Theos-Talk Archives (February 1995 Message tl00088)

Taken from *The Secret Doctrine,* vol. iii, 1895 edition.

(For notes see Section XVI, previously uploaded.  Words printed
in Greek here have been transliterated into English equivalents).

SECTION XV

ST. PAUL THE REAL FOUNDER OF PRESENT CHRISTIANITY

WE may repeat with the author of *Phallicism*:

"We are all for *construction* - even for *Christian,* although
of course philosophical *construction.* We have nothing to do
with reality, in man's limited, mechanical, scientific sense, or
with *realism.* We have undertaken to show that mysticism is the
very life and soul of religion; [1] .  .  .  that the Bible is
only misread and misrepresent when rejected as advancing supposed
fabulous and contradictory things; that Moses did not make
mistakes, but spoke to the "children of men" in the only way in
which children in their nonage can be addressed; that the world
is, indeed, a very different place from that which it is assumed
to be; that what is derided as superstition is the only true and
the only scientific knowledge, and moreover that modern knowledge
and modern science are to a great extent not only superstition
but superstition of a very destructive and deadly kind.  [2].

All this is perfectly true and correct.  But it is also true that
the New Testament, the Acts and the Epistles - however much the
historical figure of Jesus may be true - are all symbolical and
allegorical sayings, and that "it was not Jesus but Paul who was
the real founder of Christianity;" [3] but it was not the
official Church Christianity, at any rate.  "The disciples were
called Christians first in Antioch," the *Acts of the Apostles*
tell us, [4] and they were not so called before, nor for a long
time after, but simply Nazarenes.

This view is found in more than one writer of the present and the
past centuries.  But, hitherto, it has always been laid aside as
an unproven hypothesis, a blasphemous assumption; though, as the
author of *Paul, the Founder of Christianity* [5] truly says:

"Such men as Irenaeus, Epiphanius and Eusebius have transmitted
to posterity a reputation for such untruth and dishonest
practices that the heart sickens at the story of the crimes of
that period."

The more so, since the whole Christian scheme rests upon *their*
sayings.  But we find now another corroboration, and this time on
the perfect reading of biblical glyphs.  In *The Source of
Measures* we find the following:

"It must be borne in mind that our present Christianity is
*Pauline,* not *Jesus.* Jesus, in his life, was a Jew, conforming
to the law; even more, He says "The scribes and pharisees sit in
Moses' seat; whatsoever therefore they command you to do, that
observe and do." And again "I did not come to destroy but to
fulfil the law." Therefore, He was under the law to the day of
his death, and could not, while in life, abrogate one jot or
tittle of it.  He was circumcised and commanded circumcision.
But Paul said of circumcision that it availed nothing, and *he*
(Paul) abrogated the law.  *Saul* and *Paul* - that is, Saul,
under the law, and Paul, freed from the obligations of the law -
were in one man, but parallelisms *in the flesh,* of Jesus the
man under the law as observing it, who thus died in Chrestos and
arose, freed from its obligations, in the spirit world as
*Christos,* or the triumphant Christ.  It was the Christ who was
freed, but Christ was in the Spirit.  Saul in the flesh was the
function of, and parallel of Christos.  Paul in the flesh was the
function and parallel of Jesus become Christ in the spirit, as an
early reality to answer to and act for the *apotheosis;* and so
armed with all authority in the flesh to abrogate human law."
[6].

The real reason why Paul is shown as "abrogating the law" can be
found only in India, where to this day the most ancient customs
and privileges are preserved in all their purity, notwithstanding
the abuse levelled at the same.  There is only one class of
persons who can disregard the law of Bra^hmanical institutions,
caste included, with impunity, and that is the *perfect*
"Sva^mi^s," the Yogi^s - who have reached, or are supposed to
have reached, the first step towards the Ji^vanmukta state - or
the full Initiates.  And Paul was undeniably an Initiate.  We
will quote a passage or two from *Isis Unveiled,* for we can say
now nothing better than what was said then:

"Take Paul, read the little of original that is left of him in
the writings attributed to this brave, honest, sincere man, and
see whether anyone can find a word therein to show that Paul
meant by the word Christ anything more than the abstract ideal of
the personal divinity indwelling in man.  For Paul, Christ is not
a person, but an embodied idea.  "If any man is in Christ he is a
new creation," *he is reborn,* as after initiation, for the Lord
is spirit - the spirit of man.  Paul was the only one of the
apostles who had understood the secret ideas underlying the
teachings of Jesus, although he had never met him."

But Paul himself was not infallible or perfect.

"Bent upon inaugurating a new and broad reform, one embracing the
whole of humanity, he sincerely set his own doctrines far above
the wisdom of the ages, above he ancient Mysteries and final
revelation to the Epoptae.

"Another proof that Paul belonged to the circle of the
"Initiates" lies in the following fact.  The apostle had his head
shorn at Cenchreae, where Lucius *(Apuleius)* was initiated,
because "he had a vow." The Nazars - or set apart -as we see in
the Jewish Scrip- tures, had to cut their hair, which they wore
long, and which "no razor touched" at any other time, and
sacrifice it on the altar of initiation.  And the Nazars were a
class of Chaldaean Theurgists or Initiates."

It is shown in *Isis Unveiled* that Jesus belonged to this class.

"Paul declares that "According to the grace of God which is give
to me, as a wise *master-builder,* I lave laid the foundation."
*(I Corinth., iii.  10.)*"

"This expression, master-builder, used only *once* in the whole
*Bible,* and by Paul, may be considered as a whole revelation.
In the Mysteries, the third part of the sacred rites was called
Epopteia, or revelation, reception into the secrets.  In
substance it means the highest stage of clairvoyance - the
divine; .  .  .  but the real significance of the word is
"overseeing," from (Gk) *optomai* - "I see myself." In Sanskrit
the root *a^p* had the sane meaning originally, though now it is
understood as meaning "to obtain." [7].

"The word *epopteia* is compound, from (Gk) *epi* "upon," and
*optomai*" to look," or an overseer, an inspector - also used for
a master-builder.  The title of master-mason, in Freemasonry, is
derived from this, in the sense used in the Mysteries.
Therefore, when Paul entitles himself a "master-builder," he is
using a word pre-eminently kabalistic, theurgic, and masonic, and
one which no other apostle uses.  He thus declares himself an
*adept,* having the right to initiate others.

"If we search in this direction, with those sure guides, the
Grecian Mysteries and the *Kabalah,* before us, it will be easy
to find the secret reason why Paul was so persecuted and hated by
Peter, John, and James.  The author of the *Revelation* was a
Jewish Kabalist, *pur sang,* with all the hatred inherited by him
from his forefathers toward the pagan Mysteries.  [8].  His
jealousy during the life of Jesus extended even to Peter; and it
is but after the death of their common master that we see the two
apostles - the former of whom wore the Mitre and the Petaloon of
the Jewish Rabbis - preach so zealously the rite of circumcision.
In the eyes of Peter, Paul, who had humiliated him, and who he
felt so much his superior in "Greek learning" and philosophy,
must have naturally appeared as a magician, a man polluted with
the "Gnosis," with the "wisdom" of the Greek Mysteries - hence,
perhaps, "Simon, the Magician " as a comparison, not a nickname.
[9].

[1] But we can never agree with the author " that rites and
ritual and formal worship and prayers are of the absolute
necessity of things," for the external can develop and grow and
receive worship only at the expense of, and to the detriment of,
the internal, the only real and true.

[2] H.Jennings, op.  cit., pp.  37, 38.

[3] See *Isis Unveiled,* ii.  574.

[4] xi.  26.

[5] Art.  by Dr.  A.  Wilder, in *Evolution.*

[6] op. cit., p. 262.

[7] In its most extensive meaning, the Sanskrit word has the same
literal sense as the Greek term; both imply " revelation," by no
human agent, but through the " receiving of the sacred drink." In
India the initiated received the "Soma," sacred drink, which
helped to liberate his soul from the body; and in the Eleusinian
Mysteries it was the sacred drink offered at the Epopteia.  The
Grecian Mysteries are wholly derived from the Bra^hmanical Vaidic
rites, and the latter from the Ante-Vaidic religious
Mysteries-primitive Wisdom Philosophy.

[8] It is needless to state that the Gospel according to John was
not written by John, but by a Platonist or a Gnostic belonging to
the Neoplatonic school.

[9] Ibid., loc.  cit.* The fact that Peter persecuted the
"Apostle to the Gentiles" under that name, does not necessarily
imply that there was no Simon Magus individually distinct from
Paul.  It may have become a generic name of abuse.  Theodoret and
Chrysostom, the earliest and most prolific commentators on the
Gnosticism of those days, seem actually to make of Simon a rival
of Paul and to state that between them passed frequent messages.
The former, as a diligent propagandist of what Paul terms the
"antithesis of the Gnosis" *(I Epistle to Timothy)* must have
been a sore thorn in the side of the apostle.  There are
sufficient proofs of the actual existence of Simon Magus.