H. P. Blavatsky’s “Kabala” Manuscript: Its Sources and Relationship to Isis Unveiled

Introduction

Among the fragments preserved in H. P. Blavatsky’s handwriting in the Adyar Archives is a short text entitled “Kabala,” published posthumously by Boris de Zirkoff in H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, Vol. XIII, pp. 351–354. Rather than a finished essay, the surviving pages contain abbreviated extracts from nineteenth-century books, incomplete references, occasional comments, and passages difficult to decipher.

Its principal printed sources can be identified as Charles William King’s The Gnostics and Their Remains (1864) and Samuel Fales Dunlap’s Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man (1858). Distinctive wording, the succession of subjects, and several unusual details permit comparisons more precise than a general similarity of themes.

Numerous parallels also link the notes to Isis Unveiled (1877). Kabalistic doctrines, numerical correspondences, biblical references, and Greek magical names recorded in “Kabala” recur in that work, sometimes nearly verbatim and elsewhere within more elaborate discussions. Related material from King appears again in the Würzburg Manuscript and in the posthumously published third volume of The Secret Doctrine (1897).

These parallels pose a question of historical placement. Blavatsky may have compiled the notes while preparing Isis Unveiled in the 1870s; alternatively, she may have returned to the same sources when The Secret Doctrine was still envisioned as a revision and expansion of Isis. Neither explanation follows automatically from the textual correspondences.

This study identifies the manuscript’s sources, presents a graded concordance with Isis Unveiled, examines the later use of the same material, and assesses the evidence for the manuscript’s date and purpose. The investigation may also offer a view of Blavatsky’s habits of extracting, selecting, and reshaping source material across successive literary projects.

I. The Manuscript and Its Character

Boris de Zirkoff introduced his transcription of “Kabala” in Collected Writings, Vol. XIII, with the following notice:

Transcript of a MS. in H.P.B.’s handwriting, in the Adyar Archives. Bracketed queries are to indicate that the word immediately before it is illegible in the MS. and may not be so; some blank spaces with queries in them indicate that the word or words are for the present entirely illegible.

De Zirkoff reproduced facsimiles of the original manuscript pages immediately before the transcription. His bracketed queries must be kept distinct from words securely read; quotations from the transcript retain uncertainty markers where relevant.

The text opens with the antiquity of the Kabala and the doctrine of emanation, then passes through the Infinite Light, En-Soph, Tikkun, Adam Kadmon, the ten Sephiroth, and Seir-Anpin with the number 243. Without a transition it moves to Assyrian sacred fire, solar divinities, Adam and Eve, and the fire-symbolism of Mosaic religion. It closes with divine names and magical expressions associated with ancient gems, among them Iao, Abrasax, Adonai, and several groups of Greek letters.

Abrupt changes of subject, unfinished sentences, and lists of isolated names suggest an aid to research rather than prose intended for publication. Identifying the underlying books makes many of these discontinuities intelligible: the text follows one source for a time, gathers selected passages from another, and eventually returns to the first.

These characteristics suggest that the manuscript was not intended for publication in its surviving form. Its organization is more consistent with a collection of research extracts: materials gathered from existing publications, abbreviated for later consultation, and perhaps intended to be incorporated into a larger literary composition.

II. Charles William King’s The Gnostics and Their Remains

Charles William King’s The Gnostics and Their Remains, Ancient and Mediaeval, 1864, supplies the opening Kabalistic exposition and much of the final sequence of magical names. King issued a revised and considerably enlarged second edition in 1887. The versions differ at several points preserved in Blavatsky’s notes, making the edition relevant to the identification of her immediate source.

1. The Kabalistic exposition

The first portion of “Kabala” follows King’s chapter “The Kabala,” pp. 10–13 of the 1864 edition. Both begin by discussing the antiquity of the Kabala, its supposed connection with Zoroastrianism, and emanation as its central principle.

The sequence of subjects then continues virtually unchanged:

1. The Infinite Light and the King of Light.

2. En-Soph as the unknowable first principle.

3. The divine manifestation through successive emanations.

4. The withdrawal of the primordial light and formation of a void.

5. The first emanation possessing generative and conceptive powers.

6. Tikkun as the universal Form or Idea.

7. Adam Kadmon and the relationship of microcosm and macrocosm.

8. The ten Sephiroth and their divine names.

9. The emblems and titles of the Sephiroth.

10. Seir-Anpin and the numerical symbolism of 243.

Such sustained agreement in arrangement and phrasing points to direct consultation of King. It does not require that Blavatsky accepted every part of his interpretation. She condenses his sentences, omits intermediate explanations, and sometimes reduces a developed argument to a few key words. The compression explains several grammatical breaks in the transcription.

2. The ten Sephiroth

The list of Adam Kadmon’s ten emanations provides a precise point of comparison. Blavatsky records them in this order: Crown, Wisdom, Prudence, Magnificence, Severity, Beauty, Victory, Glory, Foundation, Empire.

King gives the same English names in the same sequence. The notes then assign divine names—including Jah, Jehovah, El, Elohim, Zabaoth, and Adonai—to individual Sephiroth.

The subsequent references to Jachin and Boaz, the Old Serpent, Cherubim and Seraphim, the Tree of Knowledge, and Seir-Anpin also follow King’s exposition.

Two distinctive readings favor the 1864 text. The manuscript calls Tikkun the universal “form[?] and idea,” close to King’s “universal Form or Idea”; the 1887 edition instead has “Universal Type” (Platonic Idea). It also gives Beauty the title “Husband[?] of the Church,” found in the first edition (p. 12) but omitted from the revised treatment.

3. The number 243

King concludes this sequence by connecting Seir-Anpin and the number 243 with the letters of Abram and with the orders of the celestial hierarchy. 

Blavatsky’s manuscript, however, breaks off before completing this explanation:

This figure of man, Sin Anpin, consists of 2 4 3 numbers, the numerical value.

We cannot tell whether the broken ending reflects a note left unfinished or a passage Blavatsky chose not to copy further. The fuller numerical discussion later appears in her Würzburg material.

4. Differences from King

At the beginning, the manuscript departs sharply from King on the Book of Daniel. King says it bears conspicuous traces of the Kabala; Blavatsky’s manuscript reads: “The book of Daniel lacks all traces of it.”

The added negative reverses King’s claim. Since Blavatsky elsewhere treats Daniel as a Kabalistic text, the reading presents a textual problem rather than clear evidence of a considered change of view. It could reflect a slip of the pen, a deliberate alteration, or a tentative position once held but later revised.

Other differences stem more plainly from abbreviation, but none should be silently normalized to King’s wording. The distinctive readings belong to the manuscript’s evidentiary value.

5. Evidence for the 1864 edition

Three details support use of the 1864 edition:

• The manuscript’s description of Tikkun as the universal Form or Idea closely follows the terminology of the 1864 text.

• The title “Husband of the Church,” associated with Beauty, appears in the 1864 edition but is omitted from King’s revised 1887 treatment.

• The magical formula near the manuscript’s end resembles a shortened form printed in the 1864 edition, rather than the fuller form given in 1887.

Taken together, these details favour King’s first edition as the immediate printed source. The conclusion concerns which edition Blavatsky used, not when she used it: copies published in 1864 could have remained at hand well into the 1880s.

III. Samuel Dunlap’s Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man

Samuel Dunlap’s Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man, 1858, provides the second substantial group of extracts. Immediately after the incomplete note on 243, “Kabala” shifts to an account of Assyrian armies accompanied by Magi carrying sacred fire. Dunlap discusses this subject on p. 8. The notes reproduce his appeal to Movers and his comparison with the pillar of cloud and fire in Exodus, before moving to other parts of Dunlap on solar divinities, Berith and Berouth, Adam and Eve, and Moses.

1. Assyrian sacred fire

Dunlap’s account places sacred fire with Assyrian military processions and connects its presence with the destruction of conquered peoples’ idols. The manuscript retains the same distinctive imagery and the biblical analogy; the agreement is verbal as well as thematic. The mention of Franz Carl Movers does not, by itself, show that Blavatsky read Movers. Dunlap already cites him for this account. The passage illustrates how an apparent reference to an older authority may have passed through a more recent intermediary, something common to Blavatsky’s writings, as demonstrated, for instance, in the Secret Doctrine References series.

2. Solar divinities, Berith and Berouth

Another group of notes concerns the Creator’s dwelling in the sun, Osiris, the Earth Goddess, Berith and Berouth, and a comparison with the biblical Adam and Eve. Dunlap discusses related material around p. 145. The abbreviated wording makes some details uncertain, yet the combination and order of divine names strongly indicate dependence on Dunlap. His fuller exposition offers context for expressions that the manuscript leaves almost unintelligible.

3. Moses and fire-worship

Dunlap’s discussion of fire-worship (especially pp. 111–112) explains another cluster of notes, including:

• The conception of Mosaic religion as both fire-philosophy and fire-theology.

• Moses seeing God in the burning bush.

• The contrast between the people adhering to Apis-worship and Moses participating in fire-worship upon the mountain.

• The divine voice speaking from the midst of fire.

• Biblical references to Exodus XXIV and Deuteronomy IV–V.

Blavatsky reduces these discussions to brief propositions and biblical citations.

Dunlap also helps with a doubtful reference to Deuteronomy. De Zirkoff proposed chapter V, an identification supported by the citations in Dunlap. The quotation of Numbers XXV:4 about offenders hanged before the Lord “against the sun” belongs to the same solar-symbolic argument and reappears in Isis Unveiled.

4. The character of the Dunlap extracts

The pattern differs from the relatively continuous copying of King. Blavatsky moves among Dunlap’s p. 8, the discussion around p. 145, and pp. 111–112, selecting material from distant parts of the book. That non-sequential arrangement is a notable feature of these portions of the manuscript.

IV. The Closing Magical Formulas

The closing lines return to King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, 1864 edition, pp. 85–86. They collect names and protective invocations associated with magical gems: Iao, Abrasax, Adonai, and several letter-groups. King supplies both the names and their explanatory associations in substantially the same order. The agreement identifies the likely printed context of these otherwise isolated notes.

Comparison of the magical formulas

Manuscript transcription	Identification or suggested reading	Significance
ΑΒΛΑΝΑΘΑΒΛΕ	ΑΒΛΑΝΑΘΑΒΛΑ; fuller form ΑΒΛΑΝΑΘΑΝΑΛΒΑ	A magical formula commonly identified as Ablanathanalba; the shortened form resembles King’s 1864 printing
CЄMЄCЄIΛAM	ΣΕΜΕΣ ΕΙΛΑΜ	Semes Eilam, associated with the Eternal Sun
CABAω	ΣΑΒΑΩ	Sabaō, a form associated with the divine name Sabaoth
IAωABPACAΞ	ΙΑΩ ΑΒΡΑΣΑΞ	The divine names Iaō and Abrasax

These groups of letters are magical names or invocations, not ordinary Greek sentences. King’s explanations belong to the nineteenth-century study of engraved gems.

The first formula deserves editorial restraint. The manuscript’s shortened reading resembles that printed in King’s 1864 edition; his revised edition gives the fuller palindrome ΑΒΛΑΝΑΘΑΝΑΛΒΑ.

V. Concordance with Isis Unveiled (1877)

The following concordance records parallels between the manuscript notes and Isis Unveiled. Some repeat specific words, numerical associations, or sequences of names; others share only a larger doctrinal subject. The grades distinguish those relationships:

Grade A — Close textual correspondence: distinctive wording and sequence, a specific number, or a recognizable formula occurs in both sources.

Grade B — Substantial conceptual correspondence: an identifiable explanation or cluster of ideas recurs, but in altered wording or arrangement.

Grade C — General or indirect correspondence: the subject or symbolism is related, without enough verbal agreement to establish a close textual parallel.

A dash denotes no secure parallel identified in the passages surveyed. The grades measure correspondence, not the probability of direct copying from the surviving manuscript. Blavatsky could also have returned independently to King, Dunlap, or other sources.

Concordance: Part I — Kabalistic Emanation and the Sephiroth (King)

No.	Subject in the “Kabala” manuscript	Correspondence in Isis Unveiled	Grade
1	Antiquity of the Kabala; relationship to Zoroastrianism and Persia	II, pp. 205–206; 212–214. Kabalistic and Zoroastrian teachings are compared, particularly through emanation and the divine source.	B
2	En-Soph, the Infinite Light, the unknowable divine source	II, pp. 212–214. Extended exposition of En-Soph, the divine light, and the Sephiroth.	B
3	The King of Light described as a “closed Eye”	II, p. 207. The distinctive expression concerning the King of Light as a closed eye reappears.	A
4	The primal light filling all space; withdrawal and the first emanation	II, pp. 213–214; 270–271. Corresponding descriptions of primordial light and emanation, though the detailed account of withdrawal is not reproduced.	B
5	The first emanation combining generative and conceptive principles	II, pp. 213–215; 270–271. The androgyne first principle, Sephira, and Adam Kadmon are explained.	B
6	Tikkun as the universal Form or Idea	II, pp. 275–276. Tikkun is identified with the Heavenly Man and the universal Form and Idea.	A
7	Adam Kadmon as macrocosm; man as microcosm	I, pp. 258–259; II, pp. 213–215 and 275–276. Corresponding relationships between the primordial divine man and the manifested universe.	B
8	The ten Sephiroth, their names and divine attributes	II, pp. 212–214. An extended account of the Sephiroth, using partly different terminology and classifications.	B
9	Wisdom, Nous, Logos, and Gnostic Sophia	II, pp. 213–216; 225–227. The relationship of these principles is developed through comparisons with Gnostic and Kabalistic systems.	B
10	Victory, Glory, Jachin, Boaz, the Old Serpent, Cherubim and Seraphim	II, p. 232. Nearly the same distinctive sequence of Sephiroth and symbolic correspondences.	A
11	The Sephiroth represented through circles and the figure of a man	II, pp. 232–234. The same symbolic representation is described and developed in connection with Indian and Buddhist analogues.	A
12	Seir-Anpin and the number 243	II, p. 232. The same figure and number occur, associated with the celestial hierarchy.	A
13	Foundation, the Tree of Knowledge, and the restoration of souls	II, pp. 293–294. Related discussion of the Trees of Life and Knowledge and Gnostic cosmology.	C

The densest cluster lies in Volume II, Chapter V of Isis Unveiled, “Mysteries of the Kabala” (pp. 212–234). On p. 232, several of King’s distinctive emblems and names reappear together: Victory and Glory, Jachin and Boaz, the Old Serpent, and Seir-Anpin.

Blavatsky places this material alongside Indian and Buddhist cosmological parallels, including Mount Meru and the divine hierarchies, and explicitly refers to King in the discussion. What appears in “Kabala” as a compact source extract thus occupies a different argumentative setting in Isis.

Tikkun supplies another close verbal parallel: the manuscript’s “universal form[?] and idea” corresponds to Isis, II, p. 276, where the term enters a discussion of the Heavenly Man and Adam Kadmon.

Concordance: Part II — Assyrian, Solar, and Mosaic Symbolism (Dunlap)

No.	Subject in the “Kabala” manuscript	Correspondence in Isis Unveiled	Grade
14	Assyrian armies accompanied by Magi carrying sacred fire	I, pp. 125–126. Related discussion of sacred fire and the Exodus manifestations, though no corresponding account of Assyrian armies has been securely identified.	C
15	The Creator’s residence in the Sun; Osiris as a solar deity	I, pp. 156–157; II, pp. 437–439. Solar symbolism and distinctions between divine principles and their visible manifestations.	B
16	Berith and Berouth; the ancient male-female deity	II, pp. 214–215; 270–271. Related treatment of divine androgyny, though no close reproduction of the specific Berith-Berouth passage has been identified.	C
17	Adam and Eve as later expressions of primordial divine principles	II, pp. 214–215; 270–271. Corresponding interpretation of Adam and Eve through earlier cosmological symbolism.	B
18	Mosaic religion and the symbolism of divine fire; Moses and the burning bush	I, pp. 125–126; II, pp. 207–208 and 408–411. Related accounts of divine manifestations through fire.	B/C
19	The divine voice speaking from the midst of fire; Deuteronomy IV–V	I, pp. 125–126; II, pp. 207–208. Similar interpretive framework, but no exact reproduction of the manuscript’s sequence of quotations identified.	C
20	Numbers XXV:4, the command concerning offenders hanged “against the sun”	II, pp. 128–129 and 437–439. The same biblical incident is used to argue for the solar symbolism of Mosaic religion.	A
21	Jewish religious symbols contrasted with later Christian images	II, pp. 128–129 and elsewhere. Related criticism of the loss or reinterpretation of ancient symbolism.	C

The reference to Numbers XXV:4 is the strongest identifiable link within the Dunlap-derived biblical notes. In Isis, the episode is used in an argument about solar symbolism in Mosaic religion, rather than in a continuous reproduction of Dunlap’s presentation.

The Assyrian procession and the specific Berith–Berouth explanation, by contrast, have no equally close match in the passages surveyed. This negative result matters: common sources do not mean that every surviving note entered the published text.

Concordance: Part III — Gnostic Names and Magical Formulas (King)

No.	Subject in the “Kabala” manuscript	Correspondence in Isis Unveiled	Grade
22	Iao, Abrasax, Adonai, and related divine names	II, pp. 207 and 292–297. The same divine names occur within discussions of Gnostic cosmology and magical inscriptions.	B
23	ΑΒΛΑΝΑΘΑΒΛΕ, related to the magical name Ablanathanalba	No secure occurrence of this formula identified in Isis.	—
24	CЄMЄCЄIΛAM, associated with the Sun	II, p. 293. A closely corresponding Greek expression appears in the inscription associated with Iao and Abrasax.	A
25	CABAω, with the gloss “Glory unto thee”	II, p. 207. The related divine name Sabaoth occurs, but the invocation and interpretation are not reproduced.	C
26	IAωABPACAΞ, combining Iao and Abrasax	II, pp. 293 and 296–297. The same divine names appear together in the discussion of Gnostic diagrams and magical gems.	A

A particularly close parallel occurs in Isis Unveiled, II, p. 293:

Around the Iao, runs the legend, ϹΕΜΕϹ ΕΙΛΑΜ ΑΒΡΑΣΑΞ. “The eternal Sun-Abrasax”

The same distinctive elements occur in “Kabala” as separate and abbreviated notes.

King’s discussion is the common printed source. Isis combines the names in an account of an Ophite diagram and relates the inscription to the Central Spiritual Sun and Tiphereth. The comparison establishes a recognizable textual relationship without proving that the “Kabala” sheets served as the intermediary.

As we see from the grading in the above three concordances, the Dunlap material is generally less securely corresponded to Isis than the King material.

VI. Further Relationships with the Würzburg Manuscript and The Secret Doctrine, Volume III

King’s material also occurs in Blavatsky’s later work on The Secret Doctrine, most clearly in the Würzburg Manuscript, prepared principally in 1885–1886. The relationship shows sustained engagement with the printed source; it does not, by itself, establish that “Kabala” belonged to the same manuscript collection.

1. “Hermes and the 32 Ways of Wisdom”

In “Hermes and the 32 Ways of Wisdom,” Blavatsky cites King, p. 13, on Seir-Anpin and the number 243—the very point where the first sequence of “Kabala” notes breaks off.

The Würzburg discussion continues with the numerical value of Abram and develops analogies involving Brahmā and Sanskrit terminology. Its explicit citation of King’s original pagination confirms renewed use of the passage in the 1880s. The fuller exposition should not be mistaken for evidence that the earlier-looking notes must have preceded Isis.

2. The 1897 Secret Doctrine, Volume III

A revised version of the Würzburg material appeared in the posthumous Secret Doctrine, Vol. III (1897), Section IX, “Hermetic and Kabalistic Doctrines,” notably pp. 91–97. There, too, Blavatsky develops the numerical associations of Seir-Anpin, Abram, and Brahmā.

These witnesses establish repeated engagement with an identifiable source across distinct stages of writing and publication. Nothing yet shows that Blavatsky consulted the surviving “Kabala” pages while composing the Würzburg sections. She could have used King directly, older notes, or material already incorporated into Isis.

3. Sequence of sources and the undated manuscript

Source or witness	Date	Significance of the attestation
Dunlap, Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man	1858	Principal identifiable source for biblical and solar notes
King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, first edition	1864	Principal identifiable source for Kabalistic and magical notes
Isis Unveiled	1877	Published use and development of corresponding source material
Würzburg Manuscript / The Secret Doctrine, Vol. III	1885–1886 / 1897	Further use of King; later posthumous publication of revised material
“Kabala” manuscript (Adyar Archives)	Undated	Surviving extracts; their chronological position and direct use remain undetermined

The undated manuscript has deliberately been listed apart from the chronological sequence; no secure direction of descent from “Kabala” to Isis or to Würzburg has yet been demonstrated.

VII. The Original Conception of The Secret Doctrine as a Revision of Isis Unveiled

The early history of The Secret Doctrine gives these recurring sources an additional context. Initially, the project was announced not as a wholly separate work but as a rearrangement and enlargement of Isis Unveiled.

A publisher’s notice in the December 1883 The Theosophist, “The Secret Doctrine: A New Version of ‘Isis Unveiled,’” proposed preserving important material from Isis, gathering related discussions, reducing repetition, and adding explanations. In a letter to A. P. Sinnett, received in January 1884, Blavatsky likewise spoke of rewriting Isis under the new title, with T. Subba Row’s assistance, and expanding two volumes into three or four. These accounts document a period when revisiting earlier arguments and their sources formed part of the announced enterprise.

Olcott’s retrospective account (Old Diary Leaves, Vol. III, pp. 199–200) confirms that the original scheme called for a recasting and amplification of Isis and describes a changed plan adopted in January 1885. Blavatsky herself later marked the scale of the departure. In the preface to the published Secret Doctrine (1888), she explained that the material demanded a different treatment and that the completed two volumes contained fewer than twenty pages extracted from Isis Unveiled. Her statement concerns textual extraction from the printed book, not the continued use of subjects or reference works that had informed it.

The Würzburg Manuscript belongs to this developing literary history. Its “Explanation of the First Page of Isis Unveiled” explicitly takes the earlier book as its point of departure; other sections return to the Kabala, Hermetic literature, and comparative symbolism. Portions eventually entered the 1897 volume, although that posthumous compilation should not be confused with the form or plan of the unfinished 1880s manuscripts.

VIII. The Date and Possible Purpose of the “Kabala” Manuscript

Two principal explanations remain for the date and initial purpose of these extracts.

1. Blavatsky may have written them during the preparation of Isis Unveiled in the 1870s. Both books were then available, their vocabulary and examples recur frequently in Isis, and the fragment’s concise working form would suit preliminary consultation. Some notes contain details not employed in the published work, a pattern compatible with selective use of an earlier gathering of material.
2. Alternatively, she may have assembled or recopied them during the early Secret Doctrine project, when its stated purpose was still to revise and augment Isis. That task could have encouraged a fresh return to King and Dunlap. The Würzburg citations show that King’s 1864 text remained relevant to her work in the 1880s; the particular notes need not have been written before 1877 merely because their source was older.

Neither explanation has been firmly established. No independent date or reference to a proposed book has been identified on the surviving pages, and the first-edition readings of King do not supply a secure date. Nor can we distinguish original notes from a later recopying solely by comparison with the published books.

The evidence therefore identifies the fragment’s printed sources and its place within a recurring body of subject matter, but not its precise moment of composition. 

There is one other possible aid in establishing chronology, but it is dependent upon unverifiable premises. The manuscript departs from King concerning the Book of Daniel—whereas King affirms that Daniel bears evident traces of the Kabala, Blavatksy’s manuscript states that it “lacks all traces of it.” This negative assertion contrasts with Blavatsky’s treatment of Daniel in Isis Unveiled (1877). In Volume I, p. 270, she identifies Daniel’s Ancient of Days with the Kabalistic En-Soph, while further passages in Volume II (pp. 38–39, 229–230, and 470) associate Daniel with Kabalistic doctrines and traditions. If the manuscript’s contrary statement records a position genuinely held by Blavatsky and subsequently abandoned, rather than an error of transcription or extraction, it would suggest that the notes preceded the relevant passages in Isis Unveiled. On that interpretation, the manuscript would belong to the earlier period of her literary activity, not to the projected revision of Isis undertaken in the 1880s. The argument remains conditional, however, since neither the deliberate character of the negative statement nor the proposed change in Blavatsky’s views can presently be established.

IX. Assessment of the Evidence

The categories below concern confidence in individual historical or textual findings.

Finding or hypothesis	Assessment
Opening Kabalistic passages depend chiefly on King, 1864, pp. 10–13	Established
First-edition readings of King are the closest match to the manuscript	Strongly supported
Assyrian fire and Mosaic passages derive chiefly from Dunlap	Established
The closing magical names and formulas derive from King, pp. 85–86	Strongly supported
The fragment consists of abbreviated research extracts, not a finished essay	Strongly supported
Distinctive source material also appears in Isis Unveiled	Established
In Isis the corresponding material occupies reorganized and expanded contexts	Established
“Kabala” was compiled specifically for the writing of Isis Unveiled	Plausible, not demonstrated
“Kabala” was assembled during the projected early revision of Isis	Plausible, not demonstrated
The surviving sheets were used directly to compose Isis Unveiled	Unproven
Blavatsky reused King’s Kabalistic material in the Würzburg Manuscript	Established
The surviving “Kabala” sheets belong directly to the Würzburg / SD III manuscript complex	Unproven

 

X. Significance for the Study of Blavatsky’s Writings

The manuscript fragment lets us study the gathering of material at a stage less polished than finished books or articles. Here we see that a connected nineteenth-century exposition becomes short extracts, headings, names, references, and occasional uncertain readings. Blavatsky’s later writings suggest a related practice of sustained source consultation. King’s Kabalistic material could support different comparative arguments in Isis, then be revisited and further developed during the composition of The Secret Doctrine. This history concerns Blavatsky’s choices of sources and the reshaping of their contents; it does not depend on assigning the undated “Kabala” sheets to any single stage of that work.

Yet it is interesting to note the possible working method utilized by Blavatsky when consulting contemporary books and extracting portions thought by her to be relevant and usable. An apparent staged approach—consultation of source books, compiling of short extracts blended with her own notes, and subsequent use of those materials within larger arguments—may shed light on several noticeable features of Blavatsky’s writings, including but not limited to her tendency to blend her own comments, adjustments or counter-arguments directly within her quotations of another author, or her tendency to repeatedly utilize the same extracts from certain authors across differing articles, books and arguments. 

XI. Conclusion

The “Kabala” fragment in Collected Writings, Vol. XIII, pp. 351–354, consists chiefly of abbreviated extracts from King’s The Gnostics and Their Remains (1864) and Dunlap’s Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man (1858). The sequences of ideas, names and wording identify these sources with confidence.

The concordance with Isis Unveiled establishes several close verbal parallels and a wider pattern of shared material reorganized for different arguments. Later discussions in the Würzburg Manuscript and the 1897 Secret Doctrine, Vol. III, show that Blavatsky continued to use King’s Kabalistic exposition. None of this establishes a direct line of copying from the surviving “Kabala” sheets to either published work.

Whether Blavatsky compiled the fragment for Isis or during its proposed revision remains unresolved. The manuscript’s significance lies in the working extracts themselves and in the evidence they offer for the selection, abbreviation, and reuse of sources across her literary undertakings. A secure date or physical association with other manuscripts would greatly sharpen that history; until then, the alternatives must remain open.

Principal Sources and References

Blavatsky, H. P. “[Kabala],” H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, Vol. XIII, pp. 351–354. Facsimiles of the original manuscript are reproduced immediately before the transcription.

Blavatsky, H. P. Isis Unveiled: A Master-Key to the Mysteries of Ancient and Modern Science and Theology. 2 vols. New York: J. W. Bouton, 1877. Esp. Vol. I, pp. 125–126, 156–157, 258–259, 270; Vol. II, pp. 128–129, 205–215, 230–234, 275–277, 292–297, 437–439.

King, Charles William. The Gnostics and Their Remains, Ancient and Mediaeval. London: Bell and Daldy, 1864. Esp. “The Kabala,” pp. 10–13, and the magical inscriptions on pp. 85–86.

King, Charles William. The Gnostics and Their Remains, Ancient and Mediaeval. Second, revised and enlarged edition. London: David Nutt, 1887. Esp. “The Kabbala and the Talmud,” pp. 33–36, and the corresponding magical inscriptions, pp. 326–327. Relevant chapter online.

Dunlap, Samuel Fales. Vestiges of the Spirit-History of Man. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1858. Esp. pp. 8, 111–112, and approximately p. 145.

Blavatsky, H. P. “Hermes and the 32 Ways of Wisdom,” in the Würzburg Manuscript of The Secret Doctrine, chiefly prepared 1885–1886. Published in The Theosophist, January–March 1933, and in The Secret Doctrine Würzburg Manuscript, Eastern School Press, 2014, pp. 43–51.

Blavatsky, H. P. “Hermetic and Kabalistic Doctrines,” The Secret Doctrine, Vol. III (1897), Section IX, esp. pp. 91–97. Corresponding material also appears in H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, Vol. XIV.