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.
12. Or donc , lorsqu'Adam alla dans le jardin d'Ëdcn^ et que les trois principes introduisirent ainsi un tel combat dans Adam , sa teinture fut entièrement affoiblie , et la vierge sophie s'éloigna. Car l'esprit de Tattract de ce monde Tavoit emporté dans Adam ; c'est pourquoi il se laissa tomber dans le sommeil. A l'heure même son corps céleste devînt chair et sang , et sa forte puissance devint os : alors la vierge sophie s'en alla dans l'Ether et dans l'ombre , mais dans l'Ether céleste , dans le principe de la puissance ; et là elle attend après tous les enfanè d'Adam , pour voir si quelqu'un d'eux voudra par la nouvelle génération la prendre encore pour épouse. 3. Mais qu'est-ce que Dieu devoit faire ? Il avoit créé Adam de sa volonté éternelle ; il n'auroit plus . été possible qu'Adam eût engendré de soi sa postérité virginale à la manière paradisiaque. [ Comme Porsqu'il étoit vierge lui-même, Foyez ch, lo, no, i8.] Alors Dieu établit le riAT du grand monde dans le milieu ; car Adatn étoit tombé de nouveau dans le sein du fiât , comme une personne à moitié brisée, puisque par son penchant et son imagination il étoit à moitié mort ; maintenant pour qu'il pût vivre , il falloit que Dieu l'aidât de nouveau 5 puisqu'il devoit engendrer un règne , il falloit qu'il y eut une femme pour la propagation , sembiablement à tous les autres animaux. Le royaume angélique , en Adam, étoit passé, il lui falloit désormais un royaume dece monde. 4. Or, que fit donc Dieu avec Adam ? Moïse dit t
2Lorsqu^Adam dormit^ il prit une de ses côtes , en forma une femme {àQ la côte qu'il avoit prise de l'homme) , et il ferma la place avec de la chair. En cela Moïse a écrit très juste 5 mais qui ici l'a bien entendu ? Si je n'avois pas connu le premier Adam dans sa forme virginale dans le paradis , je serois arrêté ici , et je ne saurois rien autre chose , sinon qu'Adam avoit été fait chair et seng d'une masse de terre , et Eve sa femme d'une de ses côtes et de &gs, durs os : ce qui cependant avant ce tems làm'avoit souvent paru très étonnant quand je lisois les gloses que de si grands savans ont écrites sur Moïse. Quelques uns même ont osé parler d'un fossé dans le pays oriental, d'où Adam a été pris et formé, comme un potiet fait un vase ou un pot. 5. Heureusement j'ai examiné les écritures qui disent : Ce qui est né de la chair, est chair ; de plus, la chair et le sang ne peuvent pas posséder le royaume des cieux ; déplus, personne ne monte aa ciel que le fils de l'homme qui est venu du ciel ( ou la pure vierge ) et qui est dans le ciel î ce qui m'aida beaucoup à penser que le fils-vierge étoit l'ange de la restauraiicu de ce qui avoit été perdu en Adam , car Dieu apporta de nouveau dans \a femme, dans son corps virginal, l'enfant-vierge qu'Adam devoit engendrer. Si je n'avois pas considéré le texte dans Moïse , où Dieu dit :I1 n'est pas bon que l'homme soit seul , nous voulons lui faire une aide ; je serois encore arrêté dans la volonté de la femme [ou pensée terrestre ], 6. Mais ce même texte dit : Que Dieu considéra ^î ( 220 ) CH. l3,
3tout ce qu'il avoitfait , et il vit que tout étoit bon. Or, $i cela étoit bon dans la création , il faut bien que cela soit devenu mauvais pour que Dieu ait dit : Il n'est pas bon que Fliomme soit seul. Si Dieu avoit voulu les assimiler à tous les autres animaux par la reproduction animale, il auroit aussi bien formé tout de suite un homme et une femme ; or , quç Dieu en ait un dégoût , cola est bien annoncé par le premier fils de la femme , Caïn , le meurtrier de soa frère : la malédiction de la terre le prouve aussi ; mais qu'es t-il nécessaire d'apporter ici de semblables témoignages ? La preuve claire en sera donnée^ et cela sera confirmé , non - seulement par les écritures qui en efiet forment un voile , mais par l'universalité des choses , si nous en prenons le tems, et que nous n'ensevelissions pas notre travail dans des objets périssables. 7. Ici la raison dit: Quelles sont donc les paroles de Moïse au sujet de la femme ? A cela je réponds : Moïse a écrit très jugte ; mais moi je ne l'entends pas bien , depuis que je suis dans la femme. Moïse avoit un visage tout illuminé , mais il étoit obligé d'y porter un voile, pour qu'on ne pût pas le voir en face. Or , quand le fils - vierge ou la pure vierge vint , il le regarda en face , et ôta le voile. La raison demande donc : Qu'est-ce que c'étoit que la côte tirée d'Adam , pour être une femme. La porte de laprofundeur» 8. Vois : la sofhie nous montre que lorsqu'Adant Cut subjugué y et quelle passa dans son Eilier , alorss fti. i5« ( 221 )
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.
12. Now then, when Adam went into the garden of Eden, and that the three principles introduced thus such a combat in Adam, his tincture was entirely weakened, and the virgin Sophia withdrew. For the spirit of the attract of this world had carried it away in Adam; that is why he let himself fall into sleep. At the very hour his celestial body became flesh and blood, and his strong power became bone: then the virgin Sophia went away into the Ether and into the shadow, but into the celestial Ether, into the principle of the power; and there she waits after all the children of Adam, to see whether any one of them will by the new generation take her again for spouse. 3. But what was God to do? He had created Adam of his eternal will; it would no more . have been possible that Adam should beget of himself his virginal posterity in the paradisiacal manner. [ As when he was virgin himself, see ch, lo, no, i8.] Then God established the FIAT of the great world in the midst; for Adam had fallen anew into the bosom of the fiat, as a person half broken, since by his inclination and his imagination he was half dead; now so that he might live, it was needful that God should aid him anew 5 since he was to beget a reign, it was needful that there should be a woman for the propagation, likewise to all the other animals. The angelic kingdom, in Adam, was past, he needed henceforth a kingdom of this world. 4. Now, what then did God do with Adam? Moses says:
2When Adam slept, he took one of his ribs, formed of it a woman (of the rib that he had taken from the man), and he closed the place with flesh. In that Moses has written very justly 5 but who here has well understood it? If I had not known the first Adam in his virginal form in paradise, I should be stopped here, and I should know nothing else, save that Adam had been made flesh and blood of a mass of earth, and Eve his wife of one of his ribs and of his hard bones: which nevertheless before that time had often appeared to me very astonishing when I read the glosses that such great learned men have written upon Moses. Some even have dared to speak of a ditch in the eastern country, whence Adam was taken and formed, as a potter makes a vessel or a pot. 5. Happily I have examined the scriptures which say: What is born of the flesh, is flesh; moreover, the flesh and the blood cannot possess the kingdom of the heavens; moreover, no one ascends into heaven save the son of man who is come from heaven ( or the pure virgin ) and who is in heaven: which helped me much to think that the virgin-son was the angel of the restoration of what had been lost in Adam, for God brought anew into the woman, into her virginal body, the virgin-child that Adam was to beget. If I had not considered the text in Moses, where God says: I1 is not good that man be alone, we will make him a help; I should be still stopped in the will of the woman [or terrestrial thought ], 6. But this same text says: That God considered ^î ( 220 ) CH. l3,
3all that he had made, and he saw that all was good. Now, if that was good in the creation, it must indeed have become bad for God to have said: It is not good that man be alone. If God had willed to assimilate them to all the other animals by animal reproduction, he would as well have formed at once a man and a woman; now, that God has a disgust at it, that is well announced by the first son of the woman, Cain, the murderer of his brother: the malediction of the earth proves it also; but what need is there to bring here such testimonies? The clear proof of it will be given, and that will be confirmed, not only by the scriptures which in effect form a veil, but by the universality of things, if we take the time for it, and that we bury not our labour in perishable objects. 7. Here reason says: What then are the words of Moses touching the woman? To that I answer: Moses has written very justly; but I understand him not well, since I am in the woman. Moses had a face all illuminated, but he was obliged to bear a veil upon it, so that one could not see him in the face. Now, when the virgin-son or the pure virgin came, he looked him in the face, and took away the veil. Reason asks then: What was the rib drawn from Adam, to be a woman. The gate of the profundity. 8. See: the Sophia shows us that when Adam was subjugated and that she passed into her Ether, then fti. i5« ( 221 )
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.