Fetching
One moment.
Eleven books by a shoemaker of Görlitz who wrote, by his own account, because he could not help it. Ten of them stand here in the seventeenth-century English of John Sparrow, who translated Boehme within a generation of his death and whose prose is itself now four hundred years old; where that English has drifted out of reach, the facing pane carries a modern register — the same text with archaic inflection and spelling normalised by rule, never paraphrased. Nothing is reworded, and where no register appears beside a passage it is because the rules found nothing to change.
The eleventh book is not in English at all, and it is the reason this note exists.
Des trois principes de l'essence divine, printed at Paris in 1802, is the same work as Concerning the Three Principles of the Divine Essence, which stands here as the second book — the same twenty-seven chapters in the same order, opening `Du premier principe de l'essence divine` against Sparrow's `Of the first Principle of the Divine Essence`. Its translator was Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, who gave the last years of his life to putting Boehme into French, and who has a shelf of his own in this Lycaeum.
That makes a closed circuit inside this archive, and it is worth naming plainly. Saint-Martin translates Boehme. La Iniciación, printed in Montevideo a hundred and forty years later, traces its own descent through Saint-Martin. A reader can therefore follow one thread from a German mystic of 1619, through the French philosopher who carried him into another language, to a Spanish-language monthly of the 1940s that claimed them both — and read every step of it in the original.
The two are shelved as one work rather than two because that is what they are. They are not set as facing panes: an English translation of 1619 and a French translation of 1802 are two independent readings of a lost German original, and pairing them line by line would assert a correspondence neither translator ever claimed.
199. C'est pour cela qu'après son bapléme le Glirist devoit être tenlé et fut placé en opposition contre le royaume de la colère, pour voir si le second Adam , ainsi préparé de nouveau , pourroit résister dans le nouvel et le vieil homme , avec l'ame à moitié régénérée , et à moitié lavée ; mettre son imagination en Dieu , et manger du verbe de Dieu. Alors l'ame fut tentée pour voir st elle vouloit pénétrer en Dieu 5 ou de nouveau dans l'esprit de ce monde. 100. Et tu dois apercevoir clairement ici que, lorsque l'esprit de Dieu a conduit ce Christ dans le désert pour y être tenté , il fut permis au démon de marcher contre lui dans le royaume de la colèfe de Dieu , et de tenter ce second Adam , comme il avoit tenté le premier dans le jardin d'Eden. 101. Or , là il n'y avoit ni nourriture, ni boisson terrestres ; et l'ame en Christ a bien compris alors en quelle hôtellerie elle étoit 5 qu'elle étoit en Dieu , et qu'elle pouvoit faire du pain terrestre avec des pierres , puisque là il n'y avoit point de pain. Toutefois elle ne devoit point manger du pain terrestre; mais céleste, du ternaire saint, dans son corps céleste ; et le corps terrestre devoit rester dans la faim, afin que l'ame fût vraiment tentée : car le corps terrestre fut affamé , comme le texte le dit clairement dans l'évangile. €H. 22. ( 249 )
2102. Alors le céleste devoit surmonter le terrestre, en sorte que le terrestre fût comme mort et impuissant , et que le céleste eût le gouvernement. C'est ainsi que lorsqu'Adam resta dans l'angle , entre l'amour et la colère , lorsqu'il fut tenté , là les deux règnes restèrent armés contre lui , et l'atliroient intérieurement. C'est ainsi que Dieu le père, 10. directement en avant , dans sa volonté reconçue , est le royaume céleste avec la pure divinité ; qu'en arrière de soi , 20. dans réternelle racine de la nature , est son âpreté et sa colère , et que les deux sont cependant dans l'éternel père. Or , de même que dans Péternelle nature de l'âpreté , la lumière ou le royaume de Dieu , n'est pas connue, et que, dans l'éternelle lumière , le royaume de Tâpreié et de la colère, ne l'est pas non plus , car chacun demeure en soi-même ; de même aussi l'ame de l'homme est-elle de la même manière. Elle a en «oi les deux règnes ; celui dans lequel elle place et exerce ses facultés , est celui dans lequel elle est : or , si elle trafique ou agit dans le règne céleste , alors le règne de l'enfer est mort en elle ; non pas qu'il ait passé , mais le royaume céleste est prédominant , et le règne colérique est transformé en joie ; de même aussi lorsqu'elle trafique ou agit dans le règne colérique, c'est celui-là qui domine, et le règne céleste est comme mort ; quoiqu'il ne soit pas passé en soi, cependant l'ame n'y est point établie. io3. Ainsi dans la tentation du Christ, l'essai qui fut fait , étoit de voir lequel règne pourroit triora- ( 25o ) CH. it:
3pher dans l'arae. C'est pourquoi la nourriture et la boisscn furent retirées au corps terrestre. Le roj'aume céleste devint dominant en lui ; comprenez dans le ternaire saint et dans sa divinité. Le» règne de la colère et celui du démon furent contra lui : là Tame , nouvellement lavée et à moitié régénérée , étoit dans le milieu , et elle fut attircç par hs deux règnes , comme Adam dans le paradis. io4. La divinité dans le Christ , dans le saint ternaire, dit ; Mange de la parole du seigneur ; alors tu sortiras de l'homme terrestre , et tu reposeras dans le règne céleste. Vis dans le nouvel homme j alors le vieil homme sera comme mort , par rapport au nouveau. Voici ce que le démon ditàTame: Ton corps terrestre a faim , et veut vivre j puisqu'il n^y a point de pain là , fais dv^ pain avec des pierres , pour qu'il vive. io5. Et l'ame forte en Christ, tint ferme comme un héros , et dit : V homme ne vit pas aeulement de pain ; mais de toute parole qui sort de la boucha de Vieu .11 rejeta le pain et la vie terrestre; il plaça son imaj^jnaliondans la parole de Dieu ; il mangea du verbe de Dieu : alors l'a-me domina dans le rojraume céleste, et le corps terrestre fut comme mort , par rapport au règne céleste : cependant il n'élcit pas mort j mais il étoit le serviteur du ciel, et avoit perdu sa puissante domination. 106. Or , lorsque le règne de l'enfer reçut ce puissant coup , et fut surmont, de celle manière , alors le démon perdit sou droit , par rapport à l'ame ;il dit encore eu soi : Tu as un droit sur le corps CH. 22. (aSi )
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
199. It is for that that after his baptism the Christ was to be tempted and was placed in opposition against the kingdom of the anger, to see if the second Adam, thus prepared anew, could resist in the new and the old man, with the soul half regenerated, and half washed; put his imagination in God, and eat of the word of God. Then the soul was tempted to see if it would penetrate into God 5 or anew into the spirit of this world. 100. And thou must perceive clearly here that, when the spirit of God conducted this Christ into the desert to be tempted there, it was permitted to the demon to march against him in the kingdom of the anger of God, and to tempt this second Adam, as he had tempted the first in the garden of Eden. 101. Now, there there was neither terrestrial nourishment, nor drink; and the soul in Christ comprehended well then in what inn it was 5 that it was in God, and that it could make terrestrial bread with stones, since there there was no bread. However it was not to eat of terrestrial bread; but celestial, of the holy ternary, in its celestial body; and the terrestrial body was to remain in hunger, so that the soul might be truly tempted: for the terrestrial body was famished, as the text says it clearly in the gospel. €H. 22. ( 249 )
2102. Then the celestial was to surmount the terrestrial, so that the terrestrial might be as dead and impotent, and that the celestial might have the government. It is thus that when Adam remained in the angle, between the love and the anger, when he was tempted, there the two reigns remained armed against him, and drew him inwardly. It is thus that God the father, 10. directly in front, in his will reconceived, is the celestial kingdom with the pure divinity; that behind himself, 20. in the eternal root of nature, is his harshness and his anger, and that the two are nevertheless in the eternal father. Now, just as in the eternal nature of the harshness, the light or the kingdom of God, is not known, and that, in the eternal light, the kingdom of the harshness and of the anger, is not known either, for each dwells in itself; likewise also the soul of man is in the same manner. It has in itself the two reigns; that in which it places and exercises its faculties, is that in which it is: now, if it traffics or acts in the celestial reign, then the reign of hell is dead in it; not that it has passed, but the celestial kingdom is predominant, and the choleric reign is transformed into joy; likewise also when it traffics or acts in the choleric reign, it is that one which dominates, and the celestial reign is as dead; although it be not passed in itself, nevertheless the soul is not established therein. io3. Thus in the temptation of Christ, the trial which was made, was to see which reign could trium- ( 25o ) CH. it:
3umph in the soul. That is why the nourishment and the drink were withdrawn from the terrestrial body. The celestial kingdom became dominant in him; understand in the holy ternary and in his divinity. The reign of the anger and that of the demon were against him: there the soul, newly washed and half regenerated, was in the midst, and it was drawn by the two reigns, like Adam in paradise. io4. The divinity in the Christ, in the holy ternary, says: Eat of the word of the lord; then thou shalt go out of the terrestrial man, and thou shalt repose in the celestial reign. Live in the new man; then the old man shall be as dead, in respect of the new. Behold what the demon says to the soul: Thy terrestrial body is hungry, and will live; since there is no bread there, make bread with stones, so that it may live. io5. And the strong soul in Christ, held firm like a hero, and said: Man lives not only of bread; but of every word which goes out of the mouth of God .11 He rejected the bread and the terrestrial life; he placed his imagination in the word of God; he ate of the word of God: then the soul dominated in the celestial kingdom, and the terrestrial body was as dead, in respect of the celestial reign: nevertheless it was not dead; but it was the servant of heaven, and had lost its powerful domination. 106. Now, when the reign of hell received this powerful blow, and was surmounted in this manner, then the demon lost his right, in respect of the soul; he said still in himself: Thou hast a right upon the body CH. 22. (aSi )
Our translation, period-faithful. Citable as our translation, never as the source.
Saint-Martin's French rendering of Boehme's 'Von den drei Principien göttlichen Wesens'. The same work stands in this estate in English as boehme:2. The title page also advertises 'L'Aurore naissante, du même Auteur' from the same booksellers — Saint-Martin's translation of the Aurora, whose English counterpart the estate holds as boehme:1. Reading the two versions against each other shows what a Martinist made of a German shoemaker's theosophy.
→ boehme:2
This work carries, in the author's own voice, both a set of hostile comparisons drawn against named peoples and an explicit refusal of any such boundary, and the Press publishes both rather than either alone. At Ch.25 §85 he calls the Jews blind; at Ch.17 §106 he warns of a coming visitation of the Jews and the Turks; and at Ch.26 §32-33, asked whence the Turks are grown, he answers "From thy perverted sense" — laying the rise of Mahomet at the door of christian pride and disputation. Against these stands Ch.25 §72, which opens the grace with no boundary at all: all men are invited to it, of whatever race, "whether Turks, Jews, Pagans, Christians", and no one is excluded. The same chapter that indicts turns the indictment inward at §105-106 — each believes not to dwell in Babel, and the author includes himself — and §33 concludes that God should be as near the one as the other. The contradiction is the author's, it is not resolved by him, and removing either half would misrepresent the work. Operator ruling, 2026-08-29.
This work carries, in the author's own voice, both a set of hostile comparisons drawn against named peoples and an explicit refusal of any such boundary, and the Press publishes both rather than either alone. At Ch.25 §85 he calls the Jews blind; at Ch.17 §106 he warns of a coming visitation of the Jews and the Turks; and at Ch.26 §32-33, asked whence the Turks are grown, he answers "From thy perverted sense" — laying the rise of Mahomet at the door of christian pride and disputation. Against these stands Ch.25 §72, which opens the grace with no boundary at all: all men are invited to it, of whatever race, "whether Turks, Jews, Pagans, Christians", and no one is excluded. The same chapter that indicts turns the indictment inward at §105-106 — each believes not to dwell in Babel, and the author includes himself — and §33 concludes that God should be as near the one as the other. The contradiction is the author's, it is not resolved by him, and removing either half would misrepresent the work. Operator ruling, 2026-08-29.
This work carries, in the author's own voice, both a set of hostile comparisons drawn against named peoples and an explicit refusal of any such boundary, and the Press publishes both rather than either alone. At Ch.25 §85 he calls the Jews blind; at Ch.17 §106 he warns of a coming visitation of the Jews and the Turks; and at Ch.26 §32-33, asked whence the Turks are grown, he answers "From thy perverted sense" — laying the rise of Mahomet at the door of christian pride and disputation. Against these stands Ch.25 §72, which opens the grace with no boundary at all: all men are invited to it, of whatever race, "whether Turks, Jews, Pagans, Christians", and no one is excluded. The same chapter that indicts turns the indictment inward at §105-106 — each believes not to dwell in Babel, and the author includes himself — and §33 concludes that God should be as near the one as the other. The contradiction is the author's, it is not resolved by him, and removing either half would misrepresent the work. Operator ruling, 2026-08-29.