hindu
August 6, 2013
Reflection for August 6th, 2013: The imaginative life of humanity.
Posted by FRATER BIA under atheism, Buddhism, carmelite, catholic, Christ, christian, early church, environmental, esoteric, Gnosis, God, grail, hermeticism, hindu, history, islam, judaism, jung, Kataphatic, manichaean, mysticism, Perennial, philosophy, poetry, politics, Praxis, Prayer, Pythagoras, qabbalah, russian orthodoxLeave a Comment
The same problem besets conventional science. ‘The intellectual effort to solve the mystery of the physical universe is in vain since the scientist is trying to separate himself from the universe. It is a single unit. Nature and man are not two different things.’ Thinking that they are is what transmits a misperception: the post-Cartesian world-frame that dictates duality as a model for vision. Deep ecology presages on the other hand the obsolescence of western humanism’s dominant metaphor for perception, and this is its special use as a hermeneutical tool.
We could press the point further and say that deep ecology takes us beyond any separatist dichotomies which traditionally try to distance metaphysics from practical concerns. That separatizing habit is a frequent influence on cultural judgement, by which, for instance, mystical has become synonymous with otherworldly, impractical, even inane; and down-to-earth a commendatory for what could equally be called blinkered or unimaginative. Since a rich symbol-system is essential to the imaginative life of humanity, we are reminded just how severe are the limitations of this type of dismissive judgement of the metaphysical realm. That dismissal could be likened to the global capitalist monoculture derived from the alienating perspectives of the Cartesian dichotomy, or Kantian imperative, that suggests beings other than man are simply means to be used to man’s ends. We are realizing the contrary. Human operations of destruction and appropriation evident on the level of natural ecosystems are accurately reflected in the cultural operations of judgement by which the utilitarian ethic is used to delimit the activities of the psyche and imagination. But our cultural perspective could change and develop a ‘sustainable mind-field’ to partner and revive the biophilia hypothesis, which proposed that the completeness and meaning of human being in the world depends on humans’ conviction of actual affiliation with the remainder of life (as opposed to neutral detachment or isolation, from it). Such an inclusive imaginative mind-field has in fact been the province and occupation of poetics, myth and mysticism for much longer than humanism’s recent, if persistent, denial or degrading of imagination.
http://www.sacredweb.com/online_articles/sw6_davies.html
Esoteric Dimensions of Deep Ecology
by Paul Davies
Hermeneutics: The science of interpretation, or interpretation theory.
August 5, 2013
Reflection for August 5, 2013: Credo
Posted by FRATER BIA under alchemy, angels, apocrypha, Apophatic, Arch Angel, bible, bridal chamber, Buddhism, cabbalah, Christ, christian, coptic church, cosmology, divine union, dualism, early church, Ego, esoteric, Frithjof Schuon, Gnosis, Gnosticism, God, gospel of philip, gospel of thomas, grail, hermeticism, hindu, islam, Jesus, kabbalah, Love, Magdelene, Mani, manichaean, merkabah, monad, mysticism, Nag Hammadi, Native American, nazirutha, nazorean, pagan, Pater Noster, pistis sophia, poetry, Praxis, Prayer, Pythagoras, religion, remember, Rosicrucian, Rumi, russian orthodox, Sophia, spirituality, sufi, Thunder Perfect Mind, YeshuLeave a Comment
In the Western world, a strong belief in the objective truths of religion, which are viewed as incontrovertible, demonstrable facts, is regarded as essential to the life of faith. When asking if somebody is religious, peo- ple often inquire: “Does he or she believe?” as though accepting certain credal propositions was the prime religious activity. Indeed, faith is equated with belief, but this equation is of recent provenance. Origi- nally the meaning of the word faith was akin to trust, as when we say that we have faith in a friend or an ideal. Faith was not an intellectual position but a virtue: it was the careful cultivation, by means of the ritu- als and myths of religion, of the conviction that, despite all the dispirit- ing evidence to the contrary, life had some ultimate meaning and value. The Latin word credo (translated now as “I believe”) seems to have de- rived from the phrase cor dare: to give one’s heart. The Middle English word beleven meant to love. When Christians proclaimed: credo in unum Deum , they were not so much affirming their belief in the existence of a single deity as committing their lives to God. When St. Anselm of Can- terbury prayed in the eleventh century: credo ut intellagam (“I have faith in order that I may understand”), he was not blindly submitting to the doctrines of religion in the hope that one day these incredible asser- tions would make sense today, if he abdicated his critical intelligence. His prayer should really be translated: “I commit myself in order that I may understand.” The meaning of dogma would only be revealed when he lived a fully Christian life, embracing its mythology and rituals whole- heartedly. This attitude is foreign to modernity. Today people feel that before they live a religious life, they must first satisfy themselves intel- lectually of its metaphysical claims. This is sound scientific practice: first you must establish a principle before you can apply it. But it is not the way that religion has traditionally worked.
http://www.sacredweb.com/online_articles/sw4_armstrong.pdf
Karen ARmstrong (Faith an Modernity)
December 9, 2008
Reflection for December 9, 2008: Seven limbs and nineteen doors
Posted by FRATER BIA under bible, Buddhism, buddhist, christian, cosmology, divine union, dualism, early church, esoteric, Gnosis, God, hindu, Ineffable, mysticism, Perennial, philosophy, Praxis, Prayer, Reflection, religion, upanishads, Yoga1 Comment
“Your worst enemy cannot harm you as much
as your own unguarded thoughts.
Develop the mind of equilibrium.
You will always be getting praise and blame,
but do not let either affect the poise of the mind:
follow the calmness, the absence of pride.”
–Sutta Nipata
The sharpest boundary, however, is the one that separates the intermediary from the third and highest domain of the tribhuvana, which is termed svar and corresponds to our conception of the heavenly or celestial realm. The first two domains are comparatively similar, as in fact suggested by the words bhur and bhuvar, their respective Sanskrit designations; it is the transition from bhur to bhuvar that presents itself as a radical discontinuity, and in fact entails an inversion. So too the major break on the side of knowing is situated between the second and third of the corresponding degrees, as the analogies given in the Mandukya Upanishad in fact make it clear: nothing could indeed be more radical than the transition from the dream-state to sushupti, the state of dreamless sleep, which for this very reason is generally viewed as a state in which there is no knowing at all. It hardly needs saying that no amount of psychedelic drugs can take us across that border, and that even the techniques of yoga cannot effect that transition in the absence of initiatic grace. One might add that it is the failure to distinguish between the psychic an authentically celestial world that invalidates much of what contemporary authorities have to say concerning the so-called “spiritual life.”
–Wolfgang Smith (cosmology in the face of Gnosis, Sophia Vol. 12, no.2)
God knows creatures, not according to the creature’s knowledge, but according to His own.
–Dionysius the Areopagite
AUM. This imperishable word is the universe.
It is explained as the past, the present, the future;
everything is the word AUM.
Also whatever transcends threefold time is AUM.
All here is God; this soul is God.
This same soul is fourfold.
The waking state outwardly conscious,
having seven limbs and nineteen doors,
enjoying gross objects common to all, is the first.
The dreaming state inwardly conscious,
having seven limbs and nineteen doors,
enjoying subtle objects that are bright, is the second.
When one sleeps without yearning for any desires,
seeing no dreams, that is deep sleep.
The deep-sleep state unified in wisdom gathered,
consisting of bliss, enjoying bliss,
whose door is conscious wisdom, is the third.
This is the Lord of all; this is the omniscient;
this is the inner controller; this is the universal womb,
for this is the origin and end of beings.
Not inwardly wise nor outwardly wise nor both ways wise
nor gathered wisdom, nor wise nor unwise,
unseen, incommunicable, intangible,
featureless, unthinkable, indefinable,
whose essence is the security of being one with the soul,
the end of evolution, peaceful, good, non-dual—
this they deem the fourth.
It is the soul; it should be discerned.
This is the soul in regard to the word AUM and its parts.
The parts are the letters,
and the letters are its parts: A U M.
The waking state common to all is the letter A,
the first part, from “attaining” or from being first.
Whoever knows this attains all desires and becomes first.
The sleeping state, the bright, is the letter U,
the second part, from “uprising” or from being in between.
Whoever knows this rises up in knowledge and is balanced;
no one ignorant of God is born in that family.
The deep-sleep state, the wise, is the letter M,
the third part, from “measure” or from being the end.
Whoever knows this measures everything and reaches the end.
The fourth is without a letter, the incommunicable,
the end of evolution, good, non-dual.
Thus AUM is the soul.
Whoever knows this enters by one’s soul into the soul;
this one knows this.
— MANDUKYA UPANISHAD
None of the things which are comprehended by the senses or contemplated by the intellect really subsist; nothing except the transcendent and cause of all.
–St. Gregory of Nyssa
Notes:
Tribhuvana (Sanskrit) Three worlds; in Hindu literature the three bhuvanas are svarga (heaven), bhumi (earth), and patala (the lower regions). Esoterically the tribhuvanas are the spiritual, psychic or astral, and terrestrial spheres. http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Tribhuvana/id/195496
………………
Svar (Svarga, Svargaloka)
The heavenly domain (above Bhuvarloka) of Indra, king of the demigods
(See also: Svar , Bhakti, Bhakti Yoga, Bhakti Dictionary, Body Mind and Soul) http://www.krishna.com
…………….
Firstly, the word Bhur implies existence. God is self-existent and independent of all. He is eternal and unchanging. Without beginning and without end, God exists as a continuous, permanent, constant entity. Secondly, the word Bhur can also mean the Earth, on which we are born and sustained. God is the provider of all, and it is through His divine will that we our blessed with all that we require to maintain us through our lives. Finally, Bhur signifies Prana, or life (literally, breath). God is That which gives life to all. Whilst He is independent of all, all are dependent on Him. It is God who has given us life, God who maintains us throughout our lives, and God alone who has the ability to take away our life, when He so chooses. The only permanent entity, all others are subject to His own will
http://www.eaglespace.com/spirit/gayatribywords.php
…………..
Bhuvah describes the absolute Consciousness of God. God is self-Conscious as well as being Conscious of all else, and thus is able to control and govern the Universe. Also, the word Bhuvah relates to God’s relationship with the celestial world. It denotes God’s greatness – greater than the sky and space, He is boundless and unlimited. Finally, Bhuvah is also indicative of God’s role as the remover of all pain and sufferings (Apaana). We see pain and sorrow all around us. However, through supplication to God, we can be freed from that pain and hardship. God Himself is devoid of any pain. Though He is Conscious of all, and is thus aware of pain, it does not affect Him. It is our own ignorance that makes us susceptible to the effects of Maya, or illusion, which causes us to feel pain. Through true devotion to God, we can be freed from the clutches of Maya, and thus be rid of pain and sorrow.
http://www.eaglespace.com/spirit/gayatribywords.php
………………
Sushupti: Hindu – Hinduism Dictionary on Consciousness
consciousness: Chitta or chaitanya.
1) A synonym for mind-stuff, chitta; or
2) the condition or power of perception, awareness, apprehension.
There are myriad gradations of consciousness, from the simple sentience of inanimate matter to the consciousness of basic life forms, to the higher consciousness of human embodiment, to omniscient states of superconsciousness, leading to immersion in the One universal consciousness, Parashakti. Chaitanya and chitta can name both individual consciousness and universal consciousness.
Modifiers indicate the level of awareness, e.g.,
– vyashti chaitanya, “individual consciousness;”
– buddhi chitta, “intellectual consciousness;”
– Sivachaitanya, “God consciousness.”
Five classical “states” of awareness are discussed in scripture:
1) wakefulness (jagrat),
2) “dream” (svapna) or astral consciousness,
3) “deep sleep” (sushupti) or subsuperconsciousness,
4) the superconscious state beyond (turiya “fourth”) and
5) the utterly transcendent state called turiyatita (“beyond the fourth”).
See: awareness, chitta, chaitanya, mind (all entries).
(See also: Consciousness , Hinduism, Body Mind and Soul)
November 22, 2008
Reflection for November 22, 2008:The paradox of the human condition
Posted by FRATER BIA under alchemy, bible, bridal chamber, Buddhism, catholic, Christ, christian, cosmology, Dalai Lama, dharma, divine union, Dzogchen, esoteric, Frithjof Schuon, Gnosis, gnostic, Gnostic Praxis, hermeticism, hindu, humility, islam, judaism, kabbalah, Love, mysticism, Perennial, philosophy, Praxis, Prayer, Reflection, religion, transcendental, upanishads, Yeshu, zenLeave a Comment
The paradox of the human condition is that nothing is so contrary to us as the requirement to transcend ourselves,
and nothing so fundamentally ourselves as the essence of this requirement , or perhaps,
the fruit of this transcendence
–Frithjof Schuon, Echoes of Perennial wisdom
November 12, 2008
FAITHS of Man: Abadon, Abel, Aben, Abhi-Marsin,Abi-Kāma, Ablathanabla,Abors. Bors, Abram. Abraham, Abraxas
Posted by FRATER BIA under Abadon, Abel, Aben, Abhi-Marsin, Abi-Kāma, Ablathanabla, Abors, Abraham, Abraxas, apocrypha, bible, christian, cosmology, creation myth, early church, egyptian, esoteric, food, Gnostic jargon, Gnosticism, hekalot, hermeticism, hindu, Jesus, judaism, kabbalah, mysticism, religion[2] Comments
Read Entire Book Faiths of Man Part 1
Buy entire book Faiths of Man
Abadon. Hebrew. “ Destruction ” personified as the Greek
Apolluōn (Revelat. ix, 11), and as Asmodeus (see Asmodeus) called
by Rabbis Ashmadai (see Job xxvi, 6); and in the Book of Wisdom
(xviii, 25) Olothreuōn in the Greek.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abaddon
Abel. It is necessary to distinguish Abel the second son of Adam
(Hebrew Habl), from Habāl or Hobāl the great Arabian deity,
though the letters seem the same (see Habāl). Abel is usually
supposed to be the Babylonian word Ablu “ son.” The Hebrew Ābel
is again different—a common term for “ meadow.” Arabs and
Persians call Abel and Cain, Habīl and Ḳ abīl. No very satisfactory
explanation of their legends in Genesis has been given (see Ḳain).
Aben. Hebrew Eben, “ a stone.” Perhaps the root is found in
Banah “ to build,” as Ban or Ben (“ a son ”) is builder of the family
(see Ben). Ebenezer (“ stone of help ”) was a stone emblem of the
god, like those of Arabia (see Arabia). Jeremiah tells his tribe that
a stone begat them, and that they committed adulteries with stones
Jer. ii, 27 ; iii, 9. See also Gen. xxxi, 48 ; and 1 Sam. iv, 1 ;
vii, 12). Āban (says Delitzsch) has the sense of a “ peak ” or “ pointed
thing ”—the Assyrian Ubanu “ peak, rock, or finger ” (see Finger).
Abhi-Marsin. Sanskrit. Courting, inciting.
Abi-Kāma. Sanskrit. “ Love primeval,” intense desire, struggle,
war.
Ablathanabla. See Abraxas.
Abors. Bors. The Asamese term for the wild race, calling
themselves Padams or Pagdams, inhabiting the N.E. frontier of British
territory at the bend of the Brāhmapūtra River (N. and N.W.), and
embracing the greater and lesser Dihong river valleys, north of
Sadiya. The term Abor is said to mean “ savage,” “ non-tribute
payer,” or “ fierce man ” : for Abors are a much-feared people who
hunt down even the “ wild cow ” (or Nilgau), and eat buffalo beef,
but not cows—showing a Hindu influence. They worship Nāts or
fays, spirits of the woods and waters : they tattoo their bodies, and
clothe themselves in skins and bark, but go naked in the hot season.
They are never without their bows and arrows—the latter poisoned
(for war) with the powdered root of the wild aconite, or with blood.
They wear a dhār, or long cutlass, at the waist, or slung (as by
Burmese) over the shoulder.
These people are scarcely as yet out of the communal stage, and
pay scant respect to chiefs, with some 250 of whom the Government had to deal in 1859-1870, and to try to keep them quiet by
subsidies. They are all sullen, clownish, and violent when roused,
like their congeners of Tibet and Barmah. Families are distinguished
by totems, or by marks on the forehead. The poorer are often
polyandrous : the richer are polygamous ; and sometimes they are
communists, a group of men living with a group of women. There
are barracks for bachelors and women, where considerable licence is
practised ; and chastity consists in having no intercourse outside the
clan. As regards religion, they believe in a life hereafter, with rewards
and punishments ; and sacrifices are said to please and propitiate the
spirits, and to be necessary to prevent famine and pestilence.
Abram. Abraham. There is no very satisfactory etymology of
this mythical patriarch’s name. Abram (Babylonian Ab-ramu) is
usually rendered “ high father,” that is to say, a deity like Brahmā.
Abraham is compared with the Arabic rahām, “ a host—a “ Lord of
Hosts” like Gānesa, or Yahveh. Hindus call a loving brother Rāmu.
The tablets of Esarhaddon’s days give such names as Abi-ramu and
Am-ramu. If we take the root to be Abr “ strong,” as in Abir a
“ bull ” or “ hero,” the m is only a suffix—as in Hebrew, Sabean, or
Babylonian speech. Some think this word connected with ’Abr (see
Gen. xiv, 13, and Exod. v, 3) ; for Abraham is especially called the
“ Hebrew,” and descendant of ’Eber, father of Peleg. Coming from
Padan-Aram he would naturally worship the “ high God ” (El-’Eliūn),
and seek his shrine at Ieru-salem (“ the abode of salvation ”). There
stood (no doubt) his symbol, a sacred stone (menhir or lingam) ; and
naturally he dedicated to this the agent of creation by circumcision,
swearing solemn oaths thereby, as we read that Abram and Isaac did
by what is euphemistically called the “ thigh.” See the Jewish World
(3rd April 1885), where the learned writer says: “ Abraham is a title
applied to the Creator only ” ; and if so, based on the root Bra “ create “
(Gen. i, 1).
Most Syrians and Arabs considered Abraham to be a Messiah ;
and prayers are still addressed to him (at his tomb in Hebron), as
Christians pray to Christ or to Mary. Abraham, as Ab-ram, “ the high
father,” was both a Malaki-ṣadī ḳ (Melchisedec), or “ King of righteousness,”
and a Shem—“ sign ” or “ mark.” Yet, says the Rev. Dr Cheyne
(Hibbert Lectures, 1892), “ Abraham must be given up as an historical
figure . . . some one must confess this truth, which ought, long ago,
to have found its way into our schools and colleges.”
This view is corroborated by the various widely different periods
assigned as the age of Abraham. The Samaritan and Greek Bibles say
he lived in 2605 B.C. Josephus said 2576, and the Vulgate, 2015 B.C.
Prof. Hommel (in 1896-7), says he “could not have lived earlier
than 1900 B.C.,” and Archbishop Ussher makes him 175 years
old in 1821 B.C. According to this Biblical chronology, he left Padan
Ararn in 1921 B.C. (see Bible), and went to Egypt on account of a
famine. But by Egypt we may understand the south of Palestine,
then perhaps an Egyptian province. Thence, about 1917 B.C., he
went to settle with Lot, “ towards Sodom.” In 1913 B.C. Chedorlaomer,
King of Elam, came, with ’Aniraphel, King of Shinar, Tidal king of
nations, and Arioch, King of Ellasar (Larsa), to quell a rebellion in
Eastern Palestine, which had been under Elam for twelve years.
The Biblical legend runs that Abraham (apparently 83 years old),
pursued this Babylonian army with three hundred and eighteen armed
retainers, defeating it, and taking the spoil and prisoners (Lot among
them), near Ḥ obah, “ north of Damascus.” This Hebrew fable, however,
enables us to test the dates. A tablet from Tell Lo ḥ (Revue Assyr. iv, p.
85, 1897), has been supposed to mention ’Amraphel (as Ḥ ammurabi),
with Arioch (Eriaku),and Tidal (Tudkhal), in which case Abraham would
live about the 22nd century B.C. [This translation is, however, rejected
by most specialists ; and the tablet is late, and probably refers to events
about 648 B.C.—ED.] Ḥ ammurabi (Kha-am-mu-ra-bi), is usually
supposed to have acceded in 2139 B.C. (the date given by Dr Peiser,
and by Col. Conder in his Hittites, p. 175). He ruled over “ the
west ” (Martu in Akkadian), like his successor Ammi-satana
(2034-2009 B.C.).
It has puzzled some commentators that Abraham went “ south ”
from Egypt on his way to Bethel [see Gen. xiii, 3. But the Hebrew
word so rendered is Negeb, a term applying to the “ dry ” country—as
the word means—near Beersheba.—ED.] The fatherland of Abraham
was at “ Ur of the Chaldees ” (Hebrew “ Ur of the Kasdīm ”), the later
Edessa, now Orfah. Ignoring this site, scholars have placed Ur at
Mugeiyer in Chaldea (near the mouth of the Euphrates), and have been
puzzled to explain why he went to Ḥ aran (near Edessa); but that
Ḥ aran was his fatherland, we see by his sending his confidential servant
there to seek a wife for Isaac. [The error is due to following the Greek
translation of Kasdīm by Khaldaioi (whom Herodotos mentions in
Babylon), and identifying them with the Kaldu, a people of Kaldea,
south of Babylon. Kasdīm appears to mean “ conquerors ” in Assyrian.—
ED.] The author of Acts vii, 2-4 calls Padan-Aram (Mesopotamia), the
“ land of the Ohaldeans.” Ṭ eraḥ called his youngest son also Ḥ aran ; and
there are still many legends of the patriarchs in this region—such as that
Orham, King of Or (Edessa), called Abram Ab-or-ham—reminding us of
Pater Orchamus (Ovid. Metam. iv, 212), the fabled son of Zeus, founder
of the empire of the Anatolian Mineans, who ruled Boiōtia and North
Greece from their capital Orkhomenos. M. Renan (Hist. Israel, i,
p. 63), even says, “Orham has lent his name, and several characteristic
traits, to the history of Abraham.”
Many years after the above was first written appeared the
valuable paper by Mr Hormazd Rassam, the old explorer of Nineveh
(Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch., February 1898), which proves that “ Ur of the
Ohaldees ” was Edessa, or Orfah. Cappadocia (Kappadokia) proves to
have been early entered by the Babylonians, who spread all over
North Syria. The name Khaldaioi (in the Septuagint) may thus be
connected with that of Khaldis on the Vannic inscriptions [applying
to a deity.—ED.]. From Ur, Ṭ era ḥ ’s family went to Ḥ aran, which is
only some two days’ journey from Edessa. In Judith (v, 6, 7), Jews
are called descendants of the Arameans, “a belief prevalent among all
Hebrews in Biblical lands at the present day” (Rassam). It is not
known, however, why the Septuagint translators changed the Hebrew
Kasdīm into “ Chaldeans.” According to Ezekiel (i, 3), the “ land
of the Kasdīm ” was by the River Chebar (or Khabūr River), a great
tributary of the Euphrates, one affluent of which rises in the Aram
or “ high land ” near to where Edessa is situated. It was the country
of Bal’aam (Deut. xxiii, 4), and was higher up the Euphrates than
Babylon, whereas Mugeiyer is near the mouth of that river, far below
Babylon. All this, and more, is ably set forth by Mr Rassam, who
only follows in the track of many other Oriental scholars.
In the Book Zohar (see Ḳ abbala) Abraham is called an “ incarnation
of love, mystery, and divine unity ” : he is symbolised by a pillar
(p. 41) as were Zeus, Yahveh, etc. He was the first to teach the
Ḳ abbala to Egypt, and received the mysteries “ from Noah, who
received them from Adam, who received them from God ” (Ginsburg’s
Zohar). Moses had personal intercourse with Abraham, as had most
legislators down to David and Solomon (p. 80). In the Book Jetzira
(“ Creation ”) the Ḳ abbala is called “ a monologue of Abraham,”
whereby he is induced to accept the true faith; and he is there said
to have invented writing and the Hebrew characters (p. 65). Elsewhere
he is described as a “ giant, a monster, having the strength of
seventy-four men, and requiring the food and drink of the same.”
The Arabian El Kindy (in our 8th-9th century) says, “ Abraham
lived seventy years in Ḥ aran, worshipping Al’Ozzah, who is still
revered in Arabia ” (see Royal Asiatic Society Journal, January 1882 ;
and Sir W. Muir’s El Kindy). He says that the inhabitants were
given to human sacrifice—which Abram wished to continue in
Palestine, whence the early rite of devoting the first-born to Yahveh.
The sacrifice of Isaac (or, as the Arabs say, of Ishm’ael) has now been
whittled down by Ezra-itic writers, who were evidently ashamed of it,
as making their God a bloodthirsty fiend, and their patriarch the
heartless murderer of his innocent boy. Tradition, and the persistence
of race barbarism, are however too strong for the would-be cleansers of
history ; and God and man still appear cruel and deceitful, while
multitudes still commemorate the half-enacted rite (see Sacrifice).
Abraham is represented as trying to hide his murderous purpose from
his son and servants by a lie, saying he would return with the child.
The deity doubts his sincerity till the knife is raised, when the wouldbe
murderer is lauded for wondrous “ Faith.” Faith in a God ?
—nay, in a dream. His God then promises him wealth, and offspring,
in abundance.
The sacrifice was originaJly commemorated in autumn, when
human sacrifices were common ; and what would be more orthodox
than that a great Sheikh, entering on a new land to found a colony,
should begin by offering his first-born to the god of the land ? Did
not the Christian Saint Columba bury his brother, St. Oran, in the
foundations of his church ? (Rivers of Life, ii, p. 340.)
Abraham, however, seems to have been anything but wealthy
when he died, possessing only the burial-place that he is said to have
purchased. He had given “ all he possessed ” to Isaac, and “ the
rest ” to numerous children by two stray wives. Islāmis say that he
travelled in both Arabia and Babylonia, but chiefly in Arabia ; and
that he assisted Ishm’ael in building the fourth shrine of Makka, and
in establishing the “ Black Stone ” (see our Short Studies, p. 539).
Hebrews and Arabs have reverently called him the Khalīl, or “ friend ”
of Allah (see Gen. xv, 17 ; Isaiah xli, 8).
Among arithmetical errors in the Bible is the statement that he
was born when Ṭ era ḥ was 70 years old, yet was 75 when (apparently)
Ṭ era ḥ died at the age of 205 years. He is also said not to have
known Yahveh, but only the tree gods—Āle-im or Elohim. He twice
dissembled to save his life by endangering his wife’s chastity, which
he seems to have valued little, as she lived some time in the harīms of
Pharaoh and Abimelek, who heaped riches on Abraham. It is untrue
to say that Sarah was “ without shame or reproach,” for Genesis
xii, 19 should read, “ she is my sister though I have taken her for
my wife.”
We shall not attempt to record the voluminous legends (in the
Talmud, etc.) concerning Abraham, of which the Old Testament does
not give a tithe. He is said to have visited Nimrod, and to have
converted him by the old feeble argument: “ Fire must not be worshipped
for water quenches it ; nor water because clouds carry this ;
nor clouds because winds drive them.” He might have added, “ Nor
Yahveh because we invented him.” According to other traditions,
Yahveh found great difficulty in calling (or killing) Abraham. He
sent the archangel Michael several times, to break the command to
Abraham as gently as possible : for the patriarch loved life. The
archangel—whom he fed—told his mission to Isaac, who tried to
explain it, deploring that both sun and moon (Abram and Sarah)
must ascend to heaven. The patriarch then accused Michael of
trying to steal away his soul, which he said he would never yield up.
The Lord then reminded him, by Michael, of all that he had done
for him ; and that, like Adam and others, he must die. Abraham
asked that he might first see “ all peoples and their deeds ” ; but,
when carried up in a chariot, he was so disgusted, by what he saw,
that he begged the earth might open and swallow all peoples. God
then shut his eyes lest they should all be destroyed, saying, “ I do not
wish it so, for I created all, and will only destroy the wicked.”
Abraham then saw a narrow road with few people on it, and a man
on a gold throne, “ terrible and like God,” though it was only Adam :
and again a broad road thronged with people, and with pursuing
angels. The man (or god) tore his hair and beard in sorrow, and
cast himself and his throne to the ground ; but, as people increased
on the narrow way, he rose rejoicing though “ in 7000 years only
one soul is saved.” The angels were scourging the wicked with
whips of fire ; and at the door of heaven sat one “ like the Son
of God,” though he was only Abel, having before him a table, and
a Bible twelve yards long and eight yards wide. He wrote down
the virtues and sins of all, and then weighed the souls (like Thoth).
The Lord had commanded Abel to judge all till the final judgment,
which is to be by the Son of God. Some souls were however set
aside as wanting an extra good deed, and “ Abraham prayed for such,
and the Lord saved them because of Abraham’s holiness.” He also
saved, at his request, all whom Abraham had cursed on earth. The
patriarch was then taken back to his house, to the great joy of his
family, and commanded to settle his worldly affairs, and to give up
his soul to Michael. This Abraham again refused to do; so the
Angel of Death was told to visit him—which he was very unwilling
to do. He was however commanded to disguise himself as a gentle
and beautiful spirit ; but he confessed to Abraham that he was the
“ poison of Death.” He argued long that he could not depart
without Abraham’s soul ; and he assumed many horrid forms, but
did not frighten the patriarch, who accused Death of killing even
boys and girls, and made him kneel down with him and pray for
their restoration. Death continued to torment the patriarch, who
was 175 years old ; and at last he slept on his bed, and kissed
Death’s hand, mistaking it for that of his son, so receiving “ the
poison of death.” Michael and innumerable angels “bore away his
pure soul, and placed it in the hands of the Lord ; and his body was
swathed in pure white linen, and buried in ‘ Dria the Black ’ or Elonē-
Mamre.” (From a Roumanian text, published by Dr Gaster, who
gives this interesting Apocalypse in the Transactions, Bib. Arch.
Soc., ix, 1.)
Abraxas. Abrasax. Abracadabra. Ablathanabla.
Abanathabla. Various terms on Gnostik charms—see Rivers of
Life, i, p. 511. [The translations are much disputed. Probably
they are Aramaic sentences: Abrak ha dabra, “ I bless the deed ” :
Ablaṭ ha nabla, “I give life to the corpse” : Abana thabla, “ Thou
our father leadest.”—ED.] The Persian sun-god was seen in the
Greek letters Abraxas, representing in numbers 365—the days of
the solar year. This word, placed on an amulet or seal, exorcised
evil spirits, and was eXplained by Semites as meaning Abra-Shedabara,
“go out bad spirit out” [or perhaps better, Abrak ha āsh, “I
bless the man.”—ED.] In Syria Abraxas was a form of Iao (Yahveh),
Mithras, Ṣ abaoth, or Adonis, figured as a lion-headed solar serpent
with a rayed glory (Rivers of Life, ii, p. 274) : or as a cock-headed
serpent, or the eastern serpent (Sesha) biting his own tail as Ananta
“ the Eternal.” In Egyptian Abrasax was thought to signify “hurt me
not ” ; and the pious Christian Marullus bequeathed to his children
an amulet, with this name on the one side, and a serpent on the
other, of jasper enclosed in a golden Bulla shaped like a heart—the
seat of emotions. Such bullæ are said to be the origin of the “ Sacred
Heart,” and to explain the name of Papal “ Bulls,” though these had
leaden “ seals ” later (Rivers of Life, ii, pp. 237-8). Such amulets
cured bodily pains, and averted the evil eye. We read of the
physician of Gordian II. as prescribing one for his patient (see King’s
Gnostics, pp. 105-6). Basilides the Gnostik is said to have invented
Abraxas, to denote the spirit presiding over the 365 days of the year.
But the radical idea was that of fecundity, for the image is found as
a bearded Priapus grasping his organ like Osiris.