The Supreme Doctrine - neo-alchemist

EPILOGUE
come to me from 'something' universal. From the universal my truth has
taken on, in my individual consciousness, a form, a limitation; it has
'enformed' itself in my mind in accordance with my particular structure, in
conformity with my personal style of thinking. In acquiring this form my
truth has acquired the possibility of being conceived and expressed, but it has
also acquired, beside the aspect which manifests the original Reality and
which therefore is valid, the aspect which does not manifest Reality and
which, in consequence, is valueless. The truth that I have expressed, in so far
as it manifests Reality, is of a universal nature; it is, on the contrary, of an
individual nature in so far as it does not manifest Reality and is valueless. In
other words that which is valid, worthy of consideration, in the truth that I
express does not belong to me-as-a-distinct-individual, and has not properly
speaking any connexion with my particular person.
If I have understood that, I am altogether indifferent to the particular
brain in which such a truth has taken shape; that particular brain is only the
receiving-apparatus which has caught the message. If there exists an evident
relation between the form of thoughts expressed and the particular structure
of the man who expresses them there is no relation between this structure and
the truth of the thoughts, with what the thoughts manifest of Reality. The
formal aspect of my book is certainly mine, but the informal truth that it
contains in the network of words and which may perhaps awaken in your
mind unformed thoughts in accordance with your structure, this truth is not
mine, or the property of any other man in particular; it is universal. A claim
to the paternity of any idea is absurd; it comes from the egotistical fiction of
divinity which, lurking at the bottom of our psychology, pretends that we are
the First Cause of the Universe. In reality the individual never creates
anything if man creates it is as universal man, anonymous, and as
manifestation of the Principle. In the ages of truer wisdom artists, scholars
and thinkers, did not dream of attaching their names to the works which took
form through them.
The curiosity that we may feel about the paternity of a doctrine is in
relation with a lack of confidence in our own intellectual intuition. If I seek a
belief to which to adhere without the impression of internal evidence, without
my intelligence exacting that it shall ring true, then indeed I look for private
sources, for the authorities that are responsible for this doctrine. But why
search thus? Such beliefs might have the most imposing origins but they will
remain nevertheless, in my mind, unassimilated inclusions, not reconstituted
238