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.
160. Toutefois l'esprit saint n'est pas connu dans l'origine du père avant la lumière ; mais lorsque la douce source s'élève dans la lumière, alors il sort de l'aimable source d'eau et de la lumière comme un esprit puissant et très fort , qui est dans une grande joie , et il est la puissance de la source d'eau et de la lumière. C'est lui qui alors fait la formation et les configurations , et dans toutes les essences il est le centre oii la lumière de la vie ,'originise dans la lumière du fils , ou dans le cœur du père. Et l'esprit saint est nommé par cette raison une personne distincte , puisqu'il sort du père et du fils comme «ne puissance vivante, et qu'il confirme l'éternel engendrement du trinaire. 61. Voici comment nousprions: Notre père qui es dans les deux , que ton nom soit sanctifié, etc. et il y a dans la Genèse chap. i : Dieu créa le ciel du milieu des eaux. Cela signifie le ciel du troisième principe. Or , il l'a en effet créé de son ciel dans lequel il démeure ; aussi tu peux aisément trouver comment Vengendrement de la trinité sainte existe dans la source d'eau , et en outre comment l'esprit saint est ,. en elle le formateur et le configurateur. 62. Ainsi , dans cette même création du ciel , se trouve la formation et la génération qui ne cesse point et qui est le paradis de Dieu ; comme l'écrit Moïse: V esprit de Viiu couvoit sur Veau dans lafor^ ( 56 ) cH. 4. motion du monde. Ce paradis demeure et est ainsi dans son éternité,ensorte que l'esprit de Dieu couve sur Teau dans la génération du fils de Dieu , car dans le père est la puissance et l'explosion de l'eau lumineuse^ enflammée, oude l'eau etde lalumière de Dieu.
263. Ainsi Dieu est une essence unique , indivisible et cependant triple dans une distinction personnelle ; un Dieu , une volonté , un cœur , un désir, un attract , une magniBcence , une souveraineté , une toute puissance , une plénitude de toutes choses sans commencement et sans fin. Car si je voulois concevoir en lui une limite , un commencement ou une fin , mon esprit se troubleroit. 64. Et quoique j'écrive ici comme s'il y avoit eu là un commencement puisque je traite de l'expansion du second principe , et de l'engendrement de l'essence divine , tu ne dois cependant entendre aucun commencement; car tel est l'éternel engendrement , et cela est ainsi dans la base radicale. l'écrrs seulement pour que l'homme apprenne à se connoître 5 ce qu'il est , ce qu'est Dieu , lej ciel , l'anj^e , le démon et l'enfer , aussi bien que la colère de Dieu , et le feu infernal 5 car il m'a été ainsi accordé d'écrire amplement sur l'origine. 65. C'est pourquoi , fils de l'homme , considère dans cetems ce que tu es-, n^ pense pas de toi si petitement et si légèrement ; pense que tu demeures dans le paradis , et n'éteins pas en toi la divine lumière , car tu demeurerois ensuite dans l'origine de la source de la colère , dans la vallée téuébreusej CH. 4. ( 5? ) et ta noble image de Dieu deviendroît un serpent et un dragon. 66. En effet , tu dois savoir qu'aussitôt que la lumière divine fut éteinte dans les démons , ils perdirent leur belle forme d'ange , et leur image , et devinrent semblables aux serpens , aux dragons , aux reptiles , et aux mauvais animaux , comme on le voit au serpent d'Adam. Et c'est ainsi qu'il ea est des âmes damnées. Car nous le savons dans l'origine , dans le premier principe , très exactement. Si tu demandes , pourquoi cela ? lis ce qui suit.
3Xa description d*un démon , comment il a été dans sa propre forme , ainsi que dans la forme dange, 67. Vois , fils de l'homme. Les anges tous ensemble ont été créés dans le premier principe , formés et corporisés à la manière angélique et spirituelle par l'esprit bouillonnant ; et éclairés de la lumière de Dieu afin qu'ils pussent étendre la joie paradisiaque et y demeurer éternellement. Mais pour qu'ils pussent y demeurer éternellement, il falloit qu'ils fussent formés de l'alliance indissoluble, ou du premier principe qui est l'alliance indissoluble ; ils dévoient voir dans le cœur de Dieu, et manger du verbe de Dieu , et ils eussent été saintement conservés par celte même nourriture qui eût rendu leur image claire et lumineuse , comme le cœur de Dieu dans l'expansion du second principe , et c'est là que aourcent la puissance divine , le paradis et le royaumo céleste. ( 58 ) CH. 4.
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.
160. Nevertheless the holy spirit is not known in the origin of the father before the light; but when the sweet source rises in the light, then it issues from the lovable source of water and from the light like a powerful and very strong spirit, which is in a great joy, and it is the power of the source of water and of the light. It is he who then makes the formation and the configurations, and in all the essences he is the centre where the light of the life originises itself in the light of the son, or in the heart of the father. And the holy spirit is named for that reason a distinct person, since he issues from the father and from the son as a living power, and since he confirms the eternal begetting of the trinary. 61. This is how we pray: Our father who art in the heavens, hallowed be thy name, etc. and there is in Genesis chap. i: God created the heaven from the midst of the waters. That signifies the heaven of the third principle. Now, he created it in effect of his heaven wherein he dwells; also thou canst easily find how the begetting of the holy trinity exists in the source of water, and moreover how the holy spirit is therein the former and the configurer. 62. Thus, in that same creation of the heaven, is found the formation and the generation which ceases not and which is the paradise of God; as Moses writes: the spirit of God brooded upon the water in the for- ( 56 ) cH. 4. mation of the world. That paradise dwells and is thus in its eternity, so that the spirit of God broods upon the water in the generation of the son of God, for in the father is the power and the explosion of the luminous, kindled water, or of the water and of the light of God.
263. Thus God is a unique, indivisible essence and nevertheless triple in a personal distinction; one God, one will, one heart, one desire, one attraction, one magnificence, one sovereignty, one omnipotence, one plenitude of all things without beginning and without end. For if I would conceive in him a limit, a beginning or an end, my spirit would be troubled. 64. And although I write here as if there had been there a beginning since I treat of the expansion of the second principle, and of the begetting of the divine essence, thou must nevertheless understand no beginning; for such is the eternal begetting, and that is so in the radical base. I write only that man may learn to know himself 5 what he is, what God is, the heaven, the angel, the demon and hell, as well as the anger of God, and the infernal fire 5 for it has been thus accorded me to write amply upon the origin. 65. It is why, son of man, consider in this time what thou art; think not of thyself so pettily and so lightly; think that thou dwellest in paradise, and extinguish not in thee the divine light, for thou wouldst then dwell in the origin of the source of the anger, in the tenebrous valley; CH. 4. ( 5? ) and thy noble image of God would become a serpent and a dragon. 66. In effect, thou must know that as soon as the divine light was extinguished in the demons, they lost their fair form of angel, and their image, and became like unto serpents, unto dragons, unto reptiles, and unto evil animals, as one sees in the serpent of Adam. And it is thus that it is with the damned souls. For we know it in the origin, in the first principle, very exactly. If thou askest, wherefore that? read what follows.
3The description of a demon, how he was in his own form, as well as in the form of angel, 67. See, son of man. The angels all together were created in the first principle, formed and corporised in the angelic and spiritual manner by the boiling spirit; and enlightened by the light of God in order that they might extend the paradisiac joy and dwell there eternally. But in order that they might dwell there eternally, it was necessary that they should be formed of the indissoluble alliance, or of the first principle which is the indissoluble alliance; they were to see into the heart of God, and eat of the verb of God, and they would have been holily preserved by that same nourishment which would have rendered their image clear and luminous, like the heart of God in the expansion of the second principle, and it is there that the divine power, paradise and the celestial kingdom source themselves. ( 58 ) CH. 4.
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.