The following is an examination of the use of the term “kalahamsa” in the writings of H. P. Blavatsky, with the purpose of highlighting and correcting errors in spelling and Sanskrit grammar.
At the outset, it is important to note one particular aspect of Blavatsky’s use of the term, and that is the seeming confusion between two distinct Sanskrit terms: kala and kāla. The latter, with the long ā, indicates “time, black, dark, etc.” while the former, with the short a, indicates other meanings, most commonly “a soft, melodious tone”; kala also derives from the root √kal, which may have several meanings, including “to carry.”
Blavatsky seems to exclusively use the meanings of “black, dark” and “time” (kāla and/or kali) in relation to the haṃsa in The Secret Doctrine (SD). For instance, in SD 1:77 and in the Würzburg MS. p. 172, she explicitly uses the terms and meanings of kali (black, dark) and kāla (time, eternity) as part of her word-play. However, in The Voice of the Silence (p. 5fn) we do find her connecting the haṃsa with the meaning of “melodious” (kala), as connected with AUM, where the reader is then referred to the Nādabindu Upaniṣad. This is, however, the only instance of this type, whereas in all other instances she seems to view the meaning as related to black/time.
On the surface, it would appear that Blavatsky, not being a Sanskritist, simply mistook the one for the other, as she most commonly associates the term “kalahamsa” (irregardless of spelling) with the ideas of time and darkness. However, the word-formation “kālahaṃsa” is not the traditional term, i.e. it is not traditionally written as the bird of “time” or the “black” bird (kāla-haṃsa) but rather as the “soft spoken bird” (kalahaṃsa) (see David Reigle, “Kalahaṃsa: the Soft-spoken Goose.”) The only reference to kālahaṃsa we’ve found thus far is in the Concise Pali-English Dictionary (see p. 99), where it is defined as “black swan,” but this may simply be a mistake on the part of the author of that dictionary, as we have not found any use of kālahaṃsa in any Sanskrit or Pali texts, other dictionaries, etc.
All of this does not exclude the possibility of such an interpretation as “black swan” or “swan of time” in esoteric parlance, as it is quite common in Indian texts, and among eastern teachers in general, to utilize such word-play methods when exploring deeper meanings to conventional terms. But we must note that Blavatsky’s use of the term in this way is unique and not in accordance with the traditions from which the term is originally drawn, nor in accordance with its proper Sanskrit spelling.
In the following we quote each use of the term in Blavatsky’s writings, but with corrected spellings and suggested changes to more accurately reflect the proper Sanskrit terms and grammar. The notes given below explain each notable change. One can also compare the changes highlighted in green below with the original editions of each source to get a better sense of the nature of each change. Words highlighted in red below represent changes that would be necessary to support the meanings indicated by Blavatsky, but which are not known Sanskrit terms.
The Secret Doctrine
Volume 1
Page 20
[[Compare with Würzburg, p. 150.]]
Brahma (neuter) is called Kalahaṃsa, meaning, as explained by Western Orientalists, the Eternal Swan or goose {See Stanza 3 Commentary on Sloka 8, Book 1, Part 1, pp. 77-78.}, and so is Brahmā, the Creator. A great mistake is thus brought under notice; it is Brahma (neuter) who ought to be referred to as Haṃsa-Vāhana (He who uses the swan as his Vehicle) and not Brahmā the Creator, who is the real Kalahaṃsa, while Brahma (neuter) is haṃsa, and “a-haṃsa,”1 as will be explained in the Commentary.
. . . . . . . .
Page 77
[[Compare with Würzburg, p. 171.]]
. . . . . . . .
Among such appellations, given, of course, only in esoteric philosophy, as the “Unfathomable Darkness,” the “Whirlwind,” etc.—it is also called the “It of the Kalahaṃsa, the Kala-ham-sa,” and even the “Kali Haṃsa,” (Black swan). Here the ṃ (convertible in this case with n)2
Page 78
sounds like the nasal French an or am, or, again, en or em (Ennui, Embarras, etc.). As in the Hebrew Bible, many a mysterious sacred name in Sanskrit conveys to the profane ear no more than some ordinary, and often vulgar word, because it is concealed anagrammatically or otherwise. This word of “Hansa” or esoterically “haṃsa”3 is just such a case. Haṃsa is equal to aham-sa,4 two words (three in English) meaning “I am he,”5 while divided in still another way it will read “so ’ham,”6 “he (is) I”—Soham being equal to saḥ, “he,” and aham, “I,” or “I am he.”7 In this alone is contained the universal mystery, the doctrine of the identity of man’s essence with god-essence, for him who understands the language of wisdom. Hence the glyph of, and the allegory about, Kalahaṃsa (or hamsa),8 and the name given to Brahma neuter (later on, to the male Brahmā) of “Haṃsa-Vāhana,” “he who uses the Haṃsa as his vehicle.” The same word may be read “Kālāham-sa”9 or “I am I” in the eternity of Time, answering to the Biblical, or rather Zoroastrian “I am that I am.”
. . . . . . . .
Page 79
. . . . . . . .
For these reasons, and since few believe in the foregoing, all that can now be given is that in both cases the symbol of Haṃsa (whether “I,” “He,” Goose or Swan) is an important symbol, representing, for instance, Divine Wisdom, Wisdom in darkness beyond the reach of men. For all exoteric purposes, Haṃsa, as every Hindu knows, is a fabulous bird, which, when given milk mixed with water for its food (in the allegory) separated the two, drinking the milk and leaving the water; thus showing inherent wisdom—milk standing symbolically for spirit, and water for matter.
That this allegory is very ancient and dates from the very earliest archaic period, is shown by the mention (in Bhāgavata Purāṇa 11:17:1010) of a certain caste named “Haṃsa” or “Hansa,”11 which was the “one caste” par excellence; when far back in the mists of a forgotten past there was among the Hindus only “One Veda, One Deity, One Caste.” There is also a range in the Himalayas, described in the old books as being situated north of Mount Meru, called “Haṃsa,” and connected with episodes pertaining to the history of religious mysteries and initiations. As to the name of Kala-Haṃsa being the supposed vehicle of Brahmā–Prajāpati, in the exoteric texts and translations of the
Page 80
Orientalists, it is quite a mistake. Brahma, the neuter, is called by them Kala-Haṃsa and Brahmā, the male, Haṃsa-Vāhana, because forsooth “his vehicle or Vāhana is a swan or goose” (See John Dowson, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and Religion, History and Literature, 1879, pp. 56-57.) This is a purely exoteric gloss. Esoterically and logically, if Brahma, the infinite, is all that is described by the Orientalists, namely, agreeably with the Vedāntic texts, an abstract deity in no way characterised by the description of any human attributes, and it is still maintained that he or it is called Kala-Haṃsa—then how can it ever become the Vāhana of Brahmā, the manifested finite god? It is quite the reverse. The “Swan or goose” (Haṃsa) is the symbol of that male or temporary deity, as he, the emanation of the primordial Ray, is made to serve as a Vāhana or vehicle for that divine Ray, which otherwise could not manifest itself in the Universe, being, antiphrastically, itself an emanation of “Darkness”—for our human intellect, at any rate. It is Brahmā, then, who is Kala–Haṃsa, and the Ray, the Haṃsa-Vāhana.
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 359
. . . . . . . . . .
The secret teaching explains the reason for this reverence by the Symbolism of the prehistoric races. The “First Cause” had no name in the beginnings. Later it was pictured in the fancy of the thinkers as an ever invisible, mysterious Bird that dropped an Egg into Chaos, which Egg becomes the Universe. Hence Brahmā was called Kalahaṃsa [Kālahaṃsa12], “the swan in (Space and) Time.” He became the “Swan of Eternity,” who lays at the beginning of each Mahāmanvantara a “Golden Egg.” It typifies the great Circle, or O, itself a symbol for the universe and its spherical bodies.
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 362
. . . . . . . . . .
This means simply that the ibis religiosa had and has “magical” properties in common with many other birds, the albatross pre-eminently, and the mythical white swan, the swan of Eternity or Time, the Kalahaṃsa [Kālahaṃsa13].
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 471
. . . . . . . . . .
Of course the name given in the archaic volume of the Stanzas is quite different, but Guān-yīn is a perfect equivalent. In a temple of Pǔtuó, the sacred island of the Buddhists in China, Guān-shì-yīn is represented floating on a black aquatic bird (Kala-Haṃsa [Kāla-Haṃsa14]), and pouring on the heads of mortals the elixir of life, which, as it flows, is transformed into one of the chief Dhyāni-Buddhas—the Regent of a star called the “Star of Salvation.”
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 549
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . The trunk of the Aśvattha (the tree of Life and Being, the rod of the caduceus) grows from and descends at every Beginning (every new manvantara) from the two dark wings of the Swan (Haṃsa) of Life. The two Serpents, the ever-living and its illusion (Spirit and matter) whose two heads grow from the one head between the wings, descend along the trunk, interlaced in close embrace. The two tails join on earth (the manifested Universe) into one, and this is the great illusion, O Lanoo!”
. . . . . . . . . .
Volume 2
Page 122
. . . . . . . . . .
For Leda assumes in it the shape of a white swan when uniting herself to the Divine Swan.‡ Leda is the mythical bird, then, to which, in the traditions of various peoples of the Āryan race, are attributed various ornithological forms of birds which all lay golden eggs.§ In the Kalevala (the Epic Poem of Finland), the beauteous daughter of the Ether, “the Water Mother,” creates the world in conjunction with a “Duck” (another form of the Swan or Goose, Kalahaṃsa), who lays six golden eggs, and the seventh, “an egg of iron,” in her lap.
. . . . . . . . . .
‡ See Brahmā15 Kalahaṃsa in Book I. Stanza III., p. 78.
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 131
. . . . . . . . . .
22. Then the Second evolved the Sweat-Born, the Third (Race). The sweat grew, its drops grew, and the drops became hard and round. The Sun warmed it; the Moon cooled and shaped it; the Wind fed it until its ripeness. The white swan from the starry vault (the Moon), overshadowed the big drop. The egg of the future race, the Man-Swan (Haṃsa) of the later Third (a). First Male-Female, then Man and Woman (b).
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 293
. . . . . . . . . .
“The Nest of the eternal Bird, the flutter of whose wings produces life, is boundless space,” says the Commentary, meaning Haṃsa, the bird of Wisdom.
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 465
. . . . . . . . . .
In Stanza IV. and elsewhere it is stated that exoterically Brahma (neuter), so flippantly and so often confused by the Orientalists with Brahmā—the male, is sometimes called Kala-haṃsa [Kāla-haṃsa16] (Swan in the eternity), and the esoteric meaning of aham-sa, is given (“I am he”; so ’ham being equal to saḥ “he,” and aham “I”—a mystic anagram and permutation).17
. . . . . . . . . .
The Voice of the Silence
Page 5
. . . . . . . . . .
Bestride the Bird of Life, if thou would’st know.10
. . .
10. Kalahaṃsa, the “Bird” or Swan (vide Note 11). Says the Nādabindu Upaniṣad (Ṛgveda) translated by the Kumbakonam Theosophical Society—“The syllable a is considered to be its (the bird Haṃsa’s) right wing, u, its left, m, its tail, and the Ardhamātra (half metre) is said to be its head.”
. . . . . . . . . .
Page 6
16. Some Sanskrit mystics locate seven planes of being, the seven spiritual lokas or worlds within the body of Kalahaṃsa [Kālahaṃsa18], the Swan out of Time and Space, convertible into the Swan in Time, when it becomes Brahmā instead of Brahma (neuter).
. . . . . . . . . .
Secret Doctrine Dialogues
Page 237 (Meeting of February 28, 1889)
. . . . . . . . . .
Mr. B. Keightley: Question 8. Are the “great waters” here the same as those on which “darkness moved?”
Mme. Blavatsky: Well, I wish to say one thing, that “darkness moved,” you put here in quotes. I don’t remember to have put anywhere that darkness moves. I don’t know on what darkness can ever move. I don’t know what they have been doing. I have heard of a darkness which was upon the face of the deep or the great waters, but even in Chapter 1, Genesis it is distinctly stated, verse 2, that darkness was, and that that which moved upon the face of the waters was not darkness but the Spirit of God. Now see esoterically the meaning of these two verses in Genesis. They mean that in the beginning, when Kosmos was yet without form, and chaos, or the outer space, that of illusion, was still void, darkness alone was. Now if you take Kalahaṃsa, the dark swan or the swan of eternity (it is interchangeable), and at the first radiation of the dawn the Spirit of God, which means Logos number 1, began to move on the face of the great waters of the deep; therefore, if we want to be correct, and if not clear, let us ask are the great waters the same as the darkness spoken of in The Secret Doctrine? I will answer in the affirmative. Kalahaṃsa reads in a dual manner. Now, exoterically, if you speak about Kalahaṃsa, I took them to task in The Secret Doctrine (and I was perfectly right) for putting such a thing as that, that Kalahaṃsa was Parabrahma. It is not so, but esoterically it comes to that.19 Exoterically it is Brahmā, which is the swan or the vehicle in which darkness manifests itself to human comprehension, but esoterically it is darkness, itself the ever unknowable absoluteness which becomes the vehicle of Brahmā the manifested. For under the illusion of manifestation—that which we see and feel and which comes under our sensuous perception, as we imagine—is simply that which we neither hear, feel, see, taste or touch at all: a gross illusion and nothing else. Now, is this too metaphysical?
Transactions of the Blavatsky Lodge
(Edited by H.P.B. from the above meeting of February 28, 1889)
Page 119
Q. Are the “Great Waters” the same as those on which the Darkness moved?
A. It is incorrect in this case, to speak of Darkness “moving.” Absolute Darkness, or the Eternal Unknown, cannot be active, and moving is action. Even in Genesis it is stated that Darkness was upon the face of the deep, but that which moved upon the face of the waters, was the “Spirit of God.” This means esoterically that in the beginning, when the Infinitude was without form, and Chaos, or the outer Space, was still void, Darkness (i.e., Kalahaṃsa Parabrahma)20 alone was. Then, at the first radiation of Dawn, the “Spirit of God” (after the First and Second Logos were radiated, the Third Logos, or Nārāyaṇa) began to move on the face of the Great Waters of the “Deep.” Therefore the question to be correct, if not clear, should be, “Are the Great Waters the same as the Darkness spoken of?” The answer would then be in the affirmative. Kalahaṃsa has a dual meaning. Exoterically it is Brahmā who is the Swan, the “Great Bird,” the vehicle in which Darkness manifests itself to human comprehension as light, and this Universe. But esoterically, it is Darkness itself, the unknowable Absolute which is the Source, firstly of the radiation called the First Logos, then
Page 120
of its reflection, the Dawn, or the Second Logos, and finally of Brahmā, the manifested Light, or the Third Logos. Let us remember, that under this illusion of manifestation, which we see and feel, and which, as we imagine, comes under our sensuous perceptions, is simply and in sober reality, that which we neither hear, see, feel, taste nor touch at all. It is a gross illusion and nothing else.
“The National Epic of Finland [Kalevala],” Lucifer Magazine, October, 1888
When she ceased her supplications,
Scarce a moment onward passes,
Ere a beauteous duck descending,
Hastens towards the water-mother,
Comes a-flying hither, thither,
Seeks herself a place for nesting.
This “beauteous duck” corresponds exactly, both in idea and imagery, to the Kalahaṃsa [Kālahaṃsa21], or “Swan of Time,” of the Hindu Pantheon and the Secret Doctrine.
“Thoughts on Elementals,” Lucifer Magazine, May, 1890, p. 187
He who can separate the former from the latter, as Kalahaṃsa separated the milk from the water, which was mixed with it, thus showing great wisdom—will have his reward.
[Notes on] “Pistis Sophia,” Lucifer Magazine, November, 1890, p. 194
It will be useful in this connection to compare what the “Secret Doctrine” says of “the mythical white swan, the swan of Eternity or Time, the Kalahaṃsa [Kālahaṃsa22]” (I, 78) [here follows a verbatim quotation from SD 1:78] . . .
Again in The Voice of the Silence (Fragment 1, p. 5), we read [here follows a verbatim quotation from Voice p. 5 with the footnote on the Kalahaṃsa] . . .
Notes
1. This may indicate a-haṃsa in the sense of “not haṃsa,” using the Sanskrit prefix a-, “no, not,” but it may simply indicate “ahaṃsa” in the sense of aham-sa. Both meanings are explained in the later commentary (see 1:78). This part of the sentence on 1:20 was not included in the Würzburg MS. (see p. 150), so we have no MS. to cross-check with, but in a later part of the MS. (p. 171) Blavatsky had in one place originally written (a)ham sa, which was later changed in the SD to a-ham-sa. It is possible that here on p. 20, (a)hamsa was likewise the original format. The hyphenation of the a- in the latter case is problematic, and can be easily corrected (see our change on 1:78), but the current hyphenation is not as easily solved. Option 1 is to leave it as is, in which case it will be most commonly interpreted (by those familiar with Sanskrit) as indicating the prefix a-. Option 2 would be to change it to (a)haṃsa, which would simply indicate the connection between the “haṃ” in haṃsa and the word aham, “I.”
2. In the Classical Sanskrit rules of grammar, the anusvāra (ं, in IAST ṃ) takes on the appropriate nasal pronunciation according to the letter that follows it. In this case, that letter is s (स) and so the ṃ takes on the pronunciation of n (न). Thus in Classical Sanskrit, Kalahaṃsa is pronounced Kalahansa. In addition to this, the regular letter m (म) is converted into an anusvāra when it is the final letter in the initial word of a compound. Thus, for instance, the prefix sam-, when placed together in a compound, becomes saṃ-, and then is converted into the appropriate nasal form depending on the letter that follows it. For example, sam– + buddha becomes saṃbuddha; sam- + kṛta becomes sanskṛta; sam- + jaya becomes sañjaya, and so on. Thus we have several possible conversions of letters/sounds when forming compound terms: m (म) can be converted into ṃ (ं), and ṃ can be converted into any of the nasal consonants (ṅ ङ, ñ ञ, ṇ ण, n न, mम).
In order to make this clear in the SD, after having changed Kalahansa to the correct Sanskrit spelling Kalahaṃsa, we suggest making the above noted change.
3. It is quite possible that when Blavatsky mentions the “esoteric” version of the word, she is indicating the pre-Classical Sanskrit use of the anusvāra, where instead of simply taking on a nasal pronunciation based on the following letter, it is believed to have indicated its own specific nasal sound. The “esoteric” version mentioned by Blavatsky may then perhaps be related to the candrabindu (ँ) in Vedic Sanskrit and the anunāsika. Regardless of the correct “esoteric” pronunciation, the word would look the same when represented in IAST, i.e. haṃsa. We thus suggest updating the term here, and placing the previous Hansa in quotation marks to represent the classical pronunciation.
4. This was originally given as a-ham-sa and represented as though it is three words in the Sanskrit. It is, however, only two words, aham and sa, which cover a meaning “I am he,” which in English requires three words. See also SD 2:465.
5. In Classical Sanskrit, it is possible to construct “verbless sentences,” wherein two nouns are directly equated with each other, with the format “X is Y.” In this case, aham sa, would mean “I (aham) am he (sa).” In English, we utilize three words for the same sentence. We thus suggest modifying the wording in the SD slightly, as shown above.
6. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soham_(Sanskrit). So ’ham is the format which the two words saḥ and aham assume when placed together in that order, according to proper Sandhi rules.
7. Compare with SD 2:465.
8. Having corrected the spelling to use the anusvāra, there is no longer any need to give both alternate forms, as was originally done in the SD.
9. In the original, this is given as “Kalaham-sa.” In order to derive a meaning similar to “‘I am I’ in the eternity of Time,” the terms for “time” (kāla) and for “I” (aham) would need to be distinct, and brought together by proper sandhi rules, which would result in kālāham-sa. Sa or Saḥ means “he,” rather than “I,” and so such a term as kālāhamsa could technically (based on grammatical considerations) mean something like “I am He in Time” rather than “I am I in Time,” as proposed by H.P.B., even if philosophically it carries the meaning applied to it by her.
11. Having corrected the spelling to use the anusvāra, there is no longer any need to give both alternate forms, as was originally done in the SD.
12. In order to carry the meaning of “the swan in (Space and) Time,” the “kala” part of the word would need to be kāla, with the long ā, which word indicates “time.”
13. In order to carry the meaning of “the swan in (Space and) Time,” the “kala” part of the word would need to be kāla, with the long ā, which word indicates “time.”
14. In order to carry the meaning of a “black aquatic bird,” the “kala” part of the word would need to be kāla, with the long ā, which word indicates “dark.”
15. Compare with Transactions p. 119 and Secret Doctrine Dialogues, p. 237.
16. In order to carry the meaning of “Swan in the eternity,” the “kala” part of the word would need to be kāla, with the long ā, which word indicates “time.”
17. Compare this sentence with SD 1:78, where we make the same corrections.
18. In order to carry the meaning of the Swan as related to “time,” the “kala” part of the word would need to be kāla, with the long ā, which word indicates “time.”
19. Note that HPB here reverses her approach from the SD. She corrected the Orientalists that Brahmā was the Kalahaṃsa, not Brahma (neuter). She now explains that esoterically it is, indeed, Brahma (neuter) or even Parabrahma. She also continues here with utilizing the meaning of “black” or “dark” for kāla, rather than kala.
20. Compare with SD 2:122fn.
21. In order to carry the meaning of “Swan of Time,” the “kala” part of the word would need to be kāla, with the long ā, which word indicates “time.” We see here a definite use of the form kālahaṃsa in the original of this article (given there as “Kâlahamsa”), which as a Sanskrit compound would indeed mean, literally, “swan of time.” However, as noted earlier, no such term is found in Sanskrit texts.