Fetching
One moment.
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.
1Who would now understand what kind of mighty lord and hunter he was before God, without the understanding of the Language of Nature? which, seeing it is not every man's gift to understand, we will only intimate the sense and meaning, even what the spirit does thereby understand in the word of the essence. 30. Nimrod became a mighty lord, and was a hunter before the Lord. Now if I be able to see the spirit in its essence, in the formation of the word, then I see what a lord and hunter Nimrod was; for the spirit does herein signify and point at the properties of nature, showing how the same have opened themselves in man's nature, and brought themselves into an external form to a contrived framed government among men. The spirit signifies by the name how the human free will has formed itself in the nature of the understanding; and imagined such a model and platform into its mind, out of which imagination and fancy the outward work arose. 31. For the name NIMROD does give a very clear signification,
2in open understanding, that he came from Cush, for he is in himself a taking, apprehending or an arrogation of power and might out of nature; intimating how nature does form and frame itself into a government in the mind; and has put itself forth with power, and has hunted, suppressed and oppressed the inferior properties; therefore the spirit says, a hunter before the Lord; for the nature is before the Lord, therefore the spirit speaks here of a hunter before the Lord; for look as a hunter does hunt, drive, take and tame wild beasts, even so the spirit intimates, that out of this self-advanced human nature, such evil beasts would arise, who would live only to the outward nature. 32. Now out of the wrath of nature arose, over these foolish bestial men, the hunter, viz. the outward domination; which should hunt, catch, kill and keep them in awe, so that the hunter might tame them, and hold them under a government; else there would be only a general raving, raging, biting, tearing, devouring and eating up of each other, among the bestial men. Seeing they would not suffer the Spirit of God to rule and guide them, they must suffer the office of nature to rule them; for otherwise what need has the Lord of a hunter, that the spirit in Moses says, that he was a mighty hunter before the Lord: that which hunts before the Lord of all beings does not hunt hares or other beasts.
333. Moses has a veil before his clear shining eyes. The spirit does hereby hint at the government of nature, showing how the human government has formed and contrived itself in the soul of the outward world; and how it should afterwards be among them; and what hunters would arise over them; and compares the human dominion to a hunter, who hunts for beasts to catch and slay them; and thus it would be also among them, that these hunters would hunt after men, to take them and bring them under slavery and servitude, and chase and course them to and fro by their bloodhounds; bite, tear, slay and devour them by war and murderous acts; and tame and bring under all, with force, fury and violence, and excellently well manage the government of the hunter in their own self-assumed power. 34. For man was fallen under the possession of God's wrath in nature; the same forced forth itself now with its desire, and formed itself into a government according to the outward constellations and the four elements, as they do build up and break down: even so did this hunter do with his beasts in his sport. 35. Here the world may take an exact looking-glass to behold itself in; it is the true original ground of the worldly dominion and rule. 1 And although the same ground of government has an internal spiritual original, yet it is, in the outward form only, before God, as a bestial huntsmanship among the beast-men, who must be bound and tamed. 1 Lordship.
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.
1Who would now understand what kind of mighty lord and hunter he was before God, without the understanding of the Language of Nature? which, seeing it is not every man's gift to understand, we will only intimate the sense and meaning, even what the spirit does thereby understand in the word of the essence. 30. Nimrod became a mighty lord, and was a hunter before the Lord. Now if I be able to see the spirit in its essence, in the formation of the word, then I see what a lord and hunter Nimrod was; for the spirit does herein signify and point at the properties of nature, showing how the same have opened themselves in man's nature, and brought themselves into an external form to a contrived framed government among men. The spirit signifies by the name how the human free will has formed itself in the nature of the understanding; and imagined such a model and platform into its mind, out of which imagination and fancy the outward work arose. 31. For the name NIMROD does give a very clear signification,
2in open understanding, that he came from Cush, for he is in himself a taking, apprehending or an arrogation of power and might out of nature; intimating how nature does form and frame itself into a government in the mind; and has put itself forth with power, and has hunted, suppressed and oppressed the inferior properties; therefore the spirit says, a hunter before the Lord; for the nature is before the Lord, therefore the spirit speaks here of a hunter before the Lord; for look as a hunter does hunt, drive, take and tame wild beasts, even so the spirit intimates, that out of this self-advanced human nature, such evil beasts would arise, who would live only to the outward nature. 32. Now out of the wrath of nature arose, over these foolish bestial men, the hunter, viz. the outward domination; which should hunt, catch, kill and keep them in awe, so that the hunter might tame them, and hold them under a government; else there would be only a general raving, raging, biting, tearing, devouring and eating up of each other, among the bestial men. Seeing they would not suffer the Spirit of God to rule and guide them, they must suffer the office of nature to rule them; for otherwise what need has the Lord of a hunter, that the spirit in Moses says, that he was a mighty hunter before the Lord: that which hunts before the Lord of all beings does not hunt hares or other beasts.
333. Moses has a veil before his clear shining eyes. The spirit does hereby hint at the government of nature, showing how the human government has formed and contrived itself in the soul of the outward world; and how it should afterwards be among them; and what hunters would arise over them; and compares the human dominion to a hunter, who hunts for beasts to catch and slay them; and thus it would be also among them, that these hunters would hunt after men, to take them and bring them under slavery and servitude, and chase and course them to and fro by their bloodhounds; bite, tear, slay and devour them by war and murderous acts; and tame and bring under all, with force, fury and violence, and excellently well manage the government of the hunter in their own self-assumed power. 34. For man was fallen under the possession of God's wrath in nature; the same forced forth itself now with its desire, and formed itself into a government according to the outward constellations and the four elements, as they do build up and break down: even so did this hunter do with his beasts in his sport. 35. Here the world may take an exact looking-glass to behold itself in; it is the true original ground of the worldly dominion and rule. 1 And although the same ground of government has an internal spiritual original, yet it is, in the outward form only, before God, as a bestial huntsmanship among the beast-men, who must be bound and tamed. 1 Lordship.
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.
No commentary for this page.