tycarb

AN ESSAY
IN
ONTOLOGY
WITH SOME REMARKS ON CEREMONIAL MAGIC
BY
ABHAVANANDA
(ALEISTER CROWLEY)

Key entry and formatted by Frater T.S.

for Sunwheel Oasis, O.T.O.
 tycarb
AN ESSAY IN ONTOLOGY
WITH SOME REMARKS ON CEREMONIAL MAGIC
BY ABHAVANANDA (ALEISTER CROWLEY)
tycarb petty joss of Genesis to the intangible, but self-
contradictory spectre of to-day. But if G be infinite, the
O Man, of a daring nature, thou subtle production! other forces can have no possible effect on it. As
Thou wilt not comprehend it, as when understanding some Whewell says, in the strange accident by which he
common thing. anticipates the metre of In Memoriam: “No force on
ORACLES OF ZOROASTER. earth, however great, can stretch a cord, however fine,
In presenting this theory of the Universe to the world, I into a horizontal line that shall be absolutely straight.”
have but one hope of making any profound impression, The definition of God as infinite therefore denies
viz.—that my theory has the merit of explaining the man implicitly; while if he be finite, there is an end of
divergences between the three great forms of religion the usual Christian reasons for worship, though I
now existing in the world—Buddhism, Hinduism and daresay I could myself discover some reasonably good
Christianity, and of adapting them to ontological ones. [I hardly expect to be asked, somehow.]
science by conclusions not mystical but mathematical. The resulting equilibrium of God and man,
Of Mohammedism I shall not now treat, as, in whatever destructive of worship, is of course absurd. We must
light we may decide to regard it (and its esoteric schools reject it, unless we want to fall into Positivism,
are often orthodox), in any case it must fall under one of Materialism, or something of the sort. But if, then, we
the three heads of Nihilism, Advaitism, and Dvaitism. call God infinite, how are we to regard man, and Satan?
Taking the ordinary hypothesis of the universe, that (the latter, at the very least, surely no integral part of
of its infinity, or at any rate that of the infinity of God, him). The fallacy lies not in my demonstration (which
or of the infinity of some substance or idea actually is also that of orthodoxy) that a finite God is absurd, but
existing, we first come to the question of the possibility in the assumption that man has any real force.1
of the co-existence of God and man. In our mechanical system (as I have hinted above), if
The Christians, in the category of the existent, one of the forces be infinite, the others, however great,
enumerate among other things, whose consideration we are both relatively and absolutely nothing.
may discard for the purposes of this argument, God, an In any category, infinity excludes finity, unless that
infinite being; man; Satan and his angels; man finity be an identical part of that infinity.
certainly, Satan presumably, finite beings. These are In the category of existing things, space being
not aspects of one being, but separate and even infinite, for on that hypothesis we are still working,
antagonistic existences. All are equally real; we cannot either matter fills or does not fill it. If the former,
accept mystics of the type of Caird as being orthodox matter is infinitely great; if the latter, infinitely small.
exponents of the religion of Christ. Whether the matter-universe be 1010000 light-years in
The Hindus enumerate Brahm, infinite in all diameter or half a mile makes no difference; it is
dimensions and directions—indistinguishable from the infinitely small—in effect, Nothing. The unmath-
Pleroma of the Gnostics—and Maya, illusion. This is in ematical illusion that it does exist is what the Hindus
a sense the antithesis of noumenon and phenomenon, call Maya.
noumenon being negated of all predicates until it If, on the other hand, the matter-universe is infinite,
becomes almost extinguished in the Nichts under the Brahm and God are crowded out, and the possibility of
title of the Alles. (Cf. Max Müller on the metaphysical religion is equally excluded.
Nirvana, in his Dhammapada, Introductory Essay.) The We may now shift our objective. The Hindus cannot
Buddhists express no opinion. account intelligibly, though they try hard, for Maya, the
Let us consider the force-quality in the existences cause of all suffering. Their position is radically weak,
conceived of by those two religions respectively, but at least we may say for them that they have tried to
remembering that the God of the Christian is infinite, square their religion with their common sense. The
and yet discussing the alternative if we could suppose Christians, on the other hand, though they saw whither
him to be a finite God. In any equilibrated system of the Manichean Heresy2 must lead, and crushed it, have
forces, we may sum and represent them as a triangle or not officially admitted the precisely similar conclusion
series of triangles which again resolve into one. And if with regard to man, and denied the existence of the
any one of the original forces in such a system may be human soul as distinct from the divine soul.
considered, that one is equal to the resultant of the Trismegistus, Iamblichus, Porphyry, Boehme, and the
remainder. Let x, the purpose of the universe, be the mystics generally have of course substantially done so,
resultant of the forces G, S, and M (God, Satan, and though occasionally with rather inexplicable
Man). Then M is also the resultant of G, S, and -x. So reservations, similar to those made in some cases by the
that we can regard either of our forces as supreme, and Vedantists themselves.
there is no reason for worshipping one rather that the
other. All are finite. This argument the Christians 1
Lully, Descartes, Spinoza, Schelling. See their works.
2
clearly see: hence the development of God from the The conception of Satan as a positive evil force; the lower
triangle of the Hexagram.

1
 Man then being disproved, God the Person I clearly foresee the one difficulty, and will discuss it
disappears for ever, and becomes Atman, Pleroma, Ain in advance. If my conclusions on this point are not
Soph, what name you will, infinite in all directions and accepted, we may at once get back to our previous
in all categories—to deny one is to destroy the entire irritable agnosticism, and look for our Messiah
argument and throw us back on to our old Dvaitistic elsewhere. But if we can see together on this one point,
bases. I think things will go fairly smoothly afterwards.
I entirely sympathise with my unhappy friend Rev. Consider4 Darkness! Can we philosophically or
Mansel, B.D.,1 in his piteous and pitiful plaints against actually regard as different the darkness produced by
the logical results of the Advaitist School. But, on his interference of light and that existing in the mere
basal hypothesis of an infinite God, infinite space, time, absence of light?
and so on, no other conclusion is possible. Dean Is Unity really identical with .9 recurring?
Mansel is found in the impossible position of one who Do we not mean different things when we speak
will neither give up his premisses nor dispute the respectively of 2 sine 60° and of 3 ?
validity of his logical processes, but who shrinks in Charcoal and diamond are obviously different in the
horror from the inevitable conclusion; he supposes there categories of colour, crystallisation, hardness, and so on;
must be something wrong somewhere, and concludes but are they not really so even in that of existence?
that the sole use of reason is to discover its own The third example is to my mind the best. 2 sine 60°
inferiority to faith. As Deussen2 well points out, faith in and 3 are unreal and therefore never conceivable, at
the Christian sense merely amounts to being convinced least to the present constitution of our human
on insufficient grounds.3 This is surely the last refuge intelligences. Worked out, neither has meaning;
of incompetence. unworked, both have meaning, and that a different
But though, always on the original hypothesis of the meaning in one case and the other.
infinity of space, &c., the Advaitist position of the We have thus two terms, both unreal, both
Vedantists and the great Germans is unassailable, yet on inconceivable, yet both representing intelligible and
practical grounds the Dvaitists have all the advantage. diverse ideas to our minds (and this is the point!)
Fichte and the others exhaust themselves trying to turn though identical in reality and convertible by a process
the simple and obvious position that: “If the Ego alone of reason which simulates or replaces that apprehension
exists, where is any place, not only for morals and which we can never (one may suppose) attain to.
religion, which we can very well do without, but for the Let us apply this idea to the Beginning of all things,
most essential and continuous acts of life? Why should about which the Christians lie frankly, the Hindus
an infinite Ego fill a non-existent body with imaginary prevaricate, and the Buddhists are discreetly silent,
food cooked in thought only over an illusionary fire by a while not contradicting even the gross and ridiculous
cook who is not there? Why should infinite power use accounts of the more fantastic Hindu visionaries.
such finite means, and very often fail even then?” The Qabalists explain the “First Cause”5 by the
What is the sum total of the Vedantist position? “‘I’ phrase: “From 0 to 1, as the circle opening out into the
am an illusion, externally. In reality, the true ‘I’ am the line.” The Christian dogma is really identical, for both
Infinite, and if the illusionary ‘I’ could only realise Who conceive of a previous and eternally existing God,
‘I’ really am, how very happy we should all be!” And though the Qabalists hedge by describing this latent
here we have Karma, rebirth, all the mighty laws of Deity as “Not.” Later commentators, notably the
nature operating nowhere in nothing! illustrious6 MacGregor-Mathers, have explained this
There is no room for worship or for morality in the Not as “negatively-existing.” Profound as is my respect
Advaitist system. All the specious pleas of the for the intellectual and spiritual attainments of him
Bhagavad-Gita, and the ethical works of Western whom I am proud to have been permitted to call my
Advaitist philosophers, are more or less consciously master,6 I am bound to express my view that when the
confusion of thought. But no subtlety can turn the Qabalists said Not, they meant Not, and nothing else.
practical argument; the grinning mouths of the Dvaitist In fact, I really claim to have re-discovered the long-lost
guns keep the fort of Ethics, and warn metaphysics to and central Arcanum of those divine philosophers.
keep off the rather green grass of religion. I have no serious objection to a finite god, or gods,
That its apologists have devoted so much time, distinct from men and things. In fact, personally, I
thought, scholarship and ingenuity to this question is believe in them all, and admit them to possess
the best proof of the fatuity of the Advaita position. inconceivable though not infinite power.
There is then a flaw somewhere. I boldly take up the The Buddhists admit the existence of Maha-Brahma,
glove against all previous wisdom, revert to the most but his power and knowledge are limited; and his
elementary ideas of cannibal savages, challenge all the agelong day must end. I find evidence everywhere, even
most vital premisses and axiomata that have passed in our garbled and mutilated version of the Hebrew
current coin with philosophy for centuries, and present Scriptures, that Jehovah’s power was limited in all sorts
my theory. of ways. At the Fall, for instance, Tetragrammaton

1 4
Encyclopedia Britannica, Art. Metaphysics. Ratiocination may perhaps not take us far. But a
2
“The Principles of Metaphysics.” Macmillan. continuous and attentive study of these quaint points of
3
Or, as the Sunday-school boy said: “Faith is the power of distinction may give us an intuition, or direct mind-
believing what we know to be true. I quote Deussen with the apperception of what we want, one way or the other.—A.C.
5
more pleasure, because it is about the only sentence in all his An expression they carefully avoid using.—A.C.
6
writings with which I am in accord.—A.C. I retain this sly joke from the first edition.

2
Elohim has to summon his angles hastily to guard the Pleroma, Parabrahma, or the Allah of the Unity-adoring
Tree of Life, lest he should be proved a liar. For had it followers of Mohammed. (To the Musulman fakir,
occurred to Adam to eat of that Tree before their Allah is by no means a personal God.)
transgression was discovered, or had the Serpent been Unity is thus unaffected, whether or no it be extended
aware of its properties, Adam would indeed have lived in any of the categories. But we have already agreed to
and not died. So that a mere accident saved the look to 0 for the Uncaused.
remnants of the already besmirched reputation of the Now if there was in truth 0 “before the beginning of
Hebrew tribal Fetich. years,” THAT 0 WAS EXTENDED IN NONE OF THE
When Buddha was asked how things came to be, he CATEGORIES, FOR THERE COULD HAVE BEEN
took refuge in silence, which his disciples very NO CATEGORIES IN WHICH IT COULD EXTEND!
conveniently interpreted as meaning that the question If our 0 was the ordinary 0 of mathematics, there was
tended not to edification. not truly absolute 0, for 0 is, as I have shown, dependent
I take it that the Buddha (ignorant, doubtless, of on the idea of categories. If these existed, then the
algebra) had sufficiently studied philosophy and whole question is merely thrown back; we must reach a
possessed enough worldly wisdom to be well aware that state in which this 0 is absolute. Not only must we get
any system he might promulgate would be instantly rid of all subjects, but of all predicates. By 0 (in
attacked and annihilated by the acumen of his numerous mathematics) we really mean 0n, where n is the final
and versatile opponents. term of a natural scale of dimensions, categories, or
Such teaching as he gave on the point may be predicates. Our Cosmic Egg, then, from which the
summed up as follows. “Whence, whither, why, we present universe arose, was Nothingness, extended in no
know not; but we do know that we are here, that we categories, or graphically, 00. This expression is in its
dislike being here, that there is a way out of the whole present form meaningless. Let us discover its value by a
loathsome affair—let us make haste and take it!” simple mathematical process!
I am not so retiring in disposition; I persist in my 01  n
inquiries, and at last the appalling question is answered, 00 = 01−1 = 1  Multiply by1 = 
0  n
and the past ceases to intrude its problems upon my 1
0 n
mind. Then × = 0 × ∞.
Here you are! Three shies a penny! Change all bad n 01
arguments.
I ASSERT THE ABSOLUTENESS OF THE QABALISTIC Now the multiplying of the infinitely great by the
ZERO. infinitely small results in SOME UNKNOWN FINITE
When we say that the Cosmos sprang from 0, what NUMBER EXTENDED IN AN UNKNOWN NUMBER
kind of 0 do we mean? By 0 in the ordinary sense of the OF CATEGORIES. It happened, when this our Great
term we mean “absence of extension in any of the Inversion took place, from the essence of all
categories.” nothingness to finity extended in innumerable
When I say “No cat has two tails,” I do not mean, as categories, that an incalculably vast system was
the old fallacy runs, that “Absence-of-cat possesses two produced. Merely by chance, chance in the truest sense
tails”; but that “In the category of two-tailed things, of the term, we are found with gods, men, stars, planets,
there is no extension of cat.” devils, colours, forces, and all the materials of the
Nothingness is that about which no positive Cosmos: and with time, space, and causality, the
proposition is valid. We cannot truly affirm: “Nothing- conditions limiting and involving them all.2
ness is green, or heavy, or sweet.” Remember that it is not true to say that our 00
Let us call time, space, being, heaviness, hunger, the existed; nor that it did not exist. The idea of existence
categories.1 If a man be heavy and hungry, he is was just as much unformulated as that of toasted cheese.
extended in all these, besides, of course, many more. But 00 is a finite expression, or has a finite phase,
But let us suppose that these five are all. Call the man and our universe is a finite universe; its categories are
X; his formula is then Xt+s+b+h+h. If he now eat; he will themselves finite, and the expression “infinite space” is
cease to be extended in hunger; if he be cut off from a contradiction in terms. The idea of an absolute and
time and gravitation as well, he will now be represented infinite3 God is relegated to the limbo of all similar idle
by the formula Xs+b. Should he cease to occupy space and pernicious perversions of truth. Infinity remains,
and to exist, his formula would then be X0. This but only as a mathematical conception as impossible in
expression is equal to 1; whatever X may represent, if it nature as the square root of -1. Against all this
be raised to the power of 0 (this meaning mathematical, or semi-mathematical, reasoning, it may
mathematically “if it be extended in no dimension or doubtless be objected that our whole system of numbers,
category”), the result is Unity, and the unknown factor and of manipulating them, is merely a series of
X is eliminated. conventions. When I say that the square root of three is
This is the Advaitist idea of the future of man; his
personality, bereft of all qualities, disappears and is lost,
2
while in its place arises the impersonal Unity, The Compare and contrast this doctrine with that of Herbert
Spencer (“First Principles,” Pt. I.), and see my “Science and
Buddhism” for a full discussion of the difference involved.—
1
I cannot here discuss the propriety of representing the A. C.
3
categories as dimensions. It will be obvious to any student of If by “infinitely great” we only mean “indefinitely great,”
the integral calculus, or to any one who appreciates the as a mathematician would perhaps tell us, we of course begin
geometrical significance of the term x4.—A.C. at the very point I am aiming at, viz., Ecrasez l’Infini.—A.C.

3
unreal, I know quite well that it is only so in relation to categories of emotion as certainly and easily as we now
the series 1, 2, 3, &c., and that this series is equally transform the categories of force, so that in a few years
unreal if I make 3 , p, 3 50 the members of a ternary Chicago may be importing suffering in the raw state and
scale. But this, theoretically true, is practically absurd. turning it into tinned salmon: but at present the reverse
If I mean “the number of a, b, and c,” it does not matter process is alone practicable.
if I write 3 or 3 50 ; the idea is a definite one; and it is How, then, shall we escape? Can we expect the entire
the fundamental ideas of consciousness of which we are universe to resolve itself back into the phase of 00?
treating, and to which we are compelled to refer Surely not. In the first place there is no reason why the
everything, whether proximately or ultimately. whole should do so; xy is just as convertible as x. But
So also my equation, fantastic as it may seem, has a
perfect and absolute parallel in logic. Thus: let us worse, the category of causality has already been
convert twice the proposition “some books are on the formed, and its inertia is sufficient to oppose a most
table.” By negativing both terms we get “Absence-of- serious stumbling-block to so gigantic a process.
book is not on the table,” which is precisely my equation The task before us is consequently of a terrible
backwards, and a thinkable thing. To reverse the nature. It is easy to let things slide, to grin and bear it in
process, what do I mean when I say “some pigs, but not fact, until everything is merged in the ultimate unity,
the black pig, are not in the sty”? I imply that the black which may or may not be decently tolerable. But while
pig is in the sty. All I have done is to represent the we wait?
conversion as a change, rather than as merely another There now arises the question of freewill. Causality
way of expressing the same thing. And “change” is is probably not fully extended in its own category,4 a
really not my meaning either; for change, to our minds, circumstance which gives room for a fractional amount
involves the idea of time. But the whole thing is of freewill. If this be not so, it matters little; for if I find
inconceivable—to ratiocination, though not to thought. myself in a good state, that merely proves that my
Note well too that if I say “Absence-of-books is not on destiny took me there. We are, as Herbert Spencer
the table,” I cannot convert it only “All books are on the observes, self-deluded with the idea of freewill; but if
table” but only to “some books are on the table.” The this be so, nothing matters at all. If, however, Herbert
proposition is an “I” and not an “A” proposition. It is Spencer is mistaken (unlikely as it must appear), then
the Advaita blunder to make it so; and may a schoolboy our reason is valid, and we should seek out the right
has fed off the mantelpiece for less. path and pursue it. The question therefore need not
There is yet another proof—the proof by exclusion. I trouble us at all.
have shown, and metaphysicians practically admit, the Here then we see the use of morals and of religion,
falsity alike of Dvaitism and Advaitism. The third, the and all the rest of the bag of tricks. All these are
only remaining theory, this theory, must, however methods, bad or good, for extricating ourselves from the
antecedently improbably, however difficult to universe.
assimilate, be true.1 Closely connected with this question is that of the
“My friend, my young friend,” I think I hear some will of God. People argue that an Infinite intelligence
Christian cleric say, with an air of profound wisdom, must have been at work on this cosmos. I reply No!
not untinged with pity, condescending to pose beardless There is no intelligence at work worthy of the name.
and brainless impertinence: “where is the Cause for this The Laws of Nature may be generalised in one—the
truly remarkable change?” Law of Inertia. Everything moves in the direction
That is exactly where the theory rears to heaven its determined by the path of least resistance; species arise,
stoutest bastion! There is not, and could not be, any develop, and die as their collective inertia determines; to
cause. Had 00 been extended in causality, no change this Law there is no exception but the doubtful one of
could have taken place.2 Freewill; the Law of Destiny itself is formally and really
Here then, are we, finite beings in a finite universe, identical with it.5
time, space, and causality themselves finite As to an infinite intelligence, all philosophers of any
(inconceivable as it may seem) with our individuality, standing are agreed that all-love and all-power are
and all the “illusions” of the Advaitists, just as real as incompatible. The existence of the universe is a
they practically are to our normal consciousness. standing proof of this.
As Schopenhauer, following Buddha, points out, The Deist needs the Optimist to keep him company;
suffering is a necessary condition of this existence.3 over their firesides all goes well, but it is a sad
The war of the contending forces as they grind them- shipwreck they suffer on emerging into the cold world.
selves down to the final resultant must cause endless
agony. We may one day be able to transform the
4
Causality is itself a secondary, and in its limitation as
applied to volition, an inconceivable idea. H. Spencer, op. cit.
1
I may remark that the distinction between this theory and This consideration alone should add great weight to the
the normal one of the Immanence of the Universe, is trivial, agnostic, and à fortiori to the Buddhist, position.
5
perhaps even verbal only. Its advantage, however, is that, by See H. Spencer, “First Principles,” “The Knowable,” for
hypostatising nothing, we avoid the necessity of any a fair summary of the facts underlying this generalisation;
explanation. How did nothing come to be? is a question which indeed he comes within an ace of making in so many
which requires no answer. words. It may be observed that this law is nearly if not quite
2
See the Questions of King Milinda, vol. ii. p. 103. axiomatic, its contrary being enormously difficult if not
3
See also Huxley, “Evolution and Ethics.” impossible to formulate mentally.

4
 This is why those who seek to buttress up religion are fate. Such persons are in truth their own real enemies.
so anxious to prove that the universe has no real Many of them, however, believing erroneously that they
existence, or only a temporary and relatively are being “unselfish,” do fill their hearts with devotion
unimportant one; the result is of course the usual self- for the beloved Saviour, and this process is, in its
destructive Advaitist muddle. ultimation, so similar to the earlier stages of the Great
The precepts of morality and religion are thus of use, Work itself, that some confusion has, stupidly enough,
of vital use to us, in restraining the more violent forces arisen; but for all that the practice has been the means
alike of nature and of man. For unless law and order of bringing some devotees on to the true Path of the
prevail, we have not the necessary quiet and resources Wise, unpromising as such material must sound to
for investigating, and learning to bring under our intelligent ears.
control, all the divergent phenomena of our prison, a The esoteric Christian or Hindu adopts a middle
work which we undertake that at last we may be able to path. Having projected the Absolute from his mind, he
break down the walls, and find that freedom which an endeavours to unite his consciousness with that of his
inconsiderate Inversion has denied. Absolute and of course his personality is destroyed in
The mystical precepts of pseudo-Zoroaster, Buddha, the process. Yet it is to be feared that such an adept too
Çankaracharya, pseudo-Christ and the rest, are for often starts on the path with the intention of
advanced students only, for direct attack on the aggrandising his personality to the utmost. But his
problem. Our servants, the soldiers, lawyers, all forms method is so near to the true one that this tendency is
of government, make this our nobler work possible, and soon corrected, as it were automatically.
it is the gravest possible mistake to sneer at those (The mathematical analogue of this process is to
humble but faithful followers of the great minds of the procure for yourself the realisation of the nothingness of
world. yourself by keeping the fourth dimension ever present to
What, then, are the best, easiest, directed methods to your mind.)
attain our result? And how shall we, in mortal The illusory nature of this idea of an infinite Atman
language, convey to the minds of others the nature of a is well shown by the very proof which that most
result so beyond language, baffling even imagination distinguished Vedantist, the late Swami Vivekananda
eagle-pinioned? It may help us if we endeavour to (no connection with the firm of a similar name1 across
outline the distinction between the Hindu and Buddhist the street), gives of the existence of the infinite. “Think
methods and aims of the Great Work. of a circle!” says he. “You will in a moment become
The Hindu method is really mystical in the truest conscious of an infinite circle around your original
sense; for, as I have shown, the Atman is not infinite small one.” The fallacy is obvious. The big circle is not
and eternal: one day it must sink down with the other infinite at all, but is itself limited by the little one. But
forces. But by creating in though an infinite Impersonal to take away the little circle, that is the method of the
Personality, by defining it as such, all religions except esoteric Christian or the mystic. But the process is
the Buddhist and, as I believe, the Qabalistic, have never perfect, because however small the little circle
sought to annihilate their own personality. The becomes, its relation with the big circle is still finite.
Buddhist aims directly at extinction; the Hindu denies But even allowing for a moment that the Absolute is
and abolished his own finity by the creation of an really attainable, is the nothingness of the finity related
absolute. to it really identical with that attained directly by the
As this cannot be done in reality, the process is Buddhist Arahat? This, consistently with my former
illusory; yet it is useful in the early stages—as far, at attitude, I feel constrained to deny. The consciousness
any rate, as the fourth stage of Dhyana, where the of the Absolute-wala2 is really extended infinitely rather
Buddha places it, though the Yogis claim to attain to than diminished infinitely, as he will himself assure
Nirvikalpa-Samadhi, and that Moksha is identical with you. True, Hegel says: “Pure being is pure nothing!”
Nirvana; the former claim I see no reason to deny them; and it is true that the infinite heat and cold, joy and
the latter statement I must decline at present to accept. sorrow, light and darkness, and all the other pairs of
The task of the Buddhist recluse is roughly as opposites,3 cancel one another out: yet I feel rather
follows. He must plunge every particle of his being into afraid of this Absolute! Maybe its joy and sorrow are
one idea: right views, aspirations, word, deed, life, will- represented in phases, just as 00 and finity are phases of
power, meditation, rapture, such are the stages of his an identical expression, and I have an even chance only
liberation, which resolves itself into a struggle against of being on the right side of the fence!
the laws of causality. He cannot prevent past causes
taking effect, but he can prevent present causes from
having any future results. The exoteric Christian and
1
Hindu rather rely on another person to do this for them, The Swami Vive Ananda, Madame Horos, for whose
and are further blinded by the thirst for life and history consult the Criminal Law Reports.
2
individual existence, the most formidable obstacle of all, Wala, one whose business is connected with anything.
in fact a negation of the very object of all religion. E.g. Jangli-wala, one who lives in, or has business with, a
Schopenhauer shows that life is assured to the will-to- jungle, i.e. a wild man, or a Forest Conservator.
3
live, and unless Christ (or Krishna, as the case may be) The Hindus see this as well as any one, and call Atman
destroys these folk by superior power—a task from Sat-chit-ananda, these being above the pairs of opposites,
which almightiness might well recoil baffled!—I much rather on the Hegelian lines of the reconciliation (rather than
the identity) of opposites in a master-idea. We have
fear that eternal life, and consequently eternal suffering,
dismissed infinity as the figment of a morbid mathematic: but
joy, and change of all kinds, will be their melancholy in any case the same disproof applies to it as to God.—A.C.

5
 The Buddhist leaves no chances of this kind; in all seldom or never used in the similar contingency of a
his categories he is infinitely unextended; though the cow-elephant desiring her bull in the jungles of Ceylon.
categories themselves exist; he is in fact 0A+B+C+D+E+..+N Meditation is not within the reach of every one; not
and capable of no conceivable change, unless we all possess the ability; very few indeed (in the West at
imagine Nirvana to be incomprehensibly divided by least) have the opportunity.
Nirvana, which would (supposing the two Nirvanas to In any case what the Easterns call “one-pointedness”
possess identical categories) result in the production of is an essential preliminary to even early stages of true
the original 00. But a further change would be meditation. And iron will-power is a still earlier
necessary even then before serious mischief could result. qualification.
In short, I think we may dismiss from our minds any By meditation I do not mean merely “thinking about”
alarm in respect of this contingency. anything, however profoundly, but the absolute restraint
On mature consideration, therefore, I confidently and of the mind to the contemplation of a single object,
deliberately take my refuge in the Triple Gem. whether gross, fine, or altogether spiritual.
Namo Tasso Bhagavato Arahato Sammasam- Now true magical ceremony is entirely directed to
buddhasa!1 attain this end, and forms a magnificent gymnasium for
Let there be hereafter no discussion of the classical those who are not already finished mental athletes. By
problems of philosophy and religion! In the light of this act, word, and thought, both in quantity and quality, the
exposition the antitheses of noumenon and one object of the ceremony is being constantly indicated.
phenomenon, unity and multiplicity, and their kind, are Every fumigation, purification, banishing, invocation,
all reconciled, and the only question that remains is that evocation, is chiefly a reminder of the single purpose,
of finding the most satisfactory means of attaining until the supreme moment arrives, and every fibre of the
Nirvana—extinction of all that exists, knows, or feels; body, every force-channel of the mind, is strained out in
extinction final and complete, utter and absolute one overwhelming rush of the Will in the direction
extinction. For by these words only can we indicate desired. Such is the real purport of all the apparently
Nirvana: a state which transcends thought cannot be fantastic directions of Solomon, Abramelin, and other
described in thought’s language. But from the point of sages of repute. When a man has evoked and mastered
view of thought extinction is complete: we have no data such forces as Taphtartharath, Belial, Amaimon, and
for discussing that which is unthinkable, and must the great powers of the elements, then he may be safely
decline to do so. This is the answer to those who accuse be permitted to try to stop thinking. For, needless to
the Buddha of hurling his Arahats (and himself) from say, the universe, including the thinker, exists only by
Samma Samadhi to annihilation. virtue of the thinker’s thought.2
Pray observe in the first place that my solution of the In yet one other way is magic a capital training
Great Problem permits the co-existence of an indefinite ground for the Arahat. True symbols do really awake
number of means: they need not even be compatible; those macrocosmic forces of which they are the eidola,
Karma, rebirth, Providence, prayer, sacrifice, baptism, and it is possible in this manner very largely to increase
there is room for all. On the old and, I hope, now the magical “potential” to borrow a term from electrical
finally discredited hypothesis of an infinite being, the science.
supporters of these various ideas, while explicitly Of course, there are bad and invalid processes, which
affirming them, implicitly denied. Similarly, note that tend rather to disperse or to excite the mind-stuff rather
the Qabalistic idea of a supreme God (and innumerable than to control it; these we must discard. But there is a
hierarchies) is quite compatible with this theory, true magical ceremonial, the central Arcanum alike of
provided that the supreme God is not infinite. Eastern and Western practical transcendentalism.
Now as to our weapons. The advanced Yogis of the Needless to observe, if I knew it, I should not disclose it.
East, like the Nonconformists at home, have practically I therefore affirm the validity of the Qabalistic
abandoned ceremonial as idle. I have yet to learn, tradition in its practical part as well as in those exalted
however, by what dissenters have replaced it! I take this regions of thought through which we have to recently,
to be an error, except in the case of a very advanced and so hardly, travelled.3
Yogi. For there exists a true magical ceremonial, vital
and direct, whose purpose has, however, at any rate of 2
See Berkeley and his expounders, for the Western shape
recent times, been hopelessly misunderstood. of this Eastern commonplace. Huxley, however, curiously
Nobody any longer supposes that any means but that enough, states the fact in almost these words.—A.C.
of meditation is of avail to grasp the immediate causes 3
A possible mystic transfiguration of the Vedanta system
of our being; if some person retort that he prefers to rely has been suggested to me on the lines of the Syllogism—
on a Glorified Redeemer, I simply answer that he is the God = Being (Patanjali).
very nobody to whom I now refer. Being = Nothing (Hegel).
Meditation is then the means; but only the supreme God = Nothing (Buddhism).
means. The agony column of the Times is the supreme Or, in the language of religion:
means of meeting with the gentleman in the brown Every one may admit that monotheism, exalted by the
billycock and frock coat, wearing a green tie and introduction of the ∞ symbol, is equivalent to pantheism.
chewing a straw, who was at the soirée of the Carlton Pantheism and atheism are really identical, as the opponents
Club last Monday night; no doubt! but this means is of both are the first to admit.
If this be really taught, I must tender my apologies, for
the reconcilement is of course complete.—A.C. [There was no
1
Hail unto Thee, the Blessed One, the Perfect One, the citation point for this footnote in the text of my copy of
Enlightened One! Berashith. Its current placing is a guess on my part – T.S.]

6
 Eight are the limbs of Yoga: morality and virtue, extinction of Nirvana, while even in this world of pain,
control of body, thought, and force, leading to where he must remain until the ancient causes, those
concentration, meditation, and rapture. which have already germinated, are utterly worked out
Only when the last of these has been attained, and (for even the Buddha himself could not swing back the
itself refined upon by removing the gross and even the Wheel of the Law) his certain anticipation of the
fine objects of its sphere, can the causes, subtle and approach of Nirvana is so intense as to bathe him
coarse, the unborn causes whose seed is hardly sown, of constantly in the unfathomable ocean of apprehension of
continued existence be grasped and annihilated, so that immediate bliss.
the Arahat is sure of being abolished in the utter

AUM MANI PADME HUM