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.
1le père ; et qu'un fils est engendré de son père , nous devons donc le chercher dans l'origine , dans lo principe d'où le monde est engendré et créé 5 et nous ne pouvons dire autre chose sinon que le premier principe est Dieu le père lui-même. 45. Or 5 on trouve dans l'origine Vengendrement le plus âpre et le plus effrayant 5 savoir : l'astringent , l'amer et le feu. On ne peut pas dire que cela soit Dieu , et c'est là cependant la première et la plus iqtérieure source qui soit dans Dieu le père , selon la quelle il se nomme un Dieu colérique et jaloux. Et cette même source ( comme tu le vois ci-dessus dans les trois premiers chapitres sur l'origine de l'éternel engendrement ) est le premier principe, et est Dieu le père dans son origine , d'où ce monde résulte. 46. Mais l'ange et le démon , ainsi que l'ame do l'homme sont purement et entièrement de ce même esprit. L'ange et le démon ne cessent pas d'en être, en étant substantialisés corporellement. Et l'ame de l'homme , au tems de la création du corps, a été soufflée de l'esprit de Dieu dans la racine du troisième principe ; elle est aussi dans cet esprit , y demeurant immuable , et indivisible dans son éternité i ( dans l'éternelle origine de l'être de Dieu ). Autant la pure éternelle génération, et l'alliance indissoluble du père ne peut ni finir ni passer , autant cela est-il impossible à la substance spirituelle de Phomme^ et du démon, 47. Mais il n'y a autre chose dans ce principe que le plus effrayant engendrement , la plus grande I- 4 ( 5o ) CH. 4.
2angoisse , l'affection la plus pénible ; c*est comme un esprit de souffre , et ce sont là les portes de l'enfer ou de l'abîme, c'est là que demeura le prince Lucifer lorsqu'il eut éteint sa lumière , et c'est là (entendez dans ce même abîme infernal ) que l'ame (qui est séparée du second principe , et a éteint en soi la lumière du cœur de Dieu ) demeure dans ce même abîme infernal. C'est pour cela que selon l'écrilure il y aura à la fin de ce tems une division et une séparation des saints remplis de lumière, d'avec les damnés ( desquels damnés la fontaine ou source sera sans la lumière de Dieu ). 48. Ici je t'ai montré le premier prmcipe d ou toutes choses sont provenues , et je dois parler comme s'ily avoit un lieu , une essence distincte et séparée où il y eût une semblable source , ei cela afin que le premier principe soit compréhensible , et que l'on reconnoisse et qu'on discerne l'éternité , aussi bien que la colère de Dieu , le péché , l'éternelle mort ténébreuse ( ainsi appelée depuis l'extinction de la lumière ) , de même que le feu infernal et le démon. . 49. Maintenant , je vais écrire sur le second prmcipe , sur la claire et pure divinité, (ou sur ) le cœur de Dieu. 50. Ainsi qu'il a été dit ci-dessus , il y a dans le premier principe , l'astringent , l'amer , et le feu , qui ne sont cependant pas trois choses, mais une seule , et l'une engendre l'autre. L'astringent est le père qui est sévère , très âpre et attirant à soi , et le îiiême attirement est l'aiguillon et l'amertume qui ne Crt. 4. (5i )
3peut pas supporter l'astringence , et ne se laisse pas enfermer prisonnière de la mort , mais pique et s'élève comme une essence aiguë , et cependant ne peut pas non plus sortir de sa place. Alors il j a une angoisse efTrojable qui ne peut pas trouver derepos , et Pengendrement devient comme une roue fourrante , fortement empiétante , brisante , et pleine de fureur; ce que ne peut supporter l'astringence; mais elle tire toujours plus fortement à soi , ^omme si on frottoil une pierre et un acier, d'où il sorliroit un éclair igné,et trouble. Lorsque l'astringence envisage cet éclair , elle s'effraie et se précipite en arrière comme morte, et subjuguée^et quand l'éclair de feu vient dans sa mère l'astringence , et la trouve ainsi subjuguée et douce , il s'(5tonne ( lui - même ) bien davantage , et au milieu de l'astringence soumise , il devient à l'instant blanc et clair. 5i. Quand celte astrïngence acquiert en soi celte claire lumière blanche, elle s'effraie beaucoup , de ananière qu'elle se précipite enarrière comme morte, et soumise , elle s'étend , et devient entièrement Qtténiiée et souple ; car sa propre source étoit téuéÎJreuse et âpre ; actuellement, elle est lumineuse et douce , c'est pourquoi elle est comme si elle étoit morte , et c'est alors l'esprit d'eau. 52. Ainsi l'engendremene acquiert une essence qui a l'aigu de l'astringence , la douceur , la diaphanéilé , et l'expansion de la lumière. Et lorsquel'éclair igné vient dans sa mère , et la trouve ainsi diaphane, douce et lumineuse , il perd son droit dans la qualificiiion 3 il ne s'élève plus en haut 5 il o»est plus d<kliîram et tempêtant ; il ne pique plus , mais il demeure dans sa mère et perd sa i^iopnétc ignee: il tressaille et se réjouit dans sa mère.
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.
1the father; and since a son is begotten of his father, we must then seek him in the origin, in the principle whence the world is begotten and created 5 and we can say nothing else save that the first principle is God the father himself. 45. Now 5 one finds in the origin the harshest and most frightful begetting 5 to wit: the astringent, the bitter and the fire. One cannot say that that is God, and it is there nevertheless the first and most interior source which is in God the father, according to which he names himself a choleric and jealous God. And that same source ( as thou seest above in the three first chapters upon the origin of the eternal begetting ) is the first principle, and is God the father in his origin, whence this world results. 46. But the angel and the demon, as well as the soul of man are purely and entirely of that same spirit. The angel and the demon cease not to be of it, in being substantialised corporeally. And the soul of man, at the time of the creation of the body, was breathed of the spirit of God into the root of the third principle; it is also in that spirit, dwelling there immutable, and indivisible in its eternity ( in the eternal origin of the being of God ). As much as the pure eternal generation, and the indissoluble alliance of the father can neither end nor pass, so much is that impossible to the spiritual substance of man and of the demon. 47. But there is nothing else in this principle than the most frightful begetting, the greatest I- 4 ( 5o ) CH. 4.
2anguish, the most painful affection; it is like a spirit of sulphur, and these are the gates of hell or of the abyss; it is there that the prince Lucifer dwelt when he had extinguished his light, and it is there ( understand in that same infernal abyss ) that the soul ( which is separated from the second principle, and has extinguished in itself the light of the heart of God ) dwells in that same infernal abyss. It is for that that according to the scripture there shall be at the end of this time a division and a separation of the saints filled with light, from the damned ( of which damned the fountain or source shall be without the light of God ). 48. Here I have shown thee the first principle whence all things proceeded, and I must speak as if there were a place, a distinct and separate essence where there were a like source, and that in order that the first principle may be comprehensible, and that one may recognise and discern eternity, as well as the anger of God, sin, the eternal tenebrous death ( so called since the extinction of the light ), likewise the infernal fire and the demon. 49. Now, I am going to write upon the second principle, upon the clear and pure divinity, ( or upon ) the heart of God. 50. As has been said above, there is in the first principle the astringent, the bitter, and the fire, which are nevertheless not three things, but one single, and the one begets the other. The astringent is the father who is severe, very harsh and attracting to himself, and that same attraction is the sting and the bitterness which Crt. 4. (5i )
3cannot bear the astringency, and lets not itself be shut up prisoner of death, but pricks and rises like a sharp essence, and nevertheless can no more go out of its place. Then there is a frightful anguish which cannot find repose, and the begetting becomes like a whirling wheel, strongly encroaching, breaking, and full of fury; which the astringency cannot bear; but it draws always more strongly to itself, as if one rubbed a stone and a steel, whence there should issue an igneous flash, and a troubled one. When the astringency envisages that flash, it is affrighted and precipitates itself backward as dead, and subjugated; and when the flash of fire comes into its mother the astringency, and finds it thus subjugated and sweet, it is (5astonished ( itself ) much more, and in the midst of the subdued astringency, it becomes on the instant white and clear. 5i. When that astringency acquires in itself that clear white light, it is much affrighted, so that it precipitates itself backward as dead, and subdued, it extends itself, and becomes entirely attenuated and supple; for its own source was tenebrous and harsh; at present, it is luminous and sweet, it is why it is as if it were dead, and it is then the spirit of water. 52. Thus the begetting acquires an essence which has the sharpness of the astringency, the sweetness, the diaphaneity, and the expansion of the light. And when the igneous flash comes into its mother, and finds it thus diaphanous, sweet and luminous, it loses its right in the qualification 3 it no longer rises on high 5 it is no longer tearing and storming; it pricks no more, but it dwells in its mother and loses its igneous property: it thrills and rejoices in its mother.
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.