Now this woman, though handicapped by a brain that was a mass of putrid pulp,
and a complete lack of social status, education, and moral character, did more
in the religious world than any other person had done for generations. She, and
she alone, made Theosophy possible, and without Theosophy the world-wide
interest in similar matters would never have been aroused. This interest is to
the Law of Thelema what the preaching of John the Baptist was to Christianity.
We are now in a position to say what happened to Mohammed. Somehow or
another his phenomenon happened in his mind. More ignorant than Anna Kingsford,
though, fortunately, more moral, he connected it with the story of the
"Annunciation," which he had undoubtedly heard in his boyhood, and said "Gabriel
appeared to me." But in spite of his ignorance, his total misconception of the
truth, the power of the vision was such that he was enabled to persist through
the usual persecution, and founded a religion to which even to-day one man in
every eight belongs.
The history of Christianity shows precisely the same remarkable fact. Jesus
Christ was brought up on the fables of the "Old Testament," and so was compelled
to ascribe his experiences to "Jehovah," although his gentle spirit could have
had nothing in common with the monster who was always commanding the rape of
virgins and the murder of little children, and whose rites were then, and still
are, celebrated by human sacrifice.<<footnote: The massacres of Jews in Eastern
Europe which surprise the ignorant, are almost invariably excited by the
disappearance of "Christian" children, stolen, as the parents suppose, for the
purposes of "ritual murder."<<WEH footnote: This unfortunate perpetuation of the
"blood-libel" myth was later recanted by Crowley. The blood-libel was visited
upon early Christians by the Romans and is visited today upon Thelemites by
Christian Fundamentalists.>>>>
Similarly the visions of Joan of Arc were entirely Christian; but she, like
all the others we have mentioned, found somewhere the force to do great things.
Of course, it may be said that there is a fallacy in the argument; it may be
true that all these great people "saw God," but it does not follow that every
one who "sees God" will do great things.
This is true enough. In fact, the majority of people who claim to have "seen
God," and who no doubt did "see God" just as much as those whom we have quoted,
did nothing else.
But perhaps their silence is not a sign of their weakness, but of their
strength. Perhaps these "great" men are the failures of humanity; {14} perhaps
it would be better to say nothing; perhaps only an unbalanced mind would wish to
alter anything or believe in the possibility of altering anything; but there are
those who think existence even in heaven intolerable so long as there is one
single being who does not share that joy. There are some who may wish to travel
back from the very threshold of the bridal chamber to assist belated guests.
Such at least was the attitude which Gotama Buddha adopted. Nor shall he be
alone.
Again it may be pointed out that the contemplative life is generally opposed
to the active life, and it must require an extremely careful balance to prevent
the one absorbing the other.
As it will be seen later, the "vision of God," or "Union with God," or
"Samadhi," or whatever we may agree to call it, has many kinds and many degrees,
although there is an impassable abyss between the least of them and the greatest
of all the phenomena of normal consciousness. "To sum up," we assert a secret
source of energy which explains the phenomenon of Genius.<<footnote: We have
dealt in this preliminary sketch only with examples of religious genius. Other
kinds are subject to the same remarks, but the limits of our space forbid
discussion of these.>> We do not believe in any supernatural explanations, but
insist that this source may be reached by the following out of definite rules,
the degree of success depending upon the capacity of the seeker, and not upon
the favour of any Divine Being. We assert that the critical phenomenon which
determines success is an occurrence in the brain characterized essentially by
the uniting of subject and object. We propose to discuss this phenomenon,
analyse its nature, determine accurately the physical, mental and moral
conditions which are favourable to it, to ascertain its cause, and thus to
produce it in ourselves, so that we may adequately study its effects. {15}