B. ON CHAINS OF PLANETS AND THEIR PLURALITY

B.

ON CHAINS OF PLANETS AND THEIR PLURALITY.

Such are the questions often put to us, and they have to be considered from every aspect. To the first of the two queries the answer is: We believe it because the first law in nature is uniformity in diversity, and the second is analogy. "As above, so below." The time is gone by for ever when our pious ancestors believed that our Earth was in the centre of the Universe, and the Church and her arrogant sentants could insist that the supposition that any other Planet could be inhabited should be regarded as blasphemy. Adam and Eve, the Serpent and Original Sin, followed by Atonement through Blood, have been too long in the way of progress, and universal truth has thus been sacrificed to the insane conceit of us little men.

Now what are the proofs thereof? Beyond inferential evidence and logical reasoning, there are none for the profane. To the Occultists, who believe in the knowledge acquired by countless generations of Seers and Initiates, the data offered in the Secret Books are all-sufficient. The general public needs other proofs, however. There are some Kabalists, and even some Eastern Occultists, who, failing to find uniform evidence upon this point in all the mystic works of the nations, hesitate to accept the teaching. Even such "uniform evidence" will be forthcoming presently. Meanwhile, we may approach the subject 740] from its general aspect, and see whether belief in it is so very absurd, as some Scientists along with other Nicodemuses would have it. Unconsciously, perhaps, in thinking of a plurality of inhabited "Worlds," we imagine them to be like the Globe we inhabit, and to be peopled by beings more or less resembling ourselves. And in so doing we are only following a natural instinct. Indeed, so long as the enquiry is confined to the life-history of this Globe, we can speculate on the question with some profit, and ask ourselves, with some hope of at least asking an intelligible question, what were the "Worlds" spoken of in all the ancient scriptures of Humanity? But how do we know (a) what kind of beings inhabit the Globes in general; and (b) whether those who rule Planets superior to our own do not exercise the same influence on our Earth consciously, that we may exercise unconsciously, say on the small planets (planetoids or asteroids) in the long run, by our cutting the Earth in pieces, opening canals, and thereby entirely changing our climates. Of course, like Caesar's wife, the planetoids, cannot be affected by our suspicion. They are too far, etc. Believing in Esoteric Astronomy, however, we are not so sure of that.

But when, extending our speculations beyond our Planetary Chain, we try to cross the limits of the Solar System, then indeed we act as do presumptuous fools. For—while accepting the old Hermetic axiom, "as above, so below"—as we may well believe that Nature on Earth displays the most careful economy, utilizing every vile and waste thing in her marvellous transformations, and withal never repeating herself, so we may justly conclude that there is no other Globe in all her infinite systems so closely resembling this Earth, that the ordinary powers of man's thought should be able to imagine and reproduce its semblance and containment.¹⁶⁵⁷

And indeed we find in the romances as in all the so-called scientific fictions and spiritistic "revelations" from Moon, Stars, and Planets, merely fresh combinations or modifications of the men and things, the passions and forms of life, with which we are familiar, though even on the other Planets of our own System nature and life are entirely different from those prevailing on our own. Swedenborg was preeminent in inculcating such an erroneous belief.

741] {STATES OF CONSCIOUSNESS.} But even more. The ordinary man has no experience of any state of consciousness other than that to which the physical senses link him. Men dream; they sleep the profound sleep which is too deep for its dreams to impress the physical brain; and in these states there must still be consciousness. How, then, while these mysteries remain unexplored, can we hope to speculate with profit on the nature of Globes which, in the economy of Nature, must needs belong to states of consciousness other and quite different from any which man experiences here?

And this is true to the letter. For even great Adepts (those initiated of course), trained Seers though they be, can only claim thorough acquaintance with the nature and appearance of Planets and their inhabitants belonging to our Solar System. They know that almost all the Planetary Worlds are inhabited, but—even in spirit—they can have access only to those of our System; and they are also aware how difficult it is, even for them, to put themselves into full rapport even with the planes of consciousness within our System, differing as they do from the states of consciousness possible on this Globe; such, for instance, as those which exist on the Chain of Spheres on the three planes beyond that of our Earth. Such knowledge and intercourse are possible to them because they have learned how to penetrate to planes of consciousness which are closed to the perceptions of ordinary men; but were they to communicate their knowledge, the world would be no wiser, because men lack that experience of other forms of perception which alone could enable them to grasp what they might be told.

Still the fact remains that most of the Planets, like the Stars beyond our System, are inhabited, a fact which has been admitted by the men of Science themselves. Laplace and Herschel believed it, though they wisely abstained from imprudent speculation; and the same conclusion has been worked out and supported with an array of scientific considerations by C. Flammarion, the well-known French Astronomer. The arguments he brings forward are strictly scientific, and are such as appeal even to a materialistic mind, which would remain unmoved by such thoughts as those of Sir David Brewster, the famous Physicist, who writes:
Those "barren spirits" or "base souls," as the poet calls them, who might be led to believe that the earth is the only inhabited body in the universe, would have no difficulty in conceiving the earth also to have been destitute of inhabitants. What is more, if such minds were acquainted with the deductions of geology, they would 742] admit that it was uninhabited for myriads of years; and here we come to the impossible conclusion that during these myriads of years there was not a single intelligent creature in the vast domains of the Universal King, and that before the protozoic formations there existed neither plant nor animal in all the infinity of space.¹⁶⁵⁸

Flammarion shows, in addition, that all the conditions of life—even as we know it—are present on some at least of the Planets, and points to the fact that these conditions must be much more favourable on them than they are on our Earth.

Thus scientific reasoning, as well as observed facts, concurs with the statements of the Seer, and the innate voice in man's own heart in declaring that life—intelligent, conscious life—must exist on other worlds than ours.

But this is the limit beyond which the ordinary faculties of man cannot carry him. Many are the romances and tales, some purely fanciful, others bristling with scientific knowledge, which have attempted to imagine and describe life on other Globes. But one and all they give but some distorted copy of the drama of life around us. It is either, with Voltaire, the men of our own race under a microscope, or, with de Bergerac, a graceful play of fancy and satire; but we always find that at bottom the new world is but the one we ourselves live in. So strong is this tendency that even great natural, though non-initiated, Seers, fall victims to it when untrained; witness Swedenborg, who goes so far as to dress the inhabitants of Mercury, whom he meets with in the spirit-world, in clothes such as are worn in Europe!

Commenting on this tendency, Flammarion says:

It seems as if in the eyes of those authors who have written on this subject, the Earth were the type of the Universe, and the man of Earth, the type of the inhabitants of the Heavens. It is, on the contrary, much more probable, that, since the nature of other planets is essentially varied, and the surroundings and conditions of existence essentially different, while the forces which preside over the creation of beings and the substances which enter into their mutual constitution are essentially distinct, it would follow that our mode of existence cannot be regarded as in any way applicable to other globes. Those who have written on this subject have allowed themselves to be dominated by terrestrial ideas, and have therefore fallen into error.¹⁶⁵⁹

Let us, however, leave these profitless and empty speculations, which, though they seem to fill our hearts with a glow of enthusiasm and to enlarge our mental and spiritual grasp, do but in reality cause a factitious stimulation, and blind us more and more to our ignorance not only of the world we inhabit, but even of the infinitude contained within ourselves.

When, therefore, we find "other worlds" spoken of in the Bibles of Humanity, we may safely conclude that they not only refer to other states of our Planetary Chain and Earth, but also to other inhabited Globes—Stars and Planets; withal, that no speculations were ever made about the latter. The whole of antiquity believed in the Universality of Life. But no really initiated Seer of any civilized nation has ever taught that life on other Stars could be judged by the standard of terrestrial life. What is generally meant by "Earths" and "Worlds," relates (a) to the "rebirths" of our Globe after each Manvantara and a long period of Obscuration; and (b) to the periodical and entire changes of the Earth's surface, when continents disappear to make room for oceans, and oceans and seas are violently displaced and sent rolling to the poles, to cede their emplacements to new continents.

We may begin with the Bible—the youngest of the World-scriptures. In Ecclcsiastes, we read these words of the King-Initiate:

One generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth for ever. . . . The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done, is that which shall be done, and there is no new thing under the sun.¹⁶⁶⁰

Under these words it is not easy to see the reference to the successive cataclysms by which the Races of mankind are swept away, or, going further back, to the various transitions of the Globe during the process of its formation. But if we are told that this refers only to our world as we now see it, then we shall refer the reader to the New Testament, where St. Paul speaks of the Son (the manifested Power) whom God hath appointed heir of all things, "by whom also he made the worlds" (plural).¹⁶⁶¹ This "Power" is Chokmah, the Wisdom and the Word. 744] We shall probably be told that by the term "worlds," the stars, heavenly bodies, etc., were meant. But apart from the fact that "stars" were not known as "worlds" to the ignorant editors of the Epistles, even if they must have been thus known to Paul, who was an Initiate, a "Master-Builder," we can quote on this point an eminent Theologian, Cardinal Wiseman. In his work (i. 309) treating of the indefinite period of the six days—or shall we say "too definite" period of the six days—of creation and the 6,000 years, he confesses that we are in total darkness as to the meaning of this statement of St. Paul, unless we are permitted to suppose that allusion is made in it to the period which elapsed between the first and second verses of chapter i of Genesis, and thus to those primitive revolutions, i.e., the destructions and the reproductions of the world, indicated in chapter i of Ecclesiastes; or, to accept, with so many others, and in its literal sense, the passage in chapter i of Hebrews, that speaks of the creation of "worlds"—in the plural. It is very singular, he adds, that all the cosmogonies should agree to suggest the same idea, and preserve the tradition of a first series of revolutions, owing to which the world was destroyed and again renewed.

Had the Cardinal studied the Zohar his doubts would have been changed into certainties. Thus saith the "Idra Suta":

There were old worlds which perished as soon as they came into existence; worlds with and without form called Scintillas—for they were like the sparks under the smith's hammer, flying in all directions. Some were the primordial worlds which could not continue long, because the "Aged"—his name be sanctiued—had not as yet assumed his form,¹⁶⁶² the workman was not yet the "Heavenly Man."¹⁶⁶³

Again in the Midrash, written long before the Kabalah of Simeon Ben lochai, Rabbi Abahu explains:

The Holy One, blessed be his name, has successively formed and destroyed sundry worlds before this one¹⁶⁶⁴ . . . Now this refers both to the first races [the "Kings of Edom"] and to the worlds destroyed.¹⁶⁶⁵

"Destroyed" means here what we call "obscuration." This becomes evident when we read the explanation given further on:

Still when it is said that they [the worlds] perished, it is only meant thereby that they [their humanities] lacked the true form, till the human [our] form came into 745] {THE KINGS OF' EDOM.} being, in which all things are comprised and which contains all forms . . . .·¹⁶⁶⁶—it does not mean death, but only denotes a sinking down from their status [that of worlds in activity].¹⁶⁶⁷

When, therefore, we read of the "destruction" of the Worlds, the word has many meanings, which are very clear in several of the Commentaries on the Zohar and in Kabalistic treatises. As said elsewhere, it means not only the destruction of many Worlds which have ended their life-career, but also that of the several Continents which have disappeared, as also their decline and geographical change of place.

The mysterious "Kings of Edom" are sometimes referred to as the "Worlds" that had been destroyed; but it is a "cloak." The Kings who reigned in Edom before there reigned a King in Israel, or the "Edomite Kings," could never symbolize the "prior worlds," but only the "attempts at men" on this Globe—the Pre-Adamite Races, of which the Zohar speaks, and which we explain as the First Root-Race. For as, speaking of the six Earths (the six "Limbs" of Microprosopus), it is said that the seventh (our Earth) came not into the computation when the six were created (the six Spheres above our Globe in the Terrestrial Chain), so the first seven Kings of Edom are left out of calculation in Genesis. By the law of analogy and permutation, in the Chaldæan Book of Numbers, as also in the Books of Knowledge and of Wisdom, the "seven primordial worlds" mean also the "seven primordial" races (sub-races of the First Root-Race of the Shadows); and, again, the Kings of Edom are the sons of "Esau, the father of the Edomites";¹⁶⁶⁸ i.e., Esau represents in the Bible the race which stands between the Fourth and the Fifth, the Atlantean and the Aryan. "Two nations are in thy womb," said the Lord to Rebekah; and Esau was red and hairy. From verse 24 to 34, chapter xxv of Genesis contains the allegorical history of the birth of the Fifth Race.

Says the Siphra Dtzenioutha:

And the Kings of ancient days died and their chiefs [crowns] were found no more.

And the Zohar states:

The Head of a nation that has not been formed at the beginning in the likeness of the White Head: its people is not from this Form. . . . Before it [the White Head, the Fifth Race or Ancient of the Ancients] arranged itself in its [own, or 746] present] Form ... all Worlds have been destroyed; therefore it is written; and Bela, the Son of Beor, reigned in Edom [Gen., xxxvi. Here the "Worlds" stand for Races], And he [such or another King of Edom] died, and another reigned in his stead.

No Kabalist who has hitherto treated of the symbolism and allegory hidden under these "Kings of Edom" seems to have perceived more than one aspect of them. They are neither the "worlds that were destroyed," nor the "Kings that died"—alone; but both, and much more, to treat of which there is no space at present. Therefore, leaving the mystic parables of the Zohar, we will return to the hard facts of materialistic Science; first, however, citing a few from the long list of great thinkers who have believed in the plurality of inhabited Worlds in general, and in Worlds that preceded our own. These are, the great mathematicians Leibnitz and Bernouilli, Sir Isaac Newton himself, as may be read in his Optics; Buffon, the Naturalist; Condillac, the Sceptic; Bailly, Lavater, Bernardin de St. Pierre, and, as a contrast to the two last named—suspected at least of Mysticism—Diderot and most of the writers of the Encyclopedia. Following these come Kant, the founder of modern Philosophy; the poet Philosophers, Goethe, Krause, Schelling; and many Astronomers, from Bode, Fergusson and Herschel, to Lalande and Laplace, with their many disciples in more recent years.

A brilliant list of honoured names indeed; but the facts of physical Astronomy speak even more strongly than these names in favour of the presence of life, of even organized life, on other Planets. Thus in four meteorites which fell respectively at Alais in France, in the Cape of Good Hope, in Hungary, and again in France, on analysis, there was found graphite, a form of carbon known to be invariably associated with organic life on this Earth of ours. And that the presence of this carbon is not due to any action occurring within our atmosphere is shown by the fact that carbon has been found in the very centre of a meteorite; while in one which fell at Argueil, in the south of France, in 1857, there was found water and turf, the latter being always formed by the decomposition of vegetable substances.

And further, examining the astronomical conditions of the other Planets, it is easy to show that several are far better adapted for the development of life and intelligence—even under the conditions with which men are acquainted—than is our Earth. For instance, on the Planet Jupiter the seasons, instead of varying between wide limits as 747] {WHAT FLAMMARION TELLS US.} do ours, change by almost imperceptible degrees, and last twelve times as long as ours. Owing to the inclination of its axis the seasons on Jupiter are due almost entirely to the eccentricity of its orbit, and hence change slowly and regularly. We shall be told, that no life is possible on Jupiter, as it is in an incandescent state. But not all Astronomers agree with this. For instance, what we state is declared by M. Flammarion; and he ought to know.

On the other hand Venus would be less adapted for human life such as exists on Earth, since its seasons are more extreme and its changes of temperature more sudden; though it is curious that the duration of the day is nearly the same on the four inner planets, Mercury, Venus, the Earth and Mars.

On Mercury, the Sun's heat and light are seven times what they are on the Earth, and Astronomy teaches that it is enveloped in a very dense atmosphere. And as we see that life appears more active on Earth in proportion to the light and heat of the Sun, it would seem more than probable that its intensity is far, far greater on Mercury than here.

Venus, like Mercury, has a very dense atmosphere, as also has Mars, and the snows which cover their poles, the clouds which hide their surface, the geographical configuration of their seas and continents, the variations of seasons and climates, are all closely analogous—at least to the eye of the physical Astronomer. But such facts and the considerations to which they give rise have reference only to the possibility of the existence on these Planets of human life as known on Earth. That some forms of life such as we know are possible on these Planets, has been long since abundantly demonstrated, and it seems perfectly useless to go into detailed questions of the physiology, etc., of these hypothetical inhabitants, since, after all, the reader can arrive only at an imaginary extension of his familiar surroundings. It is better to rest content with the three conclusions which M. Flammarion, whom we have so largely quoted, formulates as rigorous and exact deductions from the known facts and laws of Science.

i. The various forces which were active in the beginning of evolution gave birth to a great variety of beings on the several worlds; both in the organic and inorganic kingdoms.

ii. The animated beings were constituted from the first according to forms and organisms in correlation with the physiological state of each inhabited globe.

iii. The humanities of other worlds differ from us, as much in their inner organization as in their external physical type.

Finally the reader who may be disposed to question the validity of these conclusions as being opposed to the Bible, may be referred to an Appendix in M. Flammarion's work dealing in detail with this question, since in a work like the present it seems unnecessary to point out the logical absurdity of those churchmen who deny the plurality of worlds on the ground of biblical authority.

In this connection we may well recall those days when the burning zeal of the Primitive Church opposed the doctrine of the Earth's rotundity, on the ground that the nations at the Antipodes would be outside the pale of salvation; and again, we may remember how long it took for a nascent Science to break down the idea of a solid firmament, in the grooves of which the stars moved for the special edification of terrestrial humanity.

The theory of the Earth's rotation was met by a like opposition—even to the martyrdom of its discoverers—because, besides depriving our orb of its dignified central position in space, the theory produced an appalling confusion of ideas as to the Ascension—the terms "up" and "down" being proved to be merely relative, thus complicating not a little the question of the precise locality of Heaven!¹⁶⁶⁹

According to the best modern calculations, there are no less than 500,000,000 Stars of various magnitudes, within the range of the best telescopes. As to the distances between them, they are incalculable. Is, then, our microscopical Earth—a "grain of sand on an infinite sea-shore"—the only centre of intelligent life? Our own Sun, itself 1,300,000 times larger than our Planet, sinks into insignificance beside the giant Sun, Sirius, and the latter in its turn is dwarfed by other luminaries in infinite Space. The self-centred conception of Jehovah as the special guardian of a small and obscure semi-nomadic tribe, is tolerable beside that which confines sentient existence to our microscopical Globe. The primary reasons were without doubt: (a) astronomical ignorance on the part of the early Christians, coupled with an exaggerated appreciation of man's own importance—a crude form of selfishness; and (b) the dread that, if the hypothesis of millions 749] {SCIENCE AND OCCULTISM MAY YET AGREE.} of other inhabited Globes were accepted, the crushing rejoinder would ensue: "Was there then a Revelation to each World?"—involving the idea of the Son of God eternally "going the rounds," as it were. Happily it is now unnecessary to waste time and energy in proving the possibility of the existence of such Worlds. All intelligent persons admit it. That which now remains to be demonstrated is, that if it is once proven that there are inhabited Worlds besides our own, with humanities entirely different from each other as from our own—as maintained in the Occult Sciences—then the evolution of the preceding Races is half proved. For where is that Physicist or Geologist who is prepared to maintain that the Earth has not changed scores of times, in the millions of years which have elapsed in the course of its existence; and that changing its "skin," as it is called in Occultism, the Earth has not had each time her special Humanities adapted to such atmospheric and climatic conditions as were entailed by such change? And if so, why should not our preceding four and entirely different Mankinds have existed and thrived before our Adamic Fifth Root Race?

Before closing our debate, however, we have to examine the so-called organic evolution more closely. Let us search well and see whether it is quite impossible to make our Occult data and chronology agree—up to a certain point—with those of Science.