The history of magic

by Éliphas Lévi

[25] It was the Rod of Aaron, not that of Moses, which, according to Heb. ix. 4, was placed in the Ark of the Covenant, together with the Tables of the Law and the Pot of Manna. It is said, however, most clearly in I Kings, viii. 9, that “there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone, which Moses put there at Horeb.”

[26] Whatever the date to which the Book of the Penitence of Adam may be referable, it represents one form of a legend which was spread widely in the Middle Ages. The Gospel of Nicodemus seems to have instituted the first analogy between the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of the Cross. “All ye who have died through the wood which this man”—Adam—“hath touched: all of you I will make alive again by the wood of the cross.” The legend of the triple branch, under a strange transformation, reappears in that chronicle of the Holy Graal which has been ascribed to the authorship of Walter Map. There is no end to the stories which represent Christ dying upon a tree which was a cutting from the Tree of Knowledge. This is how the Tree of Knowledge becomes the Tree of Life in Christian legend.

[27] The Clavis Absconditorum à Constitutione Mundi, which is the chief work of Postel, outside his translation of the Sepher Yetzirah, affirms that Enoch was born at the time when Christ the Mediator would have been manifested in the flesh as the incarnation of perfect Virtue, supposing that man had remained in his first estate. There is no reference to a Genesis of Enoch.

[28] Hic intrat vivus foveam—he, being still alive, enters the tomb, says Adam of St. Victor in his third Sequence for Dec. 27.

[29] There were two canonised bishops bearing the name of Methodius at widely different periods, and as both were writers it is an open question to which of them the reference is intended. It is probably to Methodius of Olympus, who was martyred about 311. Methodius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, died in 846. There is not the least reason to suppose that the Apocalypse under the name of Bermechobus was the work of either.

[30] Compare Lopukhin’s Quelques Traits de l’Eglise Intérieure, where the sanctuary which was inaugurated by Adam is connected more especially with Abel, and was presumably maintained afterwards by Seth. In opposition thereto was the Church of Cain, which was anti-Christian from its beginning. See my introduction to Mr. Nicholson’s translation, pp. 6, 7, and the text, p. 59—Some Characteristics of the Interior Church, 1912.

[31] According to the Zohar, the intoxication of Noah contains a mystery of wisdom. He was really sounding the depths of that sin which was the downfall of the first man, and his object was to find a remedy. In this he failed, and “was drunken,” seeking to lay bare the divine essence, without the intellectual power to explore it. Section Toldoth Noah.

[32] The Sepher Ha Zohar affirms in several places that the Law was offered to the Gentiles, and was by them refused.

[33] The authority for this statement is wanting. The Zohar dwells on Genesis xxi. 9: “And Sarah saw the son of Hagar,” &c., implying that she did not acknowledge him as the son of Abraham, but of the Egyptian only. The Patriarch, however, regarded him as his own son. Sarah’s desire to expel them is justified on the ground that she had seen Ishmael worshipping the stars of heaven. See Zohar, Part I., fol. 118. There is no allusion to the alleged gifts of the father, the scripture making it evident abundantly that the bread and bottle of water are for once to be understood literally.

[34] Even at the period of Éliphas Lévi, it did not require a rabbinical scholar or a knowledge of Aramaic to prevent any fairly informed person from suggesting that the Book of Concealed Mystery, being the text here referred to, is the beginning of the Zohar. It follows the Commentary on Exodus, about midway in the whole collection, which covers the entire Pentateuch. It so happens that the little tract in question is the first of three sections rendered into Latin by Rosenroth, and this must have deceived Lévi, as a consequence of utterly careless reading. There was plenty of opportunity for correction in the Kabbala Denudata, and so also in La Kabbale—an interesting but very imperfect study by Adolphe Franck, which appeared in 1843.