5. DARKNESS ALONE FILLED THE BOUNDLESS ALL, FOR FATHER, MOTHER AND SON WERE ONCE MORE ONE, AND THE SON HAD NOT AWAKENED YET FOR THE NEW WHEEL, AND HIS PILGRIMAGE THEREON.
6. THE SEVEN SUBLIME LORDS AND THE SEVEN TRUTHS HAD CEASED TO BE, AND THE UNIVERSE, THE SON OF NECESSITY, WAS IMMERSED IN PARANISHPANNA, TO BE OUTBREATHED BY THAT WHICH IS AND YET IS NOT. NAUGHT WAS.
7. THE CAUSES OF EXISTENCE HAD BEEN DONE AWAY WITH; THE VISIBLE THAT WAS, AND THE INVISIBLE THAT IS, RESTED IN ETERNAL NON-BEING — THE ONE BEING.
8. ALONE THE ONE FORM OF EXISTENCE STRETCHED BOUNDLESS, INFINITE, CAUSELESS, IN DREAMLESS SLEEP; AND LIFE PULSATED UNCONSCIOUS IN UNIVERSAL SPACE, THROUGHOUT THAT ALL-PRESENCE WHICH IS SENSED BY THE OPENED EYE OF THE DANGMA.
“Mr. A. Keightley: Is it possible, as a speculation, as an entirely speculative thing, to conceive that after the universe has gone back into the Parabrahmic condition, that there should be to that Parabrahmic condition a ParaParabrahmic?
Mme. Blavatsky: It is what they say – ParaParabrahmic, that is the expression they use in philosophy. Don’t they?
Mr. Hall: It is the old story about veil behind veil.
Mme. Blavatsky: No, it is not that. It is [that] nothing is behind the veil but nothingness – the root of all.
Mr. A. Keightley: Otherwise, you don’t get back to infinity.
Mme. Blavatsky: Well, infinity is Sat, and Sat is Parabrahm, and Parabrahm is Absoluteness; it is immutability.
Mr. B. Keightley: You see, you can’t have the fallacy of an endless chain of the hen from the egg, and the egg from the hen and so on backwards. You must come to a stopping point somewhere.
Mr. A. Keightley: Must you? That is the question.
Mme. Blavatsky: You can conceive of it. If you train your intellect to be always aspiring and striving after the beginning of things, then you can.
Mr. B. Keightley: Can you go back?
Mme. Blavatsky: If you take the Aristotelian method you cannot go on, and you will be lost in a maze of all kinds of speculations which will be fruitless.
But if you begin with the universals, taking the method of Plato, then I think you can, because then having once traveled on that road you can far more easily backtrack, and beginning from the particulars ascend to the universals.
Then your method will be splendid; not quite on the lines of the men of science, but still it is good for something.
Mr. B. Keightley: But what I understand Arch was putting was this: behind that cause you have one cause, and behind that another cause, behind that another, and so on ad infinitum.
Mme. Blavatsky: Is it so, Arch?
Mr. A. Keightley: It is partly that. Well it is this: the subject seems to me so big that you can’t get the right expression.
Mme. Blavatsky: But “causeless cause” puts a stop to it, because that means there is no cause behind it and that it had no cause, because it is cause itself.
Why, for instance, do we say that the Absolute cannot think, nor can it desire, nor can it have attributes? Why, I have been saying to you a thousand times it has no consciousness. It has no desire because it is absolute desire; “IT” being the Absoluteness.
How can you have the smallest thing that is not in IT? But we can’t say that anything is an attribute of IT.
Mr. B. Keightley: Certainly not.
Mme. Blavatsky: Because an attribute is something finite, and this is infinite. So a stop is put to our speculations, by these words: causeless cause” and “rootless root”. And I think it is the most remarkable, suggestive and graphic expression I ever saw.
Dr. Williams: I think it says everything that can be said.
Mme. Blavatsky: Take the Vedanta. I don’t know of any philosophy in the world higher than that philosophy.”
H. P. Blavatsky