# Of Errors and of Truth

## Chapters

- Introduction
- The Cause of Errors
- Universal Source of Errors
- Sequence of Errors
- Allegorical Tableau
- Policy Uncertainty
- Mathematical Principles
- Human Attributes

## Introduction

The Work I offer to humankind is not a collection of conjectures. It is not a system that I present to them; I believe I give them a much more useful gift. Nevertheless, I have not come to bring them Science; I know too well that people do not expect this from other people. It is only a ray of their own torch that I revive before them, so it may enlighten them upon the false ideas they have received about the Truth, as well as on the weak and dangerous weapons that unsafe hands have employed to defend it. I was deeply affected, I confess, by looking at the actual state of Science. I have seen how misunderstandings have distorted it. I have seen the hideous veil under which it was covered, and, for the interest of my fellow-creatures, I thought it was my duty to remove it. Undoubtedly, for such an undertaking, I need more than ordinary resources, but without justifying myself upon those I employ, it suffices to say that they belong to the very nature of people, that they have always been known to some of them since the origin of all things, and that they will never be completely withdrawn from Earth as long as there are Thinking Beings. This is where I drew the evidence and the conviction of the truths whose research occupies the whole Universe. After this confession, if they still had to accuse me of teaching an unknown Doctrine, one could not at least suspect that I invented it, since if it is due to the nature of people, not only does it not come from me, but it would have been impossible for me to solidly establish any other. And truly, if the Reader does not draw conclusions on the Work before having perceived the whole and the bond; if he gives himself the time to feel the weight and the sequence of principles which I explain, he will agree that they are the true key of all the mysterious Allegories and Mysterious Fables ofall People, the primary source of all kinds of institutions, the very model of the Laws governing the Universe, and which constitute all Beings; that is to say, they serve as a basis for all that exists and to all that operates, whether it is in people or by the hand of people, or outside people and independent of their will; and that, consequently, outside these Principles, there can be no true Science. Hence the Reader will more readily know why we see among people a universal variety of Dogmas and Systems; why we perceive this innumerable multitude of Philosophical, Political, and Religious Sects, each of which disagrees with itself as with all the others; why, notwithstanding the efforts that the Leaders of these different Sects make every day to form a stable Doctrine on the most important points, and in order to reconcile the particular opinions, they can never succeed in doing so, because offering no fixed thing to their Disciples not only not persuades them, but they even expose them to a distrust of all Science, for they only known imaginary or vicious ones; and finally why the Teachers and the Observers incessantly show they have neither the rule nor the proof of truth. The Reader will conclude, I say, that if the principles I am discussing are the only foundation of all truth, it is because they have forgotten, that all these errors devour the Earth, and thus they have generally been misunderstood, since ignorance and uncertainty are universal. Such are the objects upon which the person who seeks to know will find a way to form ideas more sound and more consistent with the nature of the seed she carries within herself. However, although the Light is made for all eyes, it is even more certain that all eyes are not made to see it in all its brightness. This is why the small number of custodians of the truths I announce are vowed to prudence and discretion by the most formal commitments. Thus, I have promised myself to employ much caution in this writing, and to often cover myself in a veil that the least ordinary eyes will not always pierce, especially as I sometimes speak of something else than what I seem to speak of. For the same reason, although I gather in the same point of view a considerable number of different subjects, I have only revealed a sketch of the vast picture I could offer; nevertheless, I say enough to give to the greatest number of people something to think about, without excluding those who, as a matter of Science, enjoy the highest celebrity. But, with the general good of people in mind, and above all, not wishing to bring disagreement among individuals, I do not directly attack either of the received Dogmas or any of the established Political Institutions; and even in my remarks on Sciences and the different Systems, I have forbidden myself everything that may have the least connection with overly particular objects. Besides, I have committed myself to use no quotation, because first, I seldom visit Libraries, and the Books I read can't be found there; and in the second place, because truths which would only rest on testimonies would no longer be truths. It is expedient, I think, to set forth here the order and the plan of this Work. At first, we shall see some observations upon good and evil, why modern Systems have confounded both, and have been forced to deny their differences. A quick glance at people will fully explain this difficulty, and shed light as to why they are still in the most profound ignorance, not only of their surroundings, but also of their true nature. The distinctions which lie between people's faculties will be confirmed by those which we shall even point out, between the faculties of Lower Beings; in this way we will demonstrate the universality of a double law in everything that is submitted to time. The necessity of a third temporal law will be much more clearly proved by showing that the double law is absolutely in its dependence. The mistakes which have been made on all these objects will clearly reveal the cause of the obscurity, variety, and uncertainty which appear in all the works of people, as well as in all Institutions, both civil and sacred, to which they are linked; what shall be the true source of the Sovereign Power among them, and that of all the rights which constitute their various establishments. We shall make the same applications on the principles received in the higher Sciences, and principally in Mathematics, where the origin and true cause of errors will appear with evidence. Lastly, we shall remind people of their natural attributes, which distinguish them best from other Beings, and which is most fitting to bring them closer to all the knowledge which suits their nature. All these objects are contained in seven divisions, which, though resting on the same basis, each offer a different subject. If some of them had difficulty in admitting the principles which I have just recalled to people, as their embarrassment would only arise from their having followed their own sense and not that of the Work, they ought not to expect from me any other explanations, the more so as they would not be clearer than the Work itself. It is easily perceived, on reading these reflections, that I have paid little attention to form, and neglected the advantages of diction; but if the Reader is honest, he will understand that I have been too busy with it, for my subject had no need of it.

## Chapter 1 - The Cause of Errors

It is a very distressing spectacle when one desires to contemplate people, to see them all at once tormented by the desire to know, not perceiving the reason for anything, and yet having the audacity and temerity to insist upon giving reasons for everything. Instead of considering the darkness that surrounds them, and beginning by probing its depths, people proceed not only as if they were sure to dispel it, but also as if there existed no obstacles between Science and themselves. Soon, attempting to create a Truth, people dare put the Truth in the place of that which they should respect in silence and about which they have at present almost no right other than to desire and wait for it. And, in fact, if people are entirely separated from the Light, how will they be able to light, on their own, the flambeau that must serve them as a guide? How will they be able to attain by their own faculties a Science that will remove all of their doubts? Do not these glimmers and appearances of reality, which people believe they are discovering in the delusions of their imaginations, vanish under the simplest examination? And having brought forth phantoms without life and substance, do they not see themselves forced to replace them by new illusions, which soon after follow the same course and leave them stuck in the most dreadful uncertainty? Fortunate, nevertheless, if their weakness was the only cause of their mistakes! Their situation then would be much less deplorable because being unable, by their nature, to find peace instead of truth, the more painful the trials would be and the more they should serve to bring people back to the only end suitable for them. But their errors still have their source in their unrestrained will; one perceives that, far from employing to their advantage what little strength they have left, they nearly always direct it against the Law of their Being. One perceives, I say, that being restrained by this obscurity around them, it is by their own hand that they place the blindfold upon their eyes. Then, being unable to catch the least glimmer, despair or fear overcomes them, and they throw themselves into dangerous paths which remove them forever from their true course. It is, therefore, by this mixture of weakness and imprudence that the ignorance of people perpetuates itself. Such is the source of their continual inconsistencies, so that, wasting their days in useless and vain efforts, one should be little surprised that their work either produces no fruit or that which is bitter. However, when I recall here the mistakes and imprudent conduct of my fellow humans, I am far from desiring to debase them in their own eyes; my most ardent wish, on the contrary, would be that they never lose sight of the greatness which they are capable of. May I at least contribute by trying to dispel before them those difficulties which hinder them, to stimulate their courage, and to show them the way which leads to the object of their desires! With the first glance that people direct upon themselves, they will experience no difficulty in feeling and admitting that there must exist for them a Science or an evident Law, since one exists for all Beings, although it is not universally in all Beings, since even in the midst of our weaknesses, ignorance, and mistakes, we occupy ourselves only with the search for peace and light. In that case, though the efforts that people make daily to reach the object of their search succeed so rarely, one must not think that this goal is imaginary, but only that people are mistaken about the road that leads to it, and that they are, consequently, in the greatest of need since they do not even know the way by which they must travel. Consequently, one may agree henceforth that the actual misfortune of humankind is not to be ignorant of the existence of truth, but that they are mistaken about the nature of this truth, because in reality, the very ones who have pretended to deny it and destroy it have never believed that they could succeed without having another truth to replace it. And in fact, they have donned their fanciful opinions concerning force, immutability, universality - in a word, concerning all the attributes of a real and self-existent Being. They have strongly felt that a Truth could not be a truth without essentially existing, without being invariable and absolutely independent, deriving solely from itself the source of its existence; this is because, if it had received it from another Principle, the latter could return it to nothingness or to the inaction from which it would have drawn it. Thus, those who have fought against truth have proved by their own systems that they possessed the indestructible idea of Truth. Therefore, let us repeat, what torments most people on this earth is not so much knowing whether Truth exists, but knowing what this Truth is. But what disturbs this feeling in people, and so often obscures the vivid rays of this light in them, is the continuous mixture of good and evil, of light and darkness, of harmony and disorder that they perceive in the Universe and in themselves. This universal contrast disturbs them and spreads a confusion in their thoughts which they find difficult to untangle. Both distressed and surprised by so strange an assemblage, if they want to explain it, they surrender themselves to the most disastrous opinions, so that, soon ceasing to perceive this same Truth, they lose all the confidence they had in it. The greatest service that one could render them in the painful situation in which they find themselves, would therefore be to persuade them that they could know the source and origin of this disorder which astonishes them, and, above all, to prevent them from reaching any conclusions contrary to this Truth which they recognize, love, and cannot do without. It is certain that, when considering the revolutions and conflicts that befall all Beings in Nature, people must have acknowledged that it was subject to the influence of good and evil, which necessarily brought them to recognize the existence of two opposite Principles. Nothing, in fact, could be wiser than this observation and nothing more just than the consequence they have drawn from it. Why have they not been so fortunate when they have attempted to explain the nature of these two Principles? Why have they given too narrow a base to their science which forces them to continually destroy the systems they wish to support? It is because, after having neglected the true means they possessed of instructing themselves, they have been inconsiderate enough to speak for themselves about that sacred subject, as if, far from the abode of light, people could be assured of their judgments. Also, after having recognized the two Principles, they have been unable to recognize the difference. Sometimes people have accorded to these Principles an equality of force and antiquity that renders them rivals of each other by placing them on the same level of power and grandeur. Sometimes, in truth, they have declared evil as being inferior to good in every respect; but they have contradicted themselves when they wished to understand the nature of evil and its origin. Sometimes they have not feared to place evil and good in one and the same Principle, believing that they were honoring this Principle by attributing to it an exclusive power which renders it, without exception, the creator of all things, meaning that this Principle is simultaneously parent and tyrant, destroying accordingly what it elevates; it is evil and unjust by force of its magnitude and opposition, and consequently it punishes itself for upholding its own justice. Finally, tired of wavering in these uncertainties, without being able to find a solid idea, a few have denied the existence of either Principle, endeavoring to believe that everything progressed without law and order. Being unable to explain that which existed as good and evil, they have stated there was neither good nor evil. When, on the strength of this assertion, they have been asked what was, therefore, the origin of all those precepts universally prevailing on Earth, of this uniform inner voice which, so to speak, forces all people to adopt them, and which, even in the midst of their aberrations, causes people to feel that they have a destination far superior to the objects occupying their attention, then these observers, continually blinding themselves, have treated the most natural feelings as habits. They have attributed to organization and mechanical laws all of humanity's thoughts and faculties. From this they have pretended that, by reason of humany's weakness, great physical events have at all times produced in people fear and terror; that continually experiencing upon their feeble selves the superiority of the elements and Beings by which they are surrounded, they imagined that a certain indefinable power governed and upset Nature at will. Further, from this people created for themselves a succession of fanciful principles of subordination and order, punishments and rewards, which education and examples perpetuated, but without considerable differences relative to circumstances and climates. Then, by taking as proof the continuous variety of usages and the arbitrary customs of peoples, the bad faith and the rivalry of Instructors, as well as the conflict of human opinions - the fruit of doubt and ignorance - it has been easy for them to demonstrate that people, in fact, have only found uncertainty and contradictions surrounding themselves, from which they have believed themselves authorized to affirm anew that there exists nothing that is true - that is, nothing exists in essence - since, according to what has been already propounded, existence and truth are one and the same. These are, however, the means that these imprudent Masters have employed to proclaim and justify their doctrine. These are the poisoned sources from which have flowed all the scourges besetting people upon Earth and tormenting them even more than their natural misfortunes. Therefore, how much errors and suffering would these imprudent Masters have spared us if, instead of searching for truth in the appearances of material nature, they had decided to search within themselves, if they had attempted to explain matter by humanity and not humanity by matter, and, armed with courage and patience, they had pursued in the calm of their imagination, the discovery of this light that we all desire with so much ardor. Perhaps it would not have been in their power to withstand its brilliance at first sight. Struck by the splendor which surrounds it, and employing all their faculties to contemplate it, they would not have thought to pronounce in advance upon its nature nor desire to make it known to their fellow humans before having taken its rays for their guide. When people, after having resisted courageously, succeed in overcoming all that is contrary to their being, they find they are at peace with themselves and, consequently, at peace with all nature. But, if through negligence or being tired of combat, they allow the slightest spark of a fire foreign to their own essence to enter within themselves, they suffer and languish until they are entirely delivered from it. So, in this way people have realized in an even more intimate way that two different Principles exist. As they find happiness and peace with one, and as the other is always accompanied by fatigue and torment, they have distinguished them under the names of good Principle and evil Principle. Now, if people had been willing to make the same observation regarding all the Beings of the universe, it would have been easy for them to concentrate their thoughts on the nature of good and evil, and in this way, to discover the nature of their true origin. Let us say, therefore, that good is for each being the accomplishment of their own law, and evil that which is opposed to it. Let us say that each one of the Beings, possessing only a single law (and all pertaining to a primary Law which is one), the good, or the accomplishment of this law, must also be unique - that is to say, it must be solely and exclusively true, although it embraces the infinity of Beings. Evil, on the contrary, cannot have any affinity with this Law of Beings since it is in conflict with it; consequently, it can no longer be included in unity, since it tends to degrade it by attempting to form another unity. In a word, it is false because it cannot exist alone; because it cannot alter the fact that the Law of Beings has an existence simultaneous to its own; and because it cannot ever destroy it, even when it impedes or disturbs its accomplishment. I have said that when approaching the good Principle, people were in fact filled with delight and consequently above all evil. They are then so entirely absorbed in their enjoyment that they cannot entertain either the feeling or thought of any other Being; and therefore, nothing that proceeds from the evil Principle can intrude upon their joy, which proves that people are thus in their element and that their law of unity is accomplished. But if a person seeks a support other than that law which is her own, her joy is at first troubled and uncertain. She delights only in reproaching herself for her enjoyment and, being for a moment divided between the evil drawing her away and the good which she has forsaken, she experiences strongly the effect of two opposite laws. She learns through her resulting unhappiness that there exists no longer any unity for her because she has strayed from her own law. Soon, it is true, this uncertain enjoyment strengthens itself and even entirely dominates her; but, far from causing it to become more unique and true, it produces in the faculties of people a disorder so much more deplorable that the action of evil, being sterile and limited, brings the person who abandons herself to it, and all the more promptly to an inevitable emptiness and despondency. Here, then, is the infinite difference that is found between the two Principles: good derives all its power and value from itself; evil is nothing when good prevails. The good, by its presence, causes even the thought and the least trace of evil to disappear; evil, even in its success, 1s always fought and disturbed by the presence of good. Evil, by itself, possesses neither force nor power; good has universal and independent powers and these extend even over evil itself. Therefore, it is evident that one cannot admit any equality of power or seniority between these two Principles, because a Being cannot equal another in power without also equaling him in seniority, since it would always be a mark of weakness and inferiority in one of the two Beings to have not existed from the same moment as the other. Now, if from the beginning of time good had inwardly co-existed with evil, they would have never acquired any respective superiority, since in this supposition, the evil Principle, being independent of the good and having consequently the same power, either would have had no action upon the other or they would have mutually balanced and restrained each other. Therefore, there would have resulted from this equality of power an inaction and absolute sterility in these two Beings, because their reciprocal forces, finding themselves continually equal and opposed, would have found it impossible for one or the other to be productive. One should not say that to cause cessation of this inaction, a Principle superior to both would have augmented the forces of the Principle of good as being more analogous to its nature. By saying so, that superior Principle would itself be the good Principle of which we speak. One will then be forced by striking evidence to recognize in the good Principle an overwhelming superiority, unity, and indivisibility with which it has of necessity primarily existed, this being sufficient to fully demonstrate that evil can only have come after good. Establishing in this way the inferiority of the evil principle, and showing its opposition to the good Principle, is to prove that there has never been and never will be either the slightest alliance nor the least affinity between them. How could it enter into the mind that evil had ever been included in the essence and the faculties of the good to which it is so diametrically opposed? But this conclusion necessarily brings us to another just as important, which enables us to feel that this good, however powerful it may be, cannot cooperate in any way in the birth and the effects of evil. To do so would have made it necessary that, before the origin of evil, there be in the good Principle some seed, or evil faculty, and to advance this opinion would be to renew the confusion that the judgments and imprudence of humankind have propagated on these matters. Or it would have been necessary that, ever since the birth of evil, the good have communication and relation with it, which is impossible and contradictory. This, then, is the inconsequence of those who, fearing to limit the faculties of the good Principle, persist in teaching a doctrine so contrary to its nature as to generally attribute to it everything that exists, even evil and disorder. Nothing more need be said to enable one to sense the incommensurable distance found between the two Principles and to recognize the one to which we must give our confidence. Since the ideas that I have just presented are meant to bring people back to natural sentiments and to a Science which must be found within their hearts, as well as to create in them the hope of discovering new lights upon the subject that occupies our attention. Humankind, being the mirror of truth, must perceive reflected within itself all the rays of its light. And in fact, I would not have taken up my pen to refute them had we nothing more to expect but what the systems of humanity promise us. Recognizing the existence of the evil Principle, and considering the effects of its power in the Universe and in people, as well as the false consequences that observers have drawn from these considerations, does not disclose its origin. Evil exists; we see surrounding us its hideous traces, regardless of the efforts that have been made to deny its deformity. Now, if this evil does not originate from the good Principle, how then could it have originated? Certainly, this is for people the most important question, and one upon which I would desire to convince my readers. But I have not deluded myself about the success of my efforts. The truths I am about to present may seem certain, but I would not be surprised to see them rejected or misunderstood by the majority of people. When people, having elevated themselves toward the good Principle, acquire the habit of holding themselves invariably attached to it, they do not even possess the idea of evil. This is a truth that we have established and that no intelligent Being could reasonably contest. If people constantly had the courage and the will not to descend from this elevation for which they are born, evil would then be nothing to them. In fact, they only feel its dangerous influence in proportion to their deviation from the good Principle. Thus, one must conclude from this punishment that people then commit a free act, because if it is impossible for a Being who is not free to separate herself by her own will from the Law imposed upon her. It is also impossible that she renders herself guilty and that she be punished. We will later make this fact possible to conceive of when speaking of the suffering of animals. Finally, it is evident that wisdom and justice are the rule and law of all the power and virtues which form the essence of the good Principle. Consequently, this recognizes that if people suffer, they must have had the power not to suffer. Truly, if the good Principle is essentially just and powerful, our troubles are an evident proof of our wrongdoing, and consequently, of our liberty. When we see people subjected to the action of evil, we may affirm that they have freely exposed themselves to it, and that they could have defended themselves against its influence and remained separate from it. Thus, let us not look for any other cause for their misfortunes but that of having voluntarily deviated from the good Principle with which they would have continually enjoyed peace and happiness. Let us apply the same reasoning to the evil Principle. If it evidently opposes the accomplishment of the law of unity of Beings, either on the material or the intellectual plane, it must itself be in a disordered situation. If bitterness and confusion follow in its wake, this principle is altogether without a doubt their object and agent, which causes us to say that it must be unceasingly subjected to the torment and horror that it creates around itself. But it suffers only because it is removed from the good Principle, for it is only from the instant when Beings are separated from this good Principle that they become unhappy. The sufferings of the evil Principle can only be a punishment because justice, being universal, must act upon it as it acts upon people; but if it experiences punishment, it has then freely deviated from the Law that was to have perpetuated its happiness. It is, therefore, voluntarily that it became evil. This is what induces us to say that if the author of evil had made a legitimate use of its liberty, it would never have separated itself from the good Principle, and evil would as yet be unborn. By the same reasoning, if it could today employ its will to its advantage and direct it toward the good Principle, it would cease to be evil, and evil would no longer exist. It will only be through the simple and natural succession of all these observations that people will ever succeed in definitely determining their ideas concerning the origin of evil, because if it is by allowing his will to degenerate that the intelligent and free Being acquires the knowledge and sentiment of evil, one must be assured that evil possesses no other principle, no other existence but the very same will of that free Being; that it is by this will alone that the Principle, becoming evil, originally gave birth to evil and similarly still creates it today. In a word, it is by this same will that people have acquired and acquire every day this fatal knowledge of evil by which they plunge themselves into darkness, whereas they were born only for the good and for the light. If so many questions relative to Liberty have been debated in vain and have so often been terminated by vaguely deciding that people are not susceptible to it, it is because the dependence and relations of this faculty of people with their will has not been observed, that one has been unable to perceive that this will was the only agent able to conserve or destroy liberty. In other words, in liberty we look for a stable, invariable faculty which unceasingly manifests in all of us, and which likewise cannot diminish or grow, and which we always have found awaiting our orders, whatever use we have made of it. But how is it possible to conceive of a faculty inherent in people which is nonetheless independent of their will, when this will constitutes its fundamental essence? And will not one necessarily agree that either liberty does not belong to people, or that they can exert their influence upon it by the good or evil use they make of it in the more or less proper regulation of their will? And, in fact, when observers desire to study liberty, they make it quite apparent to us that it must belong to humankind, because it is always in people that observers are obliged to follow its traces and characteristics. But when they persist in considering it without regard to humankind's will, is it not exactly as if they wish to attribute to people a faculty that existed in them but was foreign to them; which belonged to them, but upon which they had neither any influence nor any power? Is there anything more absurd and contradictory? Is it surprising that one discovers nothing by observing in this manner? And will we ever be able to make pronouncements on our own nature after such weak research? If the enjoyment of Liberty did not in any way depend upon the use of the will; if people could never alter it by their weaknesses and unrestrained habits, I would then admit that all actions would thereby be fixed and uniform, and so there would not be, as there could never have been, any liberty for them. But if this faculty cannot be such as the observers conceive and would require it to be; if its force can vary at all times; if it can be nullified by inaction as well as by a sustained exercise and a too constant practice of the same acts, then one cannot deny that it belongs to us, is within us, and that we consequently have the power to strengthen and weaken it; and this by the sole right of our Being and by the privilege of our will - in other words, according to the good or evil use we voluntarily make of the laws imposed upon us by our nature. Another error that has caused the rejection of liberty by these observers is that they have desired to prove it to themselves by the very action resulting from it; thus, to satisfy them, it would be necessary that an act be and not be at the same time, which is evidently impossible. From this they have concluded that everything that happens must necessarily have happened, and, consequently, that there was no liberty. But they should have noticed that the act, and the will that had conceived it, can only conform, and not be opposed to each other; that a power that has produced its act cannot arrest its effect; and finally that liberty, taken even in its commonly accepted meaning, does not consist in being able to do one and the other at the same time, but to be able to do one and the other alternately. Whereas, were it only to be taken in this meaning, humankind would be proof enough of what is generally called its liberty, since people obviously do one or the other in their different and successive actions and are the only beings in nature who are not always obliged to walk along the same path. But it would be strangely misleading not to conceive of another idea of liberty, because it is true, this contradiction in the actions of a Being proves that there are disorder and confusion in her faculties, but it does not at all prove that she is free, since it always remains to be discovered whether or not she freely gives herself over to evil as well as good. And it is partly from having wrongly defined liberty that this point is still covered with the most profound darkness for the majority of people. Therefore, I will say that the true faculty of a free Being is to be able, by his own efforts, to maintain himself in the law prescribed to him, and to conserve his strength and independence by voluntarily resisting the obstacles and the objects that tend to prevent him from acting in conformity with this Law. This necessarily carries with it the faculty of failing in the attempt, because so doing only requires that he cease his desire to resist opposition. Then, one must judge if, in the darkness surrounding us, we can delude ourselves on our ability to always reach our goal with the same facility. If, on the contrary, we do not feel that the least negligence adds infinitely to this task by increasing the thickness of the veil that covers us, then, turning our eyes for a moment upon humankind in general, we will discover that if people can degrade and weaken their liberty at all times, likewise humanity is presently less free than it was in its early days, and, continuing a step further, less free than before its birth. Then, it is no longer either in the present state of people or in their daily actions that we must find the light to decide upon their true liberty, since nothing is more rare today than to see any of its effects in a pure state and entirely independent of causes that are foreign to it. But it would be more than senseless to reach the conclusion that liberty had never been numbered among our rights. The chains of a slave prove, I know, that she can no longer act in accordance with the full scope of her natural forces, but they do not prove that she never could. On the contrary, they proclaim that she still could, had she never deserved to be held in servitude, because were it impossible for her to recover the use of her forces, her chains would be neither a punishment nor a shame. At the same time, it would not be more reasonable to infer from the fact that people are so laboriously, so obscurely, and so rarely free today, that their actions are indifferent and that they are not obligated to fulfill the measure of good that is imposed upon them even in this state of servitude. The deprivation of people's liberty consists, in fact, of being unable to obtain by their own power the complete enjoyment of the advantages contained in the good for which they were created, but not in being able to approach evil without rendering themselves even more guilty, since it will be seen that their material body has been loaned to them solely to effect the continual comparison between the true and the false. The insensibility to which their negligence on this point leads them each day, will never be able to destroy their essence. Thus, it suffices that they had once strayed from the light to which they should have been attached, to render the succession of their errors inexcusable and to deny them any right to murmur against their sufferings. Yet it should be said that the observers have stammered so much on the subject of people's liberty, only because they have not yet realized the first notion of the nature of their will. Nothing proves it better than their continual search to determine how it functions. Not being able to surmise that its principle must be contained within itself, they have searched for it in exterior causes. Seeing in fact that here on Earth it was so often brought about by real or apparent motives, they have concluded that it did not act by itself and that it always needed a reason for its determination. But if this were so, could we be said to have a will, since far from being ours, it would always be subordinate to the different causes that continually act upon it? Is this not, then, going in circles and renewing the same errors that we have dissipated relative to liberty? In a word, saying that there exists no will without motive is to say that liberty is no longer a faculty that is a part of us, and that it has never been in our power to conserve it. So, reasoning in this way is to ignore the nature of the will which strictly proclaims a Being motivated by himself without the assistance of any other Being. Consequently, this multitude of objects and exterior motives that seduce and determine us so often today does not prove that we could not make use of our will without them, and that we would not be susceptible to liberty. It only proves that they can seize control of our will and nullify it when we offer no opposition. Because, with good faith one will agree that these exterior causes disturb and tyrannize us. Now, how could we feel and perceive this if we were not essentially created to act by ourselves and not through the attraction of these illusions? As to the manner in which the will can determine itself independently of the motives and the objects that are foreign to us, as much as this truth will seem certain to the person who will be willing to forget all that surrounds her and look within herself, so is it certain that the explanation of it is an impenetrable abyss for people and for any other Being whatsoever, since its presentation would necessitate giving substance to the immaterial. Of all researches, this would be the most detrimental to people, and the more apt to plunge them into ignorance and mental degradation, because it has no foundation and vainly makes use of all faculties inherent in them. Also, the lack of success that observers have had on this matter has only served to plunge into discouragement those who have had the imprudence to follow them and who have wanted to seek from them the return of the light their false course had removed. The wise person occupies herself to searching for the cause of that which has a cause, but she is too prudent and too enlightened to look for a cause where none exists. The will natural to people belongs in this category, since it is cause itself. For this reason, as long as people still have a will, and as long as it cannot be corrupted except by the evil use they make of it, I will continue to consider them as free, although also almost always enslaved. It is not for the person who is blind, frivolous, and without desire that I express such ideas, since he has only his eyes to guide him and judges things by what they are, not by what they have been. It would, therefore, be useless for me to present truths of this nature to him, since by comparing them with his obscure ideas, and with the judgments of his senses, he would only find shocking contradictions which would cause him to deny equally that which he had already conceived, and that which he would be made to conceive anew, and then to abandon himself to the disorder of his impressions and to follow the dead and obscure law of the animal without intelligence. But the person who has thought enough of herself and tried to understand herself, who has watched her habits, and, having already attempted to part the thick veil that envelops her, would be able to reap some fruits from these reflections. That person, I say, may open this book; I entrust it to her wholeheartedly with a view of strengthening the love she already has for the good. However, regardless of whose hands these writings might fall into, I exhort them not to seek the origin of evil anywhere but in the source I have indicated - in other words, in the corruption of the will of the Being or the Principle that has become evil. I will not hesitate to affirm that the efforts they would make to discover another cause for evil would be in vain. If it had a more stable and solid base, it would be as eternal and invincible as the good. If this degraded Being could produce anything other than acts of will, if it could form real and existent Beings, it would possess the same power as the good Principle. It is, therefore, the nonexistence of his works that makes us feel his weakness and which absolutely forbids all comparison between him and the good Principle, from which he has separated himself. It would be even more senseless to seek the origin of good elsewhere but in the good itself. After all, as we have just seen, if degraded Beings such as the evil Principle and people still have the right to be the cause of their own actions, how could we refuse this attribute to the good, which, as such, is the infinite source of all attributes, the very seed and essential agent of all that is perfect? It would, therefore, indicate a lack of common sense to look for the cause and origin of good outside of the good itself, since these exist and can only have their existence in the good Principle. I have already said enough to enable the reader to form a conception of the origin of evil. However, the exposition I have made of it obliges me, first, to give some ideas on the nature and state of the evil Principle before its corruption; and, second, to forestall any difficulty that could impede the very ones who pass as most enlightened on these subjects - namely, why the author of evil does not make use of its liberty to reconcile itself with the good Principle. But I will only pause for a moment on these subjects, so as not to interrupt my progress and stray too far from the limits prescribed to me. When stating that the evil Principle had become evil by the sole act of its will, I have implied that it was good before the instigation of this act. Now, was it then equal to this superior Principle that we have previously acknowledged? Without a doubt, no. It was good, without being its equal; it was inferior to it, without being evil. It had originated from this same superior Principle, and therefore it could not equal it, neither in strength nor in power; but it was good because the Being that produced it was goodness and perfection itself. Finally, it was also inferior because, not being the creator of its own law, it possessed the faculty of following or not following that which had been imposed on it by its origin; and it was thus exposed to the opportunity of separating itself from this law and becoming evil, while the superior Principle, possessing its own law within itself necessarily remains in the good that constitutes it, without ever being able to tend towards any other end. As to the second subject, I have made it known that if the author of evil made use of its liberty to rejoin the good Principle, it would cease to suffer and be evil, and from then on evil would no longer exist. But every day one perceives by its works that it is as though enchained to its criminal will, so that it does not produce a single act that does not aim to perpetuate confusion and disorder. It is on this point that fatalists believed they had triumphed, pretending that evil carries within itself the reason and necessity for its existence; thus, they plunge people into discouragement and despair, since, if evil is necessary, it is impossible to avoid its assaults and to conserve any hope for that peace and light which is the object of all our desires and searches. But let us refrain from adopting these errors, and let us destroy the dangerous consequences that follow in their wake by exposing the true cause for the duration of evil. By searching within ourselves, it will be easy for us to sense that one of the primary laws of universal justice 1s that there always exists an exact relationship between the nature of the punishment and that of the crime, which can only be accomplished by subjecting the transgressor to powerless acts, similar to those she has criminally produced and which, consequently, are opposed to the law from which she moved away. This is why the author of evil, having corrupted itself by the wrong use of its liberty, perseveres in the evil use of its will in the same way that it had conceived it, in other words, it never ceases to oppose the action and will of the good Principle, and in its vain efforts, it experiences a continuation of the same sufferings so that, in accordance with the laws of justice, it is in the commission of the crime itself that it encounters its own punishment. But, let us still add a few reflections upon such an important subject. If the good Principle is essential unity, if it is goodness, purity, and perfection itself, it cannot experience within itself division, contradiction, or defilement. It is therefore evident that the author of evil must have been entirely separated and rejected from it through the sole act of the opposition of its own will to the will of the good Principle so that, from then on, there could only be left to it an evil power and will, without either communication or participation from the good. Being a voluntary enemy of both the good Principle and the sole, eternal, and invariable rule, what good, what law could exist within the author of the evil Principle other than this rule, since it is impossible for a single Being to be good and evil at the same time, to produce simultaneously order and disorder, that which is pure and impure? Thus, one becomes easily convinced that by its complete separation from the good Principle, having necessarily drawn it away from all good, it was no longer in a condition to know or to produce any good. Henceforth, the exertion of its will could only produce actions without law or order, and an absolute opposition to good and truth. Thus, engulfed in its own darkness, it is not susceptible to any light from or any return to the good Principle; because before it could direct its desires toward the true light, knowledge of it should have been returned to the author of evil. It should be able to conceive a good thought, but how could a good thought originate in it, if its will and all its faculties are completely corrupted and impure? In short, from the moment that it does not have by itself any correspondence with the good, and it does not have the power either to know or to sense it, and the faculty and the freedom to return to the good are always without effect. This is what renders so horrible the deprivation to which it is condemned. Although by different means, the law of Justice performs likewise in people. It will also supply us with the lights that will guide us in the research we will have to make upon it. Any person of good faith, whose reason is not obscured or prejudiced will agree that the material life of humankind is filled almost continually with privation and suffering. Thus, in accordance with the ideas we have adopted upon Justice, it will be with good reason that we will consider the duration of this corporeal life as a period of punishment and expiation; but we cannot regard it as such, without forthwith thinking that there must have been for people a former and preferable state to that in which they find themselves today. We may say, that as much as their actual state is limited, painful, and sown with aversions, to the same extent the former must have been unlimited and filled with delights. Every one of their sufferings is an indication of the happiness they are missing; every one of their privations prove that they were created for enjoyment; every one of their subjections declare to them a former authority. In other words, the feeling that today they have nothing is the secret proof that in the past they had everything. We can form an idea of the happy estate formerly enjoyed by people by the painful realization of the appalling situation in which we find them today. At the present time they are not the master of their thoughts, and it is a torment for them to await those they desire and repel those they fear; from this we sense that they were made to own them and create them at will. It is easy, therefore, to understand the invaluable advantages attached to such a power. At present they only obtain peace and tranquility through infinite efforts and painful sacrifices. From this we conclude that they have been created to enjoy, perpetually and without effort, a state of calm and happiness and that the abode of peace had been their true home. Possessing the faculty to see all and know all, they nevertheless grovel in darkness, but in so doing they shudder at their ignorance and blindness. Is this not absolute proof that the light is their element? Finally, their bodies are subject to destruction, and, this death, of which they alone of all Beings in nature have any idea, is the most terrible step and the most humiliating act in their corporeal career and what they abhor the most. Why could not this law, so severe and frightful for people, enable us to conceive that their body had received a law infinitely more glorious, and therefore, must have enjoyed all the rights of immortality? Now then, where could this sublime state have originated that rendered people so noble and happy, if not in the intimate knowledge and continuous presence of the good Principle, since in it alone is to be found the source of all power and happiness? And why do people now languish in ignorance, weakness, and misery if it is not because they have separated themselves from this same Principle, which is the only light and the sole support of all Beings? At this point, when recalling what I have said previously concerning the justice of the first Principle and the liberty of Beings having originated from it, we will sense completely that if as a result of its crime, the evil Principle still experiences the suffering attendant to its rebellious will, so the actual suffering of people is only the natural consequence of their first mistake; similarly this mistake could only be the result of the freedom of people, who, having conceived a thought against the supreme Law, adhered to it through their own will. In accordance with the knowledge of the relationship that exists between the crime and the suffering of the evil Principle, I could, by observing their analogy, indicate the nature of the crime of the original person by the nature of this person's punishment. I could even, in this way, appease the murmurings continually heard relative to our being condemned to participate in his punishment although not having participated in his crime. But these truths would be despised by most people, and appreciated by so few that I believe that I would be committing an error in exposing them to full view. I will content myself therefore in pointing the way to my readers through a figurative picture presenting the glory of people in their former state and the sufferings to which they have been exposed since their deprivation. There is no origin higher than that of people, as they are older than any Being in Nature; they existed before the birth of the smallest of primary forms, and yet they only came into existence after them. But what elevated them well above all these Beings is that they had to be born of a father and a mother, and humankind had no mother. Moreover, their function was absolutely inferior to his; whereas that of humankind was always to fight, so as to eliminate disorder and return all to Unity, that of those Beings was to obey people. But as the combats in which people had to engage could be very dangerous for them, they were protected by an impenetrable armor which they could put to varied usage at will, and from which they even had to form copies absolutely equal and conforming to their model. Moreover, the original human was equipped with a spear composed of four metals, so well amalgamated that ever since the existence of the world, it has never been possible to separate them. This spear possessed the property of burning like fire itself; moreover, it was so sharp that nothing was impenetrable to it, and it was so accurate that it always struck at two places simultaneously. All these advantages, added to an infinity of gifts that humankind had received at the same time, rendered the original human truly strong and formidable. The Land where this original human had to engage in combat was covered with a forest composed of seven trees, of which each one had sixteen roots and four hundred ninety branches. Their fruits, being renewed continually, furnished him with the most excellent food, and the trees themselves, used as entrenchments, rendered his Post practically inaccessible. It is in this place of delights, the abode of humanity's happiness and the throne of its glory, that he would have been forever happy and invincible; because, having received orders to occupy the center, he could easily observe all that transpired around him from this point, thus enjoying the advantage of perceiving all the approaches and stratagems of his adversaries, without ever being seen by them. Therefore, during all the time he remained at his post, he maintained his natural superiority. He enjoyed a peace and tasted of a happiness that words cannot express to the people of today. But, as soon as he left his post, he ceased being its master, and another Agent was sent to take his place. Then, after having been disgracefully deprived of all his rights, the original human was flung headlong into the region of the fathers and mothers, where humanity has remained ever since, in the sorrow and affliction of seeing itself indiscriminately mixed with all the other Beings in Nature. pAl|

It is impossible to conceive of a more sorrowful and deplorable state than that of this unfortunate original human at the moment of his fall; for, not only did he immediately lose that formidable spear which no obstacle could resist, but the very armor that had covered him also disappeared and was replaced for a while by another armor which, not being impenetrable as the first one, became a source of continuous danger for him, so that, always having to wage the same combat, he was infinitely more exposed. However, in punishing humankind this way, his Father did not wish to deprive the original human of all hope and abandon him to the rage of his enemies. Touched by his repentance and shame, the Father promised him that he could, by his own efforts, recover his former estate; but this could only be accomplished after he had been granted the right to regain possession of that spear he had lost and which had been entrusted to the Agent who had replaced humankind in the very center it had just abandoned. It is therefore in the search for this incomparable spear that people have since had to occupy themselves and must occupy themselves every day. It is by this spear alone that they can secure the return of their rights and obtain all favors for which they were created. One must not be surprised at the resources remaining to the original human after his crime; it was the hand of a Father that punished him, and it was also the tenderness of a Father that watched over him, even when Its Justice removed him from Its presence. Since the place from which people came is regulated with so much wisdom, people, by retracing their steps along the same path that led them astray, can be certain to return to the central point of the forest, which is the only place where they can enjoy any peace and strength. In fact, having strayed by going from four to nine, people will never find their path of return except by going from nine to four. Besides, it would be wrong for them to complain of this inescapable rule; such is the Law imposed upon all Beings that inhabit the region of the fathers and mothers; and since people descended to it voluntarily, it is then necessary that they experience all the sorrows attached to it. This Law is terrible, I know, but it is nothing compared to the Law of the number fifty-six, a frightening Law; terrible for those who have exposed themselves to it, for they will only be able to arrive at sixty-four after they have experienced it in all its rigor. Such is the allegorical story of humankind: what they were at their origin and what they became after departing from their first Law. I have endeavored by this tableau to lead people to the source of all their troubles and to indicate to them, although in a mysterious way, the means necessary to remedy their condition. I must add that, although their crime and that of the evil Principle are equally the fruit of their evil desire, nevertheless it must be remarked that these crimes, one and the other, are of a very different nature and consequently they cannot be subjected to equal punishment nor attain to the same results. After all, Justice evaluates even the difference in the locations where their crimes have been committed. Therefore, people and the evil Principle are thus continually faced with their crimes, but they have neither the same help nor the same consolation. I have previously given to understand that by itself, the evil Principle can only persevere in its rebellious will until communication with the good be returned to it. But people, in spite of their condemnation, can appease Justice itself, reconcile themselves with truth, and savor its delights from time to time as if, somehow, they were not separated from it. It is true, nevertheless, to say that the crime of one as the crime of the other can only be penalized through deprivation. The sole difference exists only in the measure of this punishment. It is even more certain that this deprivation is the most terrible torment, and the only one that really could subjugate people. Pretending to lead us to Wisdom by this frightening picture of corporeal sufferings in a future life has been a great mistake, as a picture means nothing if we do not experience it. Now, these blind Masters must necessarily have little influence on us since the torment they describe can only be the product of their own imagination. If they had at least taken care to picture for humankind the remorse they must experience when they manifest evil, it would have been easier to reach them, because here on Earth it is possible for us to experience this sorrow. But how much happier would they have made us, and given us a more worthy idea of our Principle, had they been exalted enough to tell people that this Principle, being love itself, punishes people solely through love. At the same time, being love only, there is nothing left for people when it removes love from them. It is by this explanation that they would have enlightened and sustained people in making them feel that nothing should frighten them more than ceasing to experience the love of this Principle, since they do experience non-entity; and certainly, this non-entity that people can experience at any time, if presented to them in all its horror, would be an idea more effective and salutary for them, than that of those eternal torments to which, in spite of the doctrine of those ministers of blood, people always perceive an end and never a beginning. The assistance accorded to humanity for its rehabilitation, however precious it may be, nevertheless depends upon very rigorous conditions. And truly, the more glorious the rights that people lost, the more they must suffer to recover them. Finally, being subjected by their crime to the law of time, they cannot avoid experiencing its painful effects, because, having through their own will opposed all the obstacles pertaining to time, the Law demands that people cannot obtain anything, except in the measure that they experience and surmount them. It is at the moment of humanity's corporeal birth that one witnesses the beginning of the troubles which await them. It is then that they show all the signs of the most shameful reprobation. They are born like a vile insect in corruption and filth; they are born amidst the suffering and cries of their mother, as if it were a disgrace for her to give birth. Now, what a lesson it is for the child to realize that for all mothers, childbirth is the most painful and the most dangerous! But no sooner does the child take her first breath that she is covered with tears and tormented by the most acute pains. The first steps that she takes in life proclaim that she has come only to suffer and that she is truly the child of crime and sorrow. If, on the contrary, humanity had not been guilty, birth would have been the first feeling of happiness and peace. Seeing the light, the child would celebrate its splendor by transports of rapture and tributes of praises directed towards the Principle of his happiness. Not troubled regarding the legitimacy of his origin, without anxiety concerning the stability of his fate, he would have enjoyed all of its delights because he would have known and experienced its advantages. 0, Humanity! Shed bitter tears on the enormity of thy crime, which has so horribly changed thy condition. Tremble at the thought of the fatal decree that condemns thy posterity to be born in torment and humiliation when it should have known only glory and continuous happiness. From the first years of their elementary existence, a person's situation becomes much more frightening, because she has as yet only experienced bodily suffering, whereas now she will experience mental suffering. As her corporeal envelope has been, until now, the target of the force of elements before having acquired the minimum strength necessary for her defense, so her thoughts will be beset at an age when, not having yet exercised her will, error can most easily seduce her, carrying its attacks through a thousand paths, even to the source, to corrupt the tree in its roots. It is certain that a person then commences a career so painful and perilous that if succor did not follow the same progression for him, he should infallibly succumb. But the same hand that has given him birth neglects nothing for his preservation. In proportion to his advancement in age, as the obstacles multiply and oppose the exercise of his faculties, so in the same proportion his corporeal envelope acquires consistency. In other words, his new armor gains strength and becomes more powerful against the attacks of his enemies, until at last - the intellectual temple of the person having been erected - this envelope becomes useless and destroys itself, leaving the edifice revealed and beyond reach. It is therefore evident that this material body which covers us, is the organ of all our misfortunes. Therefore, it is this body which, forming dense limitations to our sight and all our faculties, keeps us in deprivation and suffering. Therefore, I must no longer conceal that the joining of a person to that gross envelope is the very penalty to which she has been subjected temporally by her crime, since we see the horrible effects it causes her to experience from the moment it covers her to the moment it is removed from her. This is how the trials are commenced and perpetuated, without which a person cannot re-establish her former connection with the Light. But in spite of the shadows which this material body spreads around us, we are also obliged to admit that it serves as a protection and safeguard against the dangers surrounding us, and that, without this envelope we would be infinitely more exposed. This, undoubtedly, has been the understanding of wise people throughout the ages. Their primary concern has been to guard themselves ceaselessly against the illusions presented by this body. They have despised it, because it is despicable by its nature; they have feared it, because of the fatal effects of the attacks to which it exposed them, and they have all known perfectly well that, for them, it was the way of error and falsehood. But experience has also taught them that it is the channel through which people receive the knowledge and the lights of Truth; they have sensed that since it serves us as a coverage, and our thought is not even ours, it is necessary that our ideas, all originating externally, reach us through this envelope, and that our corporeal senses be its first organs. Now, it is in relation to this subject that people, through their quick and superficial judgments, began to abandon themselves to the fatal errors that have produced the most horrible ideas in their imagination. From this the materialists have derived that humiliating system of sensations that brings people down beneath the level of the beast, since the latter, never receiving more than one impulse at a time, is not apt to go astray. On the contrary, after having been placed between opposites, people could, according to this opinion, abandon themselves indifferently to all the impressions that would affect them while remaining at peace. But according to the lights of justice that we have already recognized in humankind, it is impossible for us to adopt those degrading opinions. We have demonstrated that a person, being in charge of his own conduct, must account for all his actions. I certainly would not at present permit him to be deprived of such a sublime privilege that elevates him so far above all creatures. Nothing, therefore, will prevent me from assuring my fellow people that this error is the most astute and dangerous ruse that could have been employed to arrest them in their course and lead them astray. It would create the most hopeless incertitude for a traveler to encounter two opposite roads without knowing where they would lead her. However, by observing the road she has already traveled, recalling her point of departure and that which is her goal, she would perhaps be able to arrive at a decision and make the right choice by combining the results of her observations. But if someone appeared before her and informed her that it was absolutely useless to take so much trouble to determine the true road, that those offered to her view led equally to her destination and that she could follow one or the other indifferently, then the traveler's situation would become more vexatious and embarrassing than when she was limited to her own counsel. It would really be impossible for her to deny the opposition she would perceive between these two roads. 2D

The first impression that would then come to her mind would be to guard against the advice given her and to persuade herself that an attempt was being made to entrap her. Such is, however, the actual situation of humankind, relative to the obscurities that the authors of the systems of sensations have spread over their careers. Proclaiming to a person that he has no other law than that of his senses, and that he can have no other guide, is to tell him that he would attempt in vain to make a choice among the objects his senses present to him, since these senses themselves are subject to variance in their action. Thus, being unable to direct the nature of this action, this person would attempt uselessly to direct its courses and its effects. But like the traveler, people cannot refute their own conviction. They truly perceive that the senses bring everything to them, but at the same time, they are forced to admit that among the things the senses bring to them, some are good and some are evil. Why, therefore, should people distrust those who would divert them from making a choice, by insinuating that all these things are either indifferent or of the same nature? Should they not resent this insinuation with the most vigorous indignation and set themselves on guard against such dangerous masters? It is nevertheless, I repeat, the common attempt which is made against the thought of people; it is at the same time the most fascinating and that which the evil Principle draws upon to the best advantage. If it is possible to hold a person to the conviction that she does not have any choice to make among things of the environment, it could easily be conveyed to her the horrible uncertainty and disorder in which she has found herself involved by the privation which is the whole Law. But if Justice always watches over a person, it must be that it is for him the means of discerning the stratagems of his enemy, and of frustrating, when he wishes, all of his enterprises, without which he would only be punished by being taken by surprise. These means are well founded upon its own nature, which cannot provide more changes than the same nature of the Principle from which it comes. Thus, its own essence will be incompatible with falsehood, making known to it sooner or later its misuse and restoring it naturally to Truth. I will employ, therefore, these same means which to me are common to all people so as to show them the danger and absurdity of that injurious belief to their good fortune and which is suitable only to overwhelm them in wickedness and despair. I have sufficiently proven by our sufferings that we are undisciplined; also I address myself to the Materialists and I ask how they can blind themselves sufficiently so as to see in a person a mere machine? I desire at least that they will have the great benefit of seeing an active machine and to experience it from its Principle of action, for if it were purely passive it would receive all and produce nothing. In that case, as soon as it manifests some activity, it has at least the power within it to make this manifestation, and I do not believe that anyone maintains this power by sensations. Moreover, I believe that without this innate power in humankind, it would be impossible either for a person to acquire or to preserve the knowledge of each thing, which can undoubtedly be observed in Beings lacking in discernment. It is clear, therefore, that people carry within them the seeds of light and of truths of which they so frequently offer testimony. And would there be anything more to overthrow these rash principles by which one is intended to be degraded? I know that at first consideration, it could be pointed out to me that not only animals, but all corporeal Beings also perform an exterior action, from which it should be concluded that all these Beings have something within themselves, and are not mere machines. Then, I will be asked, what is the difference between their Principle of action and that which is in people? That difference will be easily perceived by those willing to observe it carefully, and my readers will recognize it with me by fixing their sight for a moment on the cause of this error. Certain Beings are intelligent only; others are sensate only. Humankind is one and the other at the same time. In this lies the answer to the enigma. These different classes of Beings each possess a different Principle of action. Humankind alone possesses both, and whosoever does not confuse them will be certain to discover the solution to all difficulties. Due to his origin, people have enjoyed all the rights of an intelligent Being, although they are clothed in an envelope, because there is not a single being that can exist without one in the temporal world. And now, having already hinted at it, I will hereby willingly admit that the impenetrable armor of which I have previously spoken was none other than this first envelope of humankind. Why was it impenetrable? It was because, being invariable and simple by reason of the superiority of its nature, it could not be subject to decomposition, and the law of elementary assemblage had absolutely no power over it. Since its fall, humanity has found itself clothed in a corruptible envelope. Because of its complexity, it is subject to the different actions of the senses which only operate in succession and consequently destroy one another. Yet, by their subjection to the senses, people have not lost their quality as intelligent Beings, so that they are simultaneously great and small, mortal and immortal, always free in the intellectual but bound to the corporeal by laws independent of their will; in a word, being an assemblage of two diametrically opposed Natures, people alternately demonstrate their effects in a manner so distinct that it is impossible to misinterpret them. If a modern-day person only had material senses, as the human systems endeavor to establish, one would always perceive the same characteristics in all her actions, and it would be that of the senses. In other words, like beasts, whenever she became excited by her corporeal desires, she would make every effort to satisfy them without ever resisting their impulses, except to surrender to a stronger impulse, which by now must be considered the only active one, and, always originating from the senses, which manifests in the senses and always pertains to the senses. Why then can a person depart from the Law of the senses? Why can he refuse to yield to their demands? Why, when pressed by hunger, is he nevertheless still the master and free to refuse the most delicious dishes proffered to him? Why allow himself to be tormented, overcome, even destroyed by want, and this while in full view of that which would be the most likely to pacify him? Why, I repeat, is there within people a will by which they can oppose their senses, if there is not within each of them more than one Being? And, can two such contrary actions, although manifesting together, be derived from the same source? In vain would a person protest to me that when her will acts thus, it is because it is determined by some motive. I have given sufficient explanation when speaking of liberty, that the will of a person, being a cause itself, must have the privilege to determine things by itself alone and without motive. Otherwise, it could not assume the designation of will. But, supposing that in the case under consideration her will was, in effect, determined by a motive. The existence of the two Natures of humankind would nonetheless be evident as it would always be necessary to seek the motive elsewhere rather than in the action of the senses, since her will manifests contrary to it. Even though her body endeavors always to exist and live, a person can desire that it suffer, exhaust itself, and die. This dual action of humankind is therefore a convincing proof that there exists within each person more than one Principle. On the other hand, Beings that are sensate only ever exhibit the attributes inherent to their being. It is necessary, in truth, that they have the power to convey and manifest whatever the sensations produce in them; otherwise, all that would be communicated to them would be nothing and would produce no effect. But I have no fear of being mistaken when I state that the most beautiful affections of animals, their most orderly actions, never go beyond the sensate. Animals have, in common with all Beings in Nature, individuality to preserve, and along with the life they receive, all the powers necessary to attain that object, in spite of the dangers to which they must be exposed according to their species during the course of their existence, be it in the means by which they procure their food, be it in the circumstances that accompany their reproduction, and in all the other events that multiply and vary according to the classes of these Beings, as it does for each individual. But I ask if one has ever perceived in animals any action that did not have for its sole end their corporeal well-being, and if they have ever manifested anything that was a true indication of intelligence? What deceives most people in this regard is to observe that among animals, there are several that are susceptible to being trained in performing acts that are not natural to them; they learn, they remember, they even at times act according to what they have learned and what their memory recalls to them. This observation could in fact hinder us but for the principles we have established. I have said that when animals manifest something outwardly in any way, it was necessary for them to have an active inner Principle, without which they would not exist. But this Principle I have declared as having only the sensate as a guide and the conservation of the corporeal body as an object. A person either beats or feeds animals, and it is by these two methods that he succeeds in training them and thereby directs them at will. As the active Principle of the animal tends toward the maintenance of its Being, it is only with effort that it is prompted to carry out acts it would never have performed had it been left to its own Law. A person, through fear or the appeal of food, urges and obliges the animal to extend and augment its action. It is therefore evident that this Principle, being active and sensible, is susceptible to receiving impressions. If it can receive impressions, it can also conserve them, as to do so requires only that the same impression remains and continues its action. Then, receiving and conserving impressions is, in effect, to prove that the animal is susceptible to habit. We can, therefore, safely recognize that the active Principle of animals is capable of acquiring the habit of different acts through the industry of people; for be it in the acts that the animal performs naturally, be it in those for which it is trained, one cannot perceive either any conduct or any combination in which the sensible was not the aim and motive of all. Now, then, whatever marvels the animal displays before my eyes, I will certainly find it very admirable, but my admiration will not go so far as to recognize in it an intelligent Being, whereas, I see only in it a sensible Being since, after all, the sensible is not intelligent. To better understand the difference between animals and intelligent Beings, it is necessary to consider the classes existing below this same animal, such as the plants and the mineral. When these inferior classes produce exterior acts such as growth, fructification, generation, and so on, we cannot doubt that they have in common with the animal an active Principle innate in them, and from which emanates all their different actions. Nevertheless, although we perceive in them a living Law which tends forcefully to its accomplishment, we have never seen them exhibit the least sign of pain, pleasure, fear, or desire-all of these emotions being characteristic of animals. From this we can state that, as there exists a considerable difference between animals and inferior Beings in their Principles, although they both have the vegetative faculty, so humankind has in common with animals an active Principle, susceptible to corporeal and sensate affections, but a person is essentially distinguished by her intellectual Principle, which eliminates all comparison between her and animals. Humankind has been thought to be no different from the inferior and sensate Principle to which it is attached for a limited time. There has been, therefore, confusion concerning the different links composing present-day people due solely to the concept of universal concatenation in which a Being is always linked to the one following it and the one preceding it. What confidence, then, can we have in those systems which the imagination of humankind has created regarding such matters when we see them erected upon a base so evidently false? And what stronger proof can we desire than that of feeling and experience? At this time, I will enter into some detail concerning the distinctions and concatenations of the three kingdoms of nature, and I will endeavor to substantiate the principles we have just established regarding the differences in Beings, no matter what their affinities. I warn, however, that these discussions are unrelated to people, and it is unfortunate that they feel the need of these proofs to understand themselves and to believe in their own nature, since it carries in itself much more visible proof than they can discover in their observations upon sensate and material objects. Human science does not furnish any positive rule for the orderly classification of the three kingdoms. It will never be possible to arrive at a correct classification except by following an order that conforms to Nature. In this case, it is first necessary to include in the rank of animals all corporeal Beings that carry within themselves the whole of the Principle of their fructification. Consequently, by having only one principle, they do not need to be joined to the earth to cause this action, but obtain their corporeal form by the heat of the female of their species. They acquire it either in the womb of that same female or by the exterior heat she communicates to them, as happens in the fructification of oviparous animals either by acquiring it by the heat of the sun or by some other heat. Secondly, it is necessary to place within the rank of plants all Beings that, having their generative organ in the earth, fructify by the action of two agents and manifest a production either outside of, or within, this same earth. Finally, one must consider as minerals all Beings that have their generative organ in the earth and obtain their growth and vegetation therefrom. But, being a product of the action of three agents, they cannot exhibit any sign of reproduction, because they are only passive, and the three actions that constitute them are not of their own being. After establishing these rules, it is necessary to observe whether a Being secures its substance from the elements of the earth or if it exists upon the products of the earth so as to ascertain whether it is plant or animal. If it is attached to the earth, and dies when detached from it, it is plant. If it is not bound to this same earth, although feeding upon its products, it is animal, no matter what its means of corporeality. I know the difference between plants and minerals is infinitely more difficult to ascertain than the difference between plants and animals, because there exists between plants and minerals so great an affinity, and, moreover, they have so many faculties in common, that it is not always easy to separate them. This difficulty arises from the fact that the differences between the species of all corporeal Beings always occur in a quaternary geometrical proportion. In the true order of all things, the higher the degree of the powers is raised, the more the power is weakened, because it is then further removed from the primary power from which all subsequent powers are emanated. Thus, the first phases of the progression, being closer to the root phase, possess more active properties from which, consequently, more sensate effects result and are thereby more easily distinguished. As this force in the faculties diminishes to the same degree that the phases of the progression multiply, it becomes clear that the results of the final phases must show only somewhat imperceptible nuances. This is why it is more difficult to distinguish between minerals and plants than between plants and animals, because it is within the mineral that is found the final phase of the progression of created things. It is necessary to apply the same principle to all Beings that seem to be intermediary between the different kingdoms and appear to connect them, because the progression of numbers is continuous and without limit or separation. To thoroughly know the power of any phases whatsoever of the progression under consideration, it would at least be necessary to know one of the roots, and this is one of the things that humanity lost when it was deprived of its first estate. In fact, nowadays people do not know the root of any number, because they do not know the first of all roots, as will be seen subsequently. It is equally necessary to apply the principle of the quaternary progression to Beings that are above matter, because it can be observed with the same exactitude and in a manner even more noticeable, in that they are not so far removed from the primary phase of this progression. But few people would understand me in the application I could make of it to this class; thus, my intent and obligations prevent me from speaking about it openly. If people had a chemistry by which they could know the true Principles of bodies without decomposing them, they would see that fire is the property of animals, water is the property of plants, and earth is the property of minerals. They would then have even more certain signs by which to recognize the true nature of Beings, and they would no longer be embarrassed in discerning their rank and class. I will not pause to call to people attention to the notion that these three elements, which must serve as signs in separating the different kingdoms, cannot exist separately and independently of the other two. I presume that this concept is common enough so that I do not have to recall here that although fire predominates in the animal, water and earth must also necessarily exist as is the case in the other two kingdoms, where the dominant Principle must of necessity be accompanied by the other two Principles. This observation applies with the same accuracy to all minerals, even mercury, although certain alchemists do not find any fire in it. But they should give their attention to the fact that the mineral mercury has of yet only received the second operation and therefore, although it has within itself an elementary fire as have all corporeal Beings, this fire is insensate until a superior fire agitates it-this being the third operation that I will demonstrate as necessary to complete all corporeality. This is why mercury, although having an elementary fire, is nevertheless the coldest body in nature. I repeat, I have allowed myself to go into so much detail solely to defend the nature of humankind. I have desired to show to those who degrade people by including them indiscriminately with t animals that, in this regard, they fall into an unpardonable error even when considering the purely elementary Beings, since we perceive infinite differences from one kingdom to another, although all these kingdoms do possess fundamental similarities. We see that in all classes, the inferior has no part of that which manifests in a particular manner within the superior. Thus, since we have not perceived any signs of intelligence in corporeal Beings lower than people, we cannot deny acknowledging that, here on Earth, humans are the only beings favored with this sublime advantage, even though by their elementary form, they find themselves subject to the sensate and to all the material emotions of the animal. Therefore, those who have attempted to deprive humankind of its most sublime rights, by using as a basis for their conclusions humankind's subjection and connections to the corporeal body which envelops it, have simply presented as proof a truth that we recognize as well as they do, as we all know that people do not receive any light except through the senses. But they have remained in darkness because they have not pursued their observations further, and they have thus drawn the multitude into the darkness with them. In the unfortunate condition of modern people, no idea can, in fact, make itself felt within them, except when being received by the senses. It must also be admitted that, not being always able to control the objects and the Beings that act upon their senses, they cannot hereby be held responsible for the ideas originating within them. Therefore, recognizing that we have a good Principle and an evil Principle, and consequently, a Principle of good thoughts and a Principle of evil thoughts, we should not be surprised to find that people cannot avoid sensing them when exposed to one or the other. This is what has caused observers to believe that all our thoughts and intellectual faculties had no other origin than that of our senses. But by blending into one single Being the two Beings which compose contemporary people, and not having perceived in them these two opposed actions that manifest so clearly the different Principles thereof, they only recognize in them one sort of sense, and they vaguely regard all manifestations as having derived from their faculty of feeling. However, in keeping with what we have disclosed, we need only open our eyes to recognize that modem people, having within themselves two different Beings to control and, in fact, not being able to know the needs of one or the other except through the senses, this faculty must of necessity be dual, since they themselves are dual. Moreover, what person is blind enough not to discover within himself a sensory a2

faculty relative to the intellectual, and a sensory faculty relative to the corporeal? And should it not be admitted that this distinction, taken from Nature itself, would have clarified all errors? Nevertheless, I must say that in this work I shall make use of the words senses and sensibilities in their corporeal connotation most of the time, and when I shall speak of the intellectual senses it will be in such a way that it is impossible for anyone to confuse one with the other. Secondly, from whatever point of view observers have considered the sensory faculty of people, had they better weighed their system they would have seen that our senses are really the organs of our thoughts, but not their origin. This undoubtedly constitutes too great a difference to render it excusable for one not to have perceived it. Yes, such is our torment that no thought can reach us immediately and without the help of our senses, which are necessary organs in our present state, but if we have recognized in people an active and intelligent Principle that so perfectly distinguishes them from other Beings, that Principle must have within itself its own faculties. Whereas, the only one, the usage of which has remained with us in our painful situation, is that innate will within us that people had enjoyed during their glory and which they still enjoy after their fall. Since it is through this faculty that people went astray, it is through the sole force of this will that they can hope to be reestablished in their primal rights. It is this will which absolutely preserves them from any attempt to plunge them over the precipice, and it preserves them from belief in that nothingness to which their nature would be reduced. In other words, it is through this will that people, unable to prevent good and evil from communication with them, are nonetheless responsible for the usage they make of this will in relation to either one. They cannot avoid being offered, but they can choose and choose well; and at this time, I will not furnish any proof other than that when people suffer and are punished, it is because they have chosen wrongly. The intelligent reader for whom I write cannot ignore that the torment and suffering of which I desire to speak are of a very different nature from the passing misfortune, either corporeal or conventional, that are the only ones known to the multitude. Therefore, all the attacks that have been directed against the dignity of people are no longer of any value to us; otherwise, it would be necessary to destroy the basic and most solid foundation of Justice that we previously established, as well as the invariable concepts that we know to be common to all people, and which no intelligent and reasonable Being could ever revoke by reason of doubt. I will not stop to examine whether in the ordinary conduct of people, their will always awaits a decisive reason to determine itself, or whether it is directed by the sole attraction of emotion. I believe it is susceptible to both motives, and I will say that, for the regularity of their progress, people must not exclude either of these two means. To the extent that reflection without sentiment would render people cold and immovable, to that same extent sentiment without reflection would be apt to lead them astray. But I repeat, these questions are extraneous to my subject, and I believe them to be improper and fruitless. Thus, I leave to the school of metaphysics the task of discovering how the will determines itself and acts. It is sufficient for people to recognize that it always acts freely, that this freedom is an additional misfortune for them and the reason for all their sufferings whenever they abandon the Laws that should direct it. Let us return to our subject. Although we have recognized that all Beings necessarily have something within themselves, without which they would not have either life, existence, or action, we do not admit that they all have the same thing. Even though this Law of an innate Principle is unique and universal, we will certainly refrain from saying such Principles are equal and act uniformly in all Beings since, on the contrary, our observations cause us to recognize an essential difference between them, and especially between the innate Principles within the three material kingdoms and the sacred Principle with which humankind alone is favored among all the Beings composing this Universe. Therefore, this superiority of the active and intelligent Principle in people must no longer surprise us, if we remember the property of this quaternary progression that fixes the rank and the faculties of Beings and ennobles their essence in proportion to their proximity to the primary phase of the progression. People are the second power of this universal primary generative phase, whereas the active Principle of matter is only the third. Is anything more needed to recognize that it is absolutely impossible to acknowledge any equality between them? Therefore, the source of the systems injurious to people arises from the fact that their authors have not distinguished the nature of our emotions. On one hand they have attributed to our intellectual Being the movements of the sensate Being, and on the other hand, they have confused the acts of the intelligence with material impulsions, limited in their principles as in their effects. It is not surprising that having thus distorted people, they discover in them a resemblance to the animal, and that alone is what they find in them. It is not surprising, I repeat, that having stifled all ideas and reflections within people by this means, far from enlightening them upon good and evil, they continuously keep them in doubt and ignorance regarding their own nature, since they obliterate from their eyes the only difference that could shed any light upon it. But, after having indicated as we have that people were both intelligent and sensate, we must observe that these two different faculties must necessarily manifest within them through different ways and signs, and that the emotions which are particular to them, being not at all the same, cannot in any way manifest in the same manner. The primary object of a person should therefore be to continually observe the infinite difference that is found between these two faculties and between the emotions characterizing them. Since they manifest together in nearly all these actions, nothing can appear more important to a person than distinguishing accurately that which belongs to one or the other. In fact, during the short span of a person's corporeal life, the intellectual faculty, being joined to the sensory faculty, can receive absolutely nothing except through the channel of this sensory faculty; and in turn the inferior and sensory faculty must always be directed by the accuracy and regularity of the intellectual faculty. Consequently, one perceives that, in such an intimate union, if a person ceases to be on guard for an instant, she will be unable to distinguish between these two natures, and from then on, she will not know where to find the proofs of order and truth. Moreover, as each of these faculties is capable of receiving good impressions and evil impressions apart from the other, people are exposed at every instant to the danger of confusing not only the sensate with the intellectual, but also that which can be advantageous or harmful to one or the other. I shall examine the consequences and effects of this danger attached to the present situation of humankind. I shall unveil the errors to which people's negligence in discerning their different faculties have led them, as much upon the Principle of things as upon the works of Nature. I shall also discourse upon those works and principles that have come out of their own hands and imagination. Divine, intellectual and physical sciences, the civic and natural duties of people, the arts, legislation, any institutions or establishments, are all encompassed in the subject that occupies my attention. I do not even fear to say that I consider this inquiry to be an obligation for me, because if the ignorance and obscurity into which we have fallen regarding these important points are not part of people's essence, but instead the natural effects of their first errors and of all those that have proceeded from them, it is people's duty to attempt to turn once again toward the light they have abandoned. And if this knowledge was their lot before their fall, it has not been absolutely lost to them, since it continually flows from that inexhaustible source from which they originated. In other words, regardless of the state of obscurity in which they languish, if people can always hope to perceive the Truth, and if only courage and effort are needed for them to attain truth, it would be holding it in scorn not to make use of all the power within us to draw closer to it. The continual use I make in this work of the words faculties, actions, causes, principles, agents, properties, and virtues will undoubtedly reawaken the contempt and scorn of my century for the occult qualities. However, it would be unjust to apply this name to this doctrine solely because it offers nothing to the senses. That which is occult to the eyes of the body is that which they do not see; that which is occult to the intelligence is that which it does not conceive. In this sense, I ask if there is anything more occult to the eyes ai)

or to the intelligence than the notions generally received upon all the objects that I have just enumerated? They explain matter by matter; they explain people by the senses; they explain the Author of all things by the elementary Nature. Thus, the eyes of the body, seeing only assemblages, search in vain for the elementary Principles proclaimed to them, and not ever being able to perceive them, it is clear that they have been misled. A person sees in his senses the play of his organs, but does not recognize in them his intelligence. Finally, the visible Nature presents to the eyes the work of a great Artist, but by not offering to the intelligence the reason of things, it leads to ignorance of the Justice of the Master, the tenderness of the Father, and all the counsel of the Sovereign. Thus, one cannot deny that these explanations are absolutely nil and without truth, since they always need to be replaced by new explanations. If I only apply myself to further remove from all these objects the envelopes that have darkened them, if I but turn the thoughts of people solely upon the true Principle of all things, my progress is therefore less obscure than that of the observers. And, in fact, if they truly have any aversion to occult qualities, they should begin by changing their course, as most certainly there is no course more occult and dark than that in which they would lead us.

## Chapter 2 - Universal Source of Errors

Everything that I have said about people - considering their origin and first splendor, their impure will that caused his fall and the distressing situation in which they have placed themselves - will be confirmed by the observations that we will make concerning their conduct and the opinions that they create daily. One may make the same observations regarding the original purity, the degradation, and the actual torments of the Principle that has become evil. The course of all these deviations is uniform. The primary errors, those that have followed and those which will follow, have had, and will have everlastingly, the same causes. In other words, the errors of people and of all other Beings that are clothed with the privilege of Liberty must always be attributed to the evil will, because, as I have already said, it is necessary to consider the consequences so as to demonstrate that the principle of any action is legitimate. If a person is unhappy, she is unquestionably guilty, because she cannot be unhappy unless she is free. Undoubtedly, I could have been stopped at this proposition by having my attention drawn to the sufferings of animals, but that objection has not escaped me, and since I can demonstrate it without interrupting my subject, I will apply myself to that end before embarking upon my main theme. I know that, as a sensate Being, an animal suffers, and thus, in a way, it can be considered unfortunate. But I beg the reader to observe whether the description of "unfortunate" would not pertain with more reason to Beings who, knowing that they should be happy by their nature, experience inwardly the despair of not being happy. In this regard, it could not be applied to the animal that belongs here on Earth and is not created for any state of well-being other than that of the senses. Therefore, when the well-being of an animal is disturbed, it suffers without a doubt as a sensate Being, but it perceives nothing beyond its sufferings. It bears them and even attempts to stop them, but only through the action of the sense faculty, and without being able to realize that another condition may exist. In other words, the animal does not possess that which causes unhappiness in people, this remorse and the necessity of attributing its sufferings to itself as people do. How could it do so? It does not act by its own will, but rather, it is caused to act. However, it still remains to be determined why the animal suffers and why it is so often deprived of the sensate well-being that would make it happy in its own way. I could give the reason for this difficulty, were I permitted to expound upon the relationship of things and to show to what extent evil has gained through the errors of people. However, this is a point that I will simply indicate; and so for the present, it will suffice to say that the earth is no longer virgin, which exposes it and its fruits to all the evils resulting from the loss of Virginity. We can therefore state with reason that there cannot be any truly unhappy Being except a free Being, to which I will add that if a person has freely plunged himself into sorrow and suffering, this same freedom imposes upon him the continual obligation to work towards the reparation of his crime. The more he is negligent on this point, the more he will render himself guilty and, consequently, the more he will become unhappy. Let us return to our subject. To guide us in the important examination that we propose to undertake, and which is today essentially part of a person's appointed work, let us note that the principal cause of all our errors in the sciences is not having observed one Law of two distinct actions, which manifests universally in all Beings in Creation and often plunges people into uncertainty. However, we should not be surprised to see that each Being here on Earth is subject to this dual action, since we have previously recognized two very distinct natures or opposed Principles, whose power has manifested itself since the beginning of things and continually makes itself felt in all Creation. Of these two Principles, only one is real and truly necessary, since after One, we no longer are aware of anything. Thus, the second Principle, although requiring the action of the first in creation, can certainly have neither weight, number, nor measure, since these Laws belong to the very Essence of the first Principle. One, stable and permanent, possesses life within itself and by itself; the other, irregular and without law, possesses only apparent and illusory effects for the intelligence that would allow itself to be deceived. If, therefore, it is a dual reason that has been the cause of the birth and the temporal life of the Universe, as we are intimating, it is necessary that particular bodies follow the same Law and can neither reproduce themselves nor exist without the help of a dual action. However, the dual reason directing the bodies and all matter is not the same as that dual reason resulting from the opposition of the two Principles. This one is purely intellectual and only takes its source in the contrary will of these two Beings. When either one acts upon the sensate and the corporeal, it is always with an intellectual purpose in view, in other words, to destroy the intellectual action that is opposed to it. This does not apply to the dual action ruling over Nature. This dual nature is attached only to corporeal Beings and serves as much for their reproduction as for their preservation. It is pure, in that it is directed by a third action which renders it orderly. In other words, this is the necessary means established by the source of all powers for the construction of all its material works. Although there is nothing impure in this dual reason attached to all corporeal things, and neither one of the phases is evil, nevertheless, one of them is permanent and imperishable, and the other is only fleeting and momentary. For this reason, the latter is not real to the intelligence, although its effects are real to the eyes of the body. It will thus advance us considerably if we succeed in distinguishing the nature and the results of these two different phases, or of these two different Laws which support corporeal creation; because if we learn to recognize their action in all temporal things, it will be one more way to untangle them in ourselves. In fact, we cannot conceive the extent to which the errors that are committed daily relative to our Being are closely related to those that are made regarding corporeal Beings and matter. And the person who would have the intelligence to judge the bodies would soon have that which 1s necessary to judge a person. The first error that was introduced in this regard was to make material Nature a separate class and study. Although people have perceived that this branch was alive and active, they have looked upon it as being separated from the trunk. By continually applying themselves to this dangerous examination, the trunk in turn has appeared to them so far removed from the branch that they no longer felt the need of its existence, or if they did at least recognize its existence, they have seen it only as an isolated Being, the voice of which loses itself in the distance and need not even be heard so as to conceive and accomplish the progression and the Laws of material Nature. If we limited ourselves, as they have, to considering this Nature by itself and as acting without the mediation of an exterior Principle, we could, it is true, easily perceive its sensory and apparent Laws. But we could not say that our concept was complete, since it would always remain for us to recognize its real Principle, which is visible only to the intelligence by which everything in existence is necessarily governed, and of which the sensory and apparent Laws are only the result. On the other hand, if during our sojourn among the Beings of this material Nature, we wanted to remove them entirely from our research in an endeavor to arrive at the invisible Principle, we would have to avoid keeping ourselves too far above the path we must follow, as we would then be unable to attain the object of our desires and obtain only part of the lights intended for us. We must sense the disadvantages of these two extremes. They are such that when we devote ourselves to either one, we can be assured of experiencing no success. If we neglect either of these Laws in our search for the other, we will only have a false idea of both, because their actual relationship is indispensable, although it may not always be manifested. Finally, endeavoring today to elevate ourselves to the primary superior and invisible Principle, without the support of matter, is to offend and tempt the latter. Likewise, endeavoring to know matter by excluding this first Principle and the virtues it employs to maintain it is the most absurd impiety. It is not that people can never be destined to have perfect knowledge of the first Principle without being obliged to combine it with the study of matter, much as there was a period after their fall when people were entirely subjected to this Law of matter, without their being able to think of the existence of the first Principle. But, during this intermediary passage accorded to us of being placed between the two extremes, we must not lose sight of either one or the other if we do not want to go astray. The second error is that since people have been held in the sensate region, they have, it is true, searched for the Principle of matter because they cannot doubt that it has one. However, by confusing the two Laws in this search, they have wanted that the Principle of matter must be as obvious as matter itself. They have wanted to submit both of them to the measure of their corporeal eyes. Now, a corporeal measure can only apply to an area. An area is but an assemblage, and consequently a composite Being, and if a person persisted in believing that the Principle of the area or of matter is the same as matter itself, it would then be necessary that this Principle be extended and composed in the same way as matter. Then, it is true that the eyes of her body could calculate its dimensions, according to the limits of her faculties, and yet not have advanced any further. In order to measure correctly, it would be necessary for her to have a base for her measurements, but she has none. Yet we are certainly far from entertaining a similar idea of the Principle of matter when we compare it to that which we already have of a Principle in general. All those who have attempted to explain the nature of a Principle have been unable to avoid stating that it must be indivisible, incommensurable, and absolutely different from that which matter presents to our eyes. Even mathematicians and geometricians, although acting solely by means of their senses and having only the area as their objective, contribute to the support of this definition. As truly material as is this mathematical point which they make the basis of their work, they are obliged to clothe it with all the properties of the immaterial Being; otherwise their science would not, as yet, have begun. Thus, can an indivisible and incommensurable Being, such as we sense must conceive all Principles, be to us anything other than a simple Being? Certainly, we cannot doubt that material appearances are, on the contrary, divisible and subject to sensate measure. Consequently, matter is not therefore a simple Being, and it cannot be its own Principle. It would therefore be absurd to attempt confounding matter itself with the Principle of matter. Concerning this subject, I must call attention to the obscurities in which this false method of considering material bodies has plunged the multitude. Common people have believed that by mutilating, dividing, and subdividing matter, they have actually mutilated, divided, and subdivided the Principle and essence of matter. Believing that only the limits of their corporeal organs prevented them from going as far as their thoughts in this operation, they have imagined that this division was essentially possible beyond that which they themselves could operate, and they have believed that matter was divisible ad infinitum. They have then regarded it as indestructible and, consequently, as eternal. It is definitely by having confounded matter with the Principle of matter that these errors have been almost universally adopted. In reality, dividing the forms of matter is not dividing its essence, or, to better express it, separating the diverse parts of which all bodies are composed is not dividing nor decomposing matter, because each of the material parts resulting from this division remain intact in their material appearance, and consequently, in their essence and in the number of the Principles that constitute all matter. Therefore, by what strange blindness have people come to believe that they really divided matter by modifying the dimensions of bodies? Is it not easy to see that all the operations of people in this regard are limited to the transposition and separation of that which was joined; and in order that matter be decomposed by their hand, would it not be because it was they who had composed it? Thus, I only see here the limits and weakness of the faculties of people. They are impeded by the invincible force of the Principle of matter, because we know that they can vary corporeal figures and forms at will, as these forms are but an assemblage of different particles and, for this reason, possess none of the properties of Unity. But after all, not one of these particles can be destroyed by people, because if the Principle supporting these particles is not a composite, it cannot be subject to any division in its essence. In this sense, not only is matter not divisible ad infinitum as stated by common opinion, but it is not even possible for the hand of a person to commence or operate the first or slightest division upon it, thus providing new evidence to demonstrate that the corporeal Principle is one and undivided, and is, consequently, not matter. What I have said regarding the mathematician's method must have made apparent the difference existing between their progress and that of Nature. The science of mathematics, offering through their hands only a false copy of true science, has for its foundation and results only relationships, upon which, having once established their suppositions, the consequences are found to be justified and suitable to the object they propose. In other words, mathematicians cannot go astray because they do not depart from their circle but only turn upon a pivot; thus, all their steps return them to the point from which they started. In fact, regardless of the height of their edifice, one perceives that it is equal in all its parts, and there is not the slightest difference between the materials which serve for the foundation and those from which they build the highest stories. Therefore, what can they teach us? Nature, on the contrary, having a true and infinite Being for its Principle, produces facts that resemble it. These facts are the envelope by which nature conceals itself from our eyes, and although temporary they are so manifold, varied, and active, that we perceive clearly enough that their source must be inexhaustible. More ample observations will be found further along in this work regarding mathematical science and the use that should be made of it so as to attain knowledge of Nature and of that which lies above it. We will add here another truth that will support all those we have established to prove to what extent matter is inferior to the Principle which serves as its basis and produces it. First, I beg all observers to examine whether it is not universally certain, in any order of generation whatsoever, that the production can never be equal to the Principle which generated it. This truth is continually realized in the order of material generation, although later, when growing, the fruits and the production of this class equal and even surpass in force and grandeur the individual that has engendered them. As the class of these individuals is subject to the Law of time, the old individual withers away as its fruit advances toward the time of its growth and perfection. However, at the moment of generation, this fruit is necessarily inferior to the individual from which it has proceeded, since it is from this individual that it secures its life and action. I do not fear to assert that in whatever class we pursue our researches, we will find the application of this truth; and from this we can state confidently that it is with good reason we have proclaimed it as being universal. Moreover, we must also agree that this truth is applicable to matter in relation to its Principle, because, if we can see the birth of matter, we cannot deny that it has been engendered; and if it has been engendered, it is, like all Beings, inferior to its generative Principle. One is already well advanced to have recognized the superiority of the Principle of matter over matter, and to sense that they cannot both be of the same nature. In this way we find ourselves protected from the bold judgments that have been rashly pronounced upon this subject and which, due to the authority of the Masters who have been their proponents, have become as Laws for the majority of people. We are all freed from believing, as they do, that matter is eternal and imperishable. By distinguishing the form from the principle, we will know that one can vary unceasingly, while the other remains always the same. We will no longer experience any difficulty in recognizing the end and the decline of matter in the succession of facts and Beings that Nature exposes to our eyes, whereas the Principle of this matter, not being matter, remains unalterable and indestructible. This succession of facts, and this continual renewal of corporeal Beings, has led the observers of Nature to other opinions, as false as those mentioned previously, and which expose them to the same inconsistencies. They have seen bodies being altered, being decomposed, and disappearing from their sight; but, at the same time, they have seen these bodies continually replaced by other bodies. They then believed that these new bodies were formed from the remains of the old bodies, and after having been subjected to dissolution, the different parts composing them must in turn enter into the composition of new forms. These observers then concluded that the forms truly experienced a continual mutation, but that their fundamental matter always remained the same. Then, ignorant of the true cause of the existence and action of this matter, they have failed to perceive why it would not always have been, and why it would not always be, in movement, which has caused them to decide anew that it was eternal. But if, elevating their eyes one degree, these observers had recognized the true Principles of bodies and had attributed to them the stability they thought they had perceived in their pretended fundamental matter, we would not have to reproach them for this new error. We see, as they do, the revolutions and mutations of forms. We also recognize that the Principles of bodies are indestructible and imperishable; but having demonstrated as we have that these Principles were not matter, to state that they are imperishable is not to state that matter does not perish. By distinguishing the bodies from their Principles, the observers would have avoided the dangerous error they attempt in vain to palliate, and they would have certainly refrained from attributing eternity and immortality to the material Being that affects their senses. I agree with them about the daily course of Nature. I see the birth and death of all forms, and I see them replaced by other forms. But I will refrain from concluding, as they have, that this revolution had no beginning and will not have an end, since it does not operate in effect and manifests only in bodies of a temporary nature, and not on their Principles, which can never be affected in the slightest degree. When a person has thoroughly understood the existence and stability of such Principles, independent and separate from the bodies, he will be forced to acknowledge that they could have existed before these bodies and that they could still exist after them. To this reasoning I will not add proofs upon which I would be denied credence, but they are of such a nature that it is not within my power to doubt them, any more than if I had been present at the formation of things. Moreover, the numerical Law of Beings is an irrevocable testimony. ONE exists and is conceived independently of the other numbers; and, after having vivified them through the course of the Decad, it leaves them behind and returns to its Unity. The Principles of the bodies, being one, can therefore be conceived alone and separate from any form of matter, whereas the smallest particles of this matter, on the contrary, cannot exist or be conceived without being sustained and animated by their Principle. In the same manner, we conceive of numerical Unity as existing apart from other numbers, although none of the numbers subsequent to Unity can reach our understanding except as the emanation and product of this Unity. In other words, if we wish to apply here the fundamental maxim that has been heretofore established upon the inequality that necessarily exists between the generative Being and its production, we shall see that if the Principles of matter are indestructible and eternal, it is impossible that matter enjoys the same privileges. However, this assertion of a necessary inequality between the generative Being and its production may have allowed for some uneasiness regarding the nature of people, who, having taken birth from an indestructible source should not, as inferior to their Principle, have the same advantage, and, as a consequence, are subject to destruction. But simple reflection will dissipate this doubt. Although both matter and people have their generative Principle, they are far from being the same. The generative Principle of people is Unity. This Unity, possessing all within itself, also communicates to its productions a complete and independent existence, and as chief and principle, it can thus definitely extend or restrain people's faculties; but it cannot give them death, because its works, being real, cannot not be. This is not so with matter which, being the product of a secondary Principle, inferior and subordinated to another Principle, is always dependent upon one and the other in such a way that the cooperation of their mutual action is always necessary for the continuation of its existence, because it is certain that when one of the two becomes inactive, the bodies expire and disappear. The birth and the end of these different actions manifest clearly enough in corporeal Nature to demonstrate to us that matter cannot endure. Moreover, recognizing as we must that the action of Unity, or the primary Principle, is perpetual and indivisible, we could not, without committing the most offensive error, attribute the same perpetuity of action to the secondary Principles that are responsible for the birth of matter. That is why the Author of all things cannot cause the World to be eternal as It is, since it would not render the World eternal to have it succeeded by other Worlds, which will always be within Its power to do, because each of these Worlds, being only the result of a secondary Principle, would then of necessity be perishable. Let us now examine another system relative to our subject. It has been taught that after the dissolution of corporeal Beings, the remains of these bodies were employed as part of the substance of other bodies. The observers of Nature have definitely erred in both this doctrine and in the consequences they have drawn from it. To state that bodies are formed from one another and are only successive assemblages of the same materials is as great an error as pretending that matter is eternal. They would certainly have refrained from advancing such opinions had they taken more precautions to proceed safely in the knowledge of Nature. The universal Principles of matter are simple Beings. Each one of them is ONE as shown by the result of our observations and the idea that we have given of Principles in general. The innate Principles of the smallest particles of matter must therefore possess the same property. Each one of them will thus be unique and simple, like the universal Principles of this same matter. There cannot exist any difference between these two kinds of Principles except in the duration and force of their action, which is longer and further extended within the universal Principles than within the particular Principles. Thus, the particular action of a simple Principle is itself necessarily simple and unique and, consequently, can have only one end to accomplish - it has within itself all that is needed for the complete accomplishment of its Law. Finally, it is susceptible to neither admixture nor division. The action of the universal material Principle has, therefore, the same faculties, and although the results proceeding from it multiply, extend, and subdivide ad infinitum, it is certain that this universal Principle has only one task to accomplish and only one action to perform. When its task is completed, its action must cease and be withdrawn by that which had ordered its production, but through the entire duration of time, it is subjected to the performance of the same act and to the manifestation of the same effects. This also applies to the innate Principles of the various particular bodies. They are subject to the same Law of unity of action; and when the duration of action is accomplished, it is equally withdrawn from them. Thus, if each of these Principles has but one single action, and they must all return to their primeval source upon completion of this action, we cannot reasonably expect new forms from them. We must conclude that the bodies we see successively born secure their origin and substance from Principles other than these, the suspended action of which we have perceived in the dissolution of the bodies they have produced. Therefore, we are obliged to search elsewhere for the source from which these new bodies must originate. But where could we better find it than in the force and activity of this dual Law that constitutes the universal corporeal Nature, and which reveals itself by a thousand different aspects simultaneously in the production and progress of the particular bodies? We know, in fact, that this Earth we inhabit could not exist and conserve itself if it did not have within itself a vegetative Principle which is its own. It is necessary that an exterior cause, which is none other than the Celestial or Planetary Fire, reacts upon this Principle so that its action may manifest. This also applies to the particular bodies. Each of these bodies comes from a seed in which resides an innate Seed or Principle, the depository of all its properties and of all the effects it must produce. But this Seed would always remain inactive and could not manifest any of its faculties, were it not also reactivated by an exterior igneous cause, the heat of which enables it to act upon all corporeal Beings surrounding it, and which in turn penetrate its envelope and stimulate, heat, and prepare it to support the action of the exterior cause - that is, for the manifestation of its own fruits and Virtues. And, in fact, the exterior igneous cause operating the reaction would soon overwhelm the action of the individual Principles and destroy their properties if the assistance of alimentary Beings did not come to renew their force and empower them to resist the devouring heat of this exterior cause. That is why, if Seeds deprived of nutrients are exposed to heat, they are consumed at the beginning without having produced the least part of their action. That is also why Seeds which have been empowered to begin the course of their growth, would be destroyed and consumed even sooner if they were deprived of the nutrients that are necessary for their defense against the constant activity of the igneous reaction, because this reaction, having already penetrated as far as the seed, can then deploy its destructive force all the more readily. Thus, it can be seen that the nutrients of which we speak are themselves a second means of reaction that Nature employs for the upkeep and conservation of its works, but it will be even better understood further on. Such, then, is this universal dual Law that presides at the birth and during the progress of corporeal Beings. The cooperation of these two actions is absolutely necessary so that they can exist perceptibly to our eyes - namely the first, or interior, action innate in them; and the second, or exterior, action which comes to agitate and to react upon the first. And never among material things has a body been formed except by this method. Let us apply to the constitution of the Universe what we have stated regarding the Earth. We can look upon it as an assemblage of an infinite multitude of sprouts and seeds, all of which have within themselves the innate Principle of their Laws and Properties in accordance with their class and species, but which await some exterior cause to assist them in engendering and reproducing outwardly and in preparing them for generation. At this point an explanation might even be appropriate for a phenomenon which astonishes the multitude, namely, why worms are found in fruits where no worm holes are visible and why live animals are found within the heart of stones. Such situations occur when such creatures arrive in these types of matrices either by natural means or filtrations, and then find or receive there, through the same channel of filtration, organic juices suitable to operate the necessary Law of reaction upon them. But let us not deviate from our subject. Therefore, let us now see what part the bodies and the remains of bodies can have in the formation and growth of other bodies. They can augment the forces of corporeal Beings and sustain them against the continual reaction of the igneous exterior Principle. They can even contribute, through their own reaction, to the manifestation of the faculties of Seeds and bring their properties into operation. But it would be acting contrary to the Laws of Nature, and misinterpreting the essence of a Principle in general, to believe that they could infiltrate the substance of these Seeds. They can, I repeat, be their sustenance and incentive, but they will never be part of their essence. The following observations will furnish the proof of this statement. We have previously established that the Principles of bodies are not matter but simple Beings and, as such, they must possess within themselves all that is necessary for their existence and they have nothing to borrow from other Beings. They would not even obtain the help of that exterior reaction we have been mentioning, if, because of the inferiority of their nature, they were not subject to the dual Law regulating all elementary Beings. There exists one Nature where this dual law is unknown, and where Beings receive birth without the help of secondary Beings and by the sole virtue of their generative Principle. This is the Nature through which humankind has once passed. But, in order that our progress be more certain, let us not depend upon theory until experience comes to justify it. In so doing, let us observe what occurs in the destruction of bodies. This destruction cannot occur except through cessation of the action of the innate Principle, the producer of these bodies, since this action is their true base and primary support. Now, this Principle cannot cease its action, except when the Law spurring it to action is suspended, because then, having been freed from its fetters, it separates itself from its productions and returns to its original source. As long as this Law operates, the envelope never ceases to exist under its individual and natural form. And if this form is subject to decomposition, it can only be because the Law of reaction has been removed. The innate Principle within this form, which causes its existence by binding together the three elements of which it is composed, separates itself from these three elements and abandons them to their own Laws. As these Laws are opposed to one another, the elements will now subject to their rule, combat, divide, and finally destroy themselves completely, and vanish from our sight. This is how bodies gradually die, disappear, and are utterly destroyed. Therefore, I no longer see in a corpse anything but lifeless matter deprived of the innate Principle that had produced and sustained its existence. I only see in these remains the parts that are still sustained by the presence of the secondary actions that the innate Principle had emanated in this body during the period of its own action, because its secondary emanations are present in the smallest corporeal particles, but they successively separate themselves from their particular envelope after the Principle of their production has abandoned the entire body formed by their union. What could a body deprived of life and in the process of dissolution communicate to new bodies that would encourage growth and formation? Will it be the dominant Principle? But this no longer exists in the corpse, since it is through the retreat of this Principle that the body has become a corpse. Moreover, each Seed, possessing its own innate Principle and being the depository of all its faculties, has no need to unite with another Principle. In other words, two simple Beings, never being able to unite nor compound their action or assemblage, far from contributing to the life of new bodies, would only cause disorder and destruction since it is not possible to place two centers within one circumference without altering its nature. Shall it be said that the material parts of the disintegrating body reunite and pass into the essence of Seeds? But we have just learned that each Seed is animated by a Principle which contains within itself all that is necessary for its existence. Moreover, do we not see all parts of the corpse successively disintegrating without the least trace of them remaining? Do we not know that this particular dissolution occurs only through the separation of the secondary emanations that remained in the corpse, and that we can consider each one as the center of the part it occupied? It will then become impossible for us to avoid recognizing that the bodies, the parts of the bodies, and the entire Universe are but an assemblage of centers, since we see the bodies gradually being dissipated entirely. Now if everything is a center, and if all centers disappear through dissolution, what will remain of a disintegrated body that could be a part of the existence and life of new bodies? It is therefore an error to believe that the Principles of disintegrating corporeal Beings, whether general or particular, proceed to animate new forms after being separated from their envelope, and, commencing a new career, can exist successively several times. If all is simple, if all is ONE in Nature and in the essence of Beings, this Law must apply likewise to their action, and each one of them must have its particular task, simple and unique as it is itself, or else there could be weakness in the Author of all things and confusion in His work. However, considering animal digestion as an example, I will undoubtedly be offered the objection that, in the dissolution of the nutrients which occurs through this digestion, the greatest part of the nutrients passes into the blood, lymph, and other fluids of the individual, and therefrom, being carried through all parts of the body, the animal receives. I will then be asked how it could be that these nutrients could only serve to fortify the action and the life of the animal which receives them without communicating to it the least part of themselves, and without the innate fire within them penetrating the Principle and Essence of this individual to unite with it and extend its existence. To this I answer that, most certainly, the only function of nutrients is to sustain the life and action of the individual who has devoured them. He cannot receive them either as new Principles for himself or as an augmentation of his Being, but only as agents of a reaction he needs for deploying his forces and conserving his temporal action. Although no corporeal Being could exist without such reaction, there is none in which it does not have its measure; because it is certain that if the Principle contained in the nutrient could unite with the Principle of the body which employs it for nourishment, there would no longer be any measure in the Law of action through which the latter would have been constituted. We know this from experience and by the damages that raw foods, poorly cooked meats, and improperly bled flesh cause in animals. We know, I say, how too strong a reaction is contrary to corporeal life; and we cannot deny that the animals, destined by their nature to devour other animals, are not more ferocious and cruel, that they have indeed a more avid and destructive character than animals which obtain their nourishment solely from the plant kingdom. This is because the former experience an excessive reaction by receiving, along with the flesh that sustains them, a great quantity of secondary animal Principles, and they employ all the efforts of the innate action within to cause the premature dissolution of the envelopes of these Principles. However, in not finding these envelopes in their natural catalytic state at that moment, they employ force to break these alien chains and return them to their primitive source. During this struggle, the individual experiences an effervescence which agitates and leads her to disorderly acts, and only after the envelope of the secondary Principle is dissolved and rejoined to its generative Principle, can she be returned to a more tranquil state. In considering this subject we must, in passing, censure the custom of most nations which have sought to honor their dead by either preserving their bodies or causing them to be consumed by fire. Both of these practices are senseless and contrary to Nature. The true catalyst of bodies is the earth, and since the hand of humankind is incapable of producing such bodies, it must not attempt either to determine or prolong their duration, leaving to each of their Principles the care of suspending its action according to its Law and reuniting with its source in its own time. Neither can I avoid pausing for a moment on this assertion that the true catalyst of bodies is the earth. It is, in effect, within the earth that the principal decomposition of the body of a person must occur. But the body of every person comes into its form in the body of a woman. Therefore, the person returns to the earth only that which is received from the body of a woman. The earth is then the true Principle of the body of a woman, since everything always returns to its source, and of these two Beings, so analogous to one another, it cannot be denied that the body of a woman has a terrestrial origin. But it is strangely deviating from the truth to believe that this difference could be carried beyond the form of the corporeal faculties. Concerning the intellectual Principle, women have the same source and origin as men because a man, being condemned only to trials and sorrow and not to death, has need for a Being of his own nature close to him, a Being as unfortunate as he, who would by her infirmities and privation recall him to wisdom by continually retracing before his eyes the bitter consequences of his errors. Moreover, a man is not the father of the intellectual Being of his productions, as has been taught by certain false doctrines that are so much more disastrous because they are based upon comparisons derived from matter, such as the inexhaustible emanations of the elementary fire. But within all this lies a mystery that I shall never believe to be sufficiently entombed. Let us resume the chain of our observations. There is a fact that the naturalists shall not fail to present in opposition to my statements, and it involves the colored liquids they cause to pass through certain plants, thereby succeeding in varying the color of flowers and even completely changing what was given them by Nature. My answer will be simple and will pertain to all that I have said relative to digestion. Every plant has its own innate Principle, as have all other bodies. The juices that serve the plant as nutrients cannot add anything to this Principle. But they serve as its defense against the reaction of the igneous exterior cause which, if unopposed by these nutrients, would soon overcome and consume by its heat the forces and action of the individual Principles. One can judge the extent of the variety of reaction to which they are exposed by the infinite number of different substances that can serve as nutrients to corporeal Beings. There is only one, it is true, that is really proper to each species. But the nature of perishable things, such as bodies, and the continual revolutions to which they are subjected, expose them to the reception of foreign reactions which weaken and constrain their faculties, or even completely destroy them, despite the fact that the Principle of Being is indestructible. As one knows, these reactions are operated by secondary Beings, which are also depositories of a Principle that is unique to them. This Principle cannot cause any reaction, either by itself or by the particular Principles emanating from it, unless they are all clothed with their corporeal envelope, since it is only upon this condition that simple Beings can exist here on Earth. It is therefore certain that the envelope of these secondary Principles passes, as they do, into the corporeal mass of plants and animals, to serve as nutrients and to help them resist the action of the exterior igneous cause. It is certain that they also endow the Beings with their colors and properties. But, although they pass into these different individuals, we can never admit that they blend with them and become part of their substance. For these alimentary envelopes to succeed in uniting with the substance of the individual taking possession of them, it would be necessary that their Principles intermingle reciprocally. But we have seen that these Principles are simple Beings, and therefore their merger is impossible. Since the envelopes possess properties only through their Principles, merger of the envelopes is also impossible. Therefore, although necessary to the Being that receives them, these nutrients are always foreign substances, as one knows that they benefit this Being only to the extent that it effects their dissolution. I think you will not find it difficult to agree that there cannot be any type of admixture before beginning this dissolution. If the dissolution cannot occur without having been preceded by the retreat of the innate Principles, if it involves simply division and destruction, how would it be possible that the individual operating this destruction be integrated with the very envelope that it destroys? In fact, if the nutrients and Principles enclosed within the alimentary envelopes could mix with the substance and Principles of the Beings upon which they react, they could also serve as a substitute for them and replace them. Then it would be easy to change the entire nature of the individuals and species. Thereupon, having once changed the class and nature of a Being, one could also operate the same change upon all existing classes, resulting in general confusion. This state would prevent our ever being certain of the rank and place that Beings must occupy in the order of things. Thus, the Law by which Nature has constituted its productions absolutely refuses to lend itself to such chimerical attempts. It has given to each corporeal Being a particular innate Principle that can extend, and often does extend, its action beyond the ordinary measure through the help of forced reactions and a more favorable matrix, but which can never lose nor change its essence. This Principle, being the producer and parent of its envelope, cannot separate from it without the envelope immediately entering into dissolution and eventual destruction. And it is absolutely impossible for another Principle or another parent to occupy this envelope in turn and serve as its support, since there are no adulterers, nor adopted children, in corporeal nature due to the fact that there is no freedom. Therefore, each simple Being or Principle has its own separate existence and, consequently, individual actions and faculties which are as incommunicable as its existence. Let no one present to me the objection that by mixing liquids and bodies capable of absorption that one perceives simple and singular effects, of which none of these bodies were capable by themselves. I will not fear to state that in these amalgamations the action and reaction of the various Principles upon one another produce results which are singular and simple in appearance only. This is due to the weakness of our organs, and also that these results are, in fact, combined and produced by the individual action particular to each of the assembled Principles. If one attempts to blend various bodies incapable of either sensate action or reaction upon each other, but having each its own particular property of color, flavor, and so on, there can result from their assemblage a third property which may appear to be a product of the first two being mixed and combined but not at all unified or integrated. One cannot deny to me that in this occurrence the Principles and their envelopes remain perfectly distinct and separate, and only the weakness of our senses prevents us from perceiving separately the individual actions specific to each of these bodies. Therefore, one cannot see anything here but a multitude of bodies of the same kind, stacked up or assembled with a multitude of bodies of a different kind, but always preserving their own individual action, faculties, and existence. If a solid body is projected into a fluid analogous to it, the fluid overcomes its force and properties. The parts are separated and divided, whereupon their apparent solidity is destroyed, so that they are dissolved and appear to be absorbed. Through this method of dissolution, the fluid presents to us, in effect, results which are impossible to discover separately in any of the substances forming the assemblage. But we should not conclude from this that any admixture of Principles is affected. And is it not certain that there exists here only a simple extension of the action of the dominant Principle upon that of the inferior Principle, an extension which diminishes and even ceases when the superior Principle in aa

control has activated a sufficient number of bodies that have been exposed to its action, and in so doing has consumed all the power that was in the inferior Principle? If a solid body takes possession of a fluid and absorbs it; or if two fluids, by their admixture, produce solid bodies or amalgamations indissoluble in appearance; and, lastly, if bodies which previously did not present any particular force or property but by their assemblage produce surprising effects, ardent flames, fires, noises, live and brilliant colors, could one ever demonstrate that there exists in any of these facts a merger, admixture, or communication of one Principle with another Principle? Since, if the force of the dominating Principle has only suspended the action of the weaker Principle without destroying its envelope, then it may happen that the arts could succeed in separating them and returning them both to their former state. This would be invincible proof of the truth that I have just established. If, without ever destroying the envelopes, the superior Principle were to only divide the assemblages, and if, in returning the constituent parts of these masses to their natural liberty and tenuity, it only repelled them through evaporation, then it is true that the individual Principles of the same nature which were previously assembled would find themselves dispersed randomly upon the earth and in the air, but without having communicated anything or without having lost any of their faculties, substance, or actions. If, on the contrary, the dominant Principle were to decompose the very envelope of the inferior Principle by its force and power, thus dissolving and destroying it, then the action of the inferior Principle would be annihilated. In so terminating its career, this Principle would find itself quite unable to unite or communicate its action to the dominant Principle due to the fact that the very action of the dominant Principle is, in this instance, limited to its previous activity, provided it has not been altered or exhausted beyond return by its own victory. Finally, the union and the continuity of action of the same Principle in various successive forms are no more evident in the birth of worms and other insects appearing in the putrefaction of dead bodies. The Principle of the existence of these minute animals is equally resident in their own seed: because our bodies, like all others in Creation, are the assemblage of an infinite multitude of destructive germs and verminous seeds which only await favorable reactions and circumstances so as to produce and engender themselves. As long as our body exists in the plenitude of its life and action, the dominating Principle directing it, holding the whole envelope in equilibrium, prevents its dissolution and restrains the action of these destructive germs. But, when the time is at hand for this dominant Principle to abandon its envelope, then the secondary Principles, no longer having any connection, separate naturally and leave the field open to all these animalcules. Their birth and growth are even encouraged by a reaction and warmth propitious to affecting their emergence from their seminal envelope. SZ

The remains of the corpse then serve as food to these insects and pass through them as nutrients pass through digestions in all living bodies. Evident in all things is the same dissolution, the same use of the innate Principles; but in none of them does the Principle of the dissolved bodies pass into the living body to animate it, because, as I have sufficiently established, each Being possesses life within itself and only has need of an exterior cause to activate and sustain its own principle. It is therefore evident that, in the most concealed acts of corporeal Beings, such as formation, birth, growth, and dissolution, the Principles never mix or intermingle with other Principles. Thus, nutrients are but a means of reaction necessary to protect living bodies from the excessive igneous action which devours and successively dissolves these alimentary Beings, as it would dissolve the living body itself were it not for these Beings. So they are not, as the observers and their many followers believe, the materials of which the Being in formation must be composed. Truly, this Being, along with life, possesses everything within itself; and alimentary Beings, upon dissolution, no longer possess anything. Whatever might remain with them continually loses itself as the particular Principles separate from their envelope and proceed to reunite with their original source. Thus, this apparent mutation of forms must no longer deceive us to such an extent that we believe the same Principles can embark upon a new existence. But we shall remain convinced that the new forms we see continually being born and reproduced before our eyes are simply the effects, results, and fruition of new Principles which have not as yet been activated. We shall surely have the proper idea regarding the Author of all things when we say that every thing is simple, that every thing new is in Its works, and that every thing must appear therein for the first time. It is by such truths that we demonstrate once more the extent to which such an opinion regarding the eternity of matter runs counter to the laws of Nature. Because not only is it not the same innate Principles that remain continually charged with the successive reproduction of bodies, but it is certain that any Principle whatsoever can have only one single action and, consequently, one single course. It is apparent enough that the course of the particular Beings composing matter is limited, since no moment passes when we do not perceive their end, and time is only made perceptible through their continual destruction. Yet we must no longer be surprised by the errors that have prevailed up to the present time upon this subject, and were we to adopt the opinions of which they are the results, there would be no limit to our misconceptions. The observers, having hardly advanced a single step in distinguishing matter from the Principle which sustains and engenders this matter, give to one that which belongs only to the other. They consider primary matter as being always and essentially the same, receiving only a continuous multitude of different forms. Thus, by confusing it with its inner, innate, and acting Principle, they inform us that there can be only one universal single action in this matter and, consequently, matter is permanent and indestructible. I beg them to ponder deeply what I have said at the beginning of this book regarding the origin and nature of good and evil. I have shown that any person of intelligence will be loath to admit that different properties have the same source. Therefore, let us apply this to the different properties that matter manifests to our eyes and let us determine if it is true that only one material essence exists. I ask if the action of fire is similar to that of water; if water is similar in action to earth; and if we do not perceive in these elements properties that are not only different, but are even completely opposed. However, these elements, although being many, are truly the basis of all material envelopes. It is therefore impossible for us to agree with the observers that there exists only one essence in the bodies, when we see their properties manifesting so differently. Far from being continually employed in the successive revolution of forms as they claim, matter cannot reasonably be acknowledged to be present in even two of them. Therefore, I shall not cease repeating that the essence of bodies is not, as they believe, unique. All forms are the result of their innate Principles, which can only manifest their action through the general Law of the three elements, essentially different by their nature. As a result of this, form cannot be considered a Principle, and thus, not being one, it is subject to variance and depends upon the action, more or less strong, of one or the other of these elements. Accordingly, matter cannot be stable or permanent, nor successively pass from one body to another, but all of these bodies proceed from a new and consequently different Principle. In other words, this difference between all innate Principles is palpable enough if one observes that all classes and all kingdoms of corporeal Nature are marked by striking and distinctive characteristics. By observing the opposition prevailing between most classes and species, we can confirm the fact that the innate and acting Principles of various bodies are necessarily different. For the inner, innate, and acting Principle of the bodies to be one and the same in all Nature, it would need to manifest everywhere and continually reappear in a uniform manner in various bodies. But, after having recognized this individual difference between Principles, let us recall the precision and exactitude each of them manifests in operating the particular action imposed upon it. We shall thereby render complete the idea that we have already given concerning these Principles of corporeal Beings, by asserting that they cannot be an assemblage, similar to the essences of matter. They are simple Beings, depositories of their own Law and all their faculties. They are depositories of a single action, as are all simple Beings - namely, indestructible Beings - but in which perceptible action must end, and end each instant, because they are designed only to manifest in time and to compose time. At this point, I have only a slight comment to make to the observers of Nature concerning a word they employ in describing corporeal bodies. They proclaim their birth and growth under the title of development. We cannot allow them this expression, because if it were true that the bodies only experience development, it would be necessary that they be completely whole in their seeds or Principles. Now, if these bodies were essentially and truly contained in the Principles, the latter would no longer have the primitive quality of simple Beings. They would then no longer be indivisible, nor consequently clothed with immortality, so it would be necessary to retain the immortality of the Principles to also retain it for the corporeal Beings which would be enclosed therein. This would acknowledge what we have denied up to the present and grossly contradict what we have established. If the observers do not wish to expose themselves to the most absurd consequences, they must then accustom themselves to not consider the growth of corporeal Beings as development, but as the work and operation of an innate Principle. This producer of material essences disposes and forms them according to the particular Law that it carries within itself. I know that those to whom I address myself are very far from suspecting the existence of such a doctrine, and that they will be reluctant to accept it; because nothing is more opposed to their thoughts and the manner in which they have envisioned Nature up to the present time. However, I present these Truths to them with confidence and with the conviction that they can offer no other in place of them. I do not even know how, when discussing the growth of corporeal Beings through development, they could have entertained for a moment the idea that I have previously refuted concerning the passage and merger of different parts of a body into another body, because if the seed simply develops, it must therefore possess within itself all its parts. Now, if it possesses all its parts, why should it have need of the parts of another body to form itself? Let no one believe that the argument can be turned against me by stating that if I deny that all the parts, whose formation is necessary for the complete corporification of a material Being, be contained in its seed, is admitting that it must receive the materials for its growth from the outside, which would be without doubt most contrary to the truths I have attempted to expound regarding Nature. This Nature is everywhere alive. It possesses within itself the cause of all its actions, without necessitating that the seeds contain within themselves the condensed assemblage of all the parts which must someday serve them as their envelope. They only need the faculty of producing them, and they have it. Then if they possess this faculty, all the other expedients that have been invented to explain the growth and formation of corporeal Beings become superfluous, because it is only after having failed to recognize in matter the innate Principle of its life and action, and after having so imagined it as essentially dead and sterile, that the observers have had recourse to these expedients. One more word will suffice to banish entirely this idea concerning the development of corporeal Beings. It is that, were this development to occur, there would be no deformed Beings, since everything would have been of uniform creation. And if there existed only development, the Author of All Things would no longer have anything to do. Now, we are far from believing that neither It, nor all It has produced, could remain in a state of inaction. I shall, at this point, limit my observations upon the defective manner by which people have considered the essence of corporeal nature. I dare to believe that, if they are willing to meditate upon that which I have discussed, they will admit that the reason they have so often gone astray is that they have failed to distinguish matter from its Principle. And, in accordance with that which I have just said concerning the formation of Beings, the continual mutation of forms, the distinction of the essences from the innate Principle, the properties and the simplicity of this Principle, in the particular as well as in the universal, and concerning the unity of its action which is prescribed for a limited time only, they will agree that the Principles of the different corporeal Beings do not intermingle, nor do they communicate, for the reason that they are indivisible. Being indivisible, they can never be dissolved, and they remain distinct from one another, as much by the particular nature of their action as by its duration, which is made evident by the destruction of the elements composing matter. There results an infinity of successive corporeal combinations, from which the observers have too lightly concluded that the matter serving as a basis for the constantly succeeding bodies is imperishable. Far from regarding it as eternal, they must agree with us that there is not a single instant when matter is not being destroyed, since one action always takes the place of another within this nature. Then they will no longer retain, as have the alchemists, the illusion of a continual revivification which would render them and all bodies immune to dissolution. Since the existence of bodies is of only a limited duration, it would be impossible to retard their destruction at the end of this period without joining a new Principle to the Principle which is about to separate from them. Now we have seen that this could not occur in the very order natural to all things. Would people therefore believe their powers superior to Nature and to the Laws constituting all Beings? Thus, having learned to distinguish matter from the Principle engendering it, and having recognized the different actions which manifest in this matter, they will no longer believe in all those fanciful identities which have caused them insensibly to confound everything, even the good and the evil. Let us direct our attention to higher subjects.

## Chapter 3 - Sequence of Errors

If it were possible that an error would not always be the source of an infinite number of other errors, I would be little concerned with those which I have just placed in opposition to the Principle and Laws of matter, as the errors, being of little importance, would not be very dangerous in themselves. But, in the scheme of things, such errors are bound together as truths are bound together. And, in the same way that our proofs against humankind's false reasoning have mutually served to support one another, likewise, the effects of such errors on bodies, and the untenable consequences they bring about, have in effect produced the most disastrous results, because they are essentially connected with things of a higher order. Having erred in their step of confusing matter with the Principle of matter in various bodies, people are no longer in a position either to discover the true essence of such matter or to discern the Principle maintaining it and giving it action and life. Having given equal status to the two natures constituting the whole elementary realm, it has not occurred to them to investigate whether another exists which is different and superior. We have seen that they have exposed themselves to this flawed alternative - either by giving to the Principles the limits and subjectivity of matter, or by giving matter the rights and properties of the Principle. Thereupon, the Principle of the body and the gross parts constituting it are all the same thing to people. By such reasoning, they have also easily succeeded in confusing these bodies and their Principle with Beings of a nature independent of matter. Thus, step by step, people soon established a universal equality between all Beings, so that it would seem necessary to agree with them that matter is itself the cause of everything which manifests, or that the cause of the manifestation of matter is no more intelligent than the Principles which we have recognized in this very matter, which amounts to the same thing. Giving to matter such extensive properties as they do is to declare that it contains everything within itself. Yet if it contains all within itself, what need is there for an intelligent Being to watch over and direct matter, since it can direct itself? Therefore, what would be the nature of this intelligent Being if people deny it awareness of matter and the ability to act upon matter? And, by denying it such power, would we not refuse it intelligence, since there would be something of a lower order that would be unknown to it and of which it could have no conception? Such is the narrow circle in which imprudent people would like to confine our knowledge and lights.

I know that most of them sense the dangerous results of their Principles and that they allow themselves to be led in this way less by conviction or inclination than by a lack of caution. Nevertheless, they are blameworthy for exposing themselves to these inconsistencies. At all times a person is liable to go astray, especially when he himself wants to cast his eyes upon objects, the knowledge of which is obscured within him by his exile. Despite his deprivation, there are nevertheless errors that he is guilty of not having avoided. Those occupying our attention belong to this group, and with a little good faith and the Principles we have established, it will not be possible for the authors of such systems to still find in them any semblance of truth. I could remain content with what I have already said about the difference existing between sensate Beings and intelligent Beings, and with the proofs that I have given that the most singular faculties of a corporeal Being cannot raise it beyond the sensate, as in the example cited regarding animals which hold first rank among the three kingdoms of Nature. Then, by comparing the movements and progress of animals with the faculties of another order which we have discovered to be so evident in people, we could no longer doubt at this point that people are intelligent Beings. Likewise, we cannot deny that there exist other Beings endowed with this faculty of intelligence since we have seen that people, in their present condition, possesses nothing on their own and must expect everything from an external source, even the least of their thoughts. Moreover, people cannot avoid admitting that some of the thoughts communicated to them oppose their nature while others agree with it, so they cannot reasonably attribute them to a single Principle. Therefore, we have already sufficiently proved the existence of two Principles external to people, and, as a consequence, external to matter, since it is infinitely beneath them. Thus, I repeat, one cannot deny intelligence to these two opposing Principles, since in the state of reprobation we experience, they are the only ones by which we can sense our intelligence. Therefore, if they are intelligent, they must know and conceive everything beneath them; otherwise, they would not enjoy even the slightest faculties of intelligence. If they have knowledge of and can conceive of what is beneath them, it is impossible that, as active Beings, they would not concern themselves with it, either to destroy, if it is the evil Principle, or to conserve, if it is the good Principle. By such reasoning we could easily demonstrate that matter does not exist on its own. But we must search within it for proofs that will dissuade those who attribute to it an activity essential to its nature. We have established that the Principles of matter, both general and particular, contain within themselves the life and corporeal faculties which must proceed from them. Furthermore, despite the innate and indestructible property within such Principles, they could never produce anything were they not activated and heated by the exterior igneous Principles destined to place their faculties into action, accomplished by virtue of that dual Law to which all corporeal Beings are subject and which presides over all the actions and generations of matter. Without a doubt, it is a sign of weakness and subjection in the Principle of the corporeal Being to possess life within itself and yet to be unable to put it into action on its own. However, we cannot doubt that this Principle of life, innate within the seed of all corporeal Beings, is above the exterior igneous Principles which subject it only to a simple secondary reaction, without being able to communicate to it anything essential to its existence. Seeing that these igneous Principles are inferior to the Principles of life which they serve to activate, they are even less able than the Principle of life to put themselves into action by their own volition. It would be useless to examine the cycle of corporeal Beings in order to find the primary Principle of such action. Even if it were finally stated that these Beings, mutually reactivating themselves, had no need for another cause to produce what is within them, we would be forced to admit that, in the beginning, the primary movement would have been communicated to this circle in which they are enclosed. Even the most active among the corporeal Principles would not possess any power without the reaction of another Principle, and so how could those which are inferior to them dispense with such a reaction? Therefore, it can be seen that no matter at what point of the circle one places the beginning of the primary action, it is absolutely necessary for such an action to occur. I must then ask the observers of good faith whether they conceive that this beginning action could be found in matter and belong to its nature, and if on the contrary, they conceive that it does not demonstrate physically to them its original dependence through this irrevocable Law subjecting the Principle of its daily reproduction to the cooperation and action of another Principle. Researchers should have even less doubt concerning this truth, since the means they employ in destroying it are those which serve best to support it. Let one put together, they say, such and such materials and one will soon perceive fermentation, putrefaction, and production. But if these different kinds of matter were able to combine on their own, would it then be necessary to assemble them? Therefore, seeing that these particular operations cannot occur without the help of an outside agent, can it not be said that the Universe follows the same procedure, since its nature, not Being different from that of all parts of matter, possesses nothing more than they do and cannot be governed by any other Law? I believe I can declare the necessity for an intelligent and self-activating cause that communicated the primary action to matter and continues to communicate it in all the successive acts of its reproduction and growth and in all the effects that it manifests to our eyes. Not only is it impossible to believe that matter does not owe its origin to an outside cause, but one can see that even today there must surely be a cause which unceasingly directs every action of matter. Indeed, there is not a single instant when matter could exist and sustain itself were it to be left on its own and deprived of its Principles of reaction. Finally, if a cause had been necessary to begin the primary action in matter and if it has always been necessary to have the cooperation of this cause for sustaining matter, it cannot be possible to form an idea of such matter without also having some idea as its cause, which alone makes it what it is, and without which it cannot have one moment of existence. In the same way that I cannot conceive the form of a body without the innate Principle which produced it, I cannot conceive of the activity of bodies and matter without a cause - physical but immaterial, active and intelligent, and at the same time superior to corporeal Principles. This cause provides the movement and action I perceive in them, but which I know does not belong essentially to them. This helps to explain all the regular phenomena of Nature when, by recognizing a superior cause of undeniable intelligence to be its leader and guide, we shall look upon the order and exactitude prevailing in the Universe as an effect and natural result of the intelligence of this very cause. No longer will we be surprised by anything in Nature. All of its operations, and even the destruction of Beings, will seem simple to us and in conformity with its Law because death is not non-existence but an action, and the time of which Nature is composed is simply an assemblage and succession of actions, sometimes creative and sometimes destructive. In short, we must expect to find all through the Universe the character and evidence of the Wisdom which constructed it and supports it. To the same extent that this truth makes itself perceptible to people's thinking, will they be struck by the disasters and confusion they so often perceive in Nature. To what can this contrast be attributed? Will it be to that active and intelligent cause which is the true Principle of the perfection of corporeal things? It is impossible to consider this idea for even a moment, and it is absolutely repugnant to think that this powerful cause could simultaneously act for itself and against itself. Therefore, let not this distorted spectacle take from us any of our reverence and weaken our veneration for this cause. After what has been observed concerning the dual intellectual Law, that is, regarding the opposition of the two Principles, we must know to whom the ills and disorders of Nature can be attributed, although this is not yet the place to speak of the motives causing them to operate. But a childish defiance of such truths is one of the obstacles that has most retarded the progress of our knowledge and light. It is the primary cause of those errors in people's thinking regarding such matters and of all the uncertain reasoning they have advanced when explaining the nature of things. If people had applied themselves better to a consideration of the two differing Principles they were forced to acknowledge, they would have perceived the difference and opposition of their faculties and actions. They would have seen that evil is absolutely foreign to the Principle of good. Although evil acts by its own power upon the temporal productions of the good Principle with which it is imprisoned, it has no real action upon the good in itself. The good Principle soars above all Beings, supporting those which by their nature cannot support themselves and permitting those to whom it has accorded the privilege of freedom to act and defend themselves. They would have seen that although wisdom has arranged things in such a manner that evil often is the occasion of good, this does not mean that, at the moment evil acts, it is not evil, nor could its action be attributed to the Principle of good in any way from then on. Having such awareness could also convince us of the fragility of humankind's systems and confirm our belief in the Principles we are considering. In other words, only by distinguishing the true nature and properties of the different Beings can we arrive at and form a proper understanding of Nature. But it is time to return to our subject. The observations we just made regarding the Laws which direct the formation of bodies may have caused us to discover the necessity for a superior and intelligent cause; and we may have seen that the two inferior agents namely, the primary Principle, innate within the seeds, and the secondary Principle, operating the reaction, are insufficient in themselves to produce even the slightest corporification. In the long run it is Nature itself and reason that teach us such truths, and it is no longer permissible to entertain any doubts in this regard. Nevertheless, I must fortify this doctrine by a simple observation that will give it much greater weight and authority. I shall therefore call attention to the fact that the superior, universal, temporal, intelligent, active cause, possessing as such the knowledge and direction of inferior Beings, has an influence upon these inferior Beings. This will undoubtedly become much more apparent to our eyes if we observe that, through its action, all corporeal Beings originally took their form and now maintain and reproduce themselves, as they will maintain and reproduce themselves until the end of time. The faculties of such a powerful Being must surely extend to all the work it directs. They must be such that it can watch over all, preside over all, and embrace all parts of its works. We must therefore presume that it directed the production of the substance serving as the foundation of bodies, much as it subsequently directed the corporification of this same substance. Moreover, its power and intelligence must extend both to the essence of the bodies and to the actions forming them. Single in its nature and its action, as are all simple Beings, its faculties must manifest the same character everywhere. Although there exists a distinction between the production of the seeds of matter and the corporification of the forms proceeding from it, it is not possible for the Law directing either one to be different, otherwise it would have a diversity of action, which would be completely contrary to everything we have observed. We have previously indicated that the essences or the elements from which bodies are universally composed are three in number, as it is by the number three that the Law directing the production of elements manifests itself. Therefore, the Law directing the corporification of these same elements must also manifest by the number three. It is the necessity of a simple action in a simple Being which causes us to sense this analogy; and when this Law's uniformity happens to be confirmed by strict examination and by fact itself, it then becomes a reality to us. It would, in effect, be profaning the idea that we must have concerning the intelligent cause not to recognize its obvious action upon those Beings which are unable to dispense with it for even an instant. Confusing this intelligent cause with the inferior causes of all acts and corporeal productions would be equivalent to excluding it, and we would in effect be returning matter to the sole direction of these causes or of these inferior actions. We have seen that these causes and inferior actions have been reduced to two in numbernamely, that which is innate in all seeds and that which proceeds from a secondary agent (which is necessarily employed in every act of corporeal reproduction). Let us examine once again whether I have been wrong in stating that it would be impossible to obtain any production from these two causes if left to themselves. If such causes are equal, they will remain inactive; if one is superior to the other, the superior will surmount the inferior and render it nil, so that only one can then act. Yet we know from all possible evidence that one cause alone is insufficient for the formation of any corporeal Being. Besides the action or the innate Principle in all seeds, there must be present a secondary action which is indispensable in causing the production to operate in the same way that this secondary cause must activate the seeds during their entire duration. We know, I repeat, that without the cooperation of these two causes or two actions, it is impossible for any corporeal Being to receive birth and corporification, and for it to conserve life. However, we clearly perceive that if these two causes were returned solely to their own action nothing would occur, since the one surmounting the other would remain alone. Does not this fact teach us the necessity of a third cause, whose presence and intelligence serve to direct these two inferior causes and to maintain between them the balance and mutual cooperation upon which the Law of corporeal nature is established? Therefore, it will suffice to recall what I have previously stated. I have established that there exists one Law by which all the Principles of bodies were subjected to the reaction of other bodies or secondary Principles. Did that not place observers in a position to recognize the two distinct agents employed in the corporification of every Being of form? Then, I demonstrated that without a superior and intelligent cause, those two inferior agents could not produce the slightest corporification, since they must have a primary action although we have been unable to discover it in them. Thus, the necessity for a superior agent in the temporal is demonstrated. Since everything teaches us that there exists a physical, immaterial, and intelligent cause, which presides in all the facts that matter presents to us, the bringing together of all these proofs must produce in us the most steadfast conviction. Let us now return to the tertiary number by which this cause has manifested its Law in the elements. I know that at first there will be a lack of agreement with me when I inform you that the elements are three in number, even though four are universally recognized. Having heard me speak of Earth, Water, and Fire, without having made any mention of Air, has surely caused surprise. I must therefore explain why only three elements should be recognized, and why Air is not one of the elements. Nature indicates that there are only three possible dimensions in bodies; that there are only three possible divisions in every extended Being. There are only three figures in geometry; there are only three innate faculties in any Being; there are only three temporal worlds; there are only three degrees of expiation for a person; and there are only three grades in true Freemasonry. In a word, no matter how one envisages created things, it is impossible to discover anything above three. Why would this Law which universally manifests itself with so much exactitude not have the same number of elements as those which are the foundation for bodies? And why would it make itself apparent in the effects of these elements, if these elements themselves were not subject to it? It must be stated, therefore, that the fragility of bodies indicates the fragility of their base, thus conflicting with the theory which gives them four elements for their essence; for, if they were formed of four elements, they would be indestructible, and the world would be eternal. On the contrary, being formed of only three elements, they have no permanent existence, because unity is not in them, which will be very clear to those who know the true Laws of numbers. Thus, having previously demonstrated the state of imperfection and decay of matter, it is necessary to find this decay in the substances composing it and proof that its number cannot be perfect since it is not perfect itself. I will pause for a moment, so as to prevent any alarm that my statements could spread in many minds at this time. I have declared the number three to be fragile and perishable; therefore, what will become of this Ternary which is so universally revered that certain peoples have never counted beyond this number? I declare that no one respects this sacred Ternary more than I do. I know that without it, nothing people see and know would exist. I believe that it has existed eternally and will exist forever. None of my thoughts disproves it, and this, in fact, is where I shall obtain my answer to the present objection. I dare say to my fellow human beings that despite the veneration they feel for this Ternary, the idea they have of it is nonetheless below what they should have, and I advise them to be very reserved in their judgments upon this subject. Finally, it is very true that there are three in one, but there cannot be one in three, without it being subject to death. Thus, my Principle destroys nothing, and I can safely recognize the imperfection of matter, based upon the imperfection of its number. I strongly urge those who will read my book to make a complete distinction between the sacred Ternary and the Ternary of the actions employed in sensate and temporal things. It is certain that the Ternary employed in sensate things did not receive birth, does not exist, and is not sustained except by the superior Ternary. However, as their faculties and actions are obviously distinct, it would be impossible to conceive how this Ternary could be indivisible and beyond time were one to attempt to judge it by that which exists in time. As the latter is the only one which we are permitted to know here on Earth, I shall say very little regarding the other in this work. This is why it would be contrary to my intention if one were to infer something from my account and make from it the slightest application concerning the most sublime object of our veneration, unless it were to confirm more fully the superiority and indivisibility of this sacred Ternary. Let us now return to the subject of elements. I have taught that Air is not counted among the elements, because we cannot regard as a distinctive element this gross fluid which we breathe and which expands or contracts bodies according to it being charged to some extent with either water or fire. Undoubtedly there is within this fluid a Principle that we must call Air. But countless experiments confirm that it is incomparably more active and powerful than the gross and terrestrial elements of which bodies are composed. Air is a product of Fire, not the material fire we know, but the Fire which has produced Fire and all sensate things. In short, Air is absolutely necessary for the life and sustenance of all elementary bodies; it will not exist any longer than they will. But, not being matter as the bodies are, it cannot be regarded as an element, and consequently, one may truly say that it cannot enter into the composition of these same bodies. What, therefore, is the purpose of Air in Nature? We shall not hesitate to say that it is destined simply to communicate to corporeal Beings the forces and virtues of this Fire which has produced such beings. It is the vehicle for the life of these elements, and only through its help can they receive any support for their existence, since without it all circumferences would return to the center from which they originated. It must be noted, however, that Air not only cooperates the most in the sustenance of bodies, it is also the primary agent of their destruction. This universal Law of Nature should no longer surprise us, since the dual action constituting the material Universe teaches us that one of these actions can never dominate except to the detriment of the other. This is the reason why, when corporeal Beings do not enjoy all of their particular virtues, it is necessary to protect them from Air if we wish to preserve them. This is why we carefully cover all wounds and sores, among which are sometimes found ones requiring no other remedy than protection from the action of Air. This is also why all species of animals seek cover during sleep, because Air will react more strongly upon them at this time than during their waking period when they are in possession of all their forces for resisting its attacks and they derive from it only the advantages necessary for their preservation. If, apart from these properties of Air, one desires to know more about its superiority over the elements, let it suffice to observe that when one succeeds in separating Air from bodies to the fullest possible degree, Air always conserves its strength and elasticity, regardless of the violence and the duration of the operations that are made upon it. From this fact we must recognize that Air is unalterable. This does not apply to any of the other elements, which all fall into dissolution when they are separated from each other. Due to all of these reasons we must place Air above the elements and not confuse it with them. However, at this point the following objection could be made: although I do not include Air among the elements, I nevertheless connect it to the preservation of bodies and I do not grant it any more longevity than they have. This, therefore, necessarily adds one more Principle to the constitution of corporeal Beings, so they will no longer be Ternary as I have stated. By examining the analogy that I have established between the Law of the constitution of bodies and the number of the agents causing corporification to operate, one might conclude that I am also compelled to augment the number of such agents. There undoubtedly exists a cause above the three temporal causes of which I have just spoken, since it is this cause which directs them and communicates their action to them. But this cause, which dominates the three others, makes itself known only by manifesting them to our eyes. It encloses itself within a sanctuary that is impenetrable to all Beings subject to the temporal, with both its abode and actions being absolutely beyond the sensate. This means we cannot include it either with the three causes employed in the actions of the corporification of matter or in any other temporal action. This same reason would also prevent us from admitting that Air is counted among the elements, even though the elements and bodies they engender cannot exist for a moment without it. Although its action is necessary for the preservation of bodies, it is, however, not subject to perception by corporeal sight as are bodies and elements. Finally, in the decomposition of bodies we visibly perceive Water, Earth, and Fire, and although we know that Air is undoubtedly present, we can never see it because its action is of another order and class. Thus, a perfect analogy can always be found between the three actions necessary for the existence of bodies and the number of the three constitutive elements, since Air is in the order of elements, what the primary and dominant cause is in the order of temporal actions operating corporification. And, in the same way that this cause cannot be confused with the three actions mentioned above, even though it likewise directs them, Air cannot be confused with the three elements, even though it vivifies them. As we cannot avoid recognizing the three elements, we are therefore fully justified when admitting the necessity of these three actions. Concerning this subject, I will enter into some detail upon the universal relationship of these three elements with bodies and the faculties of bodies. This will place us on the path leading to the making of some discoveries of another kind and it will confirm our certainty of all the Principles I expound. Among anatomists, the generally accepted division is that which recognizes three sections in the human body, namely, the head, chest, and abdomen. There can be no doubt that Nature itself has directed anatomists in this division, and that through a secret instinct, they themselves justify what I have said concerning the number and different actions of the three different elementary Principles. First, we find that the seminal Principles which serve for a person's corporeal reproduction are contained and operate in the lower abdomen. Now, as it is well known that the action of mercury is the basis for all material form, it is easy to see that the inferior or lower part of the abdomen truly offers us the picture of the action of the mercurial element. Secondly, the chest contains the heart or the seat of blood - in other words, the Principle of life or of the action of bodies. But it is also known that fire or sulfur is the Principle of all vegetation and of all corporeal production. The relation of the chest or upper abdomen to the sulfurous element is thereby clearly and sufficiently indicated. As for the third division, the head, it contains the source or primitive substance of the nerves, which are the organs of sensitivity within animal bodies. Likewise, it is recognized that the property of salt is to render everything perceptible. It is therefore clear that there exists a perfect analogy between their faculties, and that consequently there is an incontestable connection between the head and the third element, or salt. This concurs perfectly with what physiologists teach us regarding the source of nerve fluid. No matter how correct these divisions are found to be, and no matter how certain their relationship with the three elements is, to merely take note of this would indicate a very limited viewpoint. Apart from this faculty pertaining to the head of carrying within itself the Principle and agent of sensitivity, is it not obvious that the head is endowed with all the organs by which an animal can distinguish between objects that are either beneficial or harmful to it? And furthermore, that the head's special duty is to watch over the preservation of the individual? Moreover, seeing that the chest is not only the seat of blood, is it not also possible to observe in it the recipient of water, or the spongy viscera, which gather the air's humidity and communicate it to the fire or blood so as to moderate its heat? Then, without always having to resort to the head in discovering our three elements, we would clearly perceive all three within the two inferior divisions of the abdomen. However, even though the head is elementary in itself, 1t continues to dominate the others by occupying the center of the triangle and maintaining its equilibrtum due to the organs with which it is endowed as well as to the rank it occupies. We can thereby avoid that general error by which the superior is confused with the inferior, and the active with the passive, since the distinction between them is clearly written, even upon matter. But these subjects are too exalted to be completely revealed to the eyes of the multitude. Such things have not been considered by anatomy, because, as it is isolated by people, as are all other sciences, those who are its proponents have believed they could treat bodies and the parts of bodies separately, and they have persuaded themselves that the divisions which they have proposed bear no relationship to the Principles of a superior order. It is, however, in the division I have just discussed that they may find a perceptible image of the Quaternary, that is, of the number without which one cannot know anything, since according to what will be later revealed, it is the universal emblem of perfection. I shall not say any more regarding this number at the present time so as to avoid deviating too much from my subject. I am satisfied in having given a glimpse of it, and I will set forth other truths regarding the arrangement of the different elementary Principles in both the human body and in all other bodies. When observers desired to know the origin of things with so much fervor, it was useless for them to expand their search outside of and far from themselves. Rather, they needed to direct their eyes upon themselves. The Laws of their own bodies would have indicated to them those Laws which gave birth to everything that bodies have received. They would have seen that the opposing action which occurs in the chest between sulfur and salt, or between fire and water, keeps the body alive, and if either of these agents happen to be missing, the body ceases to exist. By applying this observation to all corporeal existence, observers will recognize that these two Principles, through their opposition and combat, are equally responsible for the life and corporeal revolution of all Nature. Nothing else is needed to further our understanding. People have, within themselves, all the means and proofs of knowledge, and they only need to examine themselves so as to know how things obtained their origin. Yet we will note that it is absolutely necessary that the two agents equally hostile to one another have a mediator which serves to limit their action and prevent them from overcoming one another, since otherwise everything would come to an end. This mediator is the mercurial Principle, the basis of all corporification, and the one with which the other two Principles cooperate in reaching the same goal. Mercury, being prevalent everywhere with them, obliges them to act everywhere according to the prescribed order. In short, to operate and sustain forms. By this harmony, animal bodies experience the action of fire through their center, and they do so without suffering and without experiencing any disturbance, since the same Law directs this action. I need not reiterate that in these two examples the true property of fluid is to moderate the ardor of fire, which, without such action, would exceed its limits, as is observed in all the effervescence of the blood of animals and in all the eruptions of terrestrial fire. One senses that if these different fires were not moderated by a fluid penetrating to their very center, they would not experience any limit to their action, and they would successively set fire to all bodies and to the entire Earth. This is why animals breathe and why Earth is subject to ebb and flow in its aquatic portion. Each animal receives a fluid while breathing which humidifies its blood aside from that which it receives from food and from the liquids consumed by drinking; and through ebb and flow the earth receives in all its parts the moisture and salt necessary to water its sulfur, that is, its Principle of vegetation. I have not made any mention of the way in which plants and minerals receive their moisture. Since they are attached to the earth, it is natural that they feed upon foods and from the digestion of their mother; for where would the water come from to even moisten them if not from Earth itself? At this point, we will allow our readers to make comparisons with all they have observed concerning the active and intelligent cause. They will be allowed to note that if everything emanates from a single source, it must be presumed that intellectual law and corporeal law follow the same course, each in its class and within its own specific action. Finally, they will discover that if the volatile is everywhere, there must be likewise a nonvolatile to contain it everywhere. As for us, let us continue to show why such beautiful analogies are nearly always forgotten by observers. The reason is that, far from having discerned agents and Laws of two different classes, they have not even discerned, as we have seen, the agents and different Laws in the same class. It is because when separating all and examining these objects individually, they have scrutinized them in isolation and have not been wise and intelligent enough to suspect any relationship they had with other objects. If, for instance, they are still in search of a satisfactory explanation regarding the ebb and flow of which I have just spoken, it is only because they always retain this unfortunate habit of dividing the sciences and considering each Being separately. Had they not deprived matter of its Principle by confusing the two, had they not removed from this same Principle a superior Law, which is active and intelligent, temporal and physical, and which must regulate all in its progress, they would have perceived that since no corporeal Being can dispense with it, Earth, like all other bodies, was subject to it. They would have seen that it was upon this Earth that this dual Law, indispensable for the existence of all materially corporified Beings, was operative in nature. However, of these two laws, we have seen that one resides primarily in the corporeal Principle of any Being of form, whether general or particular, whereas the other is of external origin. It is therefore necessary that this second law be outside the earth and all other bodies, although it is absolutely essential to the earth's existence, as it is to theirs. Thus, we shall recognize here, as we do in the dual movement of the heart of animal humankind, the presence of two agents violently chained to one another, which are directed by a superior physical cause and which each manifest in turn its sensate action to material eyes. We know that this manifestation occurs during the phases of the moon, at such time as the igneous solar action makes itself felt upon the universal saline part. Although we cannot have knowledge of these two agents, except through their sensate action, much as we cannot know the Principles of bodies except through their corporeal production or their envelope, we have no excuse in doubting their power, since their effects demonstrate it in such an irrevocable fashion. Thus, this phenomenon of ebb and flow is but a grandiose effect of this dual law, to which everything possessing a material body is necessarily subject. I shall add that since we perceive so much regularity in Nature's course and actions, while sensing that the corporeal Beings composing it are not susceptible to intelligence, there must exist for them in the temporal a knowing, powerful, and active hand to direct them, which is placed above them by a Principle as true as the hand itself, and consequently indestructible and self-existent. The law emanating from either one is the rule and measure of all the laws operating in corporeal Nature. However obvious these truths may be, I know that once they exist beyond the sensate, it is only with difficulty that they will receive consideration by the observers of my era, because, having allowed themselves to be engulfed in the sensate, they have lost contact with what lies beyond the sensate. Nevertheless, since the road they follow undoubtedly enlightens them much less than the one I have indicated, I shall not cease to advise them to search for the reason of sensate things within the Principle rather than to search for the Principle within sensate things. If they are searching for a real and true Principle, how can it be found in sensate appearances? If they are searching for an immaterial Principle, how can it be found in a body? If they are searching for an indestructible Principle, how can it be found in an assemblage? In a word, if they are searching for a living Principle in itself, how can it be found in a Being which possesses only a dependent life that must cease as soon as its temporary action is fulfilled? I have only one thing to say to those people who continue to pursue such fanciful research: if they absolutely wish that their senses understand, let them begin by finding senses which speak, as this is the only way they can be made to express intelligence. This proof will eventually become a fundamental Principle, and it is this truth which will cause people to conceive the true means of attaining the knowledge which must be the sole object of their desires. But in the meantime, let us not fail to direct our eyes upon the different parts of Nature, which will best serve to persuade observers of the certainty of the various laws we are disclosing to them. They will then convince themselves of the truth of the causes which are beyond their senses, since they will see their course written in such a palpable way in sensate things. As I previously said, mercury universally serves as a mediator to fire and water. As irreconcilable enemies, they could never act in concert without an intermediary Principle, because this intermediary Principle, partaking of both natures, brings them together at the same moment that it separates them, thus causing all their properties to turn to the advantage of corporeal Beings. There also exists in Nature, in the form of special bodies, an aerial mercury which separates the fire issuing from the terrestrial portion, from the fluid which is spread over the earth. Before this fluid can reach it, aerial mercury purifies it and makes it communicate only healthful properties to the earth. This action produces the beneficial quality of morning dew, which is superior to evening dew and fog, as they are only imperfectly purified fluids. Therefore, due to this universal property, mercury maintains in all bodies the balance between the two opposing Principles of fire and water, and thus it performs in the formation and composition of bodies what the active and intelligent cause performs in all existing things when it maintains the balance between the two laws of action and reaction which constitute the entire Universe. As long as mercury occupies this position, the individual's well-being is assured, because this element tempers the communication of fire with water. When these two last-mentioned Principles surmount or break their barriers and come together, they then engage in combat with all their might. That is in their nature, and they produce the greatest disorders and disturbances in the individual of which they form the assemblage, because, in the collision of these two agents, one must always overcome the other and thereby destroy the balance. Thunder is for us the most perfect image of this truth. We know that it is produced by Earth's saline and sulfurous exhalations, which, being drawn from their neutral abode by the sun's action and thrust outward by terrestrial fire, rise in the air, where aerial mercury takes possession of and envelops them, somewhat like the way that coal amalgamates and envelops sulfur and saltpeter in gunpowder. In this situation, aerial mercury does not thrust itself between the two Principles composing the exhalation, because it would be too active to remain there, and, being of a class superior to theirs, they cannot together constitute a body. Rather, aerial mercury envelops and encloses them through its natural tendency to form circles and spheres, and through its inherent property of binding and embracing all. At the same time, it possesses another very remarkable faculty, that of dividing itself in an incomprehensible manner, so that even the tiniest globule of such sulfurous and saline exhalations will encounter a sufficient quantity of mercury that will serve as its envelope. It is the mass of all these globules that forms clouds or the matrix of the thunderbolt. In this formation, we cannot avoid recognizing very distinctly our two agents, namely salt and sulfur, and also the image of the superior agent, or this aerial mercury, which binds the two others. Thus, we clearly perceive the necessity for these different substances to cooperate in the formation of all types of assemblages, and we perceive that it is matter alone which makes this known to us. But it is not enough to find here the true signs of all the Principles that have been established concerning the universal laws of Beings. They must also be found in the differing actions and results obtained from the mixtures of these elementary substances. For the time being let us consider the clouds where thunderbolts are formed as being merely the union of two kinds of vapors, one terrestrial, the other aerial. If no other agent were to heat them and cause them to ferment, most certainly we would never witness any explosion. It is therefore absolutely necessary to admit once again that an external heat communicates itself to the two substances enclosed in the mercurial envelope and divides with a clap of thunder all the saline and sulfurous globules enclosed in these clouds. This external heat is visible testimony of all the Principles that we have stated previously and which our readers can easily apply. But, to make it even more simple for them, it will not be remiss to examine the different properties of salt and sulfur in the thunderbolt's explosion, because we can then present some ideas regarding the two primary Laws of Nature in view of the fact that fire and sulfur are the organs and instruments of these two Laws. As has been seen, external heat acts upon the mass of material composing the thunderbolt. Its material envelope is dissolved, which by its nature is susceptible to considerable division. The heat then contacts the two internal substances and ignites the sulfurous part, which thrusts away the saline part forcibly, thereby breaking their union, being contrary to its true law, and forming a disorder in Nature. In this explosion, the mercury is so prodigiously divided that everything it contains is liberated. As for the mercury itself, after having experienced this complete dissolution, it falls with the fluid upon the earth's surface. Rainwater possesses more properties than other waters because it is more charged with mercury, and this mercury is infinitely purer than terrestrial mercury. This operation is determined therefore by two other substances, namely those which in corporeal Nature are the signs of the two Laws, and the two incorporeal Principles. Also, all the effects that we see produced by thunder are based upon the various mixtures of these two substances. In fact, it is well known that fire, being the Principle of all elementary action, gathers together the terrestrial and celestial vapors of which the thunderbolt is formed. Fire also causes them to ferment and subsequently brings about their dissolution. Therefore, the thunderbolt's origin and explosion must be attributed to fire. As for the noise which results from the thunderbolt's explosion, it can only be attributed to the shock of the saline part upon columns of air, because fire by itself will not produce any noise which can be readily perceived when fire acts in its usual way. And although fire is the Principle of all elementary action, nevertheless none of these actions can be made perceptible in Nature without salt. Color, taste, scent, sound, magnetism, electricity, and light all manifest and are perceived through it. This is why we cannot doubt that it is also the instrument of the noise in thunder, seeing that the thunderbolt and its explosion will be more violent when the thunderbolt is more fully charged with saline parts. Moreover, we cannot doubt that salt influences the color of lightning, which is much whiter when salt is more dominant than when sulfur is more prevalent. Finally, seeing that salt is the instrument of all perceptible effects, the thunderbolt is much more dangerous when it abounds in salt, because its explosion, being proportionately more violent, causes greater shocks and more frightening destruction. Indeed, the explosion caused by an abundance of salt manifests almost always in the lower part of the cloud, as it is the greater portion, the least exposed to the heat, and consequently the most susceptible to congelation, thereby producing hail. On the other hand, when a thunderbolt abounds in sulfur, its noise is neither sharp nor sudden. Its lightning flashes are red in color, and its explosion only rarely succeeds in communicating its effects down to us because it ordinarily occurs in the upper part of the cloud due to the weakness of this portion of the cloud and to the natural property of fire, which is to rise. a2

Although we do not always have visual proof of it, this is why the thunderbolt strikes every time. This is also why knowledge of the materials with which the thunderbolt is charged will indicate on what parts of the earth it may strike, because it always tends toward substances similar to itself. However, due to the fact that in the shock and opposition of all these different materials, the direction changes at every instant, it is impossible to determine the exact point where it will strike, as we would need to know its entire direction. Thus, this is where we clearly perceive the effect of the dual action in Nature. However, when all these different shocks, which are so apparently indistinct, are subjected to closer scrutiny, they present to us the fixed Law of a cause which directs them, in keeping with all other corporeal actions. This cause primarily manifests to us its property and power through this tendency of the materials in thunderbolts toward similar substances. Indeed, if the thunderbolt was directed toward a portion of the earth's surface in which it would lose its communication with columns of air charged with similar substances, the thunderbolt would finish when all its matter had been consumed and it would be extinguished at the site of its fall. This is why a thunderbolt can never rise again when it falls into deep waters, because its free communication with air is then suspended and it does not find the substances necessary for its sustenance within water. But when the direction of a thunderbolt leads it to columns of air charged with substances similar to its own, it follows and attaches itself to them, thereby adding more or less to its forces in keeping with what it finds available in sustaining itself. By means of all these columns of which the atmosphere is composed, a thunderbolt can rapidly cover different routes even when the columns of air are strongly opposed to one another. Thus, it must turn about when it encounters substances opposing it or when it encounters a location where air cannot escape, because such air is impenetrable and thus offers an invincible resistance. In other words, the thunderbolt will stop only when it no longer encounters any of these substances upon which it can sustain itself. And when it seems ready to end its course, should it again encounter new substances, it will again gather its forces and produce new effects. This is what makes thunderbolts seemingly irregular and generally so incomprehensible. However, we cannot deny that there exists a Law in this very irregularity because, in all the Principles we have already discussed, there is not a single instant when this Nature is left to its own direction and can take one step without the cause established to govern it. I have just one more thing to say regarding the subject that I have just covered. It has been commonly believed that the person who sees lightning will have nothing to fear from thunderbolts. Let us see to what extent credence should be given to this idea. If there were only one single column of air and only a single explosion of the thunderbolt, it is certain that the person who has seen lightning will have nothing to fear from the bolt w

accompanying this lightning because celestial time is so instantaneous that it cannot be perceived upon the earth. But, when a series of air columns charged with substances similar to those of the thunderbolt are in great profusion, a person may avoid the first explosion and not be protected from the second explosion, nor from all those which will be successively ignited after the lightning is perceived since the thunderbolt can extend its course as long as it encounters columns suitable for sustaining it. A person who has had time to see the lightning would then be wrong in believing himself safe until the chain of all the explosions occurring in this thunderbolt has run its course. However, this opinion does have some foundation and it cannot be contested in one circumstance. Since there can be no lightning without explosions, likewise and with stronger reason, there can be no explosions without lightning. Now, when the interval between the two is nearly nonexistent, were a man to be struck at the first explosion or at the last, it is certain that he could never have seen the lightning of the particular explosion of the thunderbolt which struck him. No matter how frivolous these natural observations may seem at first glance, I feel that they are most appropriate for creating in human eyes a picture of the universality of the Principle to which a person must attach herself, if she wishes to know. I shall only add that after my little presentation it will be easy for my readers to sense how they may protect themselves from thunder. This can be accomplished by breaking the columns of air in all directions, that is, both horizontal and perpendicular ones, and by chasing to the extremities the direction of the thunderbolt, because then, by remaining in the center, we shall not fear its approach. I shall not reveal the reason for this, as this would lead me astray from my task. I shall therefore allow my readers to discover it on their own, but I beg them to reflect upon what they have just read regarding the different properties and actions of the elements, as well as upon the Laws directing them, even when they appear to be in the greatest confusion. They will undoubtedly conclude that it is impossible for them to deny the existence of such Laws although they cannot perceive their causes and agents. Let us pursue our course and prove through humanity itself the reality of those causes which are superior to or distinct from the sensate. The details previously given concerning the analogy of the three elements with the three different parts of the human body are subject, in connection with humankind itself, to explanations of an order much worthier of people, and which must be of greater interest to them seeing that they are directly related to their Being and that they will indicate the difference between their sensate and intellectual faculties, or, if one wishes to express it another way, their passive and active faculties. The shadows in which people generally dwell regarding such matters may be considered only a minor contribution to the errors that we have seen them commit regarding their own nature, and by not perceiving the most striking disparities, they have not as yet acquired the basic notions of their Being. The real reason which causes people to believe themselves similar to animals is, and let us have no doubt about it, that they have not discerned their various faculties. By confusing the faculties of matter with those of intelligence, they have recognized in humankind only a single Being and consequently only a single Principle, and only the same essence in all things in existence. Thus, people, animals, stones, and all Nature appear the same to them and differ only by their organization and form. I shall not repeat here what was said at the beginning of this work regarding the differences between innate actions in Beings and also the differences between matter and its Principle, from which it has been possible to recognize very clearly the error of those who have confused all of these things. But I shall begin by begging my readers to observe with attentive eyes what occurs in each animal (and animal person as well) to which the division of form into three distinct parts applies, and to determine whether each of these three divisions may not really indicate to us faculties which differ although belonging to the same Being and which all have the material for an object and goal. Who is not aware, in fact, that everything is constituted by weight, number, and measure? Now, weight is not number, number is not measure, and measure is neither one nor the other. If I may be permitted to say it, number is what begets action, measure is what regulates it, and weight is what operates it. Even though these three words are universally applicable, they undoubtedly do not signify the same thing in the animal and the intellectual person. Nevertheless, if the three parts of animal bodies are constituted by these three Principles, it is necessary that we find in them the application thereof. It is through the means of the organs of the head that an animal brings into play the Principle of its actions, which is the reason why number must be applied to this part. The heart or the blood experiences a sensation of greater or lesser force according to the individual's relative strength and constitution. The degree of this sensation determines the degree of the action in the sensate. This, therefore, is why measure can be applied to the second division of the animal body. Finally, the intestines operate the same action which, according to the Law regulating the peaceful tenure of Nature, must be limited within the animal to the digestion of foodstuffs in the stomach and to the preparation of reproductive seed in the loins. This is the reason why weight must be attributed to this third part, which, with the two others, essentially constitute all animals. fis

Since it is certain that we cannot avoid sensing the differing nature of these three kinds of actions, we must necessarily recognize an essential difference existing between the faculties manifesting them. However, we cannot deny that these different faculties do not reside within the same Being. We are therefore obliged to admit that although this Being constitutes only a single individual, it is nevertheless evident that not everything is equal within him. The faculty governing digestion and reproduction does not render him sensate, whereas the faculty rendering him sensate does not cause him to operate and execute his actions according to his sensitivity; and each one of these acts carries with it some peculiar characteristic. Let us apply to people the same observations and we shall then preserve people from the attempts to engulf them in horrible confusion. If one perceives that, within people, weight, number, and measure represent faculties which not only differ between them, but are infinitely superior to those that these three Laws have shown to exist within matter, we will be justified in concluding that the Being who is endowed with these faculties will differ considerably from the corporeal Being, and then there will be no longer any excuse for confusing one with the other. You will surely agree without any difficulty that the three distinctions we have made regarding corporeal functions may be applied to a person's body and to that of any other animal, because she is animal in this part. Through the aid of the organs of her head, a person's body can manifest, as in animals, her faculties and animal functions. She experiences, as they do, sensations in the heart. She experiences in the lower abdomen, as they do, the effects to which corporeal Laws subject all animals for their maintenance and reproduction. Thus, in this sense, weight, number, and measure belong to humankind to the same extent that they belong to any other animal. But it is no longer possible to doubt that these three signs cause within people certain effects of which all the properties of matter do not offer the slightest trace. Although we basically agree that all the thoughts of present-day people are of external origin, we cannot deny, however, that the internal act and the consciousness of this thought occur within them independently of their corporeal senses. It is therefore in such internal acts that we shall surely discover the expression of these three signs - weight, number, and measure - from which all sensate acts, determined by people to be a consequence of their freedom, subsequently originate. The first of these signs is number, which we apply to thought as being the Principle and subject without which none of the subsequent acts could occur. Following this line of thought, we discover in people a will, either good or bad, which is solely responsible for the pattern of their conduct and their conformity to justice. Therefore, it appears to us that nothing could suit this will better than the second sign, namely measure. In the third place, from this thought and this will, there results an act similar to them, and it is to this act, taken as a result, that we must apply the third sign or weight. Nevertheless, as with thought and will, this act occurs within people. It is true that it, in turn, begets a sensate act which must repeat to the eyes of the body the order and progression of everything transpiring within the intelligence. But, as the relationship of this internal act to the sensate act stemming from it is the mystery of people, I cannot, without the danger of committing some indiscretion, continue further on this subject, and if I mention it subsequently when considering languages, it will never be expressed in any other way than with reserve. This does not prevent people from concurring with me by recognizing weight, number, and measure in the inner or intellectual person as being images of the laws by which everything is constituted. Furthermore, even though we recognized these three signs in animals, we shall certainly refrain from making any comparison between animals and people. In animals, these signs operate solely upon the senses, whereas in people, on the contrary, they operate upon their senses and intelligence, but in a manner peculiar to each of their faculties and in relation to the rank they occupy, one in touch with the other. If anyone should persist in denying the existence of these two faculties in people, I would only ask of those who contest them to direct their eyes upon themselves. In so doing, they would perceive that the various parts of their bodies where they manifest constitute a striking indication of the difference in these faculties. When a person wishes to consider some particular subject of reasoning, or when he proposes to find the solution to some difficulty, is it not within the head that all these efforts occur? When, on the contrary, a person experiences feelings, no matter what their nature and object, whether intellectual or sensate, does he not experience within the heart all the movement, agitation, and sensations of joy, pleasure, pain, fear, love, in short, all the behavior of which he is capable? Does he not feel also how the actions that occur within each of these parts are opposite and that, if they did not come closer due to a superior link, they would be by themselves irreconcilable? This, therefore, is the manifest difference that should convince people once again that there exists within them more than one nature. Yet, if a person, despite her state of reprobation, still finds within herself a nature superior to her sensate and corporeal nature, why would she not admit, in the universal sensate, a similar nature but one equally distinct and superior to the Universe, although particularly established to govern it? UL

This is also where we shall be apprised of what we must think regarding a question that commonly troubles people, namely, in what part of the body the active Principle or soul is placed, and what location has been assigned to it as the seat of all its operations. In corporeal and sensate Beings, the active Principle resides in the blood which, as the fire element of the body, is the source of corporeal life. Then, according to what has been said when discussing the different faculties of Beings, we cannot deny that its primary seat is none other than within the heart, from which it extends its action to all parts of the body. No one should be confused any longer by the difficulty encountered by those who have stated that if the corporeal soul resided in the blood, it would be divided and would partly escape when the animal suffered any loss of blood, as this loss would thereby weaken the animal's action through the loss of a means of exercising the soul. But the soul does not suffer any alteration within itself, because being simple, it is necessarily indivisible. What we call the death of bodies is therefore nothing more than the complete cessation of such action, which finds itself deprived of its secondary vehicles as occurs in the case of exhaustion; or when it is too constrained as happens in diseases caused by tainted fluids within the body; or when it is too free and thereby intercepted or interrupted, as happens in cases where wounds affect any parts indispensable to the life of the body. Although I declare that life or the corporeal soul resides in the blood, I must, nevertheless, call attention in passing to the fact that blood is insensate. Such an observation will enable people to recognize the difference existing between the faculties of matter and the faculties of the Principle of matter, and this will prevent them from confusing two Beings so distinct from one another. As people are similar to animals in their sensate and corporeal lives, everything just stated concerning the active animal Principle can apply to them only in regard to this particular part. But their intellectual Principle was not meant to reside in matter, and one of the greatest errors that people have committed is to search for its origin in matter and to try assigning it a fixed location and a bond selected among corporeal assemblages, as though a portion of impure and imperishable matter could serve as a barrier to a Being of this nature. Due to the Being's quality as an immaterial Being, it is quite obvious that he can only have a link and affinity with another immaterial Being, and one may perceive that communication would be impracticable with any other Being. Moreover, a person's intellectual Principle rests upon her immaterial corporeal Principle, and not upon any part of her material Being. This is where it is bound for a time by the superior hand which has condemned it to this place. But by its nature, the intellectual Principle dominates the corporeal Principle as the corporeal Principle dominates the body. We should no longer doubt this, due to the fact that, as indicated previously, all its faculties are manifested in the superior part of the head. In a word, it makes use of this Principle for the sensate execution of these same faculties, and such is the means of clearly discerning the seat and function of these two different Principles of humankind. Although the corporeal Principle is inferior due to its nature and place, it is through his links with it that a person experiences in his intellectual Being so much suffering, anxiety, deprivation, and that terrible obscurity which causes him to bring forth so many errors. Through such ties, he is forced to submit to the action of the senses of this corporeal Principle, whose medium is today vitally necessary to him for obtaining enjoyment of the true affections intended for him. But, since this method is uncertain and variable and does not always produce light in all its brilliance, people do not secure from it those advantages and satisfactions of which their nature is capable. This is what causes the disorder, either natural or accidental, which the sensate or corporeal Principle may experience to the extreme detriment of the intellectual Principle, in that they together weaken the instrument of people's actions and the organ of their affections. These facts have appeared so favorable to materialists that they have believed they could offer them as a solid basis for their system. In other words, having based people's intellectual faculties upon their corporeal constitution, materialists claim these faculties are fully dependent upon the good or poor condition of a person's body, according to the variable course of Nature. However, after all that has been observed regarding humankind's freedom and the difference existing between the two Beings of which he is composed, such objections are no longer of any value. People do not experience complete enjoyment of all the faculties that could pertain to their intellectual nature, since by their very origin, not all people receive the same measure of these faculties, and since a thousand events, independent of human will, can at any time disturb their corporeal constitution. But people are guilty when they allow the faculties granted to them to deteriorate through their own fault. Not everyone is born to enjoy the same property, but everyone is accountable for the use they make of what is allotted to them. Therefore, no matter what disorder or irregularity a person experiences in her corporeal constitution and intellectual faculties, let it not be a reason for us to believe her to be shielded from justice. No matter how insignificant the number and value of the faculties remaining to her, she will always be held accountable for them. Thus, it is only upon the insane person that true justice can make no demand, since, in this instance, justice itself holds that person under its scourge. Nor should we believe with our adversaries that such corporeal disorders and irregularities possess no other Principle than the blind Law by which they pretend to explain Nature. Later we shall indicate how far a person's conduct extends in his corporeal life even to his descendants. Moreover, we shall indicate at the proper time what immense faculties are at the disposal of the Principle or of this temporal cause, which is necessarily connected to the direction of the Universe. Thus, by reflecting upon the nature of this universal temporal cause, which not only presides primarily in the bodies, but which should also always be the compass to people's actions, it will be easy to see whether anything within this corporeal region can occur which lacks a motive and goal. Rather, we shall believe that all the deformities and accidents to which we are exposed in both our corporeal Being and our intellectual Being incontestably possess a Principle. We may not always recognize it, because it is usually sought for in the dead Law of matter rather than in the Law of justice, in the abuse of our will, or in the mistakes of our ancestors. Let the blind and unthinking person murmur against this justice which extends the punishment for the errors of parents to their descendants. I shall not offer this person, as proof, the physical Law by which an impure source communicates its impurities to its productions, because this well-known Law is false and excessive when applied to what is not a body. The blind and unthinking person would perceive even less that, if this justice can afflict the children through parents, it can also cleanse and exonerate parents through children. As long as we are not admitted to its counsel, this should be enough for us to suspend all our judgments upon this Law. This prudent glance, salutary and just, is one of the rewards of Wisdom itself. Therefore, how could it be granted to those who believe they can dispense with its light and who persuade themselves that they have no need of any other guide than their own senses and the crude notions of the multitude? The question I have just considered, regarding the location occupied in the body by the soul, naturally leads me to another regarding the corporeal Principle that is equally interesting and which likewise occupies observers, namely, determining why, when a person is deprived of one of her limbs through some accident, she will experience for some time afterwards sensations which seemingly emanate from the limb which is no longer a part of her body. The subject I have just considered concerning the location occupied by the soul in the body naturally leads me to another question regarding the corporeal Principle, which is of equal interest to observers. When a person loses one of his limbs through some accident, why does he experience sensations for some time afterwards which seem to emanate from the limb which is no longer part of his body? If the soul or corporeal Principle were divisible, as might be inferred from the opinions of materialists, a person would certainly never suffer again in this limb after its amputation, because the parts of the corporeal Principle separated at the time of amputation would die and no longer show any evidence of sensitivity, as they could no longer maintain any connection with their source. There would be even less reason to look for this sensitivity Principle in the severed limb itself since it loses all connection with the body from which has been separated at the moment of amputation. Therefore, it is solely within the corporeal Principle itself that we shall find the cause of the subject under consideration. Also, reminding ourselves of all the truths we have established, we can say that within people's present makeup, their corporeal Principle serves as the instrument and organ for the faculties of their intellectual Being in much the same way that their body serves as the instrument and organ for the faculties of their corporeal Principle. We have seen that the intellectual Principle will suffer if the corporeal Principle experiences disorders in the body's major organs, as these are fundamentally necessary for the exercise of the intellectual faculties. But I hope no one will believe that the essence of the intellectual Principle can ever be altered or divided in any way through such suffering. By its nature as a simple Being, we know that it always remains constant, and what it now experiences is simply a disturbance within its faculties. The organ that was to serve in their exercise, thus enabling the principle to attain the external intellectual reaction which are indispensable to it, is in a state of imperfection, and so the action of these intellectual faculties becomes either nonexistent or flows back to the intellectual Being itself. In the first instance, when the action of the faculties ceases, the intellectual Being demonstrates only privation, leading to imbecility and insanity, although there is no experience of suffering. Consequently, we must recognize that insanity does not cause suffering. In the second instance, when the action flows back to the Principle, true intellectual suffering is exhibited by a form of confusion, disorder, and uneasiness, because this Principle, in attempting to exert its action, finds itself restricted in the employment of its faculties. This is akin to the corporeal suffering experienced when a limb is severed. The body must serve as an organ to the corporeal Principle animating it. If this body experiences considerable mutilation, the full scope of the corporeal Principle's faculties can certainly no longer be executed in the affected member. This is because the action of the faculty, which has need of the amputated limb to produce its effects, no longer finds its corresponding agent, and it thus becomes nonexistent or flows back upon itself. This leads to confusion and acute suffering in the corporeal Principle from which the action emanates, and the situation is worsened if the amputation of a limb allows entry of destructive external actions which repulse the action of the corporeal Principle and cause it to return toward its center even more rapidly. Therefore, despite such suffering, we can never acknowledge any dismemberment taking place within the corporeal Principle or any other type of Principles. Rather, we shall simply admit that any corporeal Being, having need of organs to cause the execution of its acts, will suffer when these organs are disturbed because their particular effects cannot then be produced. Let me remark in passing that this is true of only the four external limbs or the corresponding parts of the body. In the case of the three primary sections of the body, none can be severed without causing the body to perish. Let us again briefly consider the subjects I have just covered. Through the various properties of the elements, I have shown several different actions in the composition of bodies. Apart from the two opposed and innate actions within these bodies, I have shown that there exists a superior Law by which they are regulated, even during their greatest conflicts and confusion. Afterwards I have shown that this superior Law is even now found in people, in whom it is distinct from the sensate, although it is connected to it. Therefore, we cannot deny that three actions need to be employed in the conduct of temporal things, in keeping with the three elements of which bodies are composed. Of the three actions assigned by the Primary Cause for directing the formation of corporeal Beings, one is the active and intelligent temporal cause, which regulates the action of the innate Principle within seeds by means of a secondary action - or of a reaction without which reproduction cannot occur. Keeping in mind what I have stated, you will undoubtedly sense the existence of and necessity for this intelligent cause, whose superior action must direct the two inferior actions. How can it be possible, therefore, that people have failed to recognize it and have believed that they could advance in the knowledge of Nature without it? The reason may now be perceived. The reason for people's failure in this regard is that they have misrepresented the numbers constituting these actions, much as they have misrepresented those constituting the elements. On one side, within that which is three, they have recognized only two. On the other side, they have thought they were seeing four in that which contains only three. In other words, in considering the two passive actions within bodies, they have lost sight of the active and intelligent cause, so that they have combined and confused the action and faculties of this cause with those of the two inferior actions, much as they have combined the passive faculty of three of the elements with the active faculty of the air, which is one of the strongest Principles of their reaction. By misrepresenting these numbers, these observers no longer perceive the correspondence existing between the ternary of the elements and the ternary of the actions bringing about universal and individual corporification. As this correspondence has eluded them and has thereby become meaningless to them, the observers have no longer felt the necessity and superiority of the intelligent cause's action upon the two inferior actions which serve as a basis for all corporeal production. They have mistaken all these different causes and actions for one another; or else they have considered them as one. And how could they have protected themselves from this error, since at the beginning they confused matter with the Principle of matter? Moreover, after giving to this matter all the properties of its Principle, it was but a simple step to also attribute to it all of the properties and actions of the Superior Cause which are indispensably necessary to its existence. It will be seen that failing to recognize the power and necessity of a third cause deprives us of the only support remaining to people for the explanation of Nature's progression. We will then credit it with Laws other than what it has received, or attribute to it something that is not within it. In brief, this is admitting what is not only unbelievable, but what is beyond all possibility of belief. Furthermore, how can one be unaware of what people have substituted in place of this indispensable cause? Who does not know the childish reasoning they have employed to explain the Laws of matter and also to provide a foundation for the system of the Universe lacking this cause? Blind to the origin of things and to the goal, duration, and action of Creation, all the explanations they have provided are the language of doubt and uncertainty. Thus, their whole doctrine is less a science than a ceaseless question. When through the sole force of their reason, people could make these observations on their own and perceive the indispensable need for a Principle serving as guide to Nature, they either searched for this Principle in the Primary Being itself and feared not to debase it in our eyes by not separating its actions from those of sensate things, or else they confined themselves to a slight recognition of the necessity for an intermediary agent linking this Primary Being and matter. And by not giving themselves the time to consider what this intermediary cause might be, they vaguely termed it blind destiny, fate, chance, and other expressions which, being devoid of life and action, could only increase the shadows in which humankind is now plunged. People have not seen that they themselves are the source for all these obscurities, and that chance was solely engendered by the will of people and occurs only through their ignorance. A person cannot deny that the laws constituting all Beings should possess unchanging effects and universal influence, but when she disturbs their accomplishment within the classes subject to her power, or when she blinds herself to their effects, she no longer perceives such indestructible laws, and she then concludes that they do not exist. Nonetheless, a person can never acknowledge the existence of chance in the acts or manifestations of the Primary Cause. Since this cause is the unique, inexhaustible source of all laws and perfection, it is necessary that the order prevailing about it be as unvarying as its own essence. Nor could chance be conceived of in the manifestations of the intelligent temporal cause, as the temporal action of the Primary Cause will always direct itself to its goal and continually surmount all obstacles. Therefore, it is only in the particular acts of a corporeal Nature and in the acts of a person's will that we can perceive any irregularity or constantly infallible and foreseen results. But, if a person had never forgotten the extent to which these particular acts and his will were intimately linked, if he always had present in his thoughts the fact that he was placed here to govern himself and the sensate realm, he would concede that by fulfilling his destiny, he would not only discover those universal laws governing the higher realms which he has so often failed to recognize, but he would even sense that the power of such imperishable laws would extend both to his own Being and to the particular acts in his region of darkness. In other words, chance would no longer exist either for himself or for any acts of Nature. Then, when a person perceived any disturbance occurring within the particular acts of Nature, or when she was unaware of the causes responsible for their operation and the rules directing them, she would attribute this disorder and ignorance only to her own negligence and the false usage of her will, which did not make use of all its rights - or made use of those which were criminal. However, to acquire understanding of such truths, we must place more confidence in people's grandeur and in the power of their will than is demonstrated by certain observers. It must be believed that if people are superior to the Beings surrounding them, both their vices and virtues must of necessity have some relationship and influence upon their whole realm. It can be agreed, therefore, that a person's ignorance and disordered will are the sole causes of those doubts he is seen wavering between every day. After having allowed the idea of an all-encompassing law and order to disappear within himself, he has substituted for it the first fanciful impression coming from his imagination, since even in his very blindness he always searches for some motive in Nature. By so doing he continually renews the criminal error by which, after having willingly sown uncertainty and chance around himself, he then unfairly and unfortunately imputes these to his Principle. The very people who claim that corporeal things had a beginning attribute no other cause to their existence except chance. Not being aware of the basic reason for their existence, nor even presuming that a cause outside of them is kept sufficiently busy in making it operate, they are convinced that this existence had a beginning, and in the sole properties of bodies they have included the active and innate virtue residing within which animates them and the superior Law which decreed their birth. The same course is followed in the explanation provided for the Law which supports the existence of these corporeal Beings - and it needs to be so. After establishing the origin upon a false and imaginary basis, it has become virtually necessary that the remaining part of the work conform to it. Thus, according to them, bodies exist on their own as they are born on their own. As for those who claim that matter and corporeal Beings have always existed, their error is infinitely more gross and injurious to the truth. These two doctrines have both failed to recognize the Law and the primary reason of things. The first has taught that it is possible to dispense with an active and intelligent cause when explaining their origin, whereas the other has debased this cause by making it equivalent to the active Principle of corporeal Beings, and by not believing it to be superior or more ancient than matter. At this point observers have found themselves obliged to go a step further, because after having presented such obscure Principles regarding the course and nature of things, and after confining themselves in such a tiny circle, they have been practically forced to return to it all the phenomena and events which we witness occurring in the Universe. According to them, a being bereft of intelligence and purpose has created everything and continually creates everything, and since there exist only two causes which are the instruments for everything taking place, the moment these two causes within corporeal Beings are discovered, we may then dispense with the search for a Superior Cause. It is fortunate that Nature does not submit itself to people's thoughts. Even as blind as they suppose it to be, it allows them to reason, but it follows its own course. Meanwhile, the fact that Nature's course is so firm and fearless is even for them of considerable advantage and is the best characteristic of the grandeur of the physical and temporal Being governing them. Being impenetrable to the systems of people, and demonstrating to them their weakness by its constancy in following its own Law, it will perhaps one day force people to admit their errors, abandon the obscure paths on which they crawl, and seek for truth in a more luminous source. However, to forestall any uneasiness among my fellow human beings who might believe that this active and intelligent cause of which I speak is a chimerical and imaginary Being, let me explain that certain people have known it on a physical level, and that everyone would likewise know it were they to put their trust in it and take further care in purifying and fortifying their will. However, I must give warning that I do not take this word "physical" in its everyday connotation, which attributes existence and reality solely to objects tangible to the material senses. The slightest reflection upon everything contained in this work will be enough to indicate the extent to which one is removed from the understanding of the sense of this word when it is applied to material appearances. Before taking up another subject, I shall pause a moment to resolve a difficulty that could arise, although to some extent I have already tackled it. At the beginning of this work I discussed the existence of two Principles opposing one another. Although I have amply considered the inferiority of the evil Principle in comparison to the good Principle, you might believe, in accordance with what has just been observed regarding corporeal nature, that these two Principles are necessary to the existence of one another, as it has been seen that the two inferior causes enclosed within corporeal Beings are absolutely necessary in bringing about some production. To avoid such an error, you should recall a previous statement of mine: all production or work result in corporeal Nature, as well as in all other classes, and is always inferior to its generative Principle. This inferiority makes corporeal nature unable to reproduce itself without the action of these two causes that are recognized to be in it, and which declare its weakness and dependence. If this temporal creation draws its origin from the superior good Principle - a fact we cannot doubt - this Principle must display its superiority in all things, and one of its major attributes is to possess absolutely everything except evil within itself and to need only itself and its own faculties in carrying out all of its productions. Consequently, is not the status of the evil Principle simply to serve in manifesting the grandeur and power of the good Principle which shall never be weakened by all the efforts of this evil Principle? Thus, itis no longer possible to declare that the evil Principle has always been universally necessary to the existence and manifestation of the faculties of the good Principle, although in exerting its influence upon the existence of time, this evil Principle is necessary for bringing about the birth of all temporal manifestations. Since certain manifestations do not exist in time, and since the evil Principle cannot separate itself from the temporal, it is evident that the good Principle can operate without it, a fact which will be discussed later in greater detail. Therefore, let people hereby learn to distinguish once more the Laws and faculties of this unique Principle, which is universally good and self-existent, from those of the inferior material Being which cannot exist on its own and can live only through outside assistance. I believe that I have done enough to enable my fellow human beings to perceive how groundless human opinions are regarding all the points I have considered until now. I have placed them on the road to learning how to distinguish bodies from the innate Principle within those bodies. I have also called their attention to the simplicity, unity, and immateriality of these indivisible, incommunicable Principles, which allow no admixture and always remain constant, although the form each principle produces and in which it envelops itself is subject to continued variation. With this evidence in mind, they will be able to recognize that matter, being incontestably dependent and yet acting under the direction of regular laws, requires two inferior causes to bring about its reproduction and all other acts of its existence, and these inferior causes definitely cannot dispense with the action of a superior and intelligent cause that commands them so as to cause their action and directs them toward bringing their acts to a successful conclusion. Consequently, they will admit that the two inferior causes must be subject to the laws of the superior and intelligent cause, so that time and uniformity may be observed in all their acts; that the results of all their various actions cannot be nullified, shapeless, and unpredictable; and that we may be enabled to acknowledge the reason for the order universally reigning therein. Moreover, they will agree quite willingly that this Superior Cause, not being subject to any of the laws of matter, although being charged with its direction, must be entirely distinct from it. They will also agree that the method of obtaining knowledge of either one is to consider each in its class, to study their particular faculties, to bring them together in the same situation (but solely to disentangle their differences, and not to confuse them), to make this same distinction within all other Beings in Nature and within the least of its parts where the eyes of the body and the intelligence inform us that two Beings always coexist. And finally, seeing that violence has united them only for a time, we should not look upon this union as a link existing throughout all eternity because, on the contrary, we see it coming to an end every day. All of these observations will make a person prudent and wise in that they will prevent her from abandoning herself unthinkingly to unknown paths from which she cannot extricate herself without retracing her steps or by surrendering herself to despair when she senses that she has gone too far and time is lacking. This is what will cause her to avoid the peril toward which most people are led when, being alone and in the shadows, they dare to comment upon their own nature and that of truth. We shall see in what follows the frequent falls that have been and always will be the result. We shall perceive that the greatest part of humankind's sufferings has arisen in this way, as it is by reason of having fallen from their primary state of splendor, that people are now inclined to descend ever further into shame and misery.

## Chapter 4 - Allegorical Tableau

A few people, having been brought up in ignorance and idleness and having attained maturity, set out to travel through a great kingdom. But being motivated only by simple curiosity, they made little effort to understand the true methods by which this country was governed. They had neither enough courage nor credibility to gain admission among those of the ruling class, who could have revealed to them the government's hidden operations. Rather, these people were content to roam from city to city, letting their eyes wander randomly over public squares and places. There, viewing the people in tumultuous assemblage and seemingly unrestrained, they obtained no idea of the order and wisdom of those laws secretly guarding the safety and wellbeing of the inhabitants. They believed that all the citizens, being similarly idle, lived here in full freedom. Indeed, what these people had observed presented neither rule nor law to their unenlightened minds so that, trusting only their eyes, they were far removed from the knowledge that people of superior rank and powers were governing this multitude which milled about in confusion before them. They persuaded themselves that the country through which they were traveling had no Laws and therefore lacked a ruler. Or, if it did have a ruler, he was without the authority and power to act. Deceived by such independence and foreseeing no dangerous consequences from their actions, these travelers believed they could abandon themselves to every whim, as they considered the rulers to be arbitrary and indifferent. But it was not long before they became the victims of their own errors and rash judgments, for the vigilant administrators of the state, being informed of their disorders, deprived these people of their freedom and so severely restricted them that they languished in the most profound darkness, without knowing whether the light would ever be returned to them. This is exactly what has been the conduct and fate of those who have dared to pass judgment upon Humanity and Nature. Always occupied with frivolous and useless studies, their viewpoint narrowed by habit, and being unable to envision the entire progression, they have not gone beyond the appearance of things and, by thus limiting their viewpoint, they have ignored or denied everything they could not see. In bodies they have seen only their envelopes, which they then transformed into Principles. They have seen in the Laws of such bodies only two actions or two inferior causes, and they have hastened to reject the active and intelligent superior cause, whose operations they have confused with those of the two lesser causes. Afterwards, believing themselves well assured of their results, they have created from the whole a hypothetical material Being by which they have had the imprudence to measure all the other Beings of Nature, which they have then entirely distorted. It is from this mutilated model that they have dared to envision humankind. Indeed, we can no longer doubt that they have committed the same errors regarding humankind that they have committed regarding the whole of Nature. Not only have they not differentiated the Principle from the appearance or envelope any better in a person's body than in all corporeal Beings, nor recognized or followed the progression or the Laws any better, but, even after having accepted modification upon this point, they still confuse a person's corporeal envelope with his intellectual and thinking Being, much as they have confused the innate Principle in all bodies with the active and intelligent cause directing them. Thus, not having first disentangled the superior cause from the faculties innate within the corporeal Being, and having afterwards confused the faculties of the two different Beings composing contemporary humankind, it has been impossible for these observers to recognize therein the action of the active and intelligent cause which, while communicating all the powers to Nature, gives to a person through her intelligence and likewise communicates all notion of the benefits she has lost. However, from such ignorance not only have they been rash enough to give their opinion upon a person's essence and nature, but they have attempted to explain all the contrasts presented by a person and to establish the basis of her works. When people erred only regarding elementary Nature, we saw that their errors only occasioned minor problems. This is because their opinions have no bearing upon the progress of Beings and their invariable Laws, which operate continuously with constant precision, although humankind has distorted and failed to recognize the Principle. But it will never be so regarding a person's errors about himself. Inevitably they will be disastrous for him, since being the trustee of his own Law, he can be neither mistaken about it nor disregard it without operating directly against himself and causing definite injury to himself. In short, a person is truly happy when he recognizes and follows the Laws of his Principle, whereas his ills and sufferings are obvious proof of his errors and the stumblings that have resulted therefrom. Therefore, let us observe what results from this distorted Being and see whether a person can maintain herself even though deprived of her primary support. It will be easy for us to presuppose the results of this investigation if we recall what was stated regarding the condition of Nature if left to the passive action of the two inferior Beings necessary for all corporeal production. As you know, these two Beings, being merely passive, can never produce anything on their own if the active and intelligent cause does not give them the order and power to activate what is innate within them. If it were possible to imagine a will residing within these inferior agents even though they were still powerless, it is obvious that if they tried to put this will into action without the cooperation of the active cause upon which they necessarily depend, their works would be formless and manifest only shocking confusion. Meanwhile, let us apply to people, who do have wills of their own, what we could not state concerning those inferior agents which are devoid of will. In this way we can better learn to discover the unfortunate effects of the errors we propose to combat. A person is at present composed of two Beings, one sensate, the other intelligent. We have given the understanding that originally, he was not subject to this combination, and that, enjoying the prerogatives of a simple Being, he possessed all within himself and had no need of anything more to maintain himself, since all was included in the precious gifts he derived from his Principle. We have subsequently shown the irrevocable and severe conditions which Justice attached to the rehabilitation of a person, made criminal by the false usage of her will. We have seen, I repeat, the innumerable and frightful perils with which a person is continually menaced during her sojourn in the sensate region which is so contrary to her true nature. At the same time, we have recognized that the body she occupies at present, belonging to the same classification as sensate things, forms around her in effect a shadowy veil which hides the true Light from her view and is also the constant source of her illusions and the instrument of her new crimes. Thus, in their original state, it was the Law of people to rule over the sensate region, as people still must do today, but because they were then endowed with incomparable strength and were entirely unfettered, all obstacles disappeared before them. Today, people no longer possess nearly as many forces, nor the same freedom. They are infinitely closer to peril, so that in the combat they must now maintain, we can only express the disadvantages to which they are exposed. In truth, such is the frightful situation of modem people after the crushing decree was pronounced against them. Of all the gifts people received, there remained to them only a shadow of freedom, in other words, a will almost always devoid of strength or power. All other power was stripped from them, and their union with a sensate Being reduced them to the status of a mere combination of two inferior causes, similar to those regulating all bodies. I say similar to, and not equal to, because the purpose of humankind's two natures is more noble, and their properties are very different. But regarding the action and exercise of their faculties, both are fully subject to the same Law; and the two inferior causes composing modern people do not have, so to speak, more power in themselves than the two inferior corporeal causes. It is true that in his capacity as an intellectual Being, a person always has the advantage over the corporeal beings in sensing a need which is unknown to them. But he cannot obtain solace on his own any better than can they. He cannot vitalize his intellectual faculties any better than can they animate their own Being. In other words, he cannot dispense, any better than they, with the active and intelligent cause without which nothing existing in time can operate effectively. Therefore, what kind of results could a person produce today, if, in the powerless state that we know her to be, she believed she was not subject to any other Law than her own will, and if she attempted to proceed without being guided by this active and intelligent cause upon which she is dependent, notwithstanding her own will, and from which she must anticipate all, as do the corporeal beings among which she is so sadly confused? It is certain that a person's own endeavors would then have neither value nor force, since they would be deprived of the only support that could sustain them; and the two inferior causes of which he finds himself presently composed, being in constant combat within him, would only serve to agitate him and plunge him into the most unfortunate uncertainty. This predicament is similar to the two lines in any angle which can each move in contrary directions, separate, approach each other, intermingle, or be placed one on top of the other, but which can never produce any sort of figure unless a third line is joined to them. This third line is necessary for fixing the instability of the first two lines, as it determines their position and thus perceptibly distinguishes one from the other, so as to constitute a figure eventually. It is indisputably the most productive of all figures. Nonetheless, this situation constitutes the false attempts made by people day after day, which are to work towards the accomplishment of an impossible task, in other words, to try forming a figure with two lines by concentrating upon the action of the inferior causes presently composing their nature, and by continually endeavoring to exclude the active and intelligent superior cause which they absolutely cannot dispense with. Thus, despite the evident need they have of this cause, they move further and further away from it, from illusion to illusion, without ever being able to discover the point where they must remain, because there is no perfect production without the cooperation of this third Principle. If you want to know the reason for this, it is because the instant a person arrives at three, she is at four. Then, reflecting upon the frightful uncertainty in which she finds himself, she is shocked by the disorder accompanying all her steps, and she soon denies the existence of this Principle of order and peace which she has ignored due to her negligence or bad faith. At times, attracted by the power of truth, a person also murmurs against this same Principle which he previously rejected, and he thus demonstrates the certainty of everything we have said regarding the variations and inconsistencies of any Being in which the faculties are not united and made invariable by their natural bond. |

Far from believing that all of a person's errors affect in any way this cause from which she further removes herself, we should now be informed enough about her nature to know that she alone suffers from her errors, since in her quality as a free Being she alone is guilty. We must know that when this cause, unchanging in both its faculties and essence, extends its rays down to a person, they purify her and are not therefore sullied. We will therefore pursue our course and clarify the difficulties which stop observers when, alone and without guidance, they cast their eyes upon all the institutions upon Earth, whether those which have been established by people or those to which a higher origin is attributed. It is truly here that these blind people, not knowing how to untangle the arbitrary from the real, have made of the two a monstrous combination capable of obscuring the most luminous notions. It is also, and let us entertain no doubts about this, one of the most interesting objects for a person and one upon which it is crucial that he make no errors, since this is where he must learn to regulate the faculties of which he is composed. Let us examine the reason why people, due to the observations they have made regarding the practices, usages, customs, laws, and religions that have always differed among various peoples, have been led to think that nothing in existence is true and that, since everything is arbitrary and conventional among people, it would be an illusion to acknowledge any duties to perform or to acknowledge any essential and natural order designed to serve them as a guiding light. If it were true that everything is convention as they pretend, they would be justified in arriving at this conclusion, because there would then be no distinction for them between good and evil. All their judgments would become indifferent, and no one would have any reason to compel them to follow any rules of conduct. But seeing that the error stems from the fact that observers have failed to untangle within people the two faculties of which they are composed; seeing that they have confused the intellectual and the sensate within people, and have applied to the former all the variations and disparities to which the latter is subject; and seeing that they have compounded these errors by confusing the active and intelligent cause with the various faculties of people, can we give any credence to a doctrine so false and so lacking in profound examination? Such, however, is the course these observers have followed. They have seldom if ever cast their eyes beyond the sensate. This sensate faculty, being limited and deprived of the power necessary for directing itself, will never present anything other than the repeated proofs of variation, dependence, and uncertainty. Therefore, through it alone, and through its being left to its own Law, all the differences we witness here on Earth have been introduced. Indeed, of all the branches of political and civil law encompassing different peoples, do any have an objective other than the material? Does even the moral part of all their establishments rise beyond this visible human order? Even in their most virtuous institutions there does not exist any that they themselves have not reduced to sensate rules and external Laws because, in all these things, the instructors have proceeded alone and without guidance - this being the only end towards which they could direct their steps. People's intellectual faculty is therefore not at all involved in such facts nor in the observations of which they have been so often the object. Thus, we must be wary of adopting judgments that have been obtained from them before examining the extent of their consequences and determining whether they are applicable to all. Otherwise, it would be impossible to admit them, since a truth must be universal. Let us begin by observing the most respected and universally prevalent institution among all peoples, what they consider, with reason, to be the one which cannot owe its existence to humankind's handiwork. Considering the zeal with which all people on Earth occupy themselves with this sacred object, it is very clear that all people possess the image and idea of it within themselves. We perceive among all nations a complete uniformity regarding the fundamental Principle of religion. They all recognize a superior Being; they all recognize the necessity of praying to It; they all pray to It; they all sense the necessity of a form to their prayers; and they have all given a form to these prayers. Never has humankind's will been able to destroy this truth nor replace it with another. Nevertheless, the careful attention that various peoples exhibit when honoring the Primary Being present to us differences, and arbitrary and successive changes, as do all other institutions in both practice and theory; so that, among all religions, no two are known to worship It in the same manner. Let me then ask, could this difference have occurred if people had accepted the same guide and if they had not lost sight of the sole light that could have illuminated and reconciled them? And, is this light anything other than the active and superior cause which should maintain the balance between their sensate and intellectual faculties, and without which it is impossible for them to take a single step in the right direction? It is therefore this superior cause that must nourish within people the primitive idea of a unique and universal Being, as well as the knowledge of the Laws to which this Being subjects the conduct of people towards It whenever It permits them to approach It. By removing themselves from this light, people are delivered over to their own faculties, but then those very faculties become weakened and almost entirely disappear within them. Darkness covers the faculties with such an opaque veil that, without the help of a benevolent hand, they can never free themselves from it. However, although people are then abandoned to themselves, they are always obliged to "travel." This is the reason why in the midst of this terrible ignorance, being always tormented with the idea and need of this Being, from which they sense their separation, people turn uncertain eyes towards It and pay homage according to their own thought. And although they no longer know whether the homage they offer is truly what this Being asks, they prefer to render homage, such as they conceive of it, rather than to experience the secret anxiety and regret of rendering none at all. Such is, in part, the Principle that has formed false religions and has distorted what should have been followed by peoples all over the world. Therefore, should we be surprised to see so little uniformity in humankind's pious practices and religions? Should we be surprised to see people produce all these contradictions, and contrary practices and rites, which conflict with one another and in reality, present nothing true to our thought? Is this not where people's imaginations, being freed from all restraint, causes all their works to become the results of their caprice and blind will? Is it not here, consequently, where everyone must seem indifferent to reason, since reason no longer discerns any relationship between the worship and the Being to which the instructors and their followers wish to apply it? However, I must ask whether most of these differences and even palpable clashes do not rest upon something other than what is subject to a person's corporeal eyes - that is, upon the senses. Therefore, could a conclusion be arrived at contrary to the Principle which they do not even take into consideration? Would not this Principle be as unalterable and intact after a person's shadowy thought had introduced variations even into theory and dogmas? As long as a person is not illuminated by her flambeau alone, and maintained by her sole support, she can possess no more certainty of the purity of her doctrine than she can of the justice of her actions. And finally, whatever the nature of her errors may be, could they ever prevail against truth? If errors pursue the observers and render them blind, it is therefore always because of their failure to distinguish the person thus dismembered, who employs but a part of himself, from the person who makes full use of his faculties. It is because of their failure to distinguish the distorted source from which he draws formless productions, that a person is declared to be incapable of knowing anything stable and assured. Nevertheless, let us ascertain how far the special power of people can extend when they are left to their own devices. Let us grant them only the rights that belong to them, and let us examine whether there does not exist anything beyond that which they accomplish and know. First of all, we have seen that despite their reasonings upon Nature, people are obliged to submit to its Laws. We have shown to a sufficient degree that the Laws of this Nature are fixed and invariable, although through the concentration of the two actions existing in the Universe, their accomplishment may often be disrupted. Therefore, we have here already a truth upon which humankind's arbitrariness has not the slightest influence. The time has long passed for offering me such objections, as those sensations and impressions of all kinds which various bodies make upon our senses, differ in each individual. By such means the multitudes have believed themselves fully justified in denying the existence of any rule within animals. We have anticipated this objection by declaring that Nature can act only by correspondence. We can further strengthen this principle by stating that this Law of relation is no more subject to the arbitrariness of people than Nature itself, and that we are not masters of changing their effects in any way, because diverting or hindering them is not at all changing them. On the contrary, their stability is confirmed even more so. Therefore, we already know from the evidence presented that there resides in corporeal Nature, a Power superior to people which subjects them to its Laws. We can no longer doubt its existence, although the concern that people have shown in knowing and explaining this Power has rarely resulted in obtaining enlightenment or any satisfactory success. Secondly, let us recall how we have demonstrated the weakness and infirmity of Nature in comparison to the Principle from which it secured its origin and from which it regularly obtains its existence and reaction. We shall then see that, if people are subject to this Nature, they shall, to a much greater extent, be subject to the superior Principles directing and maintaining it. Although they may have only a meager concept of their power, compared to their concept of Nature's power, their own reason would prevent them from denying the truth of their existence, when their sentiment would not. Therefore, what will result from everything people may accomplish, imagine, say, or institute against the Laws of these superior Principles? Far from being altered to the slightest degree, these Laws will only exhibit their force and power to a greater extent by leaving the person who draws herself further away from them, abandoned to her own doubts and the uncertainties of her imagination, and by obliging her to crawl as long as she chooses to ignore them. Apart from these observations, nothing more is needed to prove the insufficiency of the person who accepts only the tangible for his rule and guidance. If the lack of power which we note in corporeal Nature absolutely prevents us from attributing to it the actions it operates, and 1f, by his own reasoning, a person can arrive at a sense of the indispensable necessity for the cooperation of an active Cause, without which corporeal Beings would have no visible action, he therefore has need only of himself to acknowledge the existence of an active and intelligent Cause. And, from there, he may arrive at the unique and primary Cause from which has emanated all the temporal causes destined for the accomplishment of its works and the execution of its will. I have declared that this active and intelligent Cause possesses a universal action, manifesting in both corporeal Nature and thinking Nature. It is, in fact, the first of the temporal causes without which none of the Beings existing in time can endure. It acts upon them through the very Law of its essence and through the rights to which its destiny in the universe entitles it. Whether or not the Beings inhabiting this Universe conceive of this Cause, there is not a single one which does not receive its assistance. Moreover, since it is active and intelligent, it is obvious that both thinking and non-thinking Beings must partake of its beneficence. This is the reason why I have stated that all peoples on Earth have of necessity recognized a superior Being. They have not made all the distinctions that I have just established between the different causes. They have not distinguished this active and intelligent Cause from the primary Cause which is absolutely separate from the sensate and from time. Often, they have even confounded it with the inferior causes of Creation, to which they have sometimes given their homage. Thus, they have not received from their religion the assistance they could have expected from it had their course been further enlightened. But this subject will lead us much too far afield. Let us therefore limit ourselves to pointing out that because the active and intelligent Cause is universal in nature, people have been forced by perception and reflection to arrive at the recognition of its necessity. And, in whatever way they have imagined it, they have been mistaken only in regard to the true nature of this Cause, but never regarding its very existence. After having made this admission to herself, a person could not avoid pursuing her course. Her perception and reflections have directed her in the second step as they had in the first. By remaining her own guide on this new path, she has been unable to discover either more certitude or more enlightenment. Consequently, after having recognized a superior Cause in Nature and after having recognized that it was superior to his thinking despite his discoveries, a person could not help admitting that Laws must exist by which this Cause acts upon everything which is subject to it, and that, if the Beings which must depend upon it for everything did not fulfill these Laws, they could not hope for any enlightenment, life, or support. People were brought to the realization of these consequences by their observations concerning this same corporeal Nature to which they are attached. They could see, for instance, that if they transgressed the Laws regarding the periods and processes of cultivation, the earth only returned to them imperfect and unwholesome productions. They could see that if they did not observe the order of the seasons and an exactness in all their arrangements, the results would be fruitless and unsuccessful. This is what tangibly taught them that this corporeal Nature was directed by Laws, and that these Laws pertained in essence to the active and intelligent Cause of which all people feel the need. Then, in making the same reflection concerning their thinking Being, people became fully aware that, as they cannot accomplish anything without the primary Cause, it is in their best interests to apply themselves to the task of rendering it favorable to them. They conceived that, since this Cause watches over them and interests itself in their well-being, it must have established some means to preserve them from evil. Consequently, the acts that were advantageous to people must be acceptable to this Cause, and those which could be injurious to people were not in conformity with its Law, the purpose of which is to make all Beings content. Thus, people could do no better than to act always in accordance with its wishes and will. Since each individual was unable to determine whether the religion she conceived of had a definite relationship with both herself and the primary Being she desired to honor, she adopted according to her own inclination the means she believed most suitable in rendering this superior Being favorable to her. All people who have relied only upon themselves in their search for this institution have established what their imagination, or certain particular circumstances, created in their thought. This is the reason why all the nations of the world have been divided whether in their religious ceremonies or in the concept and image they have formed of the one who is the object of this worship. This is also why, despite their division concerning the forms of this worship, they are all in agreement concerning the necessity of possessing a religion. All have recognized the existence of a superior Being and all have sensed the need and desire for Its support. If people, in being left to their own devices, had brought to these establishments as much virtue and good faith as they have zeal, each one of them would follow in peace the religion they had adopted without disparaging those in which they perceived differences. But as unenlightened zeal only leads more promptly to error, they have given exclusive preference to their own works. The principle that caused them to walk alone when establishing a religion for themselves has led them to regard this very religion as being the only true one. They even believe they are fulfilling their religious duties more fully by not allowing any other to exist. They make it a virtue, in the service of their idol, to battle and persecute one another, because in their obscured views, they have joined their own cause to that of their idol, and rarely has there been a nation which has not believed they were honoring the superior Being by banning all religions different from that which they have chosen. As everyone knows, this is one of the principal causes of wars, either general or local, and of disorders that we see every day disturbing the various classes which compose political bodies and even overturning the most firmly established empires. However, there exists in such strife an infinity of other divisive causes sufficiently known and too futile for me to occupy myself, either in enumerating or examining them in this work. Can it not be said that all of these errors and crimes which people have committed in the name of their religion emanate from a source none other than that of having substituted themselves for the enlightened hand that was to lead them, and from having believed that they were guided by a true Principle, whereas they were only guided by themselves? oF

Therefore, we must conclude from what has just been stated that all peoples, by the sole aid of their reflections, and through the voice of their inner sentiment, have been brought to the recognition of the existence of some kind of superior Being and to the necessity of a religion for worshiping It. This concept is one that people cannot entirely efface within themselves, even though it is often obscured in the majority of people. And certainly, we cannot be at all surprised by this, as there are some who have permitted the very idea of their Being to become extinguished within themselves, and in whom the inner faculties have become so weakened that they have believed themselves mortal and perishable. It must also be concluded that if this idea of the existence of a superior Being and the necessity of a religion is a part of a person's being, it is also the final limit to which he can attain on his own while here on Earth. These are the unique fruits which can result from his perceptive and intellectual faculties when left to their own devices. This feeling is a fundamental seed within people. But if no power comes to react upon this seed, it cannot manifest anything substantial. Its productions will most certainly have no consistency, in much the same way as the seeds of corporeal Beings remain devoid of action and production if an active and intelligent Cause does not direct the reaction and, in general, all the acts concerning them. We shall persuade ourselves more fully of the truth of this thought when we reflect upon the nature and the properties of the active and intelligent Cause. It is distinct from the primary Cause, being its primary agent. It does not produce seeds in corporeal Beings, but animates them. It does not produce the intellectual and sensible faculties in people, but directs and enlightens them. In a word, being the primary and sovereign of all temporal Causes, it alone is charged with their direction, and no one can dispense with its help nor avoid being subject to it. Thus, if it is through the active and intelligent Cause that things manifest exclusively, nothing can become sensate without it. As we can only become aware of things here on Earth through the senses, how shall we succeed if this same Cause does not itself act with us and does not operate that which it alone can operate in the Universe? Therefore, we now perceive the absolute necessity for the two faculties of people always to be guided and sustained by this universal temporal Cause. It will not provide people with the idea of the primary Being of which it is the primary moving cause, but it will enable people to recognize the faculties of this primary Being by manifesting them through material productions. Nor will it provide people with the idea of a religion to honor the primary Being, but it will enlighten their ideas upon this subject. And by making the faculties of this primary Being palpable to them, it will make the certain means of honoring this Being equally palpable. This is where I perceive the end to all humankind's doubts and of all the variations which are their consequences. This active and intelligent Cause, being charged with the activation and the direction of everything, cannot fail to reconcile everything whenever its powers are properly used. The unique means that people possess in avoiding the commission of errors is to not exclude this Cause from any of their acts, institutions, or establishments, in much the same way that it cannot be excluded from any of the regular acts of Nature. People will then be sure to experience the true rapport with what they are searching for. No longer will there be any disparity between human religions, as they will all possess the same light. No longer will there exist between them any difficulty concerning dogma or belief, since they will know the primary reason of things. In a word, all will be in accord, because each person will proceed according to the true Law. We can no longer doubt that the reason for all the differences exhibited by nations in their dogmas and beliefs arise solely from the fact that they have not sought in their institutions the support of this active and intelligent Cause, which alone should direct them and which alone can unite them. I maintain that its Light is undoubtedly the only point of reunion. Outside of it, there can exist no hope, only error and suffering. Only to this Cause can this invincible truth be applied in its essence and nature, that outside of the center, there can be no stability. After having made these statements, I hope I shall not be suspected of desiring to establish equality and indifference between the diverse religions prevalent among the peoples of Earth, and even less of attempting to teach the uselessness of religion. On the contrary, I declare that no nation exists which has not felt such a necessity. I further assert that such religions must exist as long as there are people on Earth. But as long as they are not maintained by a common support, it is inevitable that they be divided and, as a consequence, it will be impossible for them to attain their intended aim. Thus, not only do I maintain the necessity for religion, but I make even more apparent the necessity for a single religion, since a single Head or Cause must direct it. Nor should one ask me at present which of all the established religions is the true one. The principle that I have just established must serve as an answer to all questions pertaining to this subject. The religion that will be directed by this active and intelligent Cause will of necessity be just and good. The religion over which it will preside will most certainly be neither negative nor evil-this is the rule. It is up to those who, among the different nations, are charged with instructing and leading men on their path, to confront their statutes and their course with the Law we are presenting to them. Our aim is not to judge established religions, but to enable their directors and ministers to pass judgment upon themselves. Naturally, I must expect objections concerning this active and intelligent Cause which I have described as being the unique, primary head of everything operating in the Universe. People can well agree upon the necessity of this Cause's action upon material Beings. They cannot even doubt that it occurs, seeing the regularity and uniformity of the results arising from it. But they will say to me, even after admitting the necessity for this Cause's action in directing humankind's entire conduct, what methods should they use to determine whether the Cause does or does not preside over it? Since their dogmas and religious establishments lack uniformity, it is absolutely necessary for them to possess some Law other than that of opinion in assuring themselves that they are following the right path. People thereby exhibit their weakness and powerlessness, and much more force is given to what we have said, because if a person could choose and determine her religion by her own volition, the power of the active and intelligent Cause, which I recognize as being indispensable, would then become superfluous in this matter. If, however, this active and intelligent Cause could never be known through a person's senses, it would be impossible for him to be assured that he had found the best path and the true religion, as this Cause must operate and manifest in all things. Therefore, it is necessary that a person possesses the certainty of which we speak, and that it not be given to him by humankind. It is necessary that this Cause itself clearly offer to humankind's intelligence and eyes the testimony of its approbation. Finally, considering that a person can be misled by fellow humans, it is necessary that he possess the means to avoid misleading himself, and that he has resources at hand from which he can expect definite help. The Principles that I have so often established are proof enough of the certainty of what I propound. Have we not already recognized on many occasions that a person is free? As such, is she not responsible for the effects, good or ill, that must result from her choice among the good or evil thoughts she receives? Would she be responsible for them, had she not within herself the faculty of untangling them without error? Thus, we perceive that basically she is not compelled to confront with her rule any of the acts she engenders, as she is not absolutely certain of anything. What can this rule be, if not the testimony and approbation of the active and intelligent Cause, which, being charged with the direction of all Beings subject to time, must visibly establish a balance between humankind's various faculties, as it does among the various actions of corporeal Beings or of matter? If this Cause is charged with the direction of a person's faculties, must it not also be charged, with even more reason, with the direction of his actions? And among these actions, certainly the least indifferent is that by which he must faithfully observe the Laws which can gain for him the approbation of the Primary Principle and bring him closer to that Being to which, he senses universally, he must render homage. And if the active and intelligent Cause is the infallible support which must uphold a person in all his steps, if it is the sure light which must direct all the acts of his thinking Being, it is absolutely necessary that this universal guide preside over humanity's religious institutions and over all their other actions, and that it does so in a way that will protect its voice and testimony from all uncertainty. I know that the question is not yet resolved, and to state how necessary it is that the active and intelligent Cause itself establishes the Laws of our homage to the Primary Principle, does not prove that such is happening. But after having stated where people must obtain this proof, one can no longer expect any other indications on my part. I shall not even cite my own personal experience, regardless of the confidence that I must place upon it. There was a time when I would not have placed any faith in truths that I could verify today. I would therefore be guilty of injustice and thoughtlessness if I were to determine my readers' convictions. No, I am not afraid to repeat it, I sincerely desire that no one believe me on the strength of my word alone, because as a person, I have no claim to the confidence of my fellow human beings. But I would be overwhelmed with joy if each one of them could attain a grand enough idea of themselves and of the Cause watching over them, in the hope that, through their own perseverance and efforts, they may be assured of the truth. I know that, through views wise and beyond the reach of the vulgar, the leaders and ministers of nearly all religions have proclaimed their dogmas with prudence and especially with a reserve that cannot be praised highly enough. Impressed, undoubtedly, by the sublimity of their functions, they have sensed the extent to which the multitude must be kept away from this knowledge. This is surely the reason why, being the trustees for the keys of knowledge, they have preferred to lead their peoples to an obscure veneration of it rather than expose its secrets to profanation. If their motives are truly these, I cannot condemn them. Darkness and silence are the refuge that truth prefers, and people possessing it cannot take too many precautions in preserving its purity. But may I not point out to them that they should also be wary of preventing its spread, their duty being to see that it prospers, to defend it zealously, and not to bury it. And finally, concealing it with too much care would perhaps cause it to fail in attaining its aim, which is to extend itself and to triumph. Therefore, I believe that they would have acted very wisely had they investigated more thoroughly the meaning of the word "mystery," which they have made a bulwark for their religions. They could fully veil the important points, announce its development as being the reward of effort and constancy, and thereby test their proselytes by exercising both their intelligence and zeal. However, they should not have made such discoveries so impracticable that the Universe thus became discouraged. They should not have rendered useless the most noble faculties of the thinking Being, who, having experienced birth in the sojourn of life, was already unfortunate enough to have left its abode without removing from him even the hope of perceiving it here on earth. In a word, I would have announced instead a Mystery as a veiled truth, and not as an impenetrable truth, and I am fortunate enough to possess proof that this definition would have been of greater value. Nothing will prevent me, therefore, from persevering in the principles that I endeavor to bring forth to humankind, and from assuring my fellow human beings that not only does the active and intelligent Cause direct them in all their acts, and consequently in those relating to religion, but moreover that it is within their power to obtain proof of it, and in a manner that does not allow any doubts to remain. In fact, we only need to observe the conduct of various nations to perceive that they all regard their religion as being founded upon the basis I have just established. Does not everyone know the ardor with which they have defended their religious rites and dogmas? Have they not supported their religion with as much zeal and fearlessness as if they had the certainty that truth itself had established it? What I am saying is this: Is not the word "truth" the bulwark of all sects and opinions? Have not the very ministers of the greatest abominations been seen enveloping themselves in this sacred name, knowing full well that they would, by so doing, more surely attain domination over people? Why would this course be so universal if its Principle did not exist within people? Why would a person, even in her false steps, seek the support of a name commanding respect, if she were not inwardly aware that this name is powerful and that she has need of it? And at the same time, why would she announce that her steps are directed by truth if she sensed that they might not be? We believe these observations to be sufficient to convince our readers of the necessity and possibility of the cooperation of an active and intelligent Cause in all of humankind's actions, and primarily in the knowledge and practice of those Laws which must direct their homage toward the Primary Being, which can be ignored by none of good faith. Thus, after the Law is imposed upon them by their own nature, and it is possible for them to obtain it according to all the Principles just revealed, by attempting to act on their own and never proceeding without its support will clearly result in their wandering aimlessly and being exposed to all sorts of dangers. They will then be even more blameworthy when they proclaim to other people that they are guided by this true light, even though they do not possess any certainty of it. No matter what their errors or bad faith are regarding this subject, no matter what peculiarities they introduce into their religious institutions, we must acknowledge at present, as I have already stated, that it can never be concluded that neither rule nor truth exists for humanity. Rather, we must become fully aware that the errors of people regarding this subject cannot involve any objects other than the outer or sensate part of their religions and, being inferior and completely subordinated to the Primary Being, all the opinions and contradictions which they might engender will never, in the slightest way, affect this Being. This is the basic consequence that must be inferred from all that has just been stated concerning the diversity of religions. Therefore, the person who is wise and accustomed to searching beyond the outer surface of things must no longer allow herself to be seduced by the variety of institutions of this kind, nor be disturbed by the universal contradictions of people upon this subject. She must actually perceive what the source of it is, and she must not doubt that if people carry within themselves the idea of the Primary Being, they must also have a fixed and uniform method of demonstrating that they know It and of rendering It homage. This method must be as simple and unalterable as this very Being, although people regularly commit errors concerning the nature of one and the other. Meanwhile, this is where we can perceive the slight confidence that can be placed in those who pretend to prove a religion by means of morality, and who well deserve the poor degree of success they usually attain. Morality, being one of the primary duties of contemporary humanity, has not always been taught by masters sufficiently enlightened to apply it justly. It has nearly always been limited to the physical senses, and from then on it has varied according to the locales and the different customs by which people have constituted their virtue. Moreover, attempting to make use of this morality as proof, such morality being no more than an accessory to religion, even the most highly perfected, is to announce right then that one does not know the true proof and that there must likewise exist proofs deserving of this title. Nor do I believe it amiss to call attention to the fact that this is what causes the deficiencies in modern doctrines, which reduce all of humanity's Laws to morality and their entire religion to humanitarian actions, or to the alleviation of the material ills of the unfortunate, in other words, to that virtue so natural and little worthy of note, by which my contemporaries attempt to support their systems, and which, by concentrating humankind in purely passive works, is nothing more than a veil for ignorance and devoid of value in the eyes of the wise person. Such virtue undoubtedly belongs among our obligations, and no one should neglect it under any pretext whatsoever, but all our duties would not be exclusively limited to temporal and physical acts if we had not become persuaded that sensate things and people are of the same rank and nature. After the result we have just noted, we must expect a second one, which can assist us in combating and overcoming another error to which observers have allowed themselves to be led upon the same subject, and which naturally proceeds from the same source. According to them, if indeed the knowledge of a Superior Being, the object of religion and the reason for its existence, were not innate within people, it would follow that the origin and birth of religious institutions would be altogether uncertain. Insurmountable difficulties would be experienced in knowing in what way and during what period they were conceived, because for people, having only the continual revolutions of nature or the impulsions of their caprice and will for their rule and Law, every moment would be the dawn of a new religion, as it would eliminate the most ancient religions and successively destroy all those that were held in respect upon Earth. According to this supposition, it would be very certain that the institutions of which we speak, having become simply the work of weakness or of interest, would not only be despised by the just person, but he would even employ every effort to erase even the slightest traces of them in himself and in all his fellow people. Nevertheless, after having established all our principles by basing them as we have done upon humankind's nature, and after having recognized the universality of a basis for all of humankind's religions, we should be sufficiently persuaded that this sentiment is truly born within people. Henceforth, all difficulty should cease regarding the origin of this idea of a Superior Being and of the worship that is due to It. Therefore, we should see in the harmony and conformity of the idea of humankind regarding these two points only the natural fruits of this indestructible seed, innate within all people and speaking to them through all ages past. Yet we cannot deny the peculiar and false usage that they have nearly always made of it. We may say as much regarding the uniform Laws that all people should observe in their worship, because, through a disastrous result of their freedom, they drive further away and almost continually disregard the superior physical Cause charged with the direction of this religion as well as all their other actions. Soon we may perceive that they have never been deprived of the faculty of sensing and hearing it, because as long as they are bound to time, this active and intelligent Cause which essentially watches over time, never could lose sight of them, and likewise they themselves would still have this same advantage regarding it, had they not been the first to abandon it. If we wish to convince ourselves more fully of the ties existing between humanity and such luminous truths, of which we proclaim humankind to be the safekeeper, we need only reflect upon the nature of thought. We shall soon perceive that as it is simple, unique, and immutable, there can be only one single species of Being which is receptive to it, because there is nothing in common between Beings of a different nature. We shall see that, if a person possesses within herself this primitive idea of a Superior Being and of an active and intelligent Cause executing its will, she must be of the same essence as this Superior Being and of the Cause linking her to this Being. We shall perceive, I repeat, that thought must be common to them, whereas all Beings incapable of receiving any communication from this thought, or of exhibiting the least evidence of it, will necessarily be excluded from the class of which we speak. It is truly in this way that a person can acquire enlightenment regarding himself, by learning to distinguish himself from all passive and corporeal Beings surrounding him. Despite any effort he employs to make himself understood by any among them regarding the principles of justice, regarding the knowledge of a Superior Being, or other objects pertaining to his thinking, he will not witness in these corporeal and sensate Beings any sign or demonstration that will indicate to him that he has been understood. All that he will obtain, and this not even true of all animals, is their conceiving of and executing the acts of his will, without however understanding the reason for it. Moreover, it would be necessary for the perfection of his communication that a person recalls their natural language of which he has lost the knowledge, because the artificial means which he makes use of today to supplement it are simply the proofs of his weakness and serve only to show him that grandeur does not consist of industry, but of force and authority. When a person no longer fixes her eyes upon the sensate and corporeal Being, and instead turns them upon her own Being, and when in her attempt to know herself she makes careful use of her intellectual faculty, her view acquires an immense scope. She conceives and touches, so to speak, rays of light which she definitely senses to be outside herself, but in which she also senses the absolute analogy with herself. New ideas descend to her, but while admiring them, she is surprised to find that they are not foreign to her. Would she experience so much affinity with such ideas if their source and her were not similar? Would she find herself so much at ease and so satisfied at the sight of the glimmerings of truth that make themselves known to her if their Principle and her did not possess the same essence? This similarity is what causes us to recognize that there must certainly have existed between the thought of humanity, the Primary Being, and the active and intelligent Cause a perfect correspondence from the first moment of a person's existence. If all the Laws that must direct humankind in the knowledge of the Superior Being (as well as the worship which must serve to honor It) are truly based upon this affinity which is necessary to all thinking Beings, we can then perceive with evidence what must have been the origin of religion among humanity and ascertain whether it is not as ancient as they are themselves. The similarity existing between all Beings endowed with thought, of which I have just given you a glimpse, requires that I call your attention at this time to an important distinction eluding most people, and one which keeps them in the deepest obscurity and exposes them to the least excusable of errors. Indeed, if they were to grant thought to an immaterial Being, such as humankind, and one informs them as I have done, that the Principle of matter is immaterial, they would also demand that this Principle be accorded thought and could not conceive that it might be denied. On the other hand, if I were to deny thought to the immaterial Principle of matter, they would no longer know whether they should not also deny it to humanity's immaterial Principle, because they perceive in these two different immaterial Beings only one similar nature and consequently the same properties. But, the same error always deceives them. It is always the lack of desire for untangling two natures so distinct from one another that they allow themselves the greatest misconceptions upon this subject. Therefore, let us bring them back to the primary Principles upon which we have already based ourselves. All immaterial Beings proceed directly or indirectly from the same source. However, they are not equal. We cannot entertain any doubt regarding this inequality of Beings, since people (who are immaterial Beings) recognize of necessity the existence of immaterial Beings superior to them, to whom they must render homage and constant attention because they are subject to them. People recognize that although they are similar to these immaterial Beings through their immaterial nature and thought, they are infinitely inferior to them in that they can lose the use of their faculties and go astray, whereas the Beings dominating them are protected from this fatal danger. Likewise, the Principle of matter is as immaterial and indestructible as the immaterial Principle of humankind. But what lessens this relationship is that one possesses thought and the other does not. And this is the case because, as I have just stated, the immaterial Being of humankind proceeds directly from the source of Beings, whereas the immaterial Being of matter proceeds only indirectly from it. I do not believe an indiscretion is committed in stating that a number distinguishes them, as will be explained subsequently. At the same time, I believe I am rendering an essential service to my fellow humans by urging them to believe in the existence of immaterial Beings which do not think. Many contemporary observers have believed they were no longer materialists once they gained, as I have, the admission and recognition of an immaterial Principle within matter. But does materialism consist solely of possessing neither a perfect knowledge nor an accurate idea of matter and its Principle? Or rather, is not the true materialist the one who places, and will always place, the immaterial Principle of intellectual person and the immaterial Principle of matter in the same category and the same rank? Therefore, I cannot urge people too strongly to avoid confounding the true notions residing within us concerning such subjects, and to believe in the existence of immaterial Beings which do not think. This is a distinction and truth which must resolve all the difficulties that have been raised regarding this subject. If, however, there still remains any doubts concerning thought, which I have presented as necessarily being common and uniform in all Beings distinct from matter and the senses, and that to support these doubts, one were to offer as an objection the difference (so remarkable among the intellectual faculties of people) that each of them does not appear to be endowed more equally in these intellectual faculties than in the corporeal and sense faculties, then I would agree with those who experience such uncertainty that, in fact, judging according to the universal difference perceived in people's intellectual faculties, it seems difficult to believe that they could all possess an equal idea of their Being and of the religion they are bound to observe in honoring it. Yet we have never pretended that the ideas of all people were equal concerning this subject. It is enough for us that they are similar. It is unnecessary, and even impossible, that all people sense their Principle equally, but it is certain that they all sense it, and no one exists who does not have some sort of idea about it. Such an admission is all that we desire on their part, and it remains for the active and intelligent Cause to do the rest. I will not be straying too far from my subject if I pause for a moment to consider the natural difference we perceive in people's intellectual faculties. And it will be useful to learn how we may recognize what they would have been in humankind's primary origin if they had remained in their glorious estate, and what they are today after their descent from it. Even if a person had retained all the advantages of his first estate, it is certain that the intellectual faculties of each of his descendants would have manifested differences. These faculties are the sign of the primary Principle from which men emanate, and because this Principle is always new although always remaining the same, the signs representing it must manifest its continual state of newness and thereby make its fecundity all the more apparent. But, far from having produced any imperfection, nor having caused sorrow and humiliation among men, such differences would not even be perceived by any of them. Too occupied in the enjoyment of their state of rapture, they would not have had the leisure to compare, and although the measure of their faculties would not have been equal, each would have amply satisfied those to whom they had been allotted. Apart from these original inequalities which always occur, a person is subject in her present state to those arising from the Laws of the sensate region she inhabits. This fact makes the exercise of her primary faculties even more difficult and multiplies their differences ad infinitum. However, not being condemned to death or to the everlasting loss of these primary faculties, the elementary region only serves to present her with one more obstacle, and she always has the unavoidable obligation of trying to surmount it. Finally, today, as in her first estate, the measure of her advantages is sufficient if she always feels the firm resolve of employing them for his own benefit. Yet who does not know that, far from deriving any advantage from such obstacles and making them serve for a person's glory, she even adds to them through the false use of her will? She does so through irregular generations, through the ignorance which engulfs her every day concerning what is appropriate for her or what is adverse for her, as well as through a multitude of other causes which continually bring about the decay of these same faculties and distorts them to the point of rendering them almost unrecognizable. Moreover, in this state of degradation into which a person allows himself to be drawn, he loses the true concept of those privileges belonging to him. His heart becomes empty, and, no longer knowing true enjoyment, he degrades himself and only values himself according to conventional differences existing only in his disordered will, but to which he clings with such fervent ardor that, having allowed his sole support to escape, he no longer possesses something to sustain him. However, despite such original differences, again multiplied either by the obstacles of the sensate region or by humanity's vicious habits, could we ever state that a person has changed her nature when we have seen that even corporeal Beings could not change theirs, despite the multitude of revolutions to which their own Law and the hand of a person can subject them? If it is within a person's nature and essence to acknowledge a Superior Being and to perceive that, being attached to the sensate realm, there must exist a palpable means enabling people to make their homage manifest to It, it is certain that, despite all their errors, the Law could never vary for them. They will make their task lengthier and more difficult, as they do in fact every day through their blindness and imprudence, but they will never dispense with the obligation of fulfilling it. If one should find himself more burdened than another by his nature and should it be thus through his own doing, it will nevertheless be necessary that his tribute be paid, and this tribute on a person's part is none other than the awareness, acknowledgment, and just employment of the faculties constituting him. Then, no matter how distorted a person may be, we will always find within her the primary Law, since her nature is always the same. We must always find her like the Being which communicates thought to her, because this thought can only be communicated between Beings of the same nature. We must, I repeat, recognize her as being inseparably bound to the idea of her Principle and to that of the duties attaching her to it, since having agreed that such ideas are universal among people, we cannot deny that these ideas are born and live perpetually with them. This is why we have traced the time of her religion's birth to the person's very origins. What value, then, can we place upon the imprudent and insane opinions which have made people's fears and timidity the roots of this sacred institution? How could such weaknesses give people an idea as sublime as that of a guide which can enlighten and sustain them in all their steps, if its seed was not resident within their breast? And since they carry this seed within themselves, why seek its origin elsewhere? Undoubtedly, we will no longer say that nature's frightening revolutions have caused the birth of this idea within humankind. At best, they have been one of the means suitable for reactivating within people the precious faculties so often found dormant. But they would never have communicated to humanity the seed of these faculties, since it is only through this seed that people are human. To an even lesser extent could they have given a person all the enlightenment and knowledge necessary for the entire accomplishment of those duties involving his religion and worship, because, at the moment that a person senses he does not possess such knowledge, he senses he can acquire it only through an intelligent Cause, which, being superior to him, is all the more superior to material nature. If a person, despite his misery and deprivation, remains above this material nature through his essence, what aids and enlightenment could he ever expect from it? In this way we perceive the kind of mediocre effects all the revolutions of the elementary region have thus produced in people, and how unreasonable it would be to search it for the source of their virtues and grandeur. Yet, despite what I have just said, the terrible events to which elementary nature is exposed have often served to reawaken the intellectual faculties benumbed within people by recalling to them both the idea of the Primary Being and the necessity of honoring It. I will even admit that, in the sorrowful situation in which people frequently have found themselves and which must have become even more frightful through the ignorance to which they have nearly always abandoned themselves, they have chosen among the scattered objects surrounding them those which seemed the most powerful to them and addressed their entreaties to the objects so as to obtain assistance against the misfortunes menacing them. I will agree that, having thus selected their deities, they have also evolved a sensate worship for them and offered sacrifices to them. I will say that as this error has occurred in various parts of the world according to the degree of fear experienced more or less by people, it has been one of the causes which has produced the diversity found among all religions. What could anyone conclude from these comments that would be contrary to the principle I defend? Can we not perceive the motivating cause behind such institutions? Can we not perceive the nature of their frivolous object? Finally, can we not perceive that the very institutions which established them, being unable to hide from themselves the weakness of their idols, have attempted to support them by multiplying their number, that they have often repudiated these idols and later replaced them with others at will, and that they have shown the same inconsistency in the choice of the means employed in making them favorable to themselves? If a fixed luminary had directed these institutions, they and their productions would have been protected from all these contradictions. It is therefore evident that those who have observed such facts have carried these consequences much too far. Merely because fear and superstition have engendered the birth of religious institutions in different parts of the world - or, which is even more true, have introduced diversities within the religions already established - it would be unfair to conclude that they have been the source of all religions, and that people have drawn from this the principles and concepts which are universally common to them and other people. But it is not completely impossible to show even more clearly the cause of this error, and to expose it entirely to view. Have I not proclaimed people as being an assemblage of sensate and intellectual faculties? Has not this caused us to conceive that these sensate faculties, being common to both people and animals, have caused people henceforth to become, much like animals, susceptible to habits? But could not these habits, all pertaining to the senses, also come into being except through the help of sensate means and causes? On the contrary, has not this caused us to conceive that people's intellectual faculties, being of an order superior to sensate causes, could not be commanded by such sensate causes, and that they have need of the reaction of a cause and an agent of another order to move and animate them-namely, one that would be of the same nature as the intellectual Being of humankind? Thus, this is where the solution to the problem is to be found. It is necessary to distinguish between a person's sensate productions and her primary ideas which belong only to her intellectual Being. It is necessary to perceive that climate, temperature, and all the relatively numerous accidents of the material and sensate Nature could well have influenced a person's customs, habits, and outward actions; and that they could even, through a manifestation to her senses, operate passively upon her intellectual faculties. But, the cooperation of all the elementary revolutions, whatever their nature, would never give her the least idea of a Superior Cause, nor the fundamental points we have discovered in It. In short, all the causes that we are examining at this moment belong by their nature within the sensate order and can only actively operate upon the senses and never upon the intellect. We would then perceive in all these effects of a person's weakness and fear only the false usage and senseless application of these intellectual faculties, but we would never perceive their origin therein. Even when these intellectual faculties act upon the sensate, they merely cause its movement but do not create it, although being superior to it. For a much stronger reason, the sensate, being inferior to such faculties, could affect them when it acts upon them, but they will never receive birth and life from it. We therefore return once more to our principle, which has been to place the origin of religion at the first moment of humanity's existence. If, after such demonstrations, those who have advanced the contrary opinion still persist in upholding it, and insist that people had found the source of the concepts and all the lights (the seed of which we proclaim that they carry within themselves) in the inferior and sensate causes, we would have but one question to ask of them so as to overturn their system completely. If, as they state, the revolutions of material Nature have given people a religion, why is it that animals do not also have their own, since they as well as people have been present during all these revolutions? Let us therefore stop occupying ourselves with such an opinion, and let us apply ourselves instead to the task of recognizing the full value of the seed that has been placed within us. Let us apply ourselves to the task of sensing that, if this precious seed must provide us with innumerable fruits whenever it has received its natural culture; conversely it cannot manifest anything except confusion and disorder whenever it receives foreign cultures. Finally, let us attribute only to these false cultures the uncertainty that people have shown in all steps, which they have taken without their guide. Yet I sense the curiosity of my readers regarding this natural culture and regarding the invariable effects of the active and intelligent Cause that I have recognized as the indispensable light of humankind-in a word, regarding that religion or unique worship which, according to the principles that I have proclaimed, would return all religions to the same Law. Although I have announced that people should not expect the proofs and positive testimony of these truths from the hand of others, people can at least receive its description from them, and I propose to present it to them. I shall not conceal, however, all the efforts that I make within myself in attempting it. I cannot cast my eyes upon science without being overcome with shame when I perceive all that humankind has lost, and I would wish that I knew not what I know, because I cannot find anything to be worthy of it within myself. For this reason, I can never express myself about such matters except through symbols. The religion of a person in his first estate was subject to a worship, as it still is today, although its form was different. The principal Law of this person was to cast his eyes continually from the East to the West and from the North to the South-in other words, to determine the latitudes and the longitudes in all parts of the Universe. Through this process he had a perfect knowledge of all that happened in the Universe; he purged all his empire of wrong-doers; he ensured the road for all well-intentioned travelers; and he established peace and order in all the states subject to his domination. Also, through this process he fully manifested the power and glory of the Primary Cause which had charged him with these sublime functions, and fulfilling such functions served to provide the homage most worthy of it, and the only homage capable of honoring and pleasing it. Being One by its essence, it has had no other object than to cause its Unity to prevail-in other words, to act for the happiness of all Beings. However, if a person had not been supported in the exercise of the immense task that had been entrusted to her, she could not have embraced all parts of it on her own. Thus, she was surrounded by faithful ministers who executed her orders with precision and clarity. As she thought, her ministers read her wishes and transcribed them into characters so clear and expressive that they were protected from all equivocation. The primary religion of humanity being invariable, people were subject to the same duties despite their fall. But since they had experienced a change of climate, it was also necessary that they change the Law so as to direct themselves in the exercise of their religion. This change is none other than a person having submitted himself to the necessity of employing tangible means for a religion which should never have known them. Nevertheless, since such means present themselves naturally to him, it requires only a slight effort on his part to search for them, but much more effort, it is true, to render them productive and to successfully make use of them. First of all, he cannot take one step without encountering his Altar, and this Altar is always decorated with Lamps which can never be extinguished and which will exist as long as the Altar itself. Secondly, he always carries incense with him, so that he can devote himself at any moment to the acts of his religion. But, with all these advantages, it is frightening to contemplate the extent to which humanity is still far from its goal, and the number of attempts that a person must make before arriving at the point of being able to fulfill her primary duties entirely. Moreover, even if she were to arrive there, she would always remain in an irrevocable subjection, which would cause her to sense, at the very end, the rigor of her condemnation. This subjection consists of a person being absolutely incapable of accomplishing anything on his own and of always being dependent on this active and intelligent Cause. It alone can set him back upon the path whenever he goes astray, and it alone can keep him on it. This Cause must today direct all his steps, because without it he cannot know anything, nor even derive the least benefit from his own knowledge and faculties. Moreover, the situation is not the same as it was during humanity's glory, when a person read even the most intimate thoughts of her superiors and her subjects, and when she could, as a consequence, communicate with them according to her will. But, in the horrible expiation to which she has exposed herself, she cannot hope to reestablish this communication without beginning to learn how to write. And she can consider herself fortunate if, subsequently, she finds herself in a position where she learns how to read, because there are many people, even among the most celebrated for their knowledge, who pass their life without ever having read. It must be said, however, that some people have read without ever having written. Yet these are special privileges, and the general Law is to commence by writing. However, a person in his first estate could, at will, continually occupy himself with reading. Since the expiation of a person must take place in "time," this Law of time subjects him to a painful and indispensable process in the gradual recovery of his rights and knowledge, whereas in his first estate he did not have to wait as each of his faculties always responded to his needs and immediately acted according to his wish. These inexpressible advantages were connected with the possession and comprehension of a priceless Book that was counted among the gifts which a person had received at birth. Although this Book consisted of only ten pages, it contained all the lights and knowledge of what was, is, and will be. The power of people was then so extensive that they possessed the faculty of reading through the ten pages of the Book at once and understanding it at a glance. At the time of humanity's degradation, this Book was indeed still in its possession, but people were deprived of the faculty of comprehending it as easily as before, and they can no longer understand all the pages except by reading one after the other. However, a person will never be entirely reestablished in her rights until she has studied them all. Although each of these ten pages contains a special knowledge, they are, nonetheless, so intertwined that it is impossible to understand one perfectly without attaining an understanding of them all. Even though I have said that a person can no longer read them except in succession, none of her steps will be assured if she does not examine them in their entirety, and the fourth page particularly, which serves as a rallying point for all the others. This is a truth to which people have paid little attention. It is however one which is infinitely necessary for them to observe and understand as they are all born with the Book in their hand. If studying and understanding this Book are precisely the tasks they need to accomplish, we can then judge how advantageous it is for them to avoid making any errors in its study. Yet humankind's negligence concerning this matter has been carried to an extreme. Very few among them have noticed this essential union of the Book's ten pages which renders them absolutely inseparable. Some have stopped in the middle of this Book, others at the third page, others at the first-a situation which has produced atheists, materialists, and deists, respectively. It is true that a few have perceived such ties, but they have not understood the important distinction that needs to be made between each of these pages, and, finding them bound together, they have believed them to be equal and of the same nature. What has been the result? By limiting themselves to that part of the Book they did not have the courage to go beyond, and by depending upon the fact that they were nevertheless expressing themselves according to the Book, they have pretended that they possess an understanding of the entire Book. Thereby believing themselves infallible in their doctrine, they have exerted all their efforts to prove it. But such isolated truths, receiving no sustenance, have soon deteriorated in the hands of those who had thus separated them, and there remained nothing for these imprudent men but a vain phantom of knowledge, which they could not offer as a solid body, nor as a true Being, without having recourse to imposture. This is precisely where all the errors we shall examine eventually in this treatise originated, as have all those we have already disclosed about the two opposing Principles, the nature and Laws of corporeal Beings, the different faculties of humankind, and the principles and origin of its religion and rites. The part of the Book in which these errors have primarily occurred will be shown afterwards, but before considering this matter we will round out the understanding that one must have of this incomparable Book by presenting in detail the different learning and properties, the knowledge of which is contained in its pages. The FIRST dealt with the universal Principle or Center from which all Centers continually emanate. The SECOND dealt with the creative Cause of the Universe, of the double corporeal Law supporting it; of the double intellectual Law manifesting in time; of the double nature of humankind; and generally of everything which is composed of and formed by two actions. The THIRD dealt with the foundation of Bodies; of all the results and productions of all genders. This is where the number of immaterial Beings which do not think is found. The FOURTH dealt with all that is active; of the Principle of all languages, whether temporal or beyond time; of the religion and rites of humanity. This is where the number of immaterial Beings who think is found. The FIFTH dealt with idolatry and putrefaction. The SIXTH dealt with the Laws governing the formation of the temporal world and the natural division of the circle by the radius. The SEVENTH dealt with the cause of winds and tides; of the geographical scale of humankind; of humanity's true knowledge and the source of its intellectual or sensate productions. The EIGHTH dealt with the temporal number of that which is the sole support, force, and hope of humankind-in other words, of that real and physical Being which has two names and four numbers due to it being active and intelligent at the same time and because its action extends over the four worlds. It also dealt with justice and all legislative powers, which include the rights of sovereigns and the authority of generals and judges. The NINTH dealt with the formation of corporeal humankind in the wombs of women and with the decomposition of the universal and particular triangle. Finally, the TENTH was the channel and complement of the preceding nine. It was undoubtedly the most essential and that without which all the others would not be known, because, by placing all ten in a circumference according to their numerical order, it will be found to have the closest affinity with the first, from which all emanates. And if one desires to judge its importance, let it be known that the Author of all things is invincible because of it, as it is a barrier which protects It from all sides and which no Being can pass. Thus, we perceive in this enumeration all the knowledge to which humanity can aspire and the Laws which are imposed upon it. It is clear that people will never possess any knowledge, nor will they ever be able to fulfill any of their true duties, without going to and drawing from this source. We also actually know the hand that must lead them to it, and although they cannot take a single step toward this fertile source on their own, they will certainly advance towards it by forgetting their own will and allowing the will of the active and intelligent Cause to act alone for them. Therefore, let us congratulate humankind for still being able to find such a support in their misery. Let a person's heart be filled with hope when he perceives that even today he can discover without error in this precious Book the essence and properties of Beings, the reason for things, and the certain and invariable Laws of his religion and rites which he must necessarily render to the Primary Being. In other words, being at once intellectual and sensate and because nothing in existence is not one or the other, he must recognize his own relationship with everything which exists. As this Book contains only ten pages and yet contains All, nothing can exist without belonging, by its very nature, to one of these ten pages. Thus, there is not a single Being which does not indicate in itself the nature of its class and to which of the ten pages it belongs. Every Being offers us thereby the means necessary for instructing us in everything concerning it. But, to direct ourselves in such understanding, we must distinguish the true and simple Laws constituting the nature of Beings from those which people think up and substitute for them every day. Let us now consider that part of the Book which I have declared as having been the most abused. It is the fourth page which has been recognized as having the closest affinity to humanity, as this is where its duties and the true Laws of its thinking Being have been written, as well as the precepts of its religion and rites. If, indeed, a person followed with exactitude, constancy, and pure intention all the points clearly expressed therein, she could obtain the help of the very hand that had punished her; elevate herself above that region of corruption to which she is relegated by condemnation; and recover traces of this ancient authority by virtue of which she determined, in the past, the latitudes and longitudes necessary for the maintenance of universal order. But, since such powerful resources were attached to this fourth page, it is also, as we have stated, in this part of the Book that humanity's errors were the most considerable. And, truly, if humanity had not neglected such advantages, all would still be peaceful and happy upon Earth. The first of these errors was to transpose this fourth page and substitute in its place the fifth, or that which deals with idolatry. In so doing, humankind distorted its religious Laws and thus could not derive the same benefits from them nor the same assistance as it would have, had it preserved the true rites. On the contrary, receiving only darkness as its reward, humanity engulfed itself in it to the point of no longer even desiring the light. As we said at the beginning of this book, the course of this Principle was such that it made itself evil by its own will. Such was the error of the first person, and such has been that of many of this person's descendants, chiefly among the peoples which seek their Orient in the South of the Earth. This is what constitutes this error or crime, which cannot be forgiven and which, on the contrary, is inevitably subject to the most rigorous punishment. But the majority of people are protected from these errors, because it is only by walking that one falls, and the greater number of people do not walk. However, how is it possible to advance without walking? The second error consists of having taken a rough idea of the properties connected with this fourth page and to believe that they could be applied to all, because attributing them to objects for which they are unsuitable makes it impossible to discover anything. Moreover, who does not know how slight has been the degree of success attained by those who base matter upon the four elements, who dare not refuse thought to animals, who attempt to square the solar calculus with the lunar calculus, who search for longitude upon the Earth and for the quadrature of the circle-in a word, who attempt every day to find an infinity of discoveries of this sort and in which they never gain satisfactory results (as we shall continue to show later in this treatise)? Yet this error is not directly aimed against the universal Principle. Those who follow it are not punished except by ignorance, and it does not demand any expiation. There is a third error by which, and through the same superficial ignorance, a person has believed himself in possession of the sacred advantages that this fourth page could, indeed, communicate to him. Pursuing this idea, he has spread among his fellow people the uncertain notions of truth which he himself has created. He has directed upon himself the eyes of the people, who should only have directed them towards the Primary Being, as well as towards the physical, active, and intelligent Cause-and upon those who, by their accomplishments and virtues, have obtained the right to represent the Cause upon Earth. This error, without being as disastrous as the first, is however infinitely more dangerous than the second, because it gives people a false and childish idea of the Author of all things and of the paths leading to It. To summarize, those who have had the imprudence and audacity to announce themselves thusly have, so to speak, established an infinity of systems, dogmas, and religions. These establishments, already so lacking in substance in themselves and through the vice of their institutions, could not avoid experiencing further alterations so that, being obscure and shadowy at the moment of their origin, they have completely disclosed their deformities through the passing of time. Therefore, by adding the enormous abuses that have been made in the knowledge contained in the fourth page of this Book, of which we are all guardians at birth, and by adding the confusion that has proceeded therefrom to all that we have observed regarding humanity's ignorance, fears, and weaknesses, as well as its departure from the symbols, we will have the explanation and origin for this multitude of religions and rites prevalent among people. Without a doubt, we can only despise them when we perceive this variety which distorts them and this mutual opposition which unveils their falsities. But if we do not lose sight of the fact that these differences and peculiarities have never affected any but the sensate, and if we recall that a person, being by her thinking the image and likeness of the Primary and Highest of thinking Beings, brings with her all her own Laws, then we shall recognize that when she is born her religion is also born within her. Far from having come to her as a result of the entreaties, caprice, ignorance, and terror which Nature's catastrophes may have inspired within her, all of these causes, on the contrary, constitute what has often distorted humanity's religion and brought her to the point where she even distrusts the only remedy available to her for the alleviation of her misfortunes. We shall recognize to even a much greater extent that people alone suffer from these variations and weaknesses, and that the source of a person's existence and the way granted to her for attaining it will never be less pure. We shall also recognize that she will always be certain to discover a point of reunion which will be common to her and her fellow people whenever she directs her eyes towards this source and towards the only light that must lead her to it. These are the concepts we must have of humanity's true religion and of all those which have usurped this designation upon Earth. Let us now search for the cause of the errors that observers have committed in politics. After having considered humanity in itself and in relation to its Principle, it is now quite important that we consider individuals in relation to other people.

## Chapter 5 - Policy Uncertainty

When considering a person in regard to his political relations, he presents two viewpoints as he has in previous observations: first, what he could be and should be in the state of society, and second, what he is in this same state. It is by carefully studying what he should be in the state of society that we can then learn how to better judge what he is today. This comparison is undoubtedly the only method available for clearly unfolding the mysteries still veiling the origin of societies, for establishing the rights of sovereigns, and for laying down the rules of administration by which empires could and should sustain and govern themselves. The greatest difficulty experienced by those statesmen and stateswomen who have tried best to follow the course of Nature has been in reconciling all social institutions with the principles of justice and equality which they perceive within themselves. Once it was made apparent to them that humankind was free, they believed people were created to be independent and thenceforth they ruled that all subjugation was contrary to their true essence. Thus, according to them, all government is truly a vice and people should have no other ruler than themselves. Despite this supposed vice of humankind's dependence and subjection to authority that generally exists before their eyes, they have been unable to resist the curiosity of searching for humanity's origin and cause. By mistaking the thing for its Principle, their imagination has given itself over to all its variations, and this is where observers have exhibited as much inadequacy as when they have attempted to explain the origin of evil. They have pretended that ability and might had placed authority in the hands of those who rule over people, and that sovereign power was based only upon the weakness of those who have allowed themselves to be subjugated. As a result, this invalid right, having no substance, is subject to vacillation as one can see. It then falls successively into those hands which have the strength and talent necessary to seize it. Others have delighted in presenting a detailed account of the violent or shrewd means which, according to them, presided at the birth of states. In so doing, they have presented the same system, but only in a more extensive fashion. Such are the empty reasonings of those who have claimed the motivating cause of such establishments to be the needs and ferocity of primitive people. Living as hunters in the forest, these unrestrained people made incursions upon those who devoted themselves to agriculture and the herding of animalswith a view of turning all advantages to their own profit. The usurpers were then forced to establish laws and punishments so as to maintain themselves in the state of authority which violence had created, and which was becoming a veritable oppression. This is how the most shrewd, daring, and ingenious among them succeeded in remaining master and in assuring their despotism. Yet we perceive that this could not have been the first society, since the existence of tillers of the soil and shepherds has been presupposed. However, this is very close to what is the basic view of those statesmen and stateswomen who have decided that the Principle of justice and equality could never form the basis for governments; and all their systems, and the observations employed to support them, have been brought to this conclusion. Some have believed they could remedy such injustice by establishing each society upon the common accord and unanimous will of the individuals composing it. However, various individuals, being unable to support the dangerous results of their fellow human's natural liberty and independence, have been forced to place the rights of their natural state into the hands of one person or a small number of persons and to pledge themselves to contribute through their united forces to the maintenance of the authority of those they have chosen as their leaders. Since this surrender of their rights is voluntary, they say there is no longer any injustice in the authority emanating from it. Afterwards establishing the powers of the sovereign and the privileges of the subjects through the same act of association, they then formed political bodies, and there is no longer any difference between them except in the particular methods of administration, which may vary according to the times and circumstances. This opinion is one that would appear to be the most judicious as it would better fulfill the natural idea being offered to us regarding the justice of governments by which people and property are under the protection of the sovereign and in which this sovereign, having no other aim than the common good, is occupied only in maintaining the Law which must procure it. In a forced association, on the contrary, we perceive simply the image of revolting atrocity whereby all subjects are victims and the tyrant retains solely for himself all the advantages of the society over which he has made himself master. Therefore, I shall not dwell any longer on the consideration of this sort of government, although it is not without example. But, as there is no trace of justice or reason visible within it, it cannot be reconciled with any of the true natural principles of man. Otherwise, we would have to say that a band of thieves also constitutes a political body. However, having been given the idea of a voluntary association is not sufficient. Nor is it even sufficient that we can find more regularity in the forms of government derived from it than in all those that may have originated in violence. What we need to do is examine carefully whether this voluntary association is possible and whether this structure is not just as imaginary as that of a forced association. Moreover, we need to examine whether, in case this agreement was possible, people would have the right of forming it lawfully. From such an examination, statesmen and stateswomen could judge the validity of the rights upon which societies have been founded, and, if we find them to be obviously defective, by discovering where the fault lies, we shall soon perceive what must necessarily be substituted for them. We need not reflect at length in order to sense how difficult it is to conceive of the voluntary association of an entire nation. For the voices to be unanimous, the manner of envisaging the motives and conditions of the new undertaking would also need to be unanimous. Never has this happened and never will it occur in a realm and in things that have only the senses for their foundation and object, because we can no longer doubt that everything is relative in the senses and nothing is stable therein. Apart from the fact that it would be necessary to suppress in each of the members the ambition either to be the leader or be close to the leader, it would still be necessary to have unanimity among an infinity of opinions, as much upon the most advantageous form of government as upon both general and special interests, and upon the multitude of subjects that must compose the articles of the contract - a situation which has never been encountered among people. Any further observations would therefore be of little value for helping us to recognize that a society freely formed through the efforts of all individuals is completely beyond all probability, and to acknowledge the impossibility that any such government ever existed. But, let us admit of such a possibility. Let us suppose a unanimity of all voices and that both the form and Laws belonging to the government in question have been acted upon through common accord. It still remains to ask whether people have the right to assume such an undertaking and whether it would be reasonable to remain with those they may have formed. In keeping with the knowledge that we should have acquired of humankind through everything that has been said concerning it, it is easy to foresee that such a right could never have been accorded to it and this action would be meaningless. First of all, let us call to mind the unchanging compass that we have recognized as being humanity's guide. Let us always have before our eyes the fact that all the steps people might take without its guidance would be uncertain, since without it a person does not possess light and because it is charged by its very essence to lead her and to preside over all her actions. If a person were to assume an undertaking of such great importance as that of submitting to another person - and then do so without the approval of the Cause which watches over him - he should doubt beforehand that such a demand would conform with his own Law and consequently help to contribute to his own happiness. If he ever so slightly listened to the voice of prudence, such a consideration should be enough to stop him. Reflecting more carefully upon his own conduct, does he not recognize that not only has he exposed himself to error, but he has even directly attacked all the principles of Justice by transferring to other men the rights which he should not legitimately dispose of and which he knows rest basically in the Hand that must lead him in all things? Secondly, such an undertaking would be vague and foolish, because, if it is true that this Cause of which we speak must be a person's guide in all instances and it possesses complete powers, to try employing any other hand would be useless. With all the more reason we shall say the same thing regarding humankind, considered from the viewpoint of statesmen and stateswomen. According to them, a person chooses masters and protectors for herself due to her helplessness and the difficulty she encounters in enduring the natural state. If this person had the strength to sustain herself, she would have no need for outside support. But if she no longer possesses such strength, and after having lost it she wants to clothe another person with it, what should constitute the basis for a contract? Therefore, voluntary association 1s not really any more just or sensible than it is practical because, by this act, a person would need to give to another person a right which he himself does not possess - namely, disposing of himself. By transferring a right to which he has no claim, he makes an absolutely worthless agreement which neither the chief nor the subjects can put into effect, since it cannot be binding upon either of them. Thus, to summarize everything we have just stated: if forced association is obviously an atrocity, and if voluntary association is impossible and at the same time opposed to Justice and reason, then where will we find the true Principles of government? There are, after all, states that have known them and follow them. If, as I have stated, statesmen and stateswomen have employed all their efforts in such research, and if what we have just seen is exactly all that they have discovered regarding this subject, then we can reasonably say that they have not yet taken the first step towards understanding such knowledge. There certainly exists a secret voice within them which inclines them to agree that, whatever has been the cause of the association in a political body, the leader finds herself essentially the guardian of a supreme authority and power which in itself must subordinate all her subjects to her. They recognize in sovereigns, I state, a superior force which naturally inspires respect and obedience for them. This is also what I strongly profess with the statesmen and stateswomen. But since they have not been able to find out where this superiority comes from, they have not formed a clear idea of it. Therefore, its applications only resulted in falsehood or contradictions. Thus, for the majority, not satisfied with their discoveries, and not finding any method of explaining people in society, have returned to their first idea and have been reduced to claiming that people should not be in a society. But we will surely perceive that this conjecture is no more soundly based than those they have formed regarding the methods of association, and instead it is obvious proof of their uncertainty and hasty judgments. We need only to direct our eyes upon a person for a moment before deciding this matter. Isn't his life simply a chain of continual dependence? Doesn't the very act of his entrance into material life carry with it the character of the subjugation to which he will be condemned during his lifetime? Doesn't he have need, when being born, for an external cause to fecundate his seed and create in it a reaction without which it could not live? And isn't it here that we find the humiliating subjection which he possesses in common with all natural Beings? Once a person has seen the light of day, this dependence becomes even more perceptible, a fact to which humankind's physical eyes bear testimony. At that point, by experiencing absolute helplessness and a truly shameful frailty, a person needs constant aid from Beings of her own species so that she will not die. Then, once attaining the age when she can dispense with their help concerning her bodily needs, a person comes into her own and enjoys all the advantages and forces of her physical being. Yet, such is the nature of people and of the wisdom of the eye watching over them, that before coming to this completion of physical independence, they experience a need of another nature - one which binds them ever more closely to the hand that has sustained their childhood. It is that of their intellectual Being which, beginning to sense its deprivation, becomes restless and blindly devotes itself to all that can pacify it. Still weak at this age, a person naturally appeals to everyone about her and above all to those who, by alleviating her corporeal needs each day, would be the ones who by all rights should be the primary repositories of her confidence. At every step she turns to them to gain further self-knowledge. Actually, she should simply expect it from them, as it is their responsibility to direct, sustain, and enlighten her according to her age and to arm her in advance against error and to prepare her for combat. In a word, it is their responsibility to accomplish for her intellectual Being what they have accomplished for her physical Being during the period when she experienced problems without possessing the strength either to handle them or to protect herself from them. This is - and there can be no doubt about it - the true source of society among people. At the same time, it is the source whereby a person can learn what the first of her duties is when she becomes a parent. Why is it that we do not find a similar situation among animals? It is because experiencing such needs is not part of their nature. It is because animals, by directing themselves solely through the senses, satisfy their sensate needs and thus nothing more remains. As corporeal feelings are the extent of all their faculties, when such feelings are satisfied, there no longer remains for them either desires or further sensate needs. This is why animals have no social ties. Examples of devotion among animals, whether between themselves or for a person, should not be given to me as we are describing here only the natural course and movements of Beings. All the examples that could be offered to the contrary would surely be the result of habit which, as we have said elsewhere, is suitable to and can be found within animals in their capacity as sensate Beings. Nor should my attention be called to those various herds of animals living and traveling together, whether upon the earth, in the water, or in the air. Only their special physical needs bring them together; and there exists so little true affection between them that one can perish and vanish without the others noticing it. Therefore, when making these observations regarding the first period of our material existence, we can perceive that people are not born to live in solitude. We perceive that after a person's physical dependence has ceased to be necessary, there still exists within him a tie that is infinitely stronger in that it relates to his very Being. We perceive, I repeat, that by an interest inseparable from his present state, he will always seek the company of his fellow humans and that, if they never deceived him or if he were not already corrupted, he would never think of withdrawing from them, even though his body has no further need of their assistance. Therefore, it is improper to search for the source of sociability in material needs alone and in the powerful means by which Nature brings together people with Beings of their Own species so as to achieve reproduction. Although humans and animals are similar in this regard, animals nevertheless do not live in a state of society, and such a means is insufficient in itself to establish human society. This is why I occupy myself only with those faculties distinguishing people and by which they are inclined to engage with other people in an interchange of moral actions, the source from which all association must derive so as to be just. In growing older, a person's intellectual faculties begin to rise above what she sees, and she begins to perceive a gleam of light in the midst of the shadows in which we are immersed. It is then that a new order of things is born for her. Not only does everything interest her - but, how much more must this interest increase for those who have helped make her taste the happiness of being a person, as well as for those whom she might, in turn, enable to taste it also? As a person advances during the course of life, this social bond becomes even stronger through the expansion of his views and thoughts. Finally, in his declining years, his powers begin to degenerate, and he again falls into that state of physical weakness which accompanied his childhood. He becomes for the second time the object of other people's pity and returns to dependence upon them until the Law common to all bodies completes and fulfills its action upon his own body and thereby terminates its course. What further proof is necessary in admitting that a person was not destined to pass his days alone and without any social bond? We also perceive in this simple natural society that there are always Beings who give and others who receive, and that there always exist superiority and dependence-in other words, this is the true model of what the political society must be. This, however, has not been given thought by those who claim that the state of society is contrary to Nature and by not finding any method of justifying this society, nor of reconciling it with their principles of natural Law, they have decided to reject It. As for those of us who sense the indispensable necessity for the joined and mutual interaction of people, we shall not be deterred by the falsity and injustice of some of those bonds which have often contributed to their assemblage into a social body. We are quite convinced that people would not be born as they are, with such reciprocal needs and with those faculties which promise them so many advantages, if such faculties were not also the legitimate means for using and extracting all the benefits of which they are capable. The use of such means, occurring only in the social interactions between individuals (though this interaction is subject to innumerable inconveniences due to humankind's present state), will not provide sufficient reason for us to reject political bodies. We will merely indicate a more solid foundation and more satisfactory principles than those which have been given up to this time. But we must surely observe that the shadows in which statesmen and stateswomen have enveloped themselves up till now arise from the same source as those which still cover modern-day observers of Nature. By confusing the Principle with its envelope and the conventional force of humankind with its true force, they have obscured and distorted everything. Furthermore, we have witnessed the little degree of success that has resulted from all these observations upon Nature by which attempts have been made to separate it from an active and intelligent Cause, whose cooperation and power has been shown to be absolutely necessary. We shall recognize, therefore, that as the course of all statesmen and stateswomen is similar, theirs must also be equally fruitless. They have searched for the principles of government within the isolated person, and they have discovered no more by this means than have observers found in matter the source of its effects and all of its productions. Thus, just as a circumference without a center cannot be conceived, likewise none of these sciences can progress without the support of their source. This is why all of these systems cannot sustain themselves, and they collapse for no other reason than that of their own weakness. If, through his primal origin, a person was destined to be the leader and command, as we have established clearly enough, what concept must we form of her realm and first estate, and upon which Beings shall we apply her authority? Will it be upon her equals? In everything which exists and in everything we can conceive, nothing will provide an example of such a Law. On the contrary, everything informs us that no authority can exist except upon inferior Beings, and that the word authority necessarily carries with itself the idea of superiority. Therefore, without pausing any longer to determine upon which Beings the rights of a person should extend, it will be enough for us to recognize that it could not be over other people. It is certain, therefore, that if a person had remained in his primal state, he would never have reigned over other people, and political society would never have existed for him, because for him, there would never have been any sensory limitations or intellectual deprivation. His sole object would have been to exercise his faculties fully rather than to conduct their painful rehabilitation as he does today. After humanity found itself fallen from this splendor and condemned to the unfortunate condition to which they are reduced at present, their primary rights were not abolished; they were merely suspended, and there always remained to humankind the power to work and succeed through their own efforts in returning them to their primary value. Therefore, even today a person could govern as she did in her original state and do so without having other people for subjects. But a person cannot regain and enjoy this empire of which we speak except through the same titles which had made her master in the past, and it is only by carrying her ancient scepter that she will fully succeed in reassuming, with justification, the title of ruler. This had been her primary state and that to which she can still aspire through the unchanging essence of her nature. In a word, such was her ancient authority in which, we repeat, the rights of a person over another person were unknown, because it was beyond all possibility that such rights should exist between equal Beings in their state of glory and perfection. In the state of expiation to which person is subject today, not only does he possess the ability to recover the ancient powers that all people enjoyed without being forced to take their subjects from among their own kind, but he can still acquire another right of which he had no knowledge in his primary state; it is that of exercising true authority over other people, and the following describes from whence this power originated. In this state of reprobation in which a person is condemned to grovel, and in which she perceives only the veil and shadow of the true light, he preserves some memory of her glory. She harbors to a certain degree the desire to go back to it, which may be accomplished through the free usage of her intellectual faculties, through the works initiated for her by the practice of justice, and through the role she must play in the accomplishment of the work. Some let themselves be subjugated and succumb to the innumerable obstacles sown in this elementary morass, while others have the courage and good fortune to avoid them. Therefore, it must be stated that the one who best protects himself from this will allow the idea of his Principle to be the least distorted and he will be the least removed from his primary state. If other men have not made the same efforts, they will not achieve the same success nor will they enjoy the same advantages. Clearly, the one who possesses all these advantages over them must be superior to them and govern them. First of all, he will be superior to them through the deed itself, because there will exist between the others and himself a real difference based upon faculties and powers, the value of which will be evident. Moreover, he will be so through necessity because other men, having exerted themselves less and having not harvested the same fruits, will truly have need of him, due to the poor and weakened state of their own faculties. If there is a person in whom this weakness progresses even to depravation, the person who has preserved herself from both will become her master, not only by deed and necessity but also through duty. She must seize control over the deprived individual and allow her no freedom in her actions, as much to satisfy the law of her Principle as for the safety and example of society. In short, she must exercise over this individual all the rights of slavery and servitude, rights as just and real in this particular case as they are inexplicable and of no value in all other circumstances. This is, therefore, the true origin of the temporal empire of humankind over other people, just as the bonds of humanity's corporeal nature were the origin of the first society. This empire, however, far from constraining and hindering natural society, must be regarded as being its most firm support and the surest means by which it can sustain itself, whether against the crimes of its members, or against the attacks of all its enemies. The person who finds himself invested with such power, remaining content only to the degree that he observes the virtues which have allowed him to acquire this power, attempts for his own sake to create happiness among his subjects. And let no one believe that this occupation must be vain and fruitless; because the individual of whom we speak cannot be such without possessing all the means of conducting himself with certainty and always being sure that his researches provide him with obvious results. Indeed, the more a person can approach the light which enlightened her in her primary state, being an inexhaustible source of faculties and virtues, the more she must extend her empire over those who remove themselves from it, and, in addition, the more she must be aware of that which can maintain order among them and assure the solidity of the state. Through the help of this light, she must be able to embrace and successfully oversee all parts of the government; she must obviously be familiar with the true principles of Law and Justice, the rules of military discipline, the rights of particular individuals and her own, as well as that multitude of means which constitute the motivating power of administration. Moreover, a person must be able to carry his views and extend his authority even to those parts which today do not form the principal object of administration in most governments, but which must constitute the firmest bond in the one of which we speak - namely, religion and the cure of disease. Finally, even in the fields of the arts, whether for leisure, or utilitarian reasons, he needs to direct their course and indicate their true taste. The flambeau which he is fortunate enough to hold in his hand, diffusing a universal light, must enlighten him upon all these subjects and enable him to perceive their connection. This situation, as chimerical as it may appear, does not present anything which does not conform to the idea that we might have regarding kings, whenever we are willing to investigate it thoroughly. When reflecting upon the respect that we have for monarchs, shall we not perceive that we regard them as necessarily being the image and representative of a superior force, and as such capable of more virtue, force, enlightenment, and wisdom than other people? Is it not with a pang of regret that we see them exposed to the foibles of humanity? And do we not feel the desire that they only be known through acts as grand and sublime as the hand that is supposed to have placed them all upon the throne? Is it not by this sacred authority that monarchs proclaim themselves and assert all their rights? Although we do not always feel certain that they act by means of it, does there not arise within us a kind of fear resulting from the thought of the possible use of such power and the veneration which monarchs inspire within us? All of this indicates to us that their primary origin is superior to the powers and will of people, thus confirming the idea I have presented - namely, that their source is higher than what is attributed to it by politics. These faculties and innumerable virtues, which we have indicated must be possessed by kings who have recovered their ancient light, are also claimed by the heads of established societies because they act as though they are in possession of all that we feel should be within them. Is not their title the seal of all the powers they discharge within their empire? Do not generals, magistrates, princes, all the orders of state, secure their authority from them, and when this authority is transmitted from hand to hand even to the last branches of the social tree, is it not always by virtue of the first emanation? Is not their connection always necessary in the exercise of useful talents and sometimes for that of talents which are merely agreeable? In all of these cases, the sovereigns themselves present to us an obvious sign that they are the center and source from which all the privileges and powers they communicate must emanate. The very act of this communication and the formalities accompanying it always show that they are, or that they can be, directed in their choice by a steady light, and also that they are enlightened regarding the capacity of the subjects to whom they entrust a part of their rights. Moreover, even these precautions on their part, as well as the decisions resulting from them, presuppose not only their personal capacity but also serve as testimonials of it. However, all the information which is gathered for the sovereigns in the different cases which crop up, and the adherence they show to the knowledge and decisions of their different tribunals, must not be regarded as a result of their ignorance concerning the different matters submitted to their legislation. Nor should it be thought that they are supposed to know everything by themselves, although one cannot avoid this supposition since they themselves create such jurisdictions; but, performing the temporal the functions of a true and infinite Being, they are charged, as It is, with total and infinite action and are, as It is, subject to the indispensable necessity of being unable to effect limited or particular actions except through their attributes and through the agents of their faculties. If we were to enter into a detailed consideration of all the motives operating and sustaining political governments, we would make the same application of it to the faculties of the leaders directing them. The exercise of Justice, civil as well as criminal, although being dispensed by hands other than theirs, but always under their authority, would indicate clearly enough that they might possess the means of discovering the rights and errors of their subjects, and determine with certainty the extent and support of their rights and likewise the reparation for their errors. The care they take in watching over the preservation of governmental Laws, the purity of morals, the maintenance of religious dogmas and practices, the perfection of the sciences and arts would all remind us that there must be within them a fertile light which extends to all, and consequently, knows all. Therefore, we do not stray from the truth by attributing the advantages so perceptibly illustrated for us by the image of monarchs to the person clothed with all the privileges of her primary estate and we can state with reason that they thereby instruct us concerning what a person could and should be, even in the midst of the impure region she inhabits today. I do not conceal from myself, however, the multitude of objections that will crop up regarding this point of view, by which I have just presented the monarchs and all the heads of societies in general. Accustomed as people are to explaining things by themselves and not by their principle, it must be novel for them to perceive in all their rights and powers, a source which is no longer of themselves, but which is nevertheless so analogous to themselves. Thus, being little accustomed to these principles, they will begin by asking me what proof nations could have of the legitimacy of their leaders, and upon what basis they could determine whether those who occupy such a position have not deceived them. I have no fear of going too far by saying that testimony of it will be obvious, whether for the leaders or for the subjects, in those who know how to make just and effective use of their intellectual faculties. Concerning this subject, I refer my readers to what I have previously said regarding the evidence of a true religion. The same answer can serve for the present objection, because sacred institutions and political institutions should have the same aim, guide, and Law. Thus, they should always be under the same direction, and when they become separated, they both lose sight of their true spirit, which consists of union and perfect intelligence. The second question that could be presented to me involves determining whether, in admitting the possibility of a government such as that which I have just described, we could find examples of it upon earth. Undoubtedly, I would not be believed if I tried to persuade my readers that all established governments conform to the model that has been presented, because, in truth, the majority are far removed from it. But I beg people to be fully convinced that true sovereigns, as well as legitimate governments, are not imaginary Beings, that they have existed at all times, that they actually exist now, and that they always will exist, because this enters into the universal order and, in short, this pertains to the Great Work, which is something other than the Philosopher's Stone. A third problem that will naturally present itself according to the principles which I have established is in perceiving that any person, by his very nature, can hope to recover the light he has lost, even though I recognize the existence of sovereigns among men. If each person achieves his full rehabilitation, who then will be the leaders? Would not all people be equal; would not they all be monarchs? This difficulty can no longer exist, considering what I have stated concerning the obstacles which so often hinder people in their course and which, multiplied further by their imprudence and the false usage of their will, are so rarely and unequally overcome on their part. You may even recall at this point what I have said concerning the natural differences in people's intellectual faculties. You may notice that, even when comparing them only from this viewpoint, there always remains an inequality among them, but an inequality that is not distressing nor humiliating for them, because their importance is real in each one of them and not relative as that which is but conventional and arbitrary. This is, in some ways, what is represented to us by the laws of military institutions, which, among all the works of people, shows us the primary estate more faithfully, and as such, is the most noble of all their establishments. Although not possessing a foundation more true or solid than humankind's other works, it should only hold in the eyes of the sensate person the first rank in order of preference; but, I repeat, it is so noble and induces so much virtue, that one almost forgets that it has need of being true. Thus, concerning this institution which best relates to the Principle of humankind, we will note that all members composing a military body are supposed to be provided and endowed with the particular faculties which are proper to their rank. They are supposed to have attained and fulfilled the goal assigned to them as part of their unit. Although these members are all unequal, they function well as a unit, and no individual is degraded, because the duties of each is fixed. In this institution it is no disgrace to be inferior to other members of the corps, but only to be inferior to one's own rank. At the same time, these military bodies, being composed of unequal members, can never remain a moment without a leader, since there will always be one member who is superior to the others. If these corps were not the work of humankind, the differences and superiority of their members would be fixed, and the subjects' quality and real worth would serve as the rule. However when the legislator needs to act, as she must, but she is not directed by her true light, she makes up for this deficiency by establishing a value and merit easier to recognize, and which has need only of the help of corporeal eyes to be determined. After the differences in rank, it is seniority which establishes rights in military bodies; and should there be only two soldiers at a post, the Law demands that the one senior in service command over the other. Is not this Law, artificial though it may be, an indication of the justice of the principle that I have set forth, and, by supposing all people to be in possession of their privileges, since there would never be complete equality between them, could we not believe that we will always have monarchs? Nevertheless, it would be the greatest of follies to take this comparison literally, as the military corps, being but the work of humankind, can only have conventional differences. This is why the superior and the inferior in the military are by their very nature alike, and despite such imposing distinctions, they all are for the most part similar, since they are always people in privation. But, in the natural order, if each person attained the utmost degree of his power, he would then be king. Yet, just as earthly monarchs do not recognize other monarchs to be their master and, as a consequence, are not subject to one another, likewise, in the case under consideration, if all people were fully rehabilitated in their rights, masters and subjects could not be found among people, as they would all be monarchs within their own realm. But I reiterate, in the present state of affairs, not all people will attain this degree of grandeur and perfection that would render them independent of one another. Thus, since this state of reprobation subsists, if they always have leaders chosen from among themselves, it must be expected that they will always have them and that it will even be indispensable until this period of punishment is entirely completed. Therefore, upon the rehabilitation of a person in his Principle, I establish with confidence the origin of his authority over his fellow people, that of his power and of all the titles of political sovereignty. I do not even fear to state that this is the sole means of explaining all rights and of reconciling the multitude of different opinions which statesmen and stateswomen have originated concerning this matter; because, to recognize the superiority of one Being over Beings of the same class, we must not search for it in the ways in which they resemble each other, but in the ways in which the one can be distinguished from the others. As people are condemned to privation by their present nature, all resemble one another fully in this regard, with the exception of a few slight differences. Therefore, it is only by endeavoring to make this privation disappear that they can hope to establish real differences between themselves. I also believe that I cannot offer to other people a more satisfactory picture than that of this society, which, as we stated previously, would be founded upon people's corporeal needs and upon the desire which they have for knowledge. And, to give it a leader such as I have just pictured is to complete and confirm the natural idea that we all carry secretly within ourselves concerning the society of humankind and the principles of governments. In effect, we would perceive reigning therein only order and universal activity that would create a network of delights and joy for all members of the political body. We would perceive that even their physical ills would find alleviation in it, because, as I have indicated, the light directing the association would embrace and enlighten all of the parties involved. This would then present to us in the midst of all perishable things the grandest image and the most just idea of perfection. It would recall that blissful age which is said to exist only in the imagination of poets, because, having strayed from it and no longer knowing its peacefulness, we have the weakness to believe that, since it has ceased to exist for us, it must have ceased to be. At the same time, if such is the Law which should bind and govern people, if this is the sole flambeau which can, without injustice, unite them in a body, it is therefore certain that by abandoning it they can expect only ignorance and all the torments inevitable for those who err in obscurity. Then, if by a subsequent examination of accepted governments, some irregularities are discovered, we may justly conclude that they exist only as a result of the abandonment of this same light and because those who have instituted political bodies did not know the principles, or because their successors allowed its purity to become altered. Yet, before undertaking this important examination, I must pacify the suspicious governments which could become alarmed by my sentiments, and fear that by unveiling their defectiveness, I would destroy the respect which is their due. Although I have already shown in some parts of the subject which I am presently considering, my veneration for the sovereigns' person and character, it is fitting that I reiterate this solemn affirmation at this time so that all those reading this book will be persuaded that I only express peace and order, that I deem submission to their leaders to be the indispensable duty of all subjects, and that I condemn without reservation all insubordination and revolt as being diametrically opposed to the principles I have set to establish. Credence must surely be given to this genuine declaration, whenever one recalls what I have previously established concerning the Law which must govern a person in her entire conduct here on earth. Have I not shown that the concatenation of her sufferings was simply the result of the false usage of her will; that the usage of this will had become false only when a person had abandoned her guide; and that, as a consequence, were she to manifest this same imprudence today she would only perpetuate her crime and thereby further augment her misfortunes? I absolutely condemn rebellion, even in the instance where the sovereign and the government have reached the height of injustice, and where neither can maintain any trace of the powers which constitute them. As iniquitous and revolting as such an administration may be, I have shown that it is not the subject who has established its political Laws nor its leaders. Therefore, it is not for him to overthrow them. Yet it is necessary to present reasons even more easily perceived. If evil is found only in the administration, and the leader has persevered in that force and those incontestable rights that we suppose her to possess as the fruit of her efforts and of the exercises that she has performed, she will have within herself all the faculties necessary to untangle and remedy the government's vice, without the subject being in a position to participate in it. If the vice is present both in the government and the leader, but the subject knows how to preserve himself from it by fulfilling that obligation common to all people of never departing from the unchanging Law which must be their guide, this subject will know how to protect himself from those vexations without employing violence. Or he will know how to recognize whether or not this calamity emanates from a superior hand. He will then refrain from murmuring or from manifesting opposition to Justice. Finally, if the vice is present at the same time in the leader, the administration, and the subject, then I should not be asked what should be done; because this would no longer be a government, it would be a tyranny; and for in a tyranny there is no Law. It would even be useless to proclaim to people living in such disorder that the more they give themselves over to it, the more they will attract suffering and affliction to themselves; that the interests of their true happiness will always forbid their fighting injustice with injustice, and that misfortune will pursue them as long as they do not endeavor to bend their thought and will to their natural rule. Such discourses would not find any access within this tumultuous confusion because they express the language of reason, and a Being left to their own resources does not reason. Let no one offer once more the objection presented by that difficulty of recognizing the signs by which one could discern whether things are or are not in order, and when one must either act or refrain from acting. I have sufficiently given to understand that every person was born to have the certainty of the legitimacy of her actions, and this is indispensable in determining the morality of her entire conduct. Thus, as long as this proof is lacking, she exposes herself if she advances even one step. From the previous remarks, one may judge whether I allow people the least imprudence and, moreover, the smallest act of violence or private authority. I believe, therefore, that this acknowledgment on my part will reassure sovereigns concerning the principles directing me. They will never perceive anything other than an inviolate attachment to their person and the most sublime respect for the sacred rank they occupy. They will perceive that even if there were usurpers and tyrants among them, their subjects would not have any legitimate pretext to cause them the slightest harm. If any sovereigns were ever to read these writings, I do not think they could persuade themselves that, in avowing my submission to their person, I have increased their powers in any way whatsoever or that I consider them to be excused from their obligation as people to subject their course to the common rule which should direct us all. On the contrary, if it is only through the intimate knowledge they are supposed to have of this rule and by their fidelity in observing it that they have assumed the title of monarch, restoring to them the right of straying from it would only favor imposture and insult the very name which causes us to honor them. Thus, if the subjects do not possess the right to avenge an injustice inflicted on them, they must be aware that they have even less right to commit an injustice themselves; because in their quality as people, the sovereign and the subject are both subservient to the same Law. The political state changes nothing in their nature as thinking Beings. It is only one more responsibility for both of them, and neither should they nor can they do anything on their own. I thought it appropriate to make this formal declaration before entering into the examination of political bodies, and I now believe that I can follow my plan without concern, because, as defective as governments may seem, I can no longer be suspected of working toward their ruin. On the contrary, all that I could earnestly desire would be to help them to appreciate the only means which are clearly proper for their happiness and perfection. First of all, what causes us to presume that most governments have not had for their basis the principle that I have previously established - namely, the rehabilitation of sovereigns in their original light-is that nearly all political bodies which have existed upon the earth have passed out of existence. This simple observation does not allow us to be persuaded that they had a real foundation or that the Law which constituted them was the true Law. The Law of which I speak possesses by its nature a living and invincible force, and thus everything it binds together should be indissoluble as long as those who are charged with being its ministers do not forsake it. The Law was therefore either not well known at the birth of the governments under consideration or it was neglected during the periods following their institution, otherwise, they would still exist. This is certainly not contrary to the idea that we all carry within ourselves concerning the stability of the effects of such a Law. According to the notions of truth residing within people, that which does not pass away, and durability is for us the proof of the reality of things. Thus, when people have accustomed themselves to regarding governments as being temporary and subject to vicissitudes, it is because they have placed such governments in the same category as all human institutions, which, being supported only by whim and unruly imagination, can vacillate in their hands and be destroyed by some other whim. Nevertheless, and by an intolerable contradiction, they demand our respect for these types of establishments whose transitory nature they themselves recognize. Is it not certain that the Principle spoke to them even in their blindness and they sensed that, as defective and fragile as their social institutions were, they were the image of one which could not possess any of these defects? This would be enough to support what I have propounded regarding the unchanging Law which must preside over any association. However, despite the idea which we all have regarding such a Law, undoubtedly we will always hesitate before giving it credence, because, having witnessed the disappearance of all empires, it becomes rather evident that they cannot endure, and we will experience difficulty in believing that there are any which will not pass out of existence. This, however, is one of the truths which I can best assert, and I do not believe that I am going too far by assuring others that there are governments which have continued since people appeared upon Earth, and which will exist until the end of time. I say this for the same reasons that have caused me to say that there have always been and always will be legitimate governments here on Earth. Therefore, I cannot be faulted in giving you to understand that if the political bodies which have disappeared from the Earth's surface had been founded upon a true Principle, they would still be in existence; that those which exist today will pass away without fail if they do not have such a principle for their basis; and that if they have moved away from it, the best means available to sustain themselves would be to draw closer to this principle. When I assert that a government is capable of enduring, it is clear that I mean to speak only of temporal duration, since governments are all established only in time. Yet, although they must come to an end as do all things, they would, nevertheless, enjoy the fullness of their action simply by carrying it full term - and this is what they could hope for if they knew how to rely upon their Principle. I shall not pause to cite as proof that pride with which governments boast of their antiquity, nor the efforts they make to extend their origin further. Nor shall I call attention to the precautions they take to ensure their preservation and duration, nor to all those establishments they continually form with a view to the future, whose fruits can only be harvested centuries afterwards. We may perceive that such considerations would thereby constitute so many secret indications of the certainty they have that they should be permanent. Consequently, I repeat, as soon as we witness the ending of a state, we can presume, without fear, that its birth was not legitimate or that the sovereigns who have successively governed it have not all endeavored to regulate their conduct by the light of that natural flambeau which we remind them must be their guide and that of humankind. By converse reasoning, if we had only this sole motive to direct our judgment, it would not yet be time to give an opinion upon existing governments, because, as long as we see them in existence, we could suppose that they are in conformity with the Principle which should constitute them all, and only their destruction would reveal to us any defects they may have. But, we have yet to consider them from other viewpoints which can also aid us in becoming aware of their faults and irregularities. The second vice that we cannot ignore in recognized governments is that they are different from one another. If some true Principle had formed them, this Principle, being unique and unvarying, would have manifested itself everywhere in the same way, and all governments produced by it would be similar. Thus, as soon as any disparity exists among them, we can no longer admit the Unity of their Principle, and most certainly some among them must be illegally established. I do not attach any importance to those local differences which, being brought about by circumstances and the continual flow of things, must make themselves felt in administration on a daily basis. Since the progress of this administration must itself be regulated by the universal constitutive Principle, any differences that it will allow, according to time and place, will indicate much more to us its wisdom and fecundity rather than causing any alteration of the Principle. At this time, I must therefore take into account only the fundamental differences which pertain to the constitution of the state. Numbered among these are the diverse forms of government, of which I shall consider only the two most important, because all the others are more or less connected to them; namely, that form in which the supreme power is held by a single hand, and that form in which it is held by several hands at once. Of these two kinds of government, if one is supposed to conform to the Principle, it must be presumed that the other is opposed to it, because, one being so different from the other, they cannot reasonably possess the same basis or origin. Consequently, I cannot admit the generally accepted opinion which determines the form of government according to its situation, area, and other considerations of this nature, by which one pretends to decide upon the kind of legislation most suitable to each people or country. According to this rule, the constitutive reason of a state would be definitely found in the secondary Causes, and this is entirely contrary to the idea that I have already presented of this Cause or constitutive Principle. As a Principle, it must dominate everywhere and direct all. It is true that being illuminated, it can accommodate itself to the circumstances that I have just cited, but it must never bend before them to the point of losing its own nature or of producing contrary effects. In a word, this would be renewing the error that we have unveiled when speaking of religion - in other words, it would be searching for the source of a true Principle in the action and Laws of tangible things, whereas these things actually repudiate and distort it. Thus, I persist in maintaining that, of the two forms of governments which I have just mentioned, one must of necessity be defective. Although in my plan I would rather present the Principles instead of giving my opinion, if you were to insist that I must decide upon which is deserving of preference, I could not avoid admitting that government by one alone is, without contradiction, the most natural, simple, and analogous to the true Laws that I have previously set forth as being essential to humanity. It is in fact, within himself and in the flambeau which accompany him, that a person must seek all counsel and enlightenment. If this person is a monarch, his duties as a person do not change; they are only extended. Thus, in this elevated rank, having always the same task to perform, he also can always hope for the same assistance. Therefore, it is not among the other members of his state that he must look for his guides; and if he is a person, he will know how to be sufficient unto himself. Although being the image of the chief, all the hands which will necessarily be employed in the administration will, each in their own class, have as their sole object only that of seconding him, and by no means that of instructing and enlightening him, since we have recognized him as being in possession of the source of the immense powers extending throughout his empire. Therefore, if we conceive that one person can unite within herself all of these privileges, it would be quite useless that there be, at the same time, several people at the head of a government since one alone can, in this case, accomplish the same thing which could be accomplished by all the others. Thus, despite any advantages we may wish to find in the government by many, I cannot regard this form as being the most perfect because there is a fault in it that is superfluous in nature - and in the idea that we carry within ourselves of a true government, there must not be any defect. Although I give preference to the government by one, nonetheless I do not maintain that all those having this form are true according to the entire regularity of the principle. After all, even among governments by one, there are still to be found infinite differences. In some, the leader possesses scarcely any authority; in others his authority is absolute; in still others he steers the middle course between dependence and despotism. Nothing is fixed, nothing is stable in these considerations. For this reason, it is very probable that all the governments where the power is solely in one hand, do not come from this invariable Law we are referring to. Therefore, we should not adopt them all. However, the third and at the same time the most powerful motive which must keep us in suspense concerning the legitimacy of all social institutions upon Earth, in those which have but one leader as well as in those which have several, is that they are at all times enemies of one another. Most certainly this enmity would not occur if the same Principle had presided over all these associations and had continually directed their course. Since the object of this Principle is order, in general as well as in particular, all the establishments over which it has presided would undoubtedly have only a single aim; and this aim, far from being to invade one another would, on the contrary, be to support one another against the common and natural vice which incessantly seeks their destruction. Thus, whenever I see them reciprocally employing their forces against one another and so grossly departing from their object, I must presume without any qualms whatsoever that it is impossible to find among all these governments one that is not irregular or defective. I know that statesmen and stateswomen employ all their efforts to mitigate this deformity. They consider social institutions to be formed in imitation of the works of nature, forgetting that the copy can never be equal to its model, especially in their hands. They carry and attribute to these artificial bodies the same life, faculties, and powers as those with which material Beings in nature are clothed. They attribute to them the same activity, force, and right to conserve themselves and, consequently, also that of repulsing the attacks of their enemies and of fighting them. This is how they justify wars between nations and the multitude of Laws established as much for the inner as for the outer security of the states. But even legislators cannot fool themselves as to the weakness and imperfection of the means they employ for the maintenance of such rights and for the conservation of political bodies. They apparently believe that if the active Principle they presuppose to be in their work were alive, it would animate without violence and conserve without destruction the active Principle manifested in natural bodies in the same way. Once the complete opposite occurs, once any Laws whatsoever of the governments cease to create and possess only the power to destroy, the leader no longer finds any true power in the instrument she employs and she can no longer deny even to herself that the Principle which caused her to form her Law has deceived her. I must then ask what this error can be if it is not to delude oneself regarding the type of combat she must wage; to have the weakness of believing that her enemies are the people who compose political bodies, and thus that it is against such bodies that she must direct all her forces and vigilance. Since this idea is one of the most disastrous results of the shadows in which a person is plunged, it is not surprising that the rights which it has caused to be established are equally false and that henceforth they can no longer be productive. Thus, you should not be surprised when I declare that a person cannot have other people for his true enemies; and that according to the Law of his nature he has actually nothing to fear from them. Indeed, once recognizing that they could not, by themselves, become superior to one another and that they all are subject to the same weakness and privation, it is certain that they have no real advantage over other people in this state. If they attempted to make use of the corporeal advantages residing within themselves - such as skill, agility, or strength-against some person - this individual who was the object of their attacks would undoubtedly succeed in preserving himself from them by allowing himself to be guided by the primary and universal Law which I have constantly presented in this work as being the indispensable guide of humankind. If, on the contrary, it was by virtue of the faculties of this same Law, and by the power of the Principle which has prescribed it, that a person really found her superiors, then the person enjoying such powers would only employ them for her own good and true happiness. Thus she would clearly have nothing to fear from others and she would be wrong in regarding them as her enemies. Therefore, people are timorous among other people through weakness and ignorance, having falsely interpreted the purpose of their origin and the object of their destination upon Earth. And if, as we have observed, one perceives a jealous and avid enmity between various governments, we must believe that this error has not had any other source or Principle. Consequently, the light which has presided over their association does not have all the rights it would have in our confidence, had it been as pure as it should have been. Apart from the defects of administration of which we shall speak later, we shall now observe three essential vices which are clearly shown among accepted governments - namely, instability, disparity, and hatred. When we consider them in themselves and in their respective relations, I would, on this basis alone, have the right to state that such associations were formed by humankind's hand and without the assistance of the superior Law which must give them sanction. This sanction having been neglected, none of the governments can sustain themselves without its aid, having degenerated from their primary state. However, since I have imposed upon myself the obligation of not passing Judgment upon any government, I shall not yet speak my mind, inasmuch as each of these governments could present objections in defending themselves from any charges. Although those which have become defunct have been in error, those which exist may not be in error. If among these I have noted a nearly universal difference, from which I have concluded of necessity that some were evil, I have merely condemned only the government by the many and even then only in general. Thus the governments by one have not been included in this judgment. Finally, if I find a well-defined hatred even among governments by one, or, to express it more appropriately, a general rivalry - each one of them could offer as an objection that it alone is the depository of those true rights which should preside over any society, and thus its duty is to be on guard against other states. All of these are the combined reasons which will always prevent me from expressing my opinion upon any existing political bodies; but since my intention is, at the same time, to place them all in a position of being able to judge themselves, I will offer other observations that will assist them in directing their judgments upon what they are and what they should be. I shall now cast my eyes upon their administration, because for a government to conform with the true Principle, its administration must be regulated by clear Laws and dictated by true Justice. If, on the contrary, it is found to be unjust and false, it will rest with the governments that make use of it to bear the consequences concerning the legitimacy of the Principle and motive to which they owe their birth. Political bodies must regulate two principal subjects: first, the rights of the state and of each of its members, that which constitutes the object of public right and civic Justice; and second, it must watch over the security of society, general as well as particular, which constitutes the object of war, police, and criminal Justice. As each of these different branches have Laws to direct themselves, in order to assure ourselves of their justness, we need only examine whether such Laws emanate directly from the true Principle or whether they have been established by people alone, deprived of their guide. Let us begin with public right. I shall only examine a single article of it, because It will suffice to indicate the obscurity in which this part of the administration is still immersed. This involves the exchanges of different parts of their states which sovereigns often make between themselves, according to their convenience. Indeed, I ask whether after a subject has or is supposed to have taken an oath of fidelity to a sovereign, that sovereign has the right to relieve him of it, and this despite all the advantages that the state might incur from this act. Does not the sovereign's custom of failing to obtain the consent of the inhabitants of the territory they exchange, point out that the original oath was not freely taken and that neither will the new one be more so? Can this conduct ever conform with the idea of a legitimate government that the legislators themselves wish to give us? In the one [form of government] whose truth and indestructible existence I have proclaimed, such exchanges are likewise customary, and those which are practiced among the accepted governments are simply the image of it, because a person cannot invent anything new. But their formalities are different and dictated by motives which render all acts equitable-in other words, the exchange is free and voluntary on the part of both parties. are not considered to be attached to the soil and being part of the domain; in short, their nature is not confused with that of temporal possessions. I dare not speak here of those well-known usurpations by which various governments have claimed to acquire property rights over peaceful and unknown nations or even over neighboring and defenseless countries, thereby manifesting their strength and cupidity against them. As everything in the Universe is accomplished through reaction, it is true that Justice has often allowed the arming of nations for the punishment of criminal peoples. However, in reciprocally serving as ministers to its vengeance, they have only added to their own crimes and defilement, and these horrible invasions, of which we have so many frightful examples before our eyes, have perhaps been less disastrous to those who have been their victims than to those who have enforced them. Let us now proceed with the examination of civil Law. I presuppose all property rights to be established and I presuppose the division of the land to be legitimately accomplished among people as was the case at the beginning of things through means which today ignorance would cause to be regarded as imaginary. When avarice, bad faith, and even uncertainty succeed in producing disputes, who is able to stop these? Who can ensure rights threatened by injustice and who can reinstate those which have declined? Who can follow the long line of inheritances and modifications from the first division to the moment of dispute? How can one remedy so many difficulties without having clear knowledge of the legitimacy of such rights and without being able to identify the true owner positively? How can one judge without having such certainty and dare to decide without being sure that one is not condoning some usurpation? No one dares to deny that this uncertainty is almost universal, from which we can boldly conclude that civil Justice is often imprudent in its decisions. But it is even more guilty and openly displays its rashness in those extremely difficult situations with which it is often confronted when determining the origin of different rights and properties. It then sets a limit to its inquiries by assigning a period during which all peaceful possession becomes legitimate, this being what justice calls statute of limitations. Yet in the case where possession is wrongfully acquired, can such an injustice can ever be effaced by any period of time? It is therefore evident that at present civil Law acts on its own. Civil Law creates Justice although it should only execute it, thus repeating the universal error by which people always confuse things with their Principle. It will probably suffice that I limit myself to this single example of civil Justice, although it may offer me several others which would equally bear witness against it, such as those varieties and contradictions to which it is exposed at every step and which oblige it to disavow itself on thousands of occasions. I shall only add that there is one circumstance in which civil Law completely exposes its imprudence and blindness, and in which the Principle of Justice, which should always direct its course, is much more grievously wounded than when it passes foolhardy judgments upon simple possessions. This is when it declares the separation of a couple joined by marriage for reasons other than adultery. In truth, adultery is the only motive upon which husband and wife can be separated legitimately, because it is the only contravention directly harming the alliance and because this act alone can break it in that the alliance was founded upon an absolute union. Thus, when civil Law allows itself to be guided by other considerations, it quite obviously does not possess even the least rudimentary idea of such a bond. Therefore, I cannot help recognizing the extent to which the course of civil Law is defective, considering both the physical being and the property rights of the members of society. This absolutely prevents me from considering this Law as being in conformity with the Principle that should be directing society, and I am forced to recognize humankind's hand in operation rather than that superior and enlightened hand which should be accomplishing everything. I shall not continue any longer regarding the first part of the administration of political bodies, but before passing to the second, I believe it appropriate to say a little concerning adultery, which we have declared to be the only legitimate cause for the dissolution of marriages. Adultery was the crime of the first person, although he committed it before there were any women. Once they came into being, the peril which led him into his first crime persisted and now people are also exposed to the adultery of the flesh. Thus, this last adultery cannot occur without being preceded by the first. What I am expressing here will become more understandable if one perceives that the primal adultery was committed only because Adam strayed from the Law that had been prescribed for him, whereas he followed the complete opposite. Physical adultery repeats the same act fully, since marriage, being subject to direction by a pure Law, cannot be the work of a person any more than her other actions. Since this person could not have formed this bond by her own will, she does not possess within herself the right to sever it. Giving herself over to adultery removes by her own authority the will of the temporal universal Cause which is supposed to have concluded the engagement, and for her to heed a will of which it has not approved. Thus, as a person's will always precedes her actions, she cannot become heedless in her physical acts without previously being heedless in her will, so that today, in abandoning herself to the adultery of the flesh, she commits two crimes rather than one. The intelligent reader of this work will easily discover in the adultery of the flesh several clear indications concerning the adultery committed by humankind before it became subject to the Law of the elements. As much as I desire that a person succeeds in this, my obligations forbid me the slightest clarification upon this point; and, furthermore, for my own good, I would rather blush for humankind's crime than speak of it. All I have to say is that if adultery seems to be of little concern for certain people, it is surely only for those who have been blind enough to be materialists. If, indeed, people possessed only the senses, adultery would not exist for them, because the Law of the senses is not stable but relative, and everything pertaining to the senses must be equal. Although people have in addition a faculty which must even measure the actions of their senses, a faculty which makes itself evident even in the choice and refinement with which they flavor their corrupted pleasures, one wonders if a person can, in good faith, persuade himself of the unimportance of such acts. Thus, far from adopting this depraved opinion, I shall employ every effort to combat it. I shall boldly affirm that the primal adultery has been the cause of the deprivation and ignorance in which humankind is still immersed, and this is what has changed humanity's state of enlightenment and splendor into a state of shadow and ignominy. The second adultery, besides rendering the first judgment even more rigorous, exposes a person temporally to inexpressible disorders, grievous sufferings, and misfortunes - the primary source of which she is often unaware and which she is far from suspecting to be so near to her. This, however, does not prevent the possibility of their being subject to a multitude of other causes. In such corporeal adultery, a person can still easily form an idea of the hardships he prepares for the descendants resulting from his crimes by considering that this temporal universal Cause, or this superior will, does not preside over couplings of which it has not approved, nor does it preside, for all the more reason, over those which it condemns. If its presence is necessary for everything existing in time, whether sensate or intellectual, a person deprives his descendants of this support when he engenders them through an illegitimate will, and consequently he exposes his descendants to extraordinary suffering and the terrible decline of all the faculties of their Being. It is in the various original adulteries that the people avid of science would find the explanation for all degenerated races, for all those nations in which the species are so peculiarly constructed, and for those monstrous and defectively colored generations with which Earth is covered and in which the observers search in vain for a class within the order of the normal works of Nature. No one should offer me the objection presented by those arbitrary concepts of beauty, which are the result of habit, recognized in various lands. These are only judged by senses that have become accustomed to all things. There must certainly exist for the human species a fixed regularity, independent of peoples' conventions and caprices, because a person's body has been constituted by a number. There is also a Law for her color, and this Law is clearly enough indicated to us by the arrangement and order of the elements present in the composition of all bodies, wherein salt is always seen upon the surface. This is the reason why the differences of climate and those often brought about by the way of life, upon both bodily form and color, do not destroy the principle which has just been established, since the regularity of people's stature does not reside in the equality of their relative height but in the just proportion of all their parts. Likewise, although there are shadings in their true color, there does exist, however, a degree they can never pass, because the elements cannot change their places without an action contrary to what is natural to them. Therefore, we can attribute without fear all those physical signs which are a striking indication of an original defilement to the dissoluteness of the ancestors of nations. Let us attribute to the same source the degradation in which entire peoples are so far immersed that they have lost all feelings of decency and shame, and that not only do they not prohibit adultery among themselves, but they are even so little shocked by nudity that the act of corporeal generation has become a public and religious ceremony among some of them. Some observers have even claimed that the feeling of modesty is not natural to people, but they did not notice that they were obtaining their examples among degenerated peoples. They did not perceive that those who show little repugnance and delicacy in this regard are also the most abandoned to the sensual life, and they are so little advanced in the enjoyment and usage of their intellectual faculties that the difference between them and animals has become almost nonexistent, except through the vestiges of some Laws which have been transmitted to them and which they conserve through habit and imitation. When, on the contrary, observers have decided to obtain their examples within wellregulated societies in which decency and the respect for the conjugal bond are merely the effect of education, they have again erred in their judgments, because these societies, having not enlightened people as to the rights of their true nature, compensate for it through instructions and artificial sentiments that time, place, and the way of life cause to disappear. Thus, by removing from these wellregulated societies the outward signs of received and accepted decency, or a relatively strong attachment to the principles of primary education, one would perhaps not really find any more decency than among the crudest of nations. But this will never prove anything against the true Law of humankind, because in these two examples the people under consideration are both removed from it, the one by a defect in culture and the other through depravation, so that neither of them are living in their natural state. To resolve this matter, we therefore need to go back as far as the natural state of humankind. We would then perceive that as the physical form, which represents the Being, is most disproportionate in comparison with the intellectual person, she is provided with the most humiliating spectacle. And if she were aware of the Principle of this form, she could not consider it without blushing, although the various parts of this body would not be at all likely to inspire within her the same horror, as they each possess a differing aim and usage. We would have seen, I repeat, that this person would have shuddered at the very notion of adultery because it would have recalled to her the frightful and despairing memory of that first adultery from which all of her misfortunes have proceeded. But how would the observers have considered a person in her Principle? They are not aware of her having any; so what credence can we give to their opinions? Thus, let us never forget that all the deformities and vices perceived in different people, whether in their bodies or in their thinking Being, derive from the fact that either their ancestors had not followed their natural Law or that they themselves have departed from it. Materialists should not believe me to be in accord with them when hearing me speak at this time of a natural Law for humankind. I desire, as they do, that people follow their natural Law. But we differ in that materialists desire that people follow the natural Law of animals, whereas I desire that they follow that which differentiates them from animals - in other words, what enlightens and assures all their steps; in a word, what pertains to the very flambeau of Truth. Let us not forget, I repeat, that a person's second crime, that of physical adultery, originates solely in the first adultery, or that of the will, by which a person has followed a corrupt Law in his production, rather than the pure Law which had been imposed upon him. Today a person may commit adultery with another, but he can also commit adultery without another person even more, as in the beginning. In other words, he may commit intellectual adultery because nothing existing in time, other than the primary temporal Cause, is more powerful than a person's will. And, in keeping with the Principle which became evil, it possesses powers even when it is impure and criminal. Let us then examine whether a person who finds herself to be the author ofall the disorders we have revealed should ever be happy and at peace, and whether she could conceal from herself that she owes even more tribute to justice than her unfortunate descendants. Those who believe themselves capable of remedying all these evils by negating the results of their crime will never, in good faith, intend to cause this depraved opinion to be adopted. On the contrary, they cannot doubt that this directs the entire scourge against themselves, while their descendants could have shared it with them. Moreover, this attributes to this same scourge an unlimited extension because, by this criminal act, added to the physical and intellectual adulteries of all the Laws forming a person's essence, not a single one has been left unviolated. I cannot expound further upon this subject without being indiscreet, as profound Truths are not suitable for all eyes. Although I do not reveal to humankind the basic reason for all the Laws of wisdom, they are nonetheless bound to observe them, because they are perceptible and people can perceive everything that is perceptible. Moreover, although it is also accepted among people that generation is a mystery, it is nevertheless true that it manifests within a Law and order unknown to animals, and that the rights attached to it are the most noble testimony of its grandeur, as well as the source of a person's condemnation and misery. Let us allow our readers to meditate on this point, and let us proceed to a consideration of the second part of social administration - namely, that which watches over the state's outer and inner security. We have observed that this second part, having two objects, also possesses two kinds of Laws for its direction. The first ones, charged with outer security, form the Laws of war and the political rights of nations. But noting the falsity of people's behavior and the custom they have of considering one another as enemies, I cannot place any degree of confidence in the Laws they have created concerning such matters. You will find it easy to agree with me by examining the continual uncertainty we perceive in those statesmen and stateswomen who meander about in their attempt to seek among human things a basis for their establishments. By recognizing only force and convention as the principle of government; by tending to ignore their sole point of support; by desiring to open the door and yet persisting in their refusal to make use of the only key with which they could succeed, the search of these statesmen and stateswomen remains absolutely fruitless. That is why I shall not add to what I have already stated upon this subject. Therefore, I shall only direct my observations to the second kind of Laws, or those which concern the inner security of the state - namely, that aspect of administration concerning the police and criminal Laws. I have even combined these two branches into a single category because, despite the difference in the subjects they embrace, they each have for their aim the maintenance of order and the reparation for crimes, since both have the same origin and are derived from the right to punish. In the examination that I am about to undertake, my design will always remain the same as that followed throughout the course of this work. I shall continue in my attempt to ascertain in every subject whether or not things are in conformity with their Principle. In this way each person may come to his own conclusions and learn on his own rather than through my own judgments. I shall, at this point, examine in whose hand the right to punish must primarily reside, and then in what way the person who is invested with such power should legitimately proceed. Without such clarifications it would be extremely rash to take up the sword since it could fall upon the innocent as well as the guilty. Even in the event that this harmful consequence could be avoided, with the blows falling only upon the criminals, there would still remain the uncertainty of whether the one who has directed the blow has the right to do so. It there exists a superior Principle, unique and universally good, as all my efforts have tended to establish up to now, and if, as I have also demonstrated, there exists an evil Principle which ceaselessly works to oppose the action of the good Principle, then it seems inevitable that crimes have taken place within this intellectual class. Since Justice is one of the essential attributes of this good Principle, crime cannot tolerate its presence for a single instant, and the penalty thereof is just as prompt as it is indispensable. The absolute necessity to punish is what is proved by this good Principle. Humanity, in its primary origin, physically experienced this truth and was solemnly invested with the right to punish. This is what constituted humanity's resemblance to its Principle. It is also by virtue of this resemblance that its Justice was exact and certain. Humankind's rights were real, enlightened, and would never have been altered had they been willing to preserve them. At that time, I assert, they truly possessed the right of life and death over the wrongdoers in their realm. However, let us keep in mind that it was not upon others that a person could have exercised it, because in the realm she then inhabited, one could not be subject to another among similar Beings. When, after degenerating from their glorious estate, humankind had fallen into the state of nature, from which results the state of society, and before long, that of corruption, they found themselves in a new order of things in which they had to fear and punish new crimes. However, no person in their present state can exercise just authority over others without having, through their own efforts, recovered the faculties they had lost. Likewise, whatever this authority may be, it can never uncover within them the right to physically punish others, nor the right of life and death over people. Even during their glorious state, people did not have the right of life and corporeal death over their subjects. For such a situation to prevail, it would have been necessary that through a person's fall his realm be extended and new subjects be acquired. But, far from having augmented their number we perceive that, on the contrary, he lost the authority he once had over his former subjects. We even perceive that the only kind of superiority that he could acquire over others would be that of placing them back on the right path when they go astray. He may even stop them when they give themselves over to crime, or rather uplift them by bringing them, through his example and virtue, nearer to that state, whose enjoyment they no longer possess. But he cannot demonstrate that kind of superiority which enables him, on his own, to exercise over them a rule that their own nature disavows. It would therefore be in vain that we would search today within humankind for the titles of a legislator and a judge. However, according to the Laws of truth, nothing must remain unpunished, and it is inevitable that Justice universally follows its course with the greatest exactitude in both the sensate and intellectual states. Rather than acquiring new rights, a person has, by her fall, allowed herself to be deprived of those rights which she once possessed. Thus it is absolutely necessary for her to find elsewhere instead of within herself those rights which are necessary so as to direct herself in that social state to which she is bound at present. And where could we better discover these rights than in this same physical and temporal Cause which has taken the place of humankind by order of the primary Principle? Has not this cause been placed, in effect, in the position that humanity lost through its own fault? Has not the aim and the employment of this aim been to prevent the enemy from remaining master of the realm from which humankind had been expelled? In a word, is it not that which is charged with serving as a beacon for humanity and for the enlightenment of all its steps? Therefore, the work which a person previously had to perform, as well as that which he has imposed upon himself by having come to inhabit a place which had not been created for him, must today be operated solely through this cause. This alone is what can explain and justify the course of humankind's criminal Laws. The society in which a person exists of necessity, and to which she is destined, engenders crimes. She does not possess within herself either the right or the strength to stop them. It is therefore quite necessary that some other cause do it for her, because the rights of Justice are irrevocable. However, since this cause is above sensate things, although it directs and presides over them, and since the punishments of a person in society need to occur in the sensate as do his crimes, it is necessary that it employ sensate means to manifest its decisions and to cause the execution of its judgments. It employs the voice of a person for this function, but only when he has rendered himself worthy of it. It is people who are charged with proclaiming Justice to other people and with making them observe it. Thus, far from being through his essence the depository of the sword, the avenger of crime, a person's very functions announce that the right to punish resides in a hand other than his own and of which he must merely be the organ. We can also perceive what infinite advantages would result for the judge who obtained the right to be truly the organ of this universal, temporal, intelligent Cause. She would find in it a steady light that would enable her to discern the innocent from the guilty without error. She would thereby be protected from committing any injustice; she would be certain to have the punishment fit the offense; and she would endeavor to repair the outcomes of other people so as to not burden herself with crimes. Nonetheless, a person's inestimable advantage, however unknown it is among people in general, offers nothing that would astonish or surpass any of those which I have up to this moment shown people to be capable. They all proceed from the faculties of this active and intelligent Cause destined to establish order in the Universe among all Beings of two natures. And if, by its means, a person can assure himself of the necessity and truth of his religion, and if he can acquire incontestable rights which will elevate and legitimately establish him above other people, doubtlessly he can hope for the same assistance in the sure administration of civil or criminal Justice in the society entrusted to his care. Moreover, everything that I have proposed is represented and indicated by what is commonly observed in criminal Justice. Is not the judge supposed to forget herself so as to become the simple agent and organ of the Law? Even though it is human, is not this Law sacred for him? Does she not make use of all the means at her command so as to enlighten her conduct and judgments, and to fit the punishment to the crime as much as the Law allows? However, is it not more often the Law itself that is the measure thereof, and when the judge observes it, does he not persuade herself that she has acted according to Justice? Therefore, it would be people themselves who would make known to us the reality of this Principle if we did not have the most intimate conviction of it otherwise. At the same time, it appears even more evident to us that the criminal Justice in use among nations is, in effect, only the appearance of what belongs to the aforementioned Principle. By not employing it as a basis of support, such Justice proceeds in the shadows much like all other human institutions, and from whose effects issue a frightening chain of iniquities and veritable assassinations. Indeed, this injunction imposed upon the judge to forget himself and his testimony so as to listen only to the voice of the witnesses, rightly proclaims that there are witnesses who do not lie and whose evidence must direct him. But since witnesses are susceptible to corruption, it is most obvious that the Law is wrong in seeking them only among people from whom it can anticipate ignorance and bad faith, because it then exposes itself to the acceptance of falsehood as proof. It thus renders itself altogether inexcusable, since it is only in the presence of a sure and true witness that a judge will forget himself and transform himself into a simple instrument. Finally, the false Law upon which he believes he can support himself will never assume responsibility for either his errors or crimes. This is why, in the judge's own eyes, the most important of her duties is attempting to determine the truth within the evidence of the witnesses. But how can she succeed in this without the help of that light which I indicate as being her sole guide as a person and which must accompany her at all times? Therefore, is it not an atrocious vice in criminal Laws not to have had this light for their principle, and does not this fault expose the judge to the greatest abuse? But let us examine the abuse which will result from the very power that human Law attributes to itself. When people state that political Law assumes responsibility for punishing individuals to whom it then denies the right of seeking redress through their own means, it is certain that they have thus given privileges to this Law that will never be suitable to it as long as it is left to its own devices for direction. Nevertheless, I agree that this political Law, which can in some fashion control the force of its blows, offers a kind of advantage in that its vengeance will not always be unlimited as that of individuals might be. Nonetheless, it can be mistaken as to who is guilty, whereas a person will not err as easily regarding his own adversary. Moreover, if this particular vengeance, however admissible it might be in a case in which a person would only be endowed with a sensate nature, is still entirely foreign to his intellectual nature - and if this intellectual nature not only has never possessed the right to punish physically, but is even presently deprived of any sort of authority and cannot in any way exercise Justice - it is most certain that until it has recovered its original state, the political Law which is not guided by another light will commit the same injustices under another name. According to the Laws of all Justice, if a person does me harm in any manner whatsoever, she is guilty. If on my own authority I strike her, or shed her blood, or kill her, I am just as much remiss as she is in the Laws of my true nature and in those of the intelligent and physical Cause that should guide me. Thus, when political Law, on its own volition, takes my place for the punishment of my enemy, it takes the place of a sanguinary person. In vain would one now protest to me that through social convention, every citizen has subjected themselves in the case of prevarication to the penalties provided by the different criminal Laws. As we have observed, people have been unable to establish political bodies legitimately by the sole effect of their convention, and so a citizen cannot transmit to his fellow citizens the right to punish him in that his true nature has not given it to him and because the contract he is supposed to have entered into with them cannot extend the essence which constitutes a person. Can it be said that this act of political vengeance is no longer considered to be operated by a person, but by Law? I shall always answer that this political Law, deprived of its flambeau, is nothing other than mere human will to which even unanimous approval does not give one additional power. Henceforth, if it is a crime for a person to act through violence and by her own volition, if it is a crime for her to shed blood, the united will of all people on Earth could never efface it. To avoid this danger, statesmen and stateswomen have believed they could do no better than to consider a criminal as a traitor and, as such, to be the enemy of the social body. By placing him, so to speak, in an assumed state of war, his death appears to them to be legitimate. According to them the political bodies are formed, as they are, in the image of a person, so they must likewise watch over their own preservation. In accordance with such principles, sovereign authority has the right to mass all its forces against the wrongdoer who menaces the state, whether in itself or in its members. We can easily perceive the flaw of this comparison by observing that in one-on-one combat, it is truly people who are fighting. On the contrary, in a war between nations one cannot state that the governments are the combatants, since they are but moral Beings of which the physical action is imaginary. Also, besides having shown that war between nations does not occupy itself with its true object, I have shown that its very aim is not to destroy people, but much rather to prevent them from doing harm. Never should an enemy be killed except when it is impossible to subdue them, and among warriors, it will always be more glorious to vanquish a nation than to annihilate it. Certainly, the advantage of an entire kingdom against a single culprit is sufficiently obvious so that the right and the glory of killing them disappears. Moreover, something which proves that this pretended right does not resemble in any way the right of war is that in the latter situation, the life of each soldier is in danger and the death of each enemy is uncertain. However, in the previous situation, an iniquitous display accompanies the executions. One hundred people arm themselves, assemble, and proceed in cold blood to exterminate one of their fellow humans who is not even permitted to use their own forces. Yet one contends that this simple human power is legitimate, a power which can be deceived every day, a power which so often pronounces unjust sentences - in short, a power which a corrupted will can turn into an instrument of murder. No, a person undoubtedly has within herself other rules. If she sometimes serves as the organ of superior Law to pronounce its judgments and to dispose of the lives of people, it is by a right which is worthy of her respect and which can teach her at the same time to direct her course in dispensing justice and equity. Should one wish to judge even more thoroughly the incompetence of contemporary humankind, it is only necessary to reflect upon its ancient rights. During humanity's glory, a person fully exercised the right to life and incorporeal death, because being then in possession of life itself, he could either communicate it to his subjects or take it away from them at will, whenever prudence caused him to judge it necessary. And since it was only through his presence that these subjects could exist, he also possessed the power to cause their death simply by separating himself from them. Today, it is only through momentary flashes that he experiences this primary life, and even then, it is no longer in relation to his former subjects but in relation to his fellow men that he succeeds in making use of it. As for this right of life and corporeal death which is the object of the present matter, we can affirm that it belongs even less to people, considered on their own and viewed in their present state. Can a person in fact consider herself to be the possessor and dispenser of her own corporeal life which is bestowed upon her and which she shares with all of her species? Do her fellow humans have need of her help to breathe and live corporeally? Shall her will and even all her forces suffice to conserve their existence? Is she not obliged at every moment to witness the Law of nature cruelly acting upon them without her being able to stop its course? Likewise, does a person possess within himself an inherent power and force which generally can deprive them of life according to his desire? When his corrupt will inclines him to think thus, imagine if you will what distance there is between this thought and the crime which must follow it! What obstacles, what trepidation between the project and the execution! And does not one perceive that the care he takes to prepare his attacks seldom agrees fully with his view? We shall therefore state with truth that by the simple Laws of his corporeal Being, a person must encounter resistance everywhere, thus proving that this corporeal Being does not give him any right whatsoever. And in fact, have we not sufficiently observed that the corporeal Being possessed only a secondary life, which was dependent upon another Principle? Consequently, is it not evident that any Being that would possess nothing more than this would be dependent as well and would henceforth exhibit the same lack of power? I repeat, therefore, it would not be within a corporeal person, when considered by herself, that we could recognize this essential right of life and death which verifies a true authority. All of this will only serve to confirm what has been determined regarding the fountainhead where, today, a person must seek the same right. It is even less true that within people we shall find the right of execution. If a person did not employ violence and foreign forces, it would be seldom that he could succeed in causing the death of a criminal unless he had recourse to treason or some ruse, and those methods would be very far removed from proclaiming a true power within people. The execution of criminal Laws is absolutely necessary so that Justice is not rendered useless. I contend, moreover, that it is inevitable. Since this right cannot belong to us, it is necessary that it be returned, along with the right to judge, to that hand which must serve as our guide. This hand will give a true strength to the natural weapon of a person, and which will place her in a position to bring about the execution of the decrees of Justice without attracting condemnation upon herself. Such, at least, are the means that true legislators have put into effect, although they make them known to us solely through symbols and allegories. Perhaps they have employed the hand of other people in making the punishment of criminals seemingly operative so as to impress the gross eyes of the peoples they govern by perceptible figures and to cover with a veil the secret powers which directed the execution. I speak with even more assurance since we have seen these legislators make use of the same veil in the simple exhibition of their civil and social Laws. Although these were the work of a sure and superior hand, they have limited themselves to speaking only to the senses so as to avoid profaning their knowledge. But, regarding their criminal Laws, they have painted the lifelike scene with such extreme severity to make the peoples under their rule feel all the rigor of true Justice and to make them realize that the slightest action contrary to the Law will not go unpunished. It is with this end in view that some of them have even imposed punishments upon animals. All of these observations teach us once again that a person cannot find within himself either the right to condemn other people or to carry out his condemnation. But, were this right to be truly part of the essence of the men who govern or are employed in the maintenance of criminal Justice within governments, as they are all so convinced, a much more difficult question would always need to be decided upon-namely, ascertaining how they would find a trustworthy rule for the direction of their judgments and for the application of the penalties in a just manner by fitting them exactly to the degree and nature of the crime. In all of these things criminal Justice is blind, uncertain, and almost never has for its guide more than the precedent in force at the moment and the legislator's talent or will. Certain governments have had the honesty to sense and admit their profound ignorance, and they have solicited the counsel of people enlightened upon such matters. I praise their zeal for having assumed the responsibility of undertaking such steps. Yet I feel no hesitancy in assuring them that they will hope in vain to obtain satisfactory enlightenment so long as they try to find it in a person's opinion and intelligence, and they themselves will have neither the courage nor the resolution to seek for enlightenment at its true source. In fact, the most celebrated of statesmen and stateswomen and jurists have not yet thrown any light upon this problem. They have accepted governments as they are, and they have admitted, as has the average person, that the basis of government is real and that the knowledge and the right to punish exists within people. They have then exhausted themselves in seeking to build a solid edifice upon this foundation. But, as we can no longer doubt that they are building only upon some supposition, it is clear that the governments which desire to learn must address themselves to other masters. Therefore, I will not decide upon the nature of the punishments to be meted out for individual crimes. On the contrary, I contend that it is impossible for a person to ever decree anything absolutely fixed regarding this matter, because, since no two crimes are exactly alike, if the identical penalty is pronounced upon each one, then some injustice will surely result. Simple logic must at least teach people to search for the punishment of the guilty solely in the object and order that have been outraged. They should not be selected from some other category which, having no bearing upon the subject of the offense, will in turn cause harm without the offense having been repaired. Human Justice is thus so weak and horribly defective that its power is at times nil, as in suicide and in concealed crimes. At times this power acts only to violate the analogy which should constantly guide it, as happens in all physical punishments which are pronounced for crimes that do not attack persons and involve only possessions. Even when it appears to be observing this analogy to a considerable extent and it seems to maintain a kind of wisdom in this regard, this human Justice is still infinitely flawed in that there exists a tiny number of penalties to be inflicted in each category, whereas in each one of these categories the crimes are innumerable and always different. This is also why written criminal Laws are one of the greatest vices of the states, in that they are dead Laws which remain always the same whereas crime is constantly increasing and renewing itself. The talion has been almost entirely banished from criminal Laws as all of its clauses can hardly ever be humanely fulfilled, either because they are not always aware of all the circumstances of the crimes, or, even if they were to know them, they are not prolific enough in themselves to always bring forth the true remedy for such a multiplication of evil. What then are such criminal codes if we do not find in them this talion which is the sole penal Law that is just and the only one that could surely regulate the progress of humankind - and which, consequently, does not emanate from people but is necessarily the work of a powerful hand, whose intelligence knows how to measure the penalties and extend or diminish them according to need? I shall not stop to consider that barbarous custom by which nations are not simply content to condemn a person blindly, but even impose torture upon them so as to extort the truth. Nothing more proclaims the weakness and darkness in which the legislator languishes, because, if she enjoyed her true rights, she would have no need for such false and cruel methods in serving as guides to her judgment. In a word, that same light which would authorize her to pass judgment upon other people causes her to execute this condemnation and instructs her in the nature of the penalties she must inflict, leaving her neither in error concerning the nature of the crimes nor concerning the names of the guilty and their accomplices. But what clearly discloses to us the impotence and blindness of legislators is the perception that they only inflict capital punishment upon crimes concerning the sensate and temporal, whereas everyday a multitude of crimes involving much more important matters are committed around them, all escaping their view. I am speaking of those monstrous ideas which reduce a person to the status of a material Being; of those corrupted and hopeless doctrines which remove from him even the sentiment of order and happiness - in short, of those foul systems which, in carrying putrefaction to his own seed, smother it or render it absolutely pestilential and cause the sovereign to have only vile machines or crooks to rule over. We have given enough consideration to the defectiveness of administration. Let us now limit ourselves to reminding those people who command and those who judge of the injustices to which they expose themselves when they act without certainty and without being assured of the legitimacy of their course. The first drawback is that of running the risk of condemning the innocent. The evils resulting from this are of such a nature as can never be evaluated by a person. They depend to a great extent upon a relatively considerable wrong which the condemned must experience regarding the fruits she might have reaped from her intellectual faculties had she remained a longer time upon Earth and to the discouraging impression that must be made upon her by an infamous, cruel, and unexpected physical punishment. How could the judge ever estimate the extent of all these ills if she did not someday acquire the bitter feeling of her own imprudence and mistakes? And yet, how could she satisfy justice if the condemned did not experience some rigorous expiation? The second drawback 1s that of inflicting a penalty upon a criminal which is not applicable to his crime. Here is the chain of evil that the imprudent judge prepares in this case, be it for his victim or for himself. First of all, the physical punishment to which the judge condemns the victim does not in any way compensate for that which true Justice has specified for them and only serves to render it more certain. Without such hasty condemnation, true Justice would perhaps allow sufficient time for the guilty party to expiate her crime through remorse and, rigorous as true Justice is, it would reduce her debt to the experience of a state of repentance. Secondly, if the blind and thoughtless judgment of a person removes from the criminal the time necessary for repentance, the atrocity of the execution removes from him the strength to repent and exposes him to lose in despair a precious life, whereas a more just use and sacrifice made at the proper time may have effaced all of his crimes. It thus forces him to incur two penalties rather than one. Far from expiating anything, these penalties can, on the contrary, cause a person to multiply his iniquities and thereby render the second penalty more inevitable. Thus, whenever the judge is willing to scrutinize herself closely, she cannot avoid imputing to herself the first of these penalties, which differs from murder only in its form. She will also be obliged to impute to herself all the disastrous consequences which we have just perceived arising from her temerity and injustice. Let her then reflect upon her situation and determine if she can be at peace with herself. Let us depart from these scenes of horror and instead employ our efforts in recalling to the minds of the sovereigns and judges the knowledge of their true Law and their reliance on that light destined to be the flambeau of humankind. Let us persuade them that if they were pure they would cause criminals to tremble more by their presence and title than by the gallows and the scaffold. Let us persuade them that this would be the only method for dissipating all those shadows that we have discovered clouding the origin of their sovereignty, the cause of the association of political states, and the laws of the civil and criminal administration of their governments. Finally, let us encourage them to cast their eyes continually upon the Principle which we have offered them as the only compass for their conduct and the sole measure of their powers. To augment the idea that the sovereigns must assume, let us at this time point out to them that this same Principle from which they should expect so much assistance could also communicate to them the powerful gift I have previously numbered among their privileges, which is that of curing disease. If this universal temporal Cause, charged with the direction of humanity and all Beings existing in the temporal, is at once active and intelligent, then surely there is no aspect of science and knowledge that it does not embrace. This indicates to an adequate degree what the person who would be directed by it should expect. Thus it would not be in error to state that a sovereign who acknowledges this light as his guide would know the true Principles of bodies - namely, those three fundamental elements which we discussed at the beginning of this work. He would distinguish in what proportion their action manifests in different bodies according to age, sex, climate, and other natural properties of each of these elements, as well as the relationship that must always reign between them. At any moment this relationship could be disturbed or destroyed when the elementary Principles try to surmount one another or separate, but he would perceive the method for reestablishing order promptly and without error. This is why Medicine must reduce itself to this simple, unique, and consequently universal rule: that of bringing together what has become divided and dividing what has become joined. But, is there any disorder or any profanation to which this rule, taken from the very nature of things, is not exposed when passing through the hands of people? The least degree of difference in the means they employ and in the action of the remedies produces effects so contrary to those they should expect, in that the admixture of those fundamental Principles, which are reduced to three in number, nevertheless changes and multiplies in so many ways that ordinary eyes could never follow all their variations. Finally, in these sorts of combinations, the same Principle often acquires different properties according to the type of reaction it experiences. Although we recognize fire to be as universally prevalent as the other two elements, we know, nonetheless, that interior fire creates, superior fire fecundates, and inferior fire consumes. We can say as much regarding salts: interior salt excites fermentation, superior salt conserves, and inferior salt corrodes. As for mercury, its general property is that of occupying an intermediary position between the two opposing Principles just mentioned. By this means it establishes peace between them by bringing them together through a thousand circumstances. However, by enclosing them in the same circle, it becomes the source of the greatest elementary disorder and at the same time offers the image of universal disorder. What cares and precautions must therefore be taken to determine the nature and effects of these different principles which, by their admixture, become even more diversified than through their natural properties? Yet, despite this infinite multitude of differences that can be observed in the revolutions of corporeal Beings, an enlightened eye, which should be possessed by a sovereign, will never lose sight of her rule. She will always classify such differences within the three types by means of the three fundamental principles from which they emanate. Consequently, she will recognize merely three maladies, and she will even know that these three maladies must possess signs as marked and distinctive as the three fundamental principles are themselves marked and distinctive in their action and in their primitive property. Of these three types of maladies, each concern one of the principal substances of which animal bodies are composed - namely, blood, bone, and flesh - three parts which are related to one of the three elements from which they originate. Their cure is obtained through their corresponding elements. Thus, with suitable preparations and temperaments, flesh is cured by salt, blood by sulfur, and bones by mercury. It is known, for example, that the diseases of the flesh and the skin originate from the thickening and the corruption of saline secretions in the capillary vessels where they can be fixed by too strong or too sudden an action of the air as well as too feeble an action of the blood. It is therefore natural to place in opposition to these stagnant and corrupted liquids a salt which divides them without repercussion, corroding and consuming them in their center without permitting them entry into the mass of the blood to which they would communicate their own putrefaction. Although this salt is the most common of those produced by Nature, it must be admitted nonetheless that it is, so to speak, still unknown to human medicine. This is why medicine is so little advanced in the cure of such maladies. Regarding the second classification - the diseases of the bone - mercury must be employed with extreme moderation because its action upon the two other principles sustaining the life of all bodies, joins and compresses them to too great a degree. It is through the restrictions which it manifests primarily upon sulfur that it becomes the destroyer of all vegetation, terrestrial as well as animal. Prudence, therefore, often requires that the mercury innate within a person's body simply be allowed to perform its natural action as the action of such mercury harmonizes with the action of blood. It does not become stronger than blood and it contains enough so that it does not weaken and evaporate, but not so much as to stifle and smother. Thus, Nature provides us regarding this subject the most clear and instructive lessons by repairing bone fractures through its own virtue and without the help of any foreign mercury. Concerning diseases of the blood, sulfur must be employed with infinitely more caution, because bodies, being much more volatile than fixed, would be exposed to even more volatile action when augmenting their sulfurous and igneous action. Therefore, the truly enlightened person will never apply this remedy except with the greatest moderation, inasmuch as he knows that when the radical humid element is altered, the gross humid element can never repair it on its own. This is why he will join it to the radical humid element itself by obtaining it from the source, which is not found entirely in the marrow of bones. Let us mention in passing that this is the reason for the frequent inadequacy and danger of pharmacy, which, in searching with so much diligence for the volatile principle of medicinal bodies, neglects far too much the usage of fixed principles, the need of which is so universal that if a person were wise they would be exclusively employed. Furthermore, who is not aware that this pharmaceutical art destroys rather than conserves, that it agitates and burns rather than restores, and that when, on the contrary, its purpose is to calm, the only way it knows how to proceed is through the use of absorbents and poisons? We can therefore perceive what would be the extent of medicine in the hands of a person who would reestablish herself in the rights of her origin. She would give salutary activity to all remedies and thereby render all cures infallible, and thus the active Cause of which she is the instrument would not have the ability to act otherwise. She would most certainly refrain from employing in this worthy and useful science the material calculations of human mathematics, which, never operating except through results that are negative or dangerous in medicine, have the objective of operating upon the very principles which manifest within bodies. For this very reason, a person would not restrict himself to formulae which, in the art of healing, represent the same thing as criminal codes do in the administration of states, since among all illnesses, there have never existed two diseases which present absolutely the same gradations, and thus it is possible that a given remedy would harm one or both. But, in the role of sovereign, a person would know the virtues of corporeal Beings. She would know of their disorders and from then on, she would be protected from committing any error regarding the application of the remedy. Therefore, let us not forget that in order to arrive at this point, a person must not mistake matter for the Principle of matter, because we have seen that this error has been the chief cause of her ignorance. Nor should we believe that this inestimable power is beyond a person's reach. On the contrary, it is numbered among the Laws that are given to him for the task he needs to accomplish during his sojourn upon Earth, because, if attacks are directed upon him through his corporeal envelope, he must not be entirely deprived of the means of sensing and repulsing them. Since the use of this privilege can be common to all people, it should, for even stronger reasons, belong in particular to sovereigns whose true aim is to preserve their subjects, as much as possible, from all sorts of evil and to defend them in both the sensate and the intellectual. If this privilege is not known to them any better than all their other rights, it will be one more reason for them to sense whether or not they have been placed in charge of people by that Principle, the power of which I have indicated to them and which is absolutely necessary for the regularity of all their undertakings. This is, I repeat, one more method that I offer them for judging themselves. Therefore, let them combine the observations I have just made regarding the art of healing to those I have made about the vices of the political, civil, and criminal administration of states; regarding the vices of the governments themselves, which have unveiled to us those of their associations; and regarding the source from which leaders must derive their different rights. Then let them decide if they recognize within themselves traces of this light which is supposed to have constituted them all and not leave them for an instant, because it is only in this way that they will be assured of the legitimacy of their power and of the justness of the institutions over which they preside. Nevertheless, let us now repeat with equal firmness and frankness that any subject who perceives all these defects within a state, and who, perceiving the sovereigns themselves to be so far below what they should be, believes herself to be freed from the least of her duties toward them and from any submission to their decrees, she would thenceforth deviate tangibly from her Law and would directly proceed against all the principles that we are establishing. Instead, let every person persuade himself that Justice will never attribute to him any but his own faults. Thus, a subject would only augment the disorders by pretending to oppose and combat them, since this would be proceeding through the will of humankind, and the will of humankind only leads to crime. Therefore, I believe that regardless of any application the sovereigns might make to themselves of everything I trace before their eyes, they can never accuse me of having established principles contrary to their authority. Rather, my sole desire is to persuade them of the existence of one invincible and unshakable authority which can be theirs. In following the chain of our observations, we will now tum our attention to the examination of those errors which have been made regarding the higher sciences, because the principles of these sciences pertain to the same source as that of political and religious Laws. Knowledge of them must thus be numbered as well among the rights of people.

## Chapter 6 - Mathematical Principles

Now I shall primarily examine mathematical science, which is connected to all the higher sciences and thus holds first rank among the objects of humankind's reasoning or intellectual faculty. First of all, let me reassure those who might pause at the mention of the word mathematics by informing them that it is unnecessary to be advanced in this science to follow my observations. In fact, there is hardly even any need to have the slightest notion of it, and the method I use in discussing this subject will be suitable to all of my readers. This science will undoubtedly offer us even more striking proofs of the Principles that have been previously advanced, as well as the errors that it has occasioned whenever people have blindly delivered themselves over to the judgments of their senses. This must seem natural because mathematical Principles, although not material, are nevertheless the true Law of the sensate. In their own way geometricians are always the true masters of reasoning upon the nature of such Principles, but as for the application of the ideas they have formed of it, they must necessarily acknowledge their errors. In this instance they no longer direct the Principle, but the Principle directs them. Thus, in order to discern the true from the false it is most fitting that we conduct a careful examination of the course they have followed and the consequences that would result from this were we to follow in their footsteps. I shall begin by pointing out that nothing can be demonstrated in mathematics if it is not traced back to an axiom, as this alone constitutes what is true. At the same time, I shall beg my readers to notice the reason why axioms are true. It is because they are independent of the sensate or the material and because they are purely intellectual. This will confirm everything I have said regarding the course that must be followed in arriving at the truth and at the same time reassure observers about a matter which is not subject to their physical sight. Therefore, it is clear that if geometricians had not lost sight of such axioms, they would never have erred in their reasoning, because axioms are connected to the very essence of the intellectual Principle and are therefore based upon the most obvious certainty. Corporeal and sensate production that has been accomplished in accordance with such intellectual Laws, taken within its own class, is undoubtedly perfectly regular, inasmuch as it conforms exactly to the order of this intellectual Principle or to the axioms which everywhere direct its existence and execution. However, as the perfection of such corporeal production is simply dependent on or relative to the Principle engendering it, its rule and source cannot reside in this production. Therefore, we can judge its regularity only by continually comparing this sensate production with the axioms or the Laws of the intellectual Principle. Let me repeat, it is through this method that we can succeed in demonstrating its justness. However, if this is the only rule that is true and if at the same time it is purely intellectual, how then can men hope to supplant it by a rule taken from the sensate? How can they expect to replace a true Being with a conventional and suppositional Being? Nonetheless, it cannot be doubted that the efforts of geometricians are trending in this direction. We shall see that after having established the axioms which are the foundations of all the truths they would have us learn, the only means they propose for teaching us how to evaluate areas are either by a measure taken in this same area or by some arbitrary numbers which in themselves always have need of a perceptible measure so as to be realized by our corporeal eyes. Must we then be satisfied with such a demonstration and consider such proofs as evidence? Since measure always resides within the Principle where the birth of the sensate production occurs, could this sensate and passive production serve as a measure and proof to itself? And are there any Beings other than those which are not created - that is, true Beings - which could prove themselves on their own? Far from contesting the evidence of intellectual mathematical Principles or that of axioms, we must already acknowledge the feeble idea that geometricians have adopted and the slight usage they have made of it so as to achieve the science of the area and other properties of matter. We must state that if they know nothing regarding this subject, it is because they have fallen into the same error that observers have committed concerning all the other subjects I have considered. In other words, they have separated the area from its true Principle, or rather, they have confounded it with its Principle and have not perceived that they are two distinct manifestations although indispensably united for the purpose of constituting the existence of matter. To make this even more palpable, we need to direct our attention to the nature of the area. The area, as is true of all other properties of bodies, is a production of the generative Principle of matter in accordance with the Laws and order which are prescribed to this inferior Principle by the superior Principle directing it. In this sense, as the area is considered only a secondary production, it cannot possess the same advantages enjoyed by the Beings included in the class of primary productions. These possess their fixed Laws within themselves. All their properties are invariable because they are united to their essence. In short, this is where weight, number, and measure are so well regulated that they can be altered no more than Being itself can be destroyed. However, concerning the properties of bodies or of secondary Beings, we have perceived amply enough that this cannot be so. Our senses have absolutely no fixed property, and thus no value can manifest to our eyes except by comparison with Beings of their own class. This being so, the area of bodies is therefore not determined for us with any more certainty than their other properties. Thus, to make known to us the value of this area, one will make use of a measure that is taken from that same area. The measure employed will be subject to the same disadvantage as the object that we wish to measure - in other words, its area cannot be more fully determined, and thus we will still need to search for the measure of this measure. No matter what means we would employ, we shall clearly perceive that we can never discover its true measure within this area, and, consequently, it will always be necessary to have recourse to the Principle which has engendered the area and all the properties of matter. This, therefore, is what completely demonstrates the inadequacy of the course that geometricians have followed when they have pretended to determine the true measure of corporeal Beings. I am aware that they do indeed attach numbers to this palpable and extended measure to which they have recourse. Yet not only are such numbers relative and conventional in themselves, and not only is a person free to vary their relations and to establish such scale as she will deem relevant, but this scale, however useful it may be in measuring all the areas of a single type in general, will definitely not be suitable for measuring the areas of some other type. Thus people still need to discover a universal, fixed, and invariable base to which they can relate all the types of areas, whatever they may be. This is the cause of the difficulty geometricians experience when they attempt to measure curves, because, having been intended for a straight line, the measure they employ only accommodates itself to this sort of line and offers insurmountable difficulties whenever one tries to apply it to a circular line or to any other curve which is derived from it. I state that this measure offers insurmountable difficulties, because, although geometricians have seemingly resolved the matter by stating the circular line to be an assemblage of infinitely small straight lines, they are wrong in their belief, since a false premise can never resolve anything. I cannot avoid regarding this definition as being false, as it is in direct opposition to the idea that Nature and geometricians themselves give us of a circumference, which is nothing more than a line in which all points are equidistant from a common center. I do not even understand how geometricians can reasonably depend upon two propositions so contrary. After all, if a circumference is simply an assemblage of straight lines - albeit infinitely small - the points of this circumference can never be equally equidistant from the center since such straight lines are themselves composed of several points, including those of the extremities and the intermediate points, which certainly will not be equidistant from the center. Thus, the center will no longer be common to them and, consequently, the circumference will no longer be a circumference. All of this, therefore, is attempting to unite contraries. It is endeavoring to make two things which are ofa very opposed nature to have an identical nature. It is, I repeat, attempting to apply the same number to two different kinds of Beings, which being different from one another must undoubtedly be calculated differently. We must admit therefore that this is where people demonstrate to us most clearly their natural penchant to confound everything and to perceive in Beings of different classes only a misleading uniformity by means of which they strive to compare things that are diametrically opposed. It is impossible to conceive of things that are more opposed, more contrary to one another in a word, more contradictory than a straight line and a circular line. Apart from the moral proofs found either in the relationship of the straight line with the regularity and perfection of unity, or in those of the circular line with the impotency and confusion connected to the multiplicity of which the circular line is the image, I can in addition advance reasons much more convincing, because they encompass intellectual principles, the only principles that can be admitted as being real and constituting the Law in the research of the nature of things-the only ones I repeat, which are as immovable as axioms. I shall warn nevertheless that these truths will not be intelligible to the majority of people and even much less to those who, up till now, have proceeded only according to the false principles which I combat. Therefore, the first step that needs be taken in understanding me would be that of studying things within their very source, and not in the notions given to them by imagination and precipitous judgments. But I know the degree to which people are capable of having such courage, and were I to assume that a large number possessed this courage I would also assume that few of them would attain full success, as this science has been so infected with error and poison. I have set forth the belief that everything in Nature has its number, and that this is the way by which all Beings of whatever nature are easy to distinguish from one another. Furthermore, all of their properties are simply the results conforming to the Laws enclosed within their number. Thus, as I have already indicated, it is certain that the straight line and the circular line are of a different nature, each having its particular number which designates its distinctive nature and serves to prevent us from making them equal in our thoughts by indiscriminately taking one for the other. If you will simply reflect for a moment upon the functions and properties of these two types of lines, you will surely be convinced of the truth of what I have just stated. What is the object of the straight line? Is it not to perpetuate ad infinitum the productions of the point from which it emanates? Is it not, when considered as perpendicular, to regulate the base and position of all Beings and to ascribe to each their own Laws? Does not the circular line, on the contrary, limit the productions of the straight line at all its points? Consequently, does it not tend to destroy the straight line continually, and can it not be considered, in its own way, as its enemy? How could two things so opposed in their course and which possess such different properties not be distinguished in number as they are in action? If this important observation had been made sooner, all those who occupy themselves in the science of mathematics would have been spared endless labor and difficulties, as it would have forestalled their search regarding a common measure for two types of lines which will never have anything in common between them. Therefore, after having recognized this essential difference which distinguishes them in their form, usage, and properties, I will not hesitate to affirm that their numbers differ. If I were pressed to explain myself more clearly and to indicate what number I would attribute to each of these lines in particular, I would readily acknowledge that the straight line bears the number four and the circular line the number nine. I will also be so bold as to state that there is no other way of knowing them, because, whether large or small, the extent of these lines will not in any way change the number that I attribute to them in particular. Each of them, in its own class, always preserves the same number regardless of whatever extent is given to it. Let me reiterate that this may not be very well understood, as matter has attained such importance in the intelligence of humanity. Despite the clarity of my proposition, some people may falsely infer from it that a long and a short line, having according to my statement the same number, must consequently be equal. But, to forestall this paradox, let me add that both long lines and short lines are simply the result of their own Laws and numbers. Although either one always has in its own class the same Law and number, this Law and number always operate differently in each onethat is, with greater or lesser force, activity, and duration. From this we perceive that the result proceeding from it must express to our eyes all of these perceptible differences, although the Principles varying such action are themselves invariable. Only this can explain the universal difference between all Beings of two natures, whether they are among those which in either nature occupy different classes or whether they are among those which belong to the same class and species. This makes comprehensible the fact that all individuals of the same class are different, although having the same origin and being subject to the same Law and number. This also causes the annihilation of the arbitrary and conventional numbers employed by geometricians in their measurements, and truly the disadvantages involved in this measurement allow us to perceive its defects clearly. Endeavoring to select the measure of the area within the area itself exposes us to the obligation of truncating this measure or lengthening it whenever the area upon which it has been based happens to receive any variations. As these variations do not always occur exactly according to multiples or submultiples of the given measure, and as they can fall upon parts of numbers which are not integers in relation to the primary number, it must necessarily follow that the given measure undergoes similar mutilation. Finally, we must also acknowledge what the calculators call fractions of unit, as though it were ever possible for a simple Being or a unit to be divided. If mathematicians had accepted this last consideration they would have adopted a more accurate idea of the clever calculation they have invented namely, that of infinity. They would have seen that they could never discover the infinitely large in matter, which is limited to three elements, but would instead have discovered it within the numbers which are the powers of all that exists and which truly have no limit, either in our thought or in their essence. They would have recognized, on the contrary, that they could not discover the calculation of the infinitely small except in matter, of which the endless division of molecules is thought to be always possible, although our senses cannot always realize it, but they have never searched for this sort of infinity in numbers, since the unit, being indivisible, is the primary manifestation of Being and does not admit of any number higher than itself. Nothing, therefore, is less similar to the true Principle than this conventional measure which people have established for themselves in their geometrical processes, and consequently, nothing is less apt to advance them in the knowledge which is absolutely necessary to them. I am aware that the assistance of such a measure is of the greatest importance in the material details involving the relations of a person's social and physical life. Thus, I do not contend that he is at fault in applying it to this usage. All that I would ask of him is not to go so far as to have the imprudence to apply it in his research upon natural truths, since he will only be misled in this category. Even the simplest errors in this realm can induce major consequences; and as all truths are connected, not a single one exists which could be subjected to the slightest deviation without communicating it to all the others. The numbers four and nine, which I proclaim as belonging essentially to the straight line and the curved line respectively, do not possess the disadvantage that has just been noted in the arbitrary method. These numbers remain always intact although their faculty expands or retracts in all the variations of which the area is susceptible. Thus, in the reality of things, there never exists any fraction within a Being, and if we recall what has been previously stated concerning the nature of the Principles of corporeal Beings, we will see that since they are indivisible as simple Beings, the numbers used to represent them and make them perceptible must enjoy the same property. Yet, I will repeat once more, all of this is beyond matter and the sensate, so I do not delude myself in thinking that a great number of people will understand me. That is why I expect a new attempt will be made and I shall be asked to explain how it will be possible to evaluate the different areas of the same order, if I give to all straight lines, without exception, the number four and to all circular and curved lines the number nine. I will be asked, I repeat, at which sign will it be possible to know definitely the various ways in which the same number acts upon unequal areas and what method should be employed to determine with accuracy any area whatsoever. It is useless for me to attempt to find an answer other than that I have already given concerning this subject. Therefore, if a person who asks me this question only desires to know areas for her own material usage and sensory inclinations or needs, | shall say that the conventional and relative measures are sufficient, since in this realm it is possible to carry regularity to the point of rendering the error undetectable to the senses. If our object is to know more than this relative value, which is also a value of approximation, and if we want to discover the real and fixed value of the area - since this value exists according to the action of its number and the number is not matter - it is easy to perceive whether we can find the rule we are searching for within material extension and whether we have been incorrect when stating that the true measure of the area could not be known through the physical senses. If this measure cannot be found within the physical senses, it will not be necessary to reflect at length in determining where it might be, since I have never ceased to indicate the sensate or intellectual is unique in all things. Henceforth we will perceive what geometricians want to teach us and the nature of the errors by which they lull our intelligence by offering it only the measure taken within the sensate and consequently relative, whereas the intelligence conceives that true measures exist and that it is capable of understanding them. At the same time, we will perceive the reappearance of this universal truth constituting the object of this work, namely that only in the Principle of things is it possible to evaluate their properties accurately, and whatever difficulties are encountered in knowing how to read it, undoubtedly if we should choose to reject this Principle regulating and measuring all things, we will no longer discover anything. I must add, nevertheless, that although we can arrive at an accurate evaluation of the measure of the area through the help of this Principle, since this Principle alone directs it, employing it in material combinations would be a real desecration, in that it can help us to discover more important Truths than those which relate only to matter. As I have stated, the senses are sufficient to direct people in sensate matters. We even perceive that Beings of a lower order than humankind have no other Law and that their senses are sufficient for their needs. Thus, for this purely relative subject, the true and just mathematics, in a word, intellectual mathematics, would not only be useless, but would not even be understood. What can be more inconsistent, therefore, than endeavoring to subject and subordinate this invariable and luminous mathematical science to that of the senses which are so limited and obscure; to maintain that this take the place of the other; and finally, to insist that the sensate serve as the rule and guide of the intellectual? What I am doing here, instead, is simply indicating once again the disadvantage to which geometricians have exposed themselves. In attempting to find a sensate measure for the area and presenting it to us as real, they do not perceive that it is as variable as the area itself. Far from directing matter, this measure is itself dependent upon this very matter, as it necessarily follows the course thereof and all the results obtained from the connection. Thus, since the numbers four and nine, which I have acknowledged to be the true measure of the two sorts of possible lines, are entirely free from this subjection, I must not fear any possibility of error in giving them all my confidence and proclaiming them, as I have done, as being the true measure, each in its own class. I will admit that it is painful for me to reveal such truths as I realize they are humiliating for geometricians. Judging from the efforts they make on a daily basis to confound these two measures, I am obliged to state that even the most celebrated among them do not yet know the difference between a straight line and a curved line, as will be subsequently seen in more detail. But the error we have just perceived is not the only one they have made concerning the area. As they have pointed out, not only have they searched for its measure, but they have even searched in it for the source of movement. Never daring to rise above this shadowy matter surrounding them, they have believed they could allocate space and limit to the principle of this movement, so that according to this system, it is no longer possible to conceive of anything manifesting action and movement beyond this limit. If they have not yet acquired a more accurate idea of movement, is it not always through the same error which causes them to confound the most distinct things, and is it not because they search only within the area itself rather than searching within its Principle? By possessing only relative properties or abstractions, it is impossible for this area to offer anything fixed or stable enough for a person's intelligence to depend upon in a satisfactory way. And endeavoring to discover within the area itself the source of its movement is to repeat all of those inadequate attempts which have already been proven wrong, and it is also endeavoring to subordinate the Principle to its production, whereas, according to the natural and true order of things, production has always been inferior to its generative Principle. It is therefore in the immaterial Principle of all Beings, be they intellectual or corporeal, that the source of movement found in each of them essentially resides. It is through the action of this Principle that all of their faculties manifest, according to their class and personal usage - in other words, intellectual faculties within the intellectual order and sensate faculties within the sensate order. If the sole action of the Principle of corporeal Beings is movement, if they grow and nourish themselves through it alone - in other words, if they manifest and render perceptible and conspicuous all their properties and consequently the area itself - how then can anyone pretend that such movement is dependent upon the area or matter since, on the contrary, it is the area or matter which proceeds from it? How can anyone state that this movement belongs essentially to matter, whereas it is matter that belongs essentially to movement? Matter, beyond all question, exists only through movement, because we perceive that when bodies are deprived of such movement, which is theirs only briefly, they disintegrate and disappear from the senses. Through this same observation it becomes just as certain that the movement which gives life to bodies does not belong to them in particular, since we perceive it being completed within them before they have ceased being perceptible to our eyes. Likewise we cannot doubt that they are fully dependent upon it, because the cessation of such movement is the primary act in their destruction. Moreover, let us recall the Law of universal reaction to which all corporeal Beings are subject and let us recognize that if the immaterial Principles of corporeal Beings were themselves subject to the reaction of another Principle, it would be even more evident that the perceptible results of these Principles, such as the area and so on, must necessarily experience this subjection. Let us conclude therefore that if everything disappears to the degree that movement recedes, it is obvious that the area exists only through movement, which is very different from stating that movement belongs to the area and within the area. We could infer, however, from this assertion that as movement creates the area - such movement, being of the essence of immaterial Principles which we must now recognize as being indestructible - it is impossible for this movement not to exist forever and consequently for the area or matter not to be eternal. This would again engulf us in those shadowy depths from which I have taken so much care to protect my readers, because, as I am well aware, the objection could be offered that it is impossible to conceive of movement without the area. This last proposition is true within the sensate order, where movement cannot be conceived which does not produce the area or does not occur within the area. But, although Principles engendering movement in the sensate order are immaterial, it would be a mistake to claim that their action is necessary and eternal, since we have seen that they are simply secondary Beings possessing only a specific action and not an infinite action. Moreover, they are completely subject to the dependence of an active and intelligent Cause which communicates this action to them for a time and then withdraws it, according to the Law and order of the Primary Cause. Furthermore, it is within this sensate order itself that we can find proofs of movement without area, although in this sensate realm it always occurs within the area. To further substantiate this let us remark that, because of the dual universal Law directing corporeal nature, two types of movement are found in all bodies. The first is growth, or the very action which manifests and sustains their material existence. The second is their attraction toward Earth which is their common center, a tendency which is apparent both in the fall of bodies and in the pressure that their own weight exerts upon them or upon the terrestrial surface. These two movements are directly opposed to one another. Thus, although it can occur only within the area, the second movement, or the attraction of bodies towards their terrestrial center, does not produce any area as does the first movement - that of the growth and existence of these same bodies. On the contrary, one tends to destroy what the other produces. For instance, if corporeal Beings could unite with their center, they would thenceforth be without action and sensate manifestation. In short, they would be without movement and consequently without area, since it is certain that all these effects only occur because the Beings which produce them are separated from their center. If, as previously stated, there exist two movements, one of which produces the area while the other destroys the area, the latter one should at least not be regarded as belonging to the area although it occurs only within the area. Therefore, this is where we could learn how to resolve this objection: that it is impossible to conceive of movement without area; and this is where we could also learn that we should no longer generally believe that movement is of the essence of all classes of immaterial Beings, since those of the sensate class are its repository for only a short while. Let me reemphasize this truth: there cannot be movement without area. Have we not admitted that there could not be any other than intellectual and sensate Beings? If the intellectual class governs the other and causes it to manifest such movement, the producer of sensate things, then this class must essentially be the true source of movement. As such, it is of another order than the class of immaterial corporeal Principles which are subordinated to it. Thus, within this class there must exist actions and results which are, as it is itself, distinct and independent of the sensate - that is, within which the sensate has no manifestation. Thus, since the sensate does not enter into any of the operations pertaining to the Primary Cause or into any of the immaterial results proceeding from it, and if it only receives from it passive life which sustains it during the passage of time, and if, in short, all sensate effects are absolutely without any influence upon the purely intellectual class during the actual time of their very existence, this class has then been able to operate, for quite obvious reasons, prior to the existence of sensate things and it will continue to act after their disappearance, because the period during which such sensate things have lived will not disturb the actions of the Primary Cause, even for an instance. Although movement and area are of necessity linked to one another within the sensate, this does not mean that there can never be action or movement within the superior class, even though nothing sensate would be existent. In this sense, we can state with certainty that although we cannot conceive of area without movement, we can unquestionably conceive of movement without area, since the Principle of movement, whether sensate or intellectual, is beyond the area. Then, in combining all these observations, we must decide whether it is ever possible to attribute with good reason any movement to the area as being essential to its being, and whether a person is not mistaken whenever he searches within the area itself for the principle and knowledge of it. I have stated that movement is generally nothing more than the effect of action, or rather action itself, since they are inseparable. Moreover, I have recognized that there are two types of opposed movements or actions within sensate things-namely, growth and deterioration; or the force which distances bodies from their center and their own Law which tends to return them to their center. But as the latter of these movements only retrace the steps of the former within the temporal and according to the same Law in reverse order, we are not afraid of being mistaken in declaring that both of them proceed from the same number. And the least informed of geometricians knows that this number is four. Who, in fact, does not know that all movements and possible revolutions of bodies are accomplished through a quaternary geometrical progression, either ascendant or descendant? Who is not aware that the number four is the universal Law of the course of celestial bodies, of mechanics, of pyrotechnics in a word, of all that moves in the material world, whether naturally or through the hand of a person? And, in truth, if life manifests without interruption and if its action is always renewed - in other words, if it continually grows or deteriorates within material Beings subject to destruction - what other Law but that of the ascending or descending geometrical progression could be appropriate for Nature? Arithmetical progression is entirely banned in fact, because it is sterile and can only encompass limited facts and constantly regular and uniform results. Thus people should never apply it except for inanimate objects, fixed divisions, or unmoving assemblages. Whenever they have attempted to employ it in the designation of Nature's simple and living actions - as that of air, or that which produces heat or cold, or all other causes of changes occurring within the atmosphere - the results or divisions have been quite flawed. They have given people a false idea of the Principle of life or corporeal action, the measure of which, not being sensate, cannot be traced in matter without committing the grossest of errors. Therefore, we shall not lead anyone astray in describing the quaternary geometrical progression as being the life principle of Beings, or, no matter how unfamiliar this language be, by asserting that the number of all action is four. But what we have not yet done is to declare what the number of the area is - and we must therefore declare that it is the number nine which has heretofore been applied to the circular line. Indeed, the area and the circular line possess such a close rapport, and are so inseparable, that they bear the same number, which is nine. As they have the same number, they must necessarily have the same measure and weight, and since these three principles always function in harmony, one cannot be determined on its own without determining the other two as well. However novel this must appear to be at present, I cannot avoid acknowledging that the area and the circular line are but one and the same. In short, the area exists only through the circular line, and conversely, only the circular line is corporeal and sensate. Material Nature and areas cannot be formed except by lines that are not straight - or, what amounts to the same thing, there is not a single straight line in Nature, a fact we will perceive in the following. But before approaching this subject I have something to say. If observers had examined Nature more closely, long ago they would have resolved a matter which is not yet properly clarified among them-namely, if generation and reproduction are accomplished through eggs, larvae, or spermatic animals, they would have perceived that everything here on Earth possesses an envelope. Moreover, since any envelope or any area whatsoever is circular, all is larva in Nature because all is egg. And, conversely, all is egg because all is larva. Let me now return to my subject. I realize that simply excluding straight lines from Nature is not enough, and that it is necessary to reveal the reasons which have contributed to my decision for doing this. First of all, if we follow the origin of all sensate and material things, we cannot deny that the Principle of corporeal Beings is fire, but their corporification results only from water, and thus bodies originate by fluid. Secondly, we cannot deny that this fluid is the principle which effects the dissolution of bodies and that subsequently fire effects their reintegration, since one of the highest Laws of Truth is that direct sequence and inverse sequence follow a uniform course in opposite directions. Yet all fluid is only a collection of spherical particles, and it is this very same spherical form of these particles which gives fluid the necessary property for extending and circulating itself. Since bodies attain birth by fluid, it is therefore consistent that they must retain in their state of perfection the same form they received at their origin since they will manifest it once again when dissolving into fluidic and spherical particles. For that reason, bodies must be considered to be a collection of these same spherical globules, but which have acquired consistency to the degree to which their fire has more or less reduced the gross portion of their humid content. No matter to what degree this collection of spherical globules is extended, it is obvious that the result will always be circular and spherical, in keeping with its principle. Do you wish to be materially convinced of what I postulate? Carefully observe bodies in which the dimensions appear straight to us; observe the most even surfaces. Everyone knows that we can discover on such surfaces only inequalities, elevations, and depressions; everyone knows, I repeat, or ought to know, that the surfaces of bodies, when viewed closely, present only a multitude of grooves. Such grooves are in turn composed of similar inequalities, and this ad infinitum; and no matter what extent our eyes or the instruments employed to supplement them can attain, we shall perceive either upon the surface of bodies or in the grooves they exhibit never anything more than a joining together of many spherical particles which touch each other only at one point of their surface. Therefore, let us now examine whether it is possible to allow a straight line therein. No one should offer me as an objection the interval existing between two given points, between which one can surmise a straight line connecting one to the other. First of all, by being thus separated, these two points are no longer said to constitute a single body, Therefore, the straight line that is said to exist between them would exist purely in the imagination and could not be conceived of as being corporeal and sensate. Secondly, this interval separating them is itself filled with aerial mercurial particles which, being spherical as are those of other bodies, could never touch one another only through their surface. Thus, this interval would itself constitute a body and would for this reason be subject to the same inequalities as are all bodies. This agrees entirely with what has been previously stated concerning the principles of matter, which despite their union could never be confused. Therefore, there being no continuity within bodies, as all are in successive and interrupted manifestation, it is impossible in any sense whatsoever to suppose and recognize any straight lines therein. Apart from the reasons which we have just seen, there are others which will serve to support and confirm the evidence of this Principle. I have decided to acknowledge that the number four is the number of the straight line; since then in concert with all other observers I have seen that the number four 1s also that which directs all kinds of movements. Therefore, a great analogy exists between the principle of movement and the straight line since we see them bearing the same number and furthermore we have recognized that the source and action of corporeal and sensate things resides within such movement. At the same time, we have noted that the straight line was the symbol of infinity and the continuity of the production of the point from which it emanates. I have demonstrated sufficiently that movement, although producing corporeal and sensate things or the area, can never belong properly to this same area nor depend upon it. Thus, if the straight line were to have the same number as movement, it must have the same Law and property - in other words, although it directs the areas and corporeal things, it will never become a part of nor blend with them and become sensate, since a principle cannot be blended with its production. All of these are the reasons which, when considered together, must prevent anyone from ever admitting the existence of a straight line within material Nature. Let us now review all of our principles: The number four is that of movement; it is that of the straight line - in other words, it is the number of everything which is not corporeal or sensible. The number nine is that of the area and of the circular line which universally constitutes the area - in other words, it is the number of bodies and all parts of bodies, because it is absolutely essential to consider the circular line as the necessary production of the movement occurring in time. We have here two unique Laws we can possibly recognize, and with them we can undoubtedly embrace everything in existence, since nothing can be either within the area or beyond the area, passive or active, result or Principle, transitory or immutable, corporeal or incorporeal, perishable or indestructible. Therefore, taking these two Laws as our guide, we shall return to the way by which we perceive that geometricians regard the two types of possible lines - the straight and the circular - and we shall determine whether it is true that the circle is, as they contend, an aggregate of straight lines since, on the contrary, no straight line can be found within the corporeal which does not consist of a collection of curved lines. Nevertheless, by not having discerned the different numbers of these two different lines, humankind has endeavored to reconcile them ever since its exile or - which is the same thing - humankind has attempted to discover what is called the quadrature of the circle. Before humanity's fall, when a person was aware of the nature of Beings, she would not have exerted herself in such fruitless efforts and she would not have applied herself to the search for a discovery whose impossibility would have been obviously known to her. Nor would she have been blind or imprudent enough to try reconciling principles as different as those of straight and circular lines. In short, it would have never entered her thought to believe that she could change the nature of Beings and somehow cause nine to equal four or four to equal nine - which is literally the object of the study and occupation of geometricians. Let us attempt to reconcile these two numbers. How can we succeed in this? How can we adapt nine to four? How can we divide nine by four, or, in effect, divide nine into four parts without allowing fractions, which, according to what we have seen, cannot be found within the natural Principles of things, although they can be operative upon their results which are simply aggregates? After having found two to be the quotient, would there not always remain a unit that would need to be divided equally by the number four? We perceive, therefore, that in form, or in the corporeal and sensate, such quadrature is impracticable and that it could never occur except immaterially or through number - in other words, by recognizing the center which is corporeal and quaternary, as will be proven fully before long. Therefore, at this time, I leave it to your thought to determine whether this quadrature is permissible as it is now approached. If its impossibility is not obviously demonstrated, then one should not be surprised that nothing has yet been discovered concerning this object, since, in regards to truth, an approximation is of no value whatsoever. It is necessary to say something about longitude, which so many people have contended for when searching for it upon Earth's surface. It will be enough to formulate an opinion regarding it to observe the difference existing between longitude and latitude. Latitude is horizontal and proceeds from south to north. The south is not designated by any of the imaginary points invented by astronomers when explaining the Universe to us, but is most definitely indicated by the sun, of which the vertical mid-point varies by rising or descending each day in relation to the previous day. It thus follows that latitude is necessarily circular and variable and, as such, it bears the number nine according to all the principles which have just been established. Longitude, on the contrary, is perpendicular and originates in the east, which is always at the same point of elevation, although this east appears each day at different points of the horizon. Longitude, being thus fixed and always the same, is the real image of the straight line and consequently bears the number four. We have just seen the incompatibility of the two numbers four and nine. Therefore, how is it possible to find the perpendicular within the horizontal? How is it possible to compare the superior to the inferior? In short, how is it possible to discover the east upon the earth's surface since it does not exist within its area? When I stated that the east was immovable, you most surely perceived that I was not speaking of that east indicated by the rising of the sun since it changes every day. Furthermore, much like latitude, the type of longitude that the sun thus indicates is always horizontal in relation to us, and for that reason alone it is extremely defective. Rather, I speak of the true east of which the rising of the sun is but the indicative sign and which manifests visibly and more truly in the verticalness and perpendicularity. I speak of that east which by its number four, can alone embrace all space, since after joining the number nine, which is that of the area, by uniting the active to the passive, it forms the number thirteen, which is the number of Nature. Therefore, locating longitude upon Earth is no more possible than is reconciling the straight line with the curved line or finding the measure of the area and movement within the area - further proof of the truth of the principles we have presented. Let us apply this Law to yet another observation by stating that even now, due to this difference between the numbers four and nine, it has been and will always remain impossible to quadrate the lunar calculus within the solar calculus accurately. This is because the moon, being associated with the earth, which has only curvatures in latitude, pertains to the number nine. Although the sun designates latitude by the south, it is nevertheless in its terrestrial east, or at the point of its rising, the image of the principle of longitude or the straight line, and as such it is quaternary. Moreover, it is clearly distinct from the region of Earth, to which it communicates the necessary reaction to its vegetative faculty - a further indication of its quaternary activity. In short, its quaternary manifests upon the moon itself through the four phases we perceive upon it and which are determined by its various positions in relation to the sun from which it receives light. Thus, by applying the principle which occupies us at present to this example, we will clearly see the reason why solar calculus and lunar calculus are incompatible and that the true method of attaining knowledge of things is not to begin by intermingling them but by separating and examining them, each according to the number and the Laws pertaining to it in particular. If only I were allowed to expand further upon the number nine, which I attribute to the moon and consequently to Earth of which it is the satellite! I would then show by the number of this Earth what its use and intention is in the Universe. This could even give us indications concerning the true form it bears and spread further light upon the present system which does not recognize it as being immovable but, on the contrary, as traveling across a very large orbit. Ness

It would appear that astronomers have perhaps been a little too hasty in their judgments. Before placing full trust in their observations, they should have examined what manifests the greatest action among corporeal Beings and what causes the reaction or what receives it. If fire were not the most mobile of the elements and blood were not more active than the bodies in which it circulates, they should have thought that Earth, although not occupying the center of the orbits of celestial bodies, could serve nonetheless as their recipient and that henceforth it would receive and await their influences without having to add a second corporeal action to its very own vegetative action, and of which those celestial bodies are deprived. Finally, the simplest experiments upon cones would have proven to them what the true form of Earth is; and we could offer them insurmountable difficulties which their systems could never resolve in the destination of the earth, in the rank it occupies among created Beings, and in the properties of the perpendicular or straight line. It might also happen that such difficulties would not be perceived, because, as with all sciences in which humankind has had a hand, astronomy has become isolated in that it has considered Earth and each of the celestial bodies as distinct Beings without any connection between them. In short, because people have acted in this regard as rashly as in all else - that is, by not directing their attention upon the principle of the existence of all these bodies nor upon the principle of their Laws and destination - they do not yet know which of them is the primary object. Moreover, it is through a seemingly praiseworthy motive that people have endeavored to belittle Earth by comparing it to the immensity and grandeur of celestial bodies. People have been weak enough to believe that Earth, being only a speck in the Universe, little deserved the attention of the Primary Cause, and thus it would be against all probabilities that Earth was the most precious jewel within creation and everything existing around or above Earth renders tribute to it - as if the Author of all things had to evaluate Its works upon a sensate measure and as if their worth did not reside in the grandeur of their use and properties rather than in the magnitude of the space and the area they occupy. It is perhaps this false combination which can lead a person to this other still further false combination by which he pretends to believe himself unworthy of his Author's attention. He has believed he was only giving heed to humility by refusing to admit that Earth and everything contained in the Universe has been created for him alone. He has feigned fear of listening too much to his pride by delivering himself over to such a thought. But he has not feared the indolence and cowardice which necessarily proceed from such pretended modesty. And if a person today avoids seeing himself as destined to be the monarch of the Universe, it is because he does not have the courage to work towards the recovery of his titles, and because the attendant duties appear to him too exhausting, and he fears renouncing his estate and all his rights less than undertaking to return them to their former value. However, if he were to look at himself for a moment, he would soon perceive that his very humility would cause him to admit, with reason, that he is now below his proper rank, but he would not believe himself of such a nature as never having occupied such rank nor or ever being able to return to it. Therefore, I repeat, if only it were possible for me to devote myself to all that I could say upon such matters! If only I could show the relationship that is to be found between Earth and a person's body, which is formed of the same substance since one proceeded from the other! If my plan allowed, I would draw out from their incontestable analogy the testimony of the uniformity of their Laws and proportions, from which it would be easy to see that both have the same aim to accomplish. You would then understand the reason why, at the beginning of this work, I indicated that people are so intensely interested in maintaining their bodies in good condition, because if they are made in the image of Earth and Earth is the foundation of corporeal creation, they can only preserve their resemblance to it by resisting, as it does also, the forces which continually battle against it. You would also see that this Earth, being our mother, must be held worthy of respect by people and that being the most powerful of entities of a temporal Nature after the Intelligent Cause and people, it is itself proof that no corporeal worlds exist other than that which is visible to us. As this opinion regarding the plurality of worlds also arises from the same source as all human errors, it is by endeavoring to separate or dismember all things that a person conjures up a multitude of other Universes of which the stars are the suns and there exists no more correspondence between themselves than with the world we inhabit. If this separate existence were compatible with the understanding we have of unity and if, in the event these supposed worlds did exist, a person would not possess knowledge of such in her capacity as an intellectual Being. If she were to possess knowledge regarding everything in existence, it would be necessary that nothing be isolated and that all be connected, since it is through one single principle that a person embraces all and she could not do so with this single principle if all corporeally created Beings were not of the same nature and similar to one another. Undoubtedly there are many other worlds since the smallest of Beings is a world in itself, but all are part of the same chain; and as a person has the right to extend his hand even to the first link of this chain, he cannot approach it without also touching all other worlds. Moreover, you would perceive in the description of its properties that Earth constitutes a fertile and inexhaustible source for humankind's well-being, both sensate and intellectual. You would also perceive that it unites all proportions, both numerical and geometrical, that it is the primary point of support which humanity has encountered in its fall and as such, a person could not overestimate its importance, since without it he would have fallen much lower. What, therefore, would happen if I dared to speak of the Principle which animates it and in which reside all the faculties of vegetation and the other virtues that I could reveal? It is certain that were I to do so, people would then learn to venerate Earth, occupying themselves all the more with its culture, and they would regard it as the entrance to the road they must travel so as to return to the place which gave them birth. Perhaps I have already said too much regarding these matters, and I would fear to usurp rights which do not belong to me were I to proceed further. Therefore, I will return to the numbers four and nine, which I have stated as being characteristic of either the straight line or the curved line, and as being also for one the number of movement or action, and for the other that of the area, because these numbers might appear to some to be either supposed or imaginary. It is fitting that I make known the reason why I employ them and why I contend that they each belong naturally to the lines which I have attributed to them. Let us begin with the number nine-that of the circular line and the area. Undoubtedly, no one will object to considering a circumference as being zero, because, what figure resembles a circumference more than zero? It will even be less objectionable to regard the center of it as a unit, since it is impossible for a circumference to possess more than one center. Everyone is also aware that a unit joined to zero produces ten - thus: 10. We can then envisage the entire circle as equaling ten (or 10) - or, in other words, the center and the circumference. Yet we can also regard the entire circle as being a corporeal Being, of which the circumference is the form or body and the center is the immaterial Principle. We have seen with sufficient clarity that one should never confuse this immaterial Principle with the area and corporeal form. Although the existence of matter is based upon their union, it is, nonetheless, an unpardonable error to consider them as being the same Being and to assume that a person's intelligence can always separate them. Is not separating the center from its circumference the same thing as separating this Principle from its corporeal form and, consequently, the same as removing the unit (1) from the denary (10)? But if one removes the unit (1) from the denary (10), most certainly only nine will remain in number; however, in figure, it is zero (0) or the circular line - in short, the circumference - that will be the remainder. Therefore, let us determine at this time whether the number nine and the circumference are not suited to one another, and whether we have been wrong in allocating the number nine to all area, since we have proven that all area is circular. Let us also determine from the relationship existing between zero (which is nil by itself) and the number nine (which is that of the area) whether we should have so thoughtlessly censured those who have contended that matter was but apparent. I am aware that since most geometricians consider the number of arithmetical characters to be dependent upon human conventions, they will have little confidence in the present demonstration. I even know that some among them have even attempted to carry the number of such characters to twenty so as to facilitate their arithmetical calculations. Let us first note that although many nations make use of arithmetical characters arising only from their conventions, Arabic characters are an exception because they are based upon the Laws and nature of sensate things which, along with intellectual things, have numerical signs properly belonging to them. Secondly, seeing that geometricians are completely ignorant of the Laws and properties of numbers, they have not seen that by multiplying them beyond the number ten, they have denatured everything and have attempted to attribute to Beings a Principle which is not simple and offers no point of unity. They have not perceived that unity, being universal as it is the sum of all these numbers, should principally retrace its image to us. Then, by showing itself as real and unalterable in its productions as it is in its essence, this unity has invincible rights to our homage and a person thus has no excuse in ignoring them. Geometricians have not perceived, I repeat, that the number ten bears this impression most perfectly, and thus a person's will can never extend the signs of numbers or the Laws of unity beyond ten. This is why experience has fully confirmed this principle and why the means employed to combat it have remained unsuccessful. I am therefore undertaking its defense, and in attributing the number one or unity to the center, I attribute the number nine to the circumference or the area. I shall not recall here what I have said concerning the union of the three fundamental elements, all of which are always to be found together in each of the three parts of bodies, a circumstance in which you will easily discover a positive relationship between the number nine and matter, or to the circular area. Nor shall I say anything regarding the formation of the cube, whether algebraic or arithmetic, which, when the factors have but two terms, can occur through only nine operations. Of the ten that are found absolutely necessary to include therein, the second and the third are simply a repetition of one another and consequently must be considered as being simply one. Yet I shall substantiate the principle which I have established with a few observations upon the nature and division of the circle. It is a mistake to claim that it was geometricians who divided the circumference into 360 degrees as being the most convenient division and that it lent itself more easily to all the operations of calculus. Dividing the circle into 360 degrees is not at all arbitrary. Nature itself presented it to us since the circle is composed only of triangles, and there exist six of these equilateral triangles in the entire area of this very circle. Let us therefore attentively follow the natural order of these numbers by joining the product which is the circumference or zero, and let us then determine whether these divisions were established by people. Must I personally indicate the natural order of these numbers? All production of whatever nature is ternary, three. There are six of these perfect productions within a circle, or six equilateral triangles, six. Finally, the circumference itself completes the operation and adds nine or zero (0). Therefore, if we reduce all these numbers to figures, we shall have primarily three (3), secondarily six (6), and finally zero (0) which, when joined together, will equal 360. Let us now perform whatever multiplications we wish upon the numbers we have just recognized as constituting the circle. Then, since all of the results will be in the ninth degree, we will no longer doubt the universality of the number nine in matter. Nor will we doubt the impotency of this number when we reflect that, no matter what number is joined to it, its nature is never altered. For those who possess the proper key, this will be striking proof of what we have previously stated - namely, that the form or envelope can vary without its immaterial Principle ceasing to be immutable and indestructible. Through such simple and natural observations, one can uncover evidence of the principle I have set forth. This also constitutes one of the methods demonstrating how we should proceed when reading within the nature of Beings, in that all their Laws are written upon their envelope, in their progression, and in the different revolutions to which their course subjects them. For example, not having distinguished the natural circumference from the artificial circumference, gave rise to the mistake I have already remarked upon regarding the way in which the circumference was viewed up to the present time - that is, as a collection of an infinite number of points united by straight lines. It is true that the circumference which a person traces with the aid of dividers can only be formed in succession, and in this sense, we can regard it as an assemblage of many points which, being traced one after the other, are not supposed to have any connection or continuity between them. All of this has caused humankind's imagination to suppose that they were united by straight lines. But, apart from my previous explanations that even in such cases the line uniting two points must be acknowledged as not being straight, as there is no straight line in the sensate, we need only recognize the formation of the natural circle so as to realize the falsity of the definitions generally offered to us regarding the circular line. The natural circle grows instantly in all directions, occupying and filling every part of its circumference. Only within the sensate order and through our material eyes do we perceive inevitable inequalities in corporeal forms because they are mere assemblages. However, through the eyes of our intellectual faculty, we perceive the same force and power everywhere and we no longer perceive such inequalities because we sense that the action of the Principle must be uniform and complete; otherwise, it would itself be exposed. In passing, let us say that this is what causes the collapse of all those childish scholastic disputes regarding the void. The limited sight of a person's body must encounter inequalities at every step because it can only read within the area, whereas a person's thinking cannot conceive of a void anywhere because it reads within the Principle. It perceives that this Principle is manifested everywhere, necessarily permeating everything, since resistance must be as universal as pressure. Therefore, we cannot compare the natural circle with the artificial circle in any way whatsoever since the natural circle creates itself instantaneously through the single explosion of its center. The artificial circle, on the other hand, begins only at the end which constitutes the triangle. As everyone knows or should know, the compass, one of whose points is kept immobile, cannot make a single move without creating a triangle. Let us now proceed to the reasons why the number four is that of the straight line. First of all, I shall state right away that I am not using the words straight line in accordance with the meaning it has in the common vernacular, by which we indicate that this area appearing to our eyes has the same alignment. And, in fact, after having demonstrated that no straight lines exist in sensate Nature, I cannot adopt the common opinion in this matter without following a course contrary to everything I have established. I shall therefore regard the straight line to be only a Principle and, as such, to be distinct from the area. Have we not perceived that the natural circle grew in all directions simultaneously and that the center instantly emitted from itself an innumerable and inexhaustible multitude of radiuses? Is not each radius thought to be a straight line in the material sense? And through its apparent straightness and through the faculty it possesses of extending itself ad infinitum, the radius is truly the image of the generative Principle which ceaselessly emanates from itself and never departs from its own Law. Moreover, we have seen that the circle itself is simply an assemblage of triangles since we have recognized everywhere that only three principles exist within bodies and that the circle itself is a body. Now, if this radius, if this seemingly straight line, if the action of this generative Principle can manifest only through a ternary production, we would simply need to unite the center's number of unity, or of this generative Principle, to the ternary number of its production to which it is joined during the corporeal Being's existence. We would then have an indication of the quaternary which we endeavor to find in the straight line according to the concept we have given of it. But, to make certain that you do not believe that we are now muddling what we have distinguished with so much care - namely, the center which is immaterial with the production or the triangle which is material and sensate - you need to recall what was said about the Principles of matter. I have clearly shown that even though they produce matter, they are immaterial in themselves. Being considered as such, it is then easy to conceive of an intimate tie existing between the center (or generative Principle) and the secondary Principles, since the three sides of the triangle and the three dimensions of forms have indicated to us perceptibly that these secondary Principles are only three in number, whereas their union with the center offers us the most perfect idea of our immaterial quaternary. Furthermore, this quaternary manifestation occurs only through the emanation of the radius from its center, and this radius, which always extends itself in a straight line, is the organ and action of the central Principle, whereas the curved line on the contrary produces nothing and always limits the action and production of the straight line or radius. Such evidence cannot be resisted and we can therefore apply the number four unhesitatingly to the straight line or radius representing it, since only this straight line or radius can give us a proper understanding of this number. By such means can a person succeed in distinguishing the corporeal envelope and form of Beings from their immaterial Principles, thereby obtaining a fair enough idea of their different numbers. She can avoid confusion in this way, and she can proceed with assurance along the path of observation. This is, I repeat, the means of finding that quadrature we have discussed, and which will never be discovered except through the number of the center. In fact, this straight line or quaternary is so indubitably the source and organ of everything which is corporeal and sensate, that geometry returns everything it attempts to measure to the number four and to the square, and it considers all the triangles established for this purpose only to be a division and a half of this same square. Is not this square composed of four lines that are considered to be straight or similar to the radius and consequently quaternary as it is itself? Is anything further needed to demonstrate that geometricians prove, by their very own process, what I have expounded to them? In other words, that the number producing Beings is the same as that which serves as their measure? And thus, the true measure of Beings can only be found within their Principle and not within their envelope or within the area, since, on the contrary, everything that is an envelope or that is the area can only be evaluated with precision by proceeding towards the center and the quaternary number which we call the generative Principle. I hope no one will consider offering the objection that, being limited by supposedly straight lines, all figures called rectilinear in geometry also bear the quaternary and thus I should not limit myself to the square for indicating quaternary measure, as it would seem to contradict the simplicity and unity of the stated principle. Even if fact could not verify my proposition, and even if it were not true, as I have previously stated, that geometricians return to the square everything that they have attempted to measure, what we have just stated concerning this immaterial quaternary would be enough to make one agree that all sensate things proceeding from it must preserve upon themselves the perceptible mark of this quaternary origin. Since this quaternary is definitely the sole generative Principle of sensate things and the only number to which this property of production is essential, it is likewise indispensable that there exists among sensate things a unique figure indicating this to us. And this figure, as stated, is the square. How could it be possible that this truth would not manifest itself to us among sensate things since we find it clearly indicated in an incontestable way within numerical Law - that is, within the most intellectual and dependable of a person's possessions here on Earth? Let me repeat, how could we find more than one quaternary measure or - what amounts to the same thing - more than one square within sensate or corporeal figures constituting the object of geometry, since it is impossible to find more than one square number in this numerical Law or that of calculation of which we have just spoken? I know that this must cause surprise and it will undoubtedly appear novel no matter how incontestable this proposition is, because it is generally accepted that a numerical square is the product of any given number multiplied by itself - and one does not even question that all numbers have this property. But, since the analogy that we have discovered within all classes between the Principles and their productions is still insufficient to dispel error upon this point, and despite the unity of the square among all sensate figures that a person can trace, geometricians have persuaded themselves that more than one numerical square can exist. I shall go into further detail so as to confirm the truth of what I have just expounded. The square expressed in figures is most certainly the quadruple of its base. And if it is only the sensate image of the intellectual and numerical square from which it originates, it is absolutely necessary that this numerical and intellectual square be the type and model of the other - that is, as the square in form is the quadruple of its base, likewise, the numerical and intellectual square must be the quadruple of its root. I can now assure all people - who are as capable of knowing it as I am - that there exists only a single number that is the quadruple of its root. I shall even refrain as much as possible from positively indicating it to them, either because it is too easily discovered or because I regret to reveal such truths. But you will perhaps ask, how will it then be possible to consider the products of all the other numbers multiplied by themselves if I allow only one numerical square? After all, if there is only one numerical square, there can only be also one square root among all numbers, and however, there is not a single number which cannot be multiplied by itself. Therefore, since all numbers can be multiplied by themselves, what will they then be if not square roots? I agree that any number whatsoever can be multiplied by itself, and consequently, none can be regarded as being a root. I further agree with the least of mathematicians that there exists no root which is not the proportionate mean between its product and the unit. But, for all of these numbers to be square roots it would be necessary that they all be connected through four with the unit. Now, among this multitude of different roots, quantity can never be determined since the number or single root must be connected through four with the unit. It is therefore clear that the number which is found to possess this connection is the only one which essentially deserves the designation of square root. And all other roots, having a different connection with the unit, will assume designations obtained from these different relationships, but they must never be designated as square roots since their connection with the unit will never be quaternary. By the same reasoning, although all roots being multiplied by themselves yield a product, it is absolutely necessary, however, that this product itself be to its root what its root is to the unit, since every root is the proportionate mean between its product and the unit. Then, if there is but a single root which is in relationship to four with the unit or which is square, it is also incontestable that there can be but one single product which is connected through four with its root, and consequently, that there can be only a single square. All other products, not being in this quaternary connection with their root, must therefore not be considered as squares, but they will carry the designations of their different relationship with their root, much as the roots which are not square bear the designation of their different connection with the unit. In short, if it is true that all roots are square roots, all roots in a dual relationship would certainly produce squares which would be doubled - the ones by the others. Yet we know that this is absolutely impossible in numbers. That is why we admit only one square and only one square root. Because they have not had an accurate enough idea of a square root, the geometricians have attributed the properties thereof to all numbers, whereas they properly belong only to a single number. It is necessary, nevertheless, to notice that the difference existing between this single square root and all other roots, as well as that existing between the sole admissible square product and all other numerical products, proceeds only from the quality of the factors which it further extends upon the results proceeding from it. In modern practice, the quaternary always directs all these operations of whatever nature or, to express it more clearly, in every form of multiplication we shall always find: first the unit; second the primary factor; third the secondary factor; and finally the result or the product proceeding from the mutual action of the two factors. And when I say "in every form of multiplication," this is because it happens to be true, not only in all those products where we know of two roots or two factors, as occurs in the multiplication of two different numbers, one by the other, but also in all the products where we know of only a single root; because this root, being multiplied by itself always distinctly offers us our two factors. Here, therefore, presenting us with added evidence, is the real power of the number four, the universal generator and Principle of all production, as well as the virtues of the straight line which is the image and action of it. Here also is where we find further proof of the distinction existing between sensate and intellectual things, and also of everything that has been said regarding their different number since, in all numerical multiplications, we tangibly recognize three things - namely, the two factors and the product. Intellectually, on the other hand, we recognize only the unity with which they are connected and that such unity never enters into the operation of composite things. Therefore, we now perceive the reason why we have recognized this quaternary as being both the Principle and the fixed measure of all Beings, and also why any product of whatever nature whether it is the area or all the properties of this area-are engendered and directed by this quaternary. Geometricians themselves corroborate all of the advantages which have been attributed to the quaternary up to now, and this they do through the division they perform upon the radius so as to estimate its connection with the circumference. They take care to divide it into the greatest possible number of parts so as to make the approximation less defective. But, in all the divisions they make, it is important to observe that they always employ decimals. Now, through a calculation that we shall not consider here, although it is fairly well known, it cannot be denied that the decimal and the quaternary have an incontestable connection since they both possess the privilege of corresponding and belonging to the unit. Therefore, by making use of decimals, geometricians still proceed through the quaternary. I know that, if need be, it might be possible to divide the radius by numbers other than decimals. I even know that these decimals never render accurate results as occurs in the division of the circle into 360 degrees, from which one could infer that neither decimals nor the quaternary to which they are inseparably united constitute the true measure. But it must be noted that the division of the circle into 360 degrees is perfectly exact because it is based upon the true number of all forms, whereas the decimal divisions expressing the number of the immaterial Principle of such forms cannot be exact in sensate nature, nor upon the corporeal radius or any other type of matter. However, this does not mean that, of all the divisions from which a person could choose, decimals are not the means which brings him closest to the point he desires. We may even say that in this, as in many other circumstances, he has been led by the Law and Principle of things without being aware of it. We may even say that his choice is a result of the natural light residing within himself which always tends to lead him to the truth. Moreover, even though the means which he has adopted may be worthless and useless for him in that he wants to make it agree with both the area and matter, it is nevertheless the best he could select for this type of calculation. Thus, despite the little success humankind has derived from its efforts, we will always be obliged to agree that the division which he has made of the radius into decimal parts confirms what I have said regarding the universality of the quaternary measure. Despite the reserve I have promised myself, after having revealed so much concerning the number four and the square root, surely all of my readers will realize that both are the same. Therefore, this is no longer the time to conceal it. Moreover, after having advanced to this point, I find myself somehow forced to admit that they would search vainly elsewhere than in this square root and in the unique square which results therefrom for the source of light and knowledge. And truly, if it is possible for the readers of this book to grasp on their own the connection of everything that I have revealed to their sight and to obtain a proper idea of the numerical and intellectual square I have presented to them, I am somehow obliged to admit the truth and I no longer refuse any admission they wrest from me. Therefore, to the extent that prudence and discretion permit, I will present beforehand a few of the properties of this quaternary and, so as to make myself more understandable, I shall consider it as the sensate and corporeal square which is the figure and production thereof - that is, as possessing four visible and distinct sides. By examining each of these four sides separately, we may then conclude that the square under consideration is truly the only means by which a person can be led to the understanding of everything contained within the Universe, and that it is also the only support which can sustain her against all the tempests she is forced to endure during her voyage in time. However, to sense the endless advantages connected with the square more fully, let us remember what was stated when we compared it to the circumference. We then learned that the circumference serves to limit and oppose the action of the center or of the square, and that they mutually react upon one another. Consequently, the circumference stops the rays of light, whereas the square, being in itself the Principle of this light, has enlightenment as its true object. In short, the circumference holds a person shackled in a prison, whereas the square is provided to deliver him from it. Indeed, the inferiority of this circumference causes all of a person's misfortunes in that she can cover all of its points only one after another, which causes her to sense to the fullest extent the penalty of time for which she was not created. The square, on the other hand, because of its correspondence with the unit, does not subject her to this Law since, in the image of its Principle, its action is complete and uninterrupted. However, we must admit that Justice itself has favored humankind even in the punishments it has inflicted upon it. Even the circumference, which has been provided so as to limit and make a person expiate his primal errors, does not leave him bereft of hope and consolation. By means of the circumference, a person can still travel over the whole Universe and return to the point from whence he departed without being forced to face another direction - in other words, without losing sight of the center. This constitutes for him the most useful and salutary exercise, much as the person who wants to magnetize an iron blade knows that after each stroke he must return the blade to the magnet, thus causing it to complete a circuit. Otherwise, it would lose the potency it has just received. Nevertheless, despite this property of the circumference, it cannot be compared with the square, since the latter directly instructs a person about the virtues of the center without her having to leave her place. In this way a person can attain and embrace the same things that she could not know by means of the circumference, but without covering all of its points. Finally, the person who has fallen within the circumference revolves around the center, because he has deviated from the action of this center or of the radius which is straight, and he is forever revolving because the action is universal and he finds it in opposition all along his path. On the other hand, the person who is attached to the center, or to the square which is its image and number, is always immovable and unvarying. Undoubtedly no purpose would be served in pursuing this allegorical comparison further because I do not doubt that intelligent eyes cannot fail to make many discoveries in what I have just stated. Therefore, it is with good cause that I declare this square to be superior to all things because, there being definitely only two types of lines - the straight and the curved - whatever does not pertain to the straight line or to the square is necessarily circular and hence temporal and perishable. Therefore, by virtue of this universal superiority, I had to give people a hint of the infinite advantages that they could discover within this square or quaternary number upon which I have proposed to present a few preliminary details to my readers. People should remember that the commonly known square is simply the image and form of the numerical and intellectual square. Moreover, they will undoubtedly realize that I propose to speak to them only of the numerical and intellectual square manifesting in time and directing it - this very square providing proof that another square exists beyond time, but complete knowledge of it is forbidden until such time as we ourselves are beyond the temporal prison. That is why I have refrained from mentioning the conclusions of the quaternary progression rising above the causes acting within time. In keeping with this, and to help us conceive how this square contains everything and leads to the understanding of everything, let us observe that in mathematics the four angles are those which measure the entire circumference. And since each of these four angles designate a particular region, it is clear that the square embraces the east, west, north, and south. Now, if we could find only these four regions in all existing things, whether sensate or intellectual, what more could we perceive beyond this? And after having surveyed them as a class, shall we not consider ourselves as certain that nothing more will remain for us to know within this class? That is why a person who had observed the four cardinal points of corporeal Creation with care and perseverance would have nothing more to learn in astronomy, and she could take pride that she completely possesses the system for both the Universe and the true arrangements of celestial bodies. In other words, she would possess an understanding of the properties of fixed stars, of Saturn's ring, of weather and the seasons suitable to agriculture, and the nature of the two causes capable of producing eclipses. By being willing to recognize only one material and visible Law in eclipses, observers have denied the existence of those arising from another source and in a period different than that indicated by the sensate order. Regarding the order of the movements of celestial bodies, a person can also possess certain knowledge of it through a careful examination of the four divisions which complete their temporal course. Of all sensate measures, time is the least subject to error. Therefore, since it is the true measure of the course of celestial bodies, we may sense that it would be easier to estimate accurately their periodic return through time calculation than it would be to evaluate the precise length of one's arm by conventional measures taken in the area, since these have a basis neither fixed nor determined by sensate nature. This is why so many nations measure space itself and route distance by the duration or passage of time. By aid of the square a person would succeed in freeing himself from the dense shadows which still cover all eyes regarding the antiquity, origin, and formation of things. He could even throw light upon the dispute regarding the birth of our world and upon all the revolutions written upon its surface, whose traces may represent the consequences and effects of the primal explosion as well as the subsequent and successive revolutions which the Universe has continually experienced since its inception. Such revolutions have always been produced by physical forces, even though they have been authorized by the primary cause and executed under the eyes of the superior temporal cause through the continued counteraction of the evil Principle, to which immense powers have often been accorded over the sensate, for the purification of the intellectual, since it is the only way leading to true transmutation (the Philosopher's Stone) or the reestablishment of Unity. But how can such purification take place without its opposite or its reaction since it must occur in time, seeing that no action can occur in time without the aid of reaction? What would enlighten a person upon this subject is, that by observing the four regions of which we speak, she would perceive that one directs, one receives, and two react. From this she would note that disasters, whose vestiges are apparent everywhere on Earth, necessarily arise from the action of the two actively opposed regions - namely, the one where fire rules and the one where water rules. No longer could he attribute the effects to which her eyes bear witness every day to the single element which seems to produce them, because she would recognize that such revolutions result from the constant struggles of these two enemies in which the advantage lies sometimes with one and sometimes with the other - but also in which neither can be the victor without that area of Earth where the combat occurs suffering proportionately and thereby experiencing alterations and changes. That is why none of what we perceive on Earth should surprise us because, even if daily revolutions (whose existence is undeniable) did not occur, these two elements would nonetheless have begun acting in opposition from the very moment temporal things originated. This is also why we must be certain that each instant produces new revolutions, because the action of these two elements upon one another is and will always be constant until the general dissolution. Thus, all those marvels which so greatly surprise naturalists will disappear. All irregularities and devastations occurring before our very eyes - as well as those where the remains and debris proclaim their antiquity - will no longer be difficult to explain and they will agree perfectly with everything we have observed regarding the innate Principles of Beings, upon their differing and opposing actions upon one another, and finally upon the disastrous results of the universal counteraction. However, all these phenomena will appear far less surprising when we recall that these two opposing elements, these two agents, or this dual universal Law within matter, are always dependent upon the active and intelligent cause which constitutes their center and bond. This cause can activate at will either of these diverse agents which are subject to it, and it can even deliver them over to an evil inferior action. Therefore, we have one more method of determining where, within the greatest revolutions, such prodigious excesses of water upon fire or of fire upon water may have originated. We need only to consider the active and intelligent cause and recognize that when the Principles of these elements are no longer within their natural limits, this is because the Principle has abandoned such limits or because it activates one rather than other by its own virtue for the accomplishment of the primary cause's decrees of Justice, and also to hasten the action or to stop the excessive counteraction of the evil Principle opposing it. In so doing we will perceive that if we wish to know the reasons behind the course this intelligent cause follows in the Universe, we must search within its intelligent nature and in everything resembling it. Being simultaneously active and intelligent, its activity causes the production of perceptible effects by communicating its diverse actions and reactions to all temporal Beings. However, only its intelligent faculty can provide the proper explanation, since it is admitted to the superior council only because of this title. Thus, there will never be any satisfactory result for those who search for this explanation simply in matter. Let us apply this to everything that has been stated concerning the method of seeking everywhere for the truth of all things so we can decide whether or not the principles guiding us are universal. Apart from the enlightenment that knowledge of the square can impart upon the constitutions of corporeal Beings, upon the harmony established between them, and upon the causes of their destruction, it also embraces the four distinct degrees to which their particular course subjects them, and which are clearly indicated by the four seasons. Who is not aware of the different properties attached to each of these seasons? Who does not know that since corporeal Beings cannot receive birth except through the reunion of two inferior actions, it is first of all necessary that these two actions be suitable to each other and in mutual accord. This is what we call adoption. This act of adoption is attributed to autumn, because during this season, Beings send forth from themselves, through the Law of their immaterial Principle, those seeds which must serve for their reproduction. And this Law begins to act only when such seeds are placed within their natural matrix. This constitutes the first stage in their progression, a stage upon which reflection and intelligence will easily discover an infinity of things which I must not mention. When the seeds are thus adopted by their matrix, the two actions acting in concert create what we must designate as conception, which, according to the Law of this same corporeal nature, is indispensable for the generation of Beings composed of matter. This second stage in their progression occurs during the winter, whose influence preserves their strength by keeping them at rest and concentrating all their fire in the center, operating upon them a violent reaction which causes them to exert themselves and renders them more apt to join together and communicate their virtues reciprocally. The third stage in their progression takes place during the springtime, and we can consider this act as that of vegetation or corporification, because it is primarily the third. We have indicated to a sufficient degree that the number three is dedicated to results, both corporeal or incorporeal. Secondly, the saline influences of wintertime, having ceased after having fulfilled their Law of reactivating not only the Principles of the generative seeds but even those of their productions, make use of their faculty and natural property by manifesting externally everything which resides within themselves. That is why the fruits of this vegetative property begin to appear during this season and why we see them issuing from the womb which has given them birth. Finally, summer completes the entire cycle. At this time all the productions issuing from the matrix where they have been formed receive the full action of the sun which brings them to maturity. This is what constitutes the fourth degree of the progression of all corporeal Beings on Earth. We sense, however, that most animals must be excluded from this progression. Even though they are subject to the four stages I have just recognized as being within the special progression of all corporeal Beings, they nevertheless do not always follow the Laws and ordinary length of seasons for their generation and growth. This exception concerning animals should not surprise anyone because, not being inherent to Earth although arising from it, their Law certainly cannot be like that of vegetative Beings which are attached to the earth. The Principle of quaternary universality should not be rejected, because we will perceive that even among vegetative Beings, some do not await the entire revolution of the four seasons to complete their course, whereas others reach this completion only after many annual solar revolutions. Such differences stem from the fact that some need a lesser reaction and others a stronger reaction so as to act and perform their own particular task. Yet these four stages or actions that I have just noted are nonetheless suitable for them and always take place with perfect exactitude in Beings exceptionally early in their development and in those that are exceptionally late in their development. According to what we have learned regarding the number four in its relationship with the area, it is the one number which measures all and carries its action everywhere, although it does not manifest an equal action everywhere as it universally proportions such action to the varying nature of Beings. Do not these observations concerning the properties attached to the four seasons throw light upon the period in which the Universe may have received birth? It is true that this can only concern those people who acknowledge an origin for the Universe. For those who have acted in bad faith or have been blind enough not to recognize an origin of the Universe, this research becomes superfluous. However, persuaded as I am that these very same individuals would profit from what I would say upon this subject, I shall, to the degree I am allowed, lift a corner of the veil before their eyes. Concerning the world's origin, if we consider only the first instant of its corporification, we would surely be tempted, by guiding ourselves according to the order of the seasons, to attribute it to springtime because it is indeed the time of vegetation. But, if we would direct our eyes a little higher and examine all the acts which must have preceded this visible corporification, the origin of the world seed would be necessarily placed in a season other than that of springtime. We would be obliged to agree that the actual progress of universal Nature is the same now as it was at the moment of its birth. The adoption of its constitutive Principles must then have taken place in the same circumstances and in the same period of time in which we perceive the adoption of the particular Principles 19]

perpetuated during its present-day course and existence. In other words, this original adoption must have commenced in autumn. Indeed, this is when Beings cease to experience the sun's heat as this celestial body moves further away from them, so they seek and draw closer to each other in order to supplement its absence by mutually communicating their own warmth. And as we have seen, this is the primary act of what must take place corporeally among individual Beings in Nature. This act must therefore occur in universal Nature in the same way. It is when the sun ceases to be perceptible to those it has warmed until that moment, that corporeal things take the first step toward existence and Nature begins. Using the same analogy, we can presuppose in which season Nature must experience decomposition and cease to exist. In other words, by following the Law of its present course, we should believe that the Universe will obtain the completion of the four acts of its universal course in the summertime. Once this completion is achieved, its career will then be terminated, and by detaching itself from the branch, it will, like all fruits, cease to be and completely disappear while the tree to which it was attached will remain forever. What I have just stated is based upon this generally accepted Law: things always end where they have experienced their beginning. However, I wish to emphasize that although the four acts of the temporal progression occur in all Beings, there are nevertheless some in which this Law operates at different times. Seeing that this progression varies between plants and animals, and even within these two classes it operates so diversely among the different species as well as among different individuals, it would be particularly difficult, for all the more reason, to establish its Law and duration by judging from the particular to the universal. Thus, nothing is further removed from my thought than to attempt to attribute a temporal season to these great periods. And in truth, such matters are entirely superfluous to people, inasmuch as they can acquire a light more useful, certain, and important upon such matters than what falls only upon the periods of transitory Beings by using the flambeau which they carry within themselves. I equally beg to not be accused of contradiction or oversight if you have heard me speak of the existence of the sun prior to the existence of corporeal things. I have not forgotten that the visible sun originated along with all other bodies, and in the same way, but I am also aware that there exists another very physical sun of which the above is merely the form and under whose eyes all acts of Nature's birth and formation have taken place, much as the daily and yearly revolutions of particular Beings occur in the sight and through the Laws of our perceptible corporeal sun. Thus, in their own self-interest, I urge the readers of this book to be wary enough not to judge me before having understood me; and if they wish to understand me, it is necessary that they often look beyond what I have said. Whether through a sense of duty or through prudence, I have left much to be desired. After having indicated in general many of the properties of the square which I have always proclaimed to be unique, I shall briefly describe some of the properties that are connected with its sides. I will then reserve the right to deal with this universal emblem in a slightly more extensive way in the following chapter. The first of these sides, as the base, foundation, or root of the other three sides, is the image of the primary, unique, universal Being, which has manifested Itself within time and within all sensate productions, but which, being Its own cause and the source of all Principle, resides outside of time and the sensate. To become aware of what I have already stated on many occasions - namely, that sensate productions, although originating from it are hardly necessary for its existence - we need only to determine the number which is suitable to it, and there is not a single person who is not aware that it is the Unit. Whatever operation we perform upon this number taken by itself - that is, whether we multiply it, elevate it to the greatest power that the imagination could conceive, or successively search for the root of all these powers - the number, the unit, will always remain as the result in all these operations. The number one, being simultaneously its own root, square, and all powers, necessarily exists by itself and independently of all other Beings. I do not mention division, because this mathematical operation can only be affected upon assemblages, but never upon a simple number such as the unit, which confirms what I have already said regarding the nonexistence of fractions. Nor do I mention the operation of addition, because it is likewise clear that it cannot occur except within composed things and also because a Being which possesses all within itself cannot add anything to itself from a union with any other Being. This serves as proof for everything which has been said heretofore regarding matter, in which those things employed for the growth and nutrition of corporeal Beings never become part of their principles. However, I speak of the multiplication or elevation of powers, as well as the extraction of roots, because the one is the image of the productive property innate within every simple Being, and the other is the correspondence of every simple Being with its production, since it is through this correspondence that reintegration becomes operative. This is what must help to convince us that this primary side of the square, the number one or the primary cause, of which it is characteristic, produces everything through this cause and receives nothing that is not from it or does not belong to it. The second side is what belongs to that active and intelligent cause that I have presented through the course of this work, as holding primary rank among temporal causes. By its active faculty, it directs the course of Nature and corporeal Beings in the same way that, using its intelligent faculty, it directs all the steps of a person, who is similar to it through her quality as an intellectual being. We attribute the second side of the square to this cause for the reason that this second side is the closest to the root. Likewise the active and intelligent cause appears immediately after the primary Being which exists beyond temporal things. Then, if we place it in parallel with the second side of the square, we must therefore also credit it with a dual number; and we perceive that we could not apply this dual number to any Being more appropriately than to this cause since it indicates this to us on its own, as much by its secondary rank as by the dual property which it possesses. And, in actual fact, this active and intelligent cause is the primary agent of all temporal and sensate things, so that nothing here on Earth could ever have existed without its help and, so to speak, without having originated through it. Does not the square itself offer us proof of this? Is not the second of its sides which we are presently examining, the first stage or step towards the manifestation of the powers of its root? In a word, is it not the image of this straight line which is the primary production of the point, and without which there would never have been either surface or solid? Therefore, within the square, we immediately discover two of the most important points for people - namely, knowledge of the primary universal cause and knowledge of the secondary cause which is its primary temporal agent and representative within sensate things. I have dwelt sufficiently elsewhere upon the immense attributes belonging to this active and intelligent secondary cause so that I can dispense with recalling them at this time. And if one wants to have the idea that suits one, it will be enough to never forget that it is the image of the Primary Cause, and loaded with all its powers for all that happens in Time. This is what one can conceive of being true about it: it is at the same time what will teach us, if after it there is no Being in Time in whom we can better place our trust. The third side of the square is that which designates whatever results, that is to say, both those which are corporeal and sensible, and those which are immaterial and beyond Time; for, just as there is a Square assigned to Time, and a Square independent of Time, so there are results attached to each of these two Squares, because each of them has the power to manifest productions, and as the productions that manifest themselves in the one and the other class are always three in number, that is why we apply them to the third side of the square. This is in perfect agreement with what we have seen on bodily productions, all of which are the assembly of three Elements; all that there is to be observed is the considerable distinction which, in spite of the similarity of the Number, is between temporal productions and those which are not; these, coming directly from the Primary Cause, are simple beings like it, and are therefore an absolute existence which nothing can annihilate, the others being born only by a secondary Cause, cannot have the same privileges as the first, but must necessarily feel the inferiority of their Principle; so their existence is only transient, and they do not subsist by themselves, like the beings who have reality. This is what the third side of the square obviously tells us; for if the second has given us the line, the third will give us the surface; and since the number three is at the same time the number of the surface and the number of the bodies, it is clear that the bodies are composed only of surfaces, that is to say, substances which are only the envelope or external appearance of the Being, which, however, neither the solidity nor the life belong to. And indeed, the last operation, indicated by human Geometry, to compose the solid, is only the repetition of those which preceded, that is to say, those which have formed the line and the surface; for the depth which this third and last operation generates is nothing else than the vertical direction of several united lines, and all the difference which is there, is that in the preceding operations the direction of the lines were only horizontal; thus this depth is always the product of the line, and as such, it cannot be anything other than an assembly of surfaces Do we want, since the opportunity arises, to still learn to evaluate more justly what the Bodies are? For this purpose, one only has to follow the reverse order of their formation. The solids will be composed of surfaces, the surfaces of lines, the lines of points, that is to say, of Principles which have neither length nor width nor depth; in a word, which have none of the dimensions of Matter, as I have amply expounded when I have had the opportunity to speak of it. Let us thus bring back the Bodies to their source and their primordial Essence, and let us see by that the idea that we must have Matter. Finally, the fourth side of the square, as repeating the Quaternary Number, by which everything has its origin, offers us the Number of all that is Center or Principle, in any class; but, as we have spoken enough of the universal Principle which is beyond Time, and this square of which we are now dealing has simply the temporal for its object, we must understand by its fourth side only the different acting principles in the temporal class, that is to say, both those who enjoy the intellectual faculties, and those who are limited to the sensible and bodily faculties; and even as to the Immaterial Principles of the corporeal beings on which we have extended ourselves as long as we have been permitted to do, we shall not here recall either their different properties, their innate action, or the necessity of a second action to make the first operate, or in a word, all these observations which have been made on the laws and the course of material Nature. We will just point out, that the relation which can be found between these bodily Principles and the fourth side of the square, is a new proof that, as quaternaries or centers, they are simple Beings, distinct from Matter and therefore indestructible, although their sensate productions, which are only assemblies are subject by their nature to decompose. It is only on the immaterial Intellectual Principles that we must now fix our attention, and among these Principles there is none upon which we can focus more aptly than on humankind at this moment; since it was humankind who was the main object of this writing; since it is in humankind that should essentially reside all the virtues contained in that imposing Square which we are occupied with; since, in the end, this Square has never been traced except for humankind and is the true source of science and enlightenment from which this human being has unfortunately been stripped. It would be by carefully contemplating the fourth side of this square, that the human being would really learn to evaluate its cost and advantages. This would be where at the same time humankind would see the Errors, by which human beings have obscured the foundation and the very object of Mathematics; how much they deceive themselves, when they substitute for the simple Laws of this sublime Science, their faulty and uncertain decisions, and how much they harm themselves when they confine it to the examination of the Material Facts of Nature, while by making another use, they would be able to get so precious fruits. But we know that we can no longer today observe this square from the same point of view as we used to do, and that among the four different classes contained in it, we occupy only the most mediocre and the darkest, instead of in our original state we occupied the first and brightest. It was then that, drawing knowledge from their very source, and approaching, without fatigue and without work, the Principle that had given us being, we enjoyed a boundless peace and happiness, because we were in his Element. It was by this means that we could with advantage and safety direct our progress in all Nature, because, having gained control over all the three lower classes of the temporal square, we could direct them, at our pleasure, without being terrified or stopped by any obstacle: it is, I say, by the properties attached to this eminent place, that we had a certain notion of all the Beings that make up this corporeal Nature, and for that reason we were not exposed to the danger of confusing our own Essence with theirs. On the contrary, relegated today to the last class of the temporal square, we find ourselves at the end of this same bodily Nature that was once submitted to humankind, and that we should never have experienced either resistance or rigor. We no longer have this inappreciable advantage, which we enjoyed in all its extent when placed between the temporal Square and the one that is beyond Time, we could read both in the one and the other. Instead of this light which we could never have separated, we perceived nothing more than a frightful darkness about humankind, which exposes us to all the sufferings to which we are subject in our body, and to all the misunderstandings to which we are trained in our thought by the false use of our will and by the abuse of all our intellectual faculties. It is therefore only too true that it is impossible for humankind to reach today without help from the knowledge contained in the Square of which we are dealing, since it no longer presents itself to us with the face that alone can render it intelligible to humankind. However, I have promised it, I do not want to discourage humankind; on the contrary, I would like to light in us a hope that never went out; I would like to bring consolations for our misery, by committing us to compare it with the means at our disposal to get rid of them. I am now going to concentrate on an incorruptible attribute which we possessed completely in our beginning, and whose enjoyment not only is not totally forbidden to us today, but which is even a right which we can claim, and which offers us the only way and the only means to recover this important place of which we have just spoken. Nothing will appear less imaginary than what I put forth, when one will think that even in our privation we still possesses the faculties of desire and will; that, therefore, having faculties, we must have attributes to manifest them, since the Primary Cause itself is subject, as well as all that pertains to its Essence, to the necessity of being unable to manifest anything without the aid of its attributes. It is true that since the faculties of this Primary Principle are as infinite as the Numbers, the attributes that respond to them must be equally limitless; for not only does this primary Principle manifest productions beyond time, for which it employs attributes inherent to it, and which are distinct from each other only by their different properties; but it still manifests productions in time, and for which, the help of these attributes inseparable from itself, it also needed attributes out of itself, coming from it, acting through it, and were not it; which constitutes the Law of Temporal Beings, and explains the double action of the Universe. But although humankind's manifestations are in no way comparable to those of the Primary Cause, we cannot be denied the faculties we have just recognized in us, as well as the indispensable need for attributes similar to these faculties, in order to enhance them; and since these attributes are the same as those by which we formerly proved our greatness, we Shall see that we should expect the same help today, if we had a constant desire to make use of it, and give them all our trust.

## Chapter 7 - Human Attributes

Those priceless attributes, in which are found humankind's sole resource, are discovered in the knowledge of languages - in other words, in that faculty common to the entire human species for reciprocally communicating their thoughts. It is a faculty which indeed all peoples have cultivated, but they have done so in a way not at all profitable for themselves because they have not applied it to its true object. Consequently, we perceive that the advantages attached to the faculty of speech involve a person's true rights, since he communicates with other people through this means and he makes all his thoughts and feelings perceptible. Only this can truly address his needs in this matter, since all the signs employed to replace speech for those who are deprived of it, whether by nature or accident, fulfill this end most imperfectly. These signs are ordinarily limited to such things as negations and affirmations, all signs by which one may respond to a question. Even if we exhaustively question such people, they cannot transmit a single thought to us, unless - which amounts to the same thing - the object is present before their eyes, and they can make us understand their intention by touch or some other demonstrative sign. Those who have advanced further in this work can be understood only by their teachers or others who have learned the same method. Although this may actually be a kind of language, we nevertheless cannot call it a true language. First, it is not common to all people. Second, it is strongly deficient in power of expression since it lacks the inestimable advantages of pronunciation. In neither this nor any other artificial language will a person's true attributes be found, for nothing that is conventional and arbitrary and constantly shifting can signify a true property. By this explanation, we can already conceive something of the necessary nature of language; for I have said that languages must be common to all people. Yet how can they be common to all people if they do not possess the same signs? Which is to say, properly speaking there can only be one language. I shall not offer as proof the eagerness with which people seek to acquire a great many languages or the admiration we have for those who are so versed, although such eagerness and admiration, false as they may be, do offer some indication of our tendency towards universality and unity. Nor shall I mention the pride with which different nations regard their particular language and the extent to which each nation is jealous of its own. I shall speak even less of the custom established among some sovereigns of corresponding with each other only in a dead language common between themselves in formal matters, for not only is this custom not general but moreover it proceeds from a motive too trivial to carry any weight in the matter under consideration. Therefore, we must find the reason and proof within people themselves for why they were created to have only a single language. In consequence, we will discern the error that has led many to deny this truth and state that language, being simply the product of habit and convention, must inevitably vary like all earthly things, a fact that has caused observers to believe that there could be all at one time many languages equally valid though different from one another. For us to proceed with some certainty, I shall advise these individuals to inquire whether they do not recognize within themselves two kinds of languages - one sensate and demonstrative by means of which they communicate with other people; and the other inner, silent, but always preceding the language which is manifested outwardly, and which is thus truly its mother. I shall ask them then to examine the nature of this inner secret language to determine whether is it anything other than the voice and expression of a Principle outside themselves which etches thought in them and thereby actualizes its inner processes. Now, in accordance with the understanding we have acquired of this Principle, we must realize that since all people are necessarily directed by it, there can exist only one uniform process, aim, and Law, regardless of the innumerable varieties of good thought which can be communicated to them through this channel. But since this process must be quite uniform, as this secret expression must be everywhere alike, it is certain that those who had not allowed the traces of this inner language to decay within them would all understand it most perfectly. They would find everywhere a resemblance to what they sense within themselves. They would perceive the similitude and representation of their selfsame ideas therein. They would learn that, apart from those things arising from the evil Principle, there does not exist anything which 1s foreign to them. Finally, they would convince themselves, in a striking manner, of the universal similarity of the intellectual Being constituting them. This is where they would clearly recognize that the true intellectual language of humankind, being everywhere the same, is essentially one - that it can never vary and that it is impossible for two languages to exist without one being fought and destroyed by the other. Then, in keeping with our understanding, since the outer sensate language is simply the product of the inner secret language, if this secret language were always in conformity with the Principle which must direct it, if it were always one and the same, it would produce the same outer sensate expression everywhere. Consequently, although today we are obliged to employ material organs, we would still have a common language that would be intelligible to all peoples. Therefore, when did sensate languages begin to vary so much among people? When did people become aware of the disparity in the way by which they communicated their ideas? Is it not when this inner secret expression had itself begun to vary? Is it not when humanity's intellectual language had become obscure and was no longer the work of a pure hand? Then, with their light no longer close to them, people indiscriminately accepted the first idea offered to their intellectual Being and they no longer sensed the connection or correspondence between what they received and the true Principle from which they should obtain all. Finally, left to their own devices, people's wills and imaginations have been their only resources, and out of necessity and ignorance they have worshiped all the productions which these false guides have presented to them. This is how the outer expression of language became so totally altered. By no longer perceiving things according to their true nature, people gave them names of their own creation which, by not being analogous to the things they represent, could not designate them unequivocally, as their natural names could have. Even though only a few people may have followed this erroneous road, one which is unlikely to result in uniformity, it is most certain that every one of these people gave different names to identical things. By being repeated and perpetuated a great number of times through the ages, these must in truth offer us the most varied and bizarre spectacle. Let us not doubt that this is the origin of the differences and divisions of languages, and based on what I have said on this subject, even if I had no other proof, this would be more than enough to convince us that people are far removed from their Principle. For, I repeat, if people were all guided by this Principle, their intellectual language would be the same and consequently their outer sensate languages would possess the same signs and idioms. I hope no one will contest what I have just stated concerning the natural and significant names of Beings. Although the different languages used on Earth do not offer uniform names, we are obliged to believe that languages should only make use of names which denote objects clearly and universally. For this reason, none of these languages, differing greatly from one another, can reasonably pass for a true language. Moreover, each of these languages considered by itself, false though it may be, clearly provides proof of what I suggest. Although the words which each language employs may be conventional, might they not still serve as clear and definite signs of the Beings they represent to all those instructed in that conventionally created language? Do we not observe a natural penchant possessed by everyone for expressing things by signs or words that seem to us to be the most analogous? And do we not enjoy a secret pleasure mixed with admiration whenever someone offers us signs, expressions, and figures which bring us closer to the nature of the object presented to us and which cause us to understand them better? Therefore, what else are we doing than repeating the progress of truth itself which has established a common language among all its productions and which, having given to each an appropriate name linked to its essence, has protected them from equivocation among themselves? In using the same means might it not protect those who, faced with the task of reestablishing their connection with its works, have known how to labor and arrive at an understanding of the true names? Thus, we cannot deny that in our very deformity and privation, we trace for ourselves the expressive emblems of the Law of Beings. And the false usage which we make of the spoken word proclaims to us the just and satisfactory usage that we could make of it without needing to go beyond Nature by simply not forgetting the source from which this language should originate. It is therefore true that had observers returned to this inner secret expression which the intellectual Principle operates within us before it manifests outwardly, the origin of the true Principle of sensate language would have been discovered therein, and not in the fragile and impotent causes which are limited to the operation of their own particular Law and incapable of producing anything else. They would not have attempted to explain by simple Laws of matter, facts of a superior order, which have existed before time and will exist beyond time without interruption and independently of matter. This is no longer the organization, no longer the discovery of primitive people which, being transmitted from age to age, has perpetuated itself up to the present time among human species by means of example or instruction. But, as we shall see, this is humankind's true attribute, and although people have been deprived of it since they rebelled against its Law, there have remained to them vestiges which could return them to its source were they to possess the courage of following them step by step and applying themselves vigorously to such endeavors. I am aware that among other people this is one of the most contested points. Not only are they uncertain as to what humankind's primal language could have been, but by deliberations upon the subject they have even arrived at the belief that people do not possess its source within themselves, all because they do not observe them speaking naturally when abandoned at infancy. But will they never see the defect in their observation? Are they not aware that in the state of deprivation in which a person finds herself today, she is condemned to accomplishing nothing, even through her intellectual faculties, without the help of an external reaction which sets them in motion? And thus to deprive a person of this Law is to remove from her absolutely all the resources which Justice accorded her and to place her in the situation of allowing her faculties to become smothered without bearing any fruit. However, we cannot deny that this is the argument of observers based on repeated experiments performed upon children in which the former refrain from speaking in their presence so as to discover what their natural language may be. When they have subsequently perceived that these children made no use of speech or that they uttered only confused sounds, they interpreted their findings according to their fancy and built opinions upon facts that they themselves had concocted. But is it not obvious that sensate nature and intellectual Law likewise call for a person to live in society? Now, why do people find themselves thus placed amidst other people, who are supposed to accomplish their own rehabilitation, if not to receive all the help they need in reawakening their dormant faculties and exercising them for their own benefit? Thus, by depriving a person of the help he should expect from these two Laws is to act directly against them and against humankind itself. It does not indicate much intelligence to pass judgment upon a person after having taken away from him the means of acquiring the ability to make use of faculties that he is said not to possess, an ability they endeavor to believe him incapable of. It is the equivalent of placing a seed upon a stone, observing its inactivity, then denying that this seed was destined to bear fruit. But, without proceeding any further, if it is evident that when a person is deprived of the help which is indispensably necessary to her, he cannot produce any fixed language, and yet seeing that languages do indeed exist among people, where then can we discover the origin of this universal language and will it not be necessary to agree that the person who was the first to teach it must have received it from a source other than the hand of another person? There is, I know, a kind of natural and uniform language that observers generally agree to recognize in people, by which they indicate feelings of pleasure and pain, and which indicates within them the existence of a type of sounds appropriate for this usage. But it is very obvious that this language - if indeed it is a language - has only corporeal sensations for its guide and object. The most convincing proof we have of this is that it is found likewise within animals, most of which manifest their sensations outwardly through movement and even through characteristic sounds. Nevertheless, we should not be surprised to discover this type of language in animals, if we recall the principles established previously. Is not the corporeal Principle of animals immaterial, since no Principle can exist that is not immaterial? As such, must they not possess faculties, and if they possess faculties, must they not have the means to manifest these? Moreover, the means by which each Being functions must always be in relation to its faculties, for if there did not exist some measure in this, as in all else, it would be an irregularity and we could never permit any irregularity within the Law of Beings. Therefore, it is through this measure that we must evaluate the kinds of language by which animals demonstrate their faculties; since, being limited to sensing, they only have need of the means of making known this sensing, and they do possess such means. Beings which possess no other faculties than those of vegetation demonstrate this faculty of vegetation through the fact itself just as clearly, but that is all they demonstrate. Thus, although animals have sensations and are capable of expressing them, although in the actual state of things these sensations are of two kinds, one good and the other bad, and since animals express both by showing when they are happy or suffering, we cannot dispense with limiting their language and all the associated demonstrative signs to this sole object. Nor will we be able to regard this manner of expression as a true language since the aim of a language is to express thought. Thought belongs to intellectual Principles, and I have demonstrated clearly enough that the Principle of animals is not intellectual although it is immaterial. If we are agreed not to regard the demonstrations through which animals make known their sensations as a real language, then, although a person as an animal also has these sensations and the means of manifesting them, we shall never admit to the slightest comparison between this limited and obscure language and that of which people are made aware through their intellectual nature. It would undoubtedly prove to be an interesting and instructive study to observe all through Nature that measure existing between the faculties of Beings and the means accorded them for their expression. In this way we would perceive that their faculties are less extended to the degree to which they are removed by their nature from the first link of the chain. At the same time, we would perceive that the means they possess to make these known follow this progression strictly. In this sense we could accord a sort of language even to the least of created Beings, since this language would be none other than the expression of their faculties and of this uniformity without which there could exist neither commerce, correspondence, nor affinity between Beings of the same class. However, in this study we need to use the utmost care when considering all Beings so as to place each in its own class and not to attribute to one class that which belongs to another. We should not attribute to minerals all the faculties of plants, nor should we attribute to both the same manner of manifesting those faculties which are common to both. Nor should we attribute to plants what we have observed in animals. Much less again should we attribute to those lesser Beings which possess only transitory actions everything that we have just discovered within a person. For this would be again descending into this horrible confusion of languages, the principle of all our errors and the true cause of our ignorance, in that henceforth the nature of all Beings would be distorted for us. However, since full consideration of this point would perhaps exceed the scope intended for my work, I am satisfied merely to mention it, and I leave its consideration to those who possess the modesty to limit themselves to isolated subjects less vast than that with which I am now occupied. Therefore, I return to humankind's most precious resource: its true and original language. I declare once more that as an intellectual and immaterial Being, people must have received faculties of a superior order and consequently the necessary attributes to manifest them during their primal existence. These attributes are nothing other than the knowledge of a language common to all thinking Beings. Furthermore, this universal language must have been dictated to them by a single Principle, of which it is the true symbol. And, finally, people no longer possess these primal faculties in their entirety as we have perceived that, since even thought did not originate within people, the attributes which accompanied these faculties have also been taken away from them and this is why we no longer perceive in them this fixed and invariable language. Yet we must also repeat that humankind has not abandoned the hope of recovering this language, and with effort and courage a person can always aspire to regain possession of his primal rights. If I were permitted to enumerate proofs of this, I would show that Earth abounds with them, and ever since the world's beginning, there has existed a language which has never been lost and will not even be lost after the world has ceased to be, although it must then be simplified. I shall show that people of all nations have had knowledge of it, and that some, although separated by centuries as well as by considerable distances, have understood each other by means of this universal and imperishable language. Through this language we would comprehend how true legislators have learned the Laws and principles by which the possessors of justice have conducted themselves since time immemorial, and how, by regulating their course upon these models, they have possessed the certainty that they were taking the correct steps. We would also perceive true military principles, the knowledge of which great generals have acquired and which they have employed with such success in combat. This language would provide the key to all calculations, the knowledge of the construction and decomposition of Beings as well as that of their reintegration. It would make known the virtues of the north; the cause of the deviation of the compass; the virgin Earth, the object of desire for aspirants to occult philosophy. Finally, without entering here into further detail upon its advantages, I do not fear to state that those it can procure are innumerable and there does not exist a Being upon which its power and light do not extend. But, besides the fact that I could not further expound upon this subject without violating my promise and failing in my duty, it would be most useless for me to speak of it more clearly because my words would be lost upon those who have not cast their eyes in this direction - and their number is nearly infinite. As for those who are proceeding along the path of knowledge, what I have said already will suffice, without it being necessary to lift another corner of the veil for them. Therefore, all I can do to indicate the universal correspondence of the principles that I have established is to beg my readers to call to mind once again this Book of Ten Leaves given to people in their primal origin which they have retained even after their second birth, but of which the understanding and the true key have been taken away from them. I also beg them to examine the relationship that can be perceived between the properties of this book and those of the fixed and unique language, to determine whether there does not exist between them a very great affinity and to try explaining the ones by the others. For this is in fact where the key to knowledge will be found, and if the book in question contains all knowledge as previously explained, the language of which we speak is its true alphabet. I must observe the same precaution when speaking about another essential point which pertains to what I have just covered namely, the means by which this language manifests. It undoubtedly occurs in only two ways, as in all languages; first, by verbal expression manifesting through the sense of hearing, and secondly, by characters or writing manifesting through the sense of sight, the only senses which are connected with intellectual actions. They are found only in people. Although animals also possess these two senses, they serve within the animal only for a material and sensate goal, since animals do not possess intelligence. Thus, the purpose of hearing and sight within animals is only the preservation of the corporeal body, as is true of all their other senses. This explains why animals have neither language nor writing. It is therefore true that it is by these two means that a person attains knowledge of so many elevated subjects, and this language really needs the aid of a person's senses so as to cause her to conceive of its precision, force, and accuracy. And how could this be otherwise since a person cannot receive anything except through the senses? Even in her primal state a person possessed senses through which all else operated, as is true today, but with a major difference - they were not liable to variation in their effects as are the corporeal senses of a person's material body, which offer her only uncertainty and which constitute the primary instruments of her errors. Moreover, how could a person succeed in understanding those who have preceded him or who dwell far away if not through the help of writing? It must, however, be agreed that these same people, whether of the past or separated by distance in the present, must have interpreters or commentators who, being likewise instructed in the true principles of the language of which we speak, make use of it in conversation, thereby bringing times and distances closer. This constitutes one of the greatest satisfactions that true language can bring, because this voice is infinitely more instructive. It is also the rarest, and the art of writing is far more common among people than that of the spoken word. The reason for this is that in our present condition, we cannot ascend except by a gradual process. Indeed, as is true of all languages, the sense of sight ranks below that of hearing, because in nature people receive through hearing, by means of the spoken word, the living explanation or the intellectual part of a language, whereas, by offering to the eyes only an inanimate expression or material object, writing merely indicates it. Be that as it may, it is by means of speech and writing appropriate to true language that a person can instruct herself in everything pertaining to the most ancient of things. For no one has spoken or written as much as have people of ages past, although today many more books are produced than in former times. It is true that there are many among the ancients and the moderns who have deformed writing and spoken language. We can recognize those who have committed such disastrous errors and we can thereby clearly perceive the origin of all languages on Earth - how they have deviated from the primal language, and how the relationship between these deviations and the profound ignorance of peoples has plunged them into an abyss of misery which they have complained about rather than accepting responsibility for this state. We can also learn how the hand which thus wounded these people only intended to punish them rather than to deliver them forever to despair. Its justice being satisfied, it has returned their first language to them with even greater extension than formerly, so that not only can they repair their disorders, but they even possess the means of protecting themselves in the future. If I were permitted to expound further upon the infinite advantages that this language employs by various means, whether through the ears or eyes, I could speak indefinitely. However, considering that it demands the complete sacrifice of a person's will as its price and that it is intelligible only to those who have forgotten their own selves so as to allow the Law of the active and intelligent cause which must govern a person and the entire Universe to act fully upon them, we may then determine whether it can possibly be known to a large number of people. However, not a moment passes when this language does not manifest itself, whether through speech or writing. But a person deliberately closes his ears and looks only for writing within books. How, then, could the true language be intelligible to him? Undoubtedly, an attribute such as that of which I have just described cannot tolerate comparison with any other. This is why I have believed myself justified in proclaiming it as being unique and independent of all the variations in which a person can indulge upon this object. However, it is not enough to have proven the necessity of such a language for the expression of the faculties within intellectual Beings. It is not even sufficient to have assured its existence by announcing that this was where the true legislators and other celebrated people had found the principles, Laws, and motives behind all their great actions. It is also necessary to prove its reality within people themselves, so that they have no further doubt upon this particular subject. It is necessary to point out to people that the multitude of languages in use among other people has varied only in sensate expression, both in written form and in the spoken language. But concerning the Principle, not a single one has strayed from it. They all follow the same course and it is absolutely impossible for them to follow any other. In short, all people on earth possess only a single language, although hardly two of them understand each other. Indeed, we cannot say that any language, imperfect as it may be, is not governed by grammatical principles. This grammar, being none other than a result inherent to our intellectual faculties, adheres so closely to their inner language that we can regard them as being inseparable. Therefore, this grammar constitutes the invariable rule of language among all people. This is the Law to which they are necessarily subject even when they make the worse possible usage of their intellectual faculties or of their inner secret language. It is because this grammar, serving only to direct the expression of our ideas, does not judge whether they are in conformity with the sole Principle which should vitalize them. Its function is only to convey this expression correctly. And this can never fail to happen since it is always correct when motivated by grammar; otherwise, it expresses nothing. For proof of this I shall only make use of what enters into the composition of discourse, or what is generally known as the parts of speech. Among such parts of speech some are fixed, fundamental, and indispensable to the completion of the expression of a thought-and they are three in number. The others are simply accessories, and this is why their number is not generally determined. The three fundamental parts of speech, without which it is completely impossible to express a thought, are the noun or active pronoun [which is the subject], the verb which expresses the manner of existence as well as the action of Beings, and lastly the noun or passive pronoun which is the object or product of the action. Let every person examine this proposition with all the care that she deems necessary and she will always perceive that a discourse of whatever nature can never take place without representing an action. And it is impossible to conceive of an action if it is not directed by an agent which operates it and is followed by the effect which is, must be, or can be the result thereof. If any of these three parts of speech are omitted we cannot acquire a complete notion of the thought involved, and we then sense that something is missing in the order demanded by our intelligence. A noun or a substantive alone signifies absolutely nothing if it is not accompanied by an agent which operates upon it and by a verb which designates the way in which this agent operates upon this noun and disposes of it. Eliminate any of these three signs, and the discourse will then offer only an abbreviated idea of which our intelligence will always await the complement. On the other hand, when these three signs are together, we can complete a thought because we can represent therein the agent, action, and product or the subject. It is therefore certain that this Law of grammar is invariable and that, if we select an example from any language whatsoever, we will find it to be in conformity with the principle that I have just propounded, since it is that of Nature itself and of the essential Laws established within a person's intellectual faculties. Let us now reflect upon everything that I have said regarding weight, number, and measure. Let us determine whether these Laws do not encompass a person, with everything residing within him and everything proceeding from him. Let us also recall what I have said regarding the illustrious ternary, whose universality I have proclaimed. Let us examine whether there exists any object that it does not embrace and let us then learn to acquire a more noble idea than we have attained up to the present regarding the Being who, despite his degradation, can elevate his sight to this point, and who can bring such knowledge and understanding closer to himself and apprehend such a vast conception of the whole. One may, however, object that there are situations in which the three parts that I recognize as fundamental to discourse are not all expressed. Often there are only two, sometimes only one, and at times even none at all, as occurs in a negation or in an affirmation. But this objection will collapse by itself when we observe that in all these cases, the number of the three fundamental parts always preserves its power, and its Law is always in force. This is because those parts of speech that are expressed will be implied. They will always maintain their rank, and only through a tacit relationship with them will others produce their effect. And in truth, if | were to answer a question only with a monosyllable, this monosyllable would always present the image of the ternary Principle, in that it would always indicate on my part some kind of action related to the object presented to me, and it is within the question itself that the part of speech that is implied in my answer would be expressed. I shall not give an example of this, as everyone can easily formulate their own. Thus, I perceive with the greatest evidence everywhere the three signs of the agent, action, and product. This order being common to all thinking Beings, I will not hesitate to state that, even if they so desired, they could not stray from it. I will not mention the order in which these three signs should be arranged so as to conform with the order of the faculties they represent. This order has undoubtedly been interchanged by passing through humankind's hands, and nearly all human languages vary upon this point. But the true language being unique, the arrangement of such signs would not have been subject to all these contrasts had humankind known how to preserve it. However, we should not believe that, even in the true language, these three signs have always been arranged in the same order that they are in our intellectual faculties, because such signs are simply their sensate expression and I have acknowledged that the sensate can never follow the same course as the intellectual. In other words, the production can never be liable to the same laws as its generative Principle. However, the superiority that the true language would have over all other languages lies in the lack of variation in its sensate expression. And this expression, without the slightest alteration, would follow the order and Laws belonging to and specific to its essence. Moreover, this language would have, as we have already seen, the advantage of being protected from all equivocation and always having the same meaning, because it pertains to the nature of things, whose nature is invariable. Of the three fundamental signs to which every expression of our thought is subjected there is one which, through preference, merits our attention and upon which we will direct our eyes for a moment. It links the other two and is the image of the action among our intellectual faculties and the image of mercury among corporeal principles. In a word, it is what grammarians designate as the verb. Therefore, it cannot be overlooked that if the verb is the image of the action, then all sensate production is based upon it. And since the property of the action is to accomplish all, that of its sign or image is to represent and indicate everything that is being accomplished. Thus, let us reflect upon the properties of this sign in the composition of discourse. Let us recognize that the stronger and more expressive it is, the more pronounced and sensate are the results proceeding from it. Let us perceive through an easily accomplished experiment that the effect of everything subject to a person's power or conventions is regulated, determined, and principally animated by the verb. Finally, let the observers examine whether it is not by this sign called the verb, that everything we know to be the most intellectual and active within us is manifested. Let observers determine whether it is not the only one of the three signs which is susceptible to strengthening or weakening expression - whereas, once the designations of the agent and the subject are determined, they remain always the same. This is how we will ascertain whether we have been justified in attributing action to the verb, since it is truly its agent, and its help is absolutely necessary for anything to be accomplished or expressed, even tacitly. This is the place to point out why idle observers and speculative Kabbalists discover nothing: it is because they always speak and they never verb. I shall not expound further upon the properties of the verb. By studying what I have just stated, intelligent eyes will be able to make most important discoveries and convince themselves that a person, at every instant of her life, represents the sensate image of the means by which everything has received birth, operates, and is governed. This, therefore, is another of the Laws to which all Beings possessing the privilege of speech are obliged to submit themselves. This is why I have stated that all the people on Earth possess only one language, although the way in which they express themselves is universally different. I have made no mention of the other parts entering into the makeup of speech. I have simply declared them to be accessories, serving only to aid the expression of words and supplement their weaknesses, and to detail certain relationships to action. Or, if one prefers, they serve as the images and repetitions of the three parts that we have recognized as being the only ones essential in completing the picture of any thought whatsoever. We need to be aware that articles (or the endings of nouns in those languages not making use of articles) serve to express the number and gender of nouns and to determine the essential relationship existing between the agent, the action, and the object of the action. Adjectives also express the qualities of nouns, while adverbs are the adjectives of the verb or action. Finally, the other parts of speech form their relationship and make the sense more or less expressive or the phrasing more harmonious. But, since the usage of these different signs is not uniformly common to all languages, and pertains to a great extent to national customs and habits, all things connected with the sensate must therefore follow such variations. We cannot admit them to the rank of the fixed and immovable parts of speech. Thus, I shall not include them among the proofs offered demonstrating the unity of human language. Nevertheless, I advise grammarians to consider their science with a little more attention than they have undoubtedly shown up to the present time. They will readily admit that languages originate from a source higher than themselves and that all the pertinent Laws are dictated by Nature. But this humble opinion has had little effect upon them, and they are far from surmising the existence of all that could be discovered within languages. Does anyone wish to know the reason for this? It is that these individuals commit the same mistake upon grammar that observers commit upon all sciences. In other words, they give a passing glance to the Principle, but, not possessing the courage to investigate at length, they degrade themselves by directing their attention to tangible and mechanical details which absorb all their faculties and allow the most essential faculty - that of intelligence - to become obscured within them. Therefore, by persuading themselves that the Laws of their science should hold to the Principle as do all other sciences, grammarians will discover in it an unending source of light and truth of which they have scarcely the slightest notion. The small number of these Laws offered to them must seem sufficient in placing them on the right path. If they clearly perceive in these the representative signs of the faculties of intellectual Beings, they will perceive the same thing regarding Beings which are not intellectual. They will then acquire a clear notion of the Principles which have been established concerning matter by simply considering the difference existing between substantives and adjectives. One of them is the Being or innate Principle; the other, the adjective, expresses the faculties of all kinds which are assumed to reside within this Principle. But it must be carefully observed that the adjective cannot join a substantive on its own, and also that the substantive is powerless in itself in the production of the adjective. Both of these await a superior action to bring them together and join them according to its will. And it is only by virtue of this action that they can receive their union and manifest properties. Let us also note that it is the work of thought and intelligence to employ adjectives at the proper place; it is what perceives or creates them and, in some manner, communicates them to the subjects it intends to thus qualify. From now on let us recognize the immense property of that universal action to which we have previously called attention since it is certain that we will encounter it everywhere. Furthermore, after having thus communicated faculties or adjectives to innate Principles or substantives, this same action can extend, diminish, and even remove them completely at will and thereby cause the Being to return to its former state of inaction, a sufficiently tangible image of what it operates in reality upon Nature. However, in this dissolution, grammarians can also perceive without fear of error that the adjective, which is simply the quality of Being, cannot exist without a Principle - a subject or substantive - whereas the substantive can be indicated quite well in speech without its qualities or adjectives. Grammarians may thus perceive a relationship with what has been shown concerning the existence of corporeal immaterial Beings, apart from their sensate faculties. And from this they may also understand what has been said regarding the eternity of the Principle of matter, although matter itself cannot be eternal; being only the effect of a reunion, matter is nothing more than an adjective. This is the method by which they will subsequently conceive how it is possible that a person may be deprived of his primary attributes, since it is by a superior hand that he has been invested with them. But, at the same time, recognizing a person's own insufficiency with even more certainty, they will admit that in order to be reestablished in these same rights, a person must definitely have the help of this very hand that has deprived him of it, and which, as I have previously stated, only demands the sacrifice of his will to return them to him. Grammarians could also discover in the six cases the six primary modifications of matter as well as the detail of the acts of its formation and all the revolutions that it experiences. The genders will represent to them the image of the opposed Principles which are irreconcilable. In short, they could make a multitude of observations of this nature, which, without being the fruit of the imagination or of systems, will convince them of the universality of the Principle and of the fact that one hand directs everything. However, after having established as I have, this unique and universal language offered to a person, even in the state of privation to which she is reduced, I must anticipate the curiosity of my readers concerning the name and nature of this language. Regarding its name, I cannot satisfy them, having promised myself not to name anything. But, regarding its nature, I will admit that each word in this language carries within itself the true meaning of things and designates them so well that it causes them to be clearly perceived. I shall add that this language constitutes the object of the desires of all nations upon Earth and secretly directs people in all their institutions. It is what each of them cultivates privately with care and without realizing it, and which they all endeavor to express in all the works they produce, because it is so well imprinted within them that they cannot produce anything which does not carry its mark. Therefore, to indicate knowledge of this to other people, I can do no better than assure them that it pertains to their very essence and that they are people by virtue of this language alone. Let them then determine whether I have been wrong in telling them that it is universal and if, despite the false usage they make of it, it will ever be possible for them to forget it entirely, since they would need to provide themselves with a different nature in doing so. This is all that I can say regarding the matter in question. Let us now continue. I have stated that this language manifests itself in two ways, as do all other languages - namely, by verbal expression and by writing. As I stated a moment ago, all human works bear its seal, so it is necessary that we quickly examine some of them so as to perceive the relationship they have with their source, no matter how false they may be. Let us first consider those works which, as images of the verbal expression of the language in question, must offer us the most correct and elevated idea of it. Afterwards we shall consider those which have a bearing upon the characters or writing of this language. The first expression of their works generally includes all that is regarded among people to be the fruit of genius, imagination, reasoning, and intelligence - or, in general, what constitutes the object of all possible types of literature and fine arts. In this classification of humankind's productions, we perceive a single prevailing design even though all of them may appear to belong to separate classes. We perceive them all animated by the same motive, which is that of depicting, of proving their object, and of inducing the conviction of its reality or at least giving the appearance of it. If the advocates of some of these types of productions allow themselves to be overcome by jealousy at times, and if they attempt to establish their prestige by heaping contempt upon the other branches that they have not cultivated, they inflict an obvious wrong upon science. We cannot doubt that among the fruits of humanity's intellectual faculties, these merit a preference that will not detract from the others but will, on the contrary, help support them and thereby offer a more solid appreciation of their unequivocal beauty. This idea is certainly shared by all judicious people endowed with sure and true taste. They know that it will only be within an intimate and universal union that their endeavors can find greater force and consistency. For a long time, it has been accepted that all parts of science are connected and reciprocally communicate their help to one another. It is a feeling so natural to people that they carry it with them everywhere, even when they follow a course disavowed by this Principle. If a speaker wants to condemn the sciences, he would need to prove himself well informed in science. If an artist wants to deprecate eloquence, no one would listen to him if he did not employ its language. However, this useful observation, proper though it may be, has been made in a manner so vague as to have produced hardly any fruit. People have accustomed themselves, in this as in all else, to make absolute distinctions and to consider each of these different parts as so many objects, all foreign to one another. This does not mean that we should not discern different types in these products of a person's intellectual faculties, and that everything therein must represent only the same subject. On the contrary, since these faculties are themselves different from one another, and since we can notice striking distinctions within them, it is natural to think that their fruits must indicate this difference and not resemble one another. Yet, at the same time, since these faculties are essentially bound to each other and it is absolutely impossible for one to act without the help of the others, we perceive that the same relationship must prevail between the different sorts of productions and that they all proclaim the same origin. However, I have already said too much about an object which is only superfluous to my scheme. Let me return to the examination that I have begun upon the relationship existing between the unique and universal language and the different intellectual productions of humankind. Whatever the nature of these productions may be, we can reduce them to two classes to which all others pertain. This is because, there being only either the intellectual or the sensate within all existing things, the totality of everything that a person could produce would never have for its object simply one or the other of these two parts. And, in effect, everything that people imagine and produce of this nature on a daily basis is limited either to instruct or excite emotions or to manifest reason or feeling. It is absolutely impossible for people to state or manifest anything outside themselves which does not possess as its object either one or the other of these two points. Regardless of any division we would make of a person's intellectual productions, we will always perceive that they either intend to enlighten and lead to the understanding of certain truths, or they intend to subjugate the intellectual person through the senses and cause her to experience situations in which, no longer being master of herself, she would be under the control of the voice speaking to her and blindly follow the good or evil attraction leading her on. We shall attribute to the first category all the works of reasoning, or in general, all that should proceed only through axioms and all that which is limited to the establishment of facts. To the second, we shall attribute all that which has for its goal the creation of impressions, of whatever nature, upon people's hearts, so as to agitate them in all directions. Now, in either of these two categories, what is the object of the authors' desire? Is it not to show their subject under aspects so luminous or attractive that those who contemplate them cannot contest its truth nor resist the force and allurement of the means used to captivate them? What are the resources they employ to create this effect? Do they not exercise extreme care in approximating the very nature of the object which occupies their attention? Do they not endeavor to return even to its source so as to penetrate its very essence? In a word, do not all their efforts tend to cause the expression to agree perfectly with their conception and render it so natural and true that they are certain to cause the same effect upon other people, were the object itself present before their eyes? Do we not experience this effect upon ourselves to some degree according to the extent of the success of the author in the accomplishment of her purpose? Is not this effect general, and are not similar beauties to be found all over Earth in this same manner? Therefore, this represents to us the image of the faculties of this veritable language we are discussing. It is within the very works and efforts of people that we find the traces of all that has been said concerning the justness and force of its expression as well as that of its universality. We must not be deterred by this inequality of impression resulting from the differences existing in the idioms and conventional languages established among various peoples. This difference in language is but an unintentional defect and not one of nature. A person can succeed in eliminating it by familiarizing himself with the idioms that are foreign to him. This difference could not in any way act contrary to the principle, and I do not hesitate to say that all the languages of the earth constitute so many testimonials confirming it. Although I have reduced the verbal productions of humankind's intellectual faculties to two categories, I have not lost sight of the multitude of branches and subdivisions to which they are susceptible, as much by the number of the different objects which are within the province of our reasoning as by the infinity of variations that our sensate feelings can receive. Without enumerating them or examining each one individually, we may consider in each category a single principal one occupying the primary rank such as mathematics among objects of reasoning, and poetry among those relating to a person's sensory faculty. But, having previously discussed the mathematical part, I shall refer my reader to it so that she may convince herself once again of the reality and universality of the principles that I have expounded. I shall now direct my eyes for a moment upon poetry. I regard it as being the most sublime of the productions of a person's faculties, as it brings him closer to his Principle and proves to him more fully the dignity of his origin because of the transport it causes him to experience. But, to the extent that this sacred language is ennobled ever more by elevating itself towards its true object, to the same extent it loses a part of its dignity when lowering itself to artificial or despicable subjects, upon which it cannot touch without soiling itself as though being prostituted. The very people who have dedicated themselves to this endeavor have always proclaimed poetry as being the language of heroes and of those benevolent Beings, which they have portrayed as watching over the protection and preservation of humankind. Its nobility has been sensed so strongly that they have not feared to attribute it to It, whom they regard as being the Author of All. They have even chosen this language whenever they proclaimed Its revelations or when they have desired to render homage to It. However, it should be unnecessary for me to warn that this language has no relation whatsoever with that trivial form which people among the various nations employ to express their thoughts. Are we not aware that the latter results from their blindness which has caused the belief that beauty could thereby be increased manyfold? Instead, they have only added to their toil and the useless care to which they subject us. The result has been to affect our sensate faculties only, as it cannot fail to encroach upon our true feelings. This language is the expression and voice of those privileged individuals who, being nourished by the continual presence of truth, have depicted it with the same fire which serves as its substance - a fire alive in itself and therefore an enemy to cold uniformity because it directs all its acts, ceaselessly recreates itself, and consequently is always renewed. We can perceive in such poetry the most perfect image of this universal language we are attempting to make known. When it truly attains its object, all things will bow down before it because it possesses, as does its Principle, a consuming fire that accompanies its every move, which softens all, dissolves all, and illuminates all. It is even the first law of poets not to break out in song when they do not sense its warmth. We must not assume, however, that this fire produces the same effect everywhere. Since all these different forms are within its province, it adjusts itself to their differing natures, but it must never manifest without attaining its goal, which is to sweep away everything it encounters in its wake. Let us at this time determine whether such poetry could ever have received birth within a frivolous or corrupted source. Must not the thought which gives it birth be at the highest degree of elevation? Would it not be true to state that the first person must have been the first poet? Let us also determine whether human poetry can indeed be this genuine and unique language which we know belongs to our kind. Definitely not! It is simply a feeble imitation. But I have selected it so as to provide the most suitable idea of poetry because, among the fruits of a person's endeavors, it adheres most closely to her Principle. Moreover, we can say that the conventional measures employed in the poetry invented by people, imperfect as they may appear, must nevertheless provide proof of the precision and justness of the true language in which weight, number, and measure are invariable. Since such poetry applies to all objects, we should also recognize that the true language of which it is, but the image must, with all the more reason, be universal and capable of encompassing everything in existence. In short, by a more detailed examination of the properties connected with this sublime language, we come closer to its model and can read within its very source. In so doing we will perceive why poetry has been celebrated among people throughout the ages, why it has accomplished so many marvels, and where that general admiration arises which all the nations of the earth preserve for those who have distinguished themselves in it. This examination expands ever further our ideas upon the Principle which has given birth to poetry. We will also perceive that the use people often make of poetry debases and distorts it to the point of rendering it unrecognizable, thus proving that poetry for people is not always the fruit of the true language occupying our attention. Employing it to extol people is profane, and making use of it to express passion is idolatrous. Poetry should have no other object than to point out to people the asylum from which it has descended so as to create within people the virtuous desire to follow in its footsteps when returning to this asylum. I have now done enough to indicate the path so that those who entertain certain desires can penetrate much further along this path. Let us now proceed to the second way by which we have learned that true language should manifest itself - namely, by the characters employed in writing. I will not hesitate to state that such characters are as varied and multitudinous as everything else contained in Nature. Not one being exists which cannot find a place in it and serve as its sign. All find their true image and representation in it, thus extending these characters to such an immense number that it is impossible for any person to retain all of them within his memory, not only because of their inconceivable multitude but also because of their differences and peculiarities. Even if we were to suppose that a person could retain all the characters of which she might have knowledge, she still could not delude herself in thinking that she had nothing more to learn about the subject, because Nature produces new things every day. Apart from showing us the infinity of things, the limit and deprivation of our species is also indicated. We can never succeed in embracing everything, since here on earth we cannot even succeed in knowing all the letters of our alphabet. The variety of those objects contained within Nature extends not only to their forms, as we can easily verify, but also to their color and the rank they occupy in the order of things. This causes the writing of the true language to vary as much as the multitude of nuances that we may perceive on material bodies, because each one of these slight nuances conveys as many different meanings. Consequently, the characters employed are as numerous as the points of the horizon, and since each of these points occupies a place belonging to itself alone, each of the letters of the true language also possesses a sense and an explanation which are quite distinct. But I shall stop, 0 Holy Truth! It would be usurping Thy rights to make public Thy secrets, even obscurely. It is for Thee alone to reveal them to whomever Thou desirest and as Thou desirest. I must limit myself to respecting Thy rights in silence, to bring together all of my desires so that other people can open their eyes to Thy Light. Then, disabused of the illusions seducing them, they may be wise and fortunate enough to prostrate themselves at Thy feet. Therefore, always taking prudence for my guide, I shall only say that the great diversity in human languages has been introduced by this infinite multitude of characters and their enormous variety in the true language. Few among them make use of identical signs, but those which agree upon this point still vary as to their number by accepting or rejecting certain signs, each according to its idiom or particular characteristics. Nonetheless, since the characters of the true language are as numerous as the Beings contained within Nature, so is it certain that such characters can originate only within this very Nature. From Nature they draw everything which serves to distinguish them, since nothing beyond Nature is perceptible. This is also why, despite the variety of the characters employed by human languages, they can never go beyond these limits. They are always obliged to render all the signs they make use of in lines and figures, which graphically proves that people cannot invent anything. We shall convince ourselves of all this with several observations upon the art of painting, which may be regarded as having received birth in the characters of the language in question, in the same way that human poetry received birth in its verbal expression. Seeing that this language is unique and as ancient as time itself, we cannot doubt that the characters it employs have been the primary models. Those people who have devoted themselves to its study have often needed to assist their memory with notes and copies. The greatest precision has been necessary in making these copies since the least misrepresentation in the multitude of characters - sometimes distinguished by only the tiniest of differences - would surely distort and confuse them. We will surely sense that if people had been wise, they would have made no other use of the art of painting and, for the sake of this art, they would have been content to limit themselves to imitating and copying the primary characters. If they are, with good reason, so particular concerning the choice of models, where could they find models truer and more exact than those which express the very nature of things? If they are so particular regarding the quality and use of colors, where else should they inquire than to forms which convey the proper colors? In a word, if they desire lasting paintings, how could they succeed more fully than by copying objects always fresh and from which they can make comparison with their productions at any time? Yet the same imprudence which removed people further from their Principle also removed them further from the means provided them in returning to it. People have lost their confidence in those true and luminous guides which, furthering their pure intentions, would surely have returned them to their goal. A person no longer seeks his models in useful and beneficent objects, from which he could continually receive assistance. Instead, he seeks them only in transitory and misleading forms which, offering him only uncertain features and changing colors, continually allow him to stray from his own Principles and despise his own works. This is what happens constantly to a person when she attempts to imitate quadrupeds, reptiles, and other animals, as well as all other Beings surrounding her. This occupation, seemingly so innocent and agreeable, accustoms a person to direct her eyes upon objects foreign to her and causes her to lose not only the sight but the very idea of what is her own. In other words, the objects a person busies herself in representing today are simply the appearance of what she should investigate at all times. According to all established Principles, the copy she makes is inferior to her model, and consequently painting as it is practiced at present is nothing more than a likeness of the likeness. Nevertheless, it is through this same crude form of painting that we shall convince ourselves fully of the incontestable truth proclaimed above - namely, that people can invent nothing. Indeed, is it not always through the representation of material Beings that people compose their paintings? How can they select their subjects elsewhere since painting, being but the science of sight, relates only to the senses and, consequently, only exists to the senses? Let us suppose instead that some painter can not only dispense with seeing sensate objects but can even apprehend his subjects within his imagination by raising himself above them. Such a supposition would be easy to disprove. Let us grant the most liberal scope to the imagination; let us allow it all the fantasies to which it could deliver itself. Let me then ask whether it could ever give birth to anything that is beyond Nature and whether we will ever be in a position to state that it has ever created anything. Undoubtedly, it will possess the faculty of visualizing bizarre Beings and monstrous assemblages of which Nature, in truth, cannot provide any examples. But are these chimerical Beings not the product of various pieces joined together? And of all these pieces, will there ever be a single one that is not found among the palpable things of Nature? It is therefore certain that in painting, as well as in all other forms of art, the inventions and works of humankind are nothing more than transpositions. Far from producing anything on her own, all of a person's works are limited to the allocation of another place to things. Thus, by learning to evaluate the worth of her productions in painting as in all other arts and although still devoting herself to this charming occupation, a person will stop believing in the reality of her works since this reality does not exist even in the models she selects. Needless to say, this crude form of painting carries with it striking indications that it descends from a more perfect art. In this sense it gives us further proof of that superior writing belonging to that unique and universal language whose properties we have indicated. In effect, it requires the resemblance of sensate Nature in everything it represents. It does not desire anything that shocks the eyes or judges. It embraces all the Beings of the Universe; and it even extends a bold hand to higher Beings. But it is then truly reprehensible, because, first of all, not being able to make such Beings known except through sensate and corporeal features, it thereafter debases them in the eyes of a person, who can only know them through the sensate, even though these Beings are not part of the material realm. Secondly, when the art of painting attempts to represent higher Beings, where does it find the model for those bodies which they do not possess and which artists nonetheless attempt to give them? Undoubtedly it could only be among the material objects of Nature, or - what amounts to the same thing - these bodies can be found within a poorly regulated imagination which, even within its very disorder, can only employ the material Beings surrounding contemporary humankind. Therefore, what relationship can exist between the model and the image which has been substituted for it, and to what conception have these kinds of images given birth? Is it not clear that this is one of the most disastrous consequences of people's ignorance, that which has exposed them the most to idolatry and which continually contributes towards engulfing them in profound darkness? And in truth, what can lifeless matter and features represented according to the painter's imagination produce if not the obliteration of the simplicity of Beings, the knowledge of which is so necessary to a person and without which all of his kind is delivered over to the most frightening superstitions? Is it not thus that the steps of a person, as alike as they are in appearance, lead him unwittingly astray and cast him into precipices once he no longer perceives the edge? People, therefore, have contented themselves with confusing the cruder forms of painting and their handiworks with the true characters copied from Nature itself. They have even disregarded the Principle from which these true characters derive their origin. In other words, perceiving that they were the masters of employing at will all the different features of this corporeal nature when composing their paintings, they have had the temerity to rely complacently upon their own work, thus neglecting the superiority of the models which they should have chosen and the source which could produce them. Having lost sight of them, they no longer even suspect their existence. We can say as much regarding heraldry which likewise derives its origin from the characters of the true language. The average person takes pride in the nobility of her armorial bearings, acting as though their symbols were real and truly carried with them the rights which preconceived opinion attributes to them. Allowing herself to be blinded by the puerile distinctions that he herself attaches to such symbols, she has forgotten that they are simply the dismal images of the natural arms physically accorded to each person so as to serve as her defense and to act also as the seal of her virtue, strength, and grandeur. Finally, the average person has acted in the same way upon the verbal expression of that sublime language from which it has been established that poetry originated. The arbitrary words and languages of human convention have taken the place of the true language in people's thoughts. In other words, because these conventional languages possess neither uniformity nor a fixed course in a person's eyes regarding expression, symbols, and generally everything that is sensate within them, he has not perceived their universal relationship with the language of the intellectual faculties, of which they are but a distorted imitation. Since the very idea of the Principle of this unique and universal language, which alone could enlighten him, has become effaced within him, he can no longer distinguish it from those which he himself has established. If a person is so ignorant as to place her works alongside those of the true and invariable Principles; if her audacious hand believes itself to equal that of Nature; and if she almost always confounds the works of this Nature with the general or particular Principle which manifests them, we should no longer be surprised that all of a person's notions are so confused and obscure. Not only has she lost the knowledge and the intelligence of the true language, she is no longer even persuaded that one exists. Nonetheless, if this true language is the only one which could reinstate a person within his rights, return to him the enjoyment of his attributes, cause him to understand the principles of Justice, and lead him to knowledge of everything in existence, it is easy to perceive how much he loses by straying from it and not devoting every moment of his life to recovering knowledge of it. No matter how immense, how frightening this course may be, no individual should ever abandon himself to despair and discouragement. I have always declared this very language to be the veritable domain of humankind and that people have been deprived of it for only a time. Far from being deprived of it forever, the hand which will return a person to it is, on the contrary, forever extended. The price attached to this favor is truly so moderate and so natural that it provides further proof of the kindness of the Principle which requests it. It consists simply of asking a person not to give equal weight to the two distinct Beings of which she is composed; and to recognize the difference in the Principles of Nature between them, and that which exists between them and the temporal cause superior to this same Nature. In other words, we must believe that a person is not matter and that Nature does not manifest on its own. We still need to examine one of the products of this true language, whose concept I am attempting to teach again to people. Being an adjunct to the verbal expression of language, this product measures its pronunciation and regulates its force. In a word, it is that art which we call music, but which among people is still stmply a shell of true harmony. Such verbal expression cannot employ words without causing sounds to be heard. This intimate relationship of words with sounds forms the fundamental Laws of true music. It is what we imitate in our artificial music, to the degree it is possible for us to do so, by the pains we take in depicting the meaning of our conventional words through sound. But, before indicating the basic defects of such artificial music, let us consider some of the true principles it offers us. We may thus find a sufficiently striking relationship with everything that has been established to convince ourselves that it still pertains to the same source, and that henceforth it is within the province of a person. Moreover, in this examination we may perceive that we always remain infinitely below our model, no matter how admirable our talents in musical imitation are. This will cause a person to determine whether this powerful instrument was given him simply to engage in childish amusements or whether it was not destined for a nobler employment from its inception. First of all, what is known in music as the perfect chord is for us the image of that primal Unity which contains everything within itself and from which all things issue. This chord is singular in nature, entirely complete in itself without needing the aid of any other sound but its very own. In short, it is unalterable in its intrinsic value because of its similarity to Unity. We must not count as an alteration the transposition of its sound, from which chords of differing denominations result. This transposition does not introduce any new sounds within the chord and, consequently, its true essence cannot be changed. Secondly, the perfect chord is the most harmonious of all, being in itself what is agreeable to a person's ear and leaving nothing to be desired. The three first sounds composing this chord are separated by two intervals of thirds which are distinct but linked to one another. This is where the repetition of everything occurring within sensate things is found. A corporeal being can neither receive nor preserve its existence without the aid and support of another Being, as corporeal as it is, thus reviving its forces and sustaining its existence. Finally, these two thirds are surmounted by a fourth, of which the terminating sound is called an octave. Although the octave is simply the repetition of the initial sound, it nevertheless fully designates the perfect chord. This is because the octave pertains essentially to the chord, as it is included within the original sounds that a resonating body causes to be heard above its own particular sound. Thus this quaternary interval is the primary agent of the chord. It is placed above the two ternary intervals so as to preside over and direct the entire action, much as the active and intelligent cause dominates and presides over the dual Law of all corporeal Beings. This interval cannot allow any mixture, no more than the active and intelligent cause can, and when it operates alone as does the universal temporal cause, all of its results are sure to be exact. However, I am aware that the octave, being in truth a mere repetition of the initial or fundamental sound, can be omitted and not entered into the enumeration of the sounds composing the perfect chord if need be. But, basically, the octave is what essentially terminates the scale. Moreover, we need to include the octave if we wish to know the nature of the alpha and omega and possess obvious proof of our chord's unity - all of this through a mathematical reasoning that I cannot reveal except by stating that the octave is the primary agent or organ by which we have arrived at the understanding of ten. Nor should it be demanded that in the sensate description I present there exist complete uniformity with the Principle of which it is but the image, because the copy would then be equal to the model. However, even though this sensate description is inferior and, moreover, subject to variation, it nevertheless exists in a complete way and represents the Principle because our senses instinctually fill in the rest. It is through such reasoning, and after having presented the two thirds as being connected with one another, we refrain from stating that both need to be heard. We are aware that both may be heard separately without offending the ear, but this will not cause the Law to be less valid, since the interval thus heard always preserves its secret correspondence with the other sounds of the chord to which it belongs. Therefore, the same situation still holds true, although we now perceive only one part of it. We may also apply the same reasoning whenever we wish to omit the octave, or even all the other sounds of the chord, and retain but one, whatever it may be. One sound heard alone is not offensive to the ear and, moreover, this sound could in itself be considered the generative sound of a new perfect chord. We have noted that the fourth is dominant over the two inferior thirds and that these two inferior thirds are the image of the dual Law directing elementary Beings. Is this not where Nature itself indicates to us the difference existing between a body and its Principle by causing us to perceive the one in subjection and dependence, whereas the other is its leader and support? These two thirds represent to us by their differences the state of perishable things of a corporeal nature which exist only through the union of differing actions. And the last sound formed by a single quaternary interval is a new image of the primary Principle, because it reminds us of its simplicity, grandeur, and immutability, as much through its rank as through its number. This does not mean that this harmonic force is more permanent than all other created things. As soon as it becomes sensate, it must pass, but this does not prevent, during its passing, its picturing to the intelligence the essence and stability of its source. Therefore, we find within the assemblage of the intervals of the perfect chord everything that is passive and everything that is active - in other words, everything that exists and everything of which a person can conceive. Yet it is not enough that we have perceived the representation of all things, both general and particular, within the perfect chord. Through fresh observations we may yet perceive the source of these same things and the origin of the distinction existing between these two Principles which took place before time and which manifest continually within time. To this end, let us not lose sight of the beauty and perfection of this perfect chord which obtains all of its advantages from itself alone. We can easily determine that if it had always remained within its own nature, complete harmony and order would have been perpetually maintained. Evil would be unknown because it would not have been born. In other words, only the action of the good Principle's faculties would have manifested because it is the only one that is real and true. How then was it possible for the second Principle to have become evil? How was it possible for evil to have originated and become manifest? Was it not when the superior and dominant sound of the perfect chord - in short, the octave - was suppressed and another sound was introduced in its stead? Now, what is this sound that was introduced in place of the octave? It is what immediately precedes it. We are aware that the new chord resulting from this change is called the chord of the seventh, and we are also aware that this seventh chord fatigues the ear, holds it in suspense and, in terms of musical art, demands that it be rescued. It is therefore through the opposition of the perfect chord to this dissonant chord, and to all those which are derived from it, that all musical productions are created. These are nothing other than a constant interplay that could be termed a combat between the perfect chord, or consonance, and the chord of the seventh, or generally, all dissonant chords. Why does this Law thus indicated by Nature not represent to us the image of the universal production of things? Why do we not discover herein its principles as we have previously discovered the assemblage and the constitution of it within the order of the intervals of the perfect chord? Why should we not put our finger and direct our eyes upon the cause, the beginning, and the result of universal temporal confusion since we are aware that, within this corporeal nature, there reside two Principles which are in constant opposition and that this nature cannot sustain itself except through the help of two contrary actions proceeding from the combat and violence we perceive? This is the mixture of regularity and disorder that harmony and composition faithfully represent to us through the combination of consonances and dissonances permeating all musical productions. Nevertheless, I hope that my readers will be wise enough to simply perceive the exalted truths of which I have spoken in such images. They will undoubtedly sense the allegory when I shall proclaim to them that, if the perfect chord had remained within its true nature, evil would yet to be born. This is because, according to established principle, it is impossible for the musical order, within its particular Law, to equal the superior order that it represents. Moreover, the musical order having been founded upon the sensate, and the sensate being simply the product of numerous actions, if only a continuity of perfect chords were to be offered to the ear, it would in truth remain undisturbed. But, apart from the tedious monotony that would result, we would discover neither expression nor order. In short, this would not constitute music for us because music, and generally everything that is sensate, is incompatible with both the unity of action and of agents. Consequently, in acknowledging all the laws necessary for the constitution of musical works, we can nevertheless apply these same laws to truths of another rank. This is why I shall continue my observations upon the chord of the seventh. By replacing the octave by this seventh, we perceived that one principle was placed alongside another, from which nothing can result except disorder according to the dictates of most sound judgment. We perceived this to be even more evident by noting that the seventh producing dissonance was likewise the sound immediately preceding the octave. Yet this seventh, being such in relation to the fundamental sound, can also be regarded as a second in relation to the octave, which is a mere repetition of the fundamental sound. We shall then recognize that the seventh is not at all the only dissonance in that the second likewise possesses this property. Therefore, any joining of two diatonic tones is condemned by the special nature of our ear, and whenever the ear senses two consecutive notes sounding simultaneously, it will be offended. Thus, since in the scale absolutely nothing other than the second and the seventh can be found in this particular relationship with the lower sound or its octave, this causes us to perceive clearly that any result or product in this field of music is based upon two dissonances from which all musical reaction arises. By subsequently extending this observation to sensate things, we shall perceive with the same evidence that these sensate things never could have been, and can never be, anything other than the product of two dissonances. Despite all efforts we may make, we shall never discover any origin for disorder other than the number connected with these two kinds of dissonance. Furthermore, by observing that what is generally called the seventh is in effect a ninth, since it is simply the assemblage of three very distinct thirds, one can determine whether I have led my readers astray when previously stating that the number nine is the true number of the area and matter. If, on the contrary, we choose to direct our eyes upon the number of consonances or sounds harmonizing with the fundamental sound, we shall perceive that they are four in number - namely, the third, the fourth, the true fifth, and the sixth. In this instance, it is not necessary to speak of the octave as an octave since we are concerned only with the particular divisions of the scale, among which this octave does not possess any other character except that of the fundamental sound itself of which it is the image. We could consider it as the fourth of the second tetrachord, which would not alter in any way the number of the four consonances that we are establishing. I will never be able elaborate upon the infinite properties of these four consonances to the extent that I would wish. I truly regret this because it would be easy for me to indicate with striking clarity their direct relationship with unity, and to indicate the way in which universal harmony is connected to this quaternary consonance and why it is impossible for any Being to remain in good condition without it. But, at every step, prudence and duty prevent me because in these matters one single point leads to all the others. I would never have undertaken to deal with even a single point if the errors with which the human sciences poison humankind had not led me to take up its defense. Nevertheless, I have promised myself not to finish this treatise without offering a few more detailed explanations upon the universal properties of the quaternary. I am not unmindful of my promise and I propose to fulfill it to the degree I am allowed to do so. But for the present, let us again return to the seventh. Let us note that although the seventh causes deviation from the perfect chord, the resulting crisis and revolution help to bring about order and the rebirth of peace for the ear, since one is obliged to reenter the perfect chord following this seventh. What is referred to in music as a series of sevenths - which is none other than a continuity of dissonances and which can never be avoided without ending with the perfect chord or its derivatives - I do not consider to be contrary to this principle. This very same dissonance also repeats for us what occurs within corporeal nature, whose course is simply a series of disorders and rehabilitations. If this same observation has previously indicated to us the true origin of corporeal things, and if it causes us to perceive today that all natural Beings are subjected to this violent law which presides at their birth, during their life, and at their demise, why could we not apply the same law to the entire universe? Why could we not recognize that if violence has caused it to be born and sustain its existence, violence must also operate its destruction? It may be noted that at the moment a musical composition is completed, a confused beat is ordinarily heard, a trill between one of the notes of the perfect chord and the second or the seventh of the dissonant chord. This dissonant chord is indicated by the bass which usually holds the fundamental note, so as to return the complete composition to the perfect chord or unity. We must also perceive that following this musical cadenza, we will necessarily return within the perfect chord, which reestablishes complete peace and order. It is certain that, following the crisis experienced by the elements, the Principles in conflict must also recover their tranquility. Then, applying the same reasoning to a person, we must understand the degree to which true musical knowledge could preserve him from the fear of death since death is merely the trill which terminates his state of confusion and returns him to his four consonances. What I am saying concerning this subject is sufficient for my readers' intelligence. It remains for them to extend the limits which I have prescribed for myself. Consequently, I may presume that they will not consider dissonances in music to be vices, but only an indication of the contraries governing all things. From such dissonances music's greatest beauty is obtained. My readers will even conceive that, in the harmony of which the music of the senses is simply the image, there must exist the same opposition from dissonance to consonance. Far from causing even the slightest defect, they are its sustenance and life. The intelligence perceives within it only the action of several different faculties which mutually sustain rather than combat one another and which, by their reunion, cause the birth of a multitude of results that are always striking and fresh. Therefore, this is only a very abbreviated extract of all the observations of such nature that I could make upon music and the relationship existing between music and important truths. But what I have said regarding this subject is sufficient to make apparent the reason of things and to teach people to not isolate their different forms of knowledge since we are indicating to them that they all are simply different branches of the same tree and that the same impress exists everywhere. Is it necessary to speak at this time about the obscurity in which the science of music still remains? We could begin by asking musicians what their rule is for obtaining tonality - that is, their scale or diapason - but if they lack one and are forced to construct one for themselves, they need to be certain of having something stable in this field. Then, if they do not possess a fixed diapason, the result is that the numerical relationship which may be obtained from their artificial diapason, with sounds which must be its correlatives, are not true tonalities either. The principles which musicians represent to us as true, using the numbers they have accepted, can simultaneously exist as other numbers, depending upon the scale's being higher or lower. This renders absolutely unreliable most of their opinions upon the numerical values they attribute to different sounds. However, I speak here only of those who have attempted to evaluate these different sounds by the number of vibrations in chords of other resonating bodies. A fixed diapason is then definitely necessary so that the resonating bodies are essentially similar, and in this way one can regulate their results authoritatively. But as these two methods were not accorded to people, since matter is only relative, it is obvious that everything they may establish upon such a basis would be liable to many errors. Therefore, it was not within matter but within the very nature of things that we should have searched for the principles of harmony. According to all that we have observed, matter cannot offer the principle of anything as it is never stable; but within the nature of things, since everything is stable and always the same, it is only necessary to have eyes to read the truth therein. Finally, a person would have perceived that she had no other rule to follow except what is found within the dual relationship of the octave, or within that wellknown double reason which is written upon all Beings and from which triple reason has descended. This would have retraced anew for her the dual action of Nature and the third temporal cause established universally upon the two others. At this point I shall limit my observations upon the defects of the Laws that people's imaginations have introduced within music, because anything that I could add would always pertain to this primal error and it is so obvious that I do not need to pursue this subject any further. I shall merely advise the innovators to meditate at length upon the nature of our senses and to notice that the sense of hearing, and that of the other senses, is susceptible to habit. Even acting in good faith, they have been mistaken as they have failed to notice this, and they have created for themselves rules based upon suppositions and unproved things, which time only has caused to appear true and normal. However, it remains for me to examine the use people have made of this music with which they are almost universally occupied, and to determine whether or not they have ever suspected its true application. Apart from the innumerable beauties of which music is susceptible, we recognize in it a strict Law. It is that rigorous measure from which it absolutely cannot deviate. Does not this alone proclaim that music possesses a true Principle and that the hand which directs it is higher than the power of the senses, since the senses possess no stability? Yet, if it pertains to this kind of principles, it is therefore certain that it was never meant to have any other guide and it was intended to be united to its source forever. As we have already perceived, its source being that primal and universal language which indicates and represents things in their natural state, we cannot doubt that music has not been the true measure of things in the same way that writing and the spoken word have expressed their meaning. Therefore, simply by attaching itself to this invariable and fruitful principle, music could have maintained its original rights and fulfilled its true function. This is how it could have painted true-to-life pictures and how all the faculties of its listeners would have been fully satisfied. In short, through this method, music would have accomplished the marvels of which it is capable, and which have been attributed to it at all times. Consequently, in separating music from its source by trying to find its subjects only within artificial sentiments or vague ideas, we have deprived it of its primary support and have removed the means of presenting itself in all its glory. Therefore, what impressions or effects does music produce at the hands of people? What ideas or meanings does it convey to us? Aside from composers, are there many ears which could possess the understanding of what they hear expressed by perceived music? And furthermore, does not the composer himself, after having given rein to his imagination, ever lose the sense of what he has represented or of what he has attempted to depict? Thus, there is nothing more formless or defective than the usage which people have made of this art. This is solely because, having so little occupied themselves with its Principle, they have not endeavored to uphold one by the other reciprocally and they have believed that they could produce copies without having their model before their eyes. It is not that I blame other people for seeking within the infinite resources of this artificial music the pleasure and relaxation it can offer. Nor do I wish to deprive them of the solace which, despite its defects, this art can provide them every day. It can, I am well aware, sometimes assist in reviving within them several of these obscured ideas which, being more refined, may be their sole nourishment and which alone can cause them to discover a point of support. But I shall always advise them to elevate their intelligence above what their senses apprehend, because a person's element is not within the senses. I shall advise them to believe that, however perfect their musical production may be, some are more regular and belong to another order, and that it is even only according to the degree of relative conformity with them that artificial music attracts us and causes us some degree of emotion. When I laid stress upon the precision of the measure to which music is subject, I did not lose sight of this Law's universality. On the contrary, I propose to return to it so as to indicate that, although it embraces all, it nevertheless possesses distinct characteristics and everything here is in full accord with all that has been established. Measure has been shown holding its place among people's intellectual faculties and as being numbered among the Laws directing them We have thereby been able to realize that these intellectual faculties, being themselves the image of the faculties of the superior Principle to which a person is indebted for all, this Principle must also possess its own measure and its own particular Laws. Therefore, if superior things possess their own measure, we should no longer find it surprising that the sensate and inferior things they have created are also subject to it, and consequently, that we should discover within this measure a strict guide for music. But, if we would briefly reflect upon the nature of this sensate measure, we would soon perceive the difference existing between this nature and that which regulates the things of another order. In music, we notice that the measure is always uniform. Once established, the movement perpetuates and repeats itself by the same form and by the same number of beats. In short, everything within it appears so regular and exact that it is impossible not to sense the Law and admit its necessity. This is why this uniform measure is so well adapted to sensate matters, and why we perceive people applying it to all of their productions which occur only as continuous action. We note that this Law serves as a point of support upon which they are content to rest, and we even perceive them making use of it in their most arduous works. In this way we can appreciate the extent of the advantage and usefulness of this powerful aid, since through this aid the worker seems to alleviate hardships that would otherwise appear unbearable to her. Moreover, music can be of assistance in instructing us concerning the nature of sensate things. Offering us such regularity within action and, I dare say, such servitude, it clearly proclaims to us that the residing Principle is not the director of this same action, but on the contrary, everything is constrained and forced within this Principle. This brings to mind what we can observe in different parts of this work concerning the inferiority of matter. Consequently, this only offers us a marked dependence and all the signs of a life that we cannot recognize as other than passive. In other words, not possessing an action of its own, it is obliged to await and receive it from a superior Law which disposes of it and subjects it to its command. Secondly, we may notice that this Law regulating the course of music manifests itself in two ways or by two types of measure known as the two-beat measure and the three-beat measure. We will not take into account the four-beat measure nor all the other subdivisions that can be formulated and which are simply multiples of the two basic measures. Even less can we accept a one-beat measure for the reason that sensate things are neither the result nor the effect of a single action, but have originated and exist only through the means of several united actions. It is the number and quality of such actions we find plainly indicated within the two different types of measure employed in music, as well as within the number of beats that these two types of measure contain. And most certainly, nothing would be more enlightening than to consider this combination of two and three beats in relation to all material things. This is where we would clearly perceive once more the double reason and the triple reason directing the universal course of things. But these points have already been given too much attention. I merely urge people to evaluate what surrounds them, and by no means may I communicate to them the knowledge that can only be the reward of their own desires and efforts. With this in view, I shall promptly bring to an end what I have yet to say regarding the two sensate measures of music. To determine which of these two measures is employed in any given musical composition, we must wait for the completion of the first measure or, what amounts to the same thing, for the beginning of the second measure. Only then does the ear become attuned and sense the number upon which it can depend. As long as a measure is not completed in this manner, we can never know what its number will be since it is always possible to add to the beats already heard. Consequently, is this not an indication to us within Nature itself of an oft-repeated truth, that the properties of sensate things are not stable but only relative, and that they only sustain themselves by one another? If it were not so, a single one of their actions in manifesting itself would carry its own true character and would not await comparison to make itself known. Therefore, the inferiority of artificial music and of all sensate things is such that they only contain passive actions. Their measure, although self-determined, can only be known to us in relation to the other measures with which comparison is being made. Among things of an order more elevated and fully beyond the sensate, this measure makes itself known by more noble traits. In this instance, each Being possesses its own action and also a measure proportional to this action within its Laws. At the same time, since each of these actions is always new and different from what precedes and follows it, it is easy to perceive that the measure accompanying them can never be identical. Thus, the uniformity of measure prevailing in music and sensate things will not be found within this class. Within perishable Nature, everything is subject to dependence and manifests only blind execution. This is simply the effect of the forced assemblage of many agents subject to the same law which, always converging towards the same end in the same way, can only produce a uniform result as long as they experience no disturbance and encounter no obstacles in the accomplishment of their action. In imperishable Nature, on the contrary, all is alive and simple. Each action carries its own Law within itself-in other words, the superior action itself regulates its own measure, whereas measure regulates the inferior action or that of matter and of all passive Nature. Nothing more is needed for us to sense the countless differences existing between artificial music and the living expression of this true language which we proclaim to people as being the most powerful of the means destined to reestablish them within their rights. Therefore, let people now learn how to distinguish this unique and invariable language from all the artificial productions that they continually substitute in its stead. The unique and invariable language, harboring its own Laws within itself, always manifests only those which are just and in conformity with the Principle which makes use of them. Artificial products are created by a person while he is in the shadows and he is unaware whether his actions are in conformity with this superior Principle from which he is separated and which he no longer knows. Thus, when a person observes that her handiwork varies continuously, that the misuse she has made of languages multiplies endlessly in the use of the spoken word and in writing and music; when she perceives that here on Earth we know only the number of things and that most of us die without ever having known their names, then a person will no longer believe that the Principle through which she gives birth to her productions is subject to the same vicissitudes and obscurity. On the contrary, a person will admit that, today, being unable to accomplish anything except through imitation, his works will never possess the solidity of those which are real. Then, debating whether it is possible for everyone to view the model from the same vantage point, he will sense nevertheless that, as this model is in the center, it remains always the same in comparison to the Principle, whose Laws and will it expresses. And, if people were courageous enough to draw nearer to it, they would perceive that all these differences, which occur only because they are so far removed from the center, gradually fade away. Therefore, a person will no longer attribute the properties of the priceless seed which resides within her to habit and imitation. On the contrary, she will agree that habits and imitations are what degrade and obscure the properties of this true, simple, and indestructible seed. In a word, if a person had known how to anticipate all these obstacles or if she had had enough strength to overcome them, she would possess a language as common to herself and to all other people as the essence which constitutes them and which establishes a universal resemblance between them. Indeed, the unity of people's Principle and essence makes it conceivable to better sense the possibility for the unity of their language. If, through the rights of their nature they can all possess the same concepts upon the Laws of Beings, upon the rules of justice, upon their religion and worship, they can then hope to recover use of all their intellectual faculties. In short, if they all tend towards the same goal, if they all have the same work to perform, and if they, however, cannot succeed without the help of languages, it is essential that this attribute be capable of acting through a uniform Law analogous to the universality and intimate unity of all their knowledge. That is why, without recalling all that we have said concerning the superiority of this true language, we believe we can make our readers understand rather clearly how unique and powerful it must be by repeating that it is the only path which can lead a person to Unity and the source of all powers. In other words, it can lead a person to the root of that square of which it is his task to traverse all the sides and of which, according to my promise, I will here reveal the properties and virtues. Previously we have seen established in sufficient detail the relationship of the square, or quaternary number, with causes external to humankind and with the Laws regulating the course of all Beings in Nature. But all that was previously shown is enlightening enough to end any further doubt that this universal emblem must possess an even more interesting relationship with a person, in that it is in more direct relation to himself and that it personally concerns him. Therefore, no one exists who does not recognize in the square a very great affinity with the fourth of the Ten Leaves comprising that Book which, before humankind's reprobation, was always clear and intelligible to people, but which today they can no longer read nor comprehend except through the succession of time. We will, moreover, perceive just as easily a striking similarity with the powerful weapon which was placed in humankind's possession at the time of humanity's original birth and of which the laborious quest constitutes the primary law of a person's condemnation and the sole object of her temporal course. Even still more will we discover the analogy with the productive center that a person occupied at the time of his glory and which he will never fully know without reentering it. Play

And truly, what can better remind us the eminent rank that a person occupied at the time of his origin than this square? This square, as well as the root of which it is the product and image, is singular in nature. The place which a person inhabited is such that it could never be compared with any other. This square measures the total circumference. A person, in the center of his kingdom, embraced all the regions of the Universe. This square is composed of four lines: a person's position was indicated by four communicating lines extending to the four cardinal points of the horizon. This square proceeds from the center and is clearly indicated to us by the four musical consonances which are the primary agents of all the beauties of harmony and which precisely occupy the center of the scale. A person's throne was in the very center of the countries over which he had dominion. And from there he governed the seven instruments of his glory, which I have previously designated as the seven trees. The majority of people would be tempted to assume them to be the seven planets; however, they are neither trees nor planets. Therefore, we can no longer doubt that the square in question is the true sign of this delightful place known upon Earth as the terrestrial paradise. In other words, it is that place of which all peoples have conceived some idea; which each of them has represented in the guise of different fables and allegories according to their wisdom, enlightenment, or blindness; and which naive geographers have sought to discover upon Earth. Thus, the immensity of the privileges which we have attributed to this square in the different sections of this book wherever we have made mention of it must no longer surprise anyone. If all truth and all enlightenment proceed from this sole Principle, if the quaternary emblem is the most perfect image of it, I say one must no longer be surprised that this emblem could enlighten a person upon the knowledge of all phases of Nature. By this I mean the Laws of the immaterial order, temporal order, corporeal order, and mixed order, which constitute the four columns of the edifice. In short, we must admit that the person who possesses the key to this universal symbol will no longer find anything hidden from her in everything that exists, because this number is identical to that of the Being which produces, operates, and embraces all. Yet, however innumerable are the advantages which are connected with it, and however powerful is the true and unique language which leads to it, we are well aware that the unfortunate state of a contemporary person is such that not only can he not reach his destination, but he cannot even take a simple step in that direction without a hand other than his opening the door for him and supporting him all during his lifetime. We are also aware that this powerful hand is that same active and intelligent physical cause, whose eye sees all and whose power supports all existing within time. Yet if its rights are exclusive, how could a person, in her weakness and most absolute privation, and alone in Nature, dispense with such support? Therefore, a person must acknowledge once again both the existence of this cause and the indispensable need that he has of its help so as to reestablish himself in his rights. He will also be obliged to admit that, if it alone can fully satisfy his desire concerning the difficulties which disturb him, the first and the most useful of his duties is to renounce his own weak will as well as the false glimmer of light by which he endeavors to color its errors and to rely solely and absolutely upon the powerful cause that today is the unique guide which must lead him. And truly, this cause is designated to repair not only the wrongs which a person has allowed to occur but even those which she has committed against herself. This cause is continually watching over her, as it does over all other Beings of the Universe, but a person is infinitely more precious to it since she is composed of its own essence and is equally indestructible. Of all the Beings corresponding to the square, they alone are endowed with the privilege of thought, whereas this perishable Nature is, in their eyes, seemingly nonexistent and like a dream. Will not a person's confidence increase in this cause in which all powers preside when he learns that this cause eminently possesses the true and unique language which he has forgotten and which he is today obliged to recall laboriously to his memory; when he realizes that without this cause he cannot know its primary element; and most of all, when he perceives that it resides within and rules supremely over this fruitful square outside of which he will find neither peace nor truth? A person will then no longer doubt that by approaching nearer to it, she approaches nearer to the true and unique light which is her only hope. And along with it, she will discover not only all the knowledge of which we have dealt, but even more importantly, knowledge of herself. Even though this cause pertains to the source of all numbers, it nevertheless manifests itself everywhere, especially through the number of this square, which is likewise the number of humankind. If only it were possible for me to lay aside the veil with which I enfold myself and pronounce the Name of this beneficent cause, the very image of strength and excellence, and upon which I wish I could direct the attention of the entire Universe! Even though this ineffable Being, the key to all Nature, the love and delight of simple Beings, the flambeau of the wise, and even the secret support of the blind, does not cease to sustain a person in all his steps, in the same way that it supports and directs all the actions of the Universe, nevertheless, the Name which would make it better known, were I to utter it, would suffice to cause a majority of people to scorn giving credence to its virtues. It would only make them wary of my entire doctrine. Designating it more clearly would thus have the effect of defeating my purpose, which is to cause people to render it honor. Therefore, I prefer to rely upon the penetrating intelligence of my readers, fully persuaded that, despite the veil with which I have concealed the truth, intelligent people will be able to understand it. Sincere people will be able to appreciate it, and even corrupt people will at least be unable to refrain from sensing it, because all people are Christs. This summarizes the reflections that I have proposed to present. If my pledges had not restrained me, I could undoubtedly have covered a much wider field. Nevertheless, in the few remarks that I have dared to present, I pride myself in having offered only what all people will sense within themselves, whenever they attempt to search inwardly with courage and at the same time protect themselves from blind credulity and haste in their judgments, two vices which both lead to ignorance and error. Consequently, even if I did not possess my own conviction as proof, I would always believe that I have recalled people to their Principle and to truth. Indeed, a person will never be deceived by representing to her forcefully what constitutes her privation and misery, as long as she is bound to transitory and sensate things, and also by pointing out to her that, among this multitude of Beings surrounding her, she and her guide are the only ones who enjoy the privilege of thought. Ifa person desires further proof of this, let him consult within this sensate class regarding all that he perceives surrounding him. Let him inquire of the elements, enemies though they may be, why they are united for the formation and existence of bodies. Let him inquire of the plant why it vegetates, and the animal why it roams upon the surface of the earth. Let him even inquire of the stars why they give light, and why, from the moment they came into existence, they have not for a single instant ceased to follow their course. Deaf to the voice that will interrogate them, each of these Beings will continue to perform its work in silence. They will not render any satisfaction to the desires of a person because their silent actions, speaking only to her corporeal eyes, will reveal nothing to her intelligence. Moreover, let a person inquire of that which is infinitely closer to himself - I speak of that corporeal envelope which he painfully carries with him. Let him ask it why it happens to be joined to a Being with which, according to the Laws constituting him, it is so incompatible. This blind form will not clarify this new problem any better and will still leave a person in uncertainty. Therefore, is there a condition more frustrating and, at the same time, more humiliating than to be relegated to a region in which all Beings living therein are so many strangers to us? Where the language we use to address them cannot be understood? Where, finally, a person, in spite of herself, being chained to a body which is not superior in any way to the other productions of Nature, drags along everywhere with her a Being with which she cannot converse? Thus, regardless of the grandeur and beauty of all these works of Nature among which we are placed, it is certain that being among them is similar to being in a desert in that they can neither understand us nor speak to us. Consequently, if observers were convinced of these truths, they would not have searched in corporeal Nature for the explanations and solutions that it can never provide. Nor would they have searched within contemporary people for the true model of what they should be, since they are so horribly distorted. Nor would they have attempted to explain the Author of All things by Its material productions, whose existence and Laws are subordinate and thus cannot reveal anything concerning It who encompasses all within Itself. Thus, announcing to observers that the path they have taken creates in itself the primary obstacle to their progress and removes them entirely from the road of discovery is to state a truth to which they will easily agree, whenever they may be willing to consider it. Likewise, since they cannot deny possessing the faculty of intelligence, is not telling them that they are created to know and embrace all, speaking the language of their own reason? A faculty of this kind would not be as noble as we sense it to be if, among transitory things, there existed some which ranked above it. Nor would people make such constant effort, as a natural movement, to escape from the annoying fetters of ignorance and bring themselves closer to knowledge, as to a realm which is particularly their own. If they have so little reason to compliment themselves upon their success, they must no longer attribute it to the weakness of their nature nor to the limits of their faculties. It is solely due to the false path they take in attaining their destination. Also, because they do not observe with sufficient attention that each class possesses its own measure and Law, the senses are required to judge sensate things. As long as things are not sensed by the body, they appear nonexistent, since the intelligence is required to judge intellectual things of which the senses can have no knowledge. In short, attempting to apply to one of these classes the Laws and the measure of the other clearly goes against the order dictated by the very nature of things, and consequently, this departs from the only existing method for discerning the truth. Therefore, I find it possible to believe that I am offering to other people only easily perceived truths when I state that the object of their search exists only in the center. For this reason, as long as they travel only around the circumference, they will discover nothing. This center, which must be unique in each Being, is indicated to us by that universal square which is evident in all existing things and is found written everywhere in indelible characters. I have made available to them only a few of the methods of reading within this productive center, which is the sole Principle of light, because, aside from my obligation, revealing myself further would have caused harm. Most certainly they would not have believed me. Therefore, as I have promised myself, I will refer them to their own experience, and never have I pretended, as a person, to possess any other rights. However, few are the means of which I have given them some idea, and however few are the steps that I have caused them to take in their progress, they will not fail to attain some confidence upon perceiving the expanse it has disclosed to their eyes and the application which we have made upon so great a number of different objects. Since it would be contrary to all the Laws of truth to assert that the multitude and diversity of objects could constitute what is forbidden to a person's understanding, I do not assume that this field could by its very vastness appear impracticable to other people. Definitely not. If a person is born within the center, there exists nothing that he cannot perceive, nothing that he cannot embrace. On the contrary, the only fault that he could commit would be to isolate and dismantle some phases of universal knowledge, since this would divide Unity by directly attacking its Principle. And in this sense, let my readers decide between this method and my own. Despite the prodigious variety of points that I have covered, I have unified all and made it a single science. Observers, on the other hand, make a thousand sciences of it, and every matter becomes the object of a separate doctrine and study. Nor do I need to call their attention to the fact that, after having presented all these observations regarding the various human sciences, they must assume that I possess at least basic notions regarding these. Moreover, by observing the marked reserve prevailing in this writing and the widely prevalent veil found herein, they can presume that I would probably have more to say to them than what they have perceived and more than what is generally known among them. However, far from viewing them with contempt when considering the obscurity in which they still dwell, all of my wishes tend to perceive them emerging from the darkness so as to direct their steps towards paths more luminous than those in which they grovel. Continuing in the same vein, although I have been fortunate enough to have been led farther than they in the search for truth, far from being consumed with pride and far from believing that I know anything, I openly proclaim my ignorance. In anticipation of their suspicion upon the sincerity of this admission, I will add that it would be impossible for me to delude myself upon this subject because I possess proof that I know nothing. This is why I have so often stated that I have no pretension of leading my readers to some conclusion. It will be enough for me to have somehow forced them to admit that the blind course of human sciences takes them even farther from the goal towards which they tend, since it leads them to even doubt that such a goal exists. They will be forced to admit that by depriving the sciences of the single Principle which directs them and from which they are in themselves inseparable, they can only become further immersed in the most fearful ignorance, rather than becoming enlightened. It is only by having rejected this Principle that observers search everywhere and why they almost never agree among themselves. Therefore, I repeat, it is enough today to have unveiled for them the essential point of the difficulties standing in their way. Truth will extend its rays more abundantly in the future and it will, in its own time, again take possession of the kingdom for which the vain sciences contend today. As for myself, being ever so slightly worthy of contemplating it, I have been obliged to confine my endeavors to causing other people to sense that it exists, and that a person, despite her misery, could convince herself of this every day of her life if she would better regulate her will. Therefore, I know that it would afford me the most exquisite recompense if, after having read my book, each person would say in the heart of her heart, there is a Truth, but I can address myself to something superior to humankind so as to learn it.