Threefold Life of Man

Being a high and deep searching out of the Threefold Life of Man, through the Three Principles. Wherein is clearly shewn that which is eternal; and also that which is mortal. And wherefore God, who is the highest Good, hath brought all things to light. Also wherefore one thing is contrary to another, and destroyeth it: and then what is right or true, and what is evil or false, and how the one severeth (distinguishes) itself from the other. Wherein especially the Three Principles are founded, which are the only original or fountain whence all things flow and are generated. Large 12 point font, Not a scanned book, new reprinted edition.

**************

Excerpt:

THERE was a time when the cry among philosophers was, " Back to Kant !" This cry, " Back!" always means that men are conscious that something is wrong somewhere, and suspect that the mistake may be as to first principles, rather than as to methods. For philosophy exists not for its own sake, but for the sake of producing a life of order and harmony; and when, after long application, men find that this result is not reached, they know that something is wrong somewhere. The error, then, may be as to first principles or as to methods. In the latter case the purpose, the aim, is right, but the means taken to achieve it may be wrong. In the former case the aim is wrong: there has been evidently some misapprehension as to what human nature is, what its real wants and capacities are; and where the aim is wrong, no means- however wise and well calculated to attain the aim-will produce satisfactory results. The task of devising means belongs to the department of practical politics, though philosophy may render valuable assistance; but the task of enquiring into and formulating first principles belongs to philosophy alone.

Philosophy may concern itself only with the seen, the surface of things, and refuse to enquire whether man has any deeper nature than the external of which he is immediately conscious. But properly the enquiry cannot limit itself. It must seek to penetrate to the whole of the data, and if any Fact is left out of account the conclusion arrived at will not stand: sooner or later evidence that something has been overlooked will be forthcoming. When philosophy admits that the data may have to be sought beyond the limits of the seen, it is sometimes then termed "Theosophy." Unfortunately the term needs to be rescued from much misapprehension both on the part of some who use it illicitly, and of those who are (in consequence) frightened by it. Briefly to indicate this misapprehension, let us say, first, that the distinction between the seen and the unseen is a purely artificial one. The two are not two different Orders, but the one and only Order cognised by beings whose faculties vary: some more perfect, and some so limited that they see but a part of what is there to be seen. The (so-called) unseen is as much a part of the order of nature, as truly subject to orderly sequences, as is the seen, the nature we know. As Emerson rightly said, " The whole Fact is here"; but we of the fallen nature see and know but in part.

The Hindu philosophy seems grounded on the idea that the outer is all and only "Maya," and that it stands in no relation to the inner; so that such as would learn anything of the inner must turn their eyes away from the outer altogether. The Christian philosophy believes that the outer is only the veil over the inner, placed there by man's limited faculty; and that a wise and profound study of the outer will yield hints and suggestions of inner truth. For even if the outer were the direct contrary of the inner (as in Scripture seems to be clearly hinted), this is none the less an exact relationship; and from the study of the contrary some notion of that of which it is the contrary can be formed.

" Theosophy" may mean either " A wisdom which is God's" or " A wisdom which man can attain about God." For all practical purposes the latter is to be preferred; for whatever view we take of theosophical truth, we never can be certain that it is the view of God. If Boehme has been called the "Teutonic Theosopher," this is only because he endeavours to penetrate into the depth of man's nature, and seeks for facts which are not to be found upon the surface thereof. Many view such an attempt with feelings akin to those of the hen who sees the ducklings she has hatched out embark boldly upon the pond. They are sure there is no foothold, and that disaster must ensue. There has been, without doubt, in all ages of the world much enquiry calling itself " theosophical" which has been illicit and disastrous. Ducklings that can safely cross a river might be lost in attempting to cross the Atlantic. Everything depends on the spirit in which the enquiry is undertaken. If in a self-sufficient pride and confidence in our own powers, or out of mere curiosity and love of the wonderful and obscure, the enquiry is illicit and likely to end in spiritual and moral disaster. One sort of spirit alone can undertake the enquiry with safety. It must be entered on for the one and only purpose of learning what we actually are, so that by this knowledge we may be enabled to shape our life and form our personal character in accordance with the eternal Fact.

Neither must we undertake to pursue the enquiry by our own natural and unaided reason and intellect. We must seek and expect guidance; that guidance which is ever afforded to those who seek it from a true motive, which is never a mere desire to explore and talk about the recondite and profound. So narrow is the gate that leads to the real divine truth that no self-sufficiency can ever enter in. Only the meek and lowly of heart, who desire to be able better to serve, rather than to pose as profound thinkers, can pass it and walk in the straitened way that will be found within. Such are known at once by this: that their whole interest is centred on what can be turned to practical account in life and conduct and character; and if, as they study, they do not find themselves becoming nearer to the divine character in love and sympathy and service, they feel that something is wrong. They are never so filled with wonders discovered as to rest content with this success; for they seek not truth for its own sake, but only for the sake of its good. They watch themselves closely, and turn aside from any knowledge that does not bear fruit in a greater earnestness in service, and in a character growing ever more pure and sympathetic and set on things above. All this Boehme is careful to say again and again.