Section VIII. The Symbolism of the Mystery-Names Iao and Jehovah, with their Relation to the Cross and Circle.
When the Abbé Louis Constant, better known as Éliphas Lévi, said in his Histoire de la Magie that the Sepher Jetzirah, the Zohar, and the Apocalypse of St. John, are the masterpieces of the Occult Sciences, he ought, if he had wished to be correct and clear, to have added—in Europe. It is quite true that these works contain “more significance than words”; and that their “expression is poetical,” while “in numbers” they are “exact.” Unfortunately, however, before any one can appreciate the poetry of the expressions, or the exactness of the numbers, he will have to learn the real significance and meaning of the terms and symbols employed. But man will never learn this so long as he remains ignorant of the fundamental principle of the Secret Doctrine, whether in Oriental Esotericism, or in the kabalistical Symbology—the key, or value, in all their aspects, of the God-names, Angel-names, and Patriarch-names in the Bible, their mathematical or geometrical value, and their relations to manifested Nature.
Therefore, if, on the one hand, the Zohar “astonishes” the mystic, by the profundity of its views and the great simplicity of its images, or the other hand, that work misleads the student by such expressions as those used with respect to Ain Suph and Jehovah, notwithstanding the assurance that:
The book is careful to explain that the human form with which it clothes God is but an image of the Word, and that God should not be expressed by any thought, or any form.
It is well known that Origen Clement, and the Rabbis confessed that the Kabalah and the Bible were veiled and secret books; but few know [pg 566] that the Esotericism of the kabalistic books in their present reëdited form is simply another and still more cunning veil thrown upon the primitive symbolism of these secret volumes.
The idea of representing the hidden Deity by the circumference of a circle, and the Creative Power—male and female, or the Androgynous Word—by the diameter across it, is one of the oldest symbols. It is upon this conception that every great Cosmogony has been built. With the old Âryans, the Egyptians, and the Chaldæans, the symbol was complete, as it embraced the idea of the eternal and immovable Divine Thought in its absoluteness, separated entirely from the incipient stage of the so-called “creation,” and comprised psychological and even spiritual evolution, and its mechanical work, or cosmogonical construction. With the Hebrews, however, though the former conception is to be distinctly found in the Zohar, and the Sepher Jetzirah, or what remains of the latter—that which has been subsequently embodied in the Pentateuch proper, and especially in Genesis, is simply this secondary stage, to wit, the mechanical law of creation, or rather of construction; while Theogony is hardly, if at all, outlined.
It is only in the first six chapters of Genesis, in the rejected Book of Enoch, and the misunderstood and mistranslated poem of Job, that true echoes of the Archaic Doctrine may now be found. The key to it is lost now, even among the most learned Rabbis, whose predecessors in the early period of the Middle Ages, in their national exclusiveness and pride, and especially in their profound hatred of Christianity, preferred to cast it into the deep sea of oblivion, rather than to share their knowledge with their relentless and fierce persecutors. Jehovah was their own tribal property, inseparable from, and unfit to play a part in, any other but the Mosaic Law. Violently torn out of his original frame, which he fitted and which fitted him, the “Lord God of Abraham and Jacob” could hardly be crammed without damage and breakage into the new Christian Canon. Being the weaker, the Judeans could not help the desecration. They kept, however, the secret of the origin of their Adam Kadmon, or male-female Jehovah, and the new tabernacle proved a complete misfit for the old God. They were, indeed, avenged!
The statement that Jehovah was the tribal God of the Jews and no higher, will be denied like many other things. Yet the Theologians are not in a position to tell us, in that case, the meaning of the verses in Deuteronomy, which say quite plainly:
When the Most High [not the “Lord,” or “Jehovah” either] divided to the [pg 567]nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds ... according to the number of the children of Israel.... The Lord's[Jehovah's] portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.[1259]
This settles the question. So impudent have been the modern translators of Bibles and Scriptures, and so damaging are these verses, that, following in the steps traced for them by their worthy Church Fathers, each translator has rendered these lines in his own way. While the above-cited quotation is taken verbatim from the English Authorized Version, in the French Bible,[1260] we find the “Most High” translated by “Souverain” (Sovereign!!), the “sons of Adam” rendered by “the children of men,” and the “Lord” changed into the “Eternal.” For impudent sleight-of-hand, the French Protestant Church seems thus to have surpassed even English ecclesiasticism.