Adyar Pamphlets

As Above, So Below

No. 106

As Above, So Below
by G.R.S. Mead
Reprinted from The Theosophical Review, Vol !V

P"blished in 1#1# $heosophi%al P"blishin& 'o"se, Adyar, (hennai )*adras+ !ndia $he $heosophist ,ffi%e, Adyar, *adras. !ndia Heaven above, heaven below; stars above, stars below; all that is above, thus also below; understand this and be blessed. -ir%her, Prodrom. (opt., pp 1#. and /01. As above, so below2 33 a 2&reat word,4 a sa%ramental phrase, a sayin& of wisdom, an aphorism, a mysti% form"la, a f"ndamental law 3 or a two3ed&ed sword of word3fen%e, that will probably do the wielder serio"s dama&e if he is not previo"sly p"t thro"&h %aref"l trainin& in its handlin&5 6hether this famo"s 7word4 is of 'ermeti% ori&in or no, we will not stay formally to en8"ire. !n essen%e it is probably as old as h"man tho"&ht itself. And as probably, the idea lyin& "nderneath it has been t"rned topsy3t"rvy more fre8"ently than any other of the immortal %ompany. As above, so below4 do"btless enshrines some vast idea of analo&i%al law, some basis of tr"e reason, whi%h wo"ld s"m "p the manifold appearan%es of thin&s into one sin&le verity9 b"t the "nderstandin& of the nat"re of this mystery of manifoldness from the one 3 all one and one in all:is not to be attained by %areless thin;in&, or by some l"%;y &"ess, or by the pastime of artifi%ial %orresponden%in&. !ndeed, if the tr"th m"st o"t, in ninety3nine %ases of a h"ndred, when one "ses this phrase to %lin%h an ar&"ment, we find that we have be&&ed the 8"estion from the start, ended where we be&an, and asserted the opposite of o"r lo&ion. !nstead of ill"minin&, not only the s"b<e%t we have in hand, b"t all s"b<e%ts, by a &rasp of the eternal verity %on%ealed within o"r sayin&, we have reversed it into the ephemeral and false proposition= 7As below, so above,4 Deus, verily, inversus est demon9 and there>s the devil to pay. B"t fort"nately there is some %ompensation even in this in an illo&i%al a&e9 for, as all the mysti% world ;nows, Demon is nothin& else b"t deus inversus. ?es, even alon& o"r most modern lines of tho"&ht, even in propositions and prin%iples that are, with every day, %omin& more and more into favo"r in the domain of pra%ti%al philosophi@in&, we find o"r a&eless aphorism stood "pon its head with s%antiest %eremony. !n the newest theolo&y, in the latest philosophy, we find a stron& tenden%y to revive the an%ient idea that man is the meas"re of the "niverse 3 whether we %all this %on%ept pra&matism or by any other name that so"nds 7as sweet4. 7As below,4 then, 7so above.4 !n fa%t we do not seem to be able to &et away from this inversion. 6e li;e it th"s t"rned "pside down9 and ! am not alto&ether s"re that, even for the ;eenest3 Pa&e 1

Adyar Pamphlets

As Above, So Below

No. 106

minded of "s, it is not an eA%ellent eAer%ise th"s to anthropomorphi@e )!n the sense of Anthropos of %o"rse, and not of his %ar%ase.+ the "niverse, and to flin& the shadow of his best within on to the infinite s%reen of the appearan%e of the thin&s witho"t. Bor is not man ;in really with all these 3 worlds, systems, elements, and spa%es, infinit"des, and times and timelessness5 B"t this way of loo;in& at the thin& does not as a r"le bother the be&inner in mysti% spe%"lation. Bas%inated with some little3;nown fa%t of the below, marvelin& at some stri;in& in%ident that has %ome "nder his noti%e 3 stri;in&, fas%inatin& for him, of %o"rse 3 he "s"ally p"ts a wei&ht "pon it that it %annot bear, eAa&&erates a parti%"lar into a "niversal, and with a desperate pl"n&e of <oy ima&es that he has finally arrived at tr"th 3 ta;in& his topsy3t"rvy 7as below4 for the eternal 7as above4. 'e does not yet reali@e that, had he tr"ly rea%hed to that 7above,4 he wo"ld ;now not only the solitary below that has %ome da@@lin&ly into his %osmos, b"t every other 7below4 of the same %lass. B"t a&ain from this hei&ht of 7philosophi@in&4 let "s %ome down to mysti% %ommonpla%e. ,f thin&s physi%al we have %ertain definite ;nowled&e, s"mmed "p in the a%%"rate meas"rement and observations, and &eneral me%hani%al art of modern s%ien%e. Beyond this domain, for me%hani%al s%ien%e there is CAC9 for the Dseein&4 mysti% there is not CAC, b"t an indefinite series of phases of s"btler and s"btler sensations. Now, as every intelli&ent reader ;nows, it is <"st the nat"re of these eAtra normal impressions that is be&innin& to be %riti%ally investi&ated on the lines of the impersonal method and <"stly bela"ded by all s%ientifi% wor;ers. !n this domain, of s"%h intense interest to many st"dents of $heosophy, how shall we say o"r 7as above4 applies5 And here let "s start at the be&innin&9 that is to say, the first dis%rete de&ree beyond the physi%al 3 the psy%hi% or so3%alled 7astral4. 6hat %onstit"tes this a dis%rete de&ree5 !s it in reality a dis%rete de&ree5 And by dis%rete ! mean= is it dis%ontin"o"s with the physi%al5 $hat is to say, is there some f"ndamental %han&e of ;ind between the two5 7East is east, and 6est is west49 Astral is astral, and Physi%al is physi%al. B"t how5 Sensationally only, or is it also rationally to be distin&"ished5 $he first diffi%"lty that %onfronts "s is this= that, however ;een a man>s s"btler senses may be, no matter how hi&hly 7%lear3seein&4 he may have be%ome 3 ! spea;, of %o"rse, only of what has %ome "nder my own personal observation and from the &eneral literat"re of the s"b<e%t, ),f vision and apo%alypti% proper, of %o"rse, and not of the s"b<e%tive seein& or re%allin& of physical scenes.+ he seems "nable to %onvey his own immediate eAperien%e %learly to a se%ond person, "nless, of %o"rse that se%ond person %an 7see4 with the first. $ry how he may, he is apparently %ompelled to fall ba%; on physi%al terms in whi%h to eAplain9 nay, it is hi&hly probable that all that has been written on the 7astral4 has prod"%ed no other impression on non3psy%hi% readers than that it is a s"btler phase of the physi%al. And this pres"mably, be%a"se the very seer himself, in eAplainin& the impressions he re&isters to himself, that is, to his physi%al %ons%io"sness, has to translate them into the only forms that %ons%io"sness %an s"pply, namely physi%al forms. !ndeed, there seems to be a &"lf fiAed between psy%hi% and physi%al, so that those impressions whi%h wo"ld pass from then%e to "s, %annot. !n other words, they %annot, in the very nat"re of thin&s, %ome na;ed into this world9 they m"st be %lothed. Now if this is tr"e, if this is an "navoidable fa%t in nat"re, then the very nat"re of the astral is removed from the nat"re of the physi%al by an "nbrid&eable &"lf= 7East is east, and 6est is west.4 B"t is it really tr"e5 !s it only that, so far, no one is ;nown who %an brid&e the &"lf perfe%tly5 ,r s"pposin& even that Pa&e 2

Adyar Pamphlets

As Above, So Below

No. 106

there be those who %an so brid&e it, is it that they are "nable to ma;e their ;nowled&e ;nown to others simply be%a"se these others %annot brid&e the &"lf in their own personal %ons%io"sness, and therefore %annot follow the continuum of their more &ifted brethren5 B"t even s"pposin& there is a %ontin"ity from physi%al to astral, it wo"ld seem that we m"st, so to spea;, &o there, and that it %annot %ome here. !n other words, the astral %annot be pre%isely re&istered in the physi%al, the ima&e %annot eAa%tly reprod"%e the prototype9 for if it %o"ld, the one wo"ld be the other. 6hat then is the nat"re of the differen%e of 8"ality or of de&ree5 'ow, a&ain, we as;, does astral really differ from physi%al5 (an we in this derive any satisfa%tion from spe%"lations %on%ernin& the so3%alled 7fo"rth dimension4 of matter5 $his is a s"b<e%t of immense diffi%"lty, and ! do not propose to enter into anythin& b"t its o"termost %o"rt9 in fa%t, ! am in%apable of doin& so. All that ! desire to note for the present is that all analo&ies between 7flatland4 and o"r three3dimensional spa%e, and between the latter and the pres"pposed fo"rth3 dimensional sta&e, are based "pon the most fla&rant petitio principii. !t is a %ase of 7As below, so above,4 in excelsis. 7Blatland 3 spa%e of two dimensions, plus the f"rther &rat"ito"s ass"mption of two3 dimensional bein&s who have their bein& and their movin& therein 3 is in%on%eivable as matter of any ;ind. A s"perfi%ies is 3 an idea9 it is not a thin& of the sensible world. 6e %an %on%eive a s"perfi%ies in o"r minds9 it is a mental %on%ept, it is not a sensible reality. 6e %an>t see it, nor taste it, nor hear it, nor smell it, nor to"%h it. ,"r two3dimensional bein&s are not only fi&ments of the ima&ination, they are absol"tely in%on%eivable as entities9 they %an>t be %ons%io"s of one another, for in the abstra%t %on%ept %alled a s"rfa%e, there %an be no position from the standpoint of itself and thin&s li;e it, b"t only from the standpoint of another. Even the most primitive sense of to"%h wo"ld be non3eAistent for o"r 7flatlanders,4 for there wo"ld be nothin& to to"%h. And so on, and so forth. $herefore, to ima&ine how three3dimensional thin&s wo"ld appear to the %ons%io"sness of a flatlander, and from this by analo&y to try to %onstr"%t fo"r3dimensional thin&s from a series of three3dimensional phenomena, is apparently a very vi%io"s %ir%le indeed. 6e %an>t &et at it that way9 we have to see; another way, a very different 7other way,4 apparently, by means of whi%h we may &et o"t of three dimensions into 3 what5 !nto 3 two, either way or every way5 6ho ;nows5 Anyway, the later Platoni% S%hool %"rio"sly eno"&h %alled the 7astral4 the 7plane49 basin& themselves on one of the so3%alled (haldean ,ra%les= 7Fo not soil the spirit nor t"rn the plane into the solid49 where the 7spirit4 %orresponds apparently to what modern $heosophi%al terminolo&y %alls the 7etheri%,4 and the 7plane4 to the 7astral4. As Psell"s says, in %ommentin& on this lo&ion= 7$he (haldeans %lothed the so"l in two vest"res= the one they %alled the spirit"o"s, whi%h is woven for it Gas it wereH o"t of the sensible body9 the other the radiant, s"btle and impalpable, whi%h they %all the plane.4 )See my Orpheus p /I. Jondon 1I#6H 'i&her than this were the 7lines> and 7points,4 all of whi%h pertained pres"mably to the re&ion of mind. 6hat, then, a&ain we as;, is the 7astral4 proper as %ompared with the physi%al5 'ow do thin&s appear to themselves on the astral proper9 for so far9 in the very nat"re of thin&s, whenever we tal; 7down here4 of the astral we have to tal; of it in terms of the physi%al5 !n what, to "se a famo"s term of an%ient Pa&e 3

Adyar Pamphlets

As Above, So Below

No. 106

philosophi@in&, %onsists its otherness45 !s 7otherness4 in this to be tho"&ht of and distin&"ished by a &"lf in matter9 a &ap 3 whi%h seems to be an abs"rdity, for 7nat"re does not leap49 she also 7abhors a va%""m,> und so weiter, alon& this line of aphorism. 'ere a&ain we are %onfronted with the other side of the shield, with the "navoidable int"ition that there is a continuum in matter9 that if it were possible ma&i%ally to propel a h"man entity into spa%e, he wo"ld s"%%essively leave his vario"s 7vehi%les4 ),r rather, to spe%"late more pre%isely, the mole%"les of some, the atoms of others, the ele%trons of others, and so on and so forth.+ in the spheres of the atmosphere and elements, while, as in the %ase of Kohn Brown, his so"l wo"ld 7&o mar%hin& on4 "ntil it arrived at the last limit 3 whenever or wherever that may be, in a "niverse that ever at every point enters into itself. 'owever this may be, there is no do"bt that the idea of a %osmi% 7st"ff4 or 7matter 2 3 whatever s"%h terms may mean 3 rolled "p %ontin"o"sly into itself, as in the dia&ram of the atom so familiar to st"dents of *odern $heosophy 3 is eA%eedin&ly ill"minative, if tho"&ht of as a symbol of for%e3systems. All thin&s, then, wo"ld appear to be solidified down here by the 7s;yCs bein& rolled "p %arpet3wise,4 to paraphrase the Lpanishat. $he 7above4 has th"s been 7involved4 into the 7below49 and if we %o"ld only follow the pro%ess, per%han%e we sho"ld then be able faintly to "nderstand the tr"th "nderlyin& o"r aphorism. $hen, and then only, in the most serio"s and literal meanin& of it, and not in the sar%asti% sense of the writer, or rather sin&er, of the shvetshvataropanishat 2when, %arpet3wise, the s;y, men shall roll "p9 then Gonly, not till thenH shall end of sorrow be, witho"t men ;nowin& Mod,4 ) !hvetshvataropanisht, vi, /0. See The "panishats G*ead and (hatter<i>s $ransH !!, #0+ for then, per%han%e, they wo"ld be Mod. Now as a matter of fa%t this continuum of matter is the &ro"nd on whi%h all s%ientifi% thin;in& is based9 perpet"al and %ontin"o"s transformation, b"t no s"dden leaps 3 orderly evol"tion, no mira%"lo"s or "n%a"sed, spontaneo"s s"rprises. And if this be tr"e, it follows that some day the dire%t line of 7des%ent4 from astral to physi%al will be %ontrolled me%hani%ally by h"man invention, and the astral wo"ld be made visible to even the most hopelessly profane from a psy%hi% standpoint9 and not only so, b"t the errors of h"man observation, whi%h vitiate all present psy%hi% investi&ation, will be obviated, in as marvelo"s a fashion as the errors of physi%al observation are now eliminated by the wonderf"lly deli%ate instr"ments already devised by h"man in&en"ity. $his seems immediately to follow from the ma<or premise of o"r present spe%"lation9 b"t somehow or other ! am by no means satisfied that this will be the %ase. !s o"r salvation to be dependent "pon ma%hines5 Dei ex mchinis indeedN B"t what has all this to do with 7As above, so below45 6hy, this= !f the sensible world rises by sta&es 3 from this &ross state, familiar to "s by o"r normal senses, thro"&h ever finer and finer &rades of matter, we finally rea%h 3 ay, there is the r"b9 what do we rea%h5 6here do we start5 $he tr"th of the matter is 3 be it whispered lowly 3 yo" %an>t thin# it out in terms of matter. B"t ta;e the 7ever so thin4 idea for the moment as s"ffi%iently indefinite for any mysti% who is not a metaphysi%ian, "sin& the latter term in the old, old way, where physis in%l"ded all nat"re that is natura, the field of be%omin&. As above, so below4: how many sta&es above5 Jet "s say seven, to be in the fashion. $he 7above4 will then be very neb"lo"s pres"mably, a sort of 7spheri%al4 7primitive strea;,4 from the within witho"t 3 b"t a 7primitive strea;4 in its own mode and fashion, and differin& pres"mably toto coelo from the primitive strea; that first appears in physi%al embryolo&y. $here may be 7%orresponden%e,4 b"t that Pa&e 4

Adyar Pamphlets

As Above, So Below

No. 106

%orresponden%e m"st be tra%ed thro"&h n"mero"s orders of 7matter49 the very neAt s"%%eedin& order to the physi%al already a%tin& as for%e, or ener&y, to the matter whi%h falls beneath o"r normal senses. 'ere we are a&ain, at the very o"tset, fa%e to fa%e with the 7astral4 $x$ % whi%h, %ompared with the physi%al, sho"ld perhaps be re&arded as a 7system of for%es,4 rather than as a mo"ld of the same fashion and form as the physi%al. And if this view is, at any rate, one sta&e nearer the reality than the interpretation of the astral by p"rely physi%al ima&ery and symbolism 3 what can possibly be the nat"re of o"r spheri%al 7primitive strea;4 sta&e9 when already at the first remove we be&&ar all o"r possibilities of des%ription5 Bor we %ertainly do not &et m"%h 7forrarder4 by simply flin&in& the pi%t"re of the physi%al, as it were, on to a series of mirrors whi%h differ from one another only in the distan%e they are removed one from another. At any rate, it seems so to the refle%tin& mind of man9 tho"&h maybe it seems 8"ite as nat"ral to his s"btler senses so to spea; of their eAperien%e when he %onverses physi%ally abo"t them. Jet it be "nderstood on%e for all that ! have not the sli&htest pretension in any way to de%ide between these apparently eternal oppositions 3 the sense and the reason9 indeed, ! have a private belief that it wo"ld be most "nseemly and disastro"s to attempt to separate the eternal spo"ses of this sa%red marria&e9 not only "nseemly b"t sa%rile&io"s to do so 3 per%han%e even the sin a&ainst the 'oly Mhost. 'and in hand, nay, in the most intimate of all "nions, m"st they ever &o to&ether, for ever &ivin& birth to the tr"e *an 3 who is their %ommon so"r%e. Still, it is ever of advanta&e %ontin"o"sly to ;eep before o"r minds the 8"estion= 6hat is a prototype9 what is a paradi&m9 what a lo&os : a reason9 what an idea5 6hat, for instan%e, is the auto'(on, the animal itself, as %ompared with all animals9 what the ever the 7same,4 as %ompared with all the 7others45 'ere, to help "s, the int"ition of thin&s that "nderlay the philosophi@in& of the 6estern world at its birth in %ons%io"s reasonin& 3 from the time of Pytha&oras onwards 3 %omes forward with its settin& of the no"menal over a&ainst the sensible or phenomenal 3 the mind over a&ainst the so"l. $he %hara%teristi% of the p"re mind is that it 7sees,4 not another, b"t itself, and ;nows it ever 7sees4 itself. !t is the 7plane of tr"th4 : wherever are the paradi&ms, and ideas, and reasons of all thin&s : and when we say 2where24 we do not mean that it is a pla%e or spa%e, for it is the everlastin& %a"sation of these, and is not %onditioned by them, b"t self3%onditions itself. !t wo"ld be too lon&, it wo"ld be too diffi%"lt, for me to attempt to write on s"%h a s"blime theme in these stray tho"&hts. ,ne thin& alone ! have desired to %all attention to9 it is the %areless translation of terms into %ons%io"sness, and the dan&er of fallin& too deeply into the habit of what Stallo %alls the 7reifi%ation of ideas4. Bor when yo" have 7reified4 yo"r ideas, be it &ravity, or atomi%ity, or vibration, yo" have only &ot the shadow and not the s"bstan%e9 the appearan%e, the phenomenon, and not the "nderlyin& tr"th, the no"menon. !t will be already seen that even in this short paper ! have "sed the same words in totally different senses9 for when ! spea; of the sa%red marria&e of mind and sense, ! am "sin& 7mind4 in a different sense from 7the mind4 of whi%h ! have <"st been spea;in&, whi%h in this sense stands for the Self, the Otman of 'ind" philosophy.

Pa&e 5

Adyar Pamphlets

As Above, So Below

No. 106

B"t no matter how we "se o"r words 3 and who that loves wisdom is so foolish as to 8"arrel abo"t words5:it seems to be an ineAp"&nable position in ri&ht reason, that that 7si&ht4 whi%h reveals to man the 7reasons4 of thin&s is a hi&her and more divine possession than that 7si&ht4 whi%h sees the sensible forms of thin&s, no matter how eA8"isitely bea"tif"l and &randiose s"%h forms may be. And when ! say 7sees4 the 7reasons4 of thin&s, do ! mean the intelle%t"al &raspin& of some sin&le eAplanation, some form"la, some abstra%tion5 By no means9 ! mean by 7reason4 lo&os : ! mean that when we 7see4 the 7reasons4 of thin&s, we see o"r 7selves4 in all thin&s9 for o"r tr"e selves are the tr"e &ro"nd of o"r bein&, the that in "s whi%h %onstit"tes "s 7Sons of Mod2 3 lo&oi as 'e is )o&os, ;in to 'im. As above, so below.4 6hat, then, is the 7above4 where there is no pla%e, no dire%tion, no dimension and no time5 And is the 7above4 s"perior to the 7below45 Ah, that is where the mind brea;s down, "nable to &rasp it. !s Eternity &reater than $ime5 !s the Same mi&htier than the ,ther5 ,f %o"rse it is, we say, as so many in so many s%hools have said before. B"t is it really so5 Are we not still in the re&ion of the opposites9 neither of whi%h %an eAist witho"t the other, and ea%h of whi%h is %o3e8"al with the other5 6e are still in the re&ion of words : words in this %ase, not reasons9 tho"&h the same word does d"ty for both in Mree; : lo&os9 showin& yet on%e a&ain that in verity demon est deus inversus. No words indeed %an tell of 'im, or of $hat if yo" so prefer, tho"&h the ne"ter &ender is as little appropriate as the mas%"line. 7$ho" that art to be worshiped in silen%e aloneN4 As $ho" art above, so art $ho" below9 as $ho" art in $hyself, so art $ho" in *an9 as $hyself is in $hee, so is $hy *an in $hyself 3 now and for ever.

Pa&e 6