"Such a figure will result from three very simple simultaneous motions. First, a simple oscillation backwards and forwards (suppose east and west); secondly, a simple oscillation at right angles to the former (suppose north and south) of half the periodic time—, twice as fast; and thirdly, a motion at right angles to these two (suppose downwards), which, in its simplest form, would be with unvarying velocity. If we project this figure in space we find on examination that the points of the curves, where chlorine, bromine, and iodine are formed, come close under each other; so also will sulphur, selenium, and tellurium; again, phosphorus, arsenic, and antimony; and in like manner other series of analogous bodies. It may be asked whether this scheme explains how and why the elements appear in this order? Let us imagine a cyclical translation in space, each evolution witnessing the genesis of the group of elements which I previously represented as produced during one complete vibration of the pendulum. Let us suppose that one cycle has thus been completed, the centre of the unknown creative force in its mighty journey through space having scattered along its track the primitive atoms—the seeds, if I may use the expression—which presently are to coalesce and develop into the groupings now known as lithium, beryllium, boron, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, sodium, magnesium, aluminium, silicon, phosphorus, sulphur, and chlorine. What is most probably the form of track now pursued? Were it strictly confined to the same plane of temperature and time, the next elementary groupings to appear would again have been those of lithium, and the original cycle would have been eternally repeated, producing again and again the same 14 elements. The conditions, however, are not quite the same. Space and electricity are as at first, but temperature has altered, and thus, instead of the atoms of lithium being supplemented with atoms in all respects analogous with themselves, the atomic groupings which come into being when the second cycle commences form, not lithium, but its lineal descendant, potassium. Suppose, therefore, the travelling to and fro in cycles along a lemniscate path, as above suggested, while simultaneously temperature is declining and time is flowing on—variations which I have endeavoured to represent by the downward sink—each coil of the lemniscate track crosses the same vertical line at lower and lower points. Projected in space, the curve shows a central line neutral as far as electricity is concerned, and neutral in chemical properties—positive electricity on the north, negative on the south. Dominant atomicities are governed by the distance east and west from the neutral centre line, monatomic elements being one remove from it, diatomic two removes, and so on. In every successive coil the same law holds good."
Individuals born with such a capacity are not very rare. That they are not heard of more frequently is due to the fact that they live and die, in almost every case, in utter ignorance of being possessed of abnormal powers at all. Mr. Keely possesses powers which are called "abnormal" just because they happen in our day to be as little known as blood circulation was before Harvey's time. Blood existed, and it behaved as it does at present in the first man born from woman; and so does that principle in man which can control and guide etheric vibratory force. At any rate it exists in all those mortals whose inner selves are primordially connected, by reason of their direct descent, with that group of Dhyan-Chohans who are called "the first-born of Ether."Mankind, psychically considered, is divided into various groups, each of which is connected with one of the Dhyanic groups that first formed psychic man; (see paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 in the Commentary to Stanza VII.) Mr. Keely being greatly favoured in this respect, and moreover, besides his psychic temperament, being intellectually a genius in mechanics, may thus achieve most wonderful results. He has achieved some already—more than any mortal man, not initiated into the final mysteries, has achieved in this age up to the present day. What he has done is certainly quite sufficient "to demolish with the hammer of Science the idols of Science"—the idols of matter with the feet of clay—as his friends justly predict and say of him. Nor would the writer for a moment think of contradicting Mrs. Bloomfield-Moore, when in her paper on "Psychic Force and Etheric Force," she states that Mr. Keely, as a philosopher, "is great enough in soul, wise enough in mind, and sublime enough in courage to overcome all difficulties, and to stand at last before the world as the greatest discoverer and inventor in the world."
the differentiation of the elements which enter into the constitution of our Solar System. It has often been asked what was the exact definition of Fohat and his powers and functions, as he seems to exercise those of a Personal God as understood in the popular religions. The answer has just been given in the comment on Stanza V. As well said in the Bhagavadgita Lectures, "The whole Kosmos must necessarily exist in the One Source of energy from which this light (Fohat) emanates." Whether we count the principles in Kosmos and man as seven or only as four, the forces of, and in, physical Nature are Seven; and it is stated by the same authority that "Pragna,or the capacity of perception, exists in seven different aspects corresponding to the seven conditions of matter" (Personal and impersonal God). For, "just as a human being is composed of seven principles, differentiated matter in the Solar System exists in seven different conditions" (ibid). So does Fohat.* He is One and Seven, and on the Cosmic plane is behind all such manifestations as light, heat, sound, adhesion, etc., etc., and is the "spirit" of E, which is the L of the Universe. As an abstraction, we call it the OL; as an objective and evident Reality, we speak of a septenary scale of manifestation, which begins at the upper rung with the One Unknowable C, and ends as Omnipresent Mind and Life immanent in every atom of Matter. Thus, while science speaks of its evolution through brute matter, blind force, and senseless motion, the Occultists point tointelligent L and sentient L, and add that Fohat is the guiding Spirit of all this. Yet he is no personal god at all, but the emanation of those other Powers behind him whom the Christians call the "Messengers" of their God (who is in reality only the Elohim, or rather one of the Seven Creators called Elohim), and we, the "Messenger of the primordial Sons of Life and Light."
"It is impossible, when the complicated facts of an entirely unfamiliar science are being presented to untrained minds for the first time, to put them forward with all their appropriate qualifications . . . and abnormal developments. . . . We must be content to take the broad rules first and deal with the exceptions afterwards, and especially is this the case with study, in connection with which the traditional methods of teaching, generally followed, aim at impressing every fresh idea on the memory by provoking the perplexity it at last relieves."
It was asked: "What planets, of those known to ordinary science, besides Mercury, belong to our system of worlds?" Now if by "System of Worlds" our terrestrial chain or "string" was intended in the mind of the querist, instead of the "Solar System of Worlds," as it should have been, then of course the answer was likely to be misunderstood. For the reply was: "Mars, etc., and four other planets of which astronomy knows nothing. Neither A, B, nor YZ are known nor can they be seen through physical means however perfected." This is plain: (a) Astronomy as yet knows nothing in reality of the planets, neither the ancient ones, nor those discovered in modern times. (b) Nocompanion planets from A to Z, i.e., no upper globes of any chain in the Solar System, can be seen.* As to Mars, Mercury, and "the four other planets," they bear
So, for instance, we have found there, concerning gravitation, the axial and orbital motions, that synchronous movement having been once overcome, in the early stage—it was enough to originate a rotatory motion till the end of Manvantara. We have also come to know in all the aforesaid combinations of possibilities with regard to incipient rotation—most complicated in every case,—some of the causes to which it may have been due,as well as some others to which it ought and should have been due, but, in some way or other, was not. Among other things, we were informed that incipient rotation may be provoked with equal ease in a mass in igneous fusion, and in one that is characterised byglacial opacity ("Heaven and Earth"). That gravitation is a law which nothing can overcome, but which, nevertheless, is overcome in and out of season by the most ordinary celestial or terrestrial bodies—the tails of impudent comets, for instance. That we owe the universe to the holy creative Trinity, called Inert Matter, Senseless Force and Blind Chance. Of the real essence and nature of any of these three, Science knows nothing, but this is a trifling detail. Ergo, we are told that, when a mass of cosmic or nebular matter—whose nature is unknown (entirely so), and which may be in a state of fusion (Laplace), or dark and cold (Thomson), for "this intervention of heat is itself a pure hypothesis" (Faye)—decides to exhibit its mechanical energy under the form of rotation, it acts in this wise. It (the mass) either bursts into spontaneous conflagration, or it remains inert, tenebrous, and frigid, both states being equally capable of sending it, without any adequate cause, spinning through space for millions of years. Its movements may be retrograde and they may be direct, about a hundred various reasons being offered for both motions, in about as many hypotheses. Anyhow, joining the maze of stars, whose origin belongs to the same miraculous and spontaneous order—for "the nebular theory does not profess to discover the origin of things, but only a stadium in material history" (Winchell: World-Life)—those millions of suns, planets, and satellites, composed of inert matter, will whirl on in most impressive and majestic symmetry around the firmament, moved
To this, De Mirville, who believes in intelligent"workmen" ruling invisibly the solar system—as we do—observes very wittily* . . "Voila certes, a voyage which has little in it of mechanicalrigour; at the utmost, one could compare it to a steamer, pulled to and fro and tossed on the waves, retarded or accelerated, all and each of which impediments might put off its arrival indefinitely, were there not the intelligences of a pilot and engineers to catch up the time lost, and to repair the damages. . ."
In a series of scientific works on Astronomy and the nebular theory, written between 1865 and 1866, the present writer, a poor tyro in Science, has counted in a few hours, no less than thirty-nine contradictory hypotheses offered as explanations for the self-generated, primitive rotatory motion of the heavenly bodies. The writer is no astronomer, no mathematician, no scientist; but was obliged to examine these errors in defence of Occultism, in general, and what is still more
Since the ages of the Sun, planets, and the Earth, as stated in the many scientific hypotheses of the astronomers and physicists, are given elsewhere (infra), we have said enough to show the disagreement between the ministers of modern Science. Whether we accept the fifteen million years of Sir W. Thomson or the thousand millions of Mr. Huxley, for the rotational evolution of our solar system, it will always come to this; by accepting self-generated rotation for the heavenly bodies composed of matter and yet moved by their own internal motion, for millions of years, this teaching of Science amounts to—
But we would ask the critics of the mediæval astronomers why should Kepler be denounced as most unscientific,for offering just the same solution as Newton did—only showing himself more sincere, more consistent and even more logical. Where may be the difference between Newton's "all-powerful Being" and Kepler's Rectores, his sidereal and Cosmic Forces, or Angels? Kepler is again criticised for his "curious hypothesis which made use of a vortical movement within the solar system;" for his theories in general, for his favouring Empedocles' idea of attraction and repulsion, and "Solar magnetism" in particular. Yet several modern men of Science, as will be shown—Hunt (if Metcalfe is to be excluded), Dr. Richardson, etc.—favour the idea very seriously. He is half excused, however, on the plea that "to the time of Kepler no interaction between masses of matter had been distinctly recognized which was generically different from magnetism" (World-Life). Is it distinctly recognised now? Does Prof. Winchell claim for Science any serious knowledge whatever of the natures of either electricity or magnetism—except that both seem to be the effects of some result arising from an undetermined cause.
Solar system, which he confessed his inability to explain by the law of gravitation. "Such were the uniformity in the directions of planetary movements, the nearly circular forms of the orbits, and their remarkable conformity to one plane" (Prof. Winchell). And if there is one single exception, then the law of gravitation has no right to be referred to as an universal law. "These adjustments," we are told, "Newton, in his general Scholium, pronounces to be 'the work of an intelligent and all-powerful Being.' " Intelligent that "Being" may be; as to "all-powerful" there would be every reason to doubt the claim. A poor "God" he, who would work upon minor details and leave the most important to secondary forces! The poverty of the argument and logic in this case, is surpassed only by that of Laplace, who, seeking very correctly to substitute motion for Newton's "all-powerful Being," and ignorant of the true nature of that eternal motion, saw in it a blind physical law. "Might not those arrangements be an effect of the laws of motion?" he asks, forgetting, as all our modern Scientists do, that thisand this motion are a vicious circle, so long as the nature of both remains unexplained. His famous answer to Napoleon: "Dieu est devenu une hypothese inutile," would be correctly stated only by one who adhered to the philosophy of the Vedantins. It becomes a pure fallacy, if we exclude the interference of operating, intelligent, powerful (never "all-powerful")Beings, who are called "gods."