet Mondrian, both of whom read Annie Besant's, Charles W. Leadbeater's, and Rudolf Steiner's creative descriptions of life on higher planes and in different forms of refined matter, their abstract art clearly emerged from a desire to portray spiritual and psychic realities, and not from mere boredom with representational painting or the experience of alienating angst (although that may have come later, and was probably exacerbated by the subsequent loss of the spiritual that the first generation of abstractionists was seeking to avoid). When Kandinsky and Mondrian used words like "mystic" and "spiritual" to describe their art, they had specific connotations in mind.

The idea that abstraction in painting and music may have emerged from a desire to portray spiritual and psychic rather than physical realities—to depict the fourth dimension, so to speak—can be pursued into the realm of modern literature as well. The resonance between the abstract paintings of Kandinsky, the modernist novels of Belyi, and the compositions of Scriabin is suggestive. All were highly creative personalities, had rigorous academic training, and were seriously interested in Theosophy. Belyi was philosophically and aesthetically saturated with Theosophical doctrine; Kandinsky was more selective. Scriabin was totally committed; he even defined the concept of "ecstasy," which is central to his creative philosophy and to his worldview, as "seeing on the higher planes of nature."

In the case of all three artists, the notion of the modern that emerges in their work is one based on the supersensible perceptions of a higher reality, on the representation of that which occurs beyond the plane of "gross matter," where spiritual "forms" need not necessarily resemble the forms of physical matter found in this world at all. Their works strive for an intellectual and spiritual dimension that is simultaneously personal and universal. Like the Theosophists, these artists strip away the "outer garments" of their historical period and their own personalities to reach the eternal and spiritual in art.

This explication has been very abstract. I would like to provide a concrete example of how a specific Theosophical idea might have affected the Russian Silver Age artist.

Thought Forms, written by Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater, was among the most provocative Theosophical works. This book was devoted to the use of color and abstract forms as representing emotions, thoughts, and feelings projected onto the astral plane. The astral plane is the second of seven levels of being. Most of us live our lives focused on in the "gross matter" of the physical, or material, plane, unaware that there is also an astral plane, mental plane, and beyond them, intuitional, spiritual, monadic, and, finally, divine planes. These seven planes of existence, Besant tells us, are "concentric interpenetrating spheres, not separated from each other by distance, but by difference of constitution" (Besant, Ancient Wisdom, 63). They exist simultaneously, occupy the same space, and are in fact differing dimensions, or states, of matter and consciousness. They are invisible to the average human being, but can be contacted by those who are mentally ill, in a dreaming state, or spiritually trained to access them.

Thoughts and feelings can become palpable on the astral plane; they can take form. To understand this, we need to turn our thinking a few degrees. While the materialists insisted that thought was the product of chemical reactions in the brain, that matter generated thought, the occultists reversed this: thought, they said, generated matter. In Isis Unveiled, Blavatsky writes:

As God creates, so man can create. Given a certain intensity of will, and the shapes created by the mind become subjective. Hallucinations, they are called, although to their creator they are real as any visible object is to anyone else. Given a more intense and intelligent concentration of this will, and the form becomes concrete, visible, objective; the man has learned the secret of secrets; he is a magician (Blavatsky, 1:62).

Consider Blavatsky's observation, a basic tenet of Theosophy, in connection with Belyi's novel Petersburg , where characters are willed into existence not only by the author, but even by other characters. The works of the period contain many such occult references.

Besant said that these forces were the result of "intense and intelligent concentration" of will: "thought forms." Thought forms are mental projections, thoughts, or ideas, too subtle to be seen in gross physical matter, but which manifest themselves in refined astral matter. While they may assume shapes reminiscent of objects in physical matter, they more commonly assume an abstract form natural to the astral or mental plane. Such a form would have nothing in common with its source on the physical plane. Besant's book contains illustrations of such thought forms: geometric figures, starbursts, hazy clouds, even proto-computer graphics, all highly suggestive of later abstract art.

Thought forms, according to Besant, take their particular structure from the vibrations of astral matter (or elemental essence). As an example, she refers to putting sand on a sound plate and then vibrating the plate. The sand will create regular patterns. Vibrations in astral matter, of course, produce astral sound as well as form. As they move through astral space, they strike other thought forms, setting up additional vibrations. Such vibrations, perhaps, produce the music of the spheres, or the ringing cosmos, or a symphony or poem.

In any event, the shape of these thought forms is fluid and easily modified. When they assume shape, the thought forms also take color from the generating emotion or intellectual thought. Thus different colors are associated with different emotions, different vibrations/sounds, and different shapes.

Belyi's novel Petersburg , published in 1912, offers a good example. "An astral entity will change its whole appearance with the most startling rapidity," Besant explains, "for astral matter takes form under every impulse of thought, the life swiftly remoulding the form to give itself new expression"  (Besant, Man and His Bodies, 39). And this is one reason why characters in Belyi's novel constantly change into other people: the Semitic Mongol—the student Upensky—Uppanchenko—the "black-hearted" Mavrokordato; Shishnarfiev—Shishnarfne—Enfranshish; Voronkov—Morkovin; the Bronze Horseman—the Dutchman—the sailor—the Bronze Guest. Why do slippers and wallpaper come alive and suitcases reshape themselves? They are all astral entities, constantly being molded and remolded on the astral plane by the thoughts of Russians. These thought forms, once in existence, can then influence events and people on the physical plane.

The same may be said of colors. In Petersburg, the Theosophical colors determine the novel's color imagery: the bright yellow of pure intellect is associated with the abstractly intellectual Senator Ableukhov and his house, for example; while the green waters of the Neva signal the selfishness and deceit that characterize the city. Red anger, gray malice, black hatred all have their own codes in the novel.

These color codes are not accidental. The Theosophical color schemes had been presented earlier in Annie Besant's Ancient Wisdom, but Thought Forms lavishly illustrated the concept in vibrant Theosophical color. Widely available and advertised, Thought Forms was closely read by the avant-garde art community. Kandinsky owned the 1908 German translation and familiarized himself with it before publishing his own major essay, Über das Geistige in der Kunst ("Concerning the Spiritual in Art"). In Russia , Theosophists and occultists read it in English, in German, or in the popular and frequently reprinted Russian paraphrase of Elena Pisareva.*

Scriabin's uses of sound and color (in his famous "light organ," for example, which was to accompany the performance of certain musical works) parallels Belyi's orchestration of words and colors in his novel. For both artists, the colors, when coupled with the music (vibration) of the cosmos, were capable of evoking a symphony of emotions and states in the reader/listener that raised him above the murky, muddy colors of the material earth and into the azure and gold of divine spirit.

The interest of Kandinsky, Belyi, Scriabin, and other creative personalities in Theosophy was a manifestation of the the larger crisis of culture and consciousness of the fin de siacle. Our deeper knowledge and appropriate understanding of the role that the Theosophical worldview played in their visual, literary, and musical quests and creations offer new interpretive possibilities of their work and their times, and help us better to appreciate the artistic masterpieces to which this era gave birth.


Selected Bibliography

Agursky, Mikhail. "Maksim Gorky and the Decline of Bolshevik Theomachy." In Christianity and Russian Culture in Soviet Society, ed. Nicolai N. Petro (Boulder. Colo. : Westview, 1990).

Berdiaev, Nikolai. Tipy religioznoi mysli v Rossii. Paris : YMCA, 1989).

Besant, Annie. Ancient Wisdom. Adyar: Theosophical Publishing House, 1977 (1897).

———. Man and His Bodies. Adyar: Theosophical Publishing House, 1975 (1896).

Besant, Annie, and C. W. Leadbeater. Thought Forms. London : Theosophical Publishing House, 1901.

Blavatsky, H. P. Isis Unveiled. Two volumes. Wheaton : Theosophical Publishing House, 1972 (1877).

Ringbom, Sixten. The Sounding Cosmos: A Study of the Spiritualism of Kandinsky and the Genesis of Abstract Painting. Ã…bo ( Turku), Finland : Ã…bo Akademi, 1970.

Sabaneyeff, Leonid. Modern Russian Composers. Translated by Judah A. Joffe. New York : International Publishers, 1927.

 

*Elena Pisareva (1855-1944) was a principal contributor to the Theosophical movement in Russia from the 1880s through the 1920s. A talented writer and prolific translator, she wrote a firsthand account of how Theosophy came to Russia and developed there until the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, after which many of the leading figures in Russian Theosophy went into exile. See her book Light of the Russian Soul: A Personal Memoir of Early Russian Theosophy, trans. George M. Young ( Wheaton : Quest, 2008; excerpted in Quest, Sept.-Oct 2008).


Maria Carlson is professor and associate chair of Slavic languages and literatures and courtesy professor of history at the University of Kansas . Her specialties include Russian culture, Russian intellectual history, Slavic folklore, and the Russian Silver Age. A version of this paper appeared in Journal of the Scriabin Society of America 12.1 (Winter 2007-08), 54-62.


The Truth

by Betty Bland
National President

Originally printed in the Winter 2011 issue of Quest magazine. 
Citation: Bland, Betty. "The Truth." Quest  99. 1 (Winter 2011): 6.

Theosophical Society - Betty Bland. Betty served as President of the Theosophical Society in America and made many important and lasting contributions to the growth and legacy of the TSA. I am drawn to the simplicity and beauty of the motto of the Theosophical Society: There is no religion higher than Truth. What is truth? Does it change? Is it absolute? Is it relative? In our lives we often have to determine the truth of a situation. Are we seeing all sides clearly? In the midst of our own personal prejudices, propaganda from friend and foe, and our inherent need to be "right," it is most difficult to determine what is actually true. We might be able to string together certain facts, but do they reveal the truth?

     We use accumulated facts to develop our sense of purpose in life—our sense of what is really true and meaningful. But truth keeps moving and growing. Is a two-year-old wrong to think that its mother"s primary function in life is to see that all its needs are met? What about the same person at age seven, or ten, or fifteen? How about at ages twenty-one, thirty-one, or fifty-one? At some point a supposedly unchanging truth becomes totally erroneous.

     This may seem to be a simplistic example, but it points to an important principle. The set of ideas that we consider to be true creates our worldview, our sense of all existence and its purposes. Human beings seem to be the only creatures on earth that demand to find meaning in existence. A part of our makeup as a soul on its "obligatory pilgrimage," as the third fundamental proposition in the Secret Doctrine tells us, is to acquire individuality, and then to grow beyond that individuality, "first by natural impulse, and then by self-induced and self-devised efforts . . . through personal effort and merit throughout a long series of metempsychoses and reincarnations." The search for understanding, meaning, and truth is a part of our very nature. We cannot get away from it. We are endowed with a discerning consciousness that seeks to understand.

     Yet paradoxically, this very structure of consciousness tends to keep us from getting at the truth. Consciousness becomes set in its own patterns, developed through long ages of evolution and influenced by every experience of this lifetime. Once we start thinking along a certain track, we set grooves of thinking that reinforce themselves. We are not as free as we like to think, because our consciousness sees reflections of itself wherever it looks. Some have described  aspects of these grooves or patterns as our paradigms—the set of assumptions through which we filter all information.

     A good example of an outworn and blinding paradigm can be seen in the Swiss watchmaking industry. In the 1960s Swiss inventors were the first to develop the concept of a quartz timepiece, but it was not accepted there. The craftsmen viewed this innovation with disdain, considering it inferior to the long-respected skill of making watches with finely intermeshed gears and gems. Their paradigm didn"t allow for a totally different mechanism. And so the idea was perfected by the Japanese, who sold the first commercial quartz movement timepieces by Seiko. Soon thereafter American entrepreneurs developed and began marketing inexpensive quartz watches; particularly notable was the flood of cheap Timex watches on the market. Now there is little call for the fine skills of crafting small, gear-driven timepieces, and a whole industry has long since collapsed and had to reinvent itself.

     Another example is the extensive use of stenographers in the last century. What seemed to be a stable profession was quickly made obsolete, first by dictating machines and then by the rapid expansion of computer technology. Today even executives manage much of their own correspondence through e-mail, and recently even through the ever-improving voice recognition software that is now available. The realities of our world and culture are constantly in flux—particularly in this age of technological advances.

     Although we need to be able to develop flexible thinking, our thought patterns are so deeply ingrained that that they are present even at the cellular level. Writing in Theosophy in Australia (September 2009), Edi Bilimoria recently cited an amazing example from Paul Pearsall"s book The Heart"s Code. Shortly after receiving a heart transplant from a ten-year-old girl who had been murdered, the eight-year-old recipient began having recurring nightmares about the man who had murdered her donor. She was sure that she could identify the murderer. According to the documentation, "the time, the weapon, the place, the clothes he wore, what the little girl he killed had said to him...everything the little heart transplant recipient reported was completely accurate," and led to the killer"s arrest.

As Theosophists, we are not surprised to realize that memories are recorded even in the physical body. The idea that the emotional and mental fields are permeated by thought forms and habitual thinking is central to the Theosophical understanding of the human makeup. These memories and patterns of thought are ever with us, coloring all that we know of life. Our memories and repeated thoughts about them are the building blocks of our patterns of consciousness, our vrittis as they are called in Sanskrit. These patterns or vrittis are such an important inhibitor to seeing clearly that in the Yoga Sutras, Patanjali tells us that the essential purpose of yoga is their cessation—and thus the stilling or clearing of the mind. To begin to rid ourselves of these restrictive patterns is to begin to open our consciousness to the perception of truth.

     H. P. Blavatsky outlined some of the steps required for this clearing in her text "The Golden Stairs." The steps include a clean life, an open mind, a pure heart, an eager intellect, and a readiness to give and receive advice and instruction. She referred to these qualities as some of the "golden stairs up the steps of which the learner may climb to the temple of divine wisdom."

Vincent de Paul, a French Catholic priest of the seventeenth century who was later canonized, was deeply concerned about the search for truth in the lives of his monastics and congregants. He urged them to practice discernment using a three-step method. The first requirement was to have an unrestricted readiness. This could be defined as an unprejudiced open mind, with a willingness to see beyond any personal agenda. Then with this clear mind, one is to carefully weigh the evidence and to seek counsel from sources one deems wise. I would add to that a large dash of common sense—the sense within us that can perceive the clear ring of truth.

What then might serve as a measuring stick by which to test the efficacy of common sense? The only way to reduce the blinding effects of our personal prejudices is to move away from our focus on self. This is the way to develop unrestricted readiness, a willingness to drop old patterns, an openness to unfolding truth. The test of the truth of an idea is to consider what kind of person it makes you. If it is a mature view aligned with truth, it will be one that diminishes your sense of self-importance.

Master Koot Hoomi spoke to this point in an 1884 letter addressing problems that were occurring in the Theosophical lodges in Europe:

You do not find certain recent letters and notes of mine—including the one to the treasurer of the London Lodge, "philosophical" and in my usual style. It could scarcely be helped: I wrote but on the business of the moment—as I am doing now—and had no time for philosophy. With the L. L. and most of the other Western Branches of the T. S. in a deplorable state, philosophy may be invoked to restrain one"s impatience, but the chief thing called for at present, is some practicable scheme for dealing with the situation. Some, most unjustly, try to make H[enry] S[teel] O[lcott] and H. P. B., solely responsible for the state of things. Those two are, say, far from perfect—in some respects, quite the opposite. But they have that in them (pardon the eternal repetition but it is being as constantly overlooked) which we have but too rarely found elsewhere — Unselfishness, and an eager readiness for self-sacrifice for the good of others; what a "multitude of sins" does not this cover! It is but a truism, yet I say it, that in adversity alone can we discover the real man. It is a true manhood when one boldly accepts one"s share of the collective Karma of the group one works with, and does not permit oneself to be embittered, and to see others in blacker colours than reality, or to throw all blame upon some one "black sheep," a victim, specially selected. Such a true man as that we will ever protect and, despite his shortcomings, assist to develop the good he has in him. Such an one is sublimely unselfish; he sinks his personality in his cause, and takes no heed of discomforts or personal obloquy unjustly fastened upon him (The Mahatma Letters, chronological edition, no. 131).

 Now here is something that we can learn from the spotty history of our beginnings: to move forward for the purposes of our founders and their teachers, we must look first to ourselves—each one of us. Are we approaching all aspects of Theosophical work with "unselfishness, and an eager readiness for self-sacrifice for the good of others"? Do we avoid bitterness and fault-finding as we work onward for the higher cause? Are we more concerned about the good of the whole than about being right? Can we ignore unjust criticisms and backbiting and return gentleness and compassion? If each one of us can measure up to this high standard given in The Mahatma Letters, then we will be protected in spite of our shortcomings. And we will always be assisted in developing the good in ourselves and in our beloved Society. If we can carry this truth with us in all that we do for the Society, it will live as a flaming beacon for all humanity well into the future!


Theosophy after the Baby Boomers

by Robert Ellwood

Originally printed in the Winter 2011 issue of Quest magazine. 
Citation: Ellwood, Robert. "God and the Great Angel." Quest  99. 1 (Winter 2011): 30-31, 39.

Theosophical Society - Robert Ellwood is emeritus professor of religion at the University of Southern California and a former vice-president of the Theosophical Society in America. He currently resides at the Krotona School of Theosophy.Virtually all Theosophists realize that changes are afoot in the constituency of the Theosophical Society in America. Many of our groups are graying and diminishing. From a high of 8520 members in 1927, and a postwar high of 6119 in 1972, official American membership declined to 3546 in 2010. To be sure, nonmember friends, including younger people, visit our libraries, bookstores, conferences, and even our regular meetings, with seeming appreciation. Yet somehow not many seem ready to make the commitment of formal membership. What's going on?

First, we need to know we're not alone. The membership problem is, if anything, more calamitous in many other organizations. Nonmembership is symptomatic of a profound sociological shift in society as a whole. Sociologist Robert Putnam discusses this phenomenon in his book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (Simon & Schuster, 2000). The title comes from the precipitous decline of bowling leagues, once a standby in the social lives of many. From a peak in 1964, membership in the American Bowling Congress had fallen some 72 percent by 1997. A few other decline percentages over the same time span, out of the many Putnam presents: American Legion, 47 percent; Jaycees, 58 percent; Kiwanis, 42 percent; Masons, 71 percent. This is despite the fact that the total U.S. population grew by more than 50 percent in the same period.

Interestingly, two of the groups showing greatest decline of all in Putnam's charts were women's organizations: the American Association of University Women, by 84 percent, and the Business and Professional Women, by 89 percent—even though, as is well known, the number of women university graduates, and of women involved in business and the professions, surged dramatically in those same increasingly feminist years. The number of women receiving bachelor's degrees has tripled since the 1960s, and since the 1990s more women than men have graduated from institutions of higher learning each year. Evidently most women no longer feel a need for an organization concerned with their position as the feminine wing of an educated elite, or of a business and professional class. The Theosophical Society also has had, and still has, distinguished leadership by women; it did so at a time when very few comparable opportunities for leadership existed for women in mainline religious or educational organizations. But does that mark of honor still draw people to Theosophy?

The issue presumably is not lack of all interest in sports, education, or spirituality, but whether people choose to delineate who they are through joining an organization. If we like bowling, do we have to join a bowling league, go to meetings and pay dues, or can we just bowl alone? If we are highly educated, do we need to join a group enabling us to associate exclusively with others of the same attainment? Even strictly professional organizations are not immune to the decline; between a high in the late 1950s and 2000, the American Medical Association decreased from enrolling about 75 percent of licensed physicians to less than 40 percent. Is there a parallel to Theosophy and its relation to spiritual seekers?

Robert Wuthnow, one of the most exacting and respected sociologists of American religion, attempted a similar project for religion, especially that of younger Americans. He discusses his findings in After the Baby Boomers: How Twenty- and Thirty-Somethings Are Shaping the Future of American Religion (Princeton University Press, 2007). His demographic is people age 21—45, the children of the famous and now graying postwar "boomer" generation. Their spiritual life, institutional and otherwise, is of tremendous importance for the future of religion, for as many a pastor will confide, most congregations across the land are not growing, and many are conspicuously aging.

To be sure, the precise picture is not easy to demarcate. Religious membership and participation in the U.S. is harder to document than that of many secular organizations. Different denominations count membership in quite different ways that are not easy to compare, and religion polls are unreliable. Sociologists are well aware of the "halo effect," whereby a significant number of those asked by pollsters about their religious life will give the answer they think they ought to give rather than the unvarnished truth. Some ingenious cross-check studies have suggested that real church attendance in America is actually 10—15 percent lower, or even more, than the figure indicated by Gallup polls, which is usually around 40 percent.

In the research reported in After the Baby Boomers, Wuthnow found that over the years 1972-2002 his youth cohort's affiliation with mainline Protestantism declined by half, in evangelicalism marginally; in Roman Catholicism it increased very slightly (largely because of immigration), while the number of religiously unaffiliated young adults has more than doubled, to 20 percent. Actual attendance at religious services declined in this age range by about 6 percent. Only a quarter of younger Americans can be considered regular church attenders in the early years of the twenty-first century.

Wuthnow, as a sociologist, does not attribute the pattern to the inherent theological appeal of various traditions so much as to demographic factors. Evangelical Protestantism has had the advantage, in his eyes, of being rooted in a rural culture in which people marry younger and have larger families than they do in mainstream and liberal Protestantism. (Nonetheless, as evangelical Protestantism has become more middle-class, its younger adherents have begun to adopt more "liberal" ways if not beliefs, and its numbers have recently stabilized or even started to decline.) Marriage, Wuthnow says, is the most consistent indicator of religious participation, and today's general trend in urban and relatively liberal sectors of society toward later and later marriage and childbearing—if there is marriage and childbearing at all—clearly has had a deleterious effect on church attendance among these influential classes. Young unmarrieds working full-time seem to have other priorities than churchgoing, and, it would seem, attending Theosophy meetings.

Another factor affecting the declining membership of many groups: the vastly increased number of women, both married and unmarried, working full-time outside the home in the years since the 1960s. This was just as seismic a social as an economic shift. Undoubtedly it helps explain the precipitous decline of women's organizations like those cited above as well as the decline of numerous parareligious and spiritual groups once predominantly composed of women. A study of a large New England Congregational church showed that in 1950 this parish had no fewer than fourteen women's circles, only three of which met in the evening; by the '90s the number of circles had fallen to six, all of which were evening gatherings. Religious or not, familied or not, working women just don't have the time and energy for the sort of leadership their gender once exercised in innumerable churches, clubs, and Theosophical groups. Some of us can remember when the once-ubiquitous women's clubs were forums of some intellectual and even political heft, and so-called women's auxiliaries no less so in the life of the church; now they are nearly gone.

One could go on to discuss other factors, such as the much-discussed role of television and the Internet in keeping people at home rather than going out on a cold night to some lecture. So many other ways there are to get what information and inspiration we need to sustain ourselves, and even to make connections with other humans, apart from gathering in solemn assemblies. Wuthnow opines that changing levels and styles of education, and even globalization, may be significant too, though they are still more problematic to quantify.

But what the post-boomers are looking for on the Internet and in Facebook may not be too different from what people used to look for clubs, churches, and lodges; it is perhaps a matter of more a different medium than a message.

Wuthnow's research says that the 25 percent of younger Americans who attend religious services, not surprisingly, state an interest in both religion and spirituality. But of those who are religiously uninvolved, 60 percent say spiritual growth is at least fairly important to them, and 29 percent say they have devoted some effort to their spiritual lives over the past year; 25 percent say their interest in spirituality is increasing; and 25 percent say they meditate at least once a week. The great majority of young people report that spiritual experience is more important than church doctrine in shaping their religious outlook. Among their elders the two are nearly equal.

Whether or not these surveys are precisely accurate, undoubtedly they tell of a vast openness out there toward free, noninstitutional perspectives on spiritual growth. I am sure Theosophy has much it could contribute to the quests of this audience. But our gifts will need to be presented in ways that make Theosophy seem less like a membership organization that one joins, and more like a welcoming resource and support group that is available 24/7 through the media younger people use, from the Internet to informal "hanging out" gatherings. We will get nowhere by looking just like another church, club, or lodge, and declining along with them. We need to find ingenious ways to connect with lives that are much more individualistic and free-floating than they were back when joining was an important way of saying who one was.

The Theosophical Society was founded in the Victorian heyday of finding, or making, personal identities through joining churches and/or such groups as Masonic lodges, gentlemen's clubs, women's clubs, literary societies, army regiments, and much else. Those commitments involved considerable time, but also often supplied the kind of contacts one needed to get good jobs, connect politically, and find mates. They had their pins and ties, perhaps even their grips and passwords. Theosophy, insofar as it is organized on the lodge or club model, reflects those days, and there is nothing wrong with that for those who find it comfortable. But clearly the time is upon us when we must also think of Theosophy as a movement of mind and spirit, intangible but powerful, to be advanced in all sorts of ways outside those particular boxes.

The day may come when Theosophy is no longer a shrinking membership organization but more like an educational foundation, supported by all who feel called to do so, and involved in promoting teaching in the Theosophical tradition through all possible media: books, pamphlets, lectures, films, Internet sites, classes, camps, and personal contact. (Even video games, which are just beginning to be taken seriously as a new art form—a fresh embodiment of the timeless hero myth?) The new Theosophy will maintain all facets of the Ancient Wisdom but will assure the old is made new by always being presented in a way that facilitates individual spiritual life and growth.

For all that, Theosophy will probably continue also to manifest itself in groups getting together in person as well as virtually, under whatever name and in whatever form they take. Clearly a reaction has set in against traditional kinds of organization, but that does not mean humans will forever be content to live, learn, and die alone. Numerous studies have shown that people who are not just in families, but also active in religious or other larger meaning-giving organizations, are happier and healthier than solitaries or those who know only casual and informal relationships. One can e-mail, tweet, text, game, and surf the Web all one wants, even stream Theosophical lectures or participate in virtual sacred rituals at a keyboard together with fellow worshipers across the continent; this has been done. But the screen still does not take the place of face-to-face meetings. Words alone will never be quite the same as hugs and eye contact.

The jury is still out on how this will be achieved. Many voices will need to be heard as Theosophy adapts itself, as it always has over the ages, to new occasions which teach new duties and new words. It is exciting to have the privilege of living in such times of change and challenge.


Robert Ellwood is emeritus professor of religion at the University of Southern California and a former vice-president of the Theosophical Society in America. He currently resides at the Krotona School of Theosophy.


God and the Great Angel

by Richard Smoley

Originally printed in the Winter 2011 issue of Quest magazine. 
Citation: Smoley, Richard. "God and the Great Angel." Quest  99. 1 (Winter 2011): 24-28.

 Theosophical Society - Richard Smoley is editor of Quest: Journal of the Theosophical Society in America and a frequent lecturer for the Theosophical SocietyWho is the God we worship? Is he really the supreme creator of the universe, or merely an impostor or a fiction?

Such questions seem sacrilegious to believers, but they have been surfacing for millennia. The Jews contend that their God, Yahweh or Jehovah, is the Supreme Being, who deigned to communicate with them and them alone in the covenant at Sinai. Christians and Muslims, their spiritual descendants, have taken up the claim—while insisting that their revelations are the final and complete versions. All of these religions, in their dominant forms, insist that any other god either does not exist or is a demon in disguise.

Sometimes, however, the charges have been reversed to say that the monotheistic God of the Abrahamic faiths is not what he is claimed to be. One of them was H. P. Blavatsky. She writes: "If we are taken to task for believing in operating 'Gods' and 'Spirits' while rejecting a personal God, we answer to the Theists and Monotheists: Admit that your Jehovah is one of the Elohim, and we are ready to recognize him. Make of him, as you do, the Infinite, the one and the Eternal God, and we will never accept him in this character. Of tribal Gods there were many; the One Universal Deity is a principle, an abstract Root-Idea which has nought to do with the unclean work of finite Form" (Secret Doctrine, I, 492n.; emphasis here and in other quotations is in the original). Blavatsky is not denying that the God of the Abrahamic religions exists; rather she is saying that, contrary to what these religions claim, he is not the sole and unique Supreme Being.

In this she echoes the Gnostics of antiquity, who said that the god who created the physical world was the Demiurge (from the Greek d?miourgos, "craftsman"), a second- or third-degree divine emanation who falsely claimed to be the true God. Some Gnostic texts call him Ialdabaoth, a name of uncertain etymology. One common suggestion is "child of chaos" (cf. Secret Doctrine I, 197); another possibility is "begetter of hosts" (Barker, Great Angel, 174). A Gnostic text called Apocryphon of John says of Ialdabaoth: "And he is impious in his madness which is in him. For he said, 'I am God and there is no other God beside me,' for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come" (Robinson, 105). This is clearly mocking the First Commandment in Exodus 20:2-3: "I am the Lord thy God. . . . Thou shalt not have any other gods before me." [*] Blavatsky equates Yahweh or Jehovah with Ialdabaoth (Secret Doctrine I, 197; cf. Isis Unveiled II, 183ff.).

The origins of Gnosticism, the great adversary of proto-catholic Christianity in the early centuries of the present era, have been hard to trace. Various authorities have sought for its sources in Iranian, Egyptian, and Greek religion, but these views all have serious defects. Margaret Barker, a British biblical scholar with solid mainstream credentials (she is a former president of the Society for Old Testament Study), argues that Gnosticism actually arose out of Judaism (Barker, Great Angel, 167). In fact she argues that Gnosticism is a descendant of the religion of Israel of the First Temple period (c. 950—586 BC).

The conventional view of Judaism in this era is derived from the Hebrew Bible as it now stands. The children of Israel made a covenant with Yahweh to worship him alone, but they kept reneging and worshipping the strange gods of their Canaanite neighbors. Yahweh periodically punished them with invasions by great powers such as Assyria and Babylon . Nonetheless, the Israelites continued to backslide, even defiling the Temple in Jerusalem , which had to be periodically purged.

The most dramatic of these purges took place in 621 bc, under Josiah, king of Judah . Worship in Jerusalem had gone so far astray, according to the Bible, that the Temple had fallen into disrepair and needed to be rebuilt. During this restoration, the lost scroll of the law of Moses was supposedly discovered and read to Josiah. "And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the book of the law, that he rent his clothes" (2 Kings 22:11). Shocked by how far his people had strayed from this law, Josiah "commanded Hilkiah the high priest, and the priests of the second order, and the keepers of the door, to bring forth out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels that were made for Baal, and for the grove, and for all the host of heaven: and he burned them without Jerusalem in the fields of Kidron" (2 Kings 23:4). Baal (a Canaanite god whose name simply means "lord"; his real name was Hadd: Patai, 45) is familiar to readers of the Old Testament as a rival god to Yahweh, but the "grove" and "the host of heaven" are puzzling. They are, however, extremely relevant to our story, and we shall return to them.

Most biblical scholars believe that the scroll read to Josiah was not a rediscovered ancient text but a composition written for the occasion. This text is generally identified with Deuteronomy. It is the first part of what is called the Deuteronomic history, which also includes Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. The prevailing scholarly view of this history is that its first version was composed in Josiah's reign and came to a stirring climax with the restoration of the true worship of Yahweh at that time. But the history does not stop here. It continues down through the death of Josiah in 609 bc and the sack of the Temple by the Babylonians in 586 bc. For this reason a second, revised edition of the Deuteronomic account is postulated; it would have been written during the Babylonian exile (586—538 BC).

All of this is, as I say, widely held by mainstream scholars. Even so, they generally accept this Deuteronomic work as a broadly accurate account of the history of Israel in the period of the First Temple . Barker disagrees, saying that the Deuteronomic history was written by innovators who radically altered the Jewish religion and rewrote history to reflect their views. Moreover, the Josianic "reform" of 621 was itself a radical restructuring of the faith. Up to that time, she suggests, the Israelites had worshipped a trinity of gods: El, the high, absolute God; Yahweh, the national god of Israel ; and Asherah, Yahweh's consort. Contrary to what the current version of the Bible says, worship of this trinity was not an aberration, but the nation's standard religion up to that time. The Deuteronomic reform purged the goddess Asherah and conflated El with Yahweh, so that the national god of Israel was now equated with the high God. Monotheism as we know it was born.

These facts have been obscured, Barker says, because all texts in the present-day Old Testament were either written or edited by supporters of this new monotheistic faith. Nevertheless, some biblical texts may retain traces of the original scheme. One of these is Daniel 7:13-14, written in the second century bc: "I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away." In Christian theology, the Father is the "Ancient of days" and Jesus Christ is the "Son of man"—but what could it have meant in its original Jewish context? For Barker, the Ancient of Days here could be a relic of El, the transcendent God, from the religion of the First Temple . The "Son of Man" would then be Yahweh, the national god of Israel (Barker, Great Angel, 153-55). The Christians did not make up this mythos; their sole innovation was to equate the "Son of Man" with the man Jesus. Or, if we are to believe the Gospels, Jesus himself made this identification.

Even more remarkably, Barker says there may have originally been no distinction between Yahweh and the Angel of Yahweh. As she points out, many texts in the Old Testament equate the two, for example Judges 2:1: "Now the angel of the Lord went up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, 'I brought you up from Egypt, and brought you into the land that I had promised to your ancestors. I said, 'I will never break my covenant with you.'" In Genesis 22, with its story of the sacrifice of Isaac, it is "the angel of Yahweh" that calls to Abraham out of heaven (Gen. 22:11), but in the end Abraham names the place where this happened "Yahweh-yireh," or "Yahweh is seen" (Gen. 22:14). In Genesis 48:15-16 Jacob says, "God, before whom my ancestors Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long to this day, the Angel which has redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads." In short, "the bulk of the evidence suggests that the Angel of Yahweh and Yahweh had been identical" (Barker, Great Angel, 35).

Sometimes Yahweh was described as being incarnated in the Davidic king, as we learn in Chronicles' account of Solomon's coronation: "And all the assembly blessed the Lord God of their fathers, and bowed their heads and worshipped the Lord and the king" (1 Chron. 29:23). If this was the case, and the tradition had survived among the people of Israel if not in the official cult of the Second Temple (539 bc—ad 70), it would explain why the Gospels stress that Jesus was a descendant of David: as the messiah, he would be the embodiment of Yahweh as the old kings of Judah had been.

These points are highly muted in the current Hebrew Bible, Barker argues, because its texts all passed through the hands of reformers like those who wrote the Deuteronomic history and Second Isaiah (Isaiah 40-55 is generally regarded to be the work of a different man from the prophet of the first thirty-nine chapters of that book). Indeed when Second Isaiah writes, "I am Yahweh, and there is none else, there is no God beside me" (Isa. 45:5), he is not stating a conventional truth but making a revisionistic theological statement.

What, then, of the goddess Asherah? Her name is probably derived from a phrase from the Ugaritic language spoken in Syria in biblical times: atirat-yammi, "she who treads upon Sea," "Sea" being a personified chaos monster (Cross, 66-67). Canaanite myth usually portrayed her as consort of the high god, El (Cross 15, 37). In First Temple Judaism, however, she appears to have been the consort of Yahweh: dedicatory inscriptions from that era have been found of the form "Blessed be X to Yahweh and his Asherah" (Barker, Great Angel, 55).

The Hebrew Bible sometimes uses asherah not as a proper name but as a common noun for a cult object representing the goddess, possibly a crudely carved wooden image. Indeed one ancient Jewish tradition says that the asherah was either a tree or a tree with a cult object beneath it. Hence translators have rendered asherah variously as "tree" and "grove." Suddenly we remember the Josianic reform: one of the things thrown out of the Temple was a "grove." This was obviously not a literal grove. Almost certainly it was an image of Asherah (Barker, Great Angel, 55).

One interesting piece of evidence about goddess worship in First Temple Judaism appears in Jeremiah 44:17-18. After the Temple's destruction, people who "had burned incense to other gods" tell Jeremiah: "We will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense to the queen of heaven and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine." This passage indicates that the worship of the goddess had long been established in Jerusalem and that some, perhaps many, in Judah believed that the Temple was destroyed not because it had been profaned by her worship (as Jeremiah said) but because her worship had been abandoned (Barker, Great Angel, 51).

Who was this Queen of Heaven? Some scholars, such as Raphael Patai in his Hebrew Goddess, suggest that she was Astarte or possibly Anath, two other Semitic deities (Patai, 62—65). Barker, however, argues that the Queen of Heaven was Asherah. Certainly these goddesses were sometimes conflated by the worshippers themselves: a plaque from the Egyptian New Kingdom representing a Semitic goddess names her as both Asherah and Astarte (along with another Semitic goddess called Anat; Dever, 178). Although she was dethroned by Josiah, Barker says, Asherah was never forgotten by the Jewish people. She changed form, mutating first into a personified "Wisdom" (cf. Prov. 8), and later into the Shekhinah, the feminine "presence" of God revered by the Kabbalists. Indeed the medieval Kabbalists taught that the restoration of her worship would inaugurate the messianic age (Barker, Great Angel, 51).

As for the "hosts of heaven," again most scholars agree that the ancient Hebrews envisaged Yahweh as enthroned among a heavenly host (the Hebrew word for "hosts," by the way, is ts'vaoth or Sabaoth, a possible source for the name Ialdabaoth). Barker portrays this host in more precise terms. She notes that one of the central symbols of Judaism is the seven-branched candelabrum known as the menorah. Modern-day Jews often have similar objects in their homes to celebrate Hanukkah, but technically these are not menorahs; they are hanukkiyot or Hanukkah candelabra. They have nine branches, whereas the one in the Temple had seven. Indeed Jews in antiquity were forbidden to have seven-branched candelabra: that was for the Temple alone (Barker, The Older Testament, 221).

The symbolism of the seven is extremely important, and to esotericists it is fairly obvious: it represents the five planets known to antiquity (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) as well as the sun and the moon. It is extremely likely that the menorah represented this "host of heaven." We do not know what image of the "host" Josiah would have cast out in his purge, but we do know that the symbolism of the seven remained alive and well in Judaism. In the postexilic period the prophet Zechariah has a vision of the menorah with seven branches. An angel asks him, "Knowest thou not what these be? . . . they are the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro throughout the earth" (Zech. 3:5, 10). The symbolism reappears in Revelation, written in the first century ad: "I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man" (Rev. 1:12-13). Theosophists can relate these seven to the Dhyan-Chohans without any great difficulty.

Thus it is possible that ancient Judaism had a schema of a supernal trinity consisting of El, Yahweh, and Asherah, and a lower set of seven "eyes of the Lord" equated with the seven planets as then known. Astonishingly, this is practically identical to the Kabbalistic Tree of Life, with its ten sefirot or principles, three supernal or "unmanifest" and seven lower or "manifest" (see diagram).

According to Barker's view of Judaism in the Second Temple , the radical monotheists who wrote Deuteronomy and Second Isaiah won the day, and their marginalized opponents preserved a kind of antitradition that is represented in works such as the pseudepigraphical 1 Enoch and in Gnosticism. The Gnostics, repudiating Judaism, would also have repudiated Yahweh, who in their eyes had usurped the position of the true, supernal God, much as Blavatsky claims; hence the stupid, arrogant Ialdabaoth.

Even so, more mainstream forms of Judaism preserved echoes of the older schema in their notion of a deuteros theos or "second God," or the immanent aspect of God. The first-century Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria, borrowing a term from Greek philosophy, called this "second god" the Logos. (Logos is frequently translated as "word," as in the opening of the Gospel of John, but it is more accurately characterized as the structuring principle of consciousness.) Jewish mystical literature from this era represents this "second god" as the mysterious angel Metatron, the "angel of the presence." (The etymology of this name is doubtful, "before the throne.") For Barker, Metatron is merely a mutated form of the original Yahweh—who was not originally imagined as distinct from the angel of the presence.

Most scholars agree that this concept of a deuteros theos was widespread in Judaism of the first century ad. Barker differs in arguing that it had always existed in Judaism. Philo's innovation, she says, was simply to connect this "second god" with the logos of Greek thought. The innovation of Christianity was to argue that this logos was embodied in Jesus, as Yahweh may have been in the kings of the old Davidic dynasty. Hence the emphasis on Jesus as the "son of David."

Barker's portrait of this Temple theology, as she calls it, could clarify a great deal about the history of Western religion. It explains why Jesus could have attained quasi-divine status very soon after his death (cf. Phil. 2:6-11): he would have been the anointed one, the embodiment of Yahweh. It also explains why the Gnostics would have had such an ambivalent, not to say hostile, attitude toward Yahweh. And it goes far toward providing a protohistory of the Kabbalah, which would then be, not an importation of Gnostic or Neoplatonic ideas into Judaism (as various scholars, including Gershom Scholem, have argued), but the survival of the old First Temple theology in an esoteric form.

Why should we today care about such arcane points, which are so far from our life and experience? Actually they are not. Monotheism as it has come down to us in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam has caused endless amounts of grief and bloodshed. Perhaps this conflict is rooted in an underlying contradiction in monotheistic theology: the idea that there is only one God, but that this God has chosen to reveal himself exclusively to my people (or religion) and not to any others. Stated so baldly, this view makes little sense, as Blavatsky, who derided the absolutistic claims of the Abrahamic faiths, well understood. But to a degree it is still held by all these religions, and it is not surprising that religious warfare over the last two thousand years has chiefly taken place in the parts of the world where these faiths are dominant.

Blavatsky's views do not coincide exactly with those of Margaret Barker. Barker is a biblical scholar and is principally concerned with these ideas as they have evolved over the course of centuries, while Blavatsky sometimes speaks as if this upstart Jehovah has a metaphysical reality. In this she resembles Kyle Griffith, author of the underground classic War in Heaven, which claims that the gods of the conventional religions are "Theocrats"—parasitic beings who maintain their existence on the astral plane with energy derived from the worship of devotees.

Whether we ourselves go this far is a matter of individual choice. But I personally believe that the great monotheistic faiths are currently seeing their grandiose and exclusivistic claims unmasked and increasingly derided. The rise of fundamentalism is in many ways a response to this trend: as a religion loses its hold over a populace, the remaining followers become more and more isolated, embittered, and extreme.

A curious Jewish mystical text known as 3 Enoch, dating from the early centuries of the Christian era, describes how Metatron is removed from his throne and demoted to the same rank as the other angels. This may reflect an attempt to reduce Metatron's status in the theology of the time, which was getting too close to that of God himself (Odeberg, 85-88). Whether or not that is the case here, such a fate sooner or later befalls all gods—that is to say, all attempts to conceptualize that which is beyond concepts. We may need these concepts, because that is how our minds work, but sooner or later we will conclude that they are nothing more than that, and we put them on the shelf alongside the other concepts in our mental closets. Only then, perhaps, will we be able to glimpse beyond them.


References

Barker, Margaret. The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1992.

——. The Hidden Tradition of the Kingdom of God. London : Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2007.

——. The Older Testament: The Survival of Themes from the Ancient Royal Cult in Sectarian Judaism and Early Christianity. London : Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1987.

Blavatsky, H.P. The Secret Doctrine. 3 vols. Wheaton : Quest, 1993 [1888].

Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Biblical Epic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.

Dever, William G. Did God Have a Wife? Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel. Grand Rapids, Mich. : Eerdmans, 2005.

. Self-published, 1988: http://www.scribd.com/doc/8146891/War-in-Heaven-by-Kyle-Griffith; accessed Feb. 3, 2010.

Kuyt, Annelies. The "Descent" to the Chariot. Tübingen, Germany : Mohr Siebeck, 1995.

Odeberg, Hugo. 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book of Enoch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928.

Patai, Raphael. The Hebrew Goddess. 3d ed. Detroit, Mich.: Wayne State University Press, 1990.

Robinson, James M., ed. The Nag Hammadi Library in English. 1st ed. San Francisco : Harper & Row, 1977.

  

Theology First TempleThe theology of the First Temple according to Margaret Barker. The supernal god, El, was worshipped along with Yahweh, the national god of Israel , and Yahweh's consort Asherah. Below them are the "host of heaven"—probably the five planets known at the time (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) along with the sun and the moon. The scheme resembles the Kabbalistic Tree of Life ( far right). The top triangle contains the "supernal" or "unmanifest" principles: Keter (Crown), Hokhmah (Wisdom); and Binah (Understanding). The lower seven principles are associated with the planets: Hesed (Mercy) with Jupiter, Gevurah (Strength) with Mars, Tiferet (Beauty) with the sun, Netzach (Victory) with Venus, Hod (Glory) with Mercury, and Yesod (Foundation) with the moon. Malkut (Kingdom) is the earth. Binah is usually associated with Saturn.

 

 

EgyptianDrawing of an Egyptian New Kingdom plaque from the Winchester College Collection. It shows the goddess riding on a lion and listing her three names: Qudshu ("holy one," another name for Asherah), Anat, and Astarte. Her Egyptian-style wig also appears in many of her images from Canaan. From William G. Dever, Did God Have a Wife?



[*] Biblical quotations are from the King James Version.


Subcategories